/tg/Station 13

DemonFiren wrote:This sounds kinda fun but also like a pain in the ass to code.

ShadowDimentio wrote:I had an idea that was much more feasible to code.

Basically, each area of research is a part of a flowchart (flowchart included below). The area you can research and want to is selected at the R&D console, and research is started and done automatically. Research is very slow, but will eventually complete itself, though there is a way to speed it up: by feeding items like the researched area into the deconstruction analyzer.

How much faster the research goes is based on 3 things: The tech levels of the item being deconstructed (allows easy porting over of the current system as most everything already has assigned tech levels), its likeness to the area currently being researched (either increasing effectiveness if it's a good match or decreasing if not), and how if that item has been used to speed up this area already (and if so how many times has it been used).

Example: I'm researching Ballistic Combat Technology. I get cargo to order a combat shotty, and I feed it into the machine. Due to the high tech level (combat 6) of the shotgun and the exact likeness to what I'm researching (a shotgun is a ballistic weapon), I get a substantial boost to research, potentially completing it instantly.

Another example: Say I'm still researching Ballistic Combat Technology because the shotgun wasn't enough, but I only have a egun left. If I were to feed it into the machine, though it has a relevant tech at a good level (combat 4 I think), it's not like the tech that I'm researching (lasers != ballistics), so the returns to research would be diminished.

Spoiler:

Iatots wrote:Roundstart maxcaps are a thing, atmos being hard is a meme perpetrated by people playing exclusively on the fly and unwilling to sit down 10 minutes and think. The slow atmos processing and magic air filters make the sistem trivial, what magic conditions could unlock new technology, and what would said technology let people do they couldn't before?

I didn't say atmos was hard, It's just that achieving SUPER pressures takes considerable effort (atleast building a chamber)

Radiation is even simpler than atmos, evenn if you coded different types of radiation, it would just be pressing buttons/stacking machines to get big numbers. And what would research in radiation even produce?

I don't think you get the point of this, sure, there are few types of radiation, but the methods by which you acquire this radiation are open game.

Chemicals with random effects would be cool, but any possible outrageous effect would be quickly patched out in kneejerk PRs from the funpolice; all random selections of traitor items are already weighted, and besides every other round getting derailed by a new deathchem would get tiring really fast.

I agree with this.

Biology experiments are dumb unless you have either random chems or random creatures. Sectioning a furry will teach you nothing, unless catpeople/lizards react differently to chems every round. Good luck getting that one through.

I don't get where you're coming from, is this a realism issue?

Bluespace: nobody has this figured out. It's just an excuse for sci-fi. "Do X and see what happens" only gives you data IRL.

I agree, bluespace is dumb but SOMETHING needs to give you levels for it though

Plasma: Yes you do need to explain more scenarios. Bombs and fire golly gee, like there is anything more to it.
I don't know, it's almost like there's 2 billion chemical reactions utilizing plasma.

Electricity: grid rework still pending.



Most of your suggestions seem to boild down to "do X, get cheevo, new feature unlocked", without even coming up with a feature to unlock, which seems to be exactly what happens in kerbal space program from what I can read (minus KSP's research system, which is computers and timers, basically what shadow suggested).

without even coming up with a feature to unlock
We already have RND rewards dude, this is about how you do RnD, NOT what RnD gives you.

Again, you're missing the point horribly. It's not about doing X the same way every round, it's about achieving X using any method you want, and that makes all the difference in the world.

In KSP (last time i played) you go on missions to extract samples of materials from space e.g drilling moon rocks, (and also expose equipment to specific conditions) in order to study them.

Only in KSP there are parts to unlock, which are basically the same as you already have but better numbers. Because a rocket science simulator needed a story mode I guess.

bman wrote:

Iatots wrote: Roundstart maxcaps are a thing, atmos being hard is a meme perpetrated by people playing exclusively on the fly and unwilling to sit down 10 minutes and think. The slow atmos processing and magic air filters make the sistem trivial, what magic conditions could unlock new technology, and what would said technology let people do they couldn't before?

I didn't say atmos was hard, It's just that achieving SUPER pressures takes considerable effort (atleast building a chamber)

bman wrote:

Iatots wrote: Radiation is even simpler than atmos, evenn if you coded different types of radiation, it would just be pressing buttons/stacking machines to get big numbers. And what would research in radiation even produce?

I don't think you get the point of this, sure, there are few types of radiation, but the methods by which you acquire this radiation are open game.

bman wrote:

Iatots wrote: Biology experiments are dumb unless you have either random chems or random creatures. Sectioning a furry will teach you nothing, unless catpeople/lizards react differently to chems every round. Good luck getting that one through.

I don't get where you're coming from, is this a realism issue?

bman wrote:

Iatots wrote: Bluespace: nobody has this figured out. It's just an excuse for sci-fi. "Do X and see what happens" only gives you data IRL.

I agree, bluespace is dumb but SOMETHING needs to give you levels for it though

bman wrote:

Iatots wrote: Plasma: Yes you do need to explain more scenarios. Bombs and fire golly gee, like there is anything more to it.

I don't know, it's almost like there's 2 billion chemical reactions utilizing plasma.

bman wrote:

Iatots wrote: Most of your suggestions seem to boild down to "do X, get cheevo, new feature unlocked", without even coming up with a feature to unlock, which seems to be exactly what happens in kerbal space program from what I can read (minus KSP's research system, which is computers and timers, basically what shadow suggested).

without even coming up with a feature to unlock
We already have RND rewards dude, this is about how you do RnD, NOT what RnD gives you.

bman wrote: Again, you're missing the point horribly. It's not about doing X the same way every round, it's about achieving X using any method you want, and that makes all the difference in the world.

bman wrote: In KSP (last time i played) you go on missions to extract samples of materials from space e.g drilling moon rocks, (and also expose equipment to specific conditions) in order to study them.

Iatots wrote: Only in KSP there are parts to unlock, which are basically the same as you already have but better numbers. Because a rocket science simulator needed a story mode I guess.

I get it, this isn't a perfect system, but would you rather come up with a way to drop massive amounts of radiation in one room to get levels in order to build an advanced e-gun or literally just sit around and wait?

Iatots wrote:

bman wrote:

Iatots wrote: Roundstart maxcaps are a thing, atmos being hard is a meme perpetrated by people playing exclusively on the fly and unwilling to sit down 10 minutes and think. The slow atmos processing and magic air filters make the sistem trivial, what magic conditions could unlock new technology, and what would said technology let people do they couldn't before?

I didn't say atmos was hard, It's just that achieving SUPER pressures takes considerable effort (atleast building a chamber)

You can't say it needs considerable effort one moment and then make the exact opposite point in brackets. Walls don't bust from excess pressure, neither do floors, and magic pumps/filters let you move around gas effortlessly.


Perhaps have it so you have to "fix" the pressure/temp to a certain randomized value requested by a machine? It would take some effort if you believe that's too easy currently (perhaps for the good, research for pressure mechanics doesn't necessarily have to be difficult).

bman wrote:

Iatots wrote: Radiation is even simpler than atmos, evenn if you coded different types of radiation, it would just be pressing buttons/stacking machines to get big numbers. And what would research in radiation even produce?

I don't think you get the point of this, sure, there are few types of radiation, but the methods by which you acquire this radiation are open game.

Yes and? There is no danger to radiation because it's such a simple system. You can dump 2^32 uranium ore pieces or whatever the in-game limit on items is and it will never spread. Your tools won't become irradiated, your floors and walls won't become irradiated, get rid of the ore and radiation goes away.


I see the issue with this now and I agree, it's really an issue of depth of our systems thoughs.

bman wrote:

Iatots wrote: Biology experiments are dumb unless you have either random chems or random creatures. Sectioning a furry will teach you nothing, unless catpeople/lizards react differently to chems every round. Good luck getting that one through.

I don't get where you're coming from, is this a realism issue?

It's a game issue. It will teach you nothing because nothing is coded to be taught. And can it?
It may sound like a meme, but biology *is* applied chemistry, and our chemistry system is really dull. What can you learn from new organisms?
New chemical reactions? No, those are all hardcoded.
A new source of chemical X? Magic chem dispensers already make chemical production a matter of button pressing, you could cut corners and have slimes produce ""end-game"" chems, but that's not the kind of discussion we are having.
Actual catalysis? Again, our chemistry is very simple, it's all balanced for rounds that barely last an hour, unless you wanted to implement more end-game chemistry and THEN RnD shortcuts, you won't get far.
On a more macroscopic perpective, you could have random organs generated and each organ would have an effect when implanted, and once studied this organ could be replicated, but where will that take you? Free surgeries for organs that cure toxins? dwarf livers?


Probably, you can simply take the "function" of the organ then 3D print your own organ with the functions you learned from previous organs. Biological research does not really have an impact ingame as it is now, which is why "scenarios" would be hardcoded/ a var applied to chemicals determining amount of levels learned.

bman wrote:

Iatots wrote: Bluespace: nobody has this figured out. It's just an excuse for sci-fi. "Do X and see what happens" only gives you data IRL.

I agree, bluespace is dumb but SOMETHING needs to give you levels for it though

Bluespace is both a crutch and and obstacle for balance reasons. It explains FTL travel and communications because otherwise we wouldn't have the setting, it's a research barrier to better versions of items, and it's an excuse for teleportation because teleportation is a thing in sci-fi settings. The only point in researching bluespace is for features that should just be electronics but can't because space (tcomms), things that should be easily upgradeable but can't because balance (beakers, backpacks, fucking bluespace syringes), or just QoL stuff because realism matters, but only sometimes (bluespace mining satchels, as if normal satchels were a thing).
The only maybe fun thing about bluespace is bluespace bodybags, which can create !FUN! situations.


Yeah, I was trying to tie bluespace into the existing concept of time dilation somehow, or spacetime ripples maybe in order to make it realistic.

bman wrote:

Iatots wrote: Plasma: Yes you do need to explain more scenarios. Bombs and fire golly gee, like there is anything more to it.

I don't know, it's almost like there's 2 billion chemical reactions utilizing plasma.

Back to chemistry, what do you learn from reacting things with plasma? Nothing, because you can't learn new reactions, because chemistry is an exact science for spessmen. Plasma, much like bluespace, is an excuse for sci-fi (cloning chems, made up chems) or balance (scarcity).

Yes, plasma is also difficult to reason out in a "scientific" way because it's an imaginary meme that is poorly explained, but just for the sake of plasma research existing I proposed for mixing plasma-based chemicals that are a pain in the ass to give you point.

bman wrote:

Iatots wrote: Most of your suggestions seem to boild down to "do X, get cheevo, new feature unlocked", without even coming up with a feature to unlock, which seems to be exactly what happens in kerbal space program from what I can read (minus KSP's research system, which is computers and timers, basically what shadow suggested).

without even coming up with a feature to unlock
We already have RND rewards dude, this is about how you do RnD, NOT what RnD gives you.

How would existing rewards be achievable in your proposed science method and what kind of new rewards can it produce?

They just reward you with levels, the protolathe is unchanged.

bman wrote: Again, you're missing the point horribly. It's not about doing X the same way every round, it's about achieving X using any method you want, and that makes all the difference in the world.

This web of methods does not currently exist.

bman wrote: In KSP (last time i played) you go on missions to extract samples of materials from space e.g drilling moon rocks, (and also expose equipment to specific conditions) in order to study them.

Iatots wrote: Only in KSP there are parts to unlock, which are basically the same as you already have but better numbers. Because a rocket science simulator needed a story mode I guess.

I get it, this isn't a perfect system, but would you rather come up with a way to drop massive amounts of radiation in one room to get levels in order to build an advanced e-gun or literally just sit around and wait?

my TL;DR
You are trying to implement a discovery system based on the real life scientific method for researching the nature of the poorly understood universe into a 2D solved spessmen game. Even worse you are walking backwards, coming up with funny situations and trying to work the method around them.


I think you're looking at the scenarios exactly how I thought people would misunderstand them, it's not that you're doing the exact same scenario every time, it's just one of the possible scenarios you can take to achieve the prerequisite, I understand your concerns about depth though


my suggestion
Work on improving existing systems, and once they are sufficiently more complex change science to work in tandem with them. Realism is not paramount, but reality is the most complex thing we are aware of and it is all one single system. More realistic features will all build up to a point of harmony that is our reality, game balance is all about making the point closer.

Please

Stop

With

This

Remie Richards wrote:

Please

Stop

With

This