[0.24.x] Stock ReBalance v1.4 | 11/09/14

[stupid_chris]

Hey guys, after having been poked about it for a while, I decided to put this on paper, so here it is.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Note: Charts outdated but still relevant.

Download: KerbalStuff | Mediafire

Optional downloads:

Balance Charts

Balance Charts (.xls format)

Here's the list of the changes:

• The NASA LFB now has a mass of 6.5t (10.5t with the tank) a thrust of 1800kN and an ISP of 270-335, as well as an alternator
  
• The KR-2L now has a mas of 9.75t, a thrust of 2000kN, and an ISP of 250-360
  
• The SLS quad engine now has a mass of 13t, a thrust of 4000kN and an ISP 0f 260-325
  
• The LES now has a decoupler
  
• All nose cones, most adapters, and some other structural parts now contain fuel.
  
• The SAS units have been rebalanced so that the old SAS part is the lightest and "weakest" reaction wheel, and that the 2.5m unit is the heaviest and most performant. The old 1.25m ASAS sits between both.
  
• The cupola has been weighed down to 3t (it's still a lot of glass panels), and it's drag has been lowered to 0.2
  
• The Poodle has been rebalanced: mass of 1.75t, thrust of 160kN, ISP of 270-410. Higher ISP, lower TWR, but much lower engine mass fraction.
  
• The 48-7S now has a mass of 0.15t and an ISP of 290-340
  
• The 24-77 now has a mass of 0.1t and an ISP of 290-340
  
• The LV-1 and LV-1R now have an ISP of 280-350
  
• The Mk. 55 radial engine now has a thrust of 150kN, and an ISP of 310-370. Basically it's an all-around engine that can both help lifting stuff from the ground, or tow things around in orbit, and now has an alternator.
  
• The LV-1 and Ion engine now show the "fuel gauge".
  
• R.A.P.I.E.R. was given an alternator.
  
• The shielded docking port's drag has been reduced to 0.1
  
• All alternator output has been unified to 0.008EC/kN (12EC/s at 1500kN)
  
• All probe/pod reaction wheel EC consumption has been normalized to 0.1EC/torque
  
• All SAS units reaction wheel EC consumption has been normalized to 0.01EC/torque
  
• Electric charge and mass thorought the probe cores has been unified to have some sort of progression
  
• The rover body is now a probe core, it's EC capacity has been bumped to 500, and it has a very weak reaction wheel
  
• Monpropellant amount bumped in the two lander cans
  
• Mass of the Mk2 lander can reduced to 1.25t
  
• EC within lander cans reduced, and augmented into normal pods
  
• Mass of the Mk1 cockpit reduced to 1t to match the Mk2 cockpit
  
• 1.25m nose cone rescaled to fit onto 1.25m tanks (and not the pod)
  
• Clampotron Jr. rescaled to fit better on the Mk1 pod (still looks good on 0.625m tanks)
  
• Important parts with no physical significance now have it back and have a sensible mass (looking at you Z-100 battery)
  
• Mass rebalance on some various structural parts
  
• All parts with no physical significance now hav a mass of zero to show correct CoM in the editor (ladders, landing gear, lights, struts, etc)
  
• Solar panels charge curve rebalance to give an inverse sqaure law (-> CaptRobau)
  
• OX solar panels (no case) cannot be retracted anymore (-> CaptRobau)
  
• Ruggedized wheel and inflated wheel have rebalanced mass/EC consumption to have different niches (-> CaptRobau)
  
• Antennas transmission speed/cost/mass rebalanced to have some form of progression (-> CaptRobau)
  
• Parachutes all have a deployment sound (only the Mk16 had one)(at least for those who aren't using RealChute )
  
• Micronode/station hub have symmetry enabled (-> CaptRobau)
  
• The weird hydraulic structural pylon now uses the decoupler module and has a staging icon that isn't blank
  
• Node fixes and CoM rebalancement on all plane parts (-> CaptRobau)
  
• The materials bay's radial attach node is now at the back of it, not on the side
  
• Typos on aerodynamics parts fixed (-> CaptRobau)
  
• Toroidal and Oscar-B fuel tank dry mass adjusted to have 1t/720LF
  
• Radial xenon tank dry mass adjusted top have the same ratio as the inline one
  
• Decoupler ejection force has been adjusted to be function of it's mass for all decouplers
  
• Solar panel mass is now adjusted to be linear with EC generation
  
• RCS units now output 2kN of thrust (-> m4v)
  
• Reaction wheel torque is much lower than it used to be to be competitive with RCS without feeling useless(-> m4v)
  
• New 2.5m SRB based off the NASA SRB, meant to be a low mass payload cheap first stage
  
• New 0.625m LES using the NASA LES model
  
• Both LES have a CoM offset to reduce a little the side thrust
  
• The NASA SRB and 2.5m SRB have gimbals
  
• Size 3 decoupler no longer physically insignificant
  
• Antennas now deliver one mit per package and speed/package EC consumption has been adjusted accordingly
  
• For the full list of changes, please consult the Excel charts.

Very special thanks to CaptRobau, m4v, and Taverius for their awesome contributions to this project!

That is for what has been done. Now maybe a disclaimer would be needed:

Feel free to propose things. I'm very open to suggestions. However, please follow some kind of good conduct etiquette. I know a lot of people are sensitive about this. No need to yell. I'll listen to what you guys have to say, but no need to be angry if we end up disagreeing. No need to get angry if there are things in the modifcations you don't like either. At the core this is a ModuleManager file for me, I'm distributing it because I've received some input from people wanting to have something similar open to the public. That's about it, but again, don't be afraid to propose things, I'm open

Disclaimer: These configs are subject to change. Maybe a lot, maybe a little, I don't know yet, I'll see how it goes over time.

Changelog:

September 11th 2014
v1.4
-Cost and mass for each part has been reviewed and rebalanced
-MM configs changed and reclassed due to the large number of new patches
-Now uses ModuleManager 2.3.4 and it's upgrades
-Wings, control surfaces, and air intakes have been rebalanced
-NASA fuel tanks have been rebalanced to have the same mass/fuel ratio a the others
-The Excel charts now document all the changes and the part stats, please consult them for more info

April 19th 2014
v1.3
-Toroidal/0.625m dry tank mass aligned with other tanks
-Radail/inline Zenon dry tank mass aligned as well
-Decoupler strenght/mass is now linear
-Solar panels mass adjusted according to EC generation
-RCS thrust bumped to 2kN
-Reaction wheel torque has gone through a heavy nerf to make RCS competitive with it, although it does not make them worthless (thanks to m4v for the help on that)
-Two new parts: 2.5m SRB based on the NASA SRB and 0.625m LES for the Mk1 pod
-NASA SRB and new 2.5m SRB have gimbals
-Size 3 decoupler and Z-400 battery no longer physics insignificant
-Antennas package size reduced to one mit and speed/EC consumption adjusted accordingly

April 7th 2014
v1.2
-Node fixes to all spaceplane parts
-Solar panels curve now obay an inverse square law
-Mass rebalance on some parts
-Adapters, all nose cones, as well as some structural parts now contain fuel
-Unification of alternator charging rate on all engines
-Unification of reaction wheel electric charge consumption on all pods/probes
-Probes rebalanced to differentiate on stats
-Antennas rebalanced on transmission speed/cost
-All parts that have no physical significance now have a mass of zero to appear as such in the VAB
-The hydraulic structural pylon now uses ModuleDecouple
-Node size fixes on parts that needed it
-Clampotron Jr. rescaled to fit better on pod and 0.625m parts
-1.25m nose cone rescaled to fit better on 1.25m parts
-Normal sized rover wheels rebalanced in size/electricity consumption
-Typos fixed
-Fuel gauge now appears on LV-1 and Ion engine

April 6th 2014
v1.1
-Minor engine rebalance thorough
-Mainsail is now a "super skipper", meaning it's thrust has been lowered a little, but ISP upped a bit
-Shielded dockingport now has 0.1 of drag
-Cupola has 0.2 of drag

April 5th 2014
v1.0
-Initial release

Copyright notice: this pack uses ModuleManager, which is a work of sarbian and ialdabaoth. Credit is due to them, and the source code as well as the license information can be found in the ModuleManager thread.

Github Repo

Edited September 11, 2014 by stupid_chris
v1.4 update

[The-Bean]

Thank you, I was hoping for something like this!

[Rakaydos]

Concerning the LFB, one idea floated was to give it the exact stats of a Mainsail+Orange tank, and rebalancing the mainsail as a kind of super-skipper, midway between the current mainsail and the skipper.

The LFB's built in fuel tank is almost never a drawback for the mainsail's stats, as you generally want at least that much fuel in the stage with it.

Conversely, the Superskipper works either as a mid level assent engine or a large payload 2nd stage engine- having a bottom attach node works out well for the former mainsail.

[Justin Kerbice]

Looks good, if only it could make people stop complaining about balance of 0.23.5 parts .

It would be great to add some more explanations of what you did stupid_chris, for people like me who have not follow all the talks about balance you were part into.

Also, to make your pictures more useful as-is, cutting the irrelevant area (everything around graphs) might be great.

[stupid_chris]

Concerning the LFB, one idea floated was to give it the exact stats of a Mainsail+Orange tank, and rebalancing the mainsail as a kind of super-skipper, midway between the current mainsail and the skipper.

The LFB's built in fuel tank is almost never a drawback for the mainsail's stats, as you generally want at least that much fuel in the stage with it.

Conversely, the Superskipper works either as a mid level assent engine or a large payload 2nd stage engine- having a bottom attach node works out well for the former mainsail.

Aye, I remember it. I'll see how it goes before playing with this too much however.

[Hyomoto]

I don't think there is anything wrong with providing this option. I think the major "concern" is that stock is the only way to "unify" our accomplishments so people are afraid of losing that yardstick, so I think it's great you want to open this up in as a tangible project. Perhaps a unified community collaboration will turn out the unofficial "stock" for purposes of challenges and such.

On that note, it might be wise to accompany this project with challenges as discussion only gets so far. A little rebalanced competition to get the process moving should spice up the activity and encourage people to actually try it out before they decide whether or not it works.

Edited April 5, 2014 by Hyomoto

[ayana]

This probably won't work for existing flights without breaking something, will it?

[stupid_chris]

This probably won't work for existing flights without breaking something, will it?

No it will, it uses ModuleManager.

And if it doesn't, complain to sarbian

[ayana]

No it will, it uses ModuleManager.

And if it doesn't, complain to sarbian

I've just had bad experiences with changing the mass of a part while it's in use.

[ayana]

For some reason, the Poodle stats aren't being changed. Or, only the mass is. There isn't any other ModuleManager file overriding it either, I checked.

Edit: Oh I found what it is. HotRockets actually renamed the engine module. Bet you didn't expect that one?

Edited April 5, 2014 by ayana

[KASASpace]

Perhaps an increase of LV-909 Isp to 400?

I mean, as it is the 1.25 meter equivalent to the Poodle, it should be close in Isp. Maybe 45 KN thrust, reduced by 5.

[Pulsar]

If you make LFB have higher thrust, better ISP, but have the same mass as mainsail , I think mainsail will obsolete.

How about making LFB heavier, less ISP so it should be possible to increase thrust to around 1800 kN? Something like super mainsail.

[ayana]

I love the boost on the radial engines. This might make a Tylo lander possible that doesn't look utterly insane.

[biohazard15]

Good job. At least someone did that instead of making another "overpowered NASA engines" thread.

[Solestis]

Oh this looks good, like the isp changes on some of the useless engines. Especially the Rockomax Mark 55 radial ones. I do however think they are a bit too powerful now, the ISP is fine now, but I think they need their thrust cut in half. 1 quarter 2.5m tank on a cupola with 2 engines gives a TWR of 3 and a dV of 1800ish, thats a bit too much imo.

Nice job though =)

[BudgetHedgehog]

The SAS parts.. is the large still as bendy as a wet noodle? Otherwise, this all seems fairly sensible.. you'd have to sort out the conflict with HotRockets though (though I wonder why it's just the Poodle...)

[CaptRobau]

Stupid_chris, I was working on a similar rebalance mod. You've already got all the engines down, but maybe you can find some use for some of the other ideas that I had. Everything with an * already has ModuleManager .cfgs that I can send over (just PM me). Anyway here are some tweaks that would help balance the game and make give use to parts that previously didn't have any:

Antennas*

Speed is the advantage that the larger antennas have, yet this is the least important. Power consumption is much more important, especially in the early game. That's why I moved the advantages and disadvantages around. The smallest antenna (the 16) is now the fastest, but requires more power to transmit. The largest one (88-88) is the slowest, but requires less power. The middle one (DTS-M1) is in between those two.

Covered Solar Panels*

The solar panels that can fold up into their own compartments (SP-W/L) are never a better choice than their uncovered counterparts (OX-4W/L). The solution to this is to make the OX-4 line not retractable. In space this is not a problem, but if you want to reuse your solar panels after going through an atmosphere, the SP-W/L panels now have a use.

Solar Panel Power*

Compared to real-life solar panels are incredibly OP. With a single OX-STAT you're generally set electricity-wise wherever you are in the solar system. In real-life solar power reduces much more drastically with distance (inverse square law). The powerCurve I made for one of my mods approximates the inverse-square law and simulates the real-life consequences quite well. RTGs become more efficient around Jool's orbit (aka Jupiter) and are reduced to almost nothing once you get out to Eeloo (Pluto). This results in two interesting changes to solar panel use in KSP: RTGs are suddenly useful if you go to Jool or Eeloo where they can compete with solar panels and if you go beyond Kerbin you have to think more about which or how many solar panels you have to put on. Both offer much more interesting gameplay than the current situation offers.

Shielded Docking Port*

Has the same drag as the normal docking port (0.25). If it was the same as other aerodynamic nosecone (0.1) it might be actually be a non-aesthetic choice to place it on the top of your spacecraft.

HubMax and Micronode*

They're not useless but would be more user-friendly if they have stack symmetry enabled. That would all you to use symmetry on the horizontal nodes (handy when adding a symmetrical number of docking ports or something), while still allowing individual placement at each node.

RoveMax Model 1

The RoveMax is heavier, more power-hungry, slower and all-around worse than the Ruggedized Wheel in every way. My proposal would be to make the RoveMax the lighter, slower, power-conservative and more easily breakable of the two, while the Ruggedized Wheel would be the heavier, faster, more power-hungry and sturdier of the two. That should give both their own niches.

Hydraulic Manifold

According to various threads it's one of the more underused parts in KSP, as its decoupling force doesn't scale with its mass. If it's mass would was reduced (from 0.4 to for example 0.045 or 0.05) it'd be more competitive with the smallest decoupler.

[vger]

Also, to make your pictures more useful as-is, cutting the irrelevant area (everything around graphs) might be great.

Optimized, for less wasted space, and... because mock-CGA images just look cooler.

[Arrowmaster]

Could you include the AIES engines in the comparison? I've had some suspisions about the balance of the probe engines.

[rkman]

Good initiative, especially if it would include other parts such as those mentioned by CaptRobau.

[stupid_chris]

Perhaps an increase of LV-909 Isp to 400?

I mean, as it is the 1.25 meter equivalent to the Poodle, it should be close in Isp. Maybe 45 KN thrust, reduced by 5.

Actually I think I prefer it that way. With this scheme, the Poodle is much more competitive for large payloads, while the 909 offers some very good performance on small payloads. Both have trheir own niche and you actually have to ask yourself "which would be better". Boosting the 909's ISP would make it better in most cases.

If you make LFB have higher thrust, better ISP, but have the same mass as mainsail , I think mainsail will obsolete.

How about making LFB heavier, less ISP so it should be possible to increase thrust to around 1800 kN? Something like super mainsail.

I originally made those stats in function of the stock logic where the NASA parts would be slightly better, but more at the end of the tree. Looking at it now in this context, it does look dumb. I'll see about another way to balance it to give both engines their own purpose.

Oh this looks good, like the isp changes on some of the useless engines. Especially the Rockomax Mark 55 radial ones. I do however think they are a bit too powerful now, the ISP is fine now, but I think they need their thrust cut in half. 1 quarter 2.5m tank on a cupola with 2 engines gives a TWR of 3 and a dV of 1800ish, thats a bit too much imo.

This wqas a bit the plan, I feel like you're being mixed up by them not being terrible I don't want them to be too good either on the ground or in space. They should really be for cases where "I need a bit more umph". If I was to lower the TWR, I'd have to boost the ISP a little more, but I don't want them to become optimized as orbital engines. If you have a proposition I'll look at it though

The SAS parts.. is the large still as bendy as a wet noodle? Otherwise, this all seems fairly sensible.. you'd have to sort out the conflict with HotRockets though (though I wonder why it's just the Poodle...)

Can't control that unfortunately. They will have stats that makes some better than others, but at the end of the day the wobble is not on my side.

Stupid_chris, I was working on a similar rebalance mod. You've already got all the engines down, but maybe you can find some use for some of the other ideas that I had. Everything with an * already has ModuleManager .cfgs that I can send over (just PM me). Anyway here are some tweaks that would help balance the game and make give use to parts that previously didn't have any:

*snip*

This is very interesting. I skimmed through the Squad folder when I did that, and I guessed I was missing a bunch of things but I didn't want to dig too deep either. slowly realizing I missed a bunch of stuff

Could you include the AIES engines in the comparison? I've had some suspisions about the balance of the probe engines.

They are pretty unbalanced, reason why I didn't include them. Most of them all have the same ISP; which was copied straight from stock parts.

Good initiative, especially if it would include other parts such as those mentioned by CaptRobau.

Thank you, and I'll look into that second part

[curiousepic]

Great stuff - I think all reaction wheels should be reduced in power to be more in line with real life.

[CaptainKipard]

Just in case you're thinking about it, I would leave the Rapier as it is. Even though it's relatively poor, this is mitigated by the mass you lose because you don't need separate rocket and jet engines.

Why don't you try and plot jet/rocket combos, against the Rapier?

[wasmic]

Great stuff - I think all reaction wheels should be reduced in power to be more in line with real life.

I disagree. I find that, like the ion engines, the "OP" reaction wheels make the game more fun, even if less realistic.

[stupid_chris]

Just in case you're thinking about it, I would leave the Rapier as it is. Even though it's relatively poor, this is mitigated by the mass you lose because you don't need separate rocket and jet engines.

Why don't you try and plot jet/rocket combos, against the Rapier?

I was not planning to touch the LV-N or RAPIER, their in their own class.

I disagree. I find that, like the ion engines, the "OP" reaction wheels make the game more fun, even if less realistic.

Same here, at least now there's some progression between them.