Science Collection Revamp

[Stratzenblitz75]

Currently, the implementation of gathering science is very simple. All you have to do is send a craft equip with a science instrument to a planet/biome, click the "Log ... Data" button, (repeat steps 1-2 for any other biomes/planets visited) and transmit or return the results to Kerbin to get your science.

Am I not the only one that thinks this implementation is completely boring and unfun? All it ends up being is giant click-fest.

"Oh Look! I got a little closer to the planet/moon! Now its time to click on all my instruments to get the "in space near" science reports! SOOO EXCITING!

Unlike science in reality, it just feels extremely shallow and dull. There is no excitement or setup for your experiments. All you do is click a button, and you're done.

---

What I suggest is to completely rework the science gathering system in KSP to add more depth to science.

Here are some ideas on how to do that:

First, change the Gravioli Detector and the Thermometer from "1 click 1 result" instruments to scanning/mapping instruments (much like the SCANsat mod, but less complicated) with the Gravity detector mapping density of the surface, and the Thermometer mapping temperature. With this change, you are rewarded in science by how much of a planet/moon's surface you map with these instruments. This change also gives players an incentive to build unmanned probes, satellites and orbiters, which currently don't have much use in the base game.

Secondly, change the Seismic Accelerometer from a "1 click 1 result" instrument to an instrument that requires a "setup" (similar to the Interstellar mod's Seismometer) where you position a lander on the surface of a planet/moon to listen for impacts and smash a spacecraft into the planet/moon to generate seismic waves. In addition, you could land a seismic probe on the surface of a planet/moon and wait for natural tectonic activity (only on tectonic active worlds like Eve or Laythe) or small asteroid impacts. With this change, the player is rewarded for setting up experiments and long-term seismic surveys rather than clicking a button.

Next, change the Presmat Barometer and Sensor Array Computing Nose Cone to measure the atmosphere as they descend/ascend through it. Players would be awarded science based on how deep they descend into the atmosphere. This is a relatively small change but, I think it adds more depth to atmospheric analysis than clicking a button at arbitrary altitudes of "Flying high" and "Flying low".

Finally, change the Mysterious Goo canister and Sc-9001 Science jr from "1 click 1 result" experiments to experiments that need to be exposed to an environment for a period of time to get results. Maybe the experiment will react in a couple of minutes or hours or maybe even days or weeks. The only way to know is to set up the experiment in an environment (like in a station or surface base) to find out how and when it reacts. Much like a real science experiment, you have to keep the experiment in the same environment; once started, moving it from environment to environment (like orbit to surface) would invalidate your results. In addition, both types of experiments would benefit from having a Kerbal monitor, and record the data. Also, there could be all sorts of in situ experiments the Kerbals can perform (for example, mixing a water sample of Laythe's oceans into an experiment). Of course, you could do it with an unmanned craft but you'd get less science. This change would encourage players to set up long term, manned surface bases and stations to run these experiments.

The addition of even more instruments such magnetometers, cameras, etc. would greatly enrich this system.

---

Now with all these instruments, we need things for them to discover!

That's why I suggest the addition of "anomalies" to all the planets and moons. Discovering and studying such anomalies would be where you get most of your science. For example, the impact crater on bop could show up as a "hot spot" on a temperature scan and reward you a significantly higher amount of science than scans of the more uninteresting areas on Bop. Think of the possibilities! There could be subsurface oceans on Minmus that you could search for with a gravity scan or volcanoes on Laythe you could study with an accelerometer. You could scan a planet, find something interesting and then send follow up missions to study the anomaly in more detail. You could take this idea one step further and introduce random events that you could study, like storms on Laythe, earthquakes on Eve, geysers on Vall.

If we take into consideration the fact that Kerbals have never been to space before, the discovery of water on Duna or Oxygen in Laythe's atmosphere could be a big discovery that would net you lots of science (much like we didn't know there was water on Mars until we sent missions to it). You could send a probe to the mysterious world "Eeloo" and gain tons of science studying a world that the Kerbals know little to nothing about. You could feel like you are actually exploring the Kerbol System, unveiling its secrets and expanding Kerbalkind's knowledge of the universe. You could actually feel that you are making significant discoveries. In my opinion, this sounds like more fun than clicking a bunch of buttons to get boring and easy-quick science.

So that's all for my suggestion. I hope the devs (or at least a modder) consider this.

And of course, tell me what you think! I'd love to hear your ideas on this subject as well.

Edited July 17, 2014 by Stratzenblitz75

[dryer_lint]

All of these ideas seem cool, I agree that science could be improved with this.

[Sky_walker]

Sounds really great, though IMHO it looses a little bit of merit with time compression. People would just switch to deep space probe, compress time to maximum, and then switch back to collect all the science. Young adults these days are so used to being instantly rewarded that anything requiring them to wait is automatically wrong and they look for a way to bypass it - and KSP offers that way.

So for them - you would only increase the clickfest, not decrease it, at least in a case of most of your experiments.

Things like measuring impactors, barometer and nose cone array, or anomalies obviously don't share this problem though.

In general though - It's still better then current system, as it makes you aware that you don't just "do science" (problem which appeared by the way of KSP cubesat - some got convinced by KSP that you can just pick some scientific equipment and "do science" (in that words) - lol) but rather you need to have a specific plan, these things take time, effort and preparations to actually get anything of value.

Your system has that - and that's why I like it. Makes you appriciate all the effort scientists put in that more than a current instant gratification system.

[Dangerous_Beans]

Sounds really great, though IMHO it looses a little bit of merit with time compression. People would just switch to deep space probe, compress time to maximum, and then switch back to collect all the science. Young adults these days are so used to being instantly rewarded that anything requiring them to wait is automatically wrong and they look for a way to bypass it - and KSP offers that way.

it's a singe player game, you don't need to force people to wait through everything in real time. the fact that they could time-warp through the gravity mapping or go fly a different ship while doing a goo experiment sounds like a good thing.

i like this suggestion, more science experiments that take place over time would be good. it would give a greater differentiation between establishing orbits and doing fly-bys, while currently there is often no reason to orbit if you won't land.

[allmhuran]

Excellent suggestions.

I am super keen on seeing any suggestions regarding improvements to the science mechanic. Right now it's not just dull and un-engaging, it's actively tedious and frustrating. I recently had a bit of a rant on this topic:

http://youtu.be/MrqhNfMyLCs?t=6m50s

You've provided some ideas here that really do put the player back into science, creating real gameplay rather than just dialog box button clicking. Not many people have managed to come up with ideas that meet this requirement, so kudos to you!

Edit:

Sounds really great, though IMHO it looses a little bit of merit with time compression. People would just switch to deep space probe, compress time to maximum, and then switch back to collect all the science

This has often been raised as an issue with the kinds of ideas presented in the OP, but the problem has since solved itself. If you put a ship in orbit, go into 100,000x warp, and do nothing else in the meantime, your contracts will expire, or your reputation will decay, etc. The mechanics required to balance against the problem of "science over time in a game with time warp" have now arrived. Time now has value. Other features may follow that further add value to time... eg stock life support, tweaks to power consumption, heating and cooling mechanics, etc.

Edited July 17, 2014 by allmhuran

[xEvilReeperx]

I am super keen on seeing any suggestions regarding improvements to the science mechanic. Right now it's not just dull and un-engaging, it's actively tedious and frustrating. I recently had a bit of a rant on this topic:

http://youtu.be/MrqhNfMyLCs?t=6m50s

Watching that part of the video with you doing the EVA report shuffle is exactly the situation that led to me Alt+F4ing and starting work on ScienceAlert. No exaggeration. If you don't mind mods, it will at least make science less tedious and frustrating, although not more engaging.

[allmhuran]

I did indeed install science alert for the rerun, so thank you for your excellent work there!

[CaptRobau]

Time compression is only really an issue when stationary on the ground. In that case, the only data that can be gotten is from that one spot. If you have to wait for science here, you're just waiting for an arbitrary timer to run down. If you are moving however, this is different. A satellite in orbit that maps the surface temperature for example would require skill to get the best result. If you put it in an equatorial orbit, it'll only map a small band of the planet. If you place it in a 45 or 90 degree orbit you'll get a far more complete picture. There is skill to be had in the placement of your satellite.

The same works for atmospheric science. Here the skill lies in keeping your probe powered throughout the descent. If your probe dies before it can transmit the data, it's lost and there's no way to do it over. This is different from static science, where you can just wait for the sun to come up or send a second mission that brings that missing antenna or something. With atmospheric science there's only one chance to do it right, which adds challenge.

In the end, more engaging gameplay for science collection is only part of the solution. After a while the tech tree is all done and the blurbs (even with that Crowd-sourced mod) are not that interesting that they'll push you to do science. What the game needs to keep science useful for longer, is actual info gained from doing science. In the real-world scientific experiments don't just tell thingalso make future missions easier. NASA mapped the Moon, tested how thick the hull of manned craft would need to be to stop things like micrometeoroids, etc. The same thing could be done for KSP. A height map of Eve would help people with finding a high mountain to return to orbit from (especially if it ever gets a cloud deck, like so many of the visual mods do). A biome map would allow people to precisely land future missions. An atmospheric probe through Laythe's atmosphere would give an indication of how thick the atmosphere is, which would be useful for future manned missions (to plant the ascent profile).

[Stratzenblitz75]

Wow guys! I did not expect this suggestion to get so much feedback! Thank you all:D

Excellent suggestions.

I am super keen on seeing any suggestions regarding improvements to the science mechanic. Right now it's not just dull and un-engaging, it's actively tedious and frustrating. I recently had a bit of a rant on this topic:

http://youtu.be/MrqhNfMyLCs?t=6m50s

You've provided some ideas here that really do put the player back into science, creating real gameplay rather than just dialog box button clicking. Not many people have managed to come up with ideas that meet this requirement, so kudos to you!

Haha, well, your rant on "Science grinding" actually inspired me to make this suggestion. I definitely agree though, the devs need to take a long, hard look at the way science is implemented. Science shouldn't be about spamming dialog boxes, it should be about exploring the Kerbol system, setting up experiments, and making discoveries. You know, how science ACTUALLY is.

Time compression is only really an issue when stationary on the ground. In that case, the only data that can be gotten is from that one spot. If you have to wait for science here, you're just waiting for an arbitrary timer to run down. If you are moving however, this is different. A satellite in orbit that maps the surface temperature for example would require skill to get the best result. If you put it in an equatorial orbit, it'll only map a small band of the planet. If you place it in a 45 or 90 degree orbit you'll get a far more complete picture. There is skill to be had in the placement of your satellite.

The same works for atmospheric science. Here the skill lies in keeping your probe powered throughout the descent. If your probe dies before it can transmit the data, it's lost and there's no way to do it over. This is different from static science, where you can just wait for the sun to come up or send a second mission that brings that missing antenna or something. With atmospheric science there's only one chance to do it right, which adds challenge.

In the end, more engaging gameplay for science collection is only part of the solution. After a while the tech tree is all done and the blurbs (even with that Crowd-sourced mod) are not that interesting that they'll push you to do science. What the game needs to keep science useful for longer, is actual info gained from doing science. In the real-world scientific experiments don't just tell thingalso make future missions easier. NASA mapped the Moon, tested how thick the hull of manned craft would need to be to stop things like micrometeoroids, etc. The same thing could be done for KSP. A height map of Eve would help people with finding a high mountain to return to orbit from (especially if it ever gets a cloud deck, like so many of the visual mods do). A biome map would allow people to precisely land future missions. An atmospheric probe through Laythe's atmosphere would give an indication of how thick the atmosphere is, which would be useful for future manned missions (to plant the ascent profile).

My idea behind having an arbitrary wait time before getting results is to encourage players to build long-term surface bases and space stations to run these experiments. I want Kerbals to become more involved in gathering science. For example, lets say you send a base to Laythe and then you send a bunch of Kerbal scientists to man it. You could then set up the goo containers and science jrs to run some experiments and the scientists would monitor the experiments and record the data. It gives the Kerbals a reason to be there on the base. However now that you mention it, I think a better way to implement this is to have the experiments slowly give you science over time, similar to how the Science Labs from the Interstellar Mod work. Maybe to add a bit of skill to it, lets say you'd get more science depending on the location of the base. If your base is near an anomaly, it would rack in far more science than if it were placed in an uninteresting location.

I have full support for biome, gravity, temperature, anomoly, atmospheric and altitude maps that you access from the science archives to help plan your missions. I'd love for the day where I can send a probe to Laythe, determine the density of the atmosphere, and use the data to determine which altitude I should Aerobrake at, rather than guessing.

[Vaporo]

Yeah, science gathering needs to be set up so that you actually have to dosomething to get decent experimental results. The suggestions for Mystery Goo and Materials Study border on being "science over time" though, which I believe that the devs have stated that they don't want. Still, though, good ideas.

[chaos_forge]

to anyone discussing possible improvements to science, I would like to point you to this excellent thread. It has several great suggestions.

[Strikerklm96]

The best kind of science you can implement is the kind that doesn't need a point system. The information you gain from doing the science rewards you directly. For instance, when landing and taking off of Eve, you can save A TON of dV if you land on a high mountain, to avoid the lower atmosphere, and extra travel distance. So using a satellite to map its height pays off directly (or you can cheat and look it up, but you can cheat in a lot of ways). Similarly with the Kethane mod, scanning a planet tells you where to land for kethane, which has obvious benefits.

Obviously there still needs to be point systems, for unlocking the tech tree, but more directly applicable results from doing science would be nice.

The major problem with building long term settlements in KSP that produce science over time is that you can fast forward, which basically breaks it. But if you force them not to fast forward for it, it's often grindy. If people want to have bases in KSP, then the bases would need to produce something that you wanted, and had to consume. For instance, a base could produce a type of super efficient fuel that your engines can't start with, for interplanetary travel or something. Then, you would have to occasionally dock with it, or maybe simply beam it to Kerbin. The KSP interstellar mod does something like this, but I haven't gotten that far in it.

But the reality is, any sort of base system would either become:

1. Too grindy.

2. You only use a base a fixed number of times, or infrequently.

3. You never interact with it at all because it's automated or useless.

I'm hoping for #2.

If you want a science related reason for space stations that isn't grindy and isn't time dependent, here is one:

In order to get ANY science from an experiment:

1. Have to process it in a mobile processing lab before you recover it.

2. Have to have an MPL either on or in orbit of the body before you can do any science experiment.

3. MPL would be REALLY HEAVY, still require SEVERAL KERBALS, and consume LOTS OF ELECTRICITY so that would be an incentive for you to put a MPL in orbit with lots of solar panels in a station sort of style, and then do science on the body, and then dock with the station and transmit. Or maybe you could transmit the science to the MPL from the surface, and then process it, and then transmit to Kerbin.

I'm not saying this is a great idea, but it's hard to find a science related reason for space stations that isn't grindy or time dependent, because both of those qualities are very bad.

[FleshJeb]

To OP: In my mind, this is EXACTLY what the game needs.

[Doc.Solveberg]

I completely agree.

I also think that unlocking new parts with science points is also not very ideal. I just don't find it exciting to finally get a battery pack for doing grindy science.

With the OP's suggestions in mind I think science should get you a Funds boost instead and have all parts unlocked from the start. The costs would have to be rebalanced of course.

Edited July 18, 2014 by Doc.Solveberg

[Asmayus]

So instead of having to milk the system to get the best results, you click once, leave the experiment run, get all the science, and carry on?

Yes! Yes please! I mean, we're spending the time clicking anyway, aren't we?

It also fixes having to carry a bunch of redundant science tools to get all the science from a location, and situations where you get a pointless amount of science from doing something after you've removed the bulk of it. I hate having to use a goo container for <0.5 science (not that I ever do) when I can take it elsewhere for a dramatically bigger payoff.

Part of me likes that you can't get all the information at once from a location. Maybe we need more (big) science tools. That would lead into multiple trips as well.

[Seio]

I do really like those points, and allmhuran brings up some of the same things as well.

So to keep it short, how science gathering would work

• Gravioloi detector and thermometer maps the planet or moon with temperatures, and gains science points for every "point" it scans. It would also give a visible map of "hotspots" to ana(l)yze with a kerbal or experiments like mystery goo and materials bay, for extra science.
  
• Mystery goo and the materials bay takes time to gather science, but has a maximum value that can be obtained for a specific altitude or biome (would need to remove "high over biome" zones though), having a kerbal on the craft would yield extra science; or be required to gain science from the experiments (I suppose the science lab could be reworked to yield even more science, for a deeper ana(l)ysis - close to what's yielded for retrieving an experiment).
  
• Altitude/photo recorders would be added, to map the planet for it's biomes, and gain science points for every biome discovered/mapped, and for every point of the body mapped: This would also make it easier to find the biome you want to grab science from.
  
• The atmosphere stuff is something I don't know much about, I've never bothered with it... but it could use the same system as the others. Same with the seismic data, I'm not too knowledgeable about how it works in real life.
  

Basically everything would be based on the "ScanSat" mod, and/or the kethane scan mod, to see the different lay outs (temperature, gravity, biome) of the body you'd have a toggle to switch between them. What it would improve is more efficient and systematized science gathering, like you're setting up an actual space program. Kerbals needing to ana(l)yze the experiments over time would make use of having more than a couple of kerbals, as they're actually being useful.

The tech tree needs a complete rework, so that it makes some sense, and gives you freedom to choose what parts you want to unlock, I think there was even a mod for it. Also, having "upgrades" for each part would be interesting, where you'd use science points, and potentially performing "experimental part" contracts, to "upgrade" the part, where an upgrade would give you a better ISP, a higher thrust, or decrease the weight of the part (nothing excessive though).

edit: Seems a certain word collided with a filter.

Edited July 18, 2014 by Seio

[Stratzenblitz75]

The best kind of science you can implement is the kind that doesn't need a point system. The information you gain from doing the science rewards you directly. For instance, when landing and taking off of Eve, you can save A TON of dV if you land on a high mountain, to avoid the lower atmosphere, and extra travel distance. So using a satellite to map its height pays off directly (or you can cheat and look it up, but you can cheat in a lot of ways). Similarly with the Kethane mod, scanning a planet tells you where to land for kethane, which has obvious benefits.

Obviously there still needs to be point systems, for unlocking the tech tree, but more directly applicable results from doing science would be nice.

The major problem with building long term settlements in KSP that produce science over time is that you can fast forward, which basically breaks it. But if you force them not to fast forward for it, it's often grindy. If people want to have bases in KSP, then the bases would need to produce something that you wanted, and had to consume. For instance, a base could produce a type of super efficient fuel that your engines can't start with, for interplanetary travel or something. Then, you would have to occasionally dock with it, or maybe simply beam it to Kerbin. The KSP interstellar mod does something like this, but I haven't gotten that far in it.

But the reality is, any sort of base system would either become:

1. Too grindy.

2. You only use a base a fixed number of times, or infrequently.

3. You never interact with it at all because it's automated or useless.

I'm hoping for #2.

If you want a science related reason for space stations that isn't grindy and isn't time dependent, here is one:

In order to get ANY science from an experiment:

1. Have to process it in a mobile processing lab before you recover it.

2. Have to have an MPL either on or in orbit of the body before you can do any science experiment.

3. MPL would be REALLY HEAVY, still require SEVERAL KERBALS, and consume LOTS OF ELECTRICITY so that would be an incentive for you to put a MPL in orbit with lots of solar panels in a station sort of style, and then do science on the body, and then dock with the station and transmit. Or maybe you could transmit the science to the MPL from the surface, and then process it, and then transmit to Kerbin.

I'm not saying this is a great idea, but it's hard to find a science related reason for space stations that isn't grindy or time dependent, because both of those qualities are very bad.

Yea... I'm starting to see how time restricted science experiments aren't that great of an idea. Simply leaving a science experiment on a planet with a bunch of Kerbals to do science over time becomes either too grindy, or too automated. If we want a reason to build science bases in KSP, I think we need a new line of heavy, expensive, and resource intensive parts. For example, there could be mobile labs like chemistry or bio labs that you need to place in orbit or on the surface of planet to gather science. From these labs, you could perform a variety of experiments like "how are microbes effected by the vacuum of space?" or "how does Duna's atmosphere effect this random sample" or "how well do plants grow in this surface sample?". In addition, they can do on-site ysis of surface samples, water samples and gas samples to give you 100% science return on transmission. As you suggested for the MPL, these labs would be fairly heavy, require multiple Kerbals and tons of electricity to operate.

[bartekkru99]

Yea... I'm starting to see how time restricted science experiments aren't that great of an idea. Simply leaving a science experiment on a planet with a bunch of Kerbals to do science over time becomes either too grindy, or too automated. If we want a reason to build science bases in KSP, I think we need a new line of heavy, expensive, and resource intensive parts. For example, there could be mobile labs like chemistry or bio labs that you need to place in orbit or on the surface of planet to gather science. From these labs, you could perform a variety of experiments like "how are microbes effected by the vacuum of space?" or "how does Duna's atmosphere effect this random sample" or "how well do plants grow in this surface sample?". In addition, they can do on-site ysis of surface samples, water samples and gas samples to give you 100% science return on transmission. As you suggested for the MPL, these labs would be fairly heavy, require multiple Kerbals and tons of electricity to operate.

Sounds nice. Having multiple types of science labs could make space stations a lot more useful.