Stock Parts

[Amphiprion]

I think craft assembled with stock parts are way uglier than when using mods..

I know people say, "U need skillz bro to use only stock" but, mods like KW rocketry have realistic parameters +they make things look so much prettier and In my opinion add so much more fun to the game.

It seems like people think they are pro when using only stock and they lift there noses to any mods.. I think its just ugly.. specially when it comes to planes..

[Comrade Jenkens]

...

10 chars

[rryy]

Some people, like me, just don't like the big part packs and their different "style". I like mods, though, and have quite a few like Kerbal Engineer, Kethane, and KAS, to name a few.

[gompasta]

...

10 chars

The reason for 10 chars is to prevent these redundant posts. Please don't.

[Sean Mirrsen]

Stock parts offer advantages. For one, they are never outdated unless the game itself drastically changes. They can be shared with impunity. They and their limitations are well-known, and when someone showcases a "stock" craft, you immediately know what sort of design challenges it implies. I find that I look at the creations made with the various spaceplane and rocket part packs, and I don't know the first thing about what kind of design achievement they actually represent. Not to mention the flight-computer-plugin-that-shall-not-be-named and its effect in devaluing achievements in precise flying by hand.

Plus you can't report bugs if you aren't flying stock, and KSP being in alpha state I find that a decent incentive.

[Amphiprion]

Some people, like me, just don't like the big part packs and their different "style". I like mods, though, and have quite a few like Kerbal Engineer, Kethane, and KAS, to name a few.

I also use a lot of mods, Fatman's nuke engines are beautiful/keth/kas/b9/ttwheels/aircraft lights/spherical fuel tanks/tac fuel balancer just to name a few.\

There are some futuristic but realistic parts that are OP like the sabre's that can decrease difficulty, but I don't like the snobby Stock only vibe going around.

@ Sean Mirrsen, Good points you have there. all very valid.

[Comrade Jenkens]

The reason for 10 chars is to prevent these redundant posts. Please don't.

Sorry

I wasn't sure what the OP was trying to say as it sounded more like he was just having a jab at people who use stock.

On topic. I mainly prefer to use stock as it helps when sharing craft files. Also it allows you to appreciate a new update more if you havn't been using a mod that does the same for ages.

I do use hyperedit and engineer/mechjeb for the data readouts and testing of designs.

[allmhuran]

Stock parts offer advantages. For one, they are never outdated unless the game itself drastically changes. They can be shared with impunity. They and their limitations are well-known, and when someone showcases a "stock" craft, you immediately know what sort of design challenges it implies. I find that I look at the creations made with the various spaceplane and rocket part packs, and I don't know the first thing about what kind of design achievement they actually represent. Not to mention the flight-computer-plugin-that-shall-not-be-named and its effect in devaluing achievements in precise flying by hand.

Plus you can't report bugs if you aren't flying stock, and KSP being in alpha state I find that a decent incentive.

All of exactly this.

[Teodzero]

I think craft assembled with stock parts are way uglier than when using mods..

I disagree with everything else in your post, but I have to agree with this. Some of the stock parts look good, but many of them don't. I feel that there should be another design overhaul, like in .18 to unify the style and fix some problems with collision boxes.

[regex]

I love the look of the stock parts. They may not look like Human craft, but this isn't a game about Humans, it's a game about Kerbals. IMO, adding in a bunch of futuristic anime-style stuff just doesn't fit with Kerbals.

[maniacc0]

Stock parts offer advantages. For one, they are never outdated unless the game itself drastically changes. They can be shared with impunity. They and their limitations are well-known, and when someone showcases a "stock" craft, you immediately know what sort of design challenges it implies. I find that I look at the creations made with the various spaceplane and rocket part packs, and I don't know the first thing about what kind of design achievement they actually represent. Not to mention the flight-computer-plugin-that-shall-not-be-named and its effect in devaluing achievements in precise flying by hand.

Plus you can't report bugs if you aren't flying stock, and KSP being in alpha state I find that a decent incentive.

Yes!! Ditto to what Sean said ...

I have nothing against people who use mods; good for you and great for supporting the wonderful and dedicated team of modders that exist in this community. When I see a pic/vid of something that has been done with mods, my first reaction is usually "Wow, that looks pretty freaking cool!" .. However, as Sean stated, my next reaction is usually along the lines of, "well, I wonder how much easier that was than trying to do it stock?" On the other hand, when I see pics/vids of stock-made crafts, I can easily relate to how easy or difficult it must have been to overcome some of the design challenges. Also, I can safely request the .craft files of any stock ships that I want to try.

Again, nothing against the mod-users, you guys can do some pretty amazing things! I just like that sense of accomplishment I get after completing a mission completely stock !

[KerbMav]

I mainly use cosmetic mods, there are simply (as of now of course) not enough lights in the game.

I shy away from mod engines, RTGs ... for what Sean said - and because I am not that knowledgable to recognize unkerbalistic stats, which I do not want to have in my game. (One can always delete these parts to save memory and keep the prutty hulls, lights, struts, gears ... )

When I finally start a space station to be my mission hub for a multiple-mission-ship, I am not above using a solar-fuel-making mod to circumvent making x refueling launches, it is just not that much fun to watch the same rocket over and over again.

As I am not getting THAT much joy from number crunching I will leave TWR, dV etc. calculations to Kerbal Engineer and maybe MechJeb, which I will both use for the data output, aerobreaking information and maybe automation of burns, but not for plotting a course, landing or docking, accompanied by Alarm Clock, Protractor and funny gizmos like Chatterer.

[bogpad]

I only play vanilla, not because I think it is in any form elite, but simply because I enjoy playing games in vanilla and not modded to death. I used kethane/engineer and KSPx at some point, but that was somewhen around .17ish, and since then I didn't care about getting them back on my hd. Everyone should play as he/she fancy, and you should stop beeing snobby about people that prefer to play stock.

[Van Disaster]

*shrug* I hardly use any stock parts. I try not to use engines which outperform stock parts ( SABREs aside ) - the jets and intakes I use tend to be massively nerfed compared to stock ones - but large tanks/engines/etc help keep part count down. And some stuff, especially aircraft parts, don't really have anything close in stock anyway ( pWings vs spamming structural wing parts? no contest ). I get no accomplishment from forcing myself into a selection of parts when I know there's options around that won't suspend my disbelief.

I don't care one way or the other, I'm having fun & so is everyone else with their playstyle, but there's advantages everywhere. I seem to have hit the part count limit again for one...

[UNSC]

I use only stock parts, and I don't think i'm better than everyone else.

[DChurchill]

I use stock for everything except where there is some function for which there is no stock part. ISA MapSat, MechJeb, TAC Fuel Balancer, KAS, Procedural Fairings. I feel the way regex does. I don't have anything against some of the part packs, they're great, but they don't fit with stock parts, and I like the stock parts. I have KSPX too, because they may as well be stock, but as more and more of those parts become actually part of the game, the need for it has diminished. Claira is working for Squad now, after all. There are a couple tank configurations in it and the big diameter nuke which will keep me using KSPX until/if they make it into the actual game.

Has Kasper made any plans to update KSPX for .21? Or does it not need it?

[Beeman]

I primarily use stock because I honestly barely have the creativity to utilize them all in any decent way. Every time I try to install mods, I'm completely overwhelmed.

So I'm just sticking with stock parts until I reach the limits of my imagination with them, then I'll reconsider downloading mods.

That said, I do really like some mods but I also appreciate the functionality of stock parts more. They just feel more complete and more polished.

[Sapphire]

Pretty much all of my creations now are made of modded parts, because honestly I don't like the aesthetics of the stock parts. I like the sleek futuristic lines of B9 Aerospace and the other great mods that came up that fit in with it. I don't look down on anyone, I just do it because I like to play that way.

[mellojoe]

I use mostly stock. I'm not quite ready to get new engines and modded thrusters because at that point it is too easy to over-achieve, much like using infinite fuel. Granted, some of them are beautiful and very awesome to see, like the Saturn V replicas. Very cool, indeed. But, I just haven't explored the limits of stock parts quite yet.

Some mods I definitely use. Crew Manifest. Procedural Fairings. They are simply designed, yet work brilliantly. Stock just has that ... STOCK feel to it. It feels fresh. Clean. You know if you screw something up it is your fault, not two things glitching each other.

[acealeam]

I do love the looks of most of the famous part packs, but I dont use them, simply because none of the parts really fill a niche. None of them are very useful, I just find myself using them over the stock ones for their looks and possibly size. And I shouldn't be doing that, I should be using them because I need to, that said, stock engines actually need to be used for different scenarios in stock. And I like that.

[zarakon]

Dirty mod-using peasants Stock-only master race

I use pretty much only stock parts, but I feel like I should try out some of the cool mods like kethane, KAS, etc. that add capabilities the stock parts just can't match.

I agree with most of what Sean Mirrsen said, but also:

- Using mods makes game updates more painful. I've played several games in the past like WoW where I made heavy use of mods, both community and my own, and it really sucks when I came to depend on them, only to have them all break horribly when a game patch came out.

- There's just something satisfying about making creative use of stock parts to do something they weren't intended for, rather than just having a part designed specifically for that purpose. For example, improvised stock fairings, weaponry, or helicopter rotors instead of parts made specifically as fairings or missiles or rotors. Sure they're ugly, but you can be more proud of them. It's like how a life-size figure made out of Legos is so much cooler than one made in a plastic mold.

- The parts lists are getting a bit full already. I don't really want a ton more parts in there

Edited July 30, 2013 by zarakon

[Anton P. Nym]

I use stock parts almost exclusively; the only modded part I've used is the Orion nuclear pulse drive, because atomic outboard motors are cool. 8) (Game busting, but cool.) Mainly as I'm a bit leery of using mod parts, particularly in that they can interact with the game engine in bizzare ways, but also because I want to retain the challenge of the base game and retain the ability to report bugs.

I used to use Protractor as a plug-in but it didn't fare too well with the v0.21 update, and then I found Kerbal Alarm Clock can also compute transfer windows so now I stick with the latter to keep the number of plug-ins down to 1.

-- Steve

[Sof]

Meh, I've begun using modded parts because I wanted to design crafts that weren't possible with stock parts.

It shouldn't matter if you choose to use better engines in your own game, it just bugs me when people on the forum claim to have achieved something, then it transpires that they used overpowered engines, balloons or mechjeb to get the job done.

Many part mods are fairly well balanced as of now.

[Tw1]

I'm one who uses stock, except when there are functionalities it doesn't offer. I like my things to look kerbal.

But I do use many mods.

[HeadHunter67]

I have to agree with everything Sean said. However, I do like to use mod parts - mainly for the look, and who doesn't like more cool toys? The main reasons I don't really use mod part packs right now are two-fold: First of all, I wind up with a lot of part clutter that I don't ever use; and secondly, the limitations of the game engine encourage running lean on mods - between longer load times and potential for crashes.

I know I could solve the first issue somewhat by paring down the packs to just the parts I like, but it's a time-consuming process. If there was a plugin or mod that would let me look through my whole parts catalog and delete parts from my install, I'd probably more often use the mod parts that I do like.