Ion Power?

[davieholgate]

Alright, so looking around I see statements like "Ions are way too underpowered" or, "not waiting for 30 minute burn" BUT then I get these arguments "its way more powerful than in real life"

and "fuel usage is op"

So, because I couldn't find another thread on it...

Ions - Buff or Nerf?

[Comrade Jenkens]

For gameplays sake I would say increase its thrust as well as reduce the electricity usage. I know that doesn't match up with rl but I personally don't enjoy doing an 8 hour burn just to escape Kerbin's SOI.

[Nexustrimean]

Ions are fairly well balanced as it is.

[Zaryulenko]

In my opinion they should stay as how they are, Those Engines are still hard to get and cost really much but their cost is well paid with their high ISP And mass cost (From fuel tanks mostly)

[qromodynmc]

If you make some researches,You may realize they are actually overpowered.

[Spartwo]

Isp of 3600,Thrust of 2,and the same power usage.

Edited February 10, 2014 by Spartwo

[KN_Namida]

I like them how they are now, they seem balanced and serve their purpose. I mean, you should use them just for probes or very small manned crafts, and manouvers should not take an unbearable amount of time unless your using ion engines on space stations...

[m4rt14n]

Either increase its power or increase physical time warp. Last thing I need is waiting for the thrusters to finish.

[Guest]

I honestly think they are fine as is, but if there was change I'd make it have 1.5 kN thrust, 8 electricity per second, and somewhat less specific impulse, maybe 3200 s.

[Spartwo]

The main problem is the thrust.If you give yourself enough fuel for Eeloo on a barebones craft you have to burn for over 2 hours this is such a long time that Moho's SOI doesn't reach far enough to actually circularise.Yes they may be OP compared to reality but in game they are just too weak to be useful when leaving a SOI.

[WhiteWeasel]

They're handy for traveling in between moons. but that kinda applies to only kerbin and jool. One is so close the efficiency is pointless, the other you need to pack twice as many solar panels.

[Dodgey]

They pose a design challenge. Buffing them would just decrease the challenge, if you think that they need to be buffed just edit your configuration file.

[problemecium]

I say make some adjustments to the game code so that ion engines can run during timewarp.

[WhiteWeasel]

They pose a design challenge. Buffing them would just decrease the challenge, if you think that they need to be buffed just edit your configuration file.

Please don't use that argument. It's like saying there is no need for the devs to add anything because there are mods. And not everyone knows how to code.

[Spartwo]

I say make some adjustments to the game code so that ion engines can run during timewarp.

I'm happy with this.

[GusTurbo]

Where's the "remove them from the game" option? Ion engines have no practical fun usage without automation.

[Brapness]

I often watch tv whilst playing KSP, so that twinned with phys-warp means long burns don't phase me. I like ion engines as they are

[Spartwo]

I often watch tv whilst playing KSP, so that twinned with phys-warp means long burns don't phase me. I like ion engines as they are

I watched Avatar while burning to encounter Jool.

[Tank Buddy]

I'm gonna go with "Stay", but I think I've already changed my mind...

They are so impractical that few people use them, and the only use for them I found is on Gilly. The amount of DV I have there in xenon gas is so ridiculous that I'd have to waste my life away trying to use up just a fraction of it. (Considering you only need ~40 m/s to land, take off, and rendezvous) You'd pretty much be better off using chemical rockets. As a matter of fact, you would be. I have given Pol a few tries, but I never add enough solar panels to land softly, but it seems plausible enough. Bop and Minmus are pushing the limit, as Ion engines struggle with the "high" gravity.

I'd say they could use some changes to make them more practical, although some people may what to preserve the "realism" of the Ion engines and keep them similar to real life. I'll I can say to that is overkill realism only detracts from the fun of the game. I'm not content with 30 minute burn times, so let's buff them.

Edited February 11, 2014 by Tank Buddy

[Skyler4856]

Thrust should be contingent on electricity available.

[maccollo]

I would say they require a rebalance to become more useful for the regular player, and not just the small group of people who set their prope to burn for hours while they go on with their daily lives. That's what mods are for.

Quadruple the thrust and half the ISP, or something like that.

[Caelib]

Ions are balanced, players just need a way to have programmable maneuver nodes so you can setup what you want to happen, then time accelerate with ion engines. A burn time of anything more than 15 minutes isn't practical for gameplay -- even with x4 accelerate override using ALT + .

[RSwordsman]

I voted to keep them the way they are. If kept even a *little* bit realistic, I won't use them either way. The KSP Interstellar pack is what I prefer.

[LostElement]

Go to the .cfg file, increase thrust to your liking, reduce electricity usage and any other modifications to your liking.

[WhiteWeasel]

Go to the .cfg file, increase thrust to your liking, reduce electricity usage and any other modifications to your liking.

Does not work like that, the values are not independent. Changing thrust will change fuel and E consumption.