Defunct Parts

[Tiron]

I think the main point of this thread is that a rebalancing is in order. Parts have been added over time and without a hard-set rule for determining stats. Since Squad went through all the trouble to model these parts, it would be nice if each part had a niche that it could fill. This will be much more important with the release of career mode (this game will not remain strictly a sandbox forever, or for much longer based on the dev's latest pushes).

For example, engine clusters outperform some of the bigger engines. This encourages higher part-counts, which the game does not like at all. Every part (especially nonstructural parts) should be pareto-optimal for some specific situation (ie the Ant engine gives the highest dV for very light vessels despite possessing abysmal ISP and TWR).

Almost all of the parts ARE optimal for some situation or another, dependent on what the player is going for. Some of them are pretty niche, but there's nearly ALWAYS something they're better at than another part.

For example: the Cylindrified RCS tank has the same dry weight as the Size 1 inline tank with 50% higher Monopropellant capacity. The Cylindrified weighs more total because of the greater amount of fuel it starts with. It's also hard to mount just one of the Cylindrified ones without unbalancing your rocket to some degree, so the inline has some merit for overall weight savings, at the cost of a worse mass fraction(monoprop wise, anyway).

One thing to keep in mind is that the parts aren't INTENDED to be balanced for Sandbox play, they're intended to be balanced for Career mode play. With no career mode in yet, some of them are bound to be less useful than others. But when the more useful part is farther up the tech tree, or costs too much, those 'lesser' parts will look a whole lot more attractive.

Also, bear in mind that the current SAS system is still in testing in many ways (C7 is looking at doing more adjustments on it now he's back), and some of the currently useless SAS parts are probably going to regain a point in the future. Right now, with all the problems the new SAS has, getting those fixed is taking precedence.

So yeah, I bet you could name just about any set of parts where one seems to be superior to the other, and I could name some thing the 'inferior' one is actually better at. It might only be cosmetic or reducing part count or something, but hey, those things matter to some people. Except for the Inline Advanced Stabilizer and Avionics Package, which probably will get fixed at some point in the future, and the AV-T1 fin, which I suspect will probably initially be the only available fin in career mode (otherwise it WILL be useless even then, unless it's made cheaper than the Tail Fin).

Edited August 20, 2013 by Tiron

[Giggleplex777]

No, the avionics provides no torque whatsoever. The avionics is just a SAS flight computer (which all command pods and probe cores have already pre-installed since 0.21).

The ladder's heat sink ability is more of a game bug rather than an actual legitimate use of what it's meant for. The pretend drill is nice, but it's still a pretend aesthetic feature that has nothing to do with the ladder's actual intended use.

Also, your rocket would be able to go much higher if you replace the radial engines with other engines that provide higher TWR, higher ISP and with less fuel.

I don't really want to argue, but...

1) I wasn't talking about reaction wheel torque, I was talking about it might make SAS more responsive.

2) It's not about what they're intended to be used for, it's about what they can be used for. (i.e. Mublin using engines as fairings for his rockets)

3) It's there for the looks, as it allows you to make powerful and good looking 1m engine clusters.

Edited August 20, 2013 by Giggleplex777