POLL - The MAX PART COUNT You Try To Keep ALL KSP Craft Designs BELOW (If Any) ?

[Wallace]

Depends how fast I'm planning to shed parts on launch, if I am going to drop 70+ parts with the boosters then I can tolerate a higher part count as I only have to sit through lag city for a minute or so.

[Blue]

One of the main limiting factors for me is not part count, but total on-the-pad vehicle size. In my mind, if it exceeds 3 orange tanks in any dimension, it likely needs revision.

[Galileo Kerbonaut]

I keep my parts under 250. That seems to be an acceptable number for me without having to experience horrible lag. Although the game speeds up a little when I close all my MJ info windows, but I just need all that info, so 250 parts is good enough for me.

[DMagic]

I keep my parts under 250. That seems to be an acceptable number for me without having to experience horrible lag. Although the game speeds up a little when I close all my MJ info windows, but I just need all that info, so 250 parts is good enough for me.

The MechJeb Delta-v window is a killer. Closing that one can really improve performance and it's not really necessary during launch.

[Caelib]

My advice to any newcomer would be to start simple and STAY simple -- especially if your main goal is exploration. I see people build these enormous, wobbly craft that lag out at launch; don't forget that it's possible to do several SMALL launches and dock the parts in orbit.

Make your payload complex, but keep your launches simple. If your rocket has excessive wobble after you launch, then it's probably a good idea to make some adjustments.

[DisarmingBaton5]

I generally do not build huge crafts, certainly never anything over 500 parts.

[FlamedSteak]

I try to be efficient but I like to have options if I balls up a manoeuvre. So I don't go out of my way to build ridiculously oversized craft, but I like to have more fuel than I need.

[numerobis]

Under 1000 isn't an option somehow.

[GusTurbo]

A craft needn't be huge to have a lot of parts.

[Madrias]

I tend to set my restriction under 400 parts. Routinely, I stay around 200 parts, but I have a lot of purpose-built craft, some of which fall under no limits territory. So I'm saying 400 parts, because my general scale is basically 200 parts, but I've built craft with 600-800 parts for specific uses (I roleplay a war against a friend where we share a save file. I've Kesslerized a few planet orbits to block uses of mobile base attacks... One most recent Kessler bomb set off somewhere near 1600 pieces into an orbit, so I have no clue what my launch stage was at the time. He wasn't happy that I denied access to his Minmus base...)

Performance scale dictates that the less you need to simulate physics on, the faster it runs. So on average, build your ship with as few parts as possible to do the job.

[FITorion]

1000.

Last time I had something at about 950 I started getting about 10 fps so 1000 is my playability limit.

[magnemoe]

A craft needn't be huge to have a lot of parts.

Just so, sent rocket with 9 probe rovers to the Mun once, each rover was 700 kg and around 50 parts.

I could had sent it to Eeloo with a few more parts, just replace the 909 and 360 liter tank with an larger tank and some LV-N.

[Dichotomy]

What about the max caps count you try to keep your topic title under?

Smart Arse. Yeah OK, should perhaps have revised it, was trying for clarity for those that only read the titles and not much else.

[Dichotomy]

@Torham234

I considered this but figured that anyone that was trying for the most minimal build would still have a part count average/median that there craft meandered around. I also thought that differing people could have vastly differing ideas with regard to "minimal". Anyway I decided against it as it would not allow for a numeric representation of those people. Thanks for your input.

@Everyone

Thanks everybody for all the votes and replies, managed to get a decent sample size IMO. Very helpful (and interesting), from my perspective.

My goal for this POLL was to determine where the middle ground lay, with respect to part count, for KSP forum-poster's craft designs. As there have been "many" threads detailing MAXIMAL PART COUNT DESIGNS, I figured one that was more representative of a given players "average/median" would be interesting to submit. I also wondered if people were limiting themselves solely for performance reasons, or if there were other gameplay/philosophical considerations at play ?

I find it pretty interesting that the results (outside of the WJ Fan Club!) are relatively evenly spread about.

@Whackjob

Your vote is self-referential ! But given your response adds instant kerbal-cred to my POLL, I will let it slide

[Arran]

I keep my creations small, and assemble bigger ships in orbit..

When i make too many parts, launches starts to lag alot, and since i'm one of the type that plays without MJ, i need to be able to keep my crafts under control even at launches.

I allways keep a mainship in Orbit, onto where i dock specialized ships, fuel modules, or Kethane miners etc etc, and bring the mainship after deploying the modules back to Kerbin.

A bit in line with Scotts reusables program.. Somehow i am obsessed with making as much as possible reusable, and to leave debris to a absolute minumum.

It might also has to do that my PC isnt the most modern one anymore, and need to play within the limits of my PC, that made me adopt this playstyle, and trying to keep my creatings "believable"

Nontheless allthough i like Wackjobs creations, its not the thing i pursuit in my program.. So i voted 350 parts as maximum i build for launches.

In Orbit i surpass this easely, and biggest ship in that manner i builded reached over 1000 parts, but the lag was getting absurt, so this was a one time try, cutted the ship down by leaving modules behind in orbit, and brought them to the destination on a other mission..

Again with basis i need to keep the partnumber down to a max of 500/600 or Lag is slowly killing everything..

[Colmath]

I don't really plan with part count in mind, and I tend to overengineer things that go into orbit, not to mention that I like to do multi-objective large missions instead of launching everything separately, so I'm allways a bit heavy on the part count. I try to stay under 500 though, just because after that the game starts really really really lagging for me, and that's not fun.

My biggest one was 621, and it lagged like hell, so I'll try and keep it under 500 in the future.

[Technical Ben]

Part count under 200 for most if not all instances. Launches included. For general gameplay anyhow. Orbital stations and other docking can get up to and past 300. Some interplanetary, but most of those are under 150 now.

If it's to the mun etc, I try to keep it under 100 for orbit and beyond, and under 150 for launch. Command capsules and return tend to be 30-50 parts for me now (got real good at shaving of unnecessary parts).

[John.E]

I try an stay under 300 as my machine will roll along very nicely at that figure. Above this is beginning to show signs of flagging By the time I get 600 plus that PC is very sad but usable (just). Any more and it's a no go.

[Spyritdragon]

Whatever i make is usually under 300, and sticking to that i havent had lag problems yet. I have yet to findnwhere exactly itll lag, but i do know that number is under 800.

[ZedNova]

I lose significant frames at 400 parts. So i guess that's a limit i strive for.

[Tidus Klein]

I said 300 just because I never really need to build any thing bigger, I think the biggest ship I ever built was a station with around 300-350 parts,(I am an extreme minimalist when it comes to this game, every thing I need nothing I don't) and the biggest thing I have of now is a mun capable B9 SSTO with 210 parts.

I tend not to be very good with BIG type of stuff, but im getting better at it.

[Moar Boosters]

I tend to try and keep it under two thousand.

[Psycix]

I try to keep it above 300.

[SkyHook]

I have different part count stipulations.

Craft: >50

Stations/Bases: >150

Auxiliary: >10

My computer could probably handle more, but I restrict part count for structural reasons in stead of technical reasons. I hate wobbly things!