Engineering could join science in the tech tree.

[Fingal]

I don't know if this has been suggested before, but the tech tree in career mode could be made a little more interesting by splitting it in two, a science tree and an engineering one. All parts on the tree could be classed as either science or engineering, so while doing science advances things like solar panels and experiments, specific mission achievements could be what unlocks new rocketry tech.

This would bring mission goals into career mode, e.g. on the first stage in the tech tree you don't get larger rocks until you reach a certain height, then you need to do things like orbital rendezvous or a lunar flyby to unlock larger rockets.

[Tex]

I see what you're saying, but don't you already basically need to do a Munar flyby to unlock larger rockets? In fact, going to the Mun is a lot easier than flying around Kerbin's atmosphere in the way of getting science points. As for the "mission goals", that's what the new Contracts system will be about.

[reilithion]

This isn't so very different from my own idea (posted here: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/81253-Career-Mode-Science-refinement-%28and-budget%29) The post itself goes into a lot of detail, but the tldr is: Science unlocks budget, flights unlock rocket parts. I like it, but I won't suggest it's the only good way to improve career mode advancement.

[Greenfire32]

The way I'd like Tech progression to work is something like:

• Start with basic parts

• Do some science and unlock a tech node.

--Tech node includes something like air-breathing engines and unlocks an "experimental version" of said parts

--In the R&D complex, build an "Experimental craft" and do some part-specific science

--Unlock "researched part" (basically the completed parts that we have now)

• Take New craft to new biomes and do new science

Wash rinse repeat.

Now I realize this would add a little bit of a tedious double-science for R&D aspect to the game. But just doing science by right clicking the "do science" button is pretty bland at the moment. It would also give the R&D complex more of a purpose since all it is right now is basically a knowledge bank that you make periodic withdrawals from.

Building the experimental craft could be unique as well. You could make it like a mini VAB or Hangar and then actually take the craft out for a drive OR you could make a unique instance where only the part is being tested (so like an engine mounted to a fixed housing that tests output or whatever).

That's how I'd like science to be, but I don't really know how much fun it would be...

[Kasuha]

I think the main issue here is misunderstanding the purpose of tech tree.

It is not supposed to be a challenge. It is supposed to be means of introducing parts in small increments so a newbie is not overwhelmed with a lot of parts which he does not know how to use.

The challenge tied with career mode should come with money and budgets which are not in game yet (wait for 0.24).

[LethalDose]

I think the main issue here is misunderstanding the purpose of tech tree.

It is not supposed to be a challenge. It is supposed to be means of introducing parts in small increments so a newbie is not overwhelmed with a lot of parts which he does not know how to use.

The challenge tied with career mode should come with money and budgets which are not in game yet (wait for 0.24).

I'm not sure I agree with the statement that the tech tree was not intended to be a challenge. It is true that the career mode is great way for new players to learn the game, but I don't think that was why the tree was implemented. It could just as easily be argued that the tree is there as a challenge because it keeps many parts locked behind "science gates", and players have to overcome "lower tier" challenges with the parts they have access to.

Anyway, the point is that unless the devs have explicitly stated there purpose of a game mechanic (e.g. the tech tree), it is very difficult to make statements about the purposes of those game mechanic (e.g. the tech tree is not supposed to be a challenge). Overall, I think it's very difficult to know the dev's intent, and that even assumes they necessarily had one to begin with.

As for the idea addressed in the OP, instead of splitting the tech tree in multiple tech trees, I would track "engineering" points and "science" points separately, and have each node on the tech tree cost X engineering points and Y science points. I actually had a post several months ago that split it into engineering, physical science, and life science points.

Edited May 31, 2014 by LethalDose