Rovers are useless

[Crampman]

Wow, thank you all for your answers!

"useless" was a bit excessive, all I meant is that in a career gameplay, rovers only role is to go from a biome to another, wich can take a long time, and could be done by biome-hopping most of the time. And getting all the KSC science too.
Hence the suggestion : give them a specific, optional, bonus. Like the space stations were given one with the Mobile Processing Labs generating science from data.
Of course this would require some rework to the scatters, but that would no be a waste.

I know you can do amazing things with them already, so why not give the opportunity to new players to see how fun they are ?

[James Kerman]

As with all things KSP some players will find them fun, some not. 

I don't feel it is necessary to give a bonus to rovers - they are just another tool in the toolkit and It is up to the player to want to use them.

[ARS]

You can build a "Mobile Refueling Base". Basically, why just land your ship near your base for refuel? Or performing complex RCS maneuvering just to line up and dock to your surface base (potentially wasting fuel)? Have it land on a general location of your base and have your base rolling into it instead! Your base becomes a "Mobile exploration lab with habitation and refueling/mining base capability"

Or take a look to this example. A heavy exploration rover that I made back then during 1.1:

Carry all stock experiment module, has 5 crew capacity (7 with 2 additional crew members on external seat), mining/ISRU and antenna capability as well as self-sustaining power generation

[Urus28]

7 hours ago, TheFlyingKerman said:

There are different design choices here. I build my rover light and fast.

 

My main rover can do >50m/s on Duna and the Mun, >55m/s on Minmus. It took me 2.5hrs to drive 400km from the Duna polar region to the equator, covering 8 biomes (poles, polar highlands, midlands, lowlands, northeast basin, western canyon, highlands, midland sea). I suspect biome hopping is at least going to be equally tedious.

Ok, I mean compare to a plane.... I've built rovers able of 80m/s on kerbin =)

[Urus28]

16 hours ago, StrandedonEarth said:

And they're good for blowing stuff up too! (see "Destroy KSC: Highway to Hell" link in my sig.)

Not if you add a rocket engine! But then they tend to lose control..... Maybe I should add spoilers...

I tried this.... A rover is already difficult to control at 50m/s, with rocket engine you can forget  any kind of control

The slow was compare to a rocket or a plane. I drive fast rovers (for a rover) and it's extremely fun, in particular on low gravity.

[Dafni]

21 hours ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

(Oh btw, when driving the Hog you'll want to setup and use the actual rover driving keybinds so you aren't controlling the reaction wheels too, it has quite a lot of torque power so it can roll itself over when flipped, makes driving a little weird. You could also just toggle them all off but they are buried in the body.)
 

Your rover looks very nice and by the sound of it must perform awesome. I'll definitely give it a try. Thanks for sharing the file. I'll keep an eye on your kerbalx for sure.

As for the reaction wheels toggling, couldnt you just switch SAS completely off? One click? I remember in a previous version of KSP I had a rover with the same "issue" of many hidden torque wheels and I got into the habit of just clicking SAS off.

[Geonovast]

2 minutes ago, Dafni said:

As for the reaction wheels toggling, couldnt you just switch SAS completely off? One click? I remember in a previous version of KSP I had a rover with the same "issue" of many hidden torque wheels and I got into the habit of just clicking SAS off.

If the reaction wheels are on their default setting, they'll still react to user input with SAS off.

[Corona688]

6 minutes ago, Geonovast said:

If the reaction wheels are on their default setting, they'll still react to user input with SAS off.

Reaction wheels are still useful on a rover, especially in low gravity, but rover wheels should never have been wired to the same wasd as reaction wheels!  It will intentionally try to tip you whenever you accelerate or turn.  Luckily you can change motor keys separately.

Edited December 13, 2017 by Corona688

[Dafni]

6 minutes ago, Geonovast said:

If the reaction wheels are on their default setting, they'll still react to user input with SAS off.

okay, I see. a non-default setting then. gotta love KSP and rovers

[Rocket In My Pocket]

18 minutes ago, Dafni said:

Your rover looks very nice and by the sound of it must perform awesome. I'll definitely give it a try. Thanks for sharing the file. I'll keep an eye on your kerbalx for sure.

As for the reaction wheels toggling, couldnt you just switch SAS completely off? One click? I remember in a previous version of KSP I had a rover with the same "issue" of many hidden torque wheels and I got into the habit of just clicking SAS off.

Thanks!

Actually it's the first craft I've ever shared really, I'm surprised so many people we're interested. 

15 minutes ago, Geonovast said:

If the reaction wheels are on their default setting, they'll still react to user input with SAS off.

This^ I suppose I could have added an action group for toggling the wheels torque but I was running short on those as it was.

Also, I didn't really imagine anyone but me would ever be driving it lol.

9 minutes ago, Corona688 said:

Reaction wheels are still useful on a rover, especially in low gravity, but rover wheels should never have been wired to the same wasd as reaction wheels!  It will intentionally try to tip you whenever you accelerate or turn.  Luckily you can change motor keys separately.

This as well^ I have my rover driving keys bound to IJKL so I'm not trying to rotate the rover as I drive it, I added a note under the craft about this after.

 

After seeing that like a dozen or so people downloaded it, I actually got a little nervous and had to load it up in my game and double check it wasn't too "user un-friendly" lol. I hope it was a pleasant experience for anyone who was brave enough!

(I'm out of likes btw, but I'll try to remember to come back later and +1 you guys!)

Edited December 13, 2017 by Rocket In My Pocket

[Dafni]

6 minutes ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

Thanks!

Actually it's the first craft I've ever shared really, I'm surprised so many people we're interested. 

 

Nice debut then my friend. And thanks again for sharing.

[Rocket In My Pocket]

6 hours ago, Crampman said:

Wow, thank you all for your answers!

"useless" was a bit excessive, all I meant is that in a career gameplay, rovers only role is to go from a biome to another, wich can take a long time, and could be done by biome-hopping most of the time. And getting all the KSC science too.
Hence the suggestion : give them a specific, optional, bonus. Like the space stations were given one with the Mobile Processing Labs generating science from data.
Of course this would require some rework to the scatters, but that would no be a waste.

I know you can do amazing things with them already, so why not give the opportunity to new players to see how fun they are ?

Well, to continue the conversation of what rovers can offer currently, the RoveMate probe core get's enhanced Kerbnet scanning capability when landed which is pretty conducive to using Rover's for anomaly hunting. Personally I use satellites to give me a broad idea of where an anomaly is, then a Rover mission to actually pinpoint it and get a Kerbal to it.

I do really like your idea of scatters having a point, but to play the devil's advocate; I still don't see how a hopper wouldn't beat the rover out at doing it on most places.

Taking some inspiration from real life, we can see that wheels are used to do one of two things in space: Drive astronauts a short distance at fairly high speed to run an experiment at a specific location or drive unmanned probe Rovers very long distances at slow speeds. We have contracts that support the first idea, but the second would really need some kind of stock system for driving rover's in the background similar to BonVoyage mod.

[Crampman]

Nice collection of rovers, everyone, but back on topic :

The idea I had was to create several types (or classes) on scatters, maybe with some rarity (like Type A are fairly common, but Type E is pretty rare, so you have to search for them), and you would have to use an experiment near to it, or towards it to detect its type, and get the science. Maybe a more sophisticated device could detect the types at some distance too. You could hop next to a scatter, but that would be more difficult than landing in a biome.

Also, I beg to differ on real life unmanned rovers : they don't drive long distances. Opportunity drove over 45km in 12 years.

[Geonovast]

So something like this? (Not doing "There's a mod for that", just clarifying what you're after)

 

[Rocket In My Pocket]

8 minutes ago, Crampman said:

Also, I beg to differ on real life unmanned rovers : they don't drive long distances. Opportunity drove over 45km in 12 years.

Well, I meant compared to the manned ones. Apollo 15 for example, they drove their rover about 27km in 3hours. Much faster and more immediate...somewhat shorter. My point was more-so that unmanned rovers shouldn't need to be "baby-sat" as they can take a decade or more to do their jobs.

As far as the scatterer thing goes; maybe you'd have to get close enough to "poke" the object with the science experiment y'know what I mean? (Like an extendable antenna mixed with a Klaw.) That way it'd be far easier to do with wheels as opposed to hopping over to it?

Edited December 14, 2017 by Rocket In My Pocket

[damerell]

6 hours ago, Dafni said:

As for the reaction wheels toggling, couldnt you just switch SAS completely off? One click? I remember in a previous version of KSP I had a rover with the same "issue" of many hidden torque wheels and I got into the habit of just clicking SAS off.

You may wish reaction wheels to be operating either for MechJeb Rover Stability Control or for manual air control in jumps (especially on worlds like Minmus); worse yet if you are using realistically capable reaction wheels hence reliant on RCS, you certainly don't want to burn up monoprop every time you touch the controls. It's not just the "Hog" - for any serious roving, you want to disconnect the rover controls from the ordinary controls.

[Crampman]

7 minutes ago, Geonovast said:

So something like this? (Not doing "There's a mod for that", just clarifying what you're after)

Make this mod stock !

[TheFlyingKerman]

5 hours ago, Crampman said:

Nice collection of rovers, everyone, but back on topic :

The idea I had was to create several types (or classes) on scatters, maybe with some rarity (like Type A are fairly common, but Type E is pretty rare, so you have to search for them), and you would have to use an experiment near to it, or towards it to detect its type, and get the science. Maybe a more sophisticated device could detect the types at some distance too. You could hop next to a scatter, but that would be more difficult than landing in a biome.

Also, I beg to differ on real life unmanned rovers : they don't drive long distances. Opportunity drove over 45km in 12 years.

A couple more counterpoints:

1) Terrain scatters is very bad for computer performance, especially when driving, because each of then have to be rendered in high detail. That is why there is an option to reduce or turn them off.

2) If these objects get turned into real, solid obstacles, they would make driving even more dangerous and impractical.

 

[kerbiloid]

When using BDArmory, rovers allow to keep anti-air and anti-tank artillery in hangars, getting them out only when let the combat begin. This keeps total part count in reasonable limits most of time.

[mystik]

I used to believe in rovers, but now I'm with the OP. With the exception of Eve, I see little use for rovers. Even on Tylo, with ISRU, while hard, you can still do better than with a rover. It took me a while to biome hop on Tylo, mostly because 3000m/s lasts you for about 5 minutes of flight. Still, I tried rovering and it was so painfully slow. Fire up those engines and get your job done quick. ISRU mandatory. Sometimes it is even more feasible to go to orbit, refuel and then land again where you need than move there. Eve is another story. With Eve I cannot even fly for long distances. The atmosphere makes it all worse. Still, I rather land somewhere, rover on short distances, get to my rocket and get out of there. Eve is too hard to be fun. It is actually quite boring. It looks cool from space, but on the ground it's pretty meh, you waste a lot of credits trying to get to it. I am planning an expedition, it includes a lander and a rover for refueling purposes, but I don't plan to travel too much, because after almost completing the Grand Tour and sciencing EVERY SINGLE BIOME from Moho, Gilly, Mun, Minmus, Duna, Ike, Dres (yes I visited that one), Pol, Bop, Tylo with my Arrow ship, I have grown tired and bored. I have Vall, Laythe and Eeloo left. I am pretty tired of it. Eve will be the only one that will not get fully scienced. I don't care for it that much. I have like 50.000 science and more to go (just finished Tylo and it was a b*tch to do). In the end, it is just better to do contracts instead, it is way more fun. All this mumbo-jumbo biome hopping is lame. You click here, you click there, you gather your science and then you're off to the next place. It's tedious and dull.

 

Rovers suck. I rover with my Arrow ship at 50m/s and the fuel lasts for a long time. On Tylo I rovered between Minor Craters, lowlands, midlands, highlands, maras and the two craters that are near each other very fast, because I could do 90m/s without issues. Let's see a rover do that. And I can cross waters as well.

 

My biggest issue with rovers is that they are too slow to be practical. They flip easily, the wheels come off like crazy, the electric motors are pretty bad at providing enough traction. I have a few rovers but I don't use them because I can just use the ship to get around.

Edited December 14, 2017 by mystik

[Fireheart318]

You don't actually have to use the wheels. I just build a rover that can do what I need it to do and then move it around with Vessel Mover. I can't find an up-to-date version online so have mine - https://www.dropbox.com/s/4sg5jd73z08i36a/VesselMover.zip?dl=0

FOUND IT! - https://github.com/PapaJoesSoup/VesselMover/releases/tag/1.6.2

Edit - Another thing that helps me with those "visit a bunch of sites in a small-ish area" contracts is building a hovercraft. It's not as hard as you'd think, you just need to build a rocket-powered rover with reaction wheels and set friction control to 0. Fast and relatively efficient. Even better with a refueling base, although you could just turn on friction again and drive it like a normal rover

Edited December 31, 2017 by Fireheart318

[Rocket In My Pocket]

7 hours ago, TheFlyingKerman said:

A couple more counterpoints:

1) Terrain scatters is very bad for computer performance, especially when driving, because each of then have to be rendered in high detail. That is why there is an option to reduce or turn them off.

2) If these objects get turned into real, solid obstacles, they would make driving even more dangerous and impractical.

 

1) There are options to have it on but lower the "percentage" of actual displayed pieces. I agree however that forcing low end PC owners to turn on an optional graphical effect in order to progress in the game seems kind of silly now that you point it out.

2) SVT actually makes the terrain scatters into physical objects. I didn't play that much with it, but you'd be surprised how quickly it stops being an issue; you're used to dodging trees and rocks when driving in other games anyways.

Edited December 14, 2017 by Rocket In My Pocket

[DualDesertEagle]

I've got kerbal foundries installed and have yet to try most of the stuff it includes but to my knowledge the included wheels are pretty strong. But if u don't  care about realism (of which there ain't much in roving anyway) and u'd like to go full-Star-Wars-Ep.5-Snowspeeder u could use the repulsors and build urself a craft that only touches the ground when u turn them off or run out of power. Propulsion might become a problem tho. Ur gonna need fuel for that, so better pack drills and ISRU.

But done right a repulsor craft can be a feasible option for "roving" since the replusors do a pretty good job of keeping the craft off the ground even when the terrain changes abruptly. I've already run into a pretty steep shoreline at pretty high speed after speeding across a part of the sea near the KSC and my test craft never even got CLOSE to hitting the ground.

Another drawback is gonna be maneuvering in no-atmosphere environments. Not gonna happen without RCS. But if an atmosphere is present stabilizer fins and rudders will do. 

 

Either way, could be a fun thing to try.

[John FX]

I like rovers, I like to do stunt jumps on other bodies.

F5 is my friend.

[HebaruSan]

On 12/13/2017 at 5:32 AM, Crampman said:

Hence the suggestion : give them a specific, optional, bonus. Like the space stations were given one with the Mobile Processing Labs generating science from data.

On 12/13/2017 at 11:51 AM, Rocket In My Pocket said:

Taking some inspiration from real life, we can see that wheels are used to do one of two things in space: Drive astronauts a short distance at fairly high speed to run an experiment at a specific location or drive unmanned probe Rovers very long distances at slow speeds. We have contracts that support the first idea, but the second would really need some kind of stock system for driving rover's in the background similar to BonVoyage mod.

18 hours ago, Crampman said:

The idea I had was to create several types (or classes) on scatters, maybe with some rarity (like Type A are fairly common, but Type E is pretty rare, so you have to search for them), and you would have to use an experiment near to it, or towards it to detect its type, and get the science. Maybe a more sophisticated device could detect the types at some distance too. You could hop next to a scatter, but that would be more difficult than landing in a biome.

Another possibility is to nerf the competition; I don't recall seeing the Apollo astronauts zooming around the Moon with their jet packs. Make EVA fuel more scarce, make the classic "Kerbal tumbles" fatal unless you apply suit repair and first aid rapidly, boost the delta V and/or risk inherent in hopping with a lander. (It looks like Rover Science has already solved the problem of biomes being monolithic, whereas a real science mission would still benefit from, for example, collecting samples every 100 meters in a grid.)