Which one is the moast useful? Moar Boosters vs. Moar Fuel vs. Moar Engines?

[burn n crash]

I've always wondered what we need the moast of. 

[Scarecrow71]

Wouldn't the correct answer be "moar everything"?

[Cpt Kerbalkrunch]

With the wobbly nature of the current game's rockets, I think "Moar Struts" is the better rallying cry .

In seriousness, though, I would say Boosters. I like building large, multi-Kerbal vessels. I find that cheap, powerful boosters to get your ship out of the atmosphere to be extremely useful. Design and execution are of obvious importance, but somebody's gotta do the heavy lifting.

[BeastHunter]

Moar fuel adds weight. Moar boosters adds extra Delta-V with actual TWR.

[RocketRockington]

Moar engineers, to duct tape things together.  Whether it be the rocket or the game.

[Superfluous J]

That's like asking what's better: a skateboard, a race car, or a 747?

The answer 100% relies on what you're trying to do.

(insert image of someone trying to axle grind a 747 on a half-pipe)

[Tazooka]

5 hours ago, Superfluous J said:

The answer 100% relies on what you're trying to do.

[B15hop]

Honestly, it's the proper balance that is most important.. Too much engine weight and not enough fuel means too much unnecessary weight and no range. Too much fuel makes leaving gravity very difficult but can be good for long range missions. However you will waste  alot of it before even leaving orbit without the right ratio. You need the right fuel to engine thrust/weight ratio. I try to go with what engines give me the best thrust to weight ratio. Dropping larger ones in stages is the best approach if you won't need them later IMO..

[Cpt Kerbalkrunch]

7 minutes ago, B15hop said:

I try to go with what engines give me the best thrust to weight ratio. Dropping larger ones in stages is the best approach if you won't need them later IMO..

Absolutely. I try to always have a TWR around 1.25-1.5 (give or take). It can be overkill at times, but I want a burn to be as short as possible. And when I need to capture or make a plane change, I want it to happen quickly. Not to mention the ability to shed speed in a hurry when landing. I love smaller engines as much as the next guy (huge fan of the Spark), but I often attach them in symmetry to keep the smaller profile fuselage with added power.

This is probably why I never use nuclear or (God forbid) ion engines. I know these are often favored for their great efficiency, but it's more than drowned out by their drawbacks (imo). Heavy and weak? No thanks.