I tried to be hard core, i really did . . .

[Meta Jonez]

. . . but in the end, FAR had to go.

I like realistic mods. I like the challenge presented by RemoteTech and TAC LS, to give a few examples. But FAR? it made launches frustrating, had to babysit the rocket too much, I often had seemingly inexplicable crashes or rockets randomly flipping . . . and since I don't fly planes much at all . . .

I found myself missing asparagus staging and launching with contraptions shaped like a circus tent on top of the rocket (part of what, I always felt, seprates the fun of Kerbals from the seriouslness of real spaceflight). I began to dread having to completely re-engineer tried-and-true designs, and though I have long since moved past the fly-to-10Km-and-turn-right method of launching (I watched how mechjeb does it and mimicked that), I find the savings in d/V to be pretty thin with FAR, in comparison.

I remember building the base lifter from Manley's Recyclable Space Program. I couldn't believe what a pain in the ass it was to get to a stable orbit. Made me realize that, as much as I enjoy watching him play the game, I was a different kind of Kerbal player than he. FAR forced me to a similar conclusion.

Mostly it became work. God forbid, I am not getting a stipend from NASA to play this game.

So, that's my rant on FAR. It is an amazing mod, and I gave it three weeks . . . just beyond my threshold of fun.

SOOOOO . . . this brings me to a few questions: I understand that Kerbal is planning to eventually move to a FAR-type model in the future. Is this gonna be real, wishful thinking, an option or hardwired into the game?

And I play with the latest B9, but mostly for a few parts within. I do want to build, at some point, a larger SSTO for ferrying Kerbals and fuel and whatnot to stations. without FAR, just how out-of-whack is a B9 SSTO?

[Boomerang]

Eh, just do you. No one worth taking seriously is going to think less of you for playing the game the way you enjoy. It is, after all, a game.

And I'm mostly in the same boat, if it makes you feel better. While I can appreciate the work that's gone into FAR and the issues with stock aero are terribly obvious, I'd rather have to deal with cheesy physics than add even more dev time to all my crafts. And NEAR is just FAR sans aero failures and the tools required to fine-tune your crafts.

As for the future, I very much doubt Squad would implement anything as demanding as FAR is. Aerodynamic shielding seems to be in the works, so that parts in cargo bays have their drag reduced. Hopefully we get that and some more sensible aerodynamic features that allow players to continuing building craft in mostly the same ways we can now.

[Superfluous J]

Amusingly I love FAR for rockets, but hate it for planes. What I hate about it with planes is essentially the same things you hate about rockets: I can't do crazy stuff and get away with it.

But after doing a few launches with FAR and getting used to the way gravity turns (actually) work, it's always kinda painful to go back to stock.

[daffy]

Nothing at all wrong with your thoughts. FAR is an incredible addition (IMO) to the game, and the creator(s) are fantastically talented to build it. It's a niche thing though. If you're interested in something...like...FAR, but not quite the dramatics of it, then give NEAR a go. Keeps some of the elements, but allows a lot more room to just have some fun too. In the end, it's a video game, and the point of it is to stay entertained. Not annoyed. Play your game the way you want to. Me personally, I am a big time Mod fan. My mods are way out of control, but I have fun. I play sandbox and have a blast.

[Red Iron Crown]

I understand that Kerbal is planning to eventually move to a FAR-type model in the future. Is this gonna be real, wishful thinking, an option or hardwired into the game?

A rework of the stock aerodynamic model is planned. Whether it ends up resembling NEAR or FAR is anyone's guess. I would be surprised if it was a toggleable option, my guess is there will be one aero model only in stock. Mods will likely be able to change that, don't know if any modders would be interested in making a mod that reverts to the current aero system.

And I play with the latest B9, but mostly for a few parts within. I do want to build, at some point, a larger SSTO for ferrying Kerbals and fuel and whatnot to stations. without FAR, just how out-of-whack is a B9 SSTO?

I was discussing this with K3|Chris (one of B9's contributors) the other day, apparently the B9 parts work fine in stock aero, the modders just don't provide any support for it.

[rodion]

NEAR hits the spot for me where FAR couldn't. Still throws out the treacle atmospheres and laughable drag calculations of the stock game a la FAR without making me feel like i'm at JPL when i'm just trying to play a game and tinker with new designs. Rockets mostly take care of themselves, it penalizes you for not watching your thrust/vector offset in flight and trying to re-enter and soft-land unrealistic lumps of space hardware is more dangerous than in stock, which are good checks on the more silly and forgiving aspects of the stock game for me.

[metl]

I've tried FAR and NEAR off and on several times. I like the more sensible lift and the way aerodynamics work overall, but I just couldn't handle the punishing, brutal penalties for getting too far off vector. Its like we went from one extreme to the other.