Is getting stuff into orbit too "easy"?

[Elthy]

I think after you figured out a proper gravityturn getting payloads into orbit is way to easy. Whenever i try to build a good looking rocket it totaly overperforms, especialy with the stock 3,75m engines. With stock there isnt much payloads to launch other than those extremly light crewpods/science parts or fueltanks to get those parts somewhere else.

I would love something that would justify larger rockets (good looking, not those pancakes you need to get a jool ascent in a single launch) again, with the current difficulty i have to launch everything in a 500km orbit just to use most of my rocket (and with FAR/NEAR i didnt even need my last stage). The best solution imho would be a larger kerbin so you would need more deltaV for an orbit, maybe about 6000m/s when using FAR/NEAR.

What do you think? Is getting stuff into orbit to easy?

[Highlad]

If you're finding it easy to launch things to orbit then I would say your payload isn't big enough. Sure, you only NEED a small payload to actually do the tasks. But life is so much more fun when you do things in style. That's where it gets hard, and that's where it gets fun

[Elthy]

I allready design with lots of unnecessary stuff that looks good, every rocket comes with fairings and nosecones and i dont cramp my kerbals in small capsules for a trip to another planet...

[Slam_Jones]

When I start feeling like it's too easy, I switch to 6.4x Kerbin. Now that​ is a bit more of a challenge!

[wasmic]

When 0.23.5 came out, there was quite a storm about the new parts being overpowered (they were). In the next update, instead of nerfing the 3.75 meter parts, they chose to buff some of the 2.5 meter parts. The end result is that rockets don't need to be as big as they used to, and there is no semblance of balance between the stock parts, since some of them will underperform compared to other engines in pretty much every situation. If you want a bigger challenge when launching, I'd suggest Jumbo32 by GregroxMun. It's a config for RSS that scales everything up by 3.2x. I've chosen to remove the parts that scale the planet's orbits around the sun, so that only launches (and landings on other planets) are harder, not the interplanetary journey itself.

[Overfloater]

Perhaps the current stock game could be easy difficulty level, x6.4 RSS would be hard, and an intermediate config would be added for intermediate level. (Normal RSS is a bit hard with stock parts isn't it?)

Easy and medium difficulties would share the same aerodynamic model(whatever the developers would develop), hard would have FAR aerodynamic.

[Kerbart]

I think after you figured out a proper gravityturn getting payloads into orbit is way to easy. Whenever i try to build a good looking rocket it totaly overperforms, especialy with the stock 3,75m engines. With stock there isnt much payloads to launch other than those extremly light crewpods/science parts or fueltanks to get those parts somewhere else. (...)

I don't know what your definition of "good looking rocket" pertains. What I do know is that it's perfectly possible to design rockets that barely make it into orbit (or not) even for something is simple as a a Mk I capsule. It is easy to design a rocket that is way overpowered? Why yes, but unless you expect the oscar-b to be the only fuel tank in the game that will always be a problem. On the other hand, my standardized orbital stations can absolutely not be launched in one piece, so I doubt stock allows you to put anything into orbit with no effort. I'm not sure what the problem is.

[Sirrobert]

It's not to easy, you are simply so much better than when you started. So you THINK it's easier

[Superfluous J]

No.

Oh I have to type more than 10 characters.

Maybe if ground stations shot at your rocket while it lifted off? That'd be awesome.

[The Destroyer]

I like how it is. It gets quite easy with big parts to go to the moon, yes, but you can challenge yourself. Like a minimalistic duna return mission, or a 1000 part gilly mothership launched in one launch *shudder* THAT was hard.

[Laie]

Voted "I'm not sure".

Once you understand the basic concept, getting anything into orbit is quite straightforward, and getting easier with every launch. The only limit is sheer part count.

Mostly, I think it's fine that way. Most participants in Eve Rocks and many in Jool-5 will prefer a ridiculously huge single launch to the hassles of rendezvous/docking. Now one could argue that something is wrong if a huge launch is easier to pull off than orbital assembly and refueling. But, well, even if you leave most of the menial tasks to MechJeb (and I don't think it can reasonably made any easier than that), orbital assembly still means that you spend a lot of time dealing with necessities (a.k.a. grinding) before you can get the mission underway.

"Just launch the damn thing already" is, and should remain, a valid approach. It's one of these things where gameplay beats realism. In career mode, it's kinda-sorta balanced by being quite expensive, forcing you to grind in the cash in some other way; but at least the player has the option of chosing his poison.

As to good-looking rockets (by which I assume you mean needle-shaped): the coming aerodynamics will probably nudge the player towards that solution. However, I hope that it remains a nudge, that unwieldy payloads and pancake rockets will not become completely impossible. Besides, I'm afraid that realistically-looking rockets will remain elusive until we get more rigid connections (decouplers are the main culprits, but there's more). There's also the issue of part recovery: the game strongly encourages king-size launchers that can make it to orbit and then be safely recovered. Nevermind if it's three times as expensive, you'll get most of your money back -- in practically all cases, this beats a "cheaper" throw-away solution.

[juanml82]

I think Jool-5 and Eve justify larger rockets, specially if you want to take a science payload (which, while not at all heavy in itself, adds to the complexity of the design, specially if you want to add, say, 2-3 science jr to pluck everything in the descend/ascend). Karbonite/Kethane miners, rover-landers-tankers to work in tandem with the mining rig, Extraplanetary launchpad stuff and bases also justify larger rockets.

[Cuky]

I voted for "I am not sure" option. Although launching anything into Kerbin orbit gets a bit plane and straight forward thing after some time, there are still challenges of launching things precise enough for rendezvous and docking for example when building stations. Add to that possible inclined orbit if you wish and things become just that bit more complicated. I like it how it is, but I wouldn't have anything against if Squad choose to rise the challenge up a bit

[Pecan]

No, it's still hard for beginners, just as it should be. It's still hard for people who challenge themselves too. Like most, I thought - and still do - that the 3.75m parts generally make the simple solution the more efficient one too, but I've stopped caring so much about it since cost became a thing and, for me anyway, my machine has a harder time coping with the expanded game anyway.

Whatever you think the best solution would be - Have you thought of building rockets that were the right size for your payloads?

[Torquemadus]

I play Career Mode on hardcore custom difficulty.

In 0.25, I found I was able to comfortably make progress in Career Mode on 10% contract rewards. In 0.90, I've opted for 20% rewards, since I need to make extra money to pay for building upgrades.

Playing on the settings I've chosen requires delaying building upgrades and working with much lower tech. My launch vehicles need to throw payloads while working within severe launch mass and part count constraints.

My launch vehicles need to be very cheap, or very recoverable, or a mixture of the two. I currently rely on two-stage-to-orbit designs that expend a "trash bins full of boom" solid first stage and recover a liquid fuelled second stage.

Making it harder to get payloads into orbit would have a big impact on Career Mode, especially if the only way to get stuff into LKO was to use late game rockets launched from late game buildings!

[Voculus]

It's not to easy, you are simply so much better than when you started. So you THINK it's easier

Bullseye.

[Bill Phil]

It just takes a long time to get to orbit. That and I have to pay attention constantly. I see why people use MechJeb now...

[Elthy]

Well, i use Mechjeb for launches (mostly because i like 100% constant results), so i dont care that much about how long an ascent is. When you are doing it manualy i understand that a longer burn is also more stress...

Currently i designed a modular interplanetary transfer-stage which is about 100t so i can finaly use my larger rockets, thats not such a big issue anymore. Im still struggeling to build a standart 2.5m LKO Taxi (like the Dragon V2 or Soyus) which doesnt look way to small or gets me to Duna and back...

[TheReaper]

There is a realism overhaul mod for realism grinding players.. however i like the game as it is, it is much more friendly to general public. although i wouldnt say no to better aerodynamics,i do know devs might have a lot going on, but implementing NEAR mod to stock would be awesome.

[Liowen]

It's not to easy, you are simply so much better than when you started. So you THINK it's easier

This....thousand times this!

Just like learning to ride a bike, drive a car, or anything that requires learning a new skill it will become easier as you do it more.

[Greep]

I wish there was simple "other" option xD

I think there should be an ISP/thrust slider in the difficulty settings, in place of buildings taking more funds. This way, newbies can get to space easier while better players have less grind (there's not much but it is there) but harder contracts.

I remember when I first played KSP and could not get things to orbit period for quite some time. I treated it like a game, not some research sim like people here do, so I didn't use the wiki or anything, I just kinda winged it. By the time I was doing moon landings, I still didn't even know quite how ISP worked, and I probably wasted a good 1000 dV from orbit because I couldn't land for crap.

I still don't use Tsiolkovsky's equations, but I've developed heuristics over time that are good enough.

[architeuthis]

I wish there was simple "other" option xD

I think there should be an ISP/thrust slider in the difficulty settings, in place of buildings taking more funds. This way, newbies can get to space easier while better players have less grind (there's not much but it is there) but harder contracts.

I like this idea!

[helaeon]

Well if you want such a thing there's KIDS http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/52882-0-90-Kerbal-Isp-Difficulty-Scaler-v1-4-2-12-16-14

Then you could adjust your contract rewards to give out more funds.

[Hannu]

Ascend to orbit is easy thing. Even if game is scaled harder, you can just put more building blocks and fly to orbit. If joints are weak, you have to learn something, but even 2000 t Eve ships came routine to me when joints was weak and such a ship needed more than 500 struts. Even FAR does not make it difficult. You learn quickly what kind of launchers works and after that problems are rare. Actually it makes things easier because it decreases dv and thrust requirements.

If your problem is that rockets does not look and/or work like real rockets, you should try Realism Overhaul and related mods. Kerbin's physical parameters are so different than Earths that it is very difficult to balance things so that they look real and give good gaming experience. It is clear that experience is more important in game.

I feel that ISPs should be nerfed because i like staging. Especially with FAR it is very easy to achieve orbit with one liquid stage and couple of SRBs. I installed FAR in 0.90 game and found very soon that it makes more things easier than harder. But on the other hand, I found that with my mod set (FAR, DRE, Station Science, KAS, Mechjeb, TAC life support etc.) balance between frustrating money and science grinding and advancing in game is surprisingly pleasant.

[foamyesque]

On the other hand, my standardized orbital stations can absolutely not be launched in one piece, so I doubt stock allows you to put anything into orbit with no effort. I'm not sure what the problem is.

I should like to see one of those stations. This smells like a challenge.

I think hitting orbit is extremely easy in sandbox or even career with a few techs unlocked. I'd like to see a necessity for higher payload masses; physics-significant batteries w/increased masses, heavier solar panels, life support, that sort of thing, and possibly a general increase in sizes for KSP's bodies and orbits. I understand there's RSS configs that do that already, but I tend to either fly straight vanilla or full-up RSS.

In addition, a better aero model and a huge nerfbat to jets, turbojets, and RAPIERs would go a fair ways.