FAR Question.

[WololoW]

I personally have only used FAR once, and it was back in .20.1 or so. What I found was that it just made the game easier and didnt add to the challenge, but did add to the realism.

My question is this - Why do people always reference FAR for people that want a greater challenge in KSP? Seems like it would do the opposite by making ÃŽâ€v requirements less... (That is, if you already design rockets with PF/cones on tops)

[BananaDealer]

I personally have only used FAR once, and it was back in .20.1 or so. What I found was that it just made the game easier and didnt add to the challenge, but did add to the realism.

My question is this - Why do people always reference FAR for people that want a greater challenge in KSP? Seems like it would do the opposite by making ÃŽâ€v requirements less... (That is, if you already design rockets with PF/cones on tops)

The challenge with FAR isn't rocket design/launch. It's the changes made to how planes react and function.

It's not that big of a challenge if you already know what you're doing, but FAR is still better than the stock aerodynamics simulation.

Coupled with DRE it can be really... entertaining.

[Hodo]

I personally have only used FAR once, and it was back in .20.1 or so. What I found was that it just made the game easier and didnt add to the challenge, but did add to the realism.

My question is this - Why do people always reference FAR for people that want a greater challenge in KSP? Seems like it would do the opposite by making ÃŽâ€v requirements less... (That is, if you already design rockets with PF/cones on tops)

Two reasons.

1- Stock KSP, any brick with a booster will make orbit, you don't need any form of aerodynamic design thought to the craft. If you want to put a barn on the end of a pancake of boosters you can.

2- Aerodynamic failures, Back when you used FAR it was far from done. You should try it now, that there is a more complete model. While it does, if you design a rocket with some form of aerodynamic thought behind it, will cost less delta Velocity to achieve orbit. But it is no means easier.

[weeble]

Yea FAR makes the game many times harder. Sure you can get to LKO with 3,200 ÃŽâ€v but every other part is 10x harder.

No more big rovers, stations or heavy lifters. No more asparagus staging. More specific design requirements. And you need to do actual gravity turns or you'll blow up. So yeah every part of the game is harder with FAR. In stock there's no challenge. You just asparagus stage everything and you can get ANYTHING into LKO.

[TK421d]

Yea FAR makes the game many times harder. Sure you can get to LKO with 3,200 ÃŽâ€v but every other part is 10x harder.

No more big rovers, stations or heavy lifters. No more asparagus staging. More specific design requirements. And you need to do actual gravity turns or you'll blow up. So yeah every part of the game is harder with FAR. In stock there's no challenge. You just asparagus stage everything and you can get ANYTHING into LKO.

i wouldnt go this far (heh heh, a pun) but my personal taste is to only use FAR for kerbin-bound planes. anything that goes into orbit or beyond, i remove the mod before starting KSP.

[Guest]

No more big rovers, stations or heavy lifters.

Not true, ferram4 himself has a ship that'll put something like 5000 tons into LEO. That's right, LEO, as in Real Solar System. I myself have put a bush plane into LKO (under RSS + 6.4:1 Kerbin) without having to fold the wings (it needed a 17m fairing, IIRC). Really you just need to follow some aerodynamic principles.

No more asparagus staging

This is also not true, you can asparagus all you want so long as you keep the craft aerodynamic (think Kerbal-X). Besides, in the stock solar system why would you ever want or need to asparagus under FAR anyway when the delta-V requirements are so much lower?

And you need to do actual gravity turns or you'll blow up.

Yes, it requires more interaction from the player and less "lol climb to 10km and turn 45 degrees".

So yeah every part of the game is harder with FAR. In stock there's no challenge.

It is true that there's no challenge in the stock game. FAR, OTOH, only increases the difficulty slightly if you follow some aerodynamic principles and pay attention to the game.

[Wanderfound]

(snip lots of points I agree with)

Seconded.

The only thing in FAR that tends to give me trouble is the occasional aerodynamic failure on re-entry to Kerbin after going interplanetary. Gotta fly careful when you're doing Mach 10.