Scrap 1.1.x wheels

[cantab]

Wheels and landing legs are currently bad enough that it's easier to make a VTOL that lands on I-beams or fuel tanks rather than try and deal with a rolling landing. They are bad enough that designing a small light aircraft is likely to require more time and effort spent sorting out the landing gear than designing the actual plane. That is not a state of affairs I feel should continue.

[The_Rocketeer]

7 minutes ago, Alshain said:

The friction control.  That is the main one that I know of.  I haven't spent a lot of time playing 1.1, but being able to alter the friction is being able to alter the physics which is fine that you can do that, but it should be something you do in Alt-F12 or in the physics config file by modding.

It was only added as a stop gap measure because the wheels are so awful anyway.  When the wheels are fixed it should be isolated or removed out of the main gameplay.

I see where you're coming from, but at the same time I'm quite comfortable with the idea of my engineers deliberately engineering the tyres/wheels to be more- or less-grippy on a particular surface. Tyre pressure and texture can have an enormous effect on traction depending on surface-type.

So, while I agree broadly with your attitude to laws-of-physics, I do think there's an argument for simple 'friction slider' as an abstraction of real engineering. Editor-only maybe, but I'm still cool with it - I would not class this a cheat, just soft-simulation.

6 minutes ago, cantab said:

Wheels and landing legs are currently bad enough that it's easier to make a VTOL that lands on I-beams or fuel tanks rather than try and deal with a rolling landing. They are bad enough that designing a small light aircraft is likely to require more time and effort spent sorting out the landing gear than designing the actual plane. That is not a state of affairs I feel should continue.

It's always been easier (in KSP) to land a VTOL than a rolling stop, assuming u have the relevant piloting ability. I disagree with your reasoning anyway - plane wheels are finnicky, but I've had no severe problems with my aircraft once I've tested and modified a little. I do this with all my crafts anyway: build, test, modify, test, modify, test, approve, mission.

 

Edited July 8, 2016 by The_Rocketeer

[Corona688]

23 minutes ago, Alshain said:

But that's what I'm telling you, it's not imposing my way of gameplay, it's imposing a 'physical world' gameplay that KSP was designed to be.

No it's not imposing.  It just sits there.  It doesn't do anything until you push it.

Once again, this is only really about other people doing things you don't like.  There'll always be a "wrong" way to play the game and there'll always be people doing it.  Live with it.  They get to do what they want, you get to do what you want.  It neither breaks your leg nor picks your pocket.  Why care?

Edited July 8, 2016 by Corona688

[Alshain]

3 minutes ago, The_Rocketeer said:

I see where you're coming from, but at the same time I'm quite comfortable with the idea of my engineers deliberately engineering the tyres/wheels to be more- or less-grippy on a particular surface. Tyre pressure and texture can have an enormous effect on traction depending on surface-type.

So, while I agree broadly with your attitude to laws-of-physics, I do think there's an argument for simple 'friction slider' as an abstraction of real engineering. Editor-only maybe, but I'm still cool with it - I would not class this a cheat, just soft-simulation.

Well, that's the thing though, the only way to change the grip would be to change the wheel.  It would be a different part.  Tire pressure may effect traction, but rover wheels don't have air in their tires.  Often airplane wheels are solid rubber too, though this is dependent on the tire (the little ones would probably be solid rubber).  So you would have to replace the wheels with other parts, which still wouldn't allow you to have 0 friction.

Just now, Corona688 said:

No it's not imposing.  It just sits there.  It doesn't do anything until you push it.

Once again, this is only really about other people doing things you don't like.  There'll always be a "wrong" way to play the game and there'll always be people doing it.  Live with it.  Let them do what they want.  You get to do what you want.  You don't have to care.  Why care?

Ok, you know what.  You are just trying to stir up a fight rather than coherently discuss this issue, so I'm just going to put you on the good ol' ignore list, because I like discussion, but not baiting.

[Corona688]

Have fun playing the wrong way.

[Spartwo]

The collision issues is something on unity's end, they might be able to fix it but no doubt it would take a lot of effort. Something that can be done and I think should is to raise the limit for wheel friction. Before 1.1 the wheels had so much grip that you needed a bunch of reaction wheels to not flip over when turning. Now they have so little you need a bunch of reaction wheels to drive straight.

[The_Rocketeer]

50 minutes ago, Alshain said:

Well, that's the thing though, the only way to change the grip would be to change the wheel.  It would be a different part.  Tire pressure may effect traction, but rover wheels don't have air in their tires.  Often airplane wheels are solid rubber too, though this is dependent on the tire (the little ones would probably be solid rubber).  So you would have to replace the wheels with other parts, which still wouldn't allow you to have 0 friction.

I don't see why a different wheel couldn't be attached to the same hub. That wouldn't be a different suspension assembly, just a different roadwheel.

The composition of the tyre can affect traction too. Steel wire wheels like the moon rover would have completely different grip to solid rubber tyres. There's lots of variables here.

I do agree 0 friction is off the end of reasonable, tho I guess it isn't so different from a free-rotation caster/dolly-wheel.

I agree it's a bit inelegant, but a simple slider handles a lot of RL variables in a really straightforward way. Always room for improvement!

[Frybert]

Unfortunately there is no way to go back at this time. Also a good portion of this thread seems to be a personal fight, so I'm going to close this one.