Diversified Science

[LethalDose]

I've seen several posts about diversifying and splitting the tech tree and science, but they seem to be primarily about how science is gathered, or splitting the tech up into a large number of small types.

I've got a divergent idea that is more complex than what is currently implemented, but remains straightforward:

Three different kinds of science and one tech tree.

Three Branches of Science

Currently, science is a resource or currency (depending on how you prefer to see it, but there's really no difference) that is generated by performing experiments and recovering craft, and exhausted by unlocking new technologies. This is awesome, and I don't think it should change. However, to make things more interested and to allow more decisions, I would propose that the current science "currency" be divided into 3 separate types of science resources in the game: Physical Sciences, Life Sciences, & Engineering (Applied Sciences).

Physical Sciences

The physical sciences include chemistry, physics, astronomy, geology and mathematics. This is the science that Einstein and Feynman would do. This branch of science would study how the planets move, the mechanics of rocketry (e.g. Newton's laws), solar radiation, etc. This is the science most similar to what is currently implemented as "Science" in 0.22. This flavor of science would be generated by performing physical experiments similar to those in the game (Goo, Thermometer, Barometer, Gravioloi detector, Seismometer, etc.) and collecting surface samples from other planets. The physical science resource would be spent on technologies that provide new instruments, computers, transmitters, and, potentially, fuel types.

The Life Sciences

The life sciences would include biology, ecology, ethology (behavior), and medicine. This branch of science would study how life developed on Kerbin, the diversity of kerbal biomes, how spaceflight effects Kerbals, and (potentially) extrakerbestrial life forms (in the form of plants and bacteria from other planets; I'm NOT suggesting including sapient aliens). The kind of science would be generated by crew reports from different biomes and taking kerbestrial organisms (from algae to mice, or whatever the kerbal-equivalent lab animal is) and collecting samples of life from extrakerbestrial sources (algae from Eve's lakes, lichens from Duna's surface, and plants from Laythe; this type of sample is not implemented in the game). The life science resource would be spent on technologies that improve life support efficiency (also not in the game), kerbal safety (Ergonomic pod design), and medicine (A topic for a later post). Charles Darwin would be the best known scientist I could think of in this field, which is sad, because NASA as produced tons of useful health and life science knowledge.

Engineering

Engineering, or the "applied" sciences to maintain the "___ Sciences form" if you prefer would include structural and materials science, aerodynamics, and rocket design. This is Goddard's, von Braun's and the Wright brothers' science. This branch would would study craft design & structure. This kind of science would be generated by in-flight crew reports (e.g. how the craft handled in different conditions) and post-mission vehicular recovery. The engineering resource would be spent to on technologies that improved craft handling and power, basically, a LOT of the bedrock rocket parts we have now.

Different planets would have different values for the different science types. For example, Kerbin samples would have high value life sciences values (the world is teeming with diverse life), but mediocre values for physical science samples (the surface of the world is, by definition, not very exotic) and engineering recoveries (recovery of ships that only flew near Kerbin don't teach the little green engineers much). On the other had, the Mün surface sucks for life sciences (it's a rock in space), but physical science samples are very valuable (Kerbolar winds have been hitting its surface for eons and the crust is rich in Kerbium-3) and engineering recoveries have a decent value.

Different science types could also lead to decisions about what instruments to take into space if implemented to encourage such a choice. Is your next mission going to gather a load of physical science data from the space near Kerbin, or would you rather push the limits of your engineering and see if you can make to Jool and back for big engineering points.

The Tech Tree

The tree would be very similar to what it is now: A single network of discrete, named technologies that unlock ship parts (and other objects, but that's a separate post) when purchased. In the current design, the each tech costs X science. In this proposed design, techs would have Physical Science, Life Science, and Engineering science costs. Some techs may only require a single type of science. For example, the "Electrics" tech may cost 100 Physical science points and 0 engineering or life science points. Other techs may require paying 2 or 3 types of points. For example, "Symbiotic life support" may cost 200 engineering, 200 physical science and 400 life science points.

Typically, the science types will tend to unlock techs that related to producing more of the same resource, but techs could require resources may unlock other parts or equipment associated with other resources to encourage more balanced approaches to generating science resources, e.g. physical science could be spent to unlock tools that allow better collection of biological specimens.

By breaking "Science" up into three different resources, it add dimensions to the game and it's decision points. I think it would add to the game's depth and immersion in that if you needed life science for something, like developing better space suits, it encourages you to go do life science experiments, instead of measuring gravity near moho.

Anyway, just some thoughts for the burgeoning career mode. Hope the community and the devs like the idea.

[Nobody]

I agree that more specific types of science would be a good improvement to the current system.

I don't think life science wouldn't be that useful unless they add life support to the stock game.

A branch I think should be added is geology for the planed resource gathering. Earned early from samples and later from mining. Geology branch would unlock better detection and extraction tools.

[LethalDose]

I agree that more specific types of science would be a good improvement to the current system.

I don't think life science wouldn't be that useful unless they add life support to the stock game.

I agree with this statement but only given the state of the game in 0.22, because there are a lot of things that can change between now and the final game. Regardless, a third branch rounds things out nicely and groups the sciences into very broad groups that resemble real divisions of science; two branches of science I think would be insufficient. Another recent suggestion is EVA evolution . Life sciences could improve the duration of EVA. It could also be involved in locating organic compounds (e.g. hydrocarbons) on planets. There are other applications that I would suggest, but would involve other game systems (at least two posts that I'm drafting currently).

A branch I think should be added is geology for the planed resource gathering. Earned early from samples and later from mining. Geology branch would unlock better detection and extraction tools.

I explicitly mentioned geology as one of the physical sciences, and could include surveying. The extraction tools would be handled under the engineering branch, since its a more direct application.

Edited November 25, 2013 by LethalDose

[peadar1987]

This has my full support, it would be amazing! (Science system has so much potential!)