Am I Missing Something?

[Stevie_D]

First, I'd like to say it's *tentatively* good to see the devs finally get back on track with the game. I'm reluctant to get too much into praising someone for what they initially should have done in the first place, but For Science seems to be the step in the right direction they needed.

I would like to stipulate that I do not want this thread devolving into bashing the devs, this is purely a technical gameplay question that I am confused by and it could be twisted by folks to attack them. So please keep it civil.

I am confused by the new tech tree progression. In every video so far, I've seen people do 2-3 missions and then unlock nearly or all -24- boxes of Tier 1.

Matt Lowne on his channel even challenged people to see if they could unlock ALL of Tier 1 in just 2 missions.

So that begs me to think "Well, why did the devs create ->24 <-boxes in the first place? Why do that if you unlock it all in 3 missions?" Surely it should be 3 to 4 boxes you need to unlock, because to design 24 would be to insinuate you're asking the player to make strategic choices of what they might need in the future and prioritize which tree branch they went down first ... but unlocking it all in 2-3 missions removes that strategic gameplay in its entirety.

So my second thought was maybe they will eventually remove the sheer amount of science points from the start of the game once all the  new solar systems are introduced and bags more science is available to collect. 

But then I remembered how game devs tend to work (this not being my first rodeo.) Obviously the game is in early access and is subject to change but, when it comes to difficulty levels, game developers have a history of only making difficulty settings easier over time, not harder (Because if they make it harder, the tendency is for the majority of the player-base to complain. The known method is to make it hard and reduce it until the majority of people are happy with the challenge.)

Then, of course, there is the fact KSP1 has a difficulty slider and your next reaction is to think maybe that will be implemented in KSP2. But, even without sliding the difficulty up or down in KSP1, the tech tree immediately starts making you make critical strategic decisions. I remember it being that way from day 1 implementation.

So I guess I'm a tad concerned that, along with the increased cartoonishness of the game's world that KSP2s game is also going to be dumbed down to the point where it is no longer a challenge, even with a difficulty slider. That isn't to say this is or will be the case, it's simply a concern at this point.

So, am I missing something with this tech tree? Because those in later tiers still seem to be unlocking many, many boxes at a time without much need of strategic gameplay thinking.

Again, please keep it civil folks. The devs have made a step in the right direction with the patch, it's not a shout from the rooftops redemption story but its a step in the right direction.

 

[Vl3d]

I started playing at 80% Science Reward and can confirm that progression slows down very much from Tier 2 onwards. Tier 1 progression is just not well balanced for experienced players.. the game rushes you to Mun Landing without going through the sounding rockets / satellites / orbital stuff.

11 minutes ago, Stevie_D said:

So I guess I'm a tad concerned that, along with the increased cartoonishness of the game's world that KSP2s game is also going to be dumbed down to the point where it is no longer a challenge, even with a difficulty slider.

You're not the only one who feels this.

PS: Please make the topic title more descriptive of the content.

Edited December 21, 2023 by Vl3d

[Kerbart]

18 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

I started playing at 80% Science Reward and can confirm that progression slows down very much from Tier 2 onwards. Tier 1 progression is just not well balanced for experienced players.. the game rushes you to Mun Landing without going through the sounding rockets / satellites / orbital stuff.

There's always the risk of reading more into the design than the actual thought that went into it, but for beginning players who struggle to get into orbit it's probably more than a challenge. Now, they could be helped with three or four more training missions (keeping the total rewards the same, meaning less rewards per mission) but it's questionable how much they gain for it and it would add towards more tedium for intermediate/advanced players.

During the long, long development of KSP2 (did I mention it was long? By Jool was it long...) one of the insights shared with us was that 80%-90% of the players never leave the Kerbin system and often peak at a Mun landing, not even making it to Minmus. There's an intention to change that. You can interpret Tier 1 as something to get you on your way, without (for new players) introducing a million parts at once, but also implying this is not the game, don't stay here too long, move on.

[Superfluous J]

Also there's the very real concept that if you give a new player an early taste of success, they're more willing to continue playing.

I remember hearing about FPSs making headshots a bit easier, and ignoring some of the shots you would take, in the first few minutes. I also recall playing a golf game where on the VERY FIRST HIT ever, I got a hole in one. Then, I didn't get another for hours upon hours of play.

Giving new players a ton of nodes to unlock just triggers that dopamine hit of achieving something. Is it cheap? Sure. Does it work? You betcha.

[Periple]

It’s generally considered good game design to have quick progression early on that levels off a bit later. It pulls players in and gets them to commit. Otherwise they tend to bounce.

You’ll see this in most current games that lean heavily on progression. In Baldur’s Gate 3 for example you’ll hit level 4 very quickly, then progression will slow down a lot.

Don’t forget that there will be at least one, possibly two more tiers. It makes sense to give you the basic stuff fast.

[chefsbrian]

6 minutes ago, Periple said:

It’s generally considered good game design to have quick progression early on that levels off a bit later. It pulls players in and gets them to commit. Otherwise they tend to bounce.

Bingo, exactly this. You want to move the player towards a 'cool' objective. Stuff like sounding rockets sounds nice when you think of the game as trying to emulate a 'real' space program, but we're not - we're trying to make space fun and accurate in equal measures. Pushing the player to quickly land on the Mun gives them that hook of "oh hell yea that was so cool" that then buoys them through figuring out the much harder steps to reach Duna, which then encourage them to do more orbital work and experimentation. But you want them to be doing that understanding why the goal on the other side is worthwhile - a Mun rush achieves that.

We're mostly veterans of the game, so we get 'bored' just rushing the Mun, we're looking for excuses to do something different with a run, but we're also the oddity they expect to let loose once the Muns been conquered. We're usually finding our own path anyway :P.

[Vl3d]

If a new player does not have enough time with every new Tier 1 parts he unlocks, he will not be able to learn the game. Being able to unlock almost everything in Tier 1 by just doing a suborbital hop is wrong - it does not teach you when you need those parts and what for.

[jacksawild]

Tier 1 is tutorial mode, experienced players will be blasting through it relatively easily. Tier 2 requires some experience and a bit of grinding, missions to Duna system and Gilly with some probes to outer planets. Tiers 3 and 4 will require some mastery. You can no longer just unlock everything with the Mun and Minmus which is what most people who played KPS1 ended up doing with the occasional Duna shot, and once the tech tree was complete then the career mode was basically over.  The number of people who completed a grand tour contract in career mode is probably quite small.

[Periple]

24 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

If a new player does not have enough time with every new Tier 1 parts he unlocks, he will not be able to learn the game. Being able to unlock almost everything in Tier 1 by just doing a suborbital hop is wrong - it does not teach you when you need those parts and what for.

It’s a balancing act. Too slow and players will bounce, too fast and they’ll get overwhelmed. I’ve no doubt progression will also get tuned as EA progresses. 

TBH I don’t think it’s going to be a problem if T1 really is too fast, it will turn off relatively few players. Too slow would be a bigger problem.

Edited December 21, 2023 by Periple

[tstein]

2 hours ago, Stevie_D said:

First, I'd like to say it's *tentatively* good to see the devs finally get back on track with the game. I'm reluctant to get too much into praising someone for what they initially should have done in the first place, but For Science seems to be the step in the right direction they needed.

I would like to stipulate that I do not want this thread devolving into bashing the devs, this is purely a technical gameplay question that I am confused by and it could be twisted by folks to attack them. So please keep it civil.

I am confused by the new tech tree progression. In every video so far, I've seen people do 2-3 missions and then unlock nearly or all -24- boxes of Tier 1.

Matt Lowne on his channel even challenged people to see if they could unlock ALL of Tier 1 in just 2 missions.

So that begs me to think "Well, why did the devs create ->24 <-boxes in the first place? Why do that if you unlock it all in 3 missions?" Surely it should be 3 to 4 boxes you need to unlock, because to design 24 would be to insinuate you're asking the player to make strategic choices of what they might need in the future and prioritize which tree branch they went down first ... but unlocking it all in 2-3 missions removes that strategic gameplay in its entirety.

So my second thought was maybe they will eventually remove the sheer amount of science points from the start of the game once all the  new solar systems are introduced and bags more science is available to collect. 

But then I remembered how game devs tend to work (this not being my first rodeo.) Obviously the game is in early access and is subject to change but, when it comes to difficulty levels, game developers have a history of only making difficulty settings easier over time, not harder (Because if they make it harder, the tendency is for the majority of the player-base to complain. The known method is to make it hard and reduce it until the majority of people are happy with the challenge.)

Then, of course, there is the fact KSP1 has a difficulty slider and your next reaction is to think maybe that will be implemented in KSP2. But, even without sliding the difficulty up or down in KSP1, the tech tree immediately starts making you make critical strategic decisions. I remember it being that way from day 1 implementation.

So I guess I'm a tad concerned that, along with the increased cartoonishness of the game's world that KSP2s game is also going to be dumbed down to the point where it is no longer a challenge, even with a difficulty slider. That isn't to say this is or will be the case, it's simply a concern at this point.

So, am I missing something with this tech tree? Because those in later tiers still seem to be unlocking many, many boxes at a time without much need of strategic gameplay thinking.

Again, please keep it civil folks. The devs have made a step in the right direction with the patch, it's not a shout from the rooftops redemption story but its a step in the right direction.

 

I think they will have to iterate a bit more on the science dynamics to get it right and well balanced. But given all their challenges I  can be patient with that.

[The Aziz]

2 hours ago, Stevie_D said:

In every video so far, I've seen people do 2-3 missions and then unlock nearly or all -24- boxes of Tier 1.

Matt Lowne on his channel even challenged people to see if they could unlock ALL of Tier 1 in just 2 missions.

These people are probably much more experienced than an average player towards which the tech tree on medium difficulty has been balanced. While minmaxing everything and speedrunning through the tech tree (thank gods you can't just walk around the KSC to get to tier 3 tech like you would in KSP1) isn't "wrong", it's not the "default" way of playing in the way the devs designed the progression.

I certainly didn't max out tier 1 after 3 missions, because I'm not interested in doing so - I collect science when there's an opportunity while I do missions, I don't seek where I can squeeze every single point from.

You'll get a different answers from new players about the balance.

Edited December 21, 2023 by The Aziz

[Kerbart]

1 hour ago, Vl3d said:

If a new player does not have enough time with every new Tier 1 parts he unlocks, he will not be able to learn the game. Being able to unlock almost everything in Tier 1 by just doing a suborbital hop is wrong - it does not teach you when you need those parts and what for.

I dare saying that the player who manages to unlock all tiles in Tier 1 with a single suborbital hop is definitely not a beginner. Even I, Kerbart The Great, needed more than that to unlock all the tiles.

It's also about teaching game mechanics without explicitly teaching game mechanics. New players will need to realize that it's key to unlock tiles to get tech they need.

8 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

thank gods you can't just walk around the KSC to get to tier 3 tech like you would in KSP1

Ah, those were the days, wardriving the research truck, literally hitting every building at the R&D facility, running half a dozen experiments at each and everyone of them...

[Superfluous J]

6 minutes ago, Kerbart said:

literally hitting every building at the R&D facility

Who knew the air pressure difference between touching and not touching Mission Control would be so lucrative?

[Tallenn]

2 hours ago, Vl3d said:

I started playing at 80% Science Reward and can confirm that progression slows down very much from Tier 2 onwards. Tier 1 progression is just not well balanced for experienced players.. the game rushes you to Mun Landing without going through the sounding rockets / satellites / orbital stuff.

You're not the only one who feels this.

PS: Please make the topic title more descriptive of the content.

I definitely agree is seems like the mun landing is rushed. IRL, they did a lot of orbital testing, including EVAs, rendezvous, and docking before even trying for a moon fly by. You certainly won't be able to do an Apollo style mission to the mun, without a lot of the tier 2 parts. 

 

The game is definitely fun, though. I'd go so far as to say more than the original even. 

[The Aziz]

1 hour ago, Superfluous J said:

Who knew the air pressure difference between touching and not touching Mission Control would be so lucrative?

Imagine if the interiors were modeled. Different pressure in director's office and in the press/audience room.

[regex]

3 hours ago, Vl3d said:

If a new player does not have enough time with every new Tier 1 parts he unlocks, he will not be able to learn the game. Being able to unlock almost everything in Tier 1 by just doing a suborbital hop is wrong - it does not teach you when you need those parts and what for.

Do you even know what you're talking about here? No one can unlock the entirety of  tier 1 with a single suborbital hop.

You can do it in two missions but you're only really doing that if you're overloading craft per mission and taking advantage of missions using craft already in flight, knowing how best to launch, basically already being an expert in KSP1. Science slows considerably in Kerbin SOI once you hit tier 2. All that tier 1 stuff is designed to be quickly unlocked for new players and old alike.

[HebaruSan]

11 hours ago, Stevie_D said:

In every video so far, I've seen people do 2-3 missions and then unlock nearly or all -24- boxes of Tier 1.

Matt Lowne on his channel even challenged people to see if they could unlock ALL of Tier 1 in just 2 missions.

Have you watched any videos or streams from players who are new to the franchise? I haven't, but I imagine it's going to be quite different from challenges put up by 10-year experts.

11 hours ago, Stevie_D said:

Why do that if you unlock it all in 3 missions?"

The players they're targeting with tier 1 won't.

11 hours ago, Vl3d said:

Tier 1 progression is just not well balanced for experienced players.. the game rushes you to Mun Landing without going through the sounding rockets / satellites / orbital stuff.

You're not the only one who feels this.

I loved fast-forwarding through the early boring stuff. I scaled my first craft to the somewhat OP thrust of the Swivel, and it has not unlocked every single tier 1 node yet, but it did get all the ones I care about after orbiting Mun and Minmus and a flyby of Duna/Ike. Getting to the point where you are able to do that is a process longer than most modern scripted RPGs.

11 hours ago, Vl3d said:

PS: Please make the topic title more descriptive of the content.

Strongly agreed.

Edited December 22, 2023 by HebaruSan

[Audaylon]

11 hours ago, Stevie_D said:

strategic gameplay thinking.

Once KSP 1 missions reach sub orbital tourism you gain unlimited cash.  I don't understand the opening statement, "back on track." as I feel they've always moved in one direction.  And then you end the post with keep it civil.. For just reason as after reading your post I think there are so many undertones and read between the lines within your post, for example,  "but then i remember how game devs tend to work" and "increased cartoonished."  I hope you can find joy in the game in the future.

[fragtzack]

Agree with others, the Mun landing is rushed in Exploration Mode KSP2.

Hopefully they will add more fluffy filler secondary missions.

[RayneCloud]

I don't get any of this, what difference does it make if it takes me 1 hour of gameplay to get to the mun or 6 hours? What do you want here? We're talking about pacing, progression curves, ease of access for new players and not catering just to the old hats, etc etc etc. You might think that everyone playing is some old KSP1 vet, but I am willing to bet money that's not the case. 

[Chilkoot]

12 hours ago, Stevie_D said:

I'm reluctant to get too much into praising someone for what they initially should have done in the first place

I think this is being a little harsh... Yes, For Science!  is probably the minimum viable product breakpoint that should have been released into EA, but with a fully bankrolled project like this, the developers don't have a lot of choice in what is released and when.   The guys that own the IP and write the cheques have almost complete directive capacity over release schedules, even if they are completely unrealistic.  Everyone we see in the dev interviews is literally a megacorp employee, and they take their orders from above.

Note the timing of 0.1 - right ahead of T2's fiscal year end and in-line with earlier investor guidance - is not a coincidence.  Could IG have arrived at the current state of progress by last Feb?  Maybe, and maybe that's on Nate, but I think the first finger-point should be at the ones holding the purse strings and calling the shots.

Probably a number of other concerns raised in this thread are related to the game being, so far at least, a recreation of KSP 1.  Same solar system, same parts, same Kerbals, same tech advancement, etc.  Why?  Returning players have done all this before, in the same order, dozens of times.  Did anyone in this forum even bother with a maneuver node for their first Mun intercept, or just eyeball it from doing it 100 times before?  The extremely easy progression we're seeing is largely a factor of all the planets, orbits, distances and rocket parts being essentially identical to KSP 1.  I still don't know how that decision made it past the whiteboard phase - that is something squarely on the dev's shoulders, and if we're going to furrow our collective brow over something, I'd suggest that's a good place to start.

[ArmchairGravy]

12 hours ago, jacksawild said:

Tier 1 is tutorial mode, experienced players will be blasting through it relatively easily. Tier 2 requires some experience and a bit of grinding, missions to Duna system and Gilly with some probes to outer planets. Tiers 3 and 4 will require some mastery. You can no longer just unlock everything with the Mun and Minmus which is what most people who played KPS1 ended up doing with the occasional Duna shot, and once the tech tree was complete then the career mode was basically over.  The number of people who completed a grand tour contract in career mode is probably quite small.

I resemble this remark. In KSP1 Sandbox I went everywhere just for the challenge of getting there. In KSP1 Science and Carreer modes I think I went to Duna once. I can see from where I am currently in KSP2 Science mode (halfway through tier 2) I'm going to have to actually get out there and scrape the Kerbol system to get the science to progress. Also KSP2 Science kind of puts a mask on some of the wonky physics landed craft are subjected to. I'm generally using one craft on a round-trip so I'm not experiencing the issues with physics loading like when I'm trying to create a Mun base in Sandbox.

 

[The Aziz]

7 hours ago, fragtzack said:

Agree with others, the Mun landing is rushed in Exploration Mode KSP2.

Is it though?

You're a new player. You manage to reach orbit. What's your next step? More of the same? No, new horizons, and the largest horizon on the... horizon, is the Mun. It's an obvious choice for step 2 in space exploration.

Sure, go ahead and build an orbital station if you like but as you said, it's just fluff, it doesn't get you anywhere, neither does it serve any purpose until orbital shipyards are in the game.

7 hours ago, Chilkoot said:

Did anyone in this forum even bother with a maneuver node for their first Mun intercept, or just eyeball it from doing it 100 times before? 

Yes. Because I hate imprecision and eyeballing. And even after 1500+ hours in KSP1 I still very much enjoy every single departure, approach and landing in KSP2, because it's not the same.

[Periple]

7 hours ago, Chilkoot said:

Did anyone in this forum even bother with a maneuver node for their first Mun intercept, or just eyeball it from doing it 100 times before? 

I even use maneuver nodes to circularize after launch! Every time!

[Dakitess]

You... Eyeball your TLI ? xD

Haha, I always set up the perfect manoeuver node, the ideal hohmann transfer that tangent the Mun Orbit, then I move the manoeuver node while paying attention to not touch any of the axis, and game on  Even after 8k hours, I would not eyeball that specific part ^^