More science experiments

[Cheif Operations Director]

I'm not sure if it's to much work but we do not have that many scientific experiments just the same old stuff.

[Rocket In My Pocket]

Problem with that is we have way more science points than we need already.

You can unlock the entire tech tree between the Mun and Minmus. Never even needing to go interplanetary. If you want to cheese science labs, you can finish it even quicker/easier.

I like the idea of having more stuff to do in any given biome though. You'd have to rebalance science points in general though.

[The Aziz]

16 minutes ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

You can unlock the entire tech tree between the Mun and Minmus. Never even needing to go interplanetary.

Which I personally never do. It kinda kills the point of gathering and the whole science mechanics. I'd rather visit Duna at least once and get some sweet science from there, than jump through all biomes within Kerbin SOI to squeeze every single science point from them in the first 6 in-game days of career. (and delete the save because I'm in endgame before doing anything)

Just because you can, [add basically anything here].

[Wjolcz]

The whole science points system and the fact that they are being used as tech currency is fundamentally broken and very hard to set up in a way it's actually balanced and fun to play with. "Gathering" (more like generating) has always been more of a chore for me.

I wouldn't mind having actual telescopes, magnetometers and all the other stuff collecting actual data in a form of charts. But as long as they are tech token generators there's no real point in having any more of them.

Edited August 30, 2018 by Wjolcz

[Aeroboi]

I'm in love with this mod

You want this, trust me.

Also to expand upon what is discussed.

I don't understand the default science multipliers in place, and I know the setup of career is a subject of discussion to many.
But if Squad actually played their own game, they know it doesn't make sense.

Conclusion: Squad does not play their own game.

When I first started to play KSP I tried playing with the science multipliers and I really need to go down from 100% to 30% to make it hardish while the preset science multiplier for "hard" is 60%. Aaaaaaahh!
So apparently hard is twice the goodies and freedom from the point where hard begins for me.
60% is nothing. You can do multiple contracts, multiple flybys and advanced docking to sack all the science from the same Kerbin, Mun, Minmus biomes and still gain enough science to at least unlock all the wanted nodes from the tech tree.

I know there are beginner players but "hard" was never hard for me and I also started like a moron not knowing how to point towards the Mun. Career also should be trial and error.
There is no shame in failing career mode when you run out of something. It's as if Squad intended your are 99.9% likely to never run out of anything so you can never complain to us how hard career mode was to begin with.

But isn't that why we got a career mode, to give challenge to the game? Otherwise we would do with sandbox only imo?
These values seem *cough* are arbitrary and nonsensical. The point of reference for who would be playing the career mode was unthought of by Squad. Sorry to say that, because I'm wrong of course, but it seems the case to me.
 

[MR L A]

I too would like more scientific parts in the base game, but as people have commented above, the science points system is pretty broken in its current state.

There's many ways to solve this I think, but I can't really be bothered to explain them seeing as they stand virtually zero chance of being implemented.

[Tyko]

I have to agree with @Aeroboi and @Rocket In My Pocket - with the current system it's too easy already. I've added DMagic Science parts because I like the looks of all his cool models, but like Aeroboi I've had to scale science returns back to 30-40% to make up for all the extra science I'm collecting. I'm happy with that because It gives me more reasons to perform probe missions as my tech increases, but it's still essentially - enter biome, run each experiment, send science points back - running more experiments doesn't really change to steps I'm performing.

One thing I've done to add complexity is zero out the transmission value of experiments with physical samples - Goo, Material Bay and Surface Samples. Now I have to either plan return sample missions or send a crewed lab to process them - both make my missions more interesting.

Edited August 30, 2018 by Tyko

[Gargamel]

Stock doesn't need any more science experiments.  It needs more things to do, similar to science experiments.  But to fill that void, there are tons of mods out there that add more things to do.  Rover Science is a good one, as there is an actual game play mechanic involved with gathering your science. 

[Theseus]

I'd love to see more science experiments, but as others have already said, there's no point in having a lot of different ways of unlocking the entire tech tree before you even leave the Kerbin SOI.

Instead, charting bodies with experiments could be a way of unlocking planets, at least in Career and Science. So, instead of going in blind and sending a manned craft to the surface of Duna, you first have to send a probe to Duna's SOI and then to its surface in order to make sure it's safe. The more you chart a planet, the more options are unlocked (different missions, space station in orbit around the planet, resource utilization etc).

[Vexillar]

It's a difficult balance - adding more science experiments makes for a richer experience, but dialling back the science rewards would make the early game very frustrating for newbies, as not everybody coming to the game has a good feel for physics, nor insight into how real missions are and were flown.  Squad put in the difficulty options to make it easier for newbies to learn the principles, while keeping it a challenge for the experienced players.

I'll admit that even after several years, I still play most of the time on Standard settings.  Exploration, colonisation and trying out new ship designs are what interest me.  Having completed the tech tree, gathering science is now just another way to earn Currency to fund non-contract missions.  

Perhaps the difficulty scale could be extended upward, now that there are so many seasoned Kerballers, but perhaps not quite the "Hyper Hard" mode that Mr Musk plays. 

[Gargamel]

10 hours ago, Theseus said:

Instead, charting bodies with experiments could be a way of unlocking planets, at least in Career and Science. So, instead of going in blind and sending a manned craft to the surface of Duna, you first have to send a probe to Duna's SOI and then to its surface in order to make sure it's safe. The more you chart a planet, the more options are unlocked (different missions, space station in orbit around the planet, resource utilization etc).

I like the idea, but the exact implementation has some issues.  I mean physics.  There is nothing preventing you from sending a manned mission to Duna blind.   And then if there was, that kind of defeats the purpose of an open world setting, as you would now be rail roaded into missions.     We already have the contract system that does pretty much this already, encourages a stepping stone approach to exploration, but doesn't restrict you from skipping ahead.   

[Tyko]

1 hour ago, Gargamel said:

I like the idea, but the exact implementation has some issues.  I mean physics.  There is nothing preventing you from sending a manned mission to Duna blind.   And then if there was, that kind of defeats the purpose of an open world setting, as you would now be rail roaded into missions.     We already have the contract system that does pretty much this already, encourages a stepping stone approach to exploration, but doesn't restrict you from skipping ahead.   

Agreed that you wouldn't want to kill the open world approach. You could add some tweaks to encourage it though.

Maybe you need a biome map and an altimetry survey before you can log surface samples - the logic being that the rocks need the context of location to be of real value. Just an idea...

[Gargamel]

1 minute ago, Tyko said:

Maybe you need a biome map and an altimetry survey before you can log surface samples - the logic being that the rocks need the context of location to be of real value. Just an idea...

This makes more sense.    Until a scan is completed, there is only one biome, the body itself. 

As for Context, watch the episode of "From the Earth to The Moon" that features Harrison Schmidt and Apollo 17.  That whole episode is about training astronauts about how the context of geology is key to understanding where the surface samples come from.