What do you expect from the Science Update?

[cocoscacao]

1 hour ago, asmi said:

I think our petty earthly political squabbles have absolutely no place in the game about science.

And colonies... But Kerbals living in colonies for a long enough time will lead a very different life. And if you don't supply them regularly, they might raise a rebellion. I should start experimenting with Death-Star-like contraptions early.

[Wheehaw Kerman]

On 5/30/2023 at 9:35 AM, asmi said:

I think our petty earthly political squabbles have absolutely no place in the game about science.

I’m torn on this - between sweet idealistic purity and crunchy delicious history :).

On 5/30/2023 at 11:11 AM, cocoscacao said:

And colonies... But Kerbals living in colonies for a long enough time will lead a very different life. And if you don't supply them regularly, they might raise a rebellion. I should start experimenting with Death-Star-like contraptions early.

I’ll just point at the Putt-Putt.  Orion drives are alarming.

[AidenMakram]

I'm hoping it brings some serious excitement to the gameplay, way more than the last version.

[LittleBitMore]

-snip-

For a moment, let's step outside the realm of management, time restrictions, money and employee limitations, and performance. In an idealistic world with an idealistic KSP2, completely ignoring all aspects of feasibility, how would you want the Science systems to work?

I personally want experiments that take a while to run and get full science, so there's reasons to have orbiters instead of flybies and reasons to have stations instead of temporary manned missions. I would also want scansat type stuff.

Remember, this thread isn't about what you expect or what's readily achievable, I just wanna see what everyone thinks is an ideal science system for KSP2 assuming unlimited time and resources.

Edited June 26, 2023 by Gargamel
Content redacted by moderator

[Polaris0352]

I'm liking where your head is on this. I was a fan of the deployable science stations from the original. Some of the more instant experiments are nice, but having something you need to deploy and then recover some time later seems more realistic. I think having some sort of observatory science would be cool. Kinda like having something watching Kerbol for a period of months to observe its changes before you get science from the experiment, maybe having something where you build a telescope that actually observes distant stars for science and maybe also discovering a nearby star to inspire interstellar travel? Ooh, ahhh...  Sorry for the ramble. I am both extremely tired and at work.

[whatsEJstandfor]

Instead of science points, I might want to tie any new part or ability to a specific science goal. For example, say you don't start out with access to a certain kind of fuel, but then collecting a surface sample at, Duna, for example, gives the material scientsist on Kerbin enough data to synthesize it.

And not only would I want parts to be unlocked with science, but engineering data as well. Like, maybe you only gain the ability to calculate your TWR on other bodies once you've sent a satellite to that body to measure its gravity or something. Something like that isn't that realistic since we can measure a body's mass remotely irl but, idk, just spitballing here.

And, until you have send a probe with a hi-res camera into a polar orbit, the map view just shows what the planets look like from ground-based telescopes. That kind of clear cause-effect in science gathering would be p fun imho

[TLTay]

We talked about this for about 3 years while waiting through delays for the game to release "when it was finshed."

Best case scenario is probably KSP1 science with a minor twist of some kind. Maybe experiments over time, or automated gathering. They're going to want to show timeline progress, and quickly... so any fancy notions of revolutionary science system should be hung up. 

Look at how the current product stacks up against KSP1 with mods (or no mods) to get an idea of what to expect.

[Superfluous J]

The below is not what I expect from the science update. I replied to a thread about what I want from the science update and it was merged into this thread.

I want science gathering to be a logistical and engineering challenge. This means:

• The way I fly and where/how I land or flyby are important.
• A ship designed to do science will be different than a ship designed to do something else.
• A ship designed to do one science experiment will be different than a ship designed to do a different science experiment.

This could be done with contracts/missions/whatever they're calling it. Let's say Rockomax wants atmospheric data or something or they can't make the next size engine because handwaviastic reasons. They give you a unique part that must be attached within X meters of a specific engine of theirs, and taking that part to various places and using the engines there will gather data. Maybe you'll get more/better data on Eve than on Kerbin, or maybe Duna. Maybe you can double dip by getting some data in the day time and some data at night (when the air is cooler). Whatever it is, you're getting Rockomax Engine data and when done, it lets you unlock a new Rockomax engine.

Another example: The Kerbin Science Institute wants you to set up a gravity gradient experiment. They want to know how gravity varies at specific distances apart in real-time. So, they want 2 gravioli detectors orbiting Kerbin in a polar orbit, but they must be X meters apart. Ideally, X would be an uncomfortably large number, so you have to design a ship around it. It's up to you to design a launcher that can deploy a vessel that holds them X meters apart. They just want the science. What you can do with that science I'm not sure but I bet it'd have to do with unlocking parts.

At no point should you have to right click any of these things and "do science"

Edited June 22, 2023 by Superfluous J

[stephensmat]

I want a reason for science to stay relevant after the Tech Tree is unlocked. KSP1 has that with options to turn excess points into funds, and that works for me. But if KSP2 isn't going to have regular 'cash', then I hope they replace it with something else; if not in the Science Update than at least in the full game.

[Lexyrus]

9 hours ago, TLTay said:

We talked about this for about 3 years while waiting through delays for the game to release "when it was finshed."

Best case scenario is probably KSP1 science with a minor twist of some kind. Maybe experiments over time, or automated gathering. They're going to want to show timeline progress, and quickly... so any fancy notions of revolutionary science system should be hung up. 

Look at how the current product stacks up against KSP1 with mods (or no mods) to get an idea of what to expect.

 

So are you willing to engage in a hypothetical or do you just want to bash the devs for an executive decision they likely had no say in (the deadline)?

To answer the actual question in the post... In an ideal scenario, I would link different types of data to different types of tech, mostly data about different materials going towards different vessel parts. What do volcanoes/geysers/atmospheres/rocks on far away planets have? Different ratios of various elements. What does that do to their physical properties? That's what you're there to find out. Why do we care? Better parts for more ships. Simple gameplay loop.
So that also could tie into a mission system and tech tree that's a little more robust, too. You wouldn't have just "Science Points" you'd have (just off the top of my head) "Materials Research", "Fuel Research", "Aerodynamics Research", and so on, but each part could take just one of them, or 2 or 3 different types to encourage variety in the missions taken on by players. Show them more of the universe by putting the stuff they need out there.

 

Now, will any of that be in 1.0? Probably not, Can a girl dream? Absolutely.

[Gargamel]

Overlapping threads have been merged. 

[KUAR]

I would like Science to be integrated into a "simulation / rocket test" mode.

One of my bugbears has always been that, to test a complex vehicle, you need to cheat-warp to a planet and actually descend/ascend. I particularly detested this the first time I created an Eve return vehicle. Otherwise, you're repeating the same launch and interplanetary transfers time and again. The first time you land on a planet ought to be a special occasion, not spoiled by the fact that you've warped to it a dozen times already to test that you've got enough parachutes or that your rocket survived re-entry without flipping / disassembling.

Once we have enough information about a planet, we can generate "simulators" for certain planets where we can test rocket designs, either landers / rovers / ascent modules.

We should start by knowing almost nothing about the Kerbolar system. We could start by identifying the planets near us using orbital telescopes perhaps. We've now identified that they're there; they have a name. Perhaps we know their mass.

To get more information about a planet - atmospheric density, temperature, surface gravity, surface composition, rotation speed, etc. we need to deploy probes with scientific equipment.

[Wheehaw Kerman]

17 hours ago, TLTay said:

We talked about this for about 3 years while waiting through delays for the game to release "when it was finshed."

Best case scenario is probably KSP1 science with a minor twist of some kind. Maybe experiments over time, or automated gathering. They're going to want to show timeline progress, and quickly... so any fancy notions of revolutionary science system should be hung up. 

Look at how the current product stacks up against KSP1 with mods (or no mods) to get an idea of what to expect.

OTOH, when you look at how KSP2 four months into EA stacks up against KSP in literally every aspect, it gives some indication of how far beyond KSP science KSP2 science could go.

I’m looking forwards to your thoughts on KSP2 1.0 versus KSP 1.0, once the game has, you know, actually been developed to the point where it bears the comparison.

 

[K33N]

I hope its some combination of career mode missions + tech tree.

They have taken sooo much longer to fix the basics of orbital mechanics than I ever thought, so I can even believe that we will never see science mode this year.

[MarcAbaddon]

On 6/22/2023 at 8:46 PM, Wheehaw Kerman said:

OTOH, when you look at how KSP2 four months into EA stacks up against KSP in literally every aspect, it gives some indication of how far beyond KSP science KSP2 science could go.

*snip*

 

Don't really get that point. I think from what we have seen so far, whatever improvements there are compared to KSP 1 they are fairly just incremental and rather small. All the big additions are later in the roadmap. Right now we just don't know how good their from-scratch gameplay systems will be, especially as they did not reveal much about them yet. At the moment my guess is that science will unfortunately be fairly similar to KSP 1. 

[Wheehaw Kerman]

11 hours ago, MarcAbaddon said:

Don't really get that point. I think from what we have seen so far, whatever improvements there are compared to KSP 1 they are fairly just incremental and rather small. All the big additions are later in the roadmap. Right now we just don't know how good their from-scratch gameplay systems will be, especially as they did not reveal much about them yet. At the moment my guess is that science will unfortunately be fairly similar to KSP 1. 

Well, we’ll see.  The AMA today was a bit vague about the Science update, but the glimpses we’re seeing of the Mini-Lab and other Science parts could be signs of a different take on it.  I forget who came up with the idea, but “fog of exploration”, where we only start with what data can be gleaned by telescope and need to do flybys, probes, etc. to get the useful information like details on the atmosphere, for example, would be fun.  Especially for those of us who are new to the game.

[stephensmat]

Some of these ideas are more RPG than space sim. To be honest, I expect to see them pop up as Mods, or in the Multiplayer expansion.

I could see it in Multiplayer. I mean, KSP1 never had weapons, but that never stopped anyone determined to make warships. Some people are going to create a multiplayer game specifically to play out 'Expanse' fanfiction. 

I look forward to the YouTube videos.

[KUAR]

12 hours ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

Well, we’ll see.  The AMA today was a bit vague about the Science update, but the glimpses we’re seeing of the Mini-Lab and other Science parts could be signs of a different take on it.  I forget who came up with the idea, but “fog of exploration”, where we only start with what data can be gleaned by telescope and need to do flybys, probes, etc. to get the useful information like details on the atmosphere, for example, would be fun.  Especially for those of us who are new to the game.

It's something I've mentioned once or twice, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. 

I reckon that gathering science about a place should enable future missions to be made easier. Just off the top of my head - performing an polar orbital scan allows you to access a 3D terrain model back at KSC and pick a landing spot in your desired biome / elevation / slope, a bit like KerbNet. Perhaps you need to actually be on the surface and take samples to enable materials analysis and thus identify ore locations. Perhaps identifying exoplanets requires solar-orbit telescopes. Perhaps dropping a probe through the atmosphere allows you to measure the atmosphere density and gravity, giving you the right number of parachutes for a given lander and allowing you to model the dV requirements to get back to orbit.

Basically, I find trial-and-error with real bodies quite tedious. Not only does it make the actual landing a bit anticlimactic after you've "nearly" got it a dozen times, but also unless you space-warp you've also got the launch, circularisation, transfer and capture to do repeatedly. Real space exploration is done in baby steps with lots of research, modelling, etc but the first thing I did when I got KSP2 was strap together an Apollo-style Mun mission, blast off and aim to get Kerbals to the Mun. A half-dozen failures (and a dozen bugs) later, I had it - but I don't think that's the way it should go when you have a career mode.

[Scarecrow71]

At this point, if I'm being honest...I don't expect much.  It is the first feature on the roadmap, and they aren't telling us anything about it other than some hints in the AMA and a couple of new animations.  Zero actual, tangible information about the direction they are taking this.

In addition to that, Nate recently stated it was "months away," which puts this coming out no sooner than Q4...and quite possibly not until after the 1st of the year.  My prediction is near the anniversary of EA release, and quite possibly not until after it.

[Kerbart]

On 6/22/2023 at 12:53 AM, Superfluous J said:

The below is not what I expect from the science update. I replied to a thread about what I want from the science update and it was merged into this thread.

I want science gathering to be a logistical and engineering challenge. This means:

• The way I fly and where/how I land or flyby are important.
• A ship designed to do science will be different than a ship designed to do something else.
• A ship designed to do one science experiment will be different than a ship designed to do a different science experiment.

(...)

At no point should you have to right click any of these things and "do science"

Those are valid points and what is missing there (but surely you are thinking along those lines) is that Science should matter.

In KSP1, Science yields anonymous points that can be used for anything. Instead experiments with engines should be needed to unlock higher I_sps, or a class of engines in the first place (not a single engine, there would be grinding). Same for fuel tanks, or pretty much any part. Make science relevant for progress in the game, find a way to assess the quality of the experiment (materials study in various orbits over an extended amount of time means higher crash limits) and apply it to the progress.

[RalphKerman]

I have no particular expectations but it would be interesting to see if science is not treated as a "currency" as in KSP 1 but more specialized. Like some people here wrote, maybe make material science experiments have a greater impact on unlocking new construction parts (larger hulls, pods etc.) and other types of science having an influence on the progress of different parts of the tech tree.

But even if it works exactly as in KSP 1 (an experiment yields x amount of science that can be used to "purchase" new tech) I will be very very happy once science mode arrives as it is to date my favourite mode to play KSP 1.

[TLTay]

Which will we get first: science update or the next year-numbered covid strain?

[RocketRockington]

17 hours ago, TLTay said:

Which will we get first: science update or the next year-numbered covid strain?

Next COVID, then delays to science to science mode will be blamed on it.  

[TLTay]

14 hours ago, RocketRockington said:

Next COVID, then delays to science to science mode will be blamed on it.  

COVID-23 it is, then. 

[Kerbin Launch Coalition]

On 5/30/2023 at 11:01 AM, Lyneira said:

A nod to political prestige in the backstory of the game (however it is told) couldn't hurt. We'll have multiplayer, and the different launch sites that will exist would presumably also be used by other space agencies. Prestige was definitely a big driver for the push towards the first human in orbit and the first moon landing.  Which is not to say the game must have AI space agencies to compete against in single player. But acknowledging it as one of the drivers, I see no problem with.

That is absolute truth, the one thing Kerbal Space Program lacks in any real regard is a narrative. I'd much rather see politics involved than just assume Kerbals are this perfect utopian society.