Stock Parts

[ash73]

The only thing I'm not keen on is the drab grey fuel tanks (I like the orange one). We need some black and white tanks, they were painted that way by NASA for a reason so external cameras could pick up the rocket orientation from the patterns, which is also useful when controlling a craft in the third person!

[Technical Ben]

Yes, the mods offer some really nice aesthetics... but I also like these:

and

[Eric S]

Sometimes I'm in the mood for a clean craft that looks like something NASA, ESA, etc. would launch. Sometimes I want that repurposed stock feel. Heck, before I heard that the devs don't plan on heat shields when dealing with reentry heat, I wanted the first inflatable heat shield to look like a kid's inflatable wading pool, duct taped to the end of the craft. I get both views, and even appreciate both.

The same goes for mods vs stock on functionality. Unless I'm specifically looking at doing something stock, I don't shy away from mods that add balanced parts or new functionality. Which isn't to say that I don't also enjoy doing a stock-only challenge, as sometimes it takes more imagination.

TLDR: If you're having fun and not interfering with other people's fun, you're doing it right.

[Caelib]

I, too, prefer the sleek style of KW Rocketry. I think the stock parts that are there are GOOD, but they lack the variety offered by the previously mentioned mod. I usually build my payload from purely stock parts and launch with KW Rocketry.

[Bothersome]

Stock parts offer advantages. For one, they are never outdated unless the game itself drastically changes. They can be shared with impunity. They and their limitations are well-known, and when someone showcases a "stock" craft, you immediately know what sort of design challenges it implies. I find that I look at the creations made with the various spaceplane and rocket part packs, and I don't know the first thing about what kind of design achievement they actually represent. Not to mention the flight-computer-plugin-that-shall-not-be-named and its effect in devaluing achievements in precise flying by hand.

Plus you can't report bugs if you aren't flying stock, and KSP being in alpha state I find that a decent incentive.

I approve of this message. Nothing else needs be added.

[air805ronin]

I have installed 4 mods thus far:

mechjeb: installed for about 30 minutes. Did two flights. Have never desired to really use it again.

flight engineer: used it for the last 3 updates to get information on my ships, mainly the stats chip.

orbital construction: back before docking I used this for about 5 days, when the mod let a delivery happen within a few kilometers of distance. Was really cool and I think a valid idea for being integrated into the game. Basically you haul parts and fuel up to a ship or space station, then you can construct an item in the VAB and teleport it to that space station. With some real polish it could be a cool tech unlock in career. Being able to build things in orbit without paying the gravity well cost to launch it whole, you can focus on some interesting designs.

ISA Map mod: Totally used this from 1.5 to 1.9 as a way to give purpose to my flights.

Verdict: I simply prefer stock right now. I enjoy the piloting. I like the stock parts. i enjoy the game and find it relaxing. I do not look down on anyone who uses mods. To each their own.

[littlebattler]

I think stock parts have the best aesthetics overall. Their style simply hits that kerbal feel. Not the sleekest nor the most beautiful, and at times can even look like a piece of junk tearing at its seams. But that's the point. Your spacecraft may be a piece of flying junk, but there's nothing to stop it from being a well made, well balanced, good looking piece of junk. I really wish, however, for the devs to provide bigger wings...

Besides, stock crafts are much easier to share. Every single person who updates their game will be able to use it. That's why I stick to stock.

Edited July 30, 2013 by littlebattler

[Amphiprion]

@ Teodzero- By disagreeing with everything else in my post except for my comment on stock being "uglier" than popular mods, you are then saying that:

1.KW rocketry's part parameters are not realistic and are OP making the game easier

2. mods don't add fun to the game

3. people don't think they are pro by using only stock

4. planes look prettier using stock.

Which I would have to double disagree with you on and say you don't know what you are talking about. Thank you for your opinion.

@ Regex, you have vaild point there, like Sean, But not enough to make my mod fever stop.

@bogpad, I agree with everything you said there, I'm not trying to come across as snobby, I'm just expressing the feeling I get, which is that people think using stock is harder/Pro compared to realistic mods like KW, This feeling could be misplaced, I have no problem with people using stock..

@Dchruchill, Mod pack parts don't fit with stock? what have you been smoking? must be good.

@Sapphire- you and I are on the same page.

@ Zarakon- with regards to your comments on the applications of imaginative stock part use age, I agree with you, it Is always nice to use a part to fill a purpose that It was not built for, but with moar parts, you can do more of that no?

+ If the parts list is getting too long for some people, they should have sub menu's in structural/pods/propulsion for each manufacturing division. would be cool and would help people that struggle with that or don't want to be paging through heaps of choices to find the parts they need.

.....................

Thank the pope for B-9.

That is All.

[Gus]

Well, the stock parts do have a bit of a Rube Goldberg feel.

[tssn1611]

I started getting into the mods around 0.19. Never anything too crazy, Kerbal Engineer Redux and KW Rocketry were my two most-used. I might download a few for the 0.21 update, maybe try NovaPunch and Quantum Struts. KW Rocketry produced some really nice looking crafts, but it tended to clutter up my parts list, and I already click around aimlessly when looking for parts enough with just the stock ones. (I understand NovaPunch is even worse than KW Rocketry from that perspective. I'll have to be choosy with the parts I use.) And all those things that Sean Mirrsen said, too.

Geez, I sound like I'm sampling recreational drugs ...

[littlebattler]

Another thing: B9 is amazing, but only when you use it on its own. Mixing it up with stock parts tend to result in less than optimal results as the two styles do not exactly mix. The reason I mostly stick to stock is that B9 does not have that many 1m parts to play with.

[Max Grant]

I have stayed stock the last two releases for a couple of reasons.

1. The stock parts are just better now. I used to get mods to do things I wanted, that stock parts couldn't. Mostly rovers.

2. Mods always cause performance issues. I have yet to use a mod that I didn't see slowing things down. That's the breaks in a beta version of the game.

3. The challenge of doing all this with the stock parts pleases me. I like solving problems, which is why I play this game. It's kind of like having a space lego set (like I used to get as a kid) that actually flies.

I have been working on finding the least possible amount of ship for the most use. The newest stock parts (especially all those squee little engines and tanks) are so cool.

Eventually I may find mods that interest me again.

One thing I would like to see for the rover wheels is cruise control. It is no fun trying to keep one of these rovers from flying down a hill at 14 meters per second . . . for half an hour.

[Swifty]

I love mods it's the only thing that's kept me playing ksp for so long. However, I do need to be a bit more picky about which mods I use as I end up with a lot of redundant parts that all do the same thing with the same performance and just look a little different.

[electricsheep]

Stock parts offer advantages. For one, they are never outdated unless the game itself drastically changes. ...

When .20 came out I had at least ten groups of mod parts and discovered I couldn't play the game for days (weeks in some cases) because of the lag in getting updates. I love those mod'ers and admire all the work they put in, but this is a hobby and I can't fault them for taking some time. So for now I'm mostly stock. Kethane for the huge functionality addition is one. The other is that "flight-computer-plugin-that-shall-not-be-named" because I'm hopelesly uncoordinated and could never have docked once without it (oh yes I tried, and tried, and ... ).

As for the aesthetics, I like my fat orange rockets. They look all Kerbaly to me.

[Guest]

@ Regex, you have vaild point there, like Sean, But not enough to make my mod fever stop.

Since when was this a "convince Amphiprion to stop using mod parts" thread? Looks like any old opinion thread to me. Are you feeling less "pro" than me or are you trying to stir up drama?

[Amphiprion]

Since when was this a "convince Amphiprion to stop using mod parts" thread? Looks like any old opinion thread to me. Are you feeling less "pro" than me or are you trying to stir up drama?

True..... apologies...

[SkyRender]

Pretty much the only mods that interest me now are the ones that add extra functionality to the game and expand what you can actually do during missions (Kethane, KAS), or that provide quick reference information in the VAB/SPH that saves me the trouble of hand-calculating delta-V or re-building the same launch stage yet again (Kerbal Engineer Redux, Subassembly Manager).

[katateochi]

I'm a fanatical mod user, I run with a custom selection of parts from B9, KW, NovaP, Kethane, KAS, DR, KSPX, RemoteTech, TAC and several others (including that infamous flight comp).

For me mods to do 3 things; help reduce part count, enable more creative designs and add challenges.

Those like KW, Nova, KSPX enable more elegant looking craft and a reduced part count (the latter being extremely important), but they don't give you specific advantages over stock as they conform to stock balancing. Those like DR (or rather its current incarnation) and KAS make for more creative designs, and mods like remote tech (one of my fav mods) really add major challenges.

Do mods make the game easier? Well sure there are some that have overpowered engines and tanks that pack way more fuel than their weight would suggest, so those would make the game easier, but those aren't my kinda mod. I think, and this is just my opinion, that the good mods (by which I mean well balanced ones) actually make the game harder. You are liberated from a part count burden in the LV and so you try for more intricate and complex designs for the payload. Making a functional craft that makes good use of DR can be a Major pain, but when it works is so very rewarding.

I made two versions of an Apollo style craft, one 100% stock, the other with mods (to make the LV look more like the Saturn V and have a folding rover). The stock took me a couple days to make, the mod version took me well over a week, it was MUCH harder building the mod version.

Right now I'm sending probes to Mun, I could do it with stock and it would be simple, but because of remote tech I have to first set up coms satellites and make sure they are in the right place first. I've lost several probes because I lost contact with them when my satellites moved behind Kerbin at just the wrong moment, so I have to re-think my sat net and send manned missions to re-position the satellites. It's made a simple Mun probe mission many times more tricky and much more fun!

Its just my opinion but effective use of mods really add extra challenges to the game, but you can abuse mods and make the game easier, its up to you which mod and how you use them. For sure mods have their downside, too many and the game crashes with monotonous regularity, they introduce more bugs, they can break after some updates and some get abandoned by their developers. But all in all I'd rather run with a good selection of well balanced and creative mods than just play pure stock.

[Sunshine]

I hope this doesn't escalate like some MJ/no MJ threads xD

Stock parts? Don't like the most of them.

First thing I do after an KSP update is to check which mods are still compatible. If my "must haves" (KW, MJ, ISA, Remote Tech, ...) are still "go for launch", I cut & paste all stock parts I dislike in a backup folder for 2 reasons.

1. More parts = more loading time

2. They clutter the parts library

If my must haves are no go for launch, I sit down in a corner and move back and forth like a mental, humming songs from my childhood... and hope it will be quick until everything is up to date.

Stock parts I do use are the Probe cores (they are beautiful and handy), solar arrays, batteries, trusses and stuff like that. I never need the engines and tanks, and I kill 100% of the plane parts - since I only build rockets (for exactly the reason OP mentioned... stock planes look...well... not well (in my opinion) )

Cool thing is, KSP let's you play the way you want. I just wish people would understand and respect that more often, especially when it comes to mech jeb for example. The uncountable pages of hate (and stupidity) being exchanges by MJ lovers and haters are a prime example of "how to waste precious life time".

[BubbaWilkins]

I'm a fanatical mod user, I run with a custom selection of parts from B9, KW, NovaP, Kethane, KAS, DR, KSPX, RemoteTech, TAC and several others (including that infamous flight comp).

For me mods to do 3 things; help reduce part count, enable more creative designs and add challenges. *snip* .

Agreed. Deadly Reentry and FAR make the game far more difficult than stock. B9, Firespitter, KSPX, Kethane, ISA Mapsat, TTwheels, RollKage, Treads, etc are all relatively well balanced against stock.

For those graphical thinkers....because the following are impossible to build or operate stock.

[Amphiprion]

@Katateochi Thank you for adding the Lowering part count point, I missed that one.

I too get much lower Part count ships with mods.. more utility for moar frame rates? yes plz

Edited July 31, 2013 by Amphiprion

[DChurchill]

@Dchruchill, Mod pack parts don't fit with stock? what have you been smoking? must be good.

I'm not saying that they don't click together, I'm saying that thematically they don't fit. Or are you saying my opinion is invalid because I don't agree with you? They don't look like the stock parts, generally. At least the ones I've looked at. Have I looked at them all? No, and I'm not going to. And I'm not interested in a bunch of clutter in the VAB with 5 parts that all basically do the same thing.

Are you looking for some validation of your desire to play with modded parts? You're not going to get it from me, because how you play this game doesn't matter to me at all. You have a right to your opinion, but your agreement with my playstyle is irrelevant. Play how you want, I don't care. I certainly don't think the way I play is the "proper" way to play. I don't think I've ever tried to say how someone else plays this game is somehow invalid.

I honestly am bewildered at how much "you don't play KSP right" there is. Why does anyone care?

Edited July 31, 2013 by DChurchill

[HeadHunter67]

I cut & paste all stock parts I dislike in a backup folder for 2 reasons.

1. More parts = more loading time

2. They clutter the parts library

I have to get around to doing this. I wish there was a plugin or some other means to delete parts within the game - rather than going into the game, looking over the whole list, noting which ones I want gone, exiting the game, deleting the parts from the directory, rinse and repeat...

[Guest]

Agreed. Deadly Reentry and FAR make the game far more difficult than stock.

I disagree with regards to FAR; I found it incredibly easy to get my payloads into orbit when using that mod, even with the addition of the Project Arcturus Thrust Corrector (which corrects engines to alter TWR by atmospheric density rather than fuel consumption). Maybe I just naturally make aerodynamic rockets...

Aside from DE and PATC, I haven't found any mods that really add more difficulty as opposed to complexity, which is why I haven't reinstalled a lot of the mods I had tried in 0.20 (they're not updated yet either).

[DChurchill]

I have to get around to doing this. I wish there was a plugin or some other means to delete parts within the game - rather than going into the game, looking over the whole list, noting which ones I want gone, exiting the game, deleting the parts from the directory, rinse and repeat...

Yes, please.