War fog, planet study, science bonus and the dream of exploration

[SaturnV]

First let's talk about the main purpose of space science. All those crafts, what are they for? To discover unknown target of course. We sent a Mars satellite because we don't know how Mars really looks like, we sent a lander to Moon because we want to know the difference between a Moon rock and normal rock on Earth.

Kerbals, however, can check almost every detail of any planet in the map view, without telescope or sending satellite.

Then kerbal space exploration seems more like a tour, rather than a must.

I know we have science achievement for players currently, but that's only some non-essential things like candies ("Laythe landing, sweet"). What I want is a strong reason for kerbals ("How thick is the air on Eve? Does it contains oxygen?")

Do you think something like war fog that can prevent player knowing detailed thing about space object is needed?

Example:

• All planet remains a question mark (like asteroid) before any of your vessel enters its SOI, all you know about the planet is the orbit info (AP/PE etc) of it.
  
• You get more information about the planet by flyby, orbit, do science, land, take surface sample, etc.
  
• Maybe you can generate surface map of the planet you send probe to (a simplified version of ScanSat), before that, the planet in map view looks like a placeholder, you can't tell if there's a mountain out of your sight in map view.
  
• Studying surface/atmosphere sample of that planet will boost the resource you can mine (as Karbonite is coming for 1.0)
  

[zekes]

I like the idea of a "war fog" so that you don't know what's out there.

[tater]

Planets need not be a ?, they can have map view just as they do now… but move the POV of the map view FAR away to match what is observable from Kerbin. For worlds like Duna, Jool, etc, use the image you see when it first renders. That's it, as good as map view gets. When you send a flyby, you get map view something like the flyby periapsis (say a multiple). When you orbit, you get that distance to start with, and the more science you do, the better map zoom gets.

[KerikBalm]

FWIW, I role play sending an unmanned probe with a small QBE with a chite and pressure+ temp sensor, on a fast trajectory that arrives before the launch window.

We knew from remote observation that mars should have a thin atmosphere, and Venus sould have a hot surface, before we sent any probes there.

We should get similar data from an "observatory" - like the info in the tracking station, which is not 100% accurate.

For a while, I didn't know you could focus on other planets outside of map view, and I didn't see what the planets were like except on the wiki, or going there.

I support this idea.

[JadedStoner]

My 2 cents, my thoughts on this back in Jan14

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/64768-Probes-discoverable-science-a-quest-for-knowledge-and-the-Fog-of-Jeb

[sumghai]

I believe the term you're looking for is Fog of War.

[Vector-5]

Example:All planet remains a question mark (like asteroid) before any of your vessel enters its SOI, all you know about the planet is the orbit info (AP/PE etc) of it.

You get more information about the planet by flyby, orbit, do science, land, take surface sample, etc.

Maybe you can generate surface map of the planet you send probe to (a simplified version of ScanSat), before that, the planet in map view looks like a placeholder, you can't tell if there's a mountain out of your sight in map view.

Building off of #s 2 & 3, I think it would be a good. idea if mapping would give science points over time. I believe that the amount of science should not be major, but enough to encourage mapping satellites once the player can travel between planets.

[kStrout]

Well, we should remember that Kerbals have telescopes, what I think would be nice is that as you upgrade the tracking station, you can get better and better pictures of other planets and moons. Of course in real life, based on pictures taken from telescopes, you can make a reasonable guess as to the mass and size, as well as whether it has an atmosphere or not. So it would make sense to assume that the same would be for planets in the Kerbol system.

[Vaporo]

Yeah, I've liked this idea for a long time.

The version that I've liked most is that you simply don't know that the planets and moons even exist when you start the game. In other words, you start being only able to see Kerbin, Mun, Sun, and maybe Minmus (I like the idea that Minmus would be hidden, and generally the first moon you discover, though). Telescope observations from Kerbin gives you a loose idea of measurements (approx mass, approx radius, approx temperature, etc) when you first discover planets (have no idea what the discovery mechanism would be. Hopefully not just random events,) and a map view that is nothing more than a marble with the planet's overall color. You can launch a small orbital satellite to get more accurate measurements.

launching a probe with various sensors (gravity sensor, camera) into a planets SOI instantly improves the data relevant to its area. Going near the planet and doing more scans should get you to approximately the data that map view gives you now (excluding things like surface temperature, which you need to land to get accurate readings for) By putting a satellite into a low polar orbit with mapping equipment, you can do a detailed mapping of the planet's surface, a la SCANsat.

I eventually hope that map view can be advanced to be something like Google Earth, where you can have ultra-detailed, 3d maps of terrain in areas you have scanned.

[SaturnV]

Well, we should remember that Kerbals have telescopes, what I think would be nice is that as you upgrade the tracking station, you can get better and better pictures of other planets and moons. Of course in real life, based on pictures taken from telescopes, you can make a reasonable guess as to the mass and size, as well as whether it has an atmosphere or not. So it would make sense to assume that the same would be for planets in the Kerbol system.

Right, they DO have telescopes (those around the Tracking Center). Kerbals can make an acceptable guess at the mass/size/atmosphere (of Duna, for example), like human. But that's a guess after all. To do detailed research they need more data from closer observation and physical samples, which is also the reason why NASA sent Curiosity to Mars while we had Hubble already.

Now kerbals got a rough image of their target, if Squad made a realistic placeholder for Duna before explored, then it should be a globe with low resolution texture. It's no better than a simply question mark (a big one, if you zoom in) considering the gameplay experience.

[Capt Snuggler]

this reminds me of my old thread from long ago.

for me the highlight was this image provided by CaptRobau.

Humans have observed and documented the position of planets for 1000s of years. I think its safe to say the kerbals know where the planets are, at least the inner rocks and gas giants. but maybe there could be outer bodies that need to be discovered.

so basically the surface of a planet should appear pixelated or blurry until better surveying equipment used.

hand held cameras: for taking low res pictures out the window and when on EVA.

orbital telescope: for partially improving resolution without leaving Kerbin SOI

orbital surface mapping module: can be attached to craft most commonly a probe. for precision orbital image gathering.

various more advanced imaging systems: (radar imaging, mass spectrometry) for mapping under cloud layers or oceans and for mapping out altimeter, temperature or density etc etc.

the images could be presented as layers in the tracking station/map view.

photos taken on surface EVA could be marked on the globe for you to mouse over and view. you can roll a single tier down your cheek as you remember that first Duna Landing.

after hi res imaging has been completed new missions would become available such as "land here" "retrieve sample from here" blah blah.

Edited February 10, 2015 by Capt Snuggler

[eddiew]

Definitely like this idea

And of course, the farside of the Mun should be a total blank until you actually send something round there! Revealing fine surface details should be via a low polar orbit, over a period of time (ScanSat has it right, but its principles could apply very well to the view you get in the tracking station).

[Slam_Jones]

I think someone suggested before that the planets, before being explored, show up on the map as Crayon drawings. Very Kerbalish

[Tuareg]

i would really love this

i think the biggest thing this game is missing is the exploration, both in the space and on the planets. there is really nothing to do as what you have is granted from the first moment. it could spice up things and would give a reason for probes...

[zeel]

The essential problem I see is that the player already has all the knowledge they need. Enough planning allows any mission to succeed unless you make a piloting mistake, by restricting that knowledge the player has to either take a big risk, or send a preliminary mission to find out the information they need. This would enrich gameplay significantly, in theory.

The fundamental problem with the concept is that the Kerbol system is immutable (accept asteroids), and therefore anyone who has played it before, or just checks the wiki, will no longer need to research everything before a mission. You can't reliably aerobrake over Jool if you don't know the thickness of the atmosphere - but once you know that number it won't matter if the game is aware that you know it. Since nothing changes subsequent playthroughs lose challenge, and many players would just cheat and check the wiki.

The solution would be for some variables to be introduced - mass, atmosphere, etc - that are randomized for each game. Thus you actually need to investigate your version of the Kerbol system. Unfortunately topography would be an issue, doing that procedurally would probably be insane, so each surface would probably be identical.

[Whirligig Girl]

I've been suggesting this for a while. Basically, the idea is you don't have any information on the planets other than their size and color. That's it. Science ships and maybe telescopes let you find this out. Cameras can map the surface.

[SaturnV]

The fundamental problem with the concept is that the Kerbol system is immutable (accept asteroids), and therefore anyone who has played it before, or just checks the wiki, will no longer need to research everything before a mission. You can't reliably aerobrake over Jool if you don't know the thickness of the atmosphere - but once you know that number it won't matter if the game is aware that you know it. Since nothing changes subsequent playthroughs lose challenge, and many players would just cheat and check the wiki.

True, that's why I want a REASON for kerbals. Just like those collectable codex in recent RPG. You can check them on wiki of course, but collect/explore them IN GAME will reward you something unique, which dosen‘t need to have actual advantage for players (like +3 attack)

As for KSP, explore a planet should rewarding you detailed map view, or planet data card or something that you (and kerbals) can't get by just knowing it or checking the wiki. When a player open his map view, finding that all planets are masked, few of them can reject the urge to explore the system.

[CaLVin-K]

I think someone suggested before that the planets, before being explored, show up on the map as Crayon drawings. Very Kerbalish

I think this would be a great addition to a game that is, after all, about little green men with a talent for engineering and a love of snacks, to have

[Alias72]

This would be awesome. It would also add importance to probes. Who wants to launch an expensive mission to the Mun only to learn you're landing zone is on the side of a cliff?

[Invader Myk]

Building off of #s 2 & 3, I think it would be a good. idea if mapping would give science points over time. I believe that the amount of science should not be major, but enough to encourage mapping satellites once the player can travel between planets.

My biggest complaint is that the real reward of doing science experiments, to wit know more about something than you did before, is swapped out for a quasi-monetary reward. This is as absurd as potty training a kid by giving him a cookie every-time he goes in a toilet, or even worse buying a kid a new car because he got a job. The reward of using a toilet is that you don't suffer the discomfort of feces in your pants, the reward of having a job is that you aren't reliant on others to provide things for you, and the reward of science is that you know how to do things related to the experiment better.

[JadedStoner]

Above all, I think most people would agree that these should be career options. From what I gather, most people agree that SQUAD doesn't want to force the players into any particular path.

With that being said, I had a thought. If scanning/mapping were added to stock, un-scanned terrain could create a situation where your instruments (speed, altitude, orbital period) provide a "range" of speed. Since the mission timer turns yellow as the physics slows down, the indicators could turn yellow/red representing a +/- 2% to 10% range from the actual values. With a probe flyby, this wouldn't be mission critical (except for VERY low periapsis). If you did choose to send a manned mission, the module DOES have a radar altimeter, so at 3k meters above the surface, your instruments do reset to 'solid green' since its reasonable to get your speed/altitude from them. This would make landing on an un-scanned surface tricky, but not impossible. Flyby's would let you scan a swath of the planet's surface, enough to provide 'solid green' speed/altitude information for the next probe to circularize it's orbit. Additionally, if your probe is below a 5k altitude, a smaller 'landing approval swath' could be created, setting up landing sites for future contracts/programs.

In the map view, I would visualize this as a '2D-path' of varying width, or event better, a 3D 'tube of possibilities'. Imagine the awesomeness of paths/tubes in highly eccentric orbits, with tiny widths near periapsis and large widths near apoapsis. Your probe/vessel could be represented as an orange disc/sphere within the path/tube, providing some idea of where you are, but not an exact measurement.

The fundamental problem with the concept is that the Kerbol system is immutable (accept asteroids), and therefore anyone who has played it before, or just checks the wiki, will no longer need to research everything before a mission. You can't reliably aerobrake over Jool if you don't know the thickness of the atmosphere - but once you know that number it won't matter if the game is aware that you know it. Since nothing changes subsequent playthroughs lose challenge, and many players would just cheat and check the wiki.

The solution would be for some variables to be introduced - mass, atmosphere, etc - that are randomized for each game. Thus you actually need to investigate your version of the Kerbol system. Unfortunately topography would be an issue, doing that procedurally would probably be insane, so each surface would probably be identical.

As for the Kerbol system being immutable, the starting positions of the planets could be options (t = year 0, 10, 30). I think I heard something about the game requiring the planets to be in position X at t=0 and that the mass/atmospheres are fundamental

So for this to work, I think the game would need to identify they surface of the planet with the orbital trajectory. How challenging is this coding-wise?

Finally, I've been playing since 0.17. I've started a dozen career/sandbox modes for different projects. I don't think long term players would just jump to the wiki. I think most would relish 'rediscovering' the Kerbol System.

True, that's why I want a REASON for kerbals. Just like those collectable codex in recent RPG. You can check them on wiki of course, but collect/explore them IN GAME will reward you something unique, which dosen‘t need to have actual advantage for players (like +3 attack)

I want to see a Monument Park where you can use a VAB style editor to create homages to your greatness!

[Yukon0009]

Maybe the devs could implement this with procedural terrain, so there would be a purpose for the war fog.