Seriously? over 30 KSC biomes?

[Axelord FTW]

I'd like Science to be split into different kinds of science.

Like, physics (more science experiments, some engine types), chemistry (engines mostly and fuels), material testing (structural and aerodynamic) and so on.

As for resource collection, I think Karbonite+SCANsat is the next best thing. The mining parts could use some love but the engines and particle collectors are nice.

[Superfluous J]

I'd actually quite enjoy a system where everything is initially hidden and you have to discover it.

The problem with this is anybody who's aerobraked at Eve a few times will be able to do it fairly confidently without doing the science for it.

Unless the system is totally randomized at the start of each game.

Which I personally think is a great idea but the devs have said they don't want that.

[tater]

The solution would be to have the kerbol system randomized. Each can have a seed, and the default game can always reuse the default seed.

It could even use the exact same system in terms of gross positions, but change the actual distances, planetary diameters, masses, atmosphere, etc ever so slightly from default, but enough to make looking it up on the wiki pointless. Again, there can be a default system you have to change to make this happen.

[Stratzenblitz75]

The problem with this is anybody who's aerobraked at Eve a few times will be able to do it fairly confidently without doing the science for it.

Unless the system is totally randomized at the start of each game.

Which I personally think is a great idea but the devs have said they don't want that.

IMO, that's not even that much of problem. Of course people who are familiar with a game are going to know how it works, that's going to happen with pretty much ANY game. The point of science is gaining knowledge. If you already know how to do something, then you shouldn't need to do science to learn how to do it. For example, if you know exactly where Eve's tallest mountains are from heart, then why should you have to map the planet to find them? Apply this logic to any other game. If you've already played a Mario game and you know exactly where are the secrets, enemies, and power-ups are, why should you be forced to find them again? You already found them, randomizing their location isn't going to make the game a "new experience", in fact, its probably just going to frustrate you. I know "Rougelites" follow this exact concept but the difference is that they were built and balanced around the idea of procedural or random generation. KSP was never built as a proceduraly generated game, so putting in procedural elements just to force the experienced players to do science is IMO not a very good idea, especially when it can mess up so many other things (like the challenge sub-forum, for example). Sure, I actually wouldn't mind this as an optional feature, but not as mandatory one.

The solution would be to have the kerbol system randomized. Each can have a seed, and the default game can always reuse the default seed.

It could even use the exact same system in terms of gross positions, but change the actual distances, planetary diameters, masses, atmosphere, etc ever so slightly from default, but enough to make looking it up on the wiki pointless. Again, there can be a default system you have to change to make this happen.

I don't think we should try to balance the game around "whether the people will look at the wiki". There are kinds of people who will always check cheat-sheets, wikis, etc no matter what game they play. Slightly mixing up the Kerbol System just to prevent these people from cheating seems kinda unnecessary.

[metl]

Man some people can complain about anything.

[Superfluous J]

If you've already played a Mario game and you know exactly where are the secrets, enemies, and power-ups are, why should you be forced to find them again?

Mario games aren't about exploration, though. They're about running to the right and not missing the warp tubes. The idea of simply not having to do science any more in a career game is distasteful to me. Far more distasteful than using said science to unlock parts is.

KSP was never built as a proceduraly generated game, so putting in procedural elements just to force the experienced players to do science is IMO not a very good idea, especially when it can mess up so many other things (like the challenge sub-forum, for example). Sure, I actually wouldn't mind this as an optional feature, but not as mandatory one.

Me either. I'd like 2 modes (like the 2nd and 3rd modes in the old Adventure game from Atari, still one of the best examples of replayability in a game with a static universe) Static mode with the current universe, and then procedural mode with something like Planet Randomizer to give experienced players something to find out.

[tater]

Randomizing the solar system is the only way to make the exploration part of KSP novel on replay. Same basic planets, with different specifics would at least create novel solutions… You want to design an Eve lander for a randomized system, first you'll have to send a probe to measure what the atmosphere is actually like, it might be easier than the current game, but even 10% harder could make many optimized designs unable to return.

Anyway, it's just an idea. Career as it is is probably more interesting the very first time you do it. I'm on careers 4-5 (last 2 concurrent unmodded and modded .25 so I can provide useful feedback). they've all been pretty much identical.

[Stratzenblitz75]

Mario games aren't about exploration, though. They're about running to the right and not missing the warp tubes. The idea of simply not having to do science any more in a career game is distasteful to me. Far more distasteful than using said science to unlock parts is.

Mario was bad example. My point is that plenty of games, including exploration games, have static universes and yet they can be interesting and re-playable. Also, science wouldn't be useless, you could still patent your reports for Funds or publish them for reputation. My idea is to give players more ways to run their space program. For example, you could gain your income from completing contracts and launching customer's satellites and other space craft into space. Or, you could run a science based program that gets its money to build and launch space probes, rovers and other sciency stuff. Or, you could even run a space program that earns its income from sending Kerbal "tourists" into space.

I'll have to give this some more thought... Perhaps there is a good way to incorporate a form of "science" into each of these play-styles...

Me either. I'd like 2 modes (like the 2nd and 3rd modes in the old Adventure game from Atari, still one of the best examples of replayability in a game with a static universe) Static mode with the current universe, and then procedural mode with something like Planet Randomizer to give experienced players something to find out.

Agreed, as long as there are some "checks" to prevent overly difficult, ridiculous, or bland solar systems, I would love to see something like this. Space Engine + KSP is my dream space game.

[rdwulfe]

Levelord, you've named why I play, and pretty much how I play. In my current campaign, I'm playing on hard, with many restrictions turned on, and TAC-LS installed. This is my first time playing with a life support mod.

I'm on a "standard" Mun mission, with Fine Print telling me to collect science from a specific crater... Every Kerbal wants to come home. Every mission designer has this goal in mind... there is a budget, constraints, and goals for each mission. I love contracts and how they give me a bit of a framework to work within outside of my own imagination (which is nice, but I like to be forced to do things I wouldn't always think of. Kolinya orbit? Oh god, ok... danig! Heh.)

Everything was going smoothly. We were heading down towards the East Farside Crater, with Willing Kerman in his pod.

A transmission crackles to life in mission control. Willing, in a steely voice, reports that he is descending a touch too quickly. The engines installed are not quite strong enough to slow him down in time. Tell his wife he loves her... They reply, she knows...

He burns hard, the cabin vibrating slightly as the surface of the Mun looms ever closer, way too quickly. The little lander manages to slow just enough, but the engine is destroyed on contact with the Munar surface. The craft settles, life support and the rest of the vessel intact, but with no way to return home. Now Mission Control is scrambling to design a craft to return him. Thankfully, the craft is fitted with 30 days of food. It's designed to go to either the Mun or Minmus. This fact may save his life.

However, with budget concerns, Mission Control isn't sure wether they should send rescue-only vessel, or a replacement. Can he salvage the science and the mission to make it a win? Willing is... Willing, but is he able?

(Seriously Willing Kerman. Hah!)

[Archgeek]

The real question we all want to know the answer to, though, is whether there's a biome for that toilet in the astronaut complex.

Edited October 20, 2014 by Archgeek
Words had gone missing somehow

[N8-Toe]

I like them as fun little tidbits. I test my landers/rovers/other vehicles on a small scale at the space center. They can be fun to see.

[Slam_Jones]

KSC, with about one sq. mile of land has 30 biomes.

Duna, with about one billion sq miles of land has 1 biome.

Gotta love Squad's priorities.

(Yes I know they're working on biomes for everything else...)

[sal_vager]

Unfinished game is unfinished, news at 11

[Dreamixpl]

Gotta love Squad's priorities.

This is soo true, "you are focusing on carrer? Lets spend some time making buildings on that one sq. mile destroyable so players can destroy them by mistake once in their game-life-time! Also-don't touch other platets, but add 30 biomes on this 1sq mile". Perfect logic (I still like KSP, and I played it for hundreds of hours).

[Moesly_Armlis]

Could be Squad's priority is the mega rush of new players expected.

[Aegrim]

My main peeve with science is if i use it i have to go to the moon in a tin can with an engine, rather than an awesome Apollo rocket.

So I just play sandbox and recreate historical missions and future concept missions.

[Kesa]

I don't know if too many places to do science is an issue so much as science not being fun to do.

And exploring KSC biomes is way funnier than making your 100-th of "testing part X at altitude H and speed V", where X, H and V are incompatible in any usefull regular craft.

I don't think scouring KSC is that much rewarding, I would be very surpised to see more than 200 collectible science points, wich are way faster achieved with EVA reports around kerbin, mun, minmus and Kerbol. So I don't feel it's unbalanced.

Anyway, this is a sandbox game, so if you feel like completing the tech tree in the first kerbin's days, spend hours of making test contract, if you feel bored of the numerous biomes of minmus and the mun, go interplanetary, if you feel making science at ksc is op, just don't do it (or even go for mods like Btsm), but if you like mission reports and easter egg, you surely want to visit the 30 ksc biomes.

[Wallygator]

obviously we just need more things to spend our science points on. perhaps a little steak restaurant / hokey redneck bar a few km outside of the KSC where photos of all the dead Kerbal pilots are posted on the walls. 50 Science points for a steak dinner...

[Pthigrivi]

You could just... not gather that science....

A couple less snarky notes though: a) I'm quite sure there will be some major balancing for the science mechanic, especially considering there will probably be a dozen new biomes added for each other planet in the system by the time they're done. Once Duna and Eve and Jool become more scientifically lucrative the value of closer biomes will diminish considerably. I personally dont see completing the tech tree as the end of the game. Just as a matter of personal play style I unlock half the tech tree before I even shoot for Duna because I like a more involved mission. My missions aren't stand alone, the last few saves I've had have had dozens of ships and stations and bases moving about the system, so maxing out the tech tree is really just the first step for me. It's fun I promise! Just max out patent sales so all the science just goes to funding more and more ridiculous missions.

[tuckjohn]

(I don't know if someone has already suggested something like this because I do not have time to read all 60+ posts. If so, sorry for the redundancy)

If any devs are reading this, I have a very simple idea it reduce the amount of science available (make it so that you HAVE TO go to other planets to finish the tech tree. The more science you get from different biomes on a planet, the less that is available in other biomes (KSC would have to be separate from Kerbin, because it would be silly to be able to max out kerbin's science with only a single rover around KSC). For example, I go to the Mun and get science from the highlands. Then I send another lander to the lowlands, but only get 75%. Then 60%, then 35%, 15%, 8% (these ratios are just made up on the fly.....the idea being that they would "decay" over time, slowly approaching 0%, but never actually getting there. For math geeks, y=0 would be an asymptote)

Just an idea, feel free to expand!

[Tuareg]

I know what you mean. You can unlock the tech tree without leaving the Kerbin system. There needs to be another incentive to go to other planets. They are bringing in resources so that's a good thing.

and yet it will NOT make you to do anything interesting as it will be probably just a part add to your craft. land on asteroid, and it will autofill up the tanks. done...