SpaceGremlin

Why? I see them as a set of related features. Knowing how much dV you have isn't really helpful if you don't know how much you need (it is a bit better than trial and error based on fuel amounts, but not much). Currently, players need to go outside the stock game to get these tools. Adding just one still means they need to go looking for the others. If a dV calculator is implemented, how much harder is it to put a decent dV map in game? Like in the tracking station or mission control.

A delta V calculator by itself is not very useful, because without a delta V map and transfer window planner you're still doing trial and error to get anywhere. So even if a dV calc was included in the stock game, new players would still likely have to come to these forums, or youtube, to get access to the extra tools they'd need to plan their missions.

Do not be afraid of the fat lower stage in FAR. Brute forcing a pancake to orbit is very doable. 130t payload to LKO, built with tier 5 tech in career. Not pretty, but it worked.

Squad should correct the LV-N description and include a second type of nuclear engine that actually spews radioactive exhaust to highlight the differences.

Lots of mods are featured in modding mondays, so what's your point? Featuring the balance mod is Squad acknowledging that not everyone agrees with the current balance situation. Remember that the Better Than Starting Manned mod was featured even though Squad deliberately made manned capsules available at the start of the tech tree?

Quid Moola Greenbacks

B9 Aerospace Quantum Struts Active Texture Management Deadly Reentry Extraplanetary Launchpads FAR Hooligan Labs KAS Kethane Procedural Fairings Shuttle Engines KW Rocketry LLL Mechjeb Final Frontier Procedural Wings RCS Build Aid Realchute Lazor Docking Cam Throttle Controlled Avionics TACLS Kerbal Alarm Clock KSP Interstellar

You must be new to the internet.

Also, sandbox is not balanced. You can get higher payload fractions than even the SLS parts by airhogging turbojets. Sounds like that needs a nerf urgently. Grab your pitchforks, we're nerfing turbojets and ram intakes!

It was in a Squadcast. They weren't sure how many people would actually bother to get ARM if it was a separate addon, and it would require extra testing with every new update to support two versions. Edit: none of this is relevant anyway since this "volunteer community" to support a separate version is essentially the mod community.

The whole point of making ARM stock was to avoid having to maintain two versions.

This is true right now, yes, but this is why I can't wait for extra balancing points (namely economic balance). With the right price to performance ratio, everything can still have a place in the inventory without adhering to the old sandbox balance. If a bundle of mainsails is dirt cheap enough, they will always be viable. Heck, make the SLS parts cost money and reputation (such as calling in favors from Kerbodyne to get the parts) to prevent them from being the go-to 100% of the time. Again, I expect them to be stat-tweaked (maybe a little, maybe a lot). I'm just trying to raise counterpoints against the immediate reactionary response of bringing them in line with existing parts. The SLS parts are out of place right now, but not unintentionally. I feel like Squad is going somewhere with this, and I want to see it.

Right now, much of career mode is a holdover from sandbox being the only game mode. As they diverge, balancing both will become more difficult. One will have to be favored over the other.

I said applicability is still up in the air, because even if you go for the "realistic" route of getting better engines with tech, the degree to which you would is going to be highly gamified. KSP rides a strange line between simulator and game.

Mechjeb dev builds.

The current engine balance was an artifact of sandbox being the only game mode. With career being the primary focus, that opens up the option for the devs to implement direct upgrades that have no tradeoffs statwise (other tradeoffs being difficulty to acquire, price, etc). Maybe someday a balance pass will affect every engine and throw out the old balance curve. Would that ruin the game? No. Does nerfing the SLS parts to be like every engine ruin the game? No. These are subjective design decisions that will have to be tackled by the devs to fit their vision of the stock game. For everything else there's a mod.

Wrong. Check out the Merlin and F-1B engines that are going to used for next gen launchers. Engines get better with tech, that is the real world. Applicability to KSP is still up in the air though.

Right, right. I forgot that for a payload that big the mass of the engine starts to become irrelevant. Does anyone care to comment on any of my other points though?

Remember, a KR-2L attached to a 2500 ton asteroid can only accelerate it at 1 m/s^2. These things are meant to move huge masses, and yes that makes them overpowered. But can we come up with something more creative than a raw stat nerf? Great gameplay mechanics often rely on less tangible aspects than pure stats (see: every rpg ever). According to the Squadcast on March 14th, these are meant to be end game rewards. Having access to them all the time with no drawbacks is bad, but there must be a way to reward a careful player with a little OP fun without letting it dominate the end game. These parts were simply implemented too early. Their tech tree placement is wonky, and they are overpowered in the only area that currently matters. Stat adjustments will always be an option, but I'm sure a little brainstorming will yield some better ideas. Career mode improvements are coming, this is the time to be thinking about ideas to support that. If we simply lock these parts into a narrow region on a graph, we limit the potential variety of future parts. Pure statistical balance of parts is likely going to be obsolete. I'd rather embrace what the devs are trying to do here and look for ways to get these to mesh well with future updates than hold these parts to an old standard. Also, multiplayer. More efficient parts reduce part count, which will probably reduce lag in multiplayer. Just a thought.

But how can ARM be real if kerbals aren't real?

You may have to resort to doing .

HOW DO THEY KNOW!?! [paranoia intensifies]

I'm saying that this is not an urgent crisis. We don't absolutely need these to be hotfixed before the next update. Like I said earlier, I doubt these stats are accidental. We know 0.24 has career mode changes coming. There will be plenty of opportunities for the devs to create interesting trade offs for these parts other than taking the most boring route of making them exactly like every other part. Realistically, I do expect these to be toned down stat wise by the devs anyway, I just am objecting to the knee jerk reaction to immediately nerf them into oblivion. So you might have to suffer through these parts being OP for a whole update. I for one trust that they were made this way for a reason by the devs, and its going to mesh well with something planned for 0.24. If that doesn't pan out I'll start calling for the nerfs too, but until then I'm just going to suck it up and see what happens.

And yet many people are demanding nerfs right now when the only thing we can effectively change is the stats.

When it comes to any game with an economic system, price balancing is a huge factor. It is a very strong argument. If an SLS part is 33% more efficient stat wise, but 200% more expensive, that narrows its practicality but a huge margin. Super expensive SLS parts could be a reward for having excess budget, but you wouldn't want to launch everything with them if the price of other components is attractive enough.