Science marathon settings?

[Cephalos]

Hello everyone

I've been playing KSP since 0.22 and always loved exploration and science gathering on different bodies. Now, when there are more biomes on every planet/moon I decided to try the career mode.

But I have one problem - science progression is too fast (yes, I have mods).

I used to use more biomes mod (forgot the exact name) and DMagic Orbital Science (for moar experiments, of course) - this resulted in significant increase of science harvest. Example?

I unlocked whole techtree by going to Moho with science-heavy rover/lander - only 2 biomes visited + orbital science and crew reports. Then Eve unmanned rover - one biome. And cleared enitre Minimus using jumping-flying science lab. And of course some basic missions, like Mun and orbiting around Kerbin.

So my question is - considering that I won't remove DMagic - how to reduce science gain? So the game would be long and epic, and not 1-flight-half-techtree-unlocked style?

[ravensoul6@hotmail.com]

Start a game with custom settings and cut the science payout in half or more.

I also play with DMagic, among other mods, so thats what I do.

[Yemo]

You might want to take a look at my SETI BalanceMod, or at least the dependencies (one mod restricts science gain from contracts) for a more balanced gameplay.

If you use SETI, start a new career.

[Epthelyn]

Start a game with custom settings and cut the science payout in half or more.

I also play with DMagic, among other mods, so thats what I do.

This seems like the best solution. Just cut the science gain to whatever you think you should be getting and play with that

[Yemo]

This seems like the best solution. Just cut the science gain to whatever you think you should be getting and play with that

The difficulty science modifier also affects the science gained from experiments, not only contracts (and I m not sure it affects all contracts).

Thus the imbalance prevails but it forces you to do contracts instead of experiments.

Using a mod is much better, you can adjust the mod settings as well, or you can combine slider with mod.

[ravensoul6@hotmail.com]

The difficulty science modifier also affects the science gained from experiments, not only contracts (and I m not sure it affects all contracts).

Thus the imbalance prevails but it forces you to do contracts instead of experiments.

Using a mod is much better, you can adjust the mod settings as well, or you can combine slider with mod.

Not really, if hes looking for a long somewhat grindy game as I am playing theres no need to do contracts for science.

Playing with a ton of mods means that every node unlocked is a more significant investment, and addition to the available parts and activities one can do. I'm playing with half science and I've found no need to try to supplement my experiments.

Your mod looks interesting though. I may check it out when I update to .90

Edited January 6, 2015 by ravensoul6@hotmail.com

[Yemo]

Not really, if hes looking for a long somewhat grindy game as I am playing theres no need to do contracts for science.

Playing with a ton of mods means that every node unlocked is a more significant investment, and addition to the available parts and activities one can do. I'm playing with half science and I've found no need to try to supplement my experiments.

Your mod looks interesting though. I may check it out when I update to .90

While there is no need for contracts for science, most contracts will provide lots of science and thus give you science regardless of experiments.

Thats where balancing mods come in.

For example with my mod configuration, which is WIP and in an early stage (but already much better than stock), you get extremely little science from contracts, while experiments give you full science.

Of course this is further modified by the difficulty slider, if you want a more "grindy"/epic game.

Also, simple experiments can be transmitted for 100% science, while special experiments (goo, materials bay) are heavier and should still be returned for full science.

About 0.90, yeah, I currently have 4 installs of KSP on my hdd. Among them an epic insterstellar game from 0.23.5 ...

[Musil]

Yemo's mod sounds great, and in my next career I might try it, but in my current one I reduced the science to about 50% - 60% (cant remember exactly).

A munar lander, with materials bay, goo, magnetometer, surface laser, neutron albedo thingy and thermometer (the surface experiments I have unlocked) gives me about 200 science points after a fresh biome. This is ideal, right now, because each trip allows me to unlock a new tech node of 160, and the rest is saved up for the 300 ones.

So I have my "Archer Program" of Apollo stile landers, and am collecting science and finding anomalies. It is really fun preparation for a grand Duna mission, that should collect all the biomes there.

A typical satellite contract gives 6 science, but I also turned the $ reward up to 180%, so that I could do the missions I wanted and not have to repeat the same satellite contracts endlessly (180% turned out to be too much, I think, If I started again I would try it at 120%).

I am really enjoying these settings, and the possibilities for fine tuning the kind of challenge you want and integrate mods into your career are great.

EDIT: note that the science from contract's, little as it is, does come in handy sometimes. With 50% it's not so easy to unlock the first nodes, unless you are willing to visit Kerbins biomes (after doing that so many times already, I am kind of bored by them), and sometimes I have been just a few points away of unlocking some node I really want before my next big mission (first munar lander, extraplanetary probe, etc), that's when 6 science points are really nice to get.

Another EDIT: yes, 180% is way too much money, but it also allows me to fail from time to time and let some kerbals really have terrible accidents. I can't really play without reverting/quicksaving (minor staging mistakes forced me to restart so many careers), but the temptation to revert a disastrous landing is hard to avoid. When you have the money to afford it without loosing your entire career, it's more fun to claim Ronvin's tragic disaster when landing on the Mun was caused by a nearby anomaly.

Edited January 6, 2015 by Musil

[Yemo]

@Musil: There is a mod on kerbalstuff, which does more intelligent auto-staging, I will add it to the recommended mods for seti.

edit: Smart Stage

Edited January 6, 2015 by Yemo

[Musil]

@Musil: There is a mod on kerbalstuff, which does more intelligent auto-staging, I will add it to the recommended mods for seti.

edit: Smart Stage

Yeah, I have seen it. Don't know if it is worth it to sacrifice memory for something that I can do myself if I pay attention. And it's not just that: sometimes a rocked needs more struts, and FAR forces you to ascend very carefully when you are lifting heavier payloads, that makes a lot of my launches fail because of very basic stuff... I just don't consider myself sufficiently experienced to play without reverting/quicksaving, not yet. But of course, I plan to get there. (at least my kerbals don't respawn).

For a while, on .25, I used mission controler's red revert button, but it causes crashes 1 out of 4 times.

I don't know if I see the staging mod as a vital addition to your SETI. Both are great concepts, sure, but I guess if you want to mix them in one career it's up to your preferences, not something I imagine as recommended by the mod makers (unlike TAC LS, for example; if you recommend LS for a mod, I assume the balance changes take that into account).