Kerbal Experience and Roles

[KSK]

Hey folks,

First of all, apologies if this is the umpteenth thread on this topic - please do merge it with any ongoing discussion. I couldn't find anything using the forum search but 'kerbal' and 'experience' aren't great keywords either.

There was quite a bit of backlash against the originally proposed kerbal experience model, which would have given small bonuses to your spacecraft depending on the skill level(s) of your kerbonauts. With that in mind, I thought this might be an alternative model. It mainly uses bonuses to the three career resources (funds, rep and science), plus a couple of small tweaks to existing stock gameplay and a couple of miscallaneous bonuses. Anyway - comments welcome!

General

Kerbals acquire Experience from flying missions and use that experience to increase their skills in any of four Traits. Each Trait confers a number of bonuses, which increase with higher levels of skill in that Trait. Kerbals can acquire a maximum of five levels in each trait, each level requiring progressively more Experience to acquire. Kerbals are assigned a Title based on their current skill levels in each Trait.

Abstracted model

Each kerbal is awarded a number of experience points for successfully completing a flight. Points to be based on distance from Kerbin (suborbital, Kerbin orbit, Mun/Minmus, interplanetary) with a diminishing returns factor for repeated similar missions. The player can then allocate experience to improve Traits as they see fit. Abstracted system representing a combination of technical background before joining the space programme and pre-flight training reinforced by implementing that training in-flight.

Task based model

Kerbals acquire experience in each trait by performing related tasks in-flight, multiplied by a mission complexity factor based on distance from Kerbin - see above. Players thus define through gameplay the skill levels that their kerbals acquire in each trait. Kerbals assigned to single seat craft automatically gain piloting experience (see below), multiseat craft will need to have pilot seat(s) defined, where the kerbal(s) assigned to those seats gain piloting experience.

Traits

Payloads

Payloads specialists focus on EVA activities and science. They excel at getting the most out of the larger science modules.

- Bonus science points from Goo canisters and Science Jrs. Bonus science from EVA recovery of experimental data. Able to refurbish Goo canisters and Science Jrs at lab modules.

NB. Requires tweak to core game to implement, in that science recovered during EVA is treated in a similar manner to transmitted science, although perhaps at a reduced penalty.

Science

Anyone can read an instrument dial and report the results to Mission Control. Scientists bring a combination of intellectual insight and diverse technical backgrounds to the mission, vastly increasing the amount of scientific data garnered from space exploration.

- Bonus science points from surface samples, instrument packages, seismometers and gravioli detectors. Bonus science points from safe return of vessel. Improved science points from transmitted data.

Engineering

Practical, focused and with an aptitude for problem solving, Engineers are peerless at fixing and testing equipment, in high pressure situations.

- Bonus to Funds and Science from part testing contracts. Able to repair damaged spacecraft parts. Able to re-pack parachutes.

Piloting

Rightly or wrongly, Pilots tend to be the public face of a space programme, but their reflexes and rapid decision making skills make them ideal complements to Engineers for equipment testing.

- Minimum piloting skill required for LKO, Mun/Minmus and interplanetary missions. Bonus to reputation gains from kerbal rescue contracts, part testing contracts outside of Kerbin's SOI, exploration contracts, Record Keeping Society contracts and the first flag planting mission on each celestial body. Bonus to rover speed.

Titles

Rookie: All traits at level 0. All newly recruited kerbals start as Rookies.

Kerbonaut: At least one trait at level 1 or above.

Senior Kerbonaut: At least one trait at level 2 remaining traits at level 1.

Commander: At least one trait at level 3. Remaining traits at level 2.

Veteran Kerbonaut: At least one trait at level 4, two of remaining traits at level 3.

Pilot: Piloting at least two levels higher than any other trait.

Payload Specialist: Payloads at least two levels higher than any other trait.

Engineer: Engineering at least two levels higher than any other trait.

Scientist: Science at least two levels higher than any other trait.

Spacewalker: Piloting and Payloads both two levels higher than remaining traits.

Test Pilot: Piloting and Engineering both at least two levels higher than remaining traits.

Pilot-Scientist: Piloting and Science both at least two levels higher than remaining traits.

Mission Specialist: Science and Engineering both at least two levels higher than remaining traits.

Research Specialist: Science and Payloads both at least two levels higher than remaining traits.

Chief Engineer: Engineering and Payloads both at least two levels higher than remaining traits.

Examples

Bill flies two missions and improves his skill in Piloting and Science. Neither trait is high enough to trigger a title award. On his third mission he improves his Piloting skill and his Payloads skill. His Piloting skill is now high enough to trigger the Pilot title. On subsequent missions he decides to continue developing his skills as a pilot and payloads specialist, eventually earning the Spacewalker title for his accomplishments in piloting and EVA. However Bill's lack of engineering ability prevented him from earning Senior Kerbonaut or command ranks.

Bob flies six missions, remaining a generalist, with a slight bias towards engineering. He is regarded as a highly skilled all-rounder, and acquires the Senior Kerbonaut title as a result. Bob flies many more missions in his career, retiring with honour as a Commander.

Edited October 28, 2014 by KSK

[Tw1]

I like this concept- something like this would be good.

It would be set up so kerbals can't have all areas maxed, to diversify roles?

It would make you think about training and sending kerbals to places, but provide realistic benefits, unlike originally planned. Not sure Piloting should boost Rover speed thought...

[KSK]

Thanks!

Yep - the idea is that maxing all areas would be impossible, so you need to make some choices, and ideally bring a mixed crew along to give you more options. Veteran Kerbonaut should be hard to reach, and even Veterans are nowhere near maxed.

The rationale behind the Rover speed boost was that pilots are likely to be better (or at least more reckless) drivers, so will tend to push their Rovers as fast as they can. I see your point, but I figured it would be a fun little bonus that wouldn't really impact on core gameplay that much, since Rovers are pretty much optional at the moment.

[lordmuffin]

I had an idea that has to do with the Engineering trait.

If modules in space stations could break (that would be cool) maybe engineers could take materials from a container and then repair it in EVA? (This is based off of a combination of KAS and USI Kolonization)

[Wanderfound]

Sounds pretty good. I'd put the piloting bonus onto rover stability rather than speed, though; less obviously physics warping.

[mattinoz]

This sounds pretty great. Would say in terms of Kerbal tasks the or a future level of autonomous Kerbal the titles could make a good control over what each kerbal can do.

So:-...

Rookie: Ballast/Tourist - Sits in a chair tries not to freak out maybe learns something on the way.

Kerbonaut: Can be delegated simple tasks under direction of a Commander or up. Solo in a craft would still be just ballast.

Senior Kerbonaut: Can handle more complex or long running tasks as part of a crew. Can solo a player focused craft.

Commander: Can solo craft without the players focus. Can Command a multi-crew craft with player focus.

Veteran Kerbonaut: Can Command and Solo a craft without player focus to recreate previous missions flown as a Commander.

[Jouni]

I'd assume that even a rookie astronaut would already be a competent pilot, engineer, or scientist, and often two of them at the same time. After all, education is so cheap and world-class experts are so common that there's no sense in launching incompetent idiots to space.

In a generic fantasy RPG, the only person who can save the world could be the angsty teenager (secretly a child of a god or at least the true heir to the throne), who's initially too weak to face a kitten in a fair fight. This is a space program simulator, however, so important jobs should be left for competent professionals who were selected over hundreds of other competent professionals.

[mattinoz]

There are book smarts and there are street smarts and I think your right most Rookies would have lots of those.

Then there are strapped to rocket next stop the cold inky blackness of zero g smarts.

I would have thought the a rookie would be promoted if they return from over 60km with positive experience but the grades after that would get a lot harder.

[John FX]

To trim down the OP it seems the traits are

Payloads

- Bonus science points. Able to refurbish Goo canisters and Science Jrs at lab modules.

Science

- Bonus science points

Engineering

- Bonus to Funds and Science. Able to repair damaged spacecraft parts. Able to re-pack parachutes.

Piloting

- Minimum piloting skill required for LKO, Mun/Minmus and interplanetary missions. Bonus to reputation. Bonus to rover speed.

Skills

Only a pilot can fly a spacecraft in LKO or beyond. This probably means this is the only class that will be used.

Payloads can refurbish goo and sci jr in combo with a lab. It is easy to complete the game without goo or sci jr or labs, see the point about pilots.

Engineering can fix a tyre and landing legs and repack chutes. This means if you don`t break those things and have a spare chute this class is pointless (a spare chute costs a LOT less than taking an extra kerbal)

Benefits

Payloads, science and engineering boost science.

Piloting boosts rep.

Engineering boosts cash.

I must say that for an experienced player there is not much reason to have anything but a pilot. Often a mission can be done unmanned anyway and there is far far too much science as it is. A further boost would mean I would have to reduce science payout yet again so is therefore pointless. (Currently playing at 20% sci, 30% cash, 20% rep and with the admin building that is still far too high.)

I like the idea that certain kerbals would have certain skills/abilities but there seems a danger of making there only be one class you would use. That being the one that can fly the ship.

Also

Titles

Rookie: All traits at level 0. All newly recruited kerbals start as Rookies.

Kerbonaut: At least one trait at level 1 or above.

Senior Kerbonaut: At least one trait at level 2 remaining traits at level 1.

Commander: At least one trait at level 3. Remaining traits at level 2.

Veteran Kerbonaut: At least one trait at level 4, two of remaining traits at level 3.

Pilot: Piloting at least two levels higher than any other trait.

Payload Specialist: Payloads at least two levels higher than any other trait.

Engineer: Engineering at least two levels higher than any other trait.

Scientist: Science at least two levels higher than any other trait.

Spacewalker: Piloting and Payloads both two levels higher than remaining traits.

Test Pilot: Piloting and Engineering both at least two levels higher than remaining traits.

Pilot-Scientist: Piloting and Science both at least two levels higher than remaining traits.

Mission Specialist: Science and Engineering both at least two levels higher than remaining traits.

Research Specialist: Science and Payloads both at least two levels higher than remaining traits.

Chief Engineer: Engineering and Payloads both at least two levels higher than remaining traits.

So under this chart, a kerbal who has maxed out everything could not fly into LKO anymore even though they have done it countless times as they were not a pilot anymore. It would make more sense to say "Pilot : Piloting at least level 3" and for kerbals to be able to hold more than one title. Then a kerbal with piloting, payload and scientist would gain the benefits from all their skills and experience.

Under the proposed system gaining more experience would reduce your skills and abilities at the higher levels which makes no sense.

[Joonatan1998]

When designing a "piloting" skill it is important to remember that you can add an probe core to a manned craft.

What happens if you have a kerbal with no piloting skill at all in a craft with a probe core?

[Tuareg]

When designing a "piloting" skill it is important to remember that you can add an probe core to a manned craft.

What happens if you have a kerbal with no piloting skill at all in a craft with a probe core?

"control from here"

[Joonatan1998]

"control from here"

If you can just use a probe core to control the craft the piloting skill is pretty useless, probe cores are light compared to manned command pods.

[Tuareg]

If you can just use a probe core to control the craft the piloting skill is pretty useless, probe cores are light compared to manned command pods.

well, for me its logical that a probe core can drive the craft on its own and it should be better than a BAD pilot. they should be able to do general things on their own or complex things with radio control (aka you pilot it) while trained kerbals should be able to do more complex things. (just as an example a probe should be able to go up on a planned route to orbit, but it cant chase an other craft to dock, cant dock etc, while a kerbal should be able to do it with the right training)

[Wallygator]

In general I do not like the idea of a kerbal improving its capability due to flying missions. They should be trained first and then receive any benefits due to the training. A trained kerbal must complete the mission he is trained for. If he dies you loose the training investment and rep. If the kerbal survives the mission then he can be trained for the next one. A kerbal trained for kerbal orbit and docking would not require any additional training if that were the only type of mission he was used for.

This would make mission planning much more engaging. Not only would you need to design your vessel, but you would also need to design your training and crew profiles.

Just a thought.

EDIT: Threw my thoughts into a blog entry http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/entries/1780-Kerbal-Training-Reputation-Records-Reliability-and-Danger%21-One-players-view so to avoid side-tracking or hijacking.

Edited November 3, 2014 by Wallygator

[ringerc]

Payload specialists would be good for articulated arms, bays, etc once those are available and supported.

The science side sounds good.

Engineering IMO should be coupled with parts failures in higher difficulties. Your engineer might be able to get that thing working again. If nobody's got a clue, you can fly on without it ... hope it wasn't important. Similarly, sure you can do a propellent transfer, but it'd be way safer (and you'd spill much less) if it was done by someone who knows how to do it.

I'm just not sure piloting makes any sense. The game is based on direct control. You wouldn't want to introduce annoyances like lightspeed lag and comms occlusion (so it can be eliminated by a pilot), as it'd be really painful when you just wanted to launch a probe. Especially since the game isn't going to have programming/automation features for probes. There's no way you can land a no-return Mars probe with real-time telemetry. Arbitrary restrictions on missions you can fly seem similarly unfun. Most of the other things I can think of for a pilot skill to do are automation-type tasks that are explicitly out-of-scope for the game design.

The real issue is that unmanned probes are directly controllable at infinite distances. Personally I don't bother wasting the extra boost getting Kerbals into orbit, and just use unmanned probes unless I want to take surface samples. Or laugh at Kerbals.

Perhaps the crew should just be there to scream entertainingly like they are right now? 'cos, really, if there's no automation and the player directly controls everything, there's not much for them to be except supercargo.

(Now I'm trying to decide if it'd be entertaining, horrible and scarring, or both if low-courage Kerbals screamed "ohgodwe'reallgoingtoDIIIIIEEEE" on re-entry, etc. Scarring if they actually did die.)

Edited November 4, 2014 by ringerc

[KSK]

Hey folks,

Thanks for all the comments. I admit that probe core + pilot is a combination I hadn't considered. Not sure how to get around that one to be honest, but at the same time I'd like piloting to mean something, and yet not be linked to improving parts. Need to think about that. Building some aspects of RemoteTech into stock would fix it - pilots can be flown as they are now, with no communication delays. Probe cores are affected by such communication delays, and for really long distance missions you'd probably need a RemoteTech style flight computer. Probably best to assume that KSC can track probes without requiring relay satellites though - forcing folks to go for the complete RemoteTech experience probably wouldnt be popular.

That might be overthinking things.

Wallygator - you can train all you like but there's no substitute for actually going out and flying. Or at least that seems to be a consistent theme in all the astronaut memoirs and other assorted space stuff that I've read. You train hard, you think you're prettty badass, then you fly and realise how much you still have to learn.

John FX - titles change when skills are acquired not vice versa. To use your example, a kerbal who has maxed out everything gets a nice title to reflect that. Just because he/she is no called a Pilot, it doesn't mean his/her piloting skill suddenly disappears.

Incidentally, in the current game, all kerbals are maxed out under this system. Bonuses to science points would become rather more important if your kerbals are only picking up half as many points for everything, as they do at the moment.

Edited November 12, 2014 by KSK
Explanation of bonuses

[Pthigrivi]

double-posstttt

why u no let me delete?

Edited November 13, 2014 by Pthigrivi

[Pthigrivi]

I dig it but honestly you could ditch payloads and just consolidate those skills into science. I could also see a bonus to the recovery value of modules landed with Engineer kerbals onboard, and possibly enabling things like part welding and in-flight fuel line use down the road. I don't know how you would enforce keeping non-pilots inside Minmus, but perhaps kerbals would need some nominal flight experience before maneuver nodes became available. Someone in another thread suggested trajectories should account for air resistance and perhaps that could be another upgrade for experienced pilots.

As for probe-cores, I think it stands to reason some of these pilot skills would be built in for the larger cores and not for the smaller ones, minus the rep bonus of course.

Just as an aside I've seen a lot of garbage kerbal training suggestions and honestly this is the most solid proposed framework Ive seen so far. Its simple and to the point, and seems fun and decent system for incentivising bringing multiple kerbals on missions.

[KSK]

I dig it but honestly you could ditch payloads and just consolidate those skills into science. I could also see a bonus to the recovery value of modules landed with Engineer kerbals onboard, and possibly enabling things like part welding and in-flight fuel line use down the road. I don't know how you would enforce keeping non-pilots inside Minmus, but perhaps kerbals would need some nominal flight experience before maneuver nodes became available. Someone in another thread suggested trajectories should account for air resistance and perhaps that could be another upgrade for experienced pilots.

As for probe-cores, I think it stands to reason some of these pilot skills would be built in for the larger cores and not for the smaller ones, minus the rep bonus of course.

Just as an aside I've seen a lot of garbage kerbal training suggestions and honestly this is the most solid proposed framework Ive seen so far. Its simple and to the point, and seems fun and decent system for incentivising bringing multiple kerbals on missions.

Thanks!

And yes - maneuver nodes are probably the easiest way of enforcing pilot skill requirements. Level 0 pilots don't get them at all, level 1 pilots get them within the Kerbin system (extending your course orbit significantly beyond Minmus orbit causes the node to vanish), level 2 or 3 pilots are not restricted at all. It shouldn't be too hard to train a pilot to level 2/3 otherwise the game becomes too grindy. On the other hand, I think that needing to train and maintain a pilot cadre (in case your first choice pilots come to an unfortunate end) would add to the 'space program management' feel.

Of course, the above idea wouldn't stop anyone from going to the Mun the old fashioned way, i.e. by burning hard prograde at Munrise. Likewise, if a player is good enough to bullseye a course to Minmus just using the Map screen. That's fine - it becomes a player choice to run a more reckless 'seat of your pants' style space program, or play things safe and use properly trained pilots.

[Laie]

In general I do not like the idea of a kerbal improving its capability due to flying missions. They should be trained first and then receive any benefits due to the training.

That's more realistic. But on-the-job training makes for better gameplay, IMO: you'll be much more attached to a pilot whom you hand-raised yourself.