Sign in to follow this  
FlightSimXManiac

ARM Parts Poll

What should be done with the new parts?  

  1. 1. What should be done with the new parts?

    • No, or very little, change
      117
    • Balance for sandbox
      7
    • Balance for career
      37
    • Balance for both sandbox and career
      47


Recommended Posts

There's no need to do anything. As things stand now, even if you did try to balance their stats it wouldn't matter. By the time you get them in Career mode there's almost nothing left to use them for. Even if there was, players could just solve the problem with, what else, more engines. I've used them with edited stats and it wasn't more or less of a challenge, either way I can't come up with a payload big enough to stress them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have only been playing for a month. I have been working a career mode and have scientificated up to the 550 point level and do not have the new engines to compare to play with yet. I was a wee bit disappointed that I got my Mainfails and the BFO tanks for free but it is nice that I have new stuff to look forward to.

Gaming is a very personal experience and play styles invariably vary. I like learning how to use the parts I have in order to gain the science for the next level. I don't use many mods (yet), KER, AGM and select root. Once I have maxed out I will start adding new fancy stuff.

Others may not want to wait and have all the new toys now. And you know what? That is just fine for me.

If you do not like what they have done with the parts then there are many solutions posted on the forums. Since the game is still in development they may change exactly what you are not liking today. The only real solution is patience.

For me I will let them keep working in their way and on their time schedule. Be sure to voice my opinion so they know how people feel and wait and see.

My solution for the new parts I wanted to earn. I finished the project I was working on in order to earn them and then started incorporating them into my builds.

Oh well, wanted to throw in my two rubles and I am glad to see a poll here so the general opinion can be heard.

Edited by Angvar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How many rockets do you see NASA and SpaceX using that have fuel lines and 50 boosters strapped to the side? None. Two-stages to reach orbit ... complaining about how this affects career mode is pointless. If anything, they should remove the fuel lines from the game and then you'd see all the complainers cry about how the game is too hard (even with the new parts).

Well first of all I think it is somewhat funny to argue in favor of realism in this specific instance, while rejecting realism in other areas such as solar system scale. The wider nature of KSP rockets comes from as a consequence from scaling down the solar system (for decreasing difficulty and launch times) and thus increasing the mass and reducing the TWR of the rocket to compensate. It's silly to demand the ease of KSP spaceflight combined with the better designs of real life, i.e. the best of both worlds.

The point is moot anyway. It was already trivial to reach orbit in KSP with an elegant two stage rocket. The most powerful NASA rocket I can find, the Delta IV, can lift 22.5 tons to LEO. In KSP one three person pod and a medium (half an orange tank) tank of fuel is 23 tons. There are plenty of designs that could get that to orbit without looking silly. The more absurd rocket designs we see in KSP are either by poor (aesthetically speaking) design, by choice, or to lift much greater payloads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Squad made the new ARM engines. Therefore, by definition, they are totally orthodox and "balanced". Those who say otherwise are heretics and should be burned at the stake :). BURN THEM!! BURN THEM WITH FIRE!!! :D

Seriously, I think there's a better argument that the older parts are UNDER-powered. After all, look at the ridiculous lengths people have to go to with obscene asparagus staging, with more struts than real rocket parts, just to get things off the ground with "old" parts. It can't really help Squad's credibility with real rocket scientists and folks like NASA to see such things in everybody's screenshots. So, in an effort to make KSP rockets look and work more like real rockets, it shouldn't surprise anybody to see the game start getting stronger joints and more efficient engines.

And don't forget, Squad also buffed some "old" parts. The 48-77 got tweaked a couple version ago. This time, we saw the Ants and the ion engine get buffed. So it's a growing trend. I wouldn't be surprised if the larger "old" engines got some tweaks as well, to bring them into line with the ARM engines, and not the other way around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So people complain, that they do not need to spend time on mundane task of creating insane CPU-eating, crazy looking heavy lifters any more? I for one prefer to focus on the mission itself, instead of spending hours on designing a crazy 300 parts lifter only to get my payload to the orbit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So people complain, that they do not need to spend time on mundane task of creating insane CPU-eating, crazy looking heavy lifters any more? I for one prefer to focus on the mission itself, instead of spending hours on designing a crazy 300 parts lifter only to get my payload to the orbit.

Large, but balanced, engines can give you that same benefit.

For example, heavy payloads became much more manageable when they added 2.5m tanks and Mainsail engines, but the Mainsail itself isn't so overpowered that it completely displaces the smaller engines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its simple really, do nothing and keep updating career mode.

The new parts blow the old parts out of the water at the moment. Once prices, contracts and further tech changes happen in career mode im sure the older parts will hold a firm place to the much bigger, more efficient but defiantly more expensive SLS parts.

It might not make much balance sense now, but the game is still a work in progress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the new parts much. I think they have brought great new possibility to KSP. Before ARM, the maxiam fuel I can send to LKO is about 4 jumbo tanks which weight about 150t. But now with the new parts and the new joint system, I can easily send two or three hundred tonnes of fuel to the orbit. Now I can make much bigger space plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They'll have to be balanced when career gets fleshed out, I guess. As for sandbox, who cares if it's balanced? That's why it's sandbox.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are two ways for SQUAD to deal with this:

a) Realistic: To 2.5, 1.25 and 0.625 they should add parts as efficient as ARM parts, to 3.75 they should add parts that are as efficient as pre-arm parts were and then weaker than any current parts to each different size. Unlocking them would be from weakest to best, but all sizes would be unlocked with the first techs.

B) Balancing current: Nerf 3.75 parts to pre-ARM levels.

I don't feel that simply making 3.75 expensive is good enough. That would mean that 3.75 is strictly late-game. 2.5 isn't so why would 3.75 be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they are fine. To be honest I think the folks hopeing for them to be "Ballanced" for both Career and Sandbox at the same time are fixated on a pipe dream. A level of balance will be achieved in Career when budgetary concerns will have to be considered. Do I launch the big expensive rocket to get this payload into orbit or do I trim down the payload design and send it up on the inexpensive one? You can have more powerful/advanced engines balanced by difficulty to unlock and cost per unit. Sandbox strips out all those balancing options leaving the only option bland sameness of having all engines be basically the same tech levels and performance envelopes. This would also result in extra engines being largely redundant. The spillover into career would also make the tech tree pointless, may as well just reduce it to 3 nodes, small rockets, bigger rockets, and ginormous rockets.

Personaly I think Career is going to be the primary game mode things are balanced around while sandbox remains just that, a sandbox. It is the free form, do what you want, with whatever parts you want, no goals but your own game mode to explore without restrictions. Some parts will be comparitively stronger or more useful in this mode because they lack budget restrictions on their use. If someone only plays sandbox and feels the parts are too strong without the career mode restrictions its not like its hard to tweek thrust/weight/ISP to suit your own concept of ballance. Heck I'm sure there will be a half dozen mod packs that do just that, shoehorn all the parts into a nice neat curve someone cooked up. I think I'll stick to whatever balance the devs come up with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are very powerful, that's for sure, but I think they work fine as of now. You can do whatever you want in sandbox, so if you don't like them, don't use them. You can also simply delete them from the NASAmission folder, if the mere presence is annoying. Still, rockets are not just "MOAR BOOSTERS", even though that is what KSP seems like at times. You don't have to use the big parts for everything. I haven't used them much, because I have other solutions to weight problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see them balanced for career mode (I think that some of them, like the new SRB, are unlocked a bit too early), but since career mode isn't complete yet I'm not sure what will balanced in career mode be in the future. So I'd rather wait for SQUAD to add more stuff into career mode before them to balance the tree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, what I'd like is for the new quad engine cluster to be made visually more symmetrical, like the later SLS design concepts. I prefer radial symmetry to bi-radial symmetry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im surprised more people haven't switched over to career yet. Like... gathering science is really what the game is about now, setting up missions to minimize weight, rovers and science module bases to gather multiple biomes. I can't imagine balancing engines for anything but career mode. Im sure there will be a lot of tweaking in the next few releases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd quite like the new engines to be separate into single engines and bi/quad couplers. That way it would be a lot more flexible and allow for more uses. (e.g. space shuttle)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Balance for both would seem to be the best answer, if it's possible. Satisfies both the sandbox and career crowds.

I wonder a bit about the "leave it as is" option. The engines are not balanced as is in either career or sandbox, and it's fun to play with overpowered parts for a while. I wonder if that option would be less popular in a few months when the newness has worn off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heavy lift rockets look more like rockets now. I do not see this as a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There was a poll like this earlier. If I remember right two thirds thought the engines were alright as they were and I think it will be similar this time.

It seems sir, you were right! (or there abouts!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are so many people picking leave it as it is? I just don't get what is so bad about balancing it for both career and sandbox?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why are so many people picking leave it as it is? I just don't get what is so bad about balancing it for both career and sandbox?

The LFB KR-1x2 is balanced for neither. It is unlocked at the same time as the mainsail, weighs only a third as much (once you take off the orange tank of fuel worth, and as a much greater ISP. How is that by any stretch of the imagination balanced.

If it was unlocked further down the tree it wouldn't be so bad.

Edit: Its also cheaper than a mainsail and orange tank but as this feature hasn't been added its fine atm.

Edited by Comrade Jenkens

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Im surprised more people haven't switched over to career yet. Like... gathering science is really what the game is about now, setting up missions to minimize weight, rovers and science module bases to gather multiple biomes.

I find the career mode much more enjoyable, if you ignore the the silly science experiments and biomes. You launch a rocket, and the crew reports how the mission went. Based on the reports, the engineers can build more advanced rockets for more ambitious missions. If you do something new during EVA, you can do an EVA report, and you can also bring home one surface sample from each planet or moon you visit.

This way, the pace of progress is much more reasonable for experienced players. You can also fly more interesting missions, as there is no griding with a million experiments in a million biomes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't care, I love these parts as they are. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this