thoughts on the New porkjet 1.05 album

[Snark]

Placement in the tech tree can balance that though. If its for a shuttle it will be in the last two tiers when you probably arent using any of those as much. Also the larger bell may cause some extra drag on a 1.25m Stack, it looks wider than that stack.

I don't really buy the tech placement argument. As Red Iron Crown points out, it will mess with sandbox players. But even for career mode: I really like the fact that even with the tech tree maxed out, there still aren't any magical engines that render everything else obsolete. Even when everything is unlocked, I still have a reason to use everything. Unlocking LV-N opens up new opportunities, but doesn't mean I stop using Terriers, or Sparks, or Skippers.

I also like the Lego-like nature of KSP. The various components aren't for just one narrow use, they're general purpose building blocks that are good for a wide variety of uses. "So we have cool looking engines for space shuttles" seems awfully narrow to me, if there's not a strong case for other uses.

- - - Updated - - -

Its mainly needed to make space shuttles work. We can make then atm but the giant engine bases stick out from the shuttle and just look bad which is why a 1.25m base looks better.

The issue there, for me at least, is that this seems like a well meaning attempt to solve one problem for one very narrow class of player, while interfering with everyone else's experience.

Space shuttles are a really narrow use case. I'm sure that for those who use them, the shuttle may loom large, but I'd guess that most players don't use them. If the only complaint is a cosmetic one, and that only for a narrow subset of players, then that seems like a slender justification for a part as disruptive as the Vector.

If shuttle cosmetics are the only problem this solves, why not just add a new Mk3 adapter or two? For example, a short, light Mk3-to-2.5m adapter so you can put a Mainsail cleanly on the back of a Mk3tank. Maybe even a Mk3-to-twin-2.5m, if it's really necessary. That way the shuttle enthusiasts can get their eye candy without disrupting the game for others.

[Alshain]

Kinda messes things up for sandbox players, though. I suspect a little more drag will not be enough to offset having 3-4x the thrust of the any other 1.25m engine, as well as better TWR.

Which sort of raises the question: Why not just remove the large tankbutts from the existing models? Skippers or Mainsails were already up to this task, they just looked bad doing it.

#DownWithTankbutts

Well, Sandbox is already unbalanced in that manner. Is there much of a reason to use the LV-T series or even a 1.25m stack unless you just have a low mass payload? If you have a low mass payload there isn't going to be much reason to use the Vector anyway, aerodynamics will see to that. Have you tried launching a rocket with 5.0 TWR in 1.0+? It's not incredibly fun, unless maybe you are going direct solar, even then you have heat to worry about. We don't really know the stats on it anyway.

I don't disagree on the tank butts.

Edited October 18, 2015 by Alshain

[Frozen_Heart]

Which sort of raises the question: Why not just remove the large tankbutts from the existing models? Skippers or Mainsails were already up to this task, they just looked bad doing it.

#DownWithTankbutts

Though I do think the shuttle engine should be distinct from the Skipper, I agree that just removing the engine bases would be much better.

I suspect that the shuttle engine will be a pain to use for conventional rockets as the high gimbal will cause them to flip out. In addition the large engine bell would make placing it more difficult. I know it wouldn't work on my 1.25m lifter.

Shuttles seem much more forgiving with where you point them.

[Snark]

I suspect that the shuttle engine will be a pain to use for conventional rockets as the high gimbal will cause them to flip out.

...except that gimbal is trivially easy to reduce, either in flight or at design time in the VAB.

I'd feel a lot better about the Vector if, first, it filled a more general need than "space shuttle cosmetics", and, second, had some serious and not trivially avoidable disadvantage that made it a design challenge to use.

If it's just about space shuttle cosmetics, why not give us a short, light Mk3-to-2.5m structural adapter instead? That way you can use Mainsail cosmetically on shuttles, and the adapter would have other uses as well. Doesn't upset any game balance, and keeps with the KSP philosophy of Lego parts that have multiple uses.

[Alshain]

If it's just about space shuttle cosmetics, why not give us a short, light Mk3-to-2.5m structural adapter instead? That way you can use Mainsail cosmetically on shuttles, and the adapter would have other uses as well. Doesn't upset any game balance, and keeps with the KSP philosophy of Lego parts that have multiple uses.

A Mk3 adapter that housed 3 2.5m parts would be massive, it still would look cosmetically bad as it would extend beyond the edges of the shuttle. In fact I think it would just be worse than clipping them together.

How does having a new engine break the 'lego' nature of the game?

[Frozen_Heart]

...except that gimbal is trivially easy to reduce, either in flight or at design time in the VAB.

I'd feel a lot better about the Vector if, first, it filled a more general need than "space shuttle cosmetics", and, second, had some serious and not trivially avoidable disadvantage that made it a design challenge to use.

If it's just about space shuttle cosmetics, why not give us a short, light Mk3-to-2.5m structural adapter instead? That way you can use Mainsail cosmetically on shuttles, and the adapter would have other uses as well. Doesn't upset any game balance, and keeps with the KSP philosophy of Lego parts that have multiple uses.

Its more than cosmetics. Its high gimbal and high power is pretty much essential for a proper working space shuttle. At the moment we have to make do with putting huge quantities of reaction wheels on the things.

Clipping skipper together is much better than a Mk-3 to 3 2.5m adaptor would be. That part would be huge and much worse than the current solution.

The fact that an engine that allows a space shuttle to work breaks the game balance to badly shows that something is already odd with how the parts are balanced. The real thing didn't use magic engines.

[BudgetHedgehog]

"This new engine is OP, it makes the Mainsail obsolete etc etc!"

Where have I heard that before? Oh yes, back when 0.23.5 introduced the Mammoth, Twin Boar and Rhino. Do people still use the Mainsail? Yes. Because, while on paper, it's worse, but in practice, it's sometimes better.

If they make the Vector have a high cost (entry and unit), whack it in the last couple of tech tree tiers, no bottom attach node, I don't see a problem. Are you going to use something that costs 40k Starbucks on a 1.25m stack that, by it's very nature, won't be taking heavy loads to space? Chances are that engine alone will be 75% of the cost of the rocket (my current 2.5m LKO runner costs about 55k) and without mods, you're just going to be staging it away to be deleted - boom, 40k down the drain. In early career, you won't have access to it and in later career, money doesn't matter as much (but it's still important - why spend 40k on one engine when I could send a whole rocket to LKO for the same price?), and you still have the problem of it being just a terrible 1.25m engine - it's 3.75 tons and has a ridiculous thrust. You'll end up losing out on dV with the weight and likely won't be able to even launch a 5.0 TWR rocket (so even if you limit the thrust, you still have the dV loss). 1.25m stacks are usually light and having a massive, high power engine on the bottom does not work too well (because aerodynamics and CoM balancing). So, with the high cost, there's more incentive to return it and get a refund - say, while attached to the back of a Shuttle?

Ok, so put it on the bottom of 2.5m stacks. Well, it looks rubbish then and you're still running into the money barrier, expect it's about 40% of your rocket rather 70%. Plus, a not-insignificant amount of users play with FAR and having that sudden cross-section change will kill you in drag.

Sandbox, I don't care about balance - why not use a 3.75m tank with a Mainsail for lifting anything? Why bother trying to keep within restrictions when there are none? It's a sandbox - same deal with stuff like Unlimited Money, or All Weapons Unlocked or whatever; the gloves are off, it's a free for all - there is no balance when you remove most of the restrictions that balance things.

In short, there's nothing to worry about, the Mainsail will still be relevant. If it's not, then.. so? Don't use the Vector then. If, despite all the reasons given above, the Vector still comes out on top of literally every other engine, then harness the same self-limits that stop you from enabling Infinite Fuel and Hack Gravity and just don't use it. Or, if you want to use it, use it in a situation it's designed to be used - on the back of a Shuttle. People use the Mammoth and Rhino exactly the same way - either career balancing stops them from using it in place of others, or they use it because it fits the role or they don't care.

Goodness me, you'd think Squad had introduced a 100000 isp ion engine with the thrust of a Skipper with the amount of naysayers the Vector has..

(Edit: engine stats subject to change, of course. Also, down with tankbutts and a mk3 - 3x2.5m adapter would look awful. We already have a mk3 - 1x2.5m adapter, but I don't see a lot of them used on Shuttles - could it be the Mainsail hasn't got the thrust to lift a 40ton plane and the fuel required to get it to orbit but 3 of them do?)

Edited October 19, 2015 by ObsessedWithKSP

[Rath]

Engine gimbal tweakable are q thing in stock

[BudgetHedgehog]

Huh, fair enough. I thought it was mods.. *goes and checks* ah, it's the gimbal speed tweakable added.. Fair enough, that argument can be ignored. Other points still stand though.

[Rath]

Making it good, but incredibly expensive and bottom attach node wool have engine return vechicle worth it. This will make the amount of people who use shuttles bigger.

[Snark]

A Mk3 adapter that housed 3 2.5m parts would be massive, it still would look cosmetically bad as it would extend beyond the edges of the shuttle. In fact I think it would just be worse than clipping them together.

How does having a new engine break the 'lego' nature of the game?

Wait, making a shuttle work requires packing *three* Mainsails on the thing?! I don't fly shuttles and never wilk-- they're just not my cup of tea-- and from the earlier messages in the thread, I was understanding the problem as being "Three of the current 1.25m engines aren't enough and a Mainsail is ugly."

If making a shuttle work requires packing that kind of power in a Mk3 footprint, then I should probably just bow out of the conversation, since it's unlikely that my contributions would be intelligent ones. . It sounds like what's needed is essentially the moral equivalent of a Mammoth in a Mk3 form factor, yes?

As for Lego: I didn't say that it *breaks* it, just didn't seem to me to fit in with it as well as other parts. To me, a nicely Lego-like part is one that has a variety of uses, more than one special purpose. Such as how the Skipper fits nicely as either a 1st stage engine for medium sized ships, or a 2nd stage on top of a Mainsail. If the only good use for a Vector is on a space shuttle, that just seems kinda narrow to me, is all.

[Alshain]

Wait, making a shuttle work requires packing *three* Mainsails on the thing?! I don't fly shuttles and never wilk-- they're just not my cup of tea-- and from the earlier messages in the thread, I was understanding the problem as being "Three of the current 1.25m engines aren't enough and a Mainsail is ugly."

If making a shuttle work requires packing that kind of power in a Mk3 footprint, then I should probably just bow out of the conversation, since it's unlikely that my contributions would be intelligent ones. . It sounds like what's needed is essentially the moral equivalent of a Mammoth in a Mk3 form factor, yes?

As for Lego: I didn't say that it *breaks* it, just didn't seem to me to fit in with it as well as other parts. To me, a nicely Lego-like part is one that has a variety of uses, more than one special purpose. Such as how the Skipper fits nicely as either a 1st stage engine for medium sized ships, or a 2nd stage on top of a Mainsail. If the only good use for a Vector is on a space shuttle, that just seems kinda narrow to me, is all.

No, not Mainsails. Skippers.

One Mainsail would certainly be enough, but people like to build replicas based on real craft and the shuttle had 3 engines. Plus an adapter alone wouldn't be enough because you have to tilt the engine across the center of mass and then it just looks terrible anyway.

Edited October 19, 2015 by Alshain

[NathanKell]

The other solution, of course, is to not have LV-Ts balanced for career have the same stats in sandbox/end-of-career. They have 3/4 the Isp and 1/2 the TWR of late game engines, so no wonder seeing a late game engine in 1.25m formfactor is shocking.

[Snark]

The other solution, of course, is to not have LV-Ts balanced for career have the same stats in sandbox/end-of-career. They have 3/4 the Isp and 1/2 the TWR of late game engines, so no wonder seeing a late game engine in 1.25m formfactor is shocking.

The interesting thing is that the LV-T's stay relevant even in the late game. I use the Swivel heavily, even after I max out the tech tree, since it fits a nice size niche and is very flexible to design around. In general, I'm really impressed with how Squad has managed to keep most things relevant at various stages of the game.

[Guest]

I personally love it. It is almost like the stock alike parts expansions, but in stock.

[youkofoxy]

I do like some of the new models... but I do dislike some...

like the Whiplash, because is the "same" as the Goliath.

I would like a more "Rolls-Royce BR700" style

Aerospike...

well, where is the spike?

I mean:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/43/Non-truncated_toroidal_aerospike_nozzle.jpg

that's what I talking about.

serious, the aerospike... can you change that... would you? please.

also, I dislike the radial air intake, but I allways disliked that thing, and the Intake Fuselage... feels kind wrong to me.

the rest? is nice, quite nice...

[NWM]

The Mk1 cabin - I don't like it - those doors are always smaller then the helmets of the kerbonauts...

The MK3 ramp should be ended with Mk2 on the top for availability of constructing a fine tail, and use both rear and front...

[xub313]

I'm exited for the new Panther jet engine. There is a big gap between when you get the Wheesley and Wiplash engines in career mode.