I'm sorry, I... I just don't like ARM... :(

[John Crichton]

Multiple lifters managed 200t payloads even before the patch, now you can do it with less parts and lag...from a play perspective that's a good thing. The new engines could stomach a bit (!!) of a nerf, but you're waaaaaaaay to critical and totally overblow the "issues" in my opinion.

I strongly disagree with the ion engine comment. Finally they're actually playable...and that's a good thing. Burn times were ridiculous before and basically prevented their use completely. There is no mechanic in KSP to do those long burns, so boosting them a bit makes sense.

[xcorps]

I like the new "Op" engines, I wouldn't like them to be nerfed. I never liked making big asparagus designs with bilions of struts just to move my space station parts into orbit - it was fun but just for the short time for me.

Forever this.

I really like the new engines.

[KerbMav]

I certainly will not miss jumpy-dancing stacked orange tanks that I would have to find tricks for placing struts along from top to botton - as well as engines ripping themselves off their tanks.

Boosters still bend when not strutted and I still manage to explode rockets on the launchpad (e.g. by forgetting to move one set of launch clamps to the first group in staging and the rocket folding in on itself, boosters ripping off and shooting upwards on their own etc.).

Some downtuning on stability might be in order though. (see FlowerChild's pics)

Asteroids can be ignored completely if one wishes not to play with them: They can be clicked invisible in the tracking station, they are not really existent physically when they are not tracked, they will not destroy the planet as they would not reach the surface were stock reentry effects not just a light show (DRE really lets them burn up? Cool.) - maybe some modder will come up with a way to limit the PE range to above LKO (as well as putting resources upon/into them??!)

I love this- the community goes ERMAGAD TOO SLOW IONS! And so Devs buff them up, while reducing ISP- essentially making them the same, just faster. Then they go Too much! Then its rebaleced to 1kn. Then...

Like playing a healer class in an MMO ...

The only thing that might be seen as overpowered - as mass, fuel usage, d/v ... remain the same in the end - is that one can use the new ions to do maneuvers the old ions were not fast enough for - oh bummer ...

.

Say, are these screenshots from shortly before everything crumbled on the ground or are the joints THAT strong now??

[SSSPutnik]

The strengthened joints would make construction way easier though even if the engines are corrected.

[Whirligig Girl]

Of course, the realism player is the one who agrees. I'm sure you and your BTWSM is going to "fix" everything, so stop complaining. I mean, what's wrong with this update? there are asteroids and bigger parts. What is forcing you to use the asteroids? What is forcing you to use the big parts? Do you really want 5 hour burns on an ion engine?

The E class asteroids are small enough to just explode in the atmosphere, not forgetting the fact that in KSP they disappear when on rails below 30 km, so being afraid of Kerbalkind is irrational.

[KerbMav]

.

May I offer you a hot beverage?

[John FX]

For all the players that ask for colonization or making it easier to do interplanetary things or even interstellar travel, the improved performance, stabler joints, and big parts help a lot in throwing big things into orbit.

I've been using KW rocketry a lot, so seeing someone make blocks of mainsails and jumbos just seems silly to me.

Also, the SLS engines aren't overpowered; the other engines are underpowered compared to real life engines.

This is what I came to say. KSP has UP not OP engines comapred to RL.

At least now there are engines capable of lifting stock fairings etc...

Also ARM is a MISSION PATCH/PACK not the 0.24 update. I see it as optional. Don`t like it? don`t use it.

[Tery215]

a simple solution to killing all your kerbals is to press the "forget about asteroids" button

it's all fine

[Javster]

You have every right to complain.

I sort of dislike it too, for similar reasons.

[Thiel]

Also ARM is a MISSION PATCH/PACK not the 0.24 update. I see it as optional. Don`t like it? don`t use it.

It's not really optional though. You can't update to .24 without getting it.

Edited April 4, 2014 by Thiel

[StainX]

Why not just delete the SLS parts and use procedural parts mod instead?

[The-Bean]

I tend to agree. Sticking to the larger mod parts for now, IMO they're better balanced.

Edited April 4, 2014 by The-Bean

[Daid]

This is pretty much a natural reaction on change. "People resist change"

Try it for 2 weeks, still feeling bad after that? Then you might really not like it. For the first 2 weeks, just just an adjusting period.

[Dodgey]

It doesn't matter that the other engines are under powered compared to the real word. KSP isn't the real world, all that matters is that the engines are balanced to eachother, there is another thread going on the the suggestions page that addresses this matter quite well.

For those saying that it's ok because they will be balanced using the money system three points;

1. Although we do have an indication of how the money system will work (the cost information on parts) we don't know fr sure and this is a quite hopeful alternative as we have been given no official word on how said system will work.

2. Would you contend to an engine being added that had 7000kn of thrust and 1200 ISP, if it was put right at the top of the tech tree and made very expensive? If so why?

3. What is so bad about balencing the engines to each other? I just don't get where your grievance is with that.

It's not that people don't like the parts flat out, it's that we don't like how they are balanced.

[ScottyDoesKnow]

This is what I came to say. KSP has UP not OP engines comapred to RL.

Except it's easier to get into orbit in KSP than in real life, which is why the other engines are less powerful than real life.

[stoani96]

i only read the initial post and i just want to give my opionion too

The only thing i think is not okay is the balance... cause this one new engine is even stronger than the mainsail is more fuel efficient... so why should i ever use the mainsail again? ^^ of course the new engine is an "endpart".

this thing with the asteriods: thats also just the balance! its no affort to change the appearing-rate of the asteriods, its more or less just a number in the code.

one thing i love are the new stronger joints. in 0.23 it never ever would have been possible to have a standing 1500ton rocket without supports

i think one big problem is, that there is no money ingame... so you can easyly build a rocket with 5 S3-KS engines and get nearly everything into orbit with them, without any real problem. but once you have a certain budget for your missions, you have to find other ways

[Dodgey]

^this, and money is coming in a future update, either .24 or .25. So we have that to look forward to.

[MalfunctionM1Ke]

I can just hope that once Money is implemented, that the NASA parts are rediculous expensive.

Once upon a time, Moho was a mystery to me.

Today I am wayting for someone to go there Single-Staged

[The Space]

Solution: don't use the new parts and don't track asteroids.

[Dodgey]

The solution of just don't use it is just a variation of just ignore the problem and it will go away. Why shouldn't I try to fix a problem that I see, doesn't fixing it make more sense then just ignoring it?

[flyboy67109]

One thing to remember is that ksp .23.5 is a pre-prerelease. The game is not completed. We have no real idea how all this is going to fit together. And, possibly, neither does Squad. By the time the game is complete, the parts will have been tweeked several times as they have been in past versions. The concept of releasing a game before it is done is a very new idea and we have the privilege of seeing the game building process out in the open that in other companies happens behind closed doors with a very select group of people. Having said that, it's also important to state what we like and don't like about the game because Squad takes those comments very seriously. Just be sure that the comments aren't too hurtful or we all risk them closing the doors and reverting back to the old style of game development. Then we won't see any other updates until version 1.0 comes out.

[Jarin]

Just my two cents here... I don't really have a problem with balance of the new parts. The tech tree will eventually be a progression of more powerful stuff rather than just unlocking mostly-balanced bits like it was in .23, so having uberrockets at the top is fitting. I DO have a problem with the pre-assembled nature of the new parts though. Integrated liquid-fuel boosters? Four engines on a multi-adapter in one part? all-in-one escape tower?! Give us the components to MAKE those, but don't put them together for us. PLEASE.

[cantab]

It's not really optional though. You can't update to .24 without getting it.

The NASA parts and I assume the asteroid mechanics are in a separate folder in GameData. You're free to delete it.

For that matter, you're free to delete the Squad folder from there too. Some people do, and play only with mod parts.

Now you can't, without making a mod, get rid of stuff like the stronger joints, or the changes to the conics and the manoeuvre node, or the ability to timewarp in the Space Centre and Tracking Station. But seriously, I have to wonder why on Kerbin you'd want to.

Except it's easier to get into orbit in KSP than in real life, which is why the other engines are less powerful than real life.

It's easier if you know what you're doing. New players generally DON'T. I certainly didn't. My first rocket to reach orbit needed about 18 small SRBs just to get a ship with a 1-man pod up there, because I didn't know that going too fast too low was bad.

[EvilotionCR2]

I can go now to every planet in the solar system. Easily, before? Hardly Duna!

[Wahgineer]

I find this kind of funny:

We ask, over and over, for newer, bigger, better parts.

We get said parts, and all you guy do is complain.

We ask for multi-engine clusters combined into one part.

We get said part, and all you do is complain about it.

We ask for the ion engine to get a thrust boost, we get it, and all you do is complain about it being OP.

We ask for joint reinforcement to reduce the amount of struts we use, for bigger parts to reduce part counts.

We get stronger joints, and you say it's over done.

We get bigger parts, and all you say is that they're op.

Harvester himself said that these parts were designed with idea that by the time you unlock them, the payload is more important than the rocket. That is, you'd much rather spend more time doing stuff in space rather than spending ages building a rocket to lift it.