Repeatable transmission nullifies sample return

[Psycix]

So the idea was that a returned experiment was (depending on the type of experiment) worth more if brought back rather than transmitted.

I remember a quote along these lines:

"A picture of a rock is much less meaningful than returning an actual rock."

However: You can only return one sample, and as soon as you hit the solar panels, you can easily re-gather and transmit data an infinite amount of times.

The system is now as follows:

"Sending the same picture of the same rock a dozen times is worth more than returning the rock."

Obviously, this does not make sense.

My proposal:

-Repeating the same experiment does not grant any science points.

-Transmitting can only grant x% of the science points, depending on the type.

-Returning a sample grants the remaining y% of science points. x+y=100%

-If you did not transmit about it, you get those x% points as well upon returning (a picture of a rock is worthless when the rock itself arrives)

-If you DID transmit about it before, you only get y%, but as you got x% before you still got the full x+y=100% in the end.

-Mystery Goo and material bays close after observation, preserving the specimen in the state in which it ended up.

-Some experiments acquire huge amounts of data, but only exist in the form of data (think of infrared imaging or radiation measurments or such) these experiments can either be transmitted live, or stored on a harddisk-like device for return. It is up to the player to decide which method is most suitable, and both give the full 100% of available points. This makes non-return probes and rovers viable missions that grant all available points for the given experiment.

CURRENT:

RETURN REPEATED a few times = all points

TRANSMIT REPEATED a lot of times = all points, no need to return

or any combination thereof = all points

SUGGESTED:

TRANSMIT = part of points

RETURN = all points

TRANSMIT + RETURN = still all points

REPEATING = nothing

Edited October 17, 2013 by Psycix

[Dunbaratu]

Yes, I noticed that too. For "roleplaying" purposes I try to recover the science bay but if I didn't care about that I could gain the science points by just repeating the "transmit data" process over and over.

There probably needs to be a limit to how many times you can do that with the same science bay. Perhaps even a limit of 1. Let you keep re-attempting the experiment, but once you decide to transmit it that's it, it's locked.

[Zeroignite]

Seconded.

After a probe-landing on the Mun earlier today I just spam-transmitted results from my goo-tube and science bay repeatedly until I was getting near-zero returns, so now I have no need to do a return from that landing site. The only hassle is waiting for solar panels to recharge the batteries.

I also realized that for one-way missions, the current system makes packing more than one bay or goo-tube pointless.

[ri00t]

-Repeating the same experiment does not grant any science points.

Completely agree. Gathering Science from same spot shouldn't give Science. Maybe after tag some craters or areas from camera orbiting celestial body give a purpose to fly on Mun, Minmus etc. again.

-Transmitting can only grant x% of the science points, depending on the type.

Agree again, but it will also depends on managed/unmanaged crew, (science abilities of Kerbals?), and size of team. (In far future)

I also force to start getting science by stock car and plane and build a comunication net like in RemoteTech. Transfering data by tiny antena from inaccessible point far in space consume the same energy like in KSC and it is always possible.

From me:

- More space for different reports.

- More space for rocks and some weight in far future

- Advanced antena should be more efficient

[Crush]

I disagree that repeating an experiment shouldn't give any more results.

Arguing from a simulationist standpoint: Repeating an experiment verifies that the results are not random but reproducible. When they are random, repeating the experiment multiple times is required to create a statistical analysis of the results. Also, there are different ways to perform an experiment. When you expose an experiment to space, it might matter how fast you open the doors or in what angle it faces the sun. In purely observational experiments like the mystery goo experiment, repetition might be equal to taking another look, but watching for different details this time before transmitting them. Or it could simulate the crew attempting to do different things with the goo containers like shaking them and reporting the results. Multiple recovery could also make sense when you rationalize that each experiment might be slightly different, although it uses the same part. Multiple goo containers could contain goo with different mixtures. Multiple science labs could contain different materials.

Arguing from a gameist standpoint: Repeating experiments and transmitting the results isn't free. The energy requirements of sending something are quite substantial. It can be mitigated by solar panels, though. That recovering the same experiment multiple times requires additional work and skill from the player and is worth rewarding is obvious.

But I do agree that transmitting shouldn't be able to completely remove the value of recovering.

Maybe each experiment could have two pools of science points, one which is only depleted by recovering and one which is depleted by both recovering and transmitting.

Edited October 17, 2013 by Crush

[Seret]

as soon as you hit the solar panels, you can easily re-gather and transmit data an infinite amount of times.

No you can't. There's a fixed amount of science available for each experiment. You can either get all that science in a lump by doing sample and return missions, or you can get it in dribs and drabs by transmitting. Either way, you'll end up with the same amount of science.

[Kerbart]

No you can't. There's a fixed amount of science available for each experiment. You can either get all that science in a lump by doing sample and return missions, or you can get it in dribs and drabs by transmitting. Either way, you'll end up with the same amount of science.

That's haggling over semantics. The OP should indeed have said "unlimited" instead of "infinite" but the point is that instead of returning a sample the same amount of science can be gathered by repeatedly sending over data of the same experiment. The amount of data transmitted diminishes every time, but by repeating the transmissions enough times the difference with returning the sample approaches zero (and due to rounding becomes zero).

NOTE: keep in mind that the game is always under development. This is why the rapid development cycle Squad has elected works so much better than waiting three years to release version 1.0 to the public: because it exposes flaws the developers never thought of.

[Seret]

the point is that instead of returning a sample the same amount of science can be gathered by repeatedly sending over data of the same experiment. The amount of data transmitted diminishes every time, but by repeating the transmissions enough times the difference with returning the sample approaches zero (and due to rounding becomes zero).

Yes, once you have solar panels you could (if you think doing so is fun) sit there and transmit > recharge > rerun experiment > transmit. It'd generally be quicker and easier to just return the sample, at least while still near Kerbin.

Is this a realistic simulation of real-life science? Nope. But it's a good enough game mechanic IMO.

[Psycix]

I disagree that repeating an experiment shouldn't give any more results.

Arguing from a simulationist standpoint: Repeating an experiment verifies that the results are not random but reproducible. When they are random, repeating the experiment multiple times is required to create a statistical analysis of the results. Also, there are different ways to perform an experiment. When you expose an experiment to space, it might matter how fast you open the doors or in what angle it faces the sun. In purely observational experiments like the mystery goo experiment, repetition might be equal to taking another look, but watching for different details this time before transmitting them. Or it could simulate the crew attempting to do different things with the goo containers like shaking them and reporting the results. Multiple recovery could also make sense when you rationalize that each experiment might be slightly different, although it uses the same part. Multiple goo containers could contain goo with different mixtures. Multiple science labs could contain different materials.

Arguing from a gameist standpoint: Repeating experiments and transmitting the results isn't free. The energy requirements of sending something are quite substantial. It can be mitigated by solar panels, though. That recovering the same experiment multiple times requires additional work and skill from the player and is worth rewarding is obvious.

But I do agree that transmitting shouldn't be able to completely remove the value of recovering.

Maybe each experiment could have two pools of science points, one which is only depleted by recovering and one which is depleted by both recovering and transmitting.

Thank you for your feedback. I partly agree, yet those points can be solved otherwise.

Simulationist: Yes, but, performing the same experiment again in another flight from a different container is a different experiment. Picking up the same rock, taking the same picture and sending it off is not.

Also, if, for example the goo got affected by a certain environment, we'd need a new sample of goo for the next one. We can't simply close the doors, forget that the goo was scorched by gamma rays and pretend it's brand new.

So I agree, that experiments may be repeated, but I think this should DEFINITELY not be with the same materials, at the same location, at the same time. Biomes already solve a part of this: Doing the experiment in a different biome is already considered a new experiment. (Perhaps the first experiment of a certain type on a certain body should give the most science, and repeating it in different biomes yield science with diminishing returns, much like the current system does for one single experiment.)

Gameist standpoint: The energy requirements may be substantial, but as soon as you get the solarpanel this turns into: "We require a lot of something we have an unlimited quantity of." Transmitting _is_ free.

Yes, once you have solar panels you could (if you think doing so is fun) sit there and transmit > recharge > rerun experiment > transmit. It'd generally be quicker and easier to just return the sample, at least while still near Kerbin.

Is this a realistic simulation of real-life science? Nope. But it's a good enough game mechanic IMO.

You do know that the game has timewarp and you can send off dozens of experiments in a minute of playtime by generating the electricity at warpspeed?

And the problem still stands: Imagine an experiment with a value of 10. (Numbers are arbitrary and guesstimated to my gameplay, I will test ingame and provide screenshots for accurate numbers once I have time)

1 x sample return (100%): 10 points of science. The next time it will be worth 5.

Total: You gained 10 points with a sample return mission.

5 x transmission (50%):

5.00 points of science. The next time it will be worth 7.5

3.25 points of science. The next time it will be worth 5.87

2.93 points. Next: 4.4

2.20 points. Next: 3.3

1.65 points. Next: 2.5

Total: You gained 15.03 points without even returning anything. (which you can still do afterwards)

How is this not flawed?

Edited October 17, 2013 by Psycix

[Seret]

And the problem still stands: Imagine an experiment with a value of 10. (Numbers are arbitrary and guesstimated to my gameplay, I will test ingame and provide screenshots for accurate numbers once I have time)

1 x sample return (100%): 10 points of science. The next time it will be worth 5.

Total: You gained 10 points with a sample return mission.

5 x transmission (50%):

5.00 points of science. The next time it will be worth 7.5

3.25 points of science. The next time it will be worth 5.87

2.93 points. Next: 4.4

2.20 points. Next: 3.3

1.65 points. Next: 2.5

Total: You gained 15.03 points without even returning anything. (which you can still do afterwards)

How is this not flawed?

As I understand it, the system doesn't work quite this way. As I understand it, say there are 20 points of science available:

Return missions:

First experiment might net 75% of this: 15 science, 5 remains

Second experiment would get 75% of that: 3.75, 1.25 remains.

And so on...

Transmitting:

First experiment gets 75%, with 50% transmitted: 7.5 science, 12.5 remains.

Second experiment gets 75% x 50%: 4.7is, 7.8 remains.

Third experiment gets: 2.9ish, 4.9 remains.

Etc...

You're never going to get more science in total by transmitting than by returning. Returning it gives you a big lumps sum payment, transmitting gives you little payments, and requires copious electricity. As you say, once you get solar panels that becomes less of an issue, and grinding science by transmitting it becomes a viable route to go down. That's why you don't get solar panels or batteries to start.

Edited October 17, 2013 by Seret

[Psycix]

You're never going to get more science in total by transmitting than by returning.

Correct. But you can get an equal amount and "exhaust the source" without having to do a return.

My illustration was meant to show that you can get more points out of a single mission by transmitting instead of returning. I'll post accurate numbers later.

The total amount of points available is equal.

The question is, which is harder: Going one-way and spamming transmit 20 times, or going somewhere AND returning a few times?

Edited October 17, 2013 by Psycix

[Tommygun]

Repeating the experiment can be defined more than one way.

If you do a complete chemical analysis of a rock sample in the field that is one experiment.

Then do it ten times over with ten different rocks.

The science is very streamlined and symbolic right now. Hopefully they will flesh it out more, but it will never really look like real science.

I think they could have at least had multiple experiments for each science part to reduce the redundant feeling.

[Seret]

The question is, which is harder: Going one-way and spamming transmit 20 times, or going somewhere AND returning a few times?

At the early tiers, where electricity is limited, the choice is made for you. You don't have enough power to transmit all your findings. Once you have big batts and solar panels, then yes you can get more science per launch, if you're happy to do multiple transmits. I think the obvious intention is to make the early missions (suborbital, orbital, mun & minmus) virtually necessitate a return, but allowing later interplanetary flights to get all their science back by transmitting.

[Merinsan]

I completely agree that there should be some benefit of returning a sample, rather than transmitting it. Realistically, you can't pack all the science equipment into a space ship (unless it's the enterprise!), you need specialized equipment in a lab. Some of the equipment may well be larger than your ship!

I agree with the OP on the breakdown on points. Sample return is worth 100%, while transmission is worth say 60% of that, and you'll never get more than that. I don't agree that repeating should not give points however. If I pick up 2 rocks from the same spot, they are never the same. They may look similar, but they are always different.

I do hope Squad changes this in the future, so you are required to return samples at some point for the maximum science. Overall though I'm still liking science!

[Grumman]

If it was me, I'd add more pools of Science points, and allow a single event to draw from multiple pools. Instead of a single Goo pool of 10 points, split it into two pools of 6 and 4 points. If you retrieve the Goo this counts for both pools, but transmitting data only accesses the one pool.

[Dunbaratu]

Arguing from a gameist standpoint: Repeating experiments and transmitting the results isn't free. The energy requirements of sending something are quite substantial. It can be mitigated by solar panels, though. That recovering the same experiment multiple times requires additional work and skill from the player and is worth rewarding is obvious.

In the alternate game you're talking about where you have to do additional things to get more data that would make sense. But in this game that's not true. It takes no effort at all to just rightclick through the menus multiple times while the spacecraft drifts. You don't actually have to send an additional mission to recover the rest of the science available from the location you're in. You can just keep re-clicking on the same probe over and over until the science from an experiment is fully depleted. And electricity is an infinitely renewable resource so no, that's not really a cost. It's just a cost in waiting a few seconds for a recharge.

[Frostiken]

If I pick up 2 rocks from the same spot, they are never the same. They may look similar, but they are always different.

We sent back thousands of pictures of different rocks from Mars. We were totally unable to learn anything new about them, so we had to send a new rover with a laser spectrometer and a science lab to directly work on samples of rocks.

Yes, once you have solar panels you could (if you think doing so is fun) sit there and transmit > recharge > rerun experiment > transmit. It'd generally be quicker and easier to just return the sample, at least while still near Kerbin.

Is this a realistic simulation of real-life science? Nope. But it's a good enough game mechanic IMO.

The problem is that neither of these things are challenging, and it honestly won't take very long for most people to cease being amazed by the science concept. Currently the entire feature is basically 'land somewhere, and click a button', and you magically get new tech. The difference between a trip to the moon and back pre-0.22 and a trip to the moon and back post-0.22 is that you have to click a couple extra things. As a result, you unlock half the tech tree upon return.

Edited October 18, 2013 by Frostiken

[NeilC]

The difference between a trip to the moon and back pre-0.22 and a trip to the moon and back post-0.22 is that you have to click a couple extra things. As a result, you unlock half the tech tree upon return.

Contrast that to Civ, or most other strategy games, where the paradigm is to click a couple things, then wait a while before unlocking the tech tree.

I agree with your point about getting too much too quickly, but I think the current Science concept is fun and playable. It just needs balancing. More than anything, I think it needs the introduction of money and Kerbonomics to act as an additional brake on what you can build.

[allmhuran]

A good suggestion! Have a +1

[Wheffle]

I love this suggestion, and I think it needs to be looked into.

This is my primary concern: spamming transmissions to get the max science out of an experiment is the easiest and quickest way to get the science, but it isn't fun. Landing a probe and clicking the goo canister over and over isn't engaging gameplay for me. I understand there are some tedious aspects of KSP, but those aspects are a product of pretty cool game mechanics, and I can deal with them. The transmission spamming tedium is completely fabricated, and it also kills any reason to bring a specimen back to Kerbin, which is actually a challenge and can be fun.

Anyway, that's the way I see it. I'm not really interested in over-realism or anything like that, I'm more interested in the game being more engaging, and having both transmission and recovery play important, interesting roles in science acquisition. I'm one of those players that like to play the game as expertly and efficiently as possible, but if the most expert/efficient way of doing things is also a boring or tedious way of doing things, it puts a damper on the game. For me, at least. I'm not big into self-imposed rules either.

[Merinsan]

We sent back thousands of pictures of different rocks from Mars. We were totally unable to learn anything new about them, so we had to send a new rover with a laser spectrometer and a science lab to directly work on samples of rocks.

That is not entirely true and is besides the point. If it were true, they'd not bother with pictures anymore. The first pictures taught us a lot, and every now and then a new picture brings new information, which is normally very marginal - diminishing returns!

How do you know that is all the Kerbals are doing? Maybe they have a laser spectrometer with them. The point is, the more sophisticated the lab, the more science you can do.

A camera is better than someone telling you what the rock looks like - scientists can analyze the photo and see strata layers etc.

A laser spectrometer is better still.

Cutting the rock open is even better.

[DannySwish]

I don't think people would be inclined to spam one reading over and over again if the experiments allowed saving more than one result in one form or another. If I want to gather all of the science from the science bay part on one mission, I either sacrifice 80% of the science, or put something like 6 science bays on the same rocket, and perform the experiment in a different place with each. This doesn't seem right to me at all. I think that the experiments you perform with this and the Goo canister should give the option of saving the data, or preserving the experiment done last to return to Kerbin. Saving the data would give you partial credit, and closing the bay/canister to preserve results of the latest of those experiments would make more realistic sense. This is essentially doing what transmitting does without having to transmit, just having a log on the pod when you return. The thermometer can only save one reading at a time, and does not transmit for 100% science. How does that make any sense at all? Temperature is the most standard reading you could get; it doesn't matter if you transmit "-12.013" or return with "-12.013." It's the same value. Nothing is to be gained by returning over transmitting with that part. And why can't it hold more than one value? Do I have to place twenty of them on my ship so I don't have to do twenty different launches to get all my data? Kerbals, please stop being so lazy and write down more than one thermostat reading.

[Wheffle]

Good point about the thermometer... and, come to think of it, the gravioli and pressure readers also. They should all be 100% transmit haha. Oh well, my main concern is that the game has turned into "Kerbal Transmission Spam Program" for me, since I'm OCD (not literally, but you understand) and I can't stand not getting all of the science possible on a mission, which makes recovery obsolete once you get any kind of solar panels.

Getting an unmanned probe into orbit or on the surface of a celestial body should get you some science (including 100% for certain experiments, like temperature and stuff), but there needs to be a good chunk of science still available for recovery missions so that organizing a manned return trip (which is more difficult) actually has a point.

I understand that a probe can't take crew reports, EVA reports or soil samples (although I'd like to see some science parts that allow for that...), which does leave some science to be done for manned missions, but I really think the only way to get full credit for materials and goo experiments (and soil) should be recovery. There needs to be some reason to do a recovery mission.

[running]

Ok so this is what I've been doing...

I hooked up doing science in 1 action group to 1 button. So pressing "2"does all the readings all my instruments can do.

I get presented with windows to click to send all the data.

And I basically grind to get science points... (I even do this during launches)

Now to me this makes sense... 1 temperature reading is ok... but if I have a 100 readings spread over time I have much more information on how the temperature varies over time. Same for a lot of other readings like presure which I measure multiple times during a launch.

But I can also imagine this being usefull for other experiments, the difference between looking at some sample briefly and sending back the results as compared to studying it over time. Or having someone/something in place that can do all kinds of stuff to the sample over time and transmitting the results.

Even if my astronaut never returns, him sitting in that shed on Duna examining rocks all day long, the information he sends back is usefull right? (ok maybe his report after 10 years of looking at rocks is less interesting than the reports he send back the first 2 days.)

But when I'm just pressing buttons to grind the system to get my science points it becomes silly, For example the EVA report... Get out, do EVA report, get in, transmit, get out, do EVA report, get in, transmit, get out, do EVA report, get in, transmit etc...

Even though I'm sure a Kerbal that did his 5th EVAmight still have learned something worth sharing, this grinding for science points is a problem. (As it is pointless, booring and should be offshored.)

I think there should be a link between unlimited energy and reports... If you have nlimited energy, your only limiting factor is the time to do the science, (for example the measurements you take during launch, you can only do so many before you are in orbit. Same for science you are doing while buzzing at high speed past an object when you are not in a stable orbit.) so maybe a continues measurements button, where you automatically keep recording and transmitting over a period of time to get all the science points you can get.

The points you get from bringing something back home, should be seperated from the data you can transmit. Brining a termometer back from space is pointless, but the value of rocks brought back from a mission is priceless.

Thinking about it... "value....priceless" maybe the value of bringing something back should be in cash. You can sell the stuff for money that came back from space. It's no longer about science it's about money.

[Dunbaratu]

The points you get from bringing something back home, should be seperated from the data you can transmit. Brining a termometer back from space is pointless, but the value of rocks brought back from a mission is priceless.

I agree. That would be a simple fix to the problem: Pure data - like numbers from science instruments, should be worth the same if transmitted as if carried back manually (if they're carried back all that means is you've carried paper copies of the electronic data you already sent. ) But, physical items, like samples, must be returned to be worth anything. So you completely split up the data into:

Instrument Information only - transmission just as good as returning - so no reason to return it. (100% value for transmission).

Physical things - samples and material bays - only worth something if returned: (transmission disabled- no value for transmission).

That gives you two different types of mission to go on, without a lot of overlap between them.