How is the stock game feel now comparing to 0.90 with FAR and DRE?

[RainDreamer]

I have been finally finishing up some of my bigger work and getting a little bit more free time for KSP. Haven't been able to play it recently and I am wondering if the new aero and heating feel too much different from the old version with FAR and DRE. I can adapt, but is there anything I should look out for during transition?

[Wiseman]

I can't speak to planes, but launching rockets feels very, very similar to .90 FAR + DRE. I'm sure more talented players will be along shortly to tell me what I'm missing, but at a basic level my play style is exactly the same - I use the same tools, same ascent profiles, the same sort of designs get into orbit, etc. The big difference is the current state of re-entry heating - it's very low and not terribly dangerous if you put even a little thought into your re-entry profiles. (I expect this to be fixed soon, but that wasn't your question.) G-forces and heat do destroy parachutes as of 1.0.2, but you can crush your kerbals in a 50-G maneuver and they'll be fine (as far as I know) so long as you don't flip your craft out and burn up / smash into something.

[RainDreamer]

Soo...a bit easier, but otherwise not so different?

[LostOblivion]

I agree with Wiseman on the rockets. They feel pretty much like in FAR (you need only a few more 100 delta-v to orbit). However, reentry is way too easy to the point where heat shields are useless.

[eddiew]

Mixed bag, imho.

I would say nuStock is vastly easier to FAR in these respects:

- Spaceplane instability is minimal; you're far less lightly to have yaw or roll wobbles (basically point where you want to go and eventually you go there).

- There is no such thing as stall; keep a plane pointing level and it'll fall about 15m/s. Nose down, then flare, and you can land anywhere (that's got a flat bit).

- Takeoffs are absurdly short; it's easy to get a plane with limited wing off the ground in 1/3 of the runway, sometimes less.

- Re-entry without airbrakes is easy; just point 15-20 degrees above the horizon from 40km downwards.

On the other hand...

- You can't fly as high or fast with air breathing engines. Nothing in the world will get you good power beyond 20km on air, and you have to deal with it. Basically you have to bias planes for a short and brutal atmospheric ascent, followed by a long rocket burn at about 1000m/s and 25km.

- You can't stack intakes (it doesn't help because the jets are hard coded to die at altitude).

- Landing on the runway is actually harder because you don't glide as well in the thick lower atmosphere.

- Rapier thrust before mach 1.5 is pitiful. You end up packing more engines than you wanted to carry, just to get you trans-sonic.

(I'm kind of assuming you're a spaceplane person since you used to use FAR.)

[Wanderfound]

It's still pretty soupy for aircraft. FAR is in no danger of becoming obsolete.