MAX Parts Required to Accomplish Most In Game Goals ?

[Dichotomy]

Howdie All

First full disclosure : I am a completely new player to KSP. I only joined the forums yesterday and for all intent and purposes this is my first real post.

I was hoping that some of the KSP veterans (actually any non-newb will do ) would not mind answering a couple of questions I had regarding the game and performance.

Essentially I would like to know if my computer has the capacity to handle the full KSP experience ?

Now I have read the other threads about processors and performance for KSP, and have come away with the following : KSP is CPU limited (not surprising really), not threaded, supports only software PhysX and is most heavily influenced by part count.

So what I would like to know is what sort of part counts are needed to accomplish "most" things within the game. For my own playstyle this would mean the following :

1. Being able to reach every planet/moon/sun in the game.

2. Being able to land and "take off" from every planet in the game. (Carrying/Deploying whatever scientific equipment/rover/etc is required)

3. Being able to build a space plane capable of reaching every planet in the game (and is atmosphere permits) fly and land on it. (NOTE REALLY A DEAL BREAKER, BUT WOULD BE NICE)

4. Be able to create a moderate space station around any planet/moon in the game. (Ie Refueling facility, small crew complement, escape vehicle, etc)

5. Be able to create a multi-part ship (assembled in space I assume) capable of reaching any planet in the system and carry landers/rovers etc.

That's about it. (NOTE : I am talking about a MOD'less KSP experience here)

BTW I obviously don't mean one ship that can do all of this but rather whatever of the above that would require the most parts, as the maximum. I also realise that people can build in huge amount of redundancy, mod parts, aesthetics etc, but I am only really interested in the MAX parts required for a reasonably well thought out design with a eye for keeping part count down (not manley-esque brilliance, but not tied up with tape by jeb either) that will accomplish these goals.

I am not at this stage interested in creating "what if" scenarios, or building giant massive multi-purpose ships (it sounds like fun, but I am sure vanilla KSP has much to offer for a long time ! ). I just want to be able to experience the game without massive lag because I need 600 parts to get to some distant planet etc.

Now I have loaded all of the stock ships and they all perform fine, but the max parts is only about 75 so its not a really impressive test. I also loaded the 600-700 part monster from the performance thread and this reduced performance to a crawl.

Anyway I reckon if I can get an estimate that would accomplish goals 1-5 above, I can then just download a ship from somewhere that has roughly that number of parts and see how it performs. As far as I am aware, launch is the most CPU intensive time for the game, so I figure if it can launch at a half decent frame rate, then all else will be ok.

Thanks everyone for reading, I really do hope someone will respond with an estimate so I can begin testing.

Thanks again and happy KSPing.

FYI If through testing I find my machine cannot handle it I will wait till early next year sometime when I will build my next machine, but as I am sure you can all appreciate I would rather play now . However given the choice of playing half the game now of the full game later, I will take the later.

Sorry for the WALL OF TEXT.

Edited November 6, 2013 by Dichotomy
Answered

[-RanZ-]

What kind of system specs do you have? I would say almost everything is reachable with less than 200 parts. You can have multiple stations around multiple planets/moons and that wont affect performance as if you are not focused on them they don't really take any cpu cycles as they are on rails.

[hobbsyoyo]

Well your payload drives everything including part count. If you just want to get to every planet and you don't care what you take with you then you could probably do that for less than 100 parts using a probe core, battery, one solar panel, a fuel tank and a nuclear engine.

Similarly, you could land on and return from most planets for less than 250 parts though you may have only room for one or no Kerbals. You won't be able to land and return from Tylo and Eve at that low part count.

Keep in mind though that for all but the most extreme missions the only real lag you should experience is in launch. After all the boosters drop away the lag should go away, dependent on how big your craft is and how good your computer is. So you are looking at only a few minutes worth of lag in the worst case scenario.

Rule of thumb: If the vessel you are building causes the VAB building screen to lag then it will be 10x worse when you launch it. If it doesn't lag in the VAB you will likely be ok.

[DMagic]

It really all depends on how efficiently you can build your crafts. You can probably get just about anywhere and back with less than 100 parts on the launch pad, but that's not easy, a lot of skill is required to really minimize part count like that.

The same goes for space stations and multi-part vessels. If you can get really good at avoiding excess parts you can do a lot with less than 100.

I haven't really tried this, but I imagine if you start out in career mode, and get the hang of the game using a more limited part set, that it will train you to get by with lower overall part counts. On the other hand, if you're not careful even a simple Mun lander can balloon to over 400 or 500 parts.

[maccollo]

This all depends on what your requirements for the final payload mass are.

Going to Tylo and back with the mk1-2 command pod which weights 4 tons is gonna take a lot more parts than going with the smallest probe body which only weights 0.4 tons.

[SunJumper]

To decrease ship part count at the cost of slightly extended game loading times, try the mods "Stretchy Tanks" and "Procedural Wings".

Also, part count limits commonly affect player's play styles. I find that launchers massing over about 150t tend to be quite laggy, and the propensity for stratospheric cartwheeling after a few minutes of lag is not something I like dealing with. Hence, I either launch probes or pods (Like an ion-powered mission to Gilly and the Sun).

From experience, it seems that a non-landing probe to most locations would be about 20 to 30 parts, and the launcher about 20 to 40 parts again. Landing capability increases that by up to 25 parts, return capability 25 parts still, manned capability much more.

[Vanamonde]

I'm not sure if this will address your question or not, but as examples, consider these two designs: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/48610-My-roundtrip-ships-for-download They have made round-trips to all the planets in game, and the small one has 99 parts on the spaceborne phase while the large one has 137 parts after assembly. Of course, these are just the delivery ships and the cargoes would add considerably to the mission's part count. But my point is, you can do just about anything in the game without part counts getting completely crazy. I do experience considerable lag on those ships with large cargoes, but it's definitely do-able.

[Dichotomy]

Firstly thanks to all for the many helpful replies. You guys really do have a great community here.

What kind of system specs do you have? I would say almost everything is reachable with less than 200 parts. You can have multiple stations around multiple planets/moons and that wont affect performance as if you are not focused on them they don't really take any cpu cycles as they are on rails.

OK well I had deliberately not mentioned the specs as I had figured I would get told to not bother (felt a little guilty about that, but really wanted to try it myself). Graphically I have two GTX 280 SLI video cards that use an SLI profile I put together using NVidia Inspector. Graphically KSP seems to be a non-issue from the small amount of testing I have done. Although those two cards sound low (and are low), in SLI configuration with a decent profile they can run every dx9 or dx10 game I have played in the last 3-4 years at 1920*1080 and mostly max settings with a frame rate of above 40 at the lowest and usually enough for full vsync (ie 60+) : (So Civ V, Fallout 3/NV, XCOM, ME 1-2, Payday 1-2, Amnesia for example)

CPU wise I only have a dual core, but it is unlocked. Its base clock rate is ~3ghz and it is running now at about 3.4-3.6 IIRC.

Memory I have DDR3 about 6GB, but given KSP is still 32 bit, I guess that matters little.

I am running Windows 7, and generally boot up in a very lean configuration for games (Ie minimum number of windows services, only absolutely necessary programs, no virus scanner etc). I also ensure KSP is running at ABOVE NORMAL priority just to make sure it gets its fair share of the CPU timeslices

FYI Will download a 200 part ship forthwith and see if my framerate will survive , and thankyou for your help. (I suspect it will but am still a little nervous )

Well your payload drives everything including part count. If you just want to get to every planet and you don't care what you take with you then you could probably do that for less than 100 parts using a probe core, battery, one solar panel, a fuel tank and a nuclear engine.

Similarly, you could land on and return from most planets for less than 250 parts though you may have only room for one or no Kerbals. You won't be able to land and return from Tylo and Eve at that low part count.

Keep in mind though that for all but the most extreme missions the only real lag you should experience is in launch. After all the boosters drop away the lag should go away, dependent on how big your craft is and how good your computer is. So you are looking at only a few minutes worth of lag in the worst case scenario.

Rule of thumb: If the vessel you are building causes the VAB building screen to lag then it will be 10x worse when you launch it. If it doesn't lag in the VAB you will likely be ok.

Hmmm OK will keep this in mind, perhaps allow for a little lower frame rate as my MINIMUM then, although from the extremely small amount I have played KSP I really do enjoy the launch , so time to add a 250 part and a 300 part test ships from the internet.

Thankyou for this information, I do appreciate it.

It really all depends on how efficiently you can build your crafts. You can probably get just about anywhere and back with less than 100 parts on the launch pad, but that's not easy, a lot of skill is required to really minimize part count like that.

The same goes for space stations and multi-part vessels. If you can get really good at avoiding excess parts you can do a lot with less than 100.

I haven't really tried this, but I imagine if you start out in career mode, and get the hang of the game using a more limited part set, that it will train you to get by with lower overall part counts. On the other hand, if you're not careful even a simple Mun lander can balloon to over 400 or 500 parts.

I will keep this in mind. I intend to take my time with the game and go for efficient designs, that said as a newbie I expect to make many and frequent mistakes. FTR I will be starting out in career mode, so this will likely help. Thanks for the suggestions.

This all depends on what your requirements for the final payload mass are.

Going to Tylo and back with the mk1-2 command pod which weights 4 tons is gonna take a lot more parts than going with the smallest probe body which only weights 0.4 tons.

Yes I am aware of that, I was just after some base numbers that would cover most things, in other words 1-3 Kerbals not 15, a serviceable rover not multiple etc etc. I realise as different engines/parts unlock things get easier/harder in terms of part counts and do understand its a bit like asking the proverbial "how longs a piece of string", but that said I am sure there is a figure that would cover most scenarios in game. But thankyou for the insight anyway, and I do hope my response is not interpreted negatively as I did not mean it as such.

To decrease ship part count at the cost of slightly extended game loading times, try the mods "Stretchy Tanks" and "Procedural Wings".

Also, part count limits commonly affect player's play styles. I find that launchers massing over about 150t tend to be quite laggy, and the propensity for stratospheric cartwheeling after a few minutes of lag is not something I like dealing with. Hence, I either launch probes or pods (Like an ion-powered mission to Gilly and the Sun).

From experience, it seems that a non-landing probe to most locations would be about 20 to 30 parts, and the launcher about 20 to 40 parts again. Landing capability increases that by up to 25 parts, return capability 25 parts still, manned capability much more.

OK well those numbers seem to be fine, sounds like automated missions will all be OK. Manned missions need much larger part counts it would seem. Thanks for the info.

I'm not sure if this will address your question or not, but as examples, consider these two designs: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/48610-My-roundtrip-ships-for-download They have made round-trips to all the planets in game, and the small one has 99 parts on the spaceborne phase while the large one has 137 parts after assembly. Of course, these are just the delivery ships and the cargoes would add considerably to the mission's part count. But my point is, you can do just about anything in the game without part counts getting completely crazy. I do experience considerable lag on those ships with large cargoes, but it's definitely do-able.

Thankyou very much for this. I will test them out.

BTW what would you consider a LARGE cargo. Are you referring to tonnage or part count, and what sort of numbers are we talking.

Thanks again everyone, very pleased with the responses and willingness of people to assist. You all will be rewarded with a completely inadequate ship design named after you, although to be fair I am more then reluctant to launch the SUNJUMPER Will let you all know how the part count goes performance wise.

Sorry to the MODS for me putting my OP in the wrong forum. Thanks again.

[SunJumper]

Large cargo means mass. More mass means bigger launcher means more parts. More parts just means more lag.

[SRV Ron]

This all stock design will send and land a probe anywhere in the Kerbal system. That includes a suicide run on the sun and a voyager mission. An LV-N is used on the interplanetary stage using drop tanks.

Suicide probe of Jool

Landing on Laythe

Orbiting Poi

And, Moho

Eeloo needs a Jool intercept window but is easily reached by this all in one design. The probe is equipped to land on those worlds where landing is possible.

[Dichotomy]

OK here are the results.

Downloaded the 3-4 different ships listed by Vanamonde and they all went well. Frame rates around 30 ish range, which I think is fine for this type of game.

So I tried a few larger part ships from the SPACEPORT.

428 Parts absolutely failed, only managed about 5 frames more then the 600 part craft from the performance thread managed. So I now know I can handle at least 180parts at a decent frame rate (ie min 30 for me), but 428 reduces the game to a paltry 9. I am trying to keep the frame rate above 20 so I guess I might eb able to handle about 300. Need to go back to the SPACEPORT and find a few testbunnies.

BTW AS I am a complete newbie to this, and want to avoid reading to much about how everything works (in terms of things like orbital transfers etc) as I enjoy figuring it all out, I had a few issues with the function of the space bar I had initially set up all my engines to fire (from the downloaded craft) and clamps to disengage and then assumed that repeated pressing of the space bar just separated empty tanks. Well to my utter surprise I found that if you manage to FORGET to link a few engines (damn some of those test ships have a lot), then the next time you press space it will fire any that are not already going. So in LKO orbit I pressed the spacebar on one design as fuel was running very low, hopefully to make it gracefully separate and low and behold four "unknown" engines roared to life and then proceeded to separate from my craft, rather then BE separated from it (THE NERVE OF THE THING). My first response was COME BACK DESPERATELY NEEDED SENTIENT ENGINES, my second was HOW COME MY CAMERA IS STUCK TO THE CRAFT THAT IS NOW FALLING NOT FLYING. Well at least part of the ship made it into orbit

Anyway still not sure whether to continue playing or wait a bit, will do a few more tests with part counts see what my max is (at least I can max out the graphics, changing my viewpoint doesn't make much difference to the framerate so I know my GPU's are doing their part). I get plenty of enjoyment just reading about the adventures you guys are having so that could keep me going for a while (with my spoiler reflexes at the ready of course ). Am toying with installing LINUX as that is supposedly meant to support a 64-BIT unity engine, and perhaps might support multicore ??? IDK Need to do more research.

Thanks everybody, all very useful. Very grateful for all your help. I now have a reasonably good idea of what minimum part numbers are needed for probes and interplanetary explorers, and can use that info to determine if my system (as it currently stands) is enough to not impact my designs (and enjoyment) too much.

Large cargo means mass. More mass means bigger launcher means more parts. More parts just means more lag.

OK got it. Sought of figured as much, but always best to ask those better informed than I.

This all stock design will send and land a probe anywhere in the Kerbal system. That includes a suicide run on the sun and a voyager mission. An LV-N is used on the interplanetary stage using drop tanks.

Thanks for that. Nice pics BTW.