Wind

[Smart Boy]

Could there be wind that disturbs the flight path of the ship and makes the game more challenging. The wind's direction is random and can be turned off in settings.

[Ryaja]

That sounds good, but instead of a random direction it could flow down from highlands to lowlands and if there was weather during tornadoes and hurricanes it could spin you around

[intelliCom]

11 hours ago, Smart Boy said:

Could there be wind that disturbs the flight path of the ship and makes the game more challenging. The wind's direction is random and can be turned off in settings.

Sorry if I sound stupid, but are you referring to turbulence within an atmosphere? In most cases regarding KSP, I'd assume "flight path" to mean "trajectory in space".

Before I thought about it longer, I honestly thought you were referring to just a random arbitrary force in space that would throw off your spacecraft's trajectory, rendering any hohmann transfer useless.

[Nazalassa]

Simple solution:

You get a dozen points with given rotation direction and speed. Then to know the wind affecting a ship at a given point of the planet, divide each point's speed by the square of the distance between that point and the ship and you get a dozen values. Then take their average, and you get the wind.

[BowlerHatGuy3]

I have no problem with them adding wind. However, if they do I hope they make it an option to fly with your mouse or a joystick. Trying to make a crosswind landing would be extremely frustrating with a keyboard, especially during a storm.

[The Aziz]

21 hours ago, Nazalassa said:

to know the wind affecting a ship at a given point of the planet, divide each point's speed by the square of the distance between that point and the ship and you get a dozen values. Then take their average

 

21 hours ago, Nazalassa said:

Simple solution

Pick one

[t_v]

2 hours ago, The Aziz said:

Pick one

In terms of modeling a planet’s wind currents, this is a pretty darn simple solution.  And plus, “simple” is simply a label that is subjective and what may be simple for one person may not be for another. Overall, I like this idea, but I think it could be revised by having those dozen points represent a certain amount of clockwise or counterclockwise wind spiraling, and wind direction on the ship depends on the angle the ship is to the point. For example, if it is a clockwise spiral and the ship is directly north, the wind vector will be pointing east for that point. 

 

Edit: oops, that is what was being suggested. 

Edited June 5, 2022 by t_v

[Nazalassa]

On 6/4/2022 at 6:40 PM, BowlerHatGuy2 said:

Trying to make a crosswind landing would be extremely frustrating with a keyboard, especially during a storm.

Who says you have to?

If you plan your flights, then you can try to avoid landing during a storm.

[Bej Kerman]

On 6/4/2022 at 5:40 PM, BowlerHatGuy2 said:

I have no problem with them adding wind. However, if they do I hope they make it an option to fly with your mouse or a joystick. Trying to make a crosswind landing would be extremely frustrating with a keyboard, especially during a storm.

Then just practice. 

[Pthigrivi]

On 6/4/2022 at 12:40 PM, BowlerHatGuy2 said:

fly with your mouse

I don't know why Ive never thought about this before. It be nice to toggle a landing mode where the camera stays fixed and the mouse controlled your pitch and yaw, throttle with scroll wheel, and roll just with Q + E. 

[linuxgurugamer]

2 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

I don't know why Ive never thought about this before. It be nice to toggle a landing mode where the camera stays fixed and the mouse controlled your pitch and yaw, throttle with scroll wheel, and roll just with Q + E. 

Look for a mod called Mouse Aim Flight

 

Edited June 5, 2022 by linuxgurugamer

[Pthigrivi]

On a more ot note there are supposed to be wind turbines included as part of colonial power supply so an interesting dynamic would be windy zones that were better for power generation but harder to land nearby. 

Edited June 6, 2022 by Pthigrivi

[BowlerHatGuy3]

On 6/5/2022 at 1:15 PM, Nazalassa said:

Who says you have to?

If you plan your flights, then you can try to avoid landing during a storm.

In atmosphere flights maybe. But what about shuttle reentrys? Most people don’t really look too closely at the KSC until they’ve made their reentry burn. If you make your burn then see an EF69 hurricane over the KSC, you’re kind of screwed. I think adding joystick and mouse controls would be the best option over all, as flying airplanes with keyboard kind of sucks anyway.

[Vl3d]

Materials density, viscosity and temperature -> ground / liquid / gas temperature transfer -> evaporation / condensation / sublimation -> rain and snow -> surface liquid flow -> atmospheric mass movement and interaction with terrain -> currents and turbulence -> wind -> clouds and storms -> seasons -> climates.

Wind, flooding and snow weight would impact buildings also.

I want all this.

Edited June 7, 2022 by Vl3d

[linuxgurugamer]

18 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

Materials density, viscosity and temperature -> ground / liquid / gas temperature transfer -> evaporation / condensation / sublimation -> rain and snow -> surface liquid flow -> atmospheric mass movement and interaction with terrain -> currents and turbulence -> wind -> clouds and storms -> seasons -> climates.

Wind, flooding and snow weight would impact buildings also.

I want all this.

You do realize this is a game, not a complete, full blown simulation?

[t_v]

2 hours ago, linuxgurugamer said:

3 hours ago, Vl3d said:

Materials density, viscosity and temperature -> ground / liquid / gas temperature transfer -> evaporation / condensation / sublimation -> rain and snow -> surface liquid flow -> atmospheric mass movement and interaction with terrain -> currents and turbulence -> wind -> clouds and storms -> seasons -> climates.

Wind, flooding and snow weight would impact buildings also.

I want all this.

You do realize this is a game, not a complete, full blown simulation?

In addition to that, even if the devs decided to implement all of those features, most of them would not impact the gameplay experience and/or could be simulated with a much less compute-intensive method. For example, viscosity could just be baked into the drag equation as a multiplier since fluids wouldn't actually visibly move, temp transfer would just be the regular day/night temperature fluctuation but with decreased amplitude and with a delay (in other words, still a simple oscillating function), and surface liquid flow could be achieved by moving the water texture over time and applying a force. The first two wouldn't impact the player at all since it would just become the new default, and the third one is not even really simulating fluid flow. 

[BowlerHatGuy3]

5 hours ago, Vl3d said:

Materials density, viscosity and temperature -> ground / liquid / gas temperature transfer -> evaporation / condensation / sublimation -> rain and snow -> surface liquid flow -> atmospheric mass movement and interaction with terrain -> currents and turbulence -> wind -> clouds and storms -> seasons -> climates.

Wind, flooding and snow weight would impact buildings also.

I want all this.

I’m gonna be honest man, a lot of the suggestions you have are kind of wack and at times just straight up unrealistic. There are games that prioritize being as true to life as possible that don’t even bother with some of these points. I would suggest dialing things back a bit, as thinking that most of these features are going to be in the game sets up for disappointment.

[linuxgurugamer]

5 hours ago, t_v said:

In addition to that, even if the devs decided to implement all of those features, most of them would not impact the gameplay experience and/or could be simulated with a much less compute-intensive method. For example, viscosity could just be baked into the drag equation as a multiplier since fluids wouldn't actually visibly move, temp transfer would just be the regular day/night temperature fluctuation but with decreased amplitude and with a delay (in other words, still a simple oscillating function), and surface liquid flow could be achieved by moving the water texture over time and applying a force. The first two wouldn't impact the player at all since it would just become the new default, and the third one is not even really simulating fluid flow. 

Do you have any idea what adding multiple simulations can do?  Sure, each type of sim may not have a large impact, but as you add more, it can get exponential in the impact

Anytime you add something like that, there will be significant overhead.  How much of course will depend on how complicated the simulation is.  And, if it gets simplified too much, you might as well not have it.

[jost]

Hate to be that guy but I actually would prefer no wind at all. As Linuxgurugamer pointed out simulations comes with a cost. 
Since I play this game mostly for the fireworks (aka I don't build and fly planes a lot and I don't enjoy them very much. Building, launching and flying moar boosters in contrary: Count me in!) I would hate to get a slower game for some (imho) not needed feature. 

On the other hand I can admit that some simulations might be interesting even for me aka to build VEGA-style Eve Balloon for planets/moons with an atmosphere. But to make it fun the simulation needs to be complex enough, that the result of each mission doesn't gets to predictable. 
Which would mean: A more complex simulation, meaning worse performance. 

So while this sounds like a awesome idea with a lot of potential for epic missions I fear the potential negative effects outweight the positive ones. 

If you disagree (since you prefer spaceplanes or for whatever reason else) that's fine. Different kerbals have different tastes

Just my two cents

[t_v]

Just to clarify, I don't see the need for extensive realism in atmospheres and fluids, whether it is fully simulated or approximated. The one system that I would actively enjoy playing with is wind (because it would make flying long distances more active) and in terms of wind, all I would want to see is a force applied to things, not pressure variations, updrafts, turbulence, etc. I think that wind would mesh well with all styles of play, whether it is rocket launching (what if you had to scrub a launch because you were in the middle of a massive hurricane), plane flying, or other exploration (balloons are a good idea in my opinion), and it would complement the weather system which we know is going to be visually there in any case. But definitely, it is important to look at what systems can be removed to improve performance, and atmospheric systems are relatively low priority.

[linuxgurugamer]

35 minutes ago, t_v said:

clarify, I don't see the need for extensive realism in atmospheres and fluids, whether it is fully simulated or approximated. The one

Yes, my reply to you was really directed at the original poster.

Sorry if if came off the wrong way

Edited June 7, 2022 by linuxgurugamer

[Vl3d]

Fine, I'll settle for rain, snow, wind, clouds, storms with lightning and thunder, seasons, climates.

Wind, flooding and snow weight would impact buildings also.

But all this with classic water AND other materials like methane etc.

Should make for some very interesting planets.

[Bej Kerman]

12 hours ago, Vl3d said:

Materials density, viscosity and temperature -> ground / liquid / gas temperature transfer -> evaporation / condensation / sublimation -> rain and snow -> surface liquid flow -> atmospheric mass movement and interaction with terrain -> currents and turbulence -> wind -> clouds and storms -> seasons -> climates.

Wind, flooding and snow weight would impact buildings also.

I want all this.

Maybe when computers run on unicorns and magic, the devs can cater to your unrealistic wishes. But not today.

[jost]

18 hours ago, Vl3d said:

Fine, I'll settle for rain, snow, wind, clouds, storms with lightning and thunder, seasons, climates.

Wind, flooding and snow weight would impact buildings also.

But all this with classic water AND other materials like methane etc.

Should make for some very interesting planets.

Even this would be quite complex to be simulated. Propably not so complex as the simulations for actual weather reports (which are made with super computers to simulate the weather for the next days and still have errors)  but still complex enough to hit the performance. 
And KSP2 isn't supposed to run just on the newest and fastest gaming rig but on older pcs too. Not every potato which was supported by KSP1 but I would expect that it it system requirements to be near the typical new PC on the original release date (2-3 years ago). Why? Because it wouldn't make sense from a economical point of view: The investors want to sell as many copys as possible. Thus creating a epic game which can just be played by gamers with access to the newest and most expensive gaming rig, wouldn't make sense. 

One might argue that the KSP weather mod don't seems to have performance issues (never played it bust just read this: https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/199347-18x-111x-kerbal-weather-project-kwp-v100/page/3/ ) but it's running with precalculated data If I unterstand everything correctly. 
And it's not even doing visual effects (like snow, lightings, clouds etc pp). 

So: It might be possible that a kind of easy weather model be included. It might even be fun/ good enough for playing (I mean KSP1s atmosphere model is kind of dumb but for most people (people without FAR) it meant years of entertainment). 

But it propably won't be the detailed, complex, fancy simulation you love to see. 

Just my two cents, Jost.

[DeadJohn]

Adding wind would be okay, as an option. Make the wind blow in a constant, random direction at the start of each mission.

I absolutely do not want wind gusts, terrain effects, and other weather variables. It would clutter the GUI too much during launch. Real mission control has many people to monitor all that and I don't want to deal with micromanagement.

It's a game. Pretend the weather is bad, miss your launch window, timewarp to the next window, done. The devs don't have to do anything to program why the weather is too bad to fly. Or pretend that the KSC was built somewhere with great weather that never limits rockets.