Realism vs Stock

[C1DEAN]

I was just wondering which style of KSP gameplay the community prefers: stock or realistic . Personal, I like playing in Realism Overhaul because of the challenge. But with stock, you can go crazy and create truly kerbal machines.

What is you all's choice and why?

Edit: Sorry guys for any misunderstanding, I forgot the Overhaul part of the title I'll be making an edit to the title.

Edit: Just realized that I can't edit the title. I really should stop speed typing 

Edit: I just wanted to say that I'm not trying to see which style is superior to the other, but to see the pros and cons of each style. 

Edited March 29, 2016 by C1DEAN

[pipercarman]

Personally I prefer the stock parts as that is how I always have played. The realism mods are just to much effort for me.

[regex]

6 minutes ago, C1DEAN said:

I was just wondering which style of KSP gameplay the community prefers

The community itself has no preference, if these forums are any indication.

As for me, I prefer Realism Overhaul.

[Kerbin vonKerbal]

It depends on my mood. Some days I want to make an SLS replica and go to Mars or start a 1950's era career and put time and effort into a basic Sounding Rocket, and some days I want to make Whackjob-esque type ships that are just ridiculous but somehow work. 

[Renegrade]

My own preference is in a philosophy I call "non-#lolfake".   Excessive realism is detrimental (the single-precision engine can barely handle the tiny stock system, let alone something real sized, for example) to gameplay, but on the other hand, excessive fakeness is harmful too.

To illustrate the stages of realism, consider the reaction wheels:

> Current reaction wheels are #lolfake - they are a hundred to a thousand times stronger than real devices, and do not suffer from saturation (nor gimbal lock).  This is undesirable as being way too FAKE.  Also their overpoweredness let people cheese their way past design issues and such.

> Nerfed down reaction wheels with lower strength but not modelling saturation or lock is acceptable realism to me.  You'll see people use RCS (just like real craft) to overcome the weakness.

> Having saturation and lock on the wheels is excessive realism.  The middle case gets the same feeling across at a much lower cost in terms of computational complexity and human/interface overhead (although it is cool that mods exist to model such things).

So when I complain that something is #lolfake, this is what I mean.

[OhioBob]

So far I've played almost exclusively stock.

I also have an install with Real Solar System, but I've only briefly puttered around with it.  One of these days I'll get serious about it.

[panzer1b]

I personally think that the stage where KSP is at is perfect for me (stock that is).

Its a healthy mix of sci-fi, stupidity, and absurdity but with plausible and arguable realistic physics at the core.  Given that i view it as a sci-fi game though, makes me perfectly fine with stuff being not realistic, and honestly realism for the sake of realism was never a very fun concept for me as it puts in too much limits.  Challenges are fun and all, but i dont exactly enjoy trying to recreate reality, and prefer to build stuff like capital ships, starfighter, tanks, and the occasional non military contraption.  Still, i really like that the way stuff behaves in game is akin to reality, and while i used to enjoy such things as warp drives, i actually enjoy the challenge of getting where i need to get while using stock propulsion (or mods that roughly have similar performance characteristics to stock, so no warp drives or dark matter reactors).  Just a perfect balance between my sci-fi tastes and realism.

Now dont get me wrong, i have tried RSS and i did enjoy it initially (challenging and you really need to engineer everything like crazy), but it quickly became tiring since you could not do much beyond LEO.  Id rather fight massive battles on explore other planets, make spacecraft and stations that can go beyond kerbin then have to constantly overengineer every single launcher just to get a measly satelite or other payload into orbit of the same planet every single time.  Was fun initially, but i find it too limiting and i really enjoy doing stuff out there more then focusing on launching something from kerbin.  Heck, ive gotten to the point where i nolonger even care about anything on kerbin itself or in kerbin orbit, its either mun/minmus for organized capital ship battles with multiple fleets, or other planets if its a more compact mission that has at most 2-3 separate ships, ill send it outside of kerbin's SOI, and if i amass enough ships out there then i have massive battles beyond mun/minmus, but usually just small skrimishes.

[r4pt0r]

Im 100% certain I speak for everyone when I say the community prefers to play entirely stock, and with no mods. Not even one that changes the in-game font.

Yeah, without a doubt.

Edited March 28, 2016 by r4pt0r

[Armisael]

I don't think it's accurate to conflate challenge and realism. I spend about half my time in a 64k playthrough using stock parts, which I personally find extremely challenging, but it is by no means realistic. Hell, one time I mounted heatshields radially to act as fins during an aerocapture - nonsense in the real world, but a reasonably effective solution in scaled KSP.

Edited March 29, 2016 by Armisael

[Kerbart]

3 minutes ago, r4pt0r said:

Im 100% certain I speak for everyone when I say the community prefers to play entirely stock, and with no mods.

Yeah, without a doubt.

Sir, you are absolutely correct. I assume of course, that with that you mean that “stock” would include the mods that I usually play with and none of those filthy heretic mods those troglodytes like to ruin their game with (and that I for obvious reasons do not install).

[Skorpychan]

KSP is hard enough as it is. If I wanted 'real', I'd go play Orbiter instead.

I like the slightly cartoony nature of KSP, and having a wide margin of error on stuff. But when it comes right down to it, it's a game. I don't want it to feel like work.

[Triop]

Stock, for me Kerbals and "realism" don't go together... 

[Cornholio]

I play realism that adds more content to the game like LS and RT.  I personally don't really see a point to having proportionately correct planets.  To me that just puts extreme limits on the amount of solar system that you can explore or colonize. 

[Curveball Anders]

stock

[Supahbrun]

Realism. It is very challenging, hard, stressful, but when you actually do a mission, you keep proud of yourself for a long time

[Tourist]

"Realism" is a pretty loaded word in this context, in that without definition it doesn't really mean anything.

Is stock KSP realistic? Yes, it simulates physical rules (although simplified) and gives you tools analogous to those that exist in the real world to work with those rules. Concepts such as the rocket equation, Holman transfers and gravity assists work in a similar way in which they work in the real world. Spaceships can't do what they can in unrealistic sci-fi, such as FTL travel, dog-fighting in a WWII fashion, and ships stopping if the engines are not burning.  

Is stock KSP realistic? No. The solar system is tiny, no N-body physics, cartoony approach, no life support, signal delay, reentry heat is not deadly enough, rockets can be built and launched instantly. 

So, I guess my answer is, I like to play stock, realistically.  

Edited March 28, 2016 by Tourist

[Red Iron Crown]

Both.

I play RO/RSS for Serious Business Rocketry and stock(ish) for a simpler, more playful style. They're so different that they're close to being separate games, sometimes I'm in the mood for one and sometimes the other.

[FullMetalMachinist]

17 minutes ago, Red Iron Crown said:

Both.

I play RO/RSS for Serious Business Rocketry and stock(ish) for a simpler, more playful style. They're so different that they're close to being separate games, sometimes I'm in the mood for one and sometimes the other.

Sounds suspiciously like the "business in the front, party in the back" philosophy of mullets.... You rock a mullet, don't you!? 

Getting back on track, I prefer RSS/RO myself. As others have said, it's more complicated, but the payoff is that much more rewarding. 

[Kllrtofu]

Good question!

Personally I like both. I play RSS/RO because of the challenge and my love for the history of space flight. But I also play other installs; one with a focus on planes (FAR etc modded), and a more or less stock very Kerbalesque install.

Other than many stock lovers though, I don't really like to play only stock. I just have to 'augment' it with some visual (EVE etc) mods and some quality of life stuff at least. Also Ven's Stock Revamp is an absolute must for me nowadays. And some proper interstaging and fairing mods. To make something kerbally is cool, but gaffer taping stuff to the side of a rocket will always be too much for me. I understand it is the character of the stock game and while I've loved it at first I need some realism at least. The biggest problem I have with stock play vs RSS is the realfuels section. I find it difficult to return to 'liquid fuel + OX' after playing RSS.

[Wallygator]

2 hours ago, r4pt0r said:

Im 100% certain I speak for everyone when I say the community prefers to play entirely stock, and with no mods. Not even one that changes the in-game font.

Yeah, without a doubt.

Irony FTW

yup sure. Why not. In the meantime I'll enjoy this RO/RSS install... 

[Draco T stand-up guy]

What I'd like is the stock ability to turn realism on or off as I choose per game. That way I'd be able to learn to play in the non-real and progress to real. Or, if I had kids, I could have them play the non-real while I play real and also use it to teach them the difference.

[regex]

10 minutes ago, Draco T stand-up guy said:

What I'd like is the stock ability to turn realism on or off as I choose per game. That way I'd be able to learn to play in the non-real and progress to real. Or, if I had kids, I could have them play the non-real while I play real and also use it to teach them the difference.

Just make multiple installs.  Not like copying the entirety of the KSP directory is that hard...  I have the base Steam install for safe updates, a stock install for challenges/proving my points, and my main RO/RSS install.

[Kerano]

Stock all the way. The 10x scaled down solar system is large enough to give you a good idea of the mechanics without requiring tediously long burns. Plus the planets and moons are cuter this way.

[Draco T stand-up guy]

Just now, regex said:

Just make multiple installs.  Not like copying the entirety of the KSP directory is that hard...  I have the base Steam install for safe updates, a stock install for challenges/proving my points, and my main RO/RSS install.

But why would I want to go to that effort when it could easily be a part of the stock install?

[C1DEAN]

3 hours ago, r4pt0r said:

Im 100% certain I speak for everyone when I say the community prefers to play entirely stock, and with no mods. Not even one that changes the in-game font.

Yeah, without a doubt.

Well yeah, I probably should have chosen my wording more carefully when I said Community.

1 hour ago, Draco T stand-up guy said:

What I'd like is the stock ability to turn realism on or off as I choose per game. That way I'd be able to learn to play in the non-real and progress to real. Or, if I had kids, I could have them play the non-real while I play real and also use it to teach them the difference.

Yeah, that feature would be kind of cool. It probably would take code a little more complex than the regular game though

3 hours ago, OhioBob said:

So far I've played almost exclusively stock.

I also have an install with Real Solar System, but I've only briefly puttered around with it.  One of these days I'll get serious about it.

I really think you would enjoy playing through Real Soar System even without RO(although it greatly enhances the experience).

Of course, I would that make that claim assuming that you've played stock for a while

55 minutes ago, Kerano said:

Stock all the way. The 10x scaled down solar system is large enough to give you a good idea of the mechanics without requiring tediously long burns. Plus the planets and moons are cuter this way.

1

I've never had a chance to actually play with that mod. Even though the burns might be a lot longer in Stock or Real Solar System, the achievement feels much greater .