Recommend good parts pack please

[Gr@y]

I'm trying to pick interesting realistyc parts build without OP or cheat parts to expand career gameplay. Community tech tree installed.

For now, I'm stopped on OPT, OPT Legacy, Near Future Tech, MK2  Stockalike Expansion, Kerbal Reusability Expansion, Kerbal Planetary Base Systems, Cryogenic Engines, Kerbal Atomics, Feline Utility Rovers, Stockalike Station Parts Expansion Redux, Heat Control, Alcubierre Warp Drive, Pathfinder, SpaceY. 

Actually, I'm not excited about SpaceY and Cryogenic Engines because of theirs self-copying and going to exclude them. Also I've tried and rejected Pure Electric Engines, EM Drive and Atomic Age for their imbalace, QuizTechAeroPack, Mark IV Spaceplane System and Mk3 Stockalike Expansion for their boredom. The main requirement is that the parts should provide something really new, not just another skin and be balanced.

I've went through  the entire SpaceDock and didn't find anything interesting. Maybe I've missed something? Help Please.

[DStaal]

What type of gameplay are you looking at adding?  I notice you have Pathfinder - I’d add MOLE for the early orbital-science experiment labs.  (And the *extremely* useful parts - even if they don't look all that different.)  But beyond that, what are you thinking?  Life support might be an option - Pathfinder/MOLE's home LS is Snacks, but you could also work with TAC-LS or USI-LS.  (Thought the configs for that under Pathfinder/MOLE need updating.)  MKS has a complex supply chain - but Pathfinder is developing it's own as well.

If you're looking for just parts that are different, you can take a look at Kerbal Flying Saucers - It's technically pre-release, but it's fairly stable and integrates well with other WBI mods.  (Though the engines are late-game parts, intentionally.)

There's lots of things interesting - but it depends on what your interested in. 

[Tyko]

I find it amusing that you consider the Alcubierre drive "realisticy" but think Atomic Age isn't balanced. Atomic Age is based on proven, demonstrable science while Alcubierre is not.

Edited January 4, 2019 by Tyko

[Gr@y]

On 1/4/2019 at 9:23 PM, Tyko said:

I find it amusing that you consider the Alcubierre drive "realisticy" but think Atomic Age isn't balanced. Atomic Age is based on proven, demonstrable science while Alcubierre is not.

Atomic Age engines are too powerfull and universal, making almost all other ones useless. It breakes gameplay and career progression. Alcubierre drives are based on a hypothes instead of axiome, but they are logical and requires common engines to  be suxessfully operated. Breaking a distance issue, they raise a speed issue instead, enriching gameplay. That's quite interesting. I love SciFi and that kind of FTL travel don't break my vision. After all, they requires TON of sciense and money, making reason to play further.

On 1/4/2019 at 6:58 PM, DStaal said:

What type of gameplay are you looking at adding?  I notice you have Pathfinder - I’d add MOLE for the early orbital-science experiment labs.  (And the *extremely* useful parts - even if they don't look all that different.)  But beyond that, what are you thinking?  Life support might be an option - Pathfinder/MOLE's home LS is Snacks, but you could also work with TAC-LS or USI-LS.  (Thought the configs for that under Pathfinder/MOLE need updating.)  MKS has a complex supply chain - but Pathfinder is developing it's own as well.

If you're looking for just parts that are different, you can take a look at Kerbal Flying Saucers - It's technically pre-release, but it's fairly stable and integrates well with other WBI mods.  (Though the engines are late-game parts, intentionally.)

There's lots of things interesting - but it depends on what your interested in. 

Thanks, I'll take a closer look. Life support mechanics didn't interested me in, maybe later and with RSS for real hardcore.

Edited January 6, 2019 by Gr@y

[TheKurgan]

On 1/4/2019 at 6:06 AM, Gr@y said:

I'm not excited about SpaceY and Cryogenic Engines because of theirs self-copying........ QuizTechAeroPack, Mark IV Spaceplane System and Mk3 Stockalike Expansion for their boredom.

 

Just because a mod doesn't meet your needs, or expectations, doesn't mean it's a good idea to openly display the frivolous reasons you do not choose to use them... 

Just stating the fact that you do not choose to use them is enough.

The people who created these mods, did it for FREE, spent considerable time and effort on them, and THOUSANDS of people love them. ZERO reasons for you to state they are boring...

 

[DStaal]

1 hour ago, Gr@y said:

Atomic Age engines are too powerfull and universal, making almost all other ones useless. It breakes gameplay and career progression. Alcubierre drives are based on a hypothes instead of axiome, but they are logical and requires common engines to  be suxessfully operated. Breaking a distance issue, they raise a speed issue instead, enriching gameplay. That's quite interesting. I love SciFi and that kind of FTL travel don't break my vision. After all, they requires TON of sciense and money, making reason to play further.

Well, the only real reasons we don't use atomic engines in real life so far is because of treaty limits which would cause an uproar, and that for the trip to LEO they aren't that useful, nor are they all that useful for small probes.  (As there's a high minimum mass to the engine.)

If you scale up to where you can afford the mass for them, they're really the universal choice if you can get past the politics.  (Well, you might be able to use solar/electric in the inner solar system, but the burn times for that are huge.)

[Tyko]

3 hours ago, Gr@y said:

On 1/4/2019 at 10:23 AM, Tyko said:

I find it amusing that you consider the Alcubierre drive "realisticy" but think Atomic Age isn't balanced. Atomic Age is based on proven, demonstrable science while Alcubierre is not.

Atomic Age engines are too powerfull and universal, making almost all other ones useless. It breakes gameplay and career progression. Alcubierre drives are based on a hypothes instead of axiome, but they are logical and requires common engines to  be suxessfully operated. Breaking a distance issue, they raise a speed issue instead, enriching gameplay. That's quite interesting. I love SciFi and that kind of FTL travel don't break my vision. After all, they requires TON of sciense and money, making reason to play further.

Atomic Age engines ARE based on real-life physics though. The nuclear lightbulb engine would be projected to have ISPs in the 1500 - 3000. In a NASA study they concluded that "the feasibility of the nuclear lightbulb engine continued to be demonstrable". They stopped research because of money and politics, not because they couldn't do it.

So the Lightbulb engine is based on known physics and building one would only come down to engineering. This isn't true of the alcubierre drive. Which is not based on widely accepted physics and couldn't be built today.

Play however you want, but you started this thread stating "I'm trying to pick interesting realistyc [sic] parts build without OP or cheat parts to expand career gameplay. " The alcubeirre drive doesn't meet these criteria while the Atomic Age engines do.

Edited January 6, 2019 by Tyko

[Espatie]

Minor threadjack (not a question worth a new thread to itself): Does anyone know of a Mod that includes a 1.875m (Medium, Making History Sized) Reaction Wheel?

[Tonka Crash]

1 hour ago, Espatie said:

Minor threadjack (not a question worth a new thread to itself): Does anyone know of a Mod that includes a 1.875m (Medium, Making History Sized) Reaction Wheel?

Missing History includes a lot of 1.875m parts. One of its guidelines is to add pieces the creator felt Squad should have included in the Making History Expansion.

[Gargamel]

5 hours ago, TheKurgan said:

Just because a mod doesn't meet your needs, or expectations, doesn't mean it's a good idea to openly display the frivolous reasons you do not choose to use them... 

I'd disagree with this, as the OP is stating why they don't like a mod.  That reason might help us better suggest others.    It wasn't a disparaging remark, just the reason they don't play with them. 

I've historically been a huge fan of the KW pack, but it might be a bit OP.  The near future packs are real nice too.  Great for building big things. 

[HeliosPh0enix]

If you want a (relatively) balanced approach to sci-fi tech, try KSP Interstellar.  A lot of the later engines are very powerful, but require expensive/hard to get resources or lots of infrastructure to use.  You basically either have to set up a massive beamed power network for low thrust but insanely high ISP stuff or carry a nuclear reactor on your ships to power massive engines.  It's all pretty interesting, plus the addition of antimatter and exotic matter keeps things interesting late game.

[Gr@y]

16 hours ago, Tyko said:

Atomic Age engines ARE based on real-life physics though. The nuclear lightbulb engine would be projected to have ISPs in the 1500 - 3000. In a NASA study they concluded that "the feasibility of the nuclear lightbulb engine continued to be demonstrable". They stopped research because of money and politics, not because they couldn't do it.

Good arguement. You got it. I'm going to include Atomic Age to my build.

 

18 hours ago, TheKurgan said:

 

Just because a mod doesn't meet your needs, or expectations, doesn't mean it's a good idea to openly display the frivolous reasons you do not choose to use them... 

Just stating the fact that you do not choose to use them is enough.

The people who created these mods, did it for FREE, spent considerable time and effort on them, and THOUSANDS of people love them. ZERO reasons for you to state they are boring...

 

Just to clarify, I'm a modder and 3D modeller too (not here, but I know that kind of job) and my words didnt point to insult somebody. This is just my IMHO, nothing more, but it has reasons, not just a sympathie.

 SpaceY is stuck on spaming dual/quad copies of existing engines, that's really annoing. It has good pack of multi-couplers and that is blasting my brain... WHY do this??? Why do they wasting memory this barbaric way?

Cryogenic Engines are fancy, but has minimal difference between each other. Kerbal Atomics do the same job much better. QuizTechAeroPack, Mark IV Spaceplane System and Mk3 StockalikeExpansion has the same flaw. OPT and MK2 Expansion do all the same and much more, but better.

KSP is a bit restricted in memory usage and I had to choose. If any mod duplicates the existing one - it's not for me.

[Tyko]

8 hours ago, Gr@y said:

Cryogenic Engines are fancy, but has minimal difference between each other. Kerbal Atomics do the same job much better.

Atomic Age and Cryogenic engines aren't nearly the same. They're actually very different. I know you're new to the forums, but I'm not sure how new you are to the game, so let's start very basic here.

Key engine capabilities are:

• ISP in seconds - vacuum (VAC) and at sea level (ASL) - this is essentially the "fuel efficiency" of the engine, the higher the ISP the more DV you get from a given quantity of fuel
• Thrust in kN - vacuum (VAC) and at sea level (ASL) - How much force the engine can push with
• Mass in kg - how much the engine weighs.
• Thrust to Weight (TWR) ratio - a calculation of the engine's thrust compared to its mass

Nuclear Thermal Rockets (NTR) - like those in Atomic Age or Kerbal Atomics - have very high VAC ISP, but low ASL ISP and very low TWR. They're great for pushing craft around in a vacuum because of their high fuel efficiency (VAC ISP), but you need a fairly heavy load to offset the weight of the engine. Doesn't make much sense to push a 10 ton load around with a 15 ton engine.

Cryogenic Engines - are bi-propellant combustion engines just like the normal LFO engines in the game. They have higher ISPs than LFO due to the different type of fuel but still have really high TWR.

They are really completely different types of engines. They're certainly not similar enough for you to say "Kerbal Atomic do the same job much better". There's really only one (broadly speaking) job that NTR do better than cryogenic engines - that's pushing big heavy loads around in space. For almost any other mission types Cryogenic engines are far better.

 

Edited January 7, 2019 by Tyko

[DStaal]

23 hours ago, Espatie said:

Minor threadjack (not a question worth a new thread to itself): Does anyone know of a Mod that includes a 1.875m (Medium, Making History Sized) Reaction Wheel?

MOLE has one as well, IIRC.

[Gr@y]

11 hours ago, Tyko said:

Atomic Age and Cryogenic engines aren't nearly the same.

I didn't say that. I said that Cryo Engines has low variety of engines. Kerbal Atomics engines has much more difference between each other.

11 hours ago, Tyko said:

I'm not sure how new you are to the game

My game level: Elon Musk  I'm planning manned mission on Duna with all 1000 science techs unlocked.

11 hours ago, Tyko said:

Nuclear Thermal Rockets (NTR) - like those in Atomic Age or Kerbal Atomics - have very high VAC ISP, but low ASL ISP and very low TWR. They're great for pushing craft around in a vacuum because of their high fuel efficiency (VAC ISP), but you need a fairly heavy load to offset the weight of the engine. Doesn't make much sense to push a 10 ton load around with a 15 ton engine.

I'm not sure how new you are to the game...  OK, let's be serious. 3.75m 24t engine from Kerbal Atomics has over 3000 kN thrust on a sea level in LH+Ox mode. That's overenough to push anything anywhere.