All-Stock Elitism?

[OrbitalBuzzsaw]

I'm one of those people for who a "stock" game has about 5 mods in it. I see all of these threads, especially in the Spacecraft Exchange, with (STOCK!) in the title, and I think "why?! what's wrong with mods, which make the game better!?" I understand that some people don't want things like hyperdrives or whatever, but most modders at least try to balance their mods to stock standards. We should be aware of all-stock elitism where all-stock players think they're "better" than modded players, even the ones who play with RemoteTech and/or RO and the like. Who thinks this is a problem? Why does it exist? How can we stop it without being rude?

Pinging @Van Disaster

Edited December 17, 2016 by OrbitalBuzzsaw

[StarStreak2109]

Everybody should play this game as he or she likes it best. For me the motto is "mod it till it crashes!", another one might prefer playing "vanilla-style". That's alright. What is by all means definitely not alright is when I go to the "vanilla-style" player and tell him that playing without mod "xyz" is playing it wrong and that this player is just stupid for not using mods (or the other way around!).

To make a long story short, my way is better as are all other ways. For me anyways. Another player thinks the same of his way of playing. So let's accept the wonderful diversity that is Kerbal Space Program and be tolerant and discuss what makes it different for each and everyone. Let's not form factions who believe their way of playing is the ultima ratio!!!

Edited December 17, 2016 by StarStreak2109

[Gaarst]

This is a thing? Never noticed in 2.5 years on the forums.

[SkyHook]

I am a modaholic. I need about 10-20 mods to have any serious playthrough in a given save. For me, mods add so much to the experience because they provide elegant, useful extensions to the game. I will say this though: stock playthroughs really make you think outside the box. Think about what stock lacks: Robotics, life support,  autopilot, delta-v readouts, etc. Not having these things forces you to have a deeper and more creative interface with the game.

I prefer elegant solutions to many of these issues, and so I use mods, but streamers like EJ_SA have showed me that a stock playthrough requires a lot of imagination and ingenuity. For me, the fun of a playthrough is NOT  for example figuring out how to shroud a payload for launch (before fairings were stock) or how to get cargo bays and doors (before they were in the game), but actually developing the payloads, bases, etc.  and seeing them come to fruition. In short, I understand the pride but it's akin to using a toy robotic arm to drive to work..you did it but there's a much simpler way to do it.

[Guest]

There are so many stock craft because that way more people can download it without problems.

[worir4]

Just play the game how you like and don't bother about how others like to play. To each their own. No way is 'best'.

Edited December 17, 2016 by worir4

[septemberWaves]

Honestly it can be a pain when people start being genuinely rude about using mods, but for the most part it seems to just be general light-hearted banter like the usual "MechJeb is cheating!" "so do you think NASA cheats by using autopilots" sort of thing.

In any case, I'm someone who likes aesthetics in a design. Mods can often make the game look a whole lot better, but at the same time it's incredibly impressive when people achieve similar levels of detail by using stock parts in extraordinarily unique ways to acquire a particular look (see literally anything made by Cupcake for examples of what I'm talking about here...). There's a pretty good balance overall between stock and modded games.

Edited December 17, 2016 by eloquentJane

[HoloYolo]

It's when people complain about my/others uses of mods it's problem. Rarely it happens but it's still a thing, but not a major problem.

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

I have made posted many craft with (stock) or similar in their title, because the old forum software had predefined [STOCK] and [MOD] tags for threads in the spacecraft exchange, so I put them on both out of habit, and because it lets someone who is looking for a craft to know whether they will have to install mods to load it.  I personally run about 10-20 mods, mostly aesthetic, gameplay enhancing, or editor modifying with maybe one or two parts mods. 

Most people who post craft to the spacecraft exchange will post craft with only stock parts, for two reasons:

1. With stock parts, anyone can use the craft with a minimum of fuss.
2. It creates a challenge by being limited in what parts you have.

I don't feel like anyone who posts a stock craft to the exchange is trying to be elitist, rather, that they are trying to clearly show what kind of craft they have.  

[Sharpy]

@Aperture Science has the first point, the simple and common one.

The other - Stock puts certain heavy limitations. There are no hinges or bearings. There are no electric propellers, or LF-powered propellers for that matter. There are no pressure pistons. There are no huge boat parts. Doing all these things in stock is damn difficult. It's a special challenge, field strip a gun vs field strip a gun, blindfolded. Little point to it, but impressive.

And as for challenges, there has to be a way to level the field. Certain mods can make the game waaaay easy. Where do you draw the line? What kind of mods can break the game? Whitelist? Blacklist? How do you decide what to blacklist? Say, you're making a spaceplane related challenge, say, SSTO with as much delta-V left as possible in LKO. You allow "airplane parts mods". Of course OPT provides some awesome airplane parts, beautiful silhouette, balanced parameters... but it also provides "Dark Drive", ISp 3000, Thrust around 1000, unaffected by air pressure. Everyone else gets 5-10km/s extra, and these with OPT dark drive come up with 20-30km/s.

Unfortunately that means unilaterally banning all part mods.

Edited December 17, 2016 by Sharpy

[septemberWaves]

@Sharpy There are also no alternative textures. Which often makes nice-looking rockets significantly more challenging to create if, like me, you like variety.

[Superfluous J]

For me, the biggest part is if you have an all-stock craft, it will work with most every mod out there. If you have a modded craft, it won't work unless you have those exact specific mods installed.

[Wjolcz]

Why on Earth should I feel worse only because I have a few mods that actually fix the game and make it playable?

Edited December 18, 2016 by Veeltch

[idamoofus]

This community is easily the most inviting and friendly. Putting users into artificial camps is going to hurt that very badly. Let's let everyone play the game the specific way they want, without trying to call attention to such things that aren't really a problem right now.

[kapteenipirk]

I was just thinking about this very subject today.

 

Before joining the forums, and even at the start of my craft posting "career", i used almost nothing but mods, because i taught it brought a whole new level of variety and fun to the game.

Nowadays tough, mods are more of an assistant/supplement.

Yes, it was the forums that tipped me over to the more "all stock" side of business. I didn't do that change because i wanted more rep (Just like Tails, i couldn't care less about rep), i just did it to prove myself and others that i can do it too.

And the main reason why i'm still doing it this way, is to make my crafts more sharable.

 

 

But yea, I think it is wrong for people to get more rep just because their going 100% stock.

But hey, that's just how i feel. We all have our own opinions and ways to play this game, and i respect and understand that.

If you want to do it the hard way and use stock parts to create wonderful shapes and mechanical solutions (or whatever really), rather than using mods to help you out. then go for it.

The most important thing is that your enjoying it .

 

But as far as stock elitism goes, rep definitely seems to gravitates more toward the stock side, but it's not as bad as it could be.

[katateochi]

I don't think it's a problem, they are just different approaches to the game.  We've got stock purists and mod fanatics but I don't think that we ever get particularly tribal about it.

I started out as a mod fanatic but I've taken to being more of a stock player at least where parts are concerned. The main reason for this is that stock craft survive updates much better than heavily modded ones.  I still love mods and use lots of visual mods, contract mods and mods which add functionality or aesthetics to craft without adding mod parts (indicator lights as an example).  If I am going to use mod parts then I tend to build the core of the craft out of stock parts and then add easily removable mod parts (ie DMagic science parts), so that I can have a pure stock version that I can be fairly certain will work in the next KSP version (and then once the mods catch up I can re add the mod parts).  

I think the reason for making a point of saying a craft is Stock is to say a) this craft will work in any KSP setup and b) it will probably continue to work in future versions.  Stock craft can also be appreciated by everyone, because we all know what the stock parts do, whereas with mod craft not everyone will know what that particular mod part does and so can't appreciate just how cool that craft is. So it's simply that mod craft will have a smaller subset of users who know the mod and appreciate what it does. Hence why stock craft appear to get more attention.

 

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

Heck, I'm known for making stock craft, but I have a RO install too with like 70 mods and no remaining unmodified stock parts.

[Just Jim]

Seriously, this is a problem??? 

[Majorjim!]

2 hours ago, OrbitalBuzzsaw said:

Why does it exist?

It doesn't.

 

1 hour ago, Mad Rocket Scientist said:

I don't feel like anyone who posts a stock craft to the exchange is trying to be elitist, rather, that they are trying to clearly show what kind of craft they have.  

Agreed.

17 minutes ago, Veeltch said:

Why on Earth should I feel worse only because I have a few mods that actually fix the game and make it playable?

You shouldn't.

 

 

 

 

Edited December 18, 2016 by Majorjim!

[DoctorDavinci]

Most of what I create is stock with few exceptions

I do this because I like the challenge of making something I design with the game as it stands when working on my own personal challenges

147 satellites to LKO from a single launch in stock was one of my most impressive and the Dres love missions I did were epic (see spoiler below)

Spoiler

 

As for what sort of craft gets the most attention, couldn't care less myself as this forum family that we are all a part of is diverse in their tastes and how they play the game ... we are all part of the KSP family so what does it matter that we all play in a different way?

[Jestersage]

Stock elitism is needed to be honest. If we don't have one then, we should have one now.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Jestersage said:

Stock elitism is needed to be honest. If we don't have one then, we should have one now.

#StockMasterrace

[Jestersage]

12 minutes ago, Aperture Science said:

#StockMasterrace

Going to make that my signature. Now we just need a logo.

[ottothesilent]

7 minutes ago, Jestersage said:

Going to make that my signature. Now we just need a logo.

Perhaps something resembling a pinwheel, with the arms bent at 90 degrees, and a man shouting vagaries in German?

[Tex]

Maybe I haven't been looking too closely, but anything regarding superiority of stock over modded or vice-versa is superfluous. I've used mods before, and technically I still have one or two installed, though I hardly make use of the parts if at all. For the most part, I do consider myself a stock purist because I don't use modded parts to enhance the functionality of my crafts. Maybe KER to do the math for me.

I think that it should be looked at as a matter of common sense and basic decency- there is simply no reason to be negative to another person simply because of their choice to use mods. It is the exact same thing as someone's choice of drink or clothes. People should enjoy the things they enjoy, and if they reference another person's/player's/forumgoer's choices, it should be constructive rather than negative.