0.23.5 complaining?

[Stargate525]

Aren't the disputed engines at the end of the tech tree?

No. The biggest offender unlocks on the same node as the engine it is better than in every regard.

[Creature]

I think most of the time people simply aren't expressing their thoughts and feelings very clearly, which leads to unnecessary arguments breaking out. I'd wager that the problem for most people isn't really the fact that some engine is unbalanced or OP as such, but it's the fact that if it is clearly better in every way, it does reduce the number of meaningful choises you need to make in designing your lifter. And that does make the game simpler and more boring for them.

If you give them the ultimate engine as an option, it's not a meaningful choise if they decide to not use it. Rather it's just an arbitrary choise. They'd just be fighting a windmill and being stubborn about it and it's not really something people usually want to do.

Personally I don't see them as game ruiningly unbalanced, I see them as not-yet-scope-complete and opening the way for much much bigger and heavier parts to be included. But in the current game, as it is now, it seems that they are better in every single way while not having any real drawbacks, thus they can be legitimally called overpowered. It's not like they're hard to get to or expensive or rare.

[Comrade Jenkens]

I understand how people are saying these larger parts are further up the tech tree and more advanced, but why is it only large parts that can be considered advanced? If people like them like this would they mind if there were smaller diameter engines which also had an ISP boost from their earlier versions?

[Superfluous J]

I understand how people are saying these larger parts are further up the tech tree and more advanced, but why is it only large parts that can be considered advanced? If people like them like this would they mind if there were smaller diameter engines which also had an ISP boost from their earlier versions?

I don't know. We've got a LOT of parts now, it seems. I've never liked the idea of upgrading parts but maybe that's a better option than having 20 of each diameter engine clogging up the parts list.

Or, when you unlock the better version hide the lesser version as you won't want to use that anyway. Maybe even make it still available by long-clicking the part in the VAB.

This would make for a much more interesting tech progression. Unlock a heavy lifter engine in like the 3rd set of nodes, but it's so terrible you'd only use it because it was the only thing available. Name it "The Keel" or something to keep the nautical theme. Then a few nodes down you get the Skipper, then the Mainsail, and finally this engine without a good enough name for me to remember

Edited April 5, 2014 by 5thHorseman

[Joonatan1998]

I just hope they nerf the liquid fuel booster.

Why is it even called an booster? Wouldnt booster mean you would use it with something else, and not just use it as the main launch engine?

[problemecium]

To be honest I did find it a little weird when I unlocked Mainsails and LFBs at the same time (They may have been in two nodes, I don't remember for sure, but neither was more than maybe one level farther down than the other). Since after all the LFB is effectively a better mainsail with a built-in orange tank

[rkman]

Merlin 1C

480kN TWR (96:1)

275 Atmo/305 Vac ISP

Merlin 1D

620kN TWR (150:1)

282 Atmo/311 Vac ISP

I am genuinely surprised.

* eats several previously spoken words

Doesn't make sense though that those engines unlock in the same tier as the Mainsail, which is made kind of obsolete anyway.

Edited April 5, 2014 by rkman

[Kasuha]

There are already at least two threads dedicated to this topic:

Engine balancing issues in ARM?

[Discussion] Would you like reducing the thrust of the new engines?

I think there's no need to have the same discussion in so many places.

[Rakaydos]

There are already at least two threads dedicated to this topic:

Engine balancing issues in ARM?

[Discussion] Would you like reducing the thrust of the new engines?

I think there's no need to have the same discussion in so many places.

Also there's a mod that brings the engines in line- not just the SLS parts, but also underperformers like the RM 55.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/75272-0-23-x-Stock-Rebalance-Project-v1-0-5-04-14

[Tiberion]

Especially since this thread doesn't actually discuss the issue but is instead an attack on people who are leaving valid feedback about a gameplay feature.

Frankly a lot of you need to get off you high horse, because you're arguing from a place of ignorance. First of all, you're assuming that people are asking for the new parts to be removed, and no one has suggested that. The concept of the new engines is perfectly valid. So valid in fact, that they have been implemented by various mods, some of them over 2 years ago.

Bigger engines are perfectly fine. And it is fairly simple to implement them in a way that is balanced against the rest of the game, so that the GAMEPLAY provided by them is consistent and logical. I have spent more time in a single day working on this sort of balance than most of you have spent thinking about engine and part balance AT ALL.

So you can take all of that hooey about "don't like it, don't use it" and shove it. The way the parts are balanced against the physical world inside of KSP is where all of the compelling gameplay of KSP starts. If the numbers didn't matter, if an engines power can be whatever you like then you're just playing a dumb mobile game where you tap a button to put a ship "in orbit"

KSP has precision physics based on real life. its not 100% accurate, but it IS what determines whether that ship you launch goes to the Mun or crashes in a heap halfway around Kerbin. You can use plugins to plan a maneuver years in advance and arrive within a meter of your destination.

You can't fudge the numbers and have things keep working the right way. There is NO doubt that the stock KSP parts will someday need an extensive re-balance, especially when real aerodynamics are introduced. But FOR NOW they are the basis that everything else is balanced around (unless you're using a total conversion mod like RSS, which is fantstic.)

The math doesn't lie, and its laid out plainly for anyone to look at. The new engines need some balance tweaks to not invalidate a lot of the basic KSP gameplay, to not cheapen it. There is even a simple ModuleManager file you can install to try out the suggested tweaks for youself.

So before you keep on bashing people (some of who have done a lot of research and offer concrete facts, not just a snarky opinion) I challenge you to try out the changes yourself.

You'll find that the new parts are still super useful and incredibly powerful compared to the smaller engines (as they should be, they're a bigger class of engine) They'll also be sanely balanced to those same parts and will play nicely with the piles and piles of mods out there which are balanced around them. And you likely won't even notice the change unless you've been abused their broken-ness. To that, I give you the same response that most people in this thread are parroting.

Deal with it.

[ArmchairGravy]

I guess because I'm not trying to min/max the game, but I'm only using the SLS parts on asteroid retrieval missions when I need to get a huge bucket o' fuel up there to shove those rocks around. Even then I'm only using two of the dual-engine boosters. I've already nailed down most everything else using Skippers. I only use Mainsails in one or two of my lifters. I've seen some of the stuff people have built with the SLS parts and I'm left wondering what mission they are trying to run. Now I'm a big fan of overkill, but it seems that people are whingeing about how OP they are when they are using a design that is purposely, outrageously overpowered.

[Tiberion]

Now I'm a big fan of overkill, but it seems that people are whingeing about how OP they are when they are using a design that is purposely, outrageously overpowered.

Where do you get that from? The people "whinging" have done math, backed it up with tests, and quite a few of them happen to be quite familiar with the "under the hood" functions of KSP and the physics it delivers. It's not just some newb building silly rockets and banging away on the forums.

And your usage of SLS is exacly the issue; bringing payload to space is part of the challenge, and just being able to strap on a rocket engine which is using 30% too little fuel to get the job done is going to trivialize that.

[Col_Jessep]

I hope you will forgive me if I didn't read all 9 pages before posting.

IMO there are ways to 'balance' these new parts:

• You have to pay for parts once career gets the next big update. Depending on how much they cost that cluster of orange tanks with Mainsails might look rather attractive again...

• Fuel lines don't connect to the new parts, fuel crossfeed capable parts don't work for them. The rocket engine only burns the fuel in 'its' tank.

If this is still not good enough for you I suggest you install Real Solar System and FAR. I think every true KSP fan should experience at least once how different a launch to LEO is compared to LKO. It is fun! Also possible with 500% less lag now!

[Mr. Boncrete]

Where do you get that from? The people "whinging" have done math, backed it up with tests, and quite a few of them happen to be quite familiar with the "under the hood" functions of KSP and the physics it delivers. It's not just some newb building silly rockets and banging away on the forums.

And your usage of SLS is exacly the issue; bringing payload to space is part of the challenge, and just being able to strap on a rocket engine which is using 30% too little fuel to get the job done is going to trivialize that.

What I don't see anybody mentioning is the fact that these are modeled to be somewhat similar to the properties of the real thing - the RS-25 (reused space shuttle main engines) have an Isp of roughly 360 at sea level, while the clustered engine part has an Isp of 320. Just because it doesn't have an awful Isp doesn't somehow invalidate its implementation in the game. It may be "unbalanced" relative to the other parts in the game, but so what?

I think the OP has a valid point - the people who are most upset are the ones that viewed themselves as some sort of "elite" ksp superhero. I'm pretty decent at ksp, and I see no reason why newer players shouldn't have an option to lift heavier payloads without hundreds of hours of trial and error. That's part of the game, but they will learn eventually anyway. I think the new parts are fine, and I love the fact that I can boost a heavy payload without messing with some sort of ridiculous asparagus-staged monstrosity that makes my computer run at 3 fps.

[Tiberion]

What I don't see anybody mentioning is the fact that these are modeled to be somewhat similar to the properties of the real thing - the RS-25 (reused space shuttle main engines) have an Isp of roughly 360 at sea level, while the clustered engine part has an Isp of 320. Just because it doesn't have an awful Isp doesn't somehow invalidate its implementation in the game. It may be "unbalanced" relative to the other parts in the game, but so what?

I think the OP has a valid point - the people who are most upset are the ones that viewed themselves as some sort of "elite" ksp superhero. I'm pretty decent at ksp, and I see no reason why newer players shouldn't have an option to lift heavier payloads without hundreds of hours of trial and error. That's part of the game, but they will learn eventually anyway. I think the new parts are fine, and I love the fact that I can boost a heavy payload without messing with some sort of ridiculous asparagus-staged monstrosity that makes my computer run at 3 fps.

Yeah, no, the numbers have nothing to do with real life, because Kerbin is vastly different to Earth. The thrusts involved are an order of magnitude off, the parts are like 60% sized, and the physics in KSP are mere imitations of the real thing. If you want to mimic the SLS, you do that by balancing via playtesting, not copying numbers from Wikipedia.

And there is no reason to respond to your personal characterizations of people you disagree with. Its cheap and beside the point.

If the new engines were properly balanced, they would still be useful as replacements for asparagus-staged monstrosities.

Once again, I challenge you to actually TRY the suggested changes before you launch into the attacks.

[Klingon Admiral]

I don't like the balance of the new parts in regards to the .23 stock parts, but I won't complain as long as fuel lines are as broken as they are.

And I might add, isn't the purpose of an alpha/beta to gather response to the current state of the game? I thought it was so 10 years ago.

[Daman453]

Wait, there was a new update, KSP! U NO TELL ME!

[soldieroffilth]

What if the new more powerful engines are squads way of secretly signalling to us all that there will be something added that is even further away than Eeloo, and that those new engines, or a big honking rocket of ridiculousness, is the only way to get there?

[Jouni]

And your usage of SLS is exacly the issue; bringing payload to space is part of the challenge, and just being able to strap on a rocket engine which is using 30% too little fuel to get the job done is going to trivialize that.

Even without the SLS parts, launching payload into orbit is no longer the challenge it used to be. I just launched 109 tonnes to LKO with 0.23 parts, serial staging, and no struts.

[Hans Dorn]

What if the new more powerful engines are squads way of secretly signalling to us all that there will be something added that is even further away than Eeloo, and that those new engines, or a big honking rocket of ridiculousness, is the only way to get there?

Kerbol needs a sister star nearby - with a dozen new planets.

[maccollo]

Even without the SLS parts, launching payload into orbit is no longer the challenge it used to be. I just launched 109 tonnes to LKO with 0.23 parts, serial staging, and no struts.

RSS will now be stock =P?

[JSD]

You simply can't do right. I'm one of those people who don't give a damn about career. I like to mess around in games. All I need is a buns of options, and I deiced what to do with it. I don't like the fact that I have to "earn" science before I unlock some next parts. It has nothing to do with each other. Space exploration = science. Science. The understanding of it all. The knowing part is the whole reason why we do it. That is my twisted point of view. I look at it at some weird angle I can never really enjoy career mode. Cause In my point of view.. Career sucks. Cause Science is nothing more that a currency that unlocks parts. I doesn't mean anything more then that inside the Kerbal world. That bothers me. Science is the main reason why we launch a rocket in the first place..

And I believe this same thing is happening with this engine thing. Kerbal Space Program was a fun, goofy kind of reflection to real space stuff. People related to that. Kerbal made a huge different in understanding Orbital knowledge. The fact that they did, make a huge impact now. Cause people, (including me) start to feel or have mixed feelings cause they suddenly care more about the game factor, first players etc etc then they do about the fact that they made a huge change in the Space stuff. The ARM update had a good feeling. A good excuse for happening. Teach people what NASA does with Asteroids. But to be honest, that is looking from a starting point off view. An update that should made much more sense in the KSP education version of the game. I think that Kerbal already grown beyond that starting point. Even I have no idea what I am doing most of the times. And that is the part I like. Let me figure it out. It's not about the overpowered engine. It about the fact that they toyed or played with the experience of most people out there that already knew that they where doing, or liked that way what they did. People don't like change. KSP made that connection with how real space stuff works. If you change that to much.. yes, you get trouble..

Edited April 5, 2014 by JSD

[NeoMorph]

Ahhh... tis sad to see that we no longer eat of the asparagus.

[soldieroffilth]

Looked at some info on the actual SLS and it says that the proposed SLS would be capable of putting a 170 ton payload into low earth orbit in its largest configuration. Numbers from KSP show this to be about the same, altitude dependent of course.

[SSSPutnik]

I have zero interest in Career mode also. Not every game needs to have a "story" wrapped around it does it?

I mostly play Challenges in Sandbox.

Some of the changes in 0.23.5 are great. The performance boost, the better joint strength. (Though perhaps they are too good now, undecided).

But the new engines are too overpowered for Sandbox challenges, nobody will use anything else. Bottom line, boring.