ARM engines.

[SSSPutnik]

ARM is nice and all, great new features.

What do people think of the engines versus 0.23.5 version?

I note they are scaled more powerful than 0.23

Edited for less bias.

Edited April 2, 2014 by SSSPutnik

[Kasuha]

Biased polls are not good polls. If you want to run a poll you should design it with no prejudice.

[SSSPutnik]

The actual questions aren't too biased? How would you word to improve it, open to suggestions.

[Benjpalmer]

You've essentially worded them to support your point.

[SSSPutnik]

Well.. What's written is fact.. Let me edit a bit.

[Taleric]

The problem lies in the lack of risk/reward career.

Sandbox wise it was just a natural move after better structural integrity. Same belle ache could be made at advent of mainsail.

If you factor in the cost and risk of loss in a career, even once unlocked it would be a precious launch vehicle.

[Daid]

The actual questions aren't too biased? How would you word to improve it, open to suggestions.

Your poll puts the idea that the new parts are not properly scaled with the rest of the game as fact instead of an idea.

Which is the first question, are they really over-powered? Which I would not know yet, haven't played enough with it. And I had enough problems with the power of the mainsail ripping my ships apart, but maybe the new joints will help here. So even more powerful engines then those might be powerful, but can also fail in most spectacular ways.

[StevenRS11]

Your poll implies that the parts dont scale, regardless of which option we pick. What if someone thinks they are balanced, and scale fine? That said, I uh, tend to agree with you on the scaling part- they do seem just better. Id like to see some ISP nerfs, and maybe some weight reductions on the old parts. Ideally, each part should remain relevant.

Edit: Gha, ninja'd

[SSSPutnik]

The ions are 4x more powerful, 0.24 ions did have a place for satellites etc.

The new few tanks actually have a poorer wet/dry ratio at first glance.

On IRC we teased out the new engines and they definitely seem scaled higher than 0.24

Edited April 2, 2014 by SSSPutnik

[KerbMav]

There is no option to say "I disagree, they are scaled and fit in well".

Option 1. only says "I dont care/It is good that they are overpowered", 2. says "I agree with you, Squad has to make changes".

The ions are 4x more powerful, 0.24 ions did have a place for satellites etc.

As stated by Squad this was a gameplay decision.

Although I can agree they could have added a more powerful larger ion engine and left the small one as a satellite thruster.

Edited April 2, 2014 by KerbMav

[Frank_G]

I like the new engines just like they are. A good and needed addition to the existing parts. In general i like the new 3.75 m parts a lot. Too bad, they just kicked out KW Rocketry... I liked that mod a lot, but i like it even more to play stock...

[magnemoe]

Compared with the orion mod (nuclear bomb engine) they are ridiculous underpowered.

[KerbMav]

Too bad, they just kicked out KW Rocketry... I liked that mod a lot, but i like it even more to play stock...

They did not, not really - if you still like the KW design you can still use them or edit them yourself to be the same.

[karolus10]

I think that it won't matter much as stock parts aren't really balanced for now - in real life rocket engines are a very lightweight compared to it's trust and rest of the rocket ,but changing engines is only a part of the solution as it's very important to balance dry weight of fuel tanks and density (and bi-propellant mixture proportions) of fuel itself as they are largest fraction of the rocket mass...

Other important thing would be changing fuel tank capacity units into liters or square meters (as well as displaying mass of the propellant inside as volume is good for defining fuel tanks capacity but mass of propellant in tank matter more during mission), so tank size can be calculated properly and give good point of reference for modding.

Also important for engines balancing is that it's thrust is changing with air pressure (atmospheric curve in KSP) but for now thrust is constant and fuel consumption is changing with specific impulse (and it should be opposite).

This causing vacuum upper stage engines with low sea level ISP to consume much more fuel instead having significantly reduced trust caused by nozzle underexpansion and first stage engines thrust won't decrease from exhaust over-expanding in upper atmosphere.

Better modeling of engine and nozzle mechanics (nozzle expansion and thrust changing with ambient pressure) would made more realistic (upper stage engines don't work well in low atmosphere and vice versa) engines and made nozzle extensions and plug nozzles (AKA areospike) useful and working as intended.

EDIT_1: I would say that new engines ISP are bit too generous when compared to older stock parts.

EDIT_2:

The Mainsail is basically useless now.

I could disagree, Mainsails in quad configuration are creating real monster, nearly twice more powerful than stock SLS cluster part.

From other hand mainsails are much heavier... mass of old engines is too big and TWR too small :/.

Edited April 2, 2014 by karolus10

[SSSPutnik]

I didn't add an option for "I think they are scaled well" because if you look at the maths, they aren't.

The Mainsail is basically useless now.

Edited April 2, 2014 by SSSPutnik

[VirtualCLD]

The ions are 4x more powerful, 0.24 ions did have a place for satellites etc.

The new few tanks actually have a poorer wet/dry ratio at first glance.

On IRC we teased out the new engines and they definitely seem scaled higher than 0.24

Am I missing something? When did 0.24 get released? I thought we were on 0.23.5 with the ARM update.

[SSSPutnik]

Sorry my bad.

[NASAFanboy]

If you don't like the engines, then don't use them.

No need to spoil it for others.

[spikeyhat09]

i would definitely agree that some of them are overpowered. one of them is better than or equal to the mainsail in literally every way (much higher thrust, much higher isp, only 0.5 tons heavier). however, it is in early access. its going to have bugs and/or balance issues. instead of criticizing the new parts, we should be providing feedback on how we would balance them

[maccollo]

I think they are monstrously overpowered, especially the KR-2L.

Seriously, you thought the 909 was made useless after the introduction of the 48-7s? Besides asthmatics there is no reason to ever use the mainsail anymore.

Anyway I think the new engines should be re-balanced in a way that maintains the lifting capacity, but keeps them in balance with other engines. This could be done by increasing the thrust, but increasing the mass more so that the TWR is lowered a bit.

[Daid]

I didn't add an option for "I think they are scaled well" because if you look at the maths, they aren't.

The Mainsail is basically useless now.

Show us the math. That would help in your argument. Until then, my math says they scale great:

[stronger engines] + [bigger engines] = [Moar power] = [Top of the Awesome scale]

[Moar Boosters]

Personally I don't think everything in the game needs to be balanced to match each other in terms of performance.

I think a lot of players were already struggling to build heavy lifters or giant rockets, so adding these parts will help a lot of people get more out of their game. I don't really think the mainsail and skipper are going to use useless now. Once career mode is padded out they can be balanced with their cost, and the fact the mainsails will come before the new engines in the tech tree. Even when everything is unlocked, they're still going to have their uses as boosters or second stages.

[SSSPutnik]

I might show the math tomorrow but its bedtime. On the prior page there is a good post on the mainsail.

[zarakon]

TWR on the new engines is pretty ridiculus compared to existing ones

[Yarrula]

I have no problems with the new parts and engines. I think they're great. There is always room for more choice, especially in Sandbox. In Career, having access to progressively better engines is also a good idea. It gives me a sense of progress to know that I now have superior technology compared to when I started. I can still use my old designs, that functioned perfectly, or I can spend the time to redesign with superior parts. More choices, more fun for me.

When budgets are implemented, I think it will be easy to balance things based on cost. Then I'll have interesting choices to make on choosing between fuel efficiency or credit efficiency.