Opinions on "Kerbal Experience"

[JedTech]

:cool:"What if I told you..." that when a Kerbal is in a spaceship they are connect to a Matrix. This Matrix provides energy to the ship by sucking it from the bio energy of the Kerbals. The more experienced/badass a Kerbal is, the more bio energy they provide. This energy is then used to increase the efficiency of the engines!?!?

Edited October 22, 2014 by JedTech

[CaptainKipard]

We [and those on Reddit] are all seasoned veterans and a small sample of the greater player base. The Silent Majority was polled on this element and they all loved it.^{[citation needed]}

I hope this is a joke. I'm not good at spotting sarcasm.

Wow. It's like no one's played an RPG before. They've been talking about Kerbal experience for a long time. This sort of thing is actually what I assumed they were talking about. I am with the crowd that see's it akin to a better driver. Sure, I am actually flying the rocket, but so is Jeb (in the game world, anyway).

Now if they'd just implement DangIt!, they could add classes (pilot, mechanic, scientist), fix the tech tree and contracts, and I may actually be interested in career mode.

It's not simply that it's like an RPG. RPG elements would be fine, if they were made sensible, not magical.

And besides I'm sure many here like RPGs, as I do, but it's not like those elements fit with every game.

This is better than nothing.

So that's the bar you've chosen.

[Draemora]

I hope this is a joke. I'm not good at spotting sarcasm.

He even put a sarcasm disclaimer man! lol The "citation needed" bit hints at his statement being a classical assumption that's seldom verified as well.

[m4v]

So that's the bar you've chosen.

If you pick the highest bar you will not reach it, you gotta walk before you can run.

[tater]

Wow. It's like no one's played an RPG before. They've been talking about Kerbal experience for a long time. This sort of thing is actually what I assumed they were talking about. I am with the crowd that see's it akin to a better driver. Sure, I am actually flying the rocket, but so is Jeb (in the game world, anyway).

Now if they'd just implement DangIt!, they could add classes (pilot, mechanic, scientist), fix the tech tree and contracts, and I may actually be interested in career mode.

I've played plenty of actual RPGs before. With dice. Skill simply modifies randomness. They are adding the skill, but none of the randomness. The problem is the combination of an abstraction (skill), with a simulation (yes, simulation, the game is simulating space flight, regardless of how accurate that ends up being). The 2 just don't mix nicely with the play controlling things.

I'd rather have AI kerbals to use for missions that have become tedious.

[CaptainKipard]

Sometimes a topic is important enough to make a person register. This is one of those times.

Add me to the pool of people who feel that kerbal traits should not change the stats of parts. Instead, if traits are going to affect the technical characteristics of a craft, let me the player access them in a logical fashion.

A few examples:

Jeb has a great deal of experience running rocket engines at full throttle and knows that you can get a bit more out of them so when he's piloting the throttle for me the player goes up to say 110% to represent running the engines above their rating. But that is going to lead to more heating and perhaps even reduced ISP, if you want to go there.

Bob on the other hand freaks out with high thrust but has learned that if you feather the throttle just right you will use fuel more efficiently and so I the player will get slightly increased ISP under 1/3rd throttle.

Meanwhile Bill loves all the science and knows just what the scientists need so hisnsample collections are worth more and his transmissions have less waste so take less time. (Which is likely the thinking already in place)

But honestly, while actually having effects come from Kerbal experience is a nice idea, I really don't feel the effects are needed. The Final Frontier mod does nothing but record the experiences of Kerbals and award them ribbons and I love it and it makes me care about /who/ I send on missions. (For instance rookies on basic parts tests or vets when pushing the boundries)

A wonderful improvement would be to simply award, as my brother put it, "hats" to the kerbals based on experience. The "hats" being things like, hair styles, glasses, space suit colors, special visors, patches, or maybe recolors of the ship parts, etc.

I know that's a lot of art work to do but a lot could be put in front of the community as was done with the kerbal company logos. However, even if you don't want to go that route yourself, please try to have the hooks installed so that the wonderful modding community that has grown around your game can?

Welcome, and good first post, but your engine examples are still within the realm of magic. Afaik rockets engine have specific ISPs and specific thrusts, and specific delta-v. They are designed to be precise. Maybe someone can correct me. Even if this isn't the case then the a pilot's experience would not be appropriate here.

If you pick the highest bar you will not reach it, you gotta walk before you can run.

So we have to choose between both extremes? Come on, be serious. One can always compromise, and I for one would prefer Squad to err on the side of realism. Besides that aiming high means you reach higher.

Edited October 22, 2014 by Cpt. Kipard

[GregA]

It is a video game, it doesn't have to make sense.

Without some reason given, Kerbals have no purpose to exist. Probes are universally easier designs than Kerbal designs, with no need to return them. Literally the only thing they can do that probes cant do better is plant flags.

For this reason, it is better if Kerbals have some impact on rockets other than making them heavier. Because otherwise lighter probe designs are almost always better easier in the Kerbal universe as it works now.

Some of the most popular mods all address the scratch that Kerbals have no reason to be in game.

[matts73]

If they become "NPCs," then they can use skills. You could also take a role playing game (think Traveller, D&D, etc) route. Make AI pilots a thing (player can always take over). Yes, like mechjeb, basically, only just Jeb, himself, and he;s already in the capsule. Whenever there is a task that requires the pilot, the game, well, rolls some dice. The skill level determines how well (within some random range) the task is completed. The rocket physics is entirely unchanged. So a burn is scheduled at T+37 minutes, 23 seconds. The burn is 100% power for 17 seconds. The ship is to be pointed at 122 degrees, no inclination. The game would take this event, and based on the pilot skill the burn should take place around T+37' 15" (really 15.5). It might take place a couple seconds late, and the burn might go long. In the latter case, Jeb might chase the marker and correct (goal always to make the burn have a green check). The actual direction might be 120 degrees, and +1 inclination, too. You get the idea. If chasing the marker, or having to do a correction (or a few) to get to the target uses more fuel, there is the penalty for an unskilled pilot. Not that the Isp of the engine is reduced.

Science is already very abstract, I'm fine with skill as a modifier (even a buff---Bill knows what rocks to collect, jeb does not).

Yes, that was, what I thought would come but not this what seems to come with physics changing by skill... And it would be much more usefull, I love to give routine jobs to mech jeb because I have done them a hundred times so if some kind of kerbal autonomous flying would be implementet just to reduce boredom from routine I would appreciate that. If it´s linked or related on what flying skill one kerbal has, even better.

[NWDogg]

I greatly dislike this idea. I don't think pilots should (or even could) affect the maximum thrust or ISP of an engine mid-flight just by being more experienced. Now, I really do like the idea that more experienced Kerbals can get greater science gains, or higher reputation returns. Why don't you work off that basis, rather than touching the hardware directly?

Celebrity Kerbals and Scientist Kerbals have already been suggested, and that makes sense. So...how about a sort-of tech-tree for Kerbals? They start out as recruits, with very basic skills, and as they gain experience you can train them to have specific specializations. 2nd tier trainees might be a Scientist, Celebrity, or Engineer (can positively affect the launch and recovery costs). 3rd tier scientists could specialize in orbital or surface science; 3rd tier engineers split into rocket or spaceplane specialization; 3rd tier celebs get MUCH higher rep but also severe penalties if they die or fail.

...and Pilots. Pilots should also be a 'class'. Instead of altering the physics of the game with magic boosts though, Kerbal Pilots could do things like execute maneuver nodes. 2nd tier pilots can only do in-SOI maneuvers. 3rd tier pilots can execute Planet-Moon transfers. Final tier they could execute interplanetary maneuvers. Maybe you could even have specializations for rockets and spaceplanes, or rover pilots even....point being, that there are ways to utilize Kerbals' experience without resorting to ridiculous RPG magic buffs (and this thread proves it isn't popular anyway.)

Anyway, I doubt the system will change greatly from the way they are developing it now, so this suggestion could be entirely pointless. If any modders see this, though, I think this would make a really neat Kerbal experience system...and I'd be willing to help anyone out who is interested in developing it.

[tntristan12]

Hoo, doggy. Catching up on all 21 pages of this discussion was a lot of effort! I don't have much to say that hasn't already been said, but I figured I'll just throw my tupence in anyway:

First off, I can understand the abstraction (perhaps even accept it a little bit), but the implementation of it seems... Well... I'd really hate to use this word, but it seems lazy to me. There are so many doable ideas that would utilize kerbals, fit in with the overarching gameplay, and be a faithful representation of crew experience, but those ideas would undoubtedly require some serious development effort be put into them. Meanwhile, the feature as it is proposed now seems clunky, tacked on, not particularly useful either way, and must I remind everyone that rockets do not work that way?

Yes, I know it's an abstraction, and perhaps there is a little green man inside the command pod pushing some buttons that don't need to be pushed or vice versa, but let's be honest. Would the game really be able to communicate that clearly at a glance? Players shouldn't be forced to construct elaborate headcanon to explain deviations from expected behavior on something so basic as ISP or thrust. And if the feature is indeed as subtle as Maxmaps is making it seem, is it really worth having?

As I've mentioned, there are a plurality of great ideas for how crew experience could be implemented. I personally like the limited autopilot idea. If it could be made to work on out of focus vessels, it solves a number of problems with a single swing: it means that experienced players don't need to endlessly repeat dull tasks that they've done a thousand times before (such as executing maneuver nodes); it allows players to fly multiple missions at once without panicking about missing a maneuver node (because the crew had got it under control); it finally gives crewed vessels a distinct use besides treating kerbals as mobile science generators (if you give uncrewed vessels the ability to generate science, there will actually be an incentive to send crews!); and it would allow for Maxmaps to implement the crew ability affecting rocket performance that he wants without having to create an elaborate headcanon!

So I think we all know where my vote went. Personally, I'm glad this discussion came up now rather than weeks down the line when a bunch of work has already been put into it. Maxmaps, you're getting some excellent advice from the community! Please consider some of it.

[Broax]

This update is shapping up really nicely... Specially the updated VAB!! But I feel I should add my voice of concern regarding the XP system... The idea is great and there are tons of good ideas on the implementation (bigger XP yield, more precise RCS maneuvers, limiting the ability to do resource transfers, etc) but activel change stats like dV sounds like a bad idea to me...

My best solution would be to limit the ability of low-level kerbals to control ships by stats... For example, rookie kerbonauts wouldnt be able to fly rockets with more X tons, thrust, stages, etc. Or even limit parts like rookies not doing science or controlling nuclear rockets or 3-man pods, etc...

Changing the stats would just break the whole thing.. :-x

[Farex]

I like this idea. How about you need a crew of at least 2 Kerbals with X-amount of experience to leave the kerbol system? This would spice things up and make deaths more serious.

[Torham234]

Why do the devs keep trying to implement things that change the way parts behave? Something similar was mentioned for contracts and the community reacted badly to that, what makes them think trying the same idea but packaging it with Kerbals would go down any better?

Just a stab in the dark, but Isn't the reason for that the fact that the game is still in development?

"Crew tasks: Have the crew take charge of controlling the craft" have been in the planned features for over two years. Maybe Kerbal influence is the latest iteration of this feature?

[LordFjord]

I might be with the minority here but I am actually looking forward to this. The fact that there is some kind of experience system is a major goal to keep Kerbals alive and have dedicated Kerbals for each task.

In my mind I picture Kerbal experiance the same was as I did learn KSP. With the time and on certain achievements they improve. Remember your first orbit, docking, mun landings? The following operations were a lot lot easier and you were a lot more effective even when flying the same vessels. In my Kerbalish RP view its perfectly fine to squeeze a bit more dV out of an engine or have more control authority.

For me it also would not change how I would build the vessels, some extra dV because of a skilled Kerbal is a welcome additional safety margin for the mission, the additional few % of plus science and funds is also not necessary, but a welcome little bonus. But I understand that some people build in such a perfect way that for them it would be an issue that a certain vessel can only be flown by a Kerbal who has X trait on level Y.

Important is, that the skills are not overdone (like the strategies currently are) and within reasonable limits. Also, an option to turn it off to satisfy all playstyles.

[CaptRobau]

I like the idea. I think everyone is overthinking the amount of impact this will have. It's going to lead to situations where a good pilot can save you a few units of fuel will prove helpful in situations where you're just about to run out, an engineer can make that RAPIER ascent more smooth since you don't need to think about throttling down a percent or two to prevent overheating or a scientist can help you get those two extra science credits needed to unlock that next tech node. If that's the way it'll be, I think the unbalancing efforts of Kerbals will be relatively small.

[Dilir]

I do like the Kerbal Experience very much, but when it comes to the effects, it is more delicate.

What could an experience system bring to kerbals?

My first idea is certification : kerbals needs to be trained on the ground, and it has a cost. Each command pod, descent lander, rover, piece of scientific equipement would require a certified user to actually work. You can add some situation as orbital EVA, surface EVA, docking. You can need certification to launch certain ships (nuclear ship, heavy ship, very high/low TWR ship).

All of this could be obtained on the ground, with some money/time cost. They would be basic levels (limited EVA time, maximum mass for docking maneuvres, limited SOI).

Second idea is mission gain experience :

- Part of experience would be used to improve certifications

- Second part would give bonuses. I am not against bonuses that breaks the physics games, as long as they are small. I would also want them to be ignorable without abandonning the whole experience system. It would also be great to have more realistics bonuses (limited automation seems a good idea, as well as RCS / SAS efficiency)

[Capt Snuggler]

"The Kerbal experience traits boost the ship/part they’re on and can have some very funky effects. Currently these include boosting thrust, reducing heat generation, increasing fuel efficiency and boosting science output."

am I the only one who is growing ever more concerned about this?

Edit* obviously not...

I completely disagree with changing part stats based on the pilot.

note to self, read posts before posting.

Edited October 22, 2014 by Capt Snuggler

[*Aqua*]

@Aqua Here is the quote from the devnotes that most of the discussion has been centered around:

The Kerbal experience traits boost the ship/part they’re on and can have some very funky effects. Currently these include boosting thrust, reducing heat generation, increasing fuel efficiency and boosting science output.

Thank you. I didn't know about that.

Well at least they don't implement one bit of the stuff i suggested for the trait system (yes i saw someone stealing my idea in this Thread ).

Although i liked my idea -> http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/96849-Devnote-Tuesdays-The-Onward-to-0-26-Edition?p=1479409&viewfull=1#post1479409

But let's face the truth and wait for the exp result maybe it's really cool how the devs plan it.

To the rest i must say, awesome load of work you managed to get done, i'm a programmer myself i can understand the pain of reworking code that works but isn't expandable anymore.

I like the idea stated there. Specialized Kerbals sound fun and then there will be a reason to send multiple Kerbals into space and to choose other ones besides Jeb, Bill & Bob.

[White Owl]

I have to wonder if Squad only made this suggestion to see exactly what the response would be. Send up a balloon to see who shoots at it, ya know?

It just doesn't make sense any other way.

[Monger]

I completely disagree with changing part stats based on the pilot.

*shrug* If Scotty is able to improve the Enterprise by 400% within a few years (without ever visiting a space dock), Jeb can do a few percent as well.

I guess the idea is to give at least a small incentive to a) actually use manned flights and take a little care of your little Kerbals instead continuously killing them off.

I am really amazed about the editor changes. There were so many moments where I thought "why can't I put my part there?". Switching between VAB and SPH made many designs a lot easier, but packing and unpacking them into submodules just to realize that you built them up from the wrong root node so you have to do everything again...

Keep up the amazing work!

[Xaiier]

I voted indifferent, because I won't really care either way.

What I do want to say though, is that all the people making a huge fuss over the fact that the current plan "isn't realistic bla bla" are being ridiculous. Despite what you may believe, this is a game, not a simulator, and providing magical (and even somewhat justifiable in this case) boosts due to character experience happens all the time in nearly every game and nobody even notices. I think this is a wonderful way to give Kerbals a useful purpose and provide extra reason to take good care of them.

[Ippo]

Mike (Mu): Well, the experience system has come on in leaps and bounds. The back end is finished and has some nice little features which modders should enjoy. The Kerbal experience traits boost the ship/part they’re on and can have some very funky effects. Currently these include boosting thrust, reducing heat generation, increasing fuel efficiency and boosting science output. Obviously, the performance boosting effects have to be quite subtle to not make things too easy but will still provide a solid boost should you care for your Kerbals.

AWESOME! Now we only need a mod that will disable that by default, void all its effects, and also erase the memory of it ever being in the game. Really... NO. I am absolutely serious when I say that I won't play one single minute until this thing can be disabled.

P.S: I can't wait to hear regex' opinion on this.

Edited October 22, 2014 by Ippo

[Luis]

I'm also firmly against the idea of Kerbal XP providing ship boosts.

One additional problem that I don't think has been brought up so far is that 'moar thrust' isn't necessarily a good thing. Imagine you build a launcher with a TWR of 2.5. On the first flight it flies just fine. But then the kerbal pilot levels up and gets a passive thrust boost. Now the TWR is higher and the rocket tears itself to pieces during the ascent. Do I need to keep a roster of medium skill pilots now, and retire them every time they get too good?

I love the idea of an XP system that affects suit flair, rank and reputation. I'd settle for something tied to the science system or a certification-based limit to which parts kerbals can use. But passive ship boosts is a definite NO. If this makes it into the game, I'll be modding it out again as quickly as possible.

[Capt Snuggler]

Ive said it before and I'll say it again. If you want a "pilot skill" for the kerbals then it should boost their ability to stay conscious during high G-force.

If the kerbals blackout - you, effectively blackout.

This would complement the players piloting skill and their ability to manage G-force.

Then balance out the probe cores making them more expensive, energy inefficient and lower their science and reputation returns.

manned flights for greater reputation and science returns + contract bonuses, but at the cost of greater difficulty and risk.

probe flights for low risk, high cost but lower science and rep. (maybe change it so not all probes are created equal? bigger more expensive probes can take samples and conduct analysis)

edit* command pods with more than one seat offer some redundancy. if the pilot blacks out from G-LOC then the co-pilot MAY be able to take over.

Edited October 22, 2014 by Capt Snuggler

[Justin Kerbice]

Regarding kerbal experience which magically alter the laws of physics OR properties of systems use in the vessel, it could be: better cooling might means finally someone figure out what the "activate cooling system", or just the blue button with missing label, means and ow useful it could be, better ISP may be "use 100% throttle instead of staying in turbo/postcombustion mode .

There is finally some use of the "banned" word (the one which start with a 'd'), still nothing about modding d....