Tech Tree Progression

[Dr. Kerbal]

Tech tree progression huh?????

[Pthigrivi]

Random question: what are the best interstellar escape trajectories if you’re trying to go somewhere specific? Is there an inherent advantage to launching from Jool and sundiving or flying from Duna up and using Jool as a slingshot? Or doe it not matter much if you’re trying to achieve some noticeable fraction of the speed of light?

Edited April 22, 2021 by Pthigrivi

[SOXBLOX]

I don't know, but you just made me think of something. I wanna build a ship, and gravity slingshot past as many stars as possible.

[MechBFP]

1 hour ago, Pthigrivi said:

Random question: what are the best interstellar escape trajectories if you’re trying to go somewhere specific? Is there an inherent advantage to launching from Jool and sundiving or flying from Duna up and using Jool as a slingshot? Or doe it not matter much if you’re trying to achieve some noticeable fraction of the speed of light?

If you want you can do the Oberth calculation at whatever periapsis around the Sun that you wish to use and see how much of a gain you get. 
 

https://www.askamathematician.com/2013/01/q-how-does-the-oberth-effect-work-and-where-does-the-extra-energy-come-from-why-is-it-better-for-a-rocket-to-fire-at-the-lowest-point-in-its-orbit/

[mcwaffles2003]

5 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

Random question: what are the best interstellar escape trajectories if you’re trying to go somewhere specific? Is there an inherent advantage to launching from Jool and sundiving or flying from Duna up and using Jool as a slingshot? Or doe it not matter much if you’re trying to achieve some noticeable fraction of the speed of light?

I believe the most efficient route would be to get really far out of the gravity well, retro-burn from apogee to graze the sun then burn at perigee near the sun.

[mattinoz]

With any luck everything we know or suspect based on KSP1 tech tree will be wrong.

[Hellenic]

I'm under the impression that the game's "tech tree" progression will sort of start where the original game left off, meaning that you start with the full tech tree of KSP 1 and go from there.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Hellenic said:

I'm under the impression that the game's "tech tree" progression will sort of start where the original game left off, meaning that you start with the full tech tree of KSP 1 and go from there.

That's an interesting option, I surely hope that they give you some more parts to start with, I get that not giving too much option to a new player is a good thing but the current tech tree of KSP1 is a little too sparse, I would at least star off with full staging capability.

Surely I hope they don't completely start with a "KSP1 is the past, now you have all the tech go build a colony on Laythe", the exploration progression of the Kerbolar system with all the firsts and unlocking the tech along the way can be made a lot more interesting with KSP2 terrain tech and useful bases and stations. 

For one I surely want a LKO KSS being a milestone of every career, not mandatory but surely helping speeding up research or training kerbonauts.

[Pthigrivi]

19 hours ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

I believe the most efficient route would be to get really far out of the gravity well, retro-burn from apogee to graze the sun then burn at perigee near the sun.

Yeah it seems like building your big interstellar vessels around the Joolean moons will make the most sense. 

[Lord Aurelius]

The tech tree in KSP1 definitely has some major problems that should be fixed in KSP2, but the bigger issue I want to see addressed is making the game progression about something more than just filling out the tech tree. The tech tree should enable game progression, not be the vast majority of it. Sandbox has its place, but I would like to see career expanded to provide more goals along the lines of what the anomaly explorer contract pack does, giving the player a concrete long term objective (get to a specific location on a planet and return data from the site, to unlock a logical next contract to maybe build a colony for example) with the tech tree facilitating those goals.

While we're on the topic of the tech tree, I think that funds, not science points should be used for unlocking nodes (similar to how KCT does it). At most, maybe returning sufficient science data from a specific location could unlock specific advanced nodes (i.e. gathering thermal data close to the sun unlocks some advanced heat shielding, landing on certain planets and gathering surface samples helps to develop landing legs/rover wheels), but in general it's a choice between spending funds to fly more missions with what you've got, or spending funds to develop new tech to enable new types of missions.

In terms of fixing the tech tree itself, I like the idea of being able to choose basically from the start whether to focus on manned vs unmanned (along with the appropriate supporting features like life support to make it a real choice, unlike in KSP where manned is superior in pretty much every way), and have a more logical progression to the tree and not lock super basic items like ladders and batteries several nodes in. It would also be neat to finally see the upgradeable parts system put to use and be able to develop more powerful and efficient variants of existing engines.

 

[mcwaffles2003]

@Lord Aurelius

5 hours ago, Lord Aurelius said:

The tech tree should enable game progression, not be the vast majority of it. Sandbox has its place, but I would like to see career expanded to provide more goals along the lines of what the anomaly explorer contract pack does, giving the player a concrete long term objective (get to a specific location on a planet and return data from the site, to unlock a logical next contract to maybe build a colony for example) with the tech tree facilitating those goals.

Honestly, with how KSP is we're going to have to define what "progression" is then. Firstly, is there an "ultimate goal" in the game? I would argue not really. We have the storyline contracts but these are simply requests to prove you can perform a maneuver but not really fulfilling a "why" you are performing that maneuver. Not to mention, once you complete the Mun and Minmus contracts then all the planet contracts are essentially the same thing just at a different place. Sadly, at this point, none of the prior contracts are preparing you for later contracts. This is why I think progress for most players stops after the Mun, nothing you are doing is helping you fulfill your future objectives, instead of being in series they're all now in parallel, so to speak.

Then we have the tech tree, but I would argue those are just hurdles to overcome and build you up to fulfill a goal, but not actually being the goal. Once again, since a player can fill out the tech tree within Kerbin's SOI there is no longer any reason complete any more objectives.

5 hours ago, Lord Aurelius said:

While we're on the topic of the tech tree, I think that funds, not science points should be used for unlocking nodes (similar to how KCT does it). At most, maybe returning sufficient science data from a specific location could unlock specific advanced nodes (i.e. gathering thermal data close to the sun unlocks some advanced heat shielding, landing on certain planets and gathering surface samples helps to develop landing legs/rover wheels), but in general it's a choice between spending funds to fly more missions with what you've got, or spending funds to develop new tech to enable new types of missions.

I agree that funding should be part in what progresses a space programs technology and I think undergoing certain events or gathering specific sets of data could act as either gates to tech (similar to what you've said) or act similar to civilization 6's tech tree and have those conditions act like "inspiration" where they "boost" the tech (make the tech cheaper and/or if time is involved shorten the time necessary to perform said research).

I really hope in the equivalent to career mode in KSP 2 we are kind of forced to colonize other bodies to find rare materials not available on Kerbin to aid in fleshing out the tech tree as there is no point in unlocking parts if you can't even build them. I think one of the biggest mechanic to overcome will also be balancing how finance works in the game and hopefully money will be necessary, but won't be able to get you everything, and raw resources will be needed in tandem to acquire the parts and pieces the player needs. Also, with exponentially expanding colonies should come exponential expansions of cost to make sure the player never ends up so rich that money no longer matters as is the case in KSP post Duna/Eve.

 

I made this thread a while ago giving a vague idea of what I hope to see out of the future of science in the game and provide some form of concrete long term objective to the overall game:

Spoiler

 

TL;DR

Mission: Catalog the universe and have the catalogue provide useful info to the players as they progress. 

It's what we do already anyway after Kerbin with no pushing or prodding so why not give it some structure and make it more useful, ya know?