Proposal for a 4 Core Levels + AI Research System

Marcus Parriott ●

this progression path leans into existing MMO RPG styles of gameplay. theres probably some value in it, but a simple "ive seen this thing, i want to be able to build it so i take it appart and put it back together" might be a simpler more effective way to do it.

that doesnt take into account the way the game has already shown how the devs might seem to want it to progress, where the more you do for the CA, the more they allow you to learn about the stuff you have seen, and use them.

personally, i think the idea of an AI assistant to the engineer might be a good way to go about it.

you see new tech, you break it down, try to build it back up, your AI goes, hmm that didnt go quite like it should have... oh hey, theres another small atmo motor, try again on that! you do, and succeed and learn something new and useful that carrys forward.

Reply URL

1

Alex ●

You are right that this would change many aspects of the progression direction the game currently seems to be taking.

The main reason I suggested separate Mining, Exploration, Combat, and Building paths is to encourage specialization and teamwork in multiplayer. Different players could focus on different roles, making faction cooperation more meaningful.

I also agree that my proposal separates these activities quite strongly. If the community likes the general idea, it could certainly be adjusted into a more balanced system that fits Space Engineers better.

My concern with the current approach is that the AI decides which technologies become available next, even if those technologies are not useful for the way a player wants to play. For example, a player may want to focus primarily on mining and unlock mining-related technologies first. With a progression system tied to activities, the path toward those unlocks becomes much clearer.

Of course, this may be taking the idea too far, and community feedback would ultimately determine whether such a system is worth pursuing.

URL

1

Mercure ●

well yes and no i do like the core idea... but the game currently has no real xp system.

nor do i think it would be a good fit for space engineers.

what would be a better fit would be to tie them in with specialized components; this would basically tie in to the game in a very natural way that is more or less already progression based.

URL

1

Alex ●

Actually, this topic is more of a concept proposal than a detailed design. I don't think it needs to be implemented exactly as written. We can take the parts we like, modify the ones that don't fit the game, and adapt the overall idea into something that feels more natural for Space Engineers 2.

My personal preference would be to have four different specialization paths, each with its own progression system (XP or something similar). Progress in a specific field would unlock the blocks related to that specialization (except, of course, in modes where classic survival progression isn't relevant). This would allow players to unlock the technologies they actually need through the way they choose to play.

For example, since mining is one of the first priorities at the beginning of the game, doing enough mining could unlock the drill block. Likewise, by constructing simple structures for your first ground vehicle, you could earn enough progression to unlock wheels. Later on, aircraft, spacecraft, and other technologies could be unlocked by continuing to perform the activities related to those fields.

On the other hand, an even more immersive system might be possible. The station AI could assign various missions, and completing those missions could grant access to the blocks you'll need. The mission pool should be large enough that players can choose missions based on the technologies they want to pursue.

For example, if you accept a mining contract, you might find a simple vehicle or ship equipped with a drill at the mission location. By dismantling and analyzing that block, you could unlock the corresponding technology. I think Marcus' suggestion on this point makes a lot of sense. The same concept could also apply to your first ground vehicles, your first aircraft, and eventually your first spacecraft.

Technologies unlocked through station missions could be limited to a certain level. More advanced technologies could instead be obtained by fighting other factions, investigating wrecks, or reverse-engineering captured technology.

It could also be interesting if exploring the world occasionally led you to abandoned facilities or wrecks that expand your technology tree when you salvage and study them.

Of course, these are just ideas, and there are still some gaps that need to be worked out. The main point I'm trying to make is that progression should encourage natural gameplay. Instead of unlocking random blocks by performing unrelated tasks—sometimes unlocking things you don't even need yet—it would be much more satisfying if new technologies were earned through exploration, missions, practical experience, and interacting with the game world.