Your opinion on current science

[Hotblack Desiato]

how about this: split the current science system in a science part, an achievement part and a moral part.

those parts could be intersecting (one thing could lead to science and achievement points).

(it would work best if a lifesupport system is integrated in stock KSP):

achievementpoints for things like getting a probe or kerbal for the first time into a certain region (like upper kerbin orbit, or duna surface and so on), and also for getting him back home. additionally there could be something like having a station somewhere and it remains manned and fully functional for a certain period of time

additional sciencepoints for having several surface samples around a station. for example: get 2-10 surface samples at a distance of 10km around the station (the lab-module could be the center for that). do does the environment change over the different seasons. or run weather stations on other planets that monitor the environment over time.

moral points (I have no clue how they could interact with the current tech tree (maybe it could interact with funds)): every time a certain goal is achieved (especially if a kerbal lands safely somewhere and survives there - with enough supply or by returning home) the player should get better moral. there could be a long term goal that a extrakerbestrial base should be self-sustaining, with a system to generate water, oxygen and snacks. letting kerbals die (due to hard collisions or due to starvation) lowers the moral-value quite significantly.

this is just a draft, but it could help a lot, because right now, gathering science is just: go somewhere, do measurements and go home, no need for overengineered bases.

[WafflesToo]

I like it a lot better than in .22 so far. Being able to see how much science has been extracted and how much remains left over is excellent just on its own, and not having to spam transmit 50 times in each biome is welcome as well.

I don't see why the OP says that unmanned probes are a waste though. My understanding is that you can get 40% of the science from a given biome via transmitting, which just means you can pick the rest up via a manned mission/science lab transmission at another time.

I think OP is just mad because goo and science jr experiments can't be spammed anymore... he also doesn't seem to understand how science points work. The total science value of a single experiment remains the same, you just get a little now and the rest later when you return the experiment to Kerbin in a follow up mission.

[Kerbonautical]

Personally I think the system needs a complete overhaul. I can understand that this is only the beginning for Science essentially, however there are a large number of game features that are completely overlooked by the current Science system. I hate to say it really, but personally I would classify the current Science model as a failure since it should accommodate all current game features as a bare minimum. For now it feels like very incomplete.

Currently the model heavily pushes you toward the design for landers and has zero reward for anything technical. For instance take a lander to Duna and back for a nice bunch of science points, but take a spaceplane out there to land and then return and you get nothing extra, in fact you get penalized since a spaceplane will unlikely be able to carry as much science equipment. While that fits nicely, the task of flying a plane on another planet alone should be worth a ton of points. Currently the model discourages creativity.

[allmhuran]

I'd go with an overhaul, in the sense that the fundamental mechanics of the science system just aren't very good. This is why we end up with weird, counter-intuitive band-aids over the top, like having transmission loss for data readings, repetitive grindy play, equipment getting "locked" when data is transmitted, and so on.

The *idea* of science is fine. Unlocking parts - also fine. But the gameplay involved in earning it doesn't quite work.

[miis]

Because career mode is in beginning of its development, the science part looks fine for now. More important will be how well it will be connected and balanced with money and currency. With all those resources together the career mode will be more complete and hopefully will lead to interesting gameplay.

[sagittary]

Personally, I'd like to see probes (and stations) serve a different purpose than manned science missions. Probes would be more for communication and data integrity - they enhance and provide info for manned missions and they allow manned missions to rely science and information back to Kerbal. Any science they perform would not the same as manned science - it would be either a limited version of such a mission or it would be something that ONLY probes could do (it'd probably be impractical and costly to have made Hubble a manned station for instance or make the Mars Orbiter manned). And that said, I don't think cost or materials should really be a major balancing point - rovers aren't really any less costly persay... it's more the cost of life and training. You can lose a probe or have it fail and that's okay. You really can't afford to lose an astronaut.

Stations, similarly, should be designed so they aren't simply 'bigger buckets' of science. But rather, they expand the options available for any resident kerbals. Science they gain and gather would be unique to them. EG a kerbal could take science to it and process it. The science would remain the same but there might be a chance to find station-based science. Stations might also allow for non-science based benefits similar to probes - a station that's well run, well funded, and is constantly supplied with science might open up or boost PR and what have you (reducing cost, raising program awarness, etc).

[Merinsan]

I think we need station/base specific parts. I am not sure how the game would know something was a station or a base (designating it as such is no good). Perhaps it should be based on time in orbit or total mass or both.

These parts would be able to do different science to what the other parts can do, for example zero-g tests or something.

Also, if science were categorized, it would force players to vary their missions. For example at the moment, you can get all the science you need from the Kerbin system. It would be good if you had to go to Duna to get some specific science to say get atomic engines or something like that.

What I find extremely strange is the goo and science jr locking up if you transmit, while I can still reset the experiment before that. This is so obviously artificial. Simply having the transmission pool smaller solves the original problem of spamming transmissions. Taking the data makes sense, since I need to remove items from it. I do like that I can take data them dump the module.

[Ralathon]

One thing I'd really like to see is a form of micro biomes. Just a procedurally generated map that gets made when you land consisting of maybe 5 biomes or so (Simple things like "Builder field", "plains", "exposed bedrock" etc). Each biome would be linked to the parent biome (Munar midlands etc) but only give 1/5th of the science, you'd have to gather science in all the microbiomes to max out the science available from the parent biome. This way rovers become a lot more useful and gathering science becomes a bit of a treasure hunt. Driving tens of kilometers to the next biome isn't fun because it gets too tedious. Driving a few dozen meters in a mini treasure hunt would be better.

Edited December 30, 2013 by Ralathon

[WafflesToo]

One thing I'd really like to see is a form of micro biomes. Just a procedurally generated map that gets made when you land consisting of maybe 5 biomes or so (Simple things like "Builder field", "plains", "exposed bedrock" etc). Each biome would be linked to the parent biome (Munar midlands etc) but only give 1/5th of the science, you'd have to gather science in all the microbiomes to max out the science available from the parent biome. This way rovers become a lot more useful and gathering science becomes a bit of a treasure hunt. Driving tens of kilometers to the next biome isn't fun because it gets too tedious. Driving a few dozen meters in a mini treasure hunt would be better.

I like this, thumbs up

[ArmchairGravy]

The one thing I'd change is that labs should give a bonus to all processed data whether it is transmitted or returned.

[AndrewBCrisp]

One thing I'd really like to see is a form of micro biomes. Just a procedurally generated map that gets made when you land consisting of maybe 5 biomes or so (Simple things like "Builder field", "plains", "exposed bedrock" etc). Each biome would be linked to the parent biome (Munar midlands etc) but only give 1/5th of the science, you'd have to gather science in all the microbiomes to max out the science available from the parent biome. This way rovers become a lot more useful and gathering science becomes a bit of a treasure hunt. Driving tens of kilometers to the next biome isn't fun because it gets too tedious. Driving a few dozen meters in a mini treasure hunt would be better.

I like this idea as well. How the microbiomes would be generated would probably depend on how the procedural terrain was generated in the first place (for example, all those little craters on the Mun would be ideal microbiome spots). I'd suggest having microbiomes unlock only for certain experiments - to wit: sensors, EVA reports, collected samples, maybe crew reports - while other experiments remain tied to the parent biome only (thinking of mystery goo containers and material bays. I sincerely doubt conditions in microbiomes would be so different across a given biome that the materials samples would react differently in each).

Basically performing one of these experiments in a biome for the first time would yield a report for that biome - but would also unlock the microbiomes for that experiment. I'd probably set the science yield lower than 1/5 of the normal biome yield though. Not sure what would be a good setting for it but it would have to be representative of what we're doing: performing a detailed study of a very small area.

[ddavis425]

I think there should be several changes. First, I'd like experiments to take time to do. I know you can just time warp through it right now, but I think Squad can come up with some way to discourage that. Secondly I'd like for there to be more experiments. I want to have a large variety of things to do, like radiation tests, geological surveys, core samples, etc. Another great thing would be interactive experiments. A really great example would be taking photos of planets Pokemon Snap-style (Maxmaps said he likes this idea, hopefully it goes somewhere). More biomes would be a good thing to have so that if you are using a plane or a rover to collect science you won't need to travel several hundred kilometers to get to the next biome. And while I'm talking about planes and rovers, there needs to be some sort of incentive of using those. Maybe for rovers there could be slight variances in soil composition in an area (like tiny biomes), making you need to travel around getting different samples. Planes could be used for aerial terrain surveys or even weather analysis if clouds are added. Lastly, I don't like the fact that it is very easy to drain all the science from an area. In KSP you can get all possible science from space near Kerbin with a single flight, but in real life we still send up satellites to study the Earth's atmosphere, radiation belts, magnetosphere, and so on.

[Hodo]

I would love to see some changes to the amount of science you get per mission, and the tech tree but that is a different topic all together.

[kinnison]

I set up a science station with extra fuel orbiting Mun and Minmus. Then have a single stage lander landing, and then docking with the station. Even with detailed analysis i am only getting half the points. i could with a return trip. I really don't understand why some instruments don't get 100% on transmission (Temp, Pressure, Sciesmic) Nor having a base giving you constant points.

Needs a lot of work

[rottielover]

I have to agree. From a gameplay "feel" perspective, science in .22 was super easy. You just spammed the transmit button. Now it feels like the pendulum has swung back full force the other way and transmitting anything is just about worthless waste of time.

Needs balance, needs polish.

[BlackBicycle]

The poll idea is interesting... I just doubt this is going to change anything.

[Col_Jessep]

I would like to see a new difficulty added:

+ Tutorial Career: You get solar panels, batteries, ladders and lights in tech node #2; you get the smaller science instruments in tech level 3 and 4; surface samples give 3 times more science; transmitting has doubled returns.

Possible career missions include satellites and planetary mapping probes that will return prestige and money that can be traded for a good amount of science points.

New players also need encouragement and help to go to other planets. An ingame delta-v calculator and launch window planner are essential!

[Xacktar]

I would like to see a new difficulty added:

+ Tutorial Career: You get solar panels, batteries, ladders and lights in tech node #2; you get the smaller science instruments in tech level 3 and 4; surface samples give 3 times more science; transmitting has doubled returns.

This isn't a bad idea. The difficulty gap between Career and sandbox seems to be growing and having something in between might help people learn and progress.

[ngianoplus]

I want to see the Funds and Reputation system implemented first.

I think that we should be able to put cameras on rover and such, kind of like Curiosity, to spark interest in the program. In return our Reputation would go up.

One thing that NEEDS to be addressed is the importance of different crafts. We need incentives and bonuses for sending different craft types to places.

-This can be achieved by putting limitations on certain things. Such as life support for manned missions will change how we handle the manned vs. unmanned choice.

-Rovers need to have value in space exploration (I'm not sure how to tackle this)

-Bases and Space Stations need continues experiments and long term science.

The Reputation system and Contracts will be a great step in this direction, as "Kerbal-Kind" will want you to put a rover on Duna, this will in return increase your reputation more than landing a probe.

[I_Killed_Jeb]

A rover autopilot where you can set it to go to a point in the planet would be pretty cool and differentiating. I know there's the terrain issue but I'd be happy to wave that away

[rcomber]

While, I understand how the simulation got to this point. I believe that the base science tree should start off FIRST with fixed wing aircraft, high altitude flights, space suit, etc.. before there are any manned rocket launches.

Airplanes can be used to do science for all the biomes in Kerban and lead to the first sub-orbital manned rocket flights.

Give me batteries before probes and allow probes to be satellites. Satellites which can perform a function, for example communication and give bonus to science when in orbit of targeted solar body.

This is an alpha. Changes will be made. In my humble opinion, KSP really needs to put planes before rockets in the career mode. (Leave sandbox wide open.)

[chuangatronic]

I have to see the other elements of career first but I'm sure tweaking and balancing will be needed to achieve the right synergy between features

[SirSnuggles]

I agree probes are absolutely useless for science missions. They are good for building spacecraft in orbit or preparing a base somewhere, but other than that, useless. Why on earth would you waste that science transmitting when you can easily return it? & if you are going to return it, make it manned & get even more science. They need to differentiate between the two or something. Maybe add something a probe can do & a manned mission cannot. Idk, but something to make probes special from manned missions so they aren't just completely overshadowed by the manned ones. Maybe get probes first & THEN capsules significantly later.

[BlackBicycle]

I agree probes are absolutely useless for science missions.

Why should I care about.... (quote from Civ 3... I think..)

Ahem. Anyways. As it stands in .23, my new career, the probes helped me enormously. I was stuck at some point. (now here comes the important part) I could have milked more science from Mun, but the whole routine got old. (Okay, now I have a new strategy that I am going to have fun with, in a new career, but that came after this story). Then I realized I don't have to roll on polar orbits of Mun and Minmus till the seats get worn out to earn my fair share of science. So I concentrated on probes.

It took me several hours and a few test launches (stretched over two evenings of intense fun) to construct the thing that was able to go far. My science level was just at those Xenon thingies. In case you don't know, it gets pretty dark out there by Eeloo. I underestimated the power of my solars, so it turned into a battle for speed for a while (was trying to brake at its orbit). It ended up in me leaving the simulation run and checking it every hour or two to correct the heading and make short pauses to orient the craft so that it could recharge well. I did succeed in the end, and now I have a probe around Eeloo. It had already sent back all it could by now and is now an honorary guard of said planet.

This was at a very low tech level. With the transmissions I got from there, it was enough to advance my program in such a way that the next mission I did was a manned landing on M.. erm.. Dune : ) I couldn't imagine landing there, let alone coming back before I had the tech that I bought with that Eeloo probe science that it delivered.

The moral of the story, of course, is that the probes are absolutely viable, as long as you want/need to push the envelope. Which is the situation that I expect when the credits come into the equation. And even before we have economical considerations, the "early-on" unmanned probe to the far reaches of the system can not only be viable, but in fact very useful. Transmissions and all.

Edited December 30, 2013 by BlackBicycle

[Eric S]

While, I understand how the simulation got to this point. I believe that the base science tree should start off FIRST with fixed wing aircraft, high altitude flights, space suit, etc.. before there are any manned rocket launches.

I have to disagree, for reasons that have already been stated elsewhere. In KSP, designing a successful aircraft is harder than designing a successful rocket. You'd basically be selling them a game of rocketry, but telling them that they have to go do something else before they can play with said rocketry. It's more realistic, yes, but realism doesn't equate out to good gameplay.