Science collection should gain benefits from duration/thoroughness.

[Visitor]

(pro-tip: it doesn't add difficulty and it's silly when timewarping is possible).

Exactly the point. It isn't difficult for a pro.

There's a difference between "your four month transfer is our nod to realism even though we've also made the solar system one-tenth the size in order to alleviate the boredom of spaceflight" and using time to make something "more difficult"

I find it odd how you can handle a HUGE gameplay mechanic (timewarping & travel times), which can quite easily take longer than a football game at 4x or even 100000x timewarp, on behalf of a "nod to realism" - and yet you cannot fathom the inclusion of any possible even notion of time-sensitive science gathering as anything more than a "stupid mechanic" - even when entirely optional.

As I said so many times above.... the time taken is not the challenge. You are making very little effort to understand, particularly given the number of times it has been explained.

[ravener]

i think the idea is that limiting a mission to say duna will let you gather more science on duna compared to doing a flyby and going to eve as well. there is a delta v cost associated with going into an orbit, there is a cost of delta v in taking a kerbal to the surface. every one of these steps have delta v costs and increesing science output by 20% or something seems apropriate. you could ofcource timewarp, but you could also go do something else like launching a return stage or something to your interplanetary cruiser or something. the other option is that to get the 20% extra science from some of the landed exsperiments you have to actually do stuff, like getting surface samples, random rocks and such and throwing them into the goo canister, or in orbit where you have to change inclinations and altitudes to get different measurments from the gravity detector.

there are multiple ways to do this, some require you to do stuff, some dont and let you go back to the space center and have the kerbals do their job collecting science.

[Guest]

and yet you cannot fathom the inclusion of any possible even notion of time-sensitive science gathering as anything more than a "stupid mechanic" - even when entirely optional.

Because it's a silly mechanic. What is the issue, the fact that someone can do a flyby of a planet or moon and get the same science as if they were in orbit? So you want to provide incentive for someone to put something into orbit in order to gain from a "long experiment"? And it's completely optional? Let me tell you why that's not an incentivizing activity.

Getting into an orbit is its own reward. From orbit you can land, you can refuel, you can rendezvous, etc... Does it take more delta-V and provide some additional design challenges? Sure, but you're going to be facing those challenges anyway. A time-sensitive mechanic is no reason to put something into orbit unless you're already there to do something else. I won't bother sending probes to Duna to do "long experiments", I'll send my lander + return vehicle to Duna, set up an orbit, timewarp through my "long experiment", land, get my samples, fly back up and return home. I've essentially gained something for free while doing what I was there for in the first place. Duration-based mechanics add no additional difficulty or incentive when timewarp is involved.

On Kerbin the silliness is even more pronounced. The game already differentiates between a stable orbit and a suborbital flight, and you get different science from each on return. Now you're saying that, in addition to getting my normal science from my orbital flight, I can timewarp and get something else for free? No skin off my teeth. I don't care whether it's completely optional or not, I'll just timewarp when it's convenient. Furthermore, once I'm in stable orbit I'm gaining a bunch of science from flying over biomes so I didn't need incentives to do "long experiments" in the first place; I'm already here for the science but now I get something for free.

Once biomes show up on other planets this mechanic will continue to provide something completely free because you're already there to inspect the biomes, might as well timewarp. There's no reason to send a Kerbal along anywhere because we just have to put tiny satellites into orbit around everywhere (a much easier design challenge than sending a Kerbal somewhere), do our "long experiments", and transmit the data back for a bonus.

On top of all that, you're also telling the newbie that complex orbital mechanics like slingshots and multiple flybys, something I haven't even personally tried, aren't worth it because you should always put yourself into an orbit to gain more science. Putting yourself into an orbit isn't hard compared to doing a multiple flyby mission; you should definitely get more science for using and applying that sort of skill.

Timewarping through an experiment is "free", that's why duration-based mechanics are bad; you have much better ideas in this thread than that one.

Edited November 7, 2013 by regex

[Eric S]

Orbit vs Flyby is solved with biomes, which are coming to most, if not all, planets. On a typical Munar flyby, I usually get reports from 2 biomes, sometimes as many as 4 biomes. On an orbit, I get 6 easily, and all the way up to 15 if I put effort into it.

I'd be fine with some experiments taking more time for slightly more reward, but I don't see a thoroughness bonus for time spent working well. If you're taking more data points, you're just doing multiple experiments, and that's already in place with diminishing returns.

[Nobody]

Science over time doesn't necessarily have to be from maintaining a stable orbit or staying in 1 biome for a long time.

For example the g force experienced while doing a slingshot maneuver is valuable scientific data so one of the science over time items would take measure g force over a time period as you use a moon to slingshot.

When reentry damage is added the effects can be measured with a disposable probe to help you build a better lander to reach eve.

For these examples the current g-meter and thermometer would give continues readings and your ship's data recorders would have a limit to how much info they can hold and multiple memory units could be added to the craft.

Even with the stationary missions it has not been suggested you would have to keep the station as the actively controlled flight. Park a station in Duna orbit and send a lander to explore it's surface and moons while it gathers the data.

[Guest]

For example the g force experienced while doing a slingshot maneuver is valuable scientific data so one of the science over time items would take measure g force over a time period as you use a moon to slingshot.

You already gain science for doing an experiment "in space near" (SOI), now you should get extra science for timewarping through an encounter with the experiment on?

When reentry damage is added the effects can be measured with a disposable probe to help you build a better lander to reach eve.

This is more of an activity-based rather than a duration-based experiment. While it's cool, I'd have to question why you somehow get more science for physics warping through a very shallow reentry. I think the experiment works better from a gameplay perspective if I do it while the hull is above a certain temperature.

Even with the stationary missions it has not been suggested you would have to keep the station as the actively controlled flight. Park a station in Duna orbit and send a lander to explore it's surface and moons while it gathers the data.

This is even more "free" than timewarping through an experiment since it literally takes none of my time. It's like I should get a bonus to the science I gained from clicking a button by clicking the button and then doing something else. When I come back suddenly I have more science? From a realism perspective it may make sense but from a gameplay perspective it's an incredibly passive and uninvolved way of gaining vital resources; there's no challenge involved.

[joykler]

you should make it possible to combine two sensors for a single experiment , each combination gives a diffrent outcome with a diffrent amount of science.

the fact that you are using your sensors should take energy and the longer you hold it on the more science you get but your battery will also drain more.

if the experiment is affected by a change in enviroment the experiment fails and you have to start over again [like going into another orbit or even over another type of terrain]

then it should be possible to store more data and more rewarding to transmit.if you have a science station it should be possible to turn the data into more data and again combine it with previous experiments [like in other orbits or other information in same orbit].and it should be possible to ruin this vast amount of science points you have gathered by combining it with the wrong data. this again makes it a guess , and if you make it a little bit realistic it also makes you think.

this makes you challenge yourself to be patient [you cant warp because that would quickly change enviroment and it would fail] it makes you really think what to record and how to record it [because you need to combine the sensors and you cant just turn everything on at the same time].

example:

you take a photograph and log the atmospheric data, you find the picture got les clear in high atmosphere[more data then separate].then you combine it with the same data on diffrent altitudes and find that high atmosphere makes the photo blurry[this gives the biggest amount of data]