[Public Test] Progression Do-Over, Please!

Current Loop: Mine> wait for Refinery> queue Assemblers> Build stuff> repeat.

Loop size based on how fast you can mine.

Proposed Loop: Queue Research. Mine AND/OR Fight NPCs > wait for Refinery & Research> queue Assemblers> Build limited amount of stuff> repeat.

Loop size based on how fast you can mine and how much investment you put into your base, how much you salvage, find, or loot. Loop can have several sub loops running or not.

There's a similar idea to this about a better tech tree. It also involves researching blueprints. To add an item to the tech tree for research, you must first find an example of that tech. And from that example you only get a fragment. Especially if it's damaged. The more damaged/incomplete the example is. The greater the time penalty for research. All of the advanced blueprints would be held on a "mainframe". If the mainframe gets damaged, over heats or loses power suddenly. Your blueprints start getting corrupted at random and suddenly you might not be able to build wheels or thrusters any more. You would also need to maintain a radio link to your mainframe to make use of advanced blueprints. And the projector block would be slaved to the mainframe.

However progression in the form of a tech tree is done in SE. I think it needs to bring with it the danger of losing that progression. Otherwise that game mechanic doesn't have much shelf life in SE.

Kevin, I did see that and the reason I went with this version specifically is because it uses as few overall changes to existing underlying systems as possible. I believe this is the superior solution because of the following:

• Definitions for getting ore/ingot already exist, and can be used to generate salvage. e.g. getting scrap from batteries.
• Definitions for generating drop items for NPCs and Cargo containers.
• 1:1 component definitions (Each Salvaged Component has a correlation to it's technology). Making a generic catch all would just get grindy.
• Losing knowledge isn't fun for any reason isn't a good mechanic, especially since it hurts casual or time limited players more. Data corruption on power loss is due to outdated tech (mechanical drives with slow write speeds) it has no place in a future based on our present.
• The only "New" code needed is the Power Draw/Timer mechanic, converting items in a block inventory into a debit against the timer and minor adjustments to unlock assembler components rather than just blocks.
• Only 1 new block is needed with associated timer logic and all other additional art assets are small low poly components making the demands on the art team relatively minor.
• Other unlock type systems can be added to this such as a grind to learn of simple blocks (in the new landers) to get your initial technologies.
• Unlock timers could be bypassed in the Visual Scripting Tool to allow quest objectives to reward tech instead (an option for mods)
• Blueprints are on my internal list as a possible add if there is ever an in game economy as an alternate method of acquiring tech, or trading/selling to another player such as a faction member. They would be something craftable by the player as a physical item. They could also be used to allow a player to build X #'s of a block without knowing the actual tech, but wouldn't provide any further unlocks. (assembling a flat pack Ikea bookcase, doesn't give you the ability to manufacture the bookcase starting from trees.
• Mainframe style systems (a'la' Star Trek TNG's main computer) are the opposite direction from where all of our computing technology is headed. distributed scalable redundant on-demand systems are the present as well as the future of information technology. Another argument against that type of system is that people learn technology, not computers; computers are just a tool for modeling and documenting technology. The knowledge should be stored in the head of the person. Individual records of this information (e.g. blueprints as I laid out) are different and only serve to transfer and duplicate this knowledge to other people.

I agree with the Zoidberg poster, the current loop could use a new step or two. BUT "waiting" for research is not gameplay nor is it fun.

Look at how the survival game Rust does research. There are certain special components you cannot manufacture yourself, but must obtain through exploration. I think this could be incorporated into SE in the following way.

1. Do not lock block blueprints, lock component blueprints in the assembler. This can easily be incorporated into your current tiered assembler changes. Late game, when you have T3 assembler, have unique component blueprints be unlocked by attached "Add-on Modules" that you build plugged into the side of the assembler.

2. For certain key blocks like tiered refineries/assemblers and their "Add-on Modules", require a single unique component you cannot initially fabricate. This would require you to explore and find that unique component per block, and once you have built the "Assembler" or a specific "Add-on Module" than you unlock the unique component for fabrication.

3. You can trade off an NPC cargo ship, find a wreck and salvage, or raid an enemy base/cargo ship to steal these components. You could also require a certain tier of Grinder to return the component, and not just scrap metal. Similar to how battery packs work.

4. Part (3.) further stratifies the tech tree and creates emergent missions. Because before you can manufacture a Jump Drive, you need the "Jump Drive Add-on Module" for your assembler, but the module requires a unique "Jump Drive Component" you cannot fabricate yourself. You will have to raid a Dreadnought or Shipyard to acquire one. But to salvage the component from the block, you need a T3 Grinder or else you'll just receive "Scrap Metal" because you botched the removal with your low quality tool. Which means you'll need the minerals, and corresponding "T3 Tools Add-on Module" for your assembler to craft the Grinder (or buy or loot a grinder). But the Dreadnought and Shipyard are not going to just let you steal this component, and they have defenses. Therefor you will need to build an attack craft or find some other engineering solution to bypass said defenses. But be careful not to hit the Jump Drive or "Jump Drive tech add-on module" you're trying to salvage, because you might destroy the very unique uncraftable component which was the entire reason for ambushing this capital ship in the first place!

5. Creating these tiers also stratifies the games economy. More "loot items" with different rarities and values, that you cannot simply just fabricate straight away from raw ore, and require an investment of combat/exploration/materials will create "specialization" between different factions and engineers. This "specialization" will incentivize teamwork, trading, raiding, exploration and looting. (This necessarily requires exploration encounters to be well thought out, designed, and placed in correct locations to facilitate advancement from any starting spawn).

6. Place these encounters and unique components where they will be needed. If you start in space, than have encounters with an orbiter/lander that has an "atmospheric thruster fabrication component", just outside the atmosphere so the engineer can loot it, make the add-on for his assembler, build atmo thrusters, and land on the planet. Then on the planet you can have an encounter with the component that unlocks large hydrogen thrusters, so they can find it, build them, and go back into space. Are you in space and need Large ion thrusters, well search the asteroids for a mining station, or trade ship crossing the void. Need the Jump drive to reach the next planet? Well, the Dreadnought that has the component you'll need to fabricate them lies beyond the moon, just far enough to reach with ion thrusters, but close enough to make it economical to still build the Drive to planet hop.

7. This further increases the fear of loss and survival aspect by requiring you to protect your vulnerable add-on modules or blueprints. If they get destroyed, then you have to explore/trade/combat to acquire another one. This opens up the possibility of LOSING progress, which fits well in a survival setting. It also incentivizes having a base, whether a station or capital ship, where you hoard and reinforce the defenses, of your valuable production capabilities. And since the unique components that give you the ability to fabricate high end components, only affect a single assembler, your production output is directly tied into the exploration, trading, combat gameplay loop. If you want a giant factory of 100 assemblers all pumping out Jump Drive parts, you're going to have to raid 100 Dreadnoughts or trade for 100 "Jump Drive Assembler add-on module components" or w/e you end up calling them. This will give a very rewarding sense of progression and increase in power over time.

8. Increase the # and variety of raw materials, and their locations. I would include Carbons (wood, oil), Gases ( Nitrogen, a Noble gas, Helium), Biological (proteins, amino acids, algae), and more Minerals. And these resources have specific locations. Incorporate them into the new and existing tech tree/blocks/components.

9. I would turn the current Ores, which are just pure minerals, into different ACTUAL ores which are mixtures of different concentrations of minerals. Much like the Better Stone mod does (https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=406244471). I would add further gameplay via Metallurgy by making more of the Refinery add-on modules to specifically target certain mineral groups in an ore, like a centrifuge for the more massive minerals (uranium), ferro-magnetic separation, for the magnetic minerals (iron), electro-phoresis add-on for materials with a charge, acidic washing, etc. Actually put some science, engineering, and most importantly, choice into the gameplay.

Sean,

as I replied to Kevin above, I held back some pieces. Mostly for things that Marek alluded to in his Dev Blog such as future economy and "game" elements. With additional game mechanics in place later, adding a blueprinting system to this for transferring knowledge to another player directly would be possible. Outside of that:

• Working as a faction is already a huge boost to unlock speeds. With the current public test system, a new faction member in an existing faction can unlock all blocks in under 5 minutes.
• With a brand new faction it is still several magnitudes faster than a solo player.
• Under the proposed system, with all players in a new faction working together to maximize the power grid with windmills/solar, then dividing into teams (Mining, Combat, and Construction) unlocks would still be much faster than solo play.
• Any system needs to ensure a large faction can't start on a server and essentially insta-unlock everything and overwhelm smaller factions or solo players. The current system is too close to being able to do this after a short delay.

"This would stagger the early game to a halt if a player cant find NPCs to salvage. Additionally, how could a player explore easily if they can't build a scout ship/rover to find said NPCs."

Not really. In my playtests I have found I would spend about the same time required to unlock a block at the beginning of a survival start, just mining and refining enough ore to complete the "Steel" components needed to finish a block. Usually I found myself running out of nickel and having to mine more before I could complete a block unlock. The time for unlocks can be adjusted and balanced on a per block basis. The example I used above was because the math was easier to digest in multiples of 10 minutes. By no means should it take 2-3 hours for a block unlock at the survival start.

As to the second part, The first NPC "ships" a player is likely to encounter are skin drop containers. They have a randomized inventory and could have salvaged components in them or be specially flagged to drop them from grinding (flagging needed because they are not "enemy" grids. It would also be trivial to drop similar types of small craft ("Hostile Probes" ) that can summon drones on a planet for players to fight.

I hope this provides some clarification.

Cheers!

Easily solved. Want salvaged components? Actually blow up your enemy. Want it's components? Grind it down.

Id argue that anything you haven't unlocked you will break in the process of taking it apart. If you had a manual (MP style sharing of unlocked tech?) you would know how to disassemble a block. But try opening a laptop for the first time w/o a guide of some sort. You will break lots of stuff on it.

Is this to appear in a future public test since it is marked Completed and the "improvements" in the current test are not what this suggestion is about?

I'm just trying to clarify what the Completed status means since this comment isn't representative of the mechanics in the suggestion at all.

the new progression tree is only GRINDING, to slow down player progress significantly, with no actual reward to it. if I was going to continue to play this game, I would never use this option, to me its worthless and this is not survival mode, my engineer still does not require food, water, or rest and they are stuck in an EVA suit, even when on a Terran class world?! that's retarded. all they did was add a few new fancy blocks, and lock blocks in a strange way, and make starting on planets , or even being on a planet problematic because no uranium, so any ship you currently have that needs uranium, guess what, wont work on a planet now unless you mining in the asteroid belt, by the way, we mine uranium, here, on earth, keen!!!

I couldn't find improvements about this in the testplay. The tree seems good looking, but not working.

"Cost" is important for this. It makes the game as game = DECISIONS. The cost makes players to choose which research first. Players may choose different research. This makes different strategies, unique builds, and scenes. The tree will visualize choices for this, not for only grinding some bit.

@Geneticus0 On this board, 'completed' means, "We did a thing vaguely related to the title of your post and didn't actually read it." since you were wondering :) They did the same thing to the 'small hydrogen tank' topic, in that case 'completed' meant they increased the hydrogen capacity of the engine. Of course, the possibility exists that it's one of the surprises. However, I highly doubt they implemented such a radical departure from their original idea of progression.

Still didn't see anything related to the actual content or methodology listed here in the last Public Test.

@Zachary Hutchison I am not a fan of Keen Surprises. They tend to bring us things like exploding dogs, broken API interfaces, etc. :-D

You've missed the point. Its not a "have to do anything" system. Its a mechanism to give choice as to how you want to go about progressing through it. You can't engineer without problems. This game barely even scratches the surface of engineering. There is more Engineering left out of the game than is in it. Survival is a game mode that should present you with challenges to overcome with limited resources and limited time. there are no problems to overcome without adding in things that put time, and resource restrictions in place.