I don't understand the fuss behind ARM

[LethalDose]

Then KSP will be a career game where you don't need to know much in order to build, fly and navigate spaceships. The ADD-gamers will be happy and the rest of us can remember the solution - self-control and/or mods. Let's just hope for everyone's sake that Squad is happy with the worldwide fame, acclaim and success of KSP :-)

Well, as a gamer with ADD, I personally find the OODA loop created by designing, flying, and improving vessels extremely engaging and the challenge was exactly what held my attention.

Further, as someone who struggles with ADD on a daily basis, your generalization is pretty offensive.

[Rakaydos]

So just putting a rocket together makes everything happen? So the entire game is DV and TWR limited? I never knew...

It's a matter of getting the full experience. If I dont want to deal with precision maneuvering, I can install Mechjeb. If you dont want to deal with designing a good rocket, you can get one off the Starport (or mod your game for OP engines). But the base game would have both challanges.

[Pecan]

Well, as a gamer with ADD, I personally find the OODA loop created by designing, flying, and improving vessels extremely engaging and the challenge was exactly what held my attention.

Further, as someone who struggles with ADD on a daily basis, your generalization is pretty offensive.

You are right and I unreservedly apologise to you and anyone else who suffers from ADD.

[SofusRud]

That begs the question. It already decides they are unbalanced. No one is arguing against balancing them. The fact is, there is nothing to balance them against currently in the Alpha.

The game has a scaled solar system, extra think atmospheres, humongous gravity wells for tiny planets... and your suggesting the fact real life stat based rockets can fly to laythe (pre and post ARM!) has balance issues? Sit back, consider that thought process for a moment.

That the goddamn point! The kerbal universe is scaled, therefore the engines need to be scaled to match! So of course any engine based off of real life engines have balance issues. How is this difficult to understand? Why do you think the atmo ISP and TWR of the LV-N are so ridiculously low compared to their real life counterparts? I'll give you a clue: it rhythms with "bame galance"

As for whether or not the engines actually are unbalanced, I'll simply refer you to Stupid_Chris's plotting of the engine stats: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/74603-Engine-balancing-issues-in-ARM

[comham]

That the goddamn point! The kerbal universe is scaled, therefore the engines need to be scaled to match! So of course any engine based off of real life engines have balance issues. How is this difficult to understand? Why do you think the atmo ISP and TWR of the LV-N are so ridiculously low compared to their real life counterparts? I'll give you a clue: it rhythms with "bame galance"

As for whether or not the engines actually are unbalanced, I'll simply refer you to Stupid_Chris's plotting of the engine stats: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/74603-Engine-balancing-issues-in-ARM

Nailed it.

[SSSPutnik]

I don't care much if the game is hard or easy, but building super efficient crafts should be hard.

But it should be hard. Same reason Tylo and Eve exists in game. They are supposed to be challenging and hard and you need to build super efficient craft to do it.

You're saying it should be easier...

[LethalDose]

As for whether or not the engines actually are unbalanced, I'll simply refer you to Stupid_Chris's plotting of the engine stats: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/74603-Engine-balancing-issues-in-ARM

ugh, I wish people would stop pointing to this graph as if it meant something. Any conclusion based on that chart is based on the drawn trendline, and the trendline's parameterization has no justification, making the whole thing meaningless.

[NecroBones]

ugh, I wish people would stop pointing to this graph as if it meant something. Any conclusion based on that chart is based on the drawn trendline, and the trendline's parameterization has no justification, making the whole thing meaningless.

That's true. And looking at the trend line, it makes the LV-N look more OP than the new engines.

[Jouni]

But it should be hard. Same reason Tylo and Eve exists in game. They are supposed to be challenging and hard and you need to build super efficient craft to do it.

Tylo and Eve are entirely different kinds of challenges. By the time you can launch nontrivial payloads to Tylo, building the lander is easy - the hard part is actually landing there in one piece. On the other hand, a succesful Eve landing requires much less piloting skills but much more engineering.

[SofusRud]

ugh, I wish people would stop pointing to this graph as if it meant something. Any conclusion based on that chart is based on the drawn trendline, and the trendline's parameterization has no justification, making the whole thing meaningless.

Fine then, here that picture of my slapdash Single Stage to Laythe craft. Again

[SSSPutnik]

The craft have to be efficient though. Engine choice is critical, TWR has to be sufficient etc etc.

[The Jedi Master]

Everyone here is ignoring the obvious solution: You don't have to use these parts if you don't want to. Revolutionary, right?

[maccollo]

Everyone here is ignoring the obvious solution: You don't have to use these parts if you don't want to. Revolutionary, right?

WOW

You are the first person to say that!

[Rakaydos]

Everyone here is ignoring the obvious solution: You don't have to use these parts if you don't want to. Revolutionary, right?

And if they were balanced, you woundnt have to use them either.

[LethalDose]

Fine then, here that picture of my slapdash Single Stage to Laythe craft. Again

It's a vastly more salient piece of evidence than the graph.

And for the record, I agree that changing the performance values for the new ARM engines would result in better gameplay/balance. I simply disagree that the presented graph's trendline provides any information whatsoever, in reference to balancing engine TWR & ISP, or otherwise.

I'll only really be upset by this issue if the values aren't change before the final game release.

[cantab]

That the goddamn point! The kerbal universe is scaled, therefore the engines need to be scaled to match!

No they don't. Not unless we want stock KSP to be as hard as Real Solar System KSP is. The engines only arguably need to be balanced with each other.

[The Jedi Master]

WOW

You are the first person to say that!

Are you serious? I honestly can't tell.

[Rakaydos]

Are you serious? I honestly can't tell.

http://1d4chan.org/wiki/Oberoni_Fallacy

Edited April 13, 2014 by Rakaydos

[Pecan]

Are you serious? I honestly can't tell.

Of course not, lots of people have said it's fine if Squad add any old thing because no-one has to use it (#270 prior to yours, for instance) or things can be improved/replaced/provided by mods. Squad might as well stop now, if that's the case.

So seriously, I only bought KSP in December (0.22) and have only seen the 0.23 upgrade before. Is there usually this endless bickering where no-one bothers to read the posts they're arguing with, let alone the whole thread? This is the first time I've seen so much acrimony in this forum.

[Vanamonde]

Please restrict the discussion to the subject of the thread, and not the originality of each other's comments.

[The Jedi Master]

http://1d4chan.org/wiki/Oberoni_Fallacy

First. person. Ever. [/sarcasm]

I guess that is a sound argument. Still, it kinda irks me that people are obsessing over this (not very fun, in my opinion) when they can just ignore it and have fun.

[SSSPutnik]

Do the devs ever comment on issues like this?

If so, a statement from them would be appreciated.

Please, make it stop.

[The Jedi Master]

Do the devs ever comment on issues like this?

Yes, they do. Often shortly after a request like this is made.

[Guest]

So what happens if this is what SQUAD intends these new engines to be? What if they get balanced through career mode mechanics?

It's pretty obvious that there's going to be some balancing in the future here, at the very least to fix costs which vary wildly. Perhaps a few updates down the road we'll see some sort of restructuring going on. Who knows, maybe Kerbin will get scaled up a bit and these parts are a prelude.

On the other hand, I quite agree with SQUAD's sentiments regarding building large launchers. These new parts have certainly reduced my recent craft part counts, and that is very welcome. Perhaps the other engines should be brought in line with the new ones...

[Rakaydos]

There was a comment in the Suggestions forum that said a new NASA engine (a 1m stock shuttle engine was being discussed) would have to be approved by NASA before it could be added.

What if it's not SQUAD that's made the engines unbalanced, but NASA?