[Discussion] Tilt Dres 80 degrees on its side?

[HafCoJoe]

Currently in KSP every single celedtial body orbits on a perfectly level plane. I think it would be interesting if this was changed for most planets to add an additional challenge, but in the meantime I think it would be a nice suggestion to add to Dres. It would make it quite a bit more unique and perhaps make it a more visited location.

Edited May 5, 2016 by Avera9eJoe

[Dman979]

17 minutes ago, Avera9eJoe said:

Currently in KSP every single celedtial body orbits on a perfectly level plane. I think it would be interesting if this was changed for most planets to add an additional challenge, but in the meantime I think it would be a nice suggestion to add to Dres. It would make it quite a bit more unique and perhaps make it a more visited location.

I don't think that KSP support axial tilt.

[HafCoJoe]

9 minutes ago, Dman979 said:

I don't think that KSP support axial tilt.

It doesn't  - it screws up the navball and coodrinate gets too I think. It's pretty much the biggest lack of orbital mechanics still in the game though :/

[VaPaL]

The is a mod for OPM that tilt Urlum 90°. But I never get to test it.
 

 

Edited May 5, 2016 by VaPaL

[spacebrick3]

Would the asteroids be tilted as well? And to slow down from an equatorial orbit relative to the surface, would you have to burn normal? I think that would make it more interesting, but also harder to land there. 

[HafCoJoe]

4 minutes ago, spacebrick3 said:

Would the asteroids be tilted as well? And to slow down from an equatorial orbit relative to the surface, would you have to burn normal? I think that would make it more interesting, but also harder to land there. 

It would be easy to land at the poles as they would hardly spin and sit very close to the solar plane. Asteroid mechanics wouldn't change. Getting into an equatorial orbit would be... interesting

[J.Random]

What are you talking about? Orbit normal is always the same, regardless of the axial tilt: grab the planet with your right hand, digits in the same direction as orbit, thumb up - there's your normal. Equatorial orbit is... well, equatorial, it will be tilted relative to ecliptic, but relative to the planet it's where it should be: at the equator. Equatorial insertion would be just as easy as polar insertion now.

[cubinator]

You can switch between polar and equatorial transfers with just a few m/s when coming in from an interplanetary transfer. It wouldn't be all that hard, but definitely would be interesting. Maybe a couple of small moons in a resonance?

The big problem here is that KSP doesn't simulate axial tilt. That is the first thing that has to change in order to even make this possible.

Edited May 5, 2016 by cubinator

[pandaman]

Assuming its a possibility at some point, I'm not sure it would be 'wise' to change the axial tilt of the existing bodies as it could possibly screw up saves and missions in progress.

But if and when they introduce new planets etc then yes bring it on! 

[cubinator]

2 minutes ago, pandaman said:

Assuming its a possibility at some point, I'm not sure it would be 'wise' to change the axial tilt of the existing bodies as it could possibly screw up saves and missions in progress.

But if and when they introduce new planets etc then yes bring it on! 

Maybe a different dwarf planet between Duna and Jool could have extremely high axial tilt. Right now there's almost nothing in that space.

[HafCoJoe]

4 minutes ago, pandaman said:

Assuming its a possibility at some point, I'm not sure it would be 'wise' to change the axial tilt of the existing bodies as it could possibly screw up saves and missions in progress.

But if and when they introduce new planets etc then yes bring it on! 

It could be as well that it would tilt everything in it's SOI by the same amount, so that everything remains uniform. It would be the unlucky people with a craft just about to enter another SOI who would have minor trouble.

[pandaman]

2 minutes ago, Avera9eJoe said:

It could be as well that it would tilt everything in it's SOI by the same amount, so that everything remains uniform. It would be the unlucky people with a craft just about to enter another SOI who would have minor trouble.

Wherever they put new planets inside the orbits of the current outer planets there is bound to be at least one player that suddenly finds themself on a collision course, or inside the planet. 

[Alshain]

I think with sufficient warning, complications could be mitigated.

Not sure if this or the lack of lagrange points is the biggest thing missing, but I doubt we will ever see either.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Alshain said:

Not sure if this or the lack of lagrange points is the biggest thing missing, but I doubt we will ever see either.

Given that one relies on integration, which means moving to a system like Principia, while the other is a code change that unlocks the planetary axis from the Planetarium "UP" (if I recall the issue correctly), we have a much higher chance of seeing one than the other.  Both require some work, but one is already supported if the correct changes to the code are made.

[Alshain]

Just now, regex said:

Given that one relies on integration, which means moving to a system like Principia, while the other is a code change that unlocks the planetary axis from the Planetarium "UP" (if I recall the issue correctly), we have a much higher chance of seeing one than the other.  Both require some work, but one is already supported if the correct changes to the code are made.

More likely or not, I still doubt we will ever see either.

[Guest]

Just now, Alshain said:

More likely or not, I still doubt we will ever see either.

You'll only see one at this point if you install Principia.  You may see the other if the devs find value in unclamping the planetary rotation axis.  Big difference.

[SpaceplaneAddict]

4 hours ago, Avera9eJoe said:

Currently in KSP every single celedtial body orbits on a perfectly level plane. I think it would be interesting if this was changed for most planets to add an additional challenge, but in the meantime I think it would be a nice suggestion to add to Dres. It would make it quite a bit more unique and perhaps make it a more visited location.

Wouldn't that make it so hard to go to that no one ever goes there?

[Superfluous J]

57 minutes ago, Alshain said:

More likely or not, I still doubt we will ever see either.

I can't tell if you're being a pessimist or a realist, or if one is all that much different from the other, but I agree with you. I still want axial tilt and don't really care about lagrange points.

5 minutes ago, SpaceplaneAddict said:

Wouldn't that make it so hard to go to that no one ever goes there?

Not really. Once you can tweak your approach from interplanetary distances to nail an equatorial orbit in the game CURRENTLY, you have all the skills to nail one on a tilted planet. So it's actually not much harder, just requires a little more fuel to align your orbit once you're there. And if you're landing, you don't even need to do that part.

And it'd give poor little Dres something unique which it kinda needs - new dresteroids aside of course

[Alshain]

1 hour ago, regex said:

You'll only see one at this point if you install Principia.  You may see the other if the devs find value in unclamping the planetary rotation axis.  Big difference.

Big difference or not, I still doubt we will ever see either.

 

1 minute ago, 5thHorseman said:

I can't tell if you're being a pessimist or a realist, or if one is all that much different from the other, but I agree with you. I still want axial tilt and don't really care about lagrange points.

Realist.  If they wanted to spend time on Axial Tilt, they would have done it by now.  The repercussions at this point in the game are rather huge, and will be even bigger once the console versions launch.

[Superfluous J]

1 minute ago, Alshain said:

Realist.  If they wanted to spend time on Axial Tilt, they would have done it by now.  The repercussions at this point in the game are rather huge, and will be even bigger once the console versions launch.

I don't think they're any worse than changes to atmo in 0.90 - 1.0. Less, in fact. And as they keep telling us, the version number doesn't actually mean anything so really we're just one version past that massive change.

[Alshain]

2 minutes ago, 5thHorseman said:

I don't think they're any worse than changes to atmo in 0.90 - 1.0. Less, in fact. And as they keep telling us, the version number doesn't actually mean anything so really we're just one version past that massive change.

Yeah but even in Squad's magical definitions of early access, beta, and release, you are talking about a significant change in not only game mechanics but learning.  The aero change was still in beta.

[Guest]

Axial tilt can be implemented without changing anything in the game.  I imagine its primary benefit would be to modders.

[cubinator]

27 minutes ago, regex said:

Axial tilt can be implemented without changing anything in the game.  I imagine its primary benefit would be to modders.

And also to those of us who can't play RSS because the tilted ecliptic bugs the crap out of us.

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, cubinator said:

And also to those of us who can't play RSS because the tilted ecliptic bugs the crap out of us.

That's your problem...   FYI, Principia may end up being a hard dependency for RO/RSS in the future, so there's that.

But yeah, I hope to see support for this appear because it would be probably the last piece of the patched conics puzzle and complete KSP.

[Matuchkin]

5 hours ago, Dman979 said:

I don't think that KSP support axial tilt.

What about RSS? Nothing seems to be screwed up there. So why shouldn't axial tilt be possible?

Edited May 5, 2016 by Matuchkin