SE2 Progression IDEAs

Ammorok ●

The community wants to see a richer development of progression but as not too complex as to become tedious.

"To engineers new blocks are like buttons, we all want more, but they need to do different things in an interesting way."

Quote by: All of us at some point

While looking at all the other threads in the topics for feedback there are common themes. Many are asking for progression variety, desiring multiple ways to adapt to situations of gameplay when encountering different playstyles. This is a challenge when the progression is developed in a linear manner. Instead of thinking in concepts of Levels or Tiers like buildings, re-frame the idea as Branches like a tree. Fitting with the concept of core gameplay as expressed by Keen, the central part of the "Core" game experience will support branches that come later as the game grows. Our community has many styles of play, (Thank you Darian Wolf for the outline) Each play style will have different needs at different times but all are building something to fit the purpose of survival.

Base Builder: This player wants to make an outpost, a station that is nice, fulfills all needs he has to build.

Factory Builder: This player basically wants to play Factorio in 3D, or Satisfactory with more flexibility.

Freelancer: this player wants to upgrade ships, take on contracts and doing trade as well as combat.

Explorer: This player wants to wander around planets and asteroids to see what they can find.

Engineer: This player wants to build cool contraptions to achieve tasks.

Commander: This player wants to make high command decisions over fleets.

Raider: Somebody who gets a kick out of destroying things.

The principal of First Survival- "Getting started" quickly is important to feeling instant gratification, without this engineers desiccate in the hot sun and become Clone-Jerky. This initial core gameplay is to be simple and hopefully intuitive for the new engineer and hopefully palatable and not to spicy.

The principal of Second Expedition-"Getting Outta Here" beyond this point in SE1 has been linear and players could follow one path. Obviously when SE1 began there was no lore or storyline for this sandbox requiring a more logical progression. As SE2 is being developed, the community has been asking for reconciliation of this pathway and there are a few key points common across the feedback.

1) Richness- Each advancement has a rational meaning as to why it is there, call it the "lore of importance".

Example: We have toilets but is there an actual reality based use for the toilet? Why would sitting on a toilet charge your suit? The only charging that might happen is for your phone but we all know that falls in the toilet anyhow. Modders have done a great job of utilizing this "lore of importance" in daily living.

2) Variety- More branches to follow for technology development without redundance.

Example: Assemblers are huge blocks, a one stop shop for making any and all components, and large scale production bottlenecks for each assembler for each component. Although production can be shared across multiple assemblers, it is not intuitive. Especially to new players who may be used to other concepts in games like "separate crafting tables". Also the number of huge assemblers become a bulky rate limiting step to production even with upgrade modules. The large number of bulky assemblers in one location is a prime target for attacks and when destroyed can be a frustrating "death blow" back to the "stone age".

However, knowing this provides a multifaceted opportunity for variety by "not putting all our eggs in one basket". Think of assemblers more like component fabricators. If simple components and advanced components have diverging paths of discovery and manufacturing why lump them all in one block? The ability to integrate them into the core build and upgrade them in different ways supports innovation. Some components need Milling in a CNC machine, others Injection molding, and still others need advanced metallurgy and chemistry to make. Players always ask for more blocks, this provides the artists at Keen the opportunity to make cool new blocks each with their own important function. Not to make block spam but give the players what they want in an interesting way that has a purpose and function.

3) Logical- The steps to the next advancement support the core theme and goal of the engineers direction of play.

The next leap in variety could be upgrading the various blocks created but not with just speed yield or power consumption modules but with new types of modules or new components.

Modules?:
This idea is not creating generic tiered blocks but allowing the player the ability to use an upgrade module, attached to the fabricator, to advance the tech tree. Example: An advanced Metallurgy or Chemistry upgrade module would make something needed for the next advancement step like alloys or plastics.
Components?:
This idea may also integrate new components into a block that directly effects it performance. Unique components placed in blocks advance performance based on inheritance from the components that make them up. Example: Regular thrusters have steel plate casings, what if you retrofitted the recipe to use Titanium, would it make them lighter and possibly tolerate higher burn temperatures for longer durations and cool thermal signatures faster?

4) Interdependence- Eventually the outputs from each branch of progression effects the efficiency of the players build system.

What if what an advanced fabricator builds, (i.e. better components) effects the downstream product but also unlocks the next branch of tech dependent on that component. Ships need power to the batteries or they don’t run, all systems are dependent on it. If there is no Uranium in a reactor power isn't generated, same with H2 engines and Ice. Right now in SE1 we just make more batteries or reactors.

Example: What if a chemical fabricator upgrade module gives the lead acid battery better acid resulting in better power storage or faster charge or dispersion rates? Maybe the upgrade lets the better acid to be used to make better materials for specific armor coatings or manufacturing like Teflon. Or a metallurgy upgrade module gives a smelter the ability to render ultra-refined Lithium, unlocking Ion batteries, ceramics and superconductors, better ionic drives or electronic components?

Thinking this way is unique and turns linear progression more into a web of progression and by looking at the process as a method to help resolve each player types problems in unique and interesting ways. Upgrades and inheritance could be used to reduce ship weight for the freelancer instead of just putting on 100 more batteries to the build. It could also reduce time spent on bulk resource mining and processing steps for the raider and engineer. It could also challenge the base and factory builder to make efficient streamlined systems and the explorer the chance to find all the resources to make it happen. And give a commander better tools to help oversee the missions success.

Again these are ideas please add to them, if there is a specific or different way this could be executed.

The community wants to see a richer development of progression but as not too complex as to become tedious.

"To engineers new blocks are like buttons, we all want more, but they need to do different things in an interesting way."

Quote by: All of us at some point

While looking at all the other threads in the topics for feedback there are common themes. Many are asking for progression variety, desiring multiple ways to adapt to situations of gameplay when encountering different playstyles. This is a challenge when the progression is developed in a linear manner. Instead of thinking in concepts of Levels or Tiers like buildings, re-frame the idea as Branches like a tree. Fitting with the concept of core gameplay as expressed by Keen, the central part of the "Core" game experience will support branches that come later as the game grows. Our community has many styles of play, (Thank you Darian Wolf for the outline) Each play style will have different needs at different times but all are building something to fit the purpose of survival.

Base Builder: This player wants to make an outpost, a station that is nice, fulfills all needs he has to build.

Factory Builder: This player basically wants to play Factorio in 3D, or Satisfactory with more flexibility.

Freelancer: this player wants to upgrade ships, take on contracts and doing trade as well as combat.

Explorer: This player wants to wander around planets and asteroids to see what they can find.

Engineer: This player wants to build cool contraptions to achieve tasks.

Commander: This player wants to make high command decisions over fleets.

Raider: Somebody who gets a kick out of destroying things.

The principal of First Survival- "Getting started" quickly is important to feeling instant gratification, without this engineers desiccate in the hot sun and become Clone-Jerky. This initial core gameplay is to be simple and hopefully intuitive for the new engineer and hopefully palatable and not to spicy.

The principal of Second Expedition-"Getting Outta Here" beyond this point in SE1 has been linear and players could follow one path. Obviously when SE1 began there was no lore or storyline for this sandbox requiring a more logical progression. As SE2 is being developed, the community has been asking for reconciliation of this pathway and there are a few key points common across the feedback.

1) Richness- Each advancement has a rational meaning as to why it is there, call it the "lore of importance".

Example: We have toilets but is there an actual reality based use for the toilet? Why would sitting on a toilet charge your suit? The only charging that might happen is for your phone but we all know that falls in the toilet anyhow. Modders have done a great job of utilizing this "lore of importance" in daily living.

2) Variety- More branches to follow for technology development without redundance.

Example: Assemblers are huge blocks, a one stop shop for making any and all components, and large scale production bottlenecks for each assembler for each component. Although production can be shared across multiple assemblers, it is not intuitive. Especially to new players who may be used to other concepts in games like "separate crafting tables". Also the number of huge assemblers become a bulky rate limiting step to production even with upgrade modules. The large number of bulky assemblers in one location is a prime target for attacks and when destroyed can be a frustrating "death blow" back to the "stone age".

However, knowing this provides a multifaceted opportunity for variety by "not putting all our eggs in one basket". Think of assemblers more like component fabricators. If simple components and advanced components have diverging paths of discovery and manufacturing why lump them all in one block? The ability to integrate them into the core build and upgrade them in different ways supports innovation. Some components need Milling in a CNC machine, others Injection molding, and still others need advanced metallurgy and chemistry to make. Players always ask for more blocks, this provides the artists at Keen the opportunity to make cool new blocks each with their own important function. Not to make block spam but give the players what they want in an interesting way that has a purpose and function.

3) Logical- The steps to the next advancement support the core theme and goal of the engineers direction of play.

The next leap in variety could be upgrading the various blocks created but not with just speed yield or power consumption modules but with new types of modules or new components.

Modules?:
This idea is not creating generic tiered blocks but allowing the player the ability to use an upgrade module, attached to the fabricator, to advance the tech tree. Example: An advanced Metallurgy or Chemistry upgrade module would make something needed for the next advancement step like alloys or plastics.
Components?:
This idea may also integrate new components into a block that directly effects it performance. Unique components placed in blocks advance performance based on inheritance from the components that make them up. Example: Regular thrusters have steel plate casings, what if you retrofitted the recipe to use Titanium, would it make them lighter and possibly tolerate higher burn temperatures for longer durations and cool thermal signatures faster?

4) Interdependence- Eventually the outputs from each branch of progression effects the efficiency of the players build system.

What if what an advanced fabricator builds, (i.e. better components) effects the downstream product but also unlocks the next branch of tech dependent on that component. Ships need power to the batteries or they don’t run, all systems are dependent on it. If there is no Uranium in a reactor power isn't generated, same with H2 engines and Ice. Right now in SE1 we just make more batteries or reactors.

Example: What if a chemical fabricator upgrade module gives the lead acid battery better acid resulting in better power storage or faster charge or dispersion rates? Maybe the upgrade lets the better acid to be used to make better materials for specific armor coatings or manufacturing like Teflon. Or a metallurgy upgrade module gives a smelter the ability to render ultra-refined Lithium, unlocking Ion batteries, ceramics and superconductors, better ionic drives or electronic components?

Thinking this way is unique and turns linear progression more into a web of progression and by looking at the process as a method to help resolve each player types problems in unique and interesting ways. Upgrades and inheritance could be used to reduce ship weight for the freelancer instead of just putting on 100 more batteries to the build. It could also reduce time spent on bulk resource mining and processing steps for the raider and engineer. It could also challenge the base and factory builder to make efficient streamlined systems and the explorer the chance to find all the resources to make it happen. And give a commander better tools to help oversee the missions success.

Again these are ideas please add to them, if there is a specific or different way this could be executed.

1

Ammorok ●

Do we want a little bit of crafting to make an improved progression mechanic?

Reply URL

1

Ammorok ● ●

The community wants to see a richer development of progression but as not too complex as to become tedious.

"To engineers new blocks are like buttons, we all want more, but they need to do different things in an interesting way."

Quote by: All of us at some point

While looking at all the other threads in the topics for feedback there are common themes. Many are asking for progression variety, desiring multiple ways to adapt to situations of gameplay when encountering different playstyles. This is a challenge when the progression is developed in a linear manner. Instead of thinking in concepts of Levels or Tiers like buildings, re-frame the idea as Branches like a tree. Fitting with the concept of core gameplay as expressed by Keen, the central part of the "Core" game experience will support branches that come later as the game grows. Our community has many styles of play, (Thank you Darian Wolf for the outline) Each play style will have different needs at different times but all are building something to fit the purpose of survival.

Base Builder: This player wants to make an outpost, a station that is nice, fulfills all needs he has to build.

Factory Builder: This player basically wants to play Factorio in 3D, or Satisfactory with more flexibility.

Freelancer: this player wants to upgrade ships, take on contracts and doing trade as well as combat.

Explorer: This player wants to wander around planets and asteroids to see what they can find.

Engineer: This player wants to build cool contraptions to achieve tasks.

Commander: This player wants to make high command decisions over fleets.

Raider: Somebody who gets a kick out of destroying things.

The principal of First Survival- "Getting started" quickly is important to feeling instant gratification, without this engineers desiccate in the hot sun and become Clone-Jerky. This initial core gameplay is to be simple and hopefully intuitive for the new engineer and hopefully palatable and not to spicy.

The principal of Second Expedition-"Getting Outta Here" beyond this point in SE1 has been linear and players could follow one path. Obviously when SE1 began there was no lore or storyline for this sandbox requiring a more logical progression. As SE2 is being developed, the community has been asking for reconciliation of this pathway and there are a few key points common across the feedback.

1) Richness- Each advancement has a rational meaning as to why it is there, call it the "lore of importance".

Example: We have toilets but is there an actual reality based use for the toilet? Why would sitting on a toilet charge your suit? The only charging that might happen is for your phone but we all know that falls in the toilet anyhow. Modders have done a great job of utilizing this "lore of importance" in daily living.

2) Variety- More branches to follow for technology development without redundance.

Example: Assemblers are huge blocks, a one stop shop for making any and all components, and large scale production bottlenecks for each assembler for each component. Although production can be shared across multiple assemblers, it is not intuitive. Especially to new players who may be used to other concepts in games like "separate crafting tables". Also the number of huge assemblers become a bulky rate limiting step to production even with upgrade modules. The large number of bulky assemblers in one location is a prime target for attacks and when destroyed can be a frustrating "death blow" back to the "stone age".

However, knowing this provides a multifaceted opportunity for variety by "not putting all our eggs in one basket". Think of assemblers more like component fabricators. If simple components and advanced components have diverging paths of discovery and manufacturing why lump them all in one block? The ability to integrate them into the core build and upgrade them in different ways supports innovation. Some components need Milling in a CNC machine, others Injection molding, and still others need advanced metallurgy and chemistry to make. Players always ask for more blocks, this provides the artists at Keen the opportunity to make cool new blocks each with their own important function. Not to make block spam but give the players what they want in an interesting way that has a purpose and function.

3) Logical- The steps to the next advancement support the core theme and goal of the engineers direction of play.

The next leap in variety could be upgrading the various blocks created but not with just speed yield or power consumption modules but with new types of modules or new components.

Modules?:
This idea is not creating generic tiered blocks but allowing the player the ability to use an upgrade module, attached to the fabricator, to advance the tech tree. Example: An advanced Metallurgy or Chemistry upgrade module would make something needed for the next advancement step like alloys or plastics.
Components?:
This idea may also integrate new components into a block that directly effects it performance. Unique components placed in blocks advance performance based on inheritance from the components that make them up. Example: Regular thrusters have steel plate casings, what if you retrofitted the recipe to use Titanium, would it make them lighter and possibly tolerate higher burn temperatures for longer durations and cool thermal signatures faster?

4) Interdependence- Eventually the outputs from each branch of progression effects the efficiency of the players build system.

What if what an advanced fabricator builds, (i.e. better components) effects the downstream product but also unlocks the next branch of tech dependent on that component. Ships need power to the batteries or they don’t run, all systems are dependent on it. If there is no Uranium in a reactor power isn't generated, same with H2 engines and Ice. Right now in SE1 we just make more batteries or reactors.

Example: What if a chemical fabricator upgrade module gives the lead acid battery better acid resulting in better power storage or faster charge or dispersion rates? Maybe the upgrade lets the better acid to be used to make better materials for specific armor coatings or manufacturing like Teflon. Or a metallurgy upgrade module gives a smelter the ability to render ultra-refined Lithium, unlocking Ion batteries, ceramics and superconductors, better ionic drives or electronic components?

Thinking this way is unique and turns linear progression more into a web of progression and by looking at the process as a method to help resolve each player types problems in unique and interesting ways. Upgrades and inheritance could be used to reduce ship weight for the freelancer instead of just putting on 100 more batteries to the build. It could also reduce time spent on bulk resource mining and processing steps for the raider and engineer. It could also challenge the base and factory builder to make efficient streamlined systems and the explorer the chance to find all the resources to make it happen. And give a commander better tools to help oversee the missions success.

Again these are ideas please add to them, if there is a specific or different way this could be executed.

The community wants to see a richer development of progression but as not too complex as to become tedious.

"To engineers new blocks are like buttons, we all want more, but they need to do different things in an interesting way."

Quote by: All of us at some point

While looking at all the other threads in the topics for feedback there are common themes. Many are asking for progression variety, desiring multiple ways to adapt to situations of gameplay when encountering different playstyles. This is a challenge when the progression is developed in a linear manner. Instead of thinking in concepts of Levels or Tiers like buildings, re-frame the idea as Branches like a tree. Fitting with the concept of core gameplay as expressed by Keen, the central part of the "Core" game experience will support branches that come later as the game grows. Our community has many styles of play, (Thank you Darian Wolf for the outline) Each play style will have different needs at different times but all are building something to fit the purpose of survival.

Base Builder: This player wants to make an outpost, a station that is nice, fulfills all needs he has to build.

Factory Builder: This player basically wants to play Factorio in 3D, or Satisfactory with more flexibility.

Freelancer: this player wants to upgrade ships, take on contracts and doing trade as well as combat.

Explorer: This player wants to wander around planets and asteroids to see what they can find.

Engineer: This player wants to build cool contraptions to achieve tasks.

Commander: This player wants to make high command decisions over fleets.

Raider: Somebody who gets a kick out of destroying things.

The principal of First Survival- "Getting started" quickly is important to feeling instant gratification, without this engineers desiccate in the hot sun and become Clone-Jerky. This initial core gameplay is to be simple and hopefully intuitive for the new engineer and hopefully palatable and not to spicy.

The principal of Second Expedition-"Getting Outta Here" beyond this point in SE1 has been linear and players could follow one path. Obviously when SE1 began there was no lore or storyline for this sandbox requiring a more logical progression. As SE2 is being developed, the community has been asking for reconciliation of this pathway and there are a few key points common across the feedback.

1) Richness- Each advancement has a rational meaning as to why it is there, call it the "lore of importance".

Example: We have toilets but is there an actual reality based use for the toilet? Why would sitting on a toilet charge your suit? The only charging that might happen is for your phone but we all know that falls in the toilet anyhow. Modders have done a great job of utilizing this "lore of importance" in daily living.

2) Variety- More branches to follow for technology development without redundance.

Example: Assemblers are huge blocks, a one stop shop for making any and all components, and large scale production bottlenecks for each assembler for each component. Although production can be shared across multiple assemblers, it is not intuitive. Especially to new players who may be used to other concepts in games like "separate crafting tables". Also the number of huge assemblers become a bulky rate limiting step to production even with upgrade modules. The large number of bulky assemblers in one location is a prime target for attacks and when destroyed can be a frustrating "death blow" back to the "stone age".

However, knowing this provides a multifaceted opportunity for variety by "not putting all our eggs in one basket". Think of assemblers more like component fabricators. If simple components and advanced components have diverging paths of discovery and manufacturing why lump them all in one block? The ability to integrate them into the core build and upgrade them in different ways supports innovation. Some components need Milling in a CNC machine, others Injection molding, and still others need advanced metallurgy and chemistry to make. Players always ask for more blocks, this provides the artists at Keen the opportunity to make cool new blocks each with their own important function. Not to make block spam but give the players what they want in an interesting way that has a purpose and function.

3) Logical- The steps to the next advancement support the core theme and goal of the engineers direction of play.

The next leap in variety could be upgrading the various blocks created but not with just speed yield or power consumption modules but with new types of modules or new components.

Modules?:
This idea is not creating generic tiered blocks but allowing the player the ability to use an upgrade module, attached to the fabricator, to advance the tech tree. Example: An advanced Metallurgy or Chemistry upgrade module would make something needed for the next advancement step like alloys or plastics.
Components?:
This idea may also integrate new components into a block that directly effects it performance. Unique components placed in blocks advance performance based on inheritance from the components that make them up. Example: Regular thrusters have steel plate casings, what if you retrofitted the recipe to use Titanium, would it make them lighter and possibly tolerate higher burn temperatures for longer durations and cool thermal signatures faster?

4) Interdependence- Eventually the outputs from each branch of progression effects the efficiency of the players build system.

What if what an advanced fabricator builds, (i.e. better components) effects the downstream product but also unlocks the next branch of tech dependent on that component. Ships need power to the batteries or they don’t run, all systems are dependent on it. If there is no Uranium in a reactor power isn't generated, same with H2 engines and Ice. Right now in SE1 we just make more batteries or reactors.

Example: What if a chemical fabricator upgrade module gives the lead acid battery better acid resulting in better power storage or faster charge or dispersion rates? Maybe the upgrade lets the better acid to be used to make better materials for specific armor coatings or manufacturing like Teflon. Or a metallurgy upgrade module gives a smelter the ability to render ultra-refined Lithium, unlocking Ion batteries, ceramics and superconductors, better ionic drives or electronic components?

Thinking this way is unique and turns linear progression more into a web of progression and by looking at the process as a method to help resolve each player types problems in unique and interesting ways. Upgrades and inheritance could be used to reduce ship weight for the freelancer instead of just putting on 100 more batteries to the build. It could also reduce time spent on bulk resource mining and processing steps for the raider and engineer. It could also challenge the base and factory builder to make efficient streamlined systems and the explorer the chance to find all the resources to make it happen. And give a commander better tools to help oversee the missions success.

Again these are ideas please add to them, if there is a specific or different way this could be executed.

Reply URL

SE2 Progression IDEAs

Replies (2)