Would you like reducing the thrust of the new engines?

[vger]

Maybe my English understanding is wrong but... Doesn't overpowered mean more-powerfull, if you see the comparations with the old engines you can see they are less powerfull than ARM engines, thats the true for me. Also i created this post to see people's opinion, not to create a war

More powerful and overpowered aren't the same thing. Overpowered means TOO powerful, and it breaks the balance of the game by making it too easy.

[Kasuha]

Plainly, SOME bodies in the system should ALWAYS be a challenge to reach, regardless of what parts we have access to.

Now honestly, which body in KSP was the biggest challenge for you to reach?

For me it was Mun.

And it will stay that way at least in career because you need to go there to unlock SLS machinery.

[boomerdog2000]

Personally I have faith that once the rest of career mode is in and balancing can truly begin the SLS will be be cost balanced along with the science rewards to ensure that the SLS is a late game tech and the previous missions will still be plenty challenging. Besides it's a very logical step to add bigger rockets if they eventually intend to add planets farther out as well.

[Giggleplex777]

The only engine that should be nerfed is the KR-2L. I facepalmed when I saw the stats before the update was released, and sure enough, those specs stayed. They should reduce its thrust to 1200kN.

[vger]

Now honestly, which body in KSP was the biggest challenge for you to reach?

For me it was Mun.

And it will stay that way at least in career because you need to go there to unlock SLS machinery.

For me it's Eeloo. A long burn is needed to match inclination, then for the transfer, and then to decel.

A lot of people seem to give this title to Jool and I really don't know why. It's so massive that getting caught by it is relatively easy.

As for the Mun, just go to Minmus first. The ease of escaping it more than makes up for the longer transfer burn required to get there. I've heard that people have actually EMU'ed their way beck to Kerbin from it.

Edited April 4, 2014 by vger

[WhiteWeasel]

The only engine that should be nerfed is the KR-2L. I facepalmed when I saw the stats before the update was released, and sure enough, those specs stayed. They should reduce its thrust to 1200kN.

Do you know what you are saying? That's less than the mainsail. The whole point of the engine having a larger radial size than the mainsail is to have more thrust.

To OP: No.

Edited April 4, 2014 by WhiteWeasel

[DonLorenzo]

If you feel it's now too easy to get off Kerbin, I suggest giving the Real Solar System mod a go. Honestly, it's not the engines that make it too easy to get into space and orbit, it's the planet!

[vger]

If you feel it's now too easy to get off Kerbin, I suggest giving the Real Solar System mod a go. Honestly, it's not the engines that make it too easy to get into space and orbit, it's the planet!

I kinda figured that the size of the system was something of a computer limitation. The few times I tried to create a planet (of a realistic size) in different 3D modelling programs, I started encountering render glitches before I even reached 1% the diameter of Earth.

[Dodgey]

Vegr, I'm pretty sure the scale of the universe is just for gamplay reasons, I don't think the devs wanted for us to spend 10 minutes getting to orbit

[DonLorenzo]

Yep, it's pure gameplay. The RSS mod works just fine (the terrain is a bit bland because it's basically just stretched out, but that's it!) and if you think back to a time when there wasn't any timewarp implemented you'll understand why Kerbin is the size that it is. These days we have all sorts of tools however so it's not that big a deal. Give it a go, getting to orbit is a whole new achievement again!

[mordin86]

Would you like reducing the thrust of the new engines?

nope, I`m very happy that I can put big payloads on orbit without resorting to mods or asparagus staging with tons of struts.

[SofusRud]

Would you like reducing the thrust of the new engines

No. I would however like to see them balance better, mostly though adjusting the ISP and TWR to fit better with the other engines. IMO, high TWR should lead to lowered ISP. its not a question of realism, its a question of gameplay, the same reason Aerospike got a nerf back in the day and the LV-N (NERVA) has far lower TWR than its real life counterpart. I believe the devs explicitly stated that the LV-N was nerfed in order to not make it the best engine for every situation in the interest of gameplay, and I believe the same way of thinking applies here.

[garosz]

nope, I`m very happy that I can put big payloads on orbit without resorting to mods or asparagus staging with tons of struts.

That is what experienced players does to put big payloads on orbit....

- they use practices of designs (popular or self invented)

- they invent tactics of staging, docking and for other things

In this game everybody can use the same (stock) parts to achieve different goals, but this game is interesting because you can create a space station or landing ships not because you have better technologies but you have the experience of designing better stuff, make more effective docking and other manouvers...

With the new engines you don't have to learn about physics, you don't have to invent your tricks and try it over and over again to achieve your goals... you just put that huge rocket under any payload and the problem is solved(you will have enough thrust to put it in orbit and you will have enough fuel for the mission).

[Killerdude8]

The new parts aren't Parts, They are The equivalent to an Orange Tank Asparagus lifter, combined into a singular part.

It takes an enormous chunk out of your parts count to build these lifters, Squad just added in a singular part to fill that purpose and MASSIVELY reduce the Part count.

Again, Don't think of them as singular parts, but a Lifter combined into an Efficient method.

[Red Iron Crown]

The new parts aren't Parts, They are The equivalent to an Orange Tank Asparagus lifter, combined into a singular part.

It takes an enormous chunk out of your parts count to build these lifters, Squad just added in a singular part to fill that purpose and MASSIVELY reduce the Part count.

Again, Don't think of them as singular parts, but a Lifter combined into an Efficient method.

No combination of the old parts can match the new ones in both TWR and Isp at the same time.

Properly balanced large parts would also reduce the part count.

[Killerdude8]

No combination of the old parts can match the new ones in both TWR and Isp at the same time.

Properly balanced large parts would also reduce the part count.

Not on a comparable level to the new parts.

I can build a Reasonable lifter in under 10 parts with the new ones, Before I'd required ~150 parts for the Lifter Alone, Even buffing the old parts would still leave me at +100 parts spent in JUST a lifter.

My game can run better and therefore has improved substantially, Why is that such a problem for people?

These parts are Really good and I'm glad they're stock, I hate modding.

[Red Iron Crown]

You could also read the second line of my post. Part count reduction does not require unbalanced parts, just larger ones.

[rkman]

Technically, it's only been demonstrated that the new engines are more powerful than the old ones.

More powerful as in, "have more thrust"? Sure, that is obvious.

Beyond that the new engines also have significantly better efficiency (relatively high Isp and low mass) - that is what makes the new engines overpowered, not just the fact that they have more thrust.

[Killerdude8]

You could also read the second line of my post. Part count reduction does not require unbalanced parts, just larger ones.

But they're not unbalanced.

So all's well.

Stop trying to nerf my fun!

[Red Iron Crown]

But they're not unbalanced.

So all's well.

Stop trying to nerf my fun!

If the Isp was reduced in the new engines, or their mass increased, would your fun be reduced?

[Killerdude8]

If the Isp was reduced in the new engines, or their mass increased, would your fun be reduced?

Yeah.

The whole reason why I love them is their effectiveness.

No longer am I plagued with massive numbers of Orange tanks annihilating my FPS and therefore my enjoyment of the game. They are great Endgame Tier parts that are for those who have made it in Career, When money isn't an Issue and they can afford to launch these things.

The parts aren't Unbalanced, The part of the game that would Balance them just doesn't exist yet.

[coolitic]

They are not OP. NASA helped make these engines so if they are anything they are more realistic.

Just because they are better than kwrocketry doesnt make them OP since that is a mod.

[Red Iron Crown]

The parts aren't Unbalanced, The part of the game that would Balance them just doesn't exist yet.

I don't think I can argue with that sort of reasoning.

[ayana]

After trying them out with somewhat decreased thrust and raised mass, it's really not that much of a difference. The lack of proper structural parts to support the 3 meter fuel tanks is noticeable, though.

[Vesparco]

I would say that this answer is rather impossible to answer due to the following facts:

- They are overpowered in comparison to other engines yes, but the models are meant to reflect future NASA engine development, which of course should have higher performance than other real engines from the American and Russian space programs from the 60s (which are the ones that are reflecting current KSP stock and mod development). We are speaking of top tier technology and should behave as such (and that depends on which level of the tech tree you get them, which I don't know btw).

- The real balancer should be money, which is not currently implemented in the game (yet). Is not relevant if an engine is slightly better or worse if you are able to assemble true behemoths to compensate it. Even docking parts in orbit can outcome this.

Up to that, as previously said, there's no game yet. And even if it was, you would have another ton of balancing elements (a.k.a. mods) that would alter your perception of fairness (deadly re-entry, FAR, Life support,...).

As a personal opinion, I don't see them bad. Mostly because they make me spend less time in the VAB and more time in the flight phase studying the insights of asteroid approach & capture (which is already difficult by definition. I even believe that the offset in the engines are meant to ease this difficulty).