Nuclear engines are so boring now...

[Captain Sierra]

I take great pride in the fact that I've come to a point where the core game and my skills became TDR. Seeing what I can build and accomplish is the whole game to me. I'm glad to be past the novice phases. Having mildly heavy rockets collapse on themselves despite 700 structural struts in 0.22 was a drag. It was not "exciting".

When you have well over 1500 hours in the game I'm sure you'll start to find launches get uneventful quick. Come back and read this post when you too are closing in on 2000 hours and you'll realize how ridiculous most of your post sounds to someone with that much experience.

Veterancy changes your outlook a lot (though regex did not metaphorically age well). You see and play the game completely differently.

Judging from my own personal experiences I'm guessing your in the 200-400 hour range right now where everything is starting to click for you and the game is your oyster.

[regex]

#kerbalhipster

#420NOMAGICALREACTIONWHEELS #HYDRAZINERCSERRYDAY

[Xavven]

When you have well over 1500 hours in the game I'm sure you'll start to find launches get uneventful quick. Come back and read this post when you too are closing in on 2000 hours and you'll realize how ridiculous most of your post sounds to someone with that much experience.

Veterancy changes your outlook a lot (though regex did not metaphorically age well). You see and play the game completely differently.

Judging from my own personal experiences I'm guessing your in the 200-400 hour range right now where everything is starting to click for you and the game is your oyster.

Eh, that seems like attacking the person, not the argument. I have 1047 hours in the game and I share Camaron's opinion. Is it more valid now?

NERVA overheating is fun to some people but not others. I recall seeing a lot of threads a couple months ago complaining that we need radiator parts, and that the mk1 liquid fuel tanks were too bulky. Then Scott Manley posted a video explaining that real NERVA fuel is extremely bulky (liquid hydrogen has very low density) so we have it easy in KSP. As for me, I found pre 1.0.4 NERVAs challenging, and usually I like a challenge, but it wasn't a fun challenge to me.

Gameplay balance is one of those things where no matter what you pick, you won't satisfy everyone. The developer has to balance their own vision against popular opinion.

[YNM]

You know, the game is open for further modifications... Why not building on from that ? Also there's lots of mods out there if you're lazy to mod, even RO with all real Sol. The game might be already rusty for players from long ago, but remember new players are still coming in !

[klgraham1013]

I dont look at mass or do any stupid math, I have fun eyeballing it and seeing if it works.

I honestly 100% agree. I love the lack of the dV, makes it exciting. If you want that get a mod, but dont taint the stock game. The guessing keeps it fun.

I like knowing what I build will work as intended. How about them apples!

[Xavven]

I like knowing what I build will work as intended. How about them apples!

Same here. I probably fit in the "theorycrafting" group of players, so I calculate my dV on an Excel spreadsheet while I play. To me, there's more excitement in making an informed decision based on information, as opposed to the "thrill of the unknown."

[regex]

You know, the game is open for further modifications... Why not building on from that ?

You know, normally I play a full RO install since about 0.24. I was talking about how I was actually excited to play the stock game for once in a long time. Last night I booted up my career install what I started in 1.0.2, went to my Jool tug, fired up four nuclear engines to bring it out by Bop orbit and ... nothing. No tension, no excitement, everything worked perfectly, not a lick of heat.

Just sad about that, that I actually enjoyed the stock game for a bit but now I don't. Oh well, back to Earth and all my hypergolics.

[Camaron]

When you have well over 1500 hours in the game I'm sure you'll start to find launches get uneventful quick. Come back and read this post when you too are closing in on 2000 hours and you'll realize how ridiculous most of your post sounds to someone with that much experience.

Veterancy changes your outlook a lot (though regex did not metaphorically age well). You see and play the game completely differently.

Judging from my own personal experiences I'm guessing your in the 200-400 hour range right now where everything is starting to click for you and the game is your oyster.

I have at least 3,000 hours. (Probably closer to 4,000). The huge majority of my play time predated my steam purchase, which is now also up to 900. Launches aren't even a part of it anymore.

You had no reason to personally attack me for having a different opinion. It looks like you called out regex, too, which was equally uncalled for. The fact that my rep is only two bars only says that I don't put much on the forums.

I will stand by my opinion: Heating dynamics without heat resolution options is ridiculous, and I'm thrilled that Squad fixed it. If you feel like trying to build a ship without radiators, you're free to do so, but it doesn't mean the game should stay broken for you.

Edited July 25, 2015 by Camaron

[Wallygator]

From my albeit neophyte perspective I am under the understanding that real world Nucs operated under normal duty cycles should not overheat at all.

So... All this hubbub seems over egged.

I could be completely wrong here. Just my opinion.

Now... If we all want a "gamey" version of a nuc that gets hot, well... Ok.

[BagelRabbit]

IMHO, regex, it is a terrible thing for you to look at an engine and say that it is boring because it no longer has a tendency to explode. If the only thing that keeps your play sessions interesting is the chance that your rocket engines will go boom, you need to play KSP differently, or take a break, or something. Your sanity very likely depends on it.

~~~

I'm not entirely sure why this thread was created, by the way. What was the purpose of this thread, other than bemoaning the removal of an aspect of the game that most people disliked anyway? Do you want SQUAD to re-institute the old nuclear-engine heating system (amid the protests of many), do you wish to vent anger, or do you just want some sympathy from your fellow Forum-goers? I respect you, but unless you provide a solution to the problem you're complaining about, this thread does absolutely nothing.

-Upsilon

[regex]

What was the purpose of this thread, other than bemoaning the removal of an aspect of the game that most people disliked anyway?

People bemoaned the loss of the terrible placeholder we called "aerodynamics" even though the majority wanted something new, why should I be denied the pleasure of shiptoasting about my favorite crappy mechanic?

Also, my nukes only exploded once. Then I spent some time figuring out how to engineer ships around them. Then I started riding the edge of explosion to save on parts and mass. That was fun.

[Kegereneku]

Well... Regex is entitled to his opinions, no matter if out-of-touch-with-reality. ** snicker **

Joke aside, Regex, just your signature-quote -now out-of-context- can be interpreted in ways that contradict a personal fondness for "realism" (taken here as greater verisimilitude).

Quote Originally Posted by tater View Post

The very notion of "gameplay over realism" is utter nonsense, the 2 things have exactly nothing to do with each other.

We could say that we cannot have the advantage of both without the flaws of each.

Or that it is because because Gameplay Realism are separate feature, Gameplay-rich/poor and realism-poor/rich games being different goals.

Or argue around Realism being the antithesis of Gameplay. Realism representing a constant effort to prevent you from making things to your liking (and not in a challenging way, just "you can't do that"), whereas Gameplay is a constant effort to allow you to make thing to your liking despite realism (your liking including challenge & verisimilitude).

A game is the sum of all its parts and their interactions, not of their individual similarity with distinct systems.

For example :

- Simulating HEAT correctly is pointless if you do not have the means (radiator/heatsink/shield) to manage it.

- Having a Realistic nuclear engine is boring as well as logically it is built so you can't possibly mismanage it during flight.

Gameplay is something that must be built.

- Do the LV-N require distinct rocket-fuel ? Check

- Can the LV-N fail if you didn't put enough radiator ? Check (always up to rebalance)

- Is part thermal conductivity intuitive enough to play ? ...pending

- Still, do the above make design, launch & flight enjoyable ? Check

To me we 90% of what's really needed. The rest can wait or is counter-productive.

Let's not forget that any feature, no matter how complicated, will eventually become boring. It doesn't make it a bad feature, it simply mean that you have to change the previously interesting gameplay for another new one. Myself I bought Kerbal Space Program, not "Nuclear Space Program" so it is good enough.

If anything, the big complain I get here is that KSP balance feel random. Features alternate continuously between too-much or too-little and still don't feel part of a whole.

[Technical Ben]

You play KSP to watch things explode? What is wrong with you... oh wait, that is part of the game!

But in all honesty, most explosions are take off and landing. Events mid flight are by their nature less dramatic. Heating is still in need of tweaking I agree.

[regex]

You play KSP to watch things explode?

No, you read wrong.

[r4pt0r]

Then I started riding the edge of explosion to save on parts and mass. That was fun.

I certainly can see the fun in the "Will I or wont I make it?" gameplay.

What exactly would you want changed? Increase the heat output of the nerva? decrease the effectiveness of the radiators?

[Whirligig Girl]

No, I just reinstalled RO.

#LOLTOYSOLARSYSTEM

We will all be nothing but impressed with you if you managed an SRB-only Moon landing using Realism Overhaul and Real Solar System.

[Wjolcz]

I certainly can see the fun in the "Will I or wont I make it?" gameplay.

Same. Life support would make it even more fun.

I agree with regex. Keeping some sort of vessel management where you have to watch your stats and temperatures is a fun thing IMO.

[Franklin]

I'm certainly in the 'Squad needs to add more wildcards into the mix' camp. Predictability always leads to monotony.

[Windspren]

I built a ship with 2 LV-Ns and a couple RTGs. Guess what overheated on the 7 minute burn? The RTGs. Yes, the RTGs

[Woksaus]

Same. Life support would make it even more fun.

I agree with regex. Keeping some sort of vessel management where you have to watch your stats and temperatures is a fun thing IMO.

Yeah, life support would be cool! I think adding the need for food supplies to be delivered to, say, a space station, would add some cool realism. What might also be fun is having a limit on the amount of time a Kerbonaut can spend in space before he/she goes insane or simply dies. The limit would be determined by the XP of the Kerbonaut, with higher XP meaning that he/she could spend a longer time in space before getting messed up.

[regex]

We will all be nothing but impressed with you if you managed an SRB-only Moon landing using Realism Overhaul and Real Solar System.

Eh, too much trial and error. Plus, I don't care whether you're impressed.

[Guest]

I built a ship with 2 LV-Ns and a couple RTGs. Guess what overheated on the 7 minute burn? The RTGs. Yes, the RTGs

That is weird. Then again, I still have no idea how the new heat system works. I just slap some radiators on everything and hope for the best.

[Red Iron Crown]

I think I'm picking up what regex is throwing down. LV-Ns were a bit difficult to use to their full potential in 1.0.x<3 due to their heat. It took some careful arrangement of parts (or using wings as radiators) to make them work well, and players were calling for either a reduction in their heat generation or some dedicated heat management parts to help make it easier. Squad chose to do both, so now LV-N heat is hardly a problem and the stock radiators are rarely required.

[X-SR71]

I like how the LV-Ns are right now. You only have to worry about radiators if you cluster some LV-Ns together. Heat isn't much of a problem if you spread them apart. I'd hate for it to be required to add at least 1 radiator for every LV-N.. keep that part count down eh!

[Nich]

Meh radiators just need to go. why add obligatory parts on a game that is already part limited? I never had a problem with the old nukes. Amazing ISP, good thrust, weight and heat off set the advantages. What I hated was a week after a burn my batteries are still overheating but the nuke doesn't even show a temp bar. In my opinion they need to add a scaled up versions for 2.5 m and 3.5 m in stock. As you go up in size you would get more heat and slightly better ISP plus corresponding thrust.