What balance issues have you found that need tweaking?

[michaelphoenix22]

If you were in charge of balancing the game what issues would stick in your mind? What parts or mechanics that are overpowered (OP) or parts or mechanics that are underpowered (UP)? What would you alter in the game?

Personally i think that the PB-NUK RTG parts are a little OP atm. You slap them on and you never have to worry about electric charge for the life of the vehicle.

[Nobody_1707]

Really? RTGs are much heavier than solar panels and you need a boatload of them to power even a single ion engine. While I like the idea of never running out of power actually using RTGs is always a huge pain in the ass. Especially since they don't have an inline version...

[rosenkranz]

I think RTG's are an early game items since they have been around for a very long time now. Better energy generation systems for mid-late game play will be available, i'm sure.

[magnemoe]

RTG is to power probe bodies and science packs, not to run ion engines or large trucks. just as it is in real world.

Ion engines are to strong, this is for gameplay reasons as we can not use week long burns. They are a bit to weak still, perhaps scale up 5 times.

RTC is to strong, again this might be gameplay reason as most is wasted. Something like an mechjeb smartass who controlled it would be nice. Using torque combined with variable trust to offset center of trust/ weight errors and prefer torque for minor rotations.

[Tauge]

Remember, they are balancing against what is fun not what is realistic. From what I've seems nothing is really that far overpowered within the scope of the game.

[dmx]

The specific impulse of most of the jet engines is far lower than it should be. Turbofans should be around 6,000 seconds, for example.

Here's a chart showing real-world numbers for various kinds of jet engines:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4f/Specific-impulse-kk-20090105.png/700px-Specific-impulse-kk-20090105.png

[Nao]

The specific impulse of most of the jet engines is far lower than it should be. Turbofans should be around 6,000 seconds, for example.

Here's a chart showing real-world numbers for various kinds of jet engines:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4f/Specific-impulse-kk-20090105.png/700px-Specific-impulse-kk-20090105.png

Actually they have much higher ISP than irl counterparts since in the KSP the listed ISP is for mass going through the engine and that includes air so the actual (liquid fuel) ISP is 16 times higher.

As for the OP's question, would be nice to get some tweaking of jet engines, also i would love for Kerbin to be harder to launch from but that's not going to happen . But things like the possibility to launch from other planets, for example Eve combined with Ferram mod (or just revamped drag physics) would rock!

[UmbralRaptor]

It's hard to say if parts are "objectively" over/underpowered. However, I can reasonably say that the Mk 1 fuselage is underpowered relative to the other jet hulls (too much dry mass/too little fuel), the Poodle is underpowered relative to the LV-909 (thrust should be buffed to 250+. I like 260.), and the aerospike and Mk 55 are lacking in roles.

The specific impulse of most of the jet engines is far lower than it should be. Turbofans should be around 6,000 seconds, for example.

Yes, but no. As KSP jet engines get 15/16 of their propellant mass for free, their actual Isps are 16x what the numbers suggest (typically above 20,000 s)

[SGT_RIZZO300]

A little off topic but isn't the Curiosity rover run with a small nuclear RTG? Anyway more on topic RTGs are pefectly balanced in my opinion.

[LongbowEOD]

I don't know if it's exactly a "balance" problem, but I'd like to see engine gimbals become smart enough to guide a tractor-configuration rocket. Right now they can only correctly control a pusher-style rocket.

[foamyesque]

I don't know if it's exactly a "balance" problem, but I'd like to see engine gimbals become smart enough to guide a tractor-configuration rocket. Right now they can only correctly control a pusher-style rocket.

I'd like the gimbal engines to give me roll control.

[jshier]

Smarter gimbal control from the ASAS. Mainsail shouldn't overheat under normal usage (i.e. connected to an orange fuel tank).

[cardgame]

I'd like the gimbal engines to give me roll control.

I don't think that's possible at all, at least not with a single nozzle.

[Giggleplex777]

I think that the speed of sound show be lowered to 338 m/s (Kerbin's atmosphere should be slighty thinner than Earth's).

[CobraA1]

RTG is to power probe bodies and science packs, not to run ion engines or large trucks. just as it is in real world.

NASA seems to think nuclear is okay for ion engines.

In any case - personally, I think we need something to make turning large ships faster, and to get rid of crazy rotations during the last leg of the atmosphere/space transition.

[M5000]

get rid of crazy rotations during the last leg of the atmosphere/space transition.

This. As soon as I decouple my second actual stage (most of my rockets consist of radial boosters, a central booster, a smaller high-altitude/orbital tug with higher ISP thrusters, and then the payload) I prepare myself for a rolling about all over the place of my craft... Even with ASAS.. I guess the sudden change in center of mass makes it go wonky...

[Brotoro]

I don't think that's possible at all, at least not with a single nozzle.

No, gimbaling engine control of roll is not possible with one engine, but it certainly should be possible with multiple engines (which does not currently happen). I would give a lot for this correction.

[Brotoro]

...get rid of crazy rotations during the last leg of the atmosphere/space transition.

And I would give even more for this correction. It's such a problem because I can't figure out WHY it happens, since it only happens some times and not others.

[tavert]

Jets are overpowered. Exhibit A: http://imgur.com/a/Hdew6#0

Stacking intakes allows you to get to orbital speeds purely on jets right now, for payload fractions of around 75%. Greatly diminishing the returns of having more than one intake per engine would help fix this, as well as reducing the maximum speed at which the turbojet generates thrust.

[Levelord]

Jets are overpowered. Exhibit A: http://imgur.com/a/Hdew6#0

Stacking intakes allows you to get to orbital speeds purely on jets right now, for payload fractions of around 75%. Greatly diminishing the returns of having more than one intake per engine would help fix this, as well as reducing the maximum speed at which the turbojet generates thrust.

Looks like the jets are balanced. It's more like the intakes being overpowered.

[Fel]

Jets aren't balanced... they're more powerful than rockets and have insane isps. (Of course, this is required to make the whole "space plane without rockets..." work.)

And on spaceplanes,

Let's just abandon rotpower and settle for RCS / Control Surfaces. Space planes have an overwhelming amount of rotpower (and no physics trying to tear them apart), the game "magically" makes the plane move which makes the whole "plane" aspect rather meaningless. I mean, you'd think an F-18 could enter a stable orbit according to kerbal physics.

[foamyesque]

I wouldn't mind seeing rot power on all the pods chopped way down in order to force people to learn to use RCS on their rockets, but I think a lot of people wouldn't like the change.

And yeah, single-nozzle gimbal roll control isn't possible (well it is but you'd get all sorts of other unwanted movements), but it darn well should be with clustered engines, and the game's smart enough to allow roll control for RCS and control surfaces... so why not gimballed engines?

Jet engines are fine. Intake collision meshes and/or functions need to be modified, however.

[Awaras]

A little off topic but isn't the Curiosity rover run with a small nuclear RTG? Anyway more on topic RTGs are pefectly balanced in my opinion.

Yeah, but due to the low power output, it's top speed is 0.0381 meters per second...

[tavert]

Jet engines are fine. Intake collision meshes and/or functions need to be modified, however.

They're really not. Generating 112 kN thrust at 2000 m/s is ridiculous, the x values on the thrust-vs-velocity curve need to be brought down at least a few hundred m/s. The collision mesh is a miniscule part of the problem with intakes, most people stack them using the same placement bug that can be used for any part.

[bsalis]

I think it is generally well balanced.

For me the only big issue is Airhoggin. Other than that, parts that do the same thing but one is clearly superior. For example...

Standard Control Surface : Mass 0.04 Drag 0.02 Lift 0.7

Small Control Surface : Mass 0.01 Drag 0.02 Lift 0.5

The Standard is only better in terms of Drag but considering these typically get attached to the back of the craft that's sort of a good thing.