How often do you use autostrut??

[TheGuyNamedAlan]

How often do you use them??

i use them when i build big vehicles and realising i got too much parts for a mission.

i personally really enjoy them as a new feature and i think its pretty cool.

what are your thoughts??

-Alan

[JohnnyPanzer]

All the time. I only use manual struts for astethic reasons these days. 

[magnemoe]

I found them very useful, then assembling huge ships in orbit they are an lifesaver, 


Orion nuclear pulse engine craft on an minmus qualification run before going to Duna, because of the high g pulses its perfect to test stability.  
Payload now is 6 satellites and probes on top, an empty srb for testing around Duna and a scan probe. 
Not only did the two heavy payloads jerk forward and back but the entire ship did compress a bit, turning on autostrut on large parts and its rock solid. 

6 minutes ago, JohnnyPanzer said:

All the time. I only use manual struts for astethic reasons these days. 

I overdid strutting on this, manual struts still has its place as auto strut is between centers of mass. if you want an strut to hold boosters in place on top standard struts is better. 
For my orion I could just have used autostrut between docking ports and heaviest part for the outriggers. 

[Zaphod12]

I use autostruts all the time, especially for my SLS lookalike. (Autostruts actually work fine with my SRB's)

[TheGuyNamedAlan]

1 hour ago, Zaphod12 said:

I use autostruts all the time, especially for my SLS lookalike. (Autostruts actually work fine with my SRB's)

wow that's amazing!!

[Vaporized Steel]

Always.

They're also alot stronger then the regular struts. Whether that is because they actually are stronger, or KSP struts better then I strut huts, I really don't know

[Streetwind]

Not at all.

As with any singleplayer game, every player decides for themselves what's cheating or not; and for myself, I feel like autostruts belong into the debug menu category of features. They are a crutch that was implemented to work around edge cases with Unity's attachment nodes in very specific instances (wheels); it is not, and was never intended to be, standard for all parts (there are plenty dev quotes to that end). It is still available freely for them - but then again, so is the debug menu, and I don't feel comfortable using that outside of absolute edge cases either.   Hence my decision to abstain.

Perhaps one day I will build something that will absolutely not hold together properly unless I activate autostrutting on it... but that day has not yet come.

[p1t1o]

Personally, I like how the aesthetics of my craft evolve as the design demands various parts to be added somehow. So if my craft requires struts, I rather they be manually added and visible, giving the craft a more "industrial" look and a more pragmatic feel. In sci-fi terms this equates to the ugly but practical "Red Dwarf" compared to the slick and shiny "Enterprise".

  

[Superfluous J]

Since 1.2 became a public beta, I've used them on every single ship that I would have otherwise put regular struts on. I've used regular struts only a couple times, and that was in testing to see if there was any reason to anymore. I don't think there is.

[The Aziz]

I was using Kerbal Joint Reinforcement, but since I discovered autostruts, and how powerful they are, I use them to prevent big vessels from wobbling. Come one, few of them placed around docking ports keep my orbital station straight, and that's without adding more parts! (which would increase wobbling again). 

[Majorjim!]

4 hours ago, JohnnyPanzer said:

All the time. I only use manual struts for astethic reasons these days. 

These days? :-) they've only just been released! 

 Personally I don't trust them yet. I need to do more testing. The issue I see is that you cannot auto strut to another close part so they are quite limited. 

 Does anyone know if they cause any lag like a visible part does? They must have at least a small impact. 

[Gaarst]

How often? No.

I won't say it's cheating because half of the forums will come screaming at me, but just that I find them a bit OP.

[Majorjim!]

2 hours ago, 5thHorseman said:

Since 1.2 became a public beta, I've used them on every single ship that I would have otherwise put regular struts on. I've used regular struts only a couple times, and that was in testing to see if there was any reason to anymore. I don't think there is.

As I said above you cannot strut to a close part so they are limited. In a single build I have at least 10 points were auto strutting would not work and good ol building experience and struts are the only solution.

[DocMoriarty]

I never used them so far. When struts are missing it's MY fault. Much more challenge and fun. Same for KER and the like. Way too easy. A real Kerbal lives and dies with his own solutions.

[Superfluous J]

14 minutes ago, Majorjim! said:

As I said above you cannot strut to a close part so they are limited. In a single build I have at least 10 points were auto strutting would not work and good ol building experience and struts are the only solution.

I've found some great "grandparent" tricks, like translating SRBs down on the decouplers so the "root to root" autostruts make a triangle of stability instead of a line. Also, strutting everything (that is strutted, I'm not saying to strut everything :D) to the same thing, be it root or heaviest part, is a boon.

[Majorjim!]

6 minutes ago, 5thHorseman said:

I've found some great "grandparent" tricks, like translating SRBs down on the decouplers so the "root to root" autostruts make a triangle of stability instead of a line. Also, strutting everything (that is strutted, I'm not saying to strut everything :D) to the same thing, be it root or heaviest part, is a boon.

I can see that in certain situations it is useful but I have already seen lots of times when they just won't work. Parts that need to stay strutted after separation, as one example. 

[Firemetal]

Autostruts really do help orbital construction.  Built a Duna cruiser out of four launches and it never wobbled.

Now, I just use autostrut. Very helpful for planes since normal struts cause a lot of drag.

Fire

[Tr1gg3r]

Never used autostrut, prefer the engineering challenge of getting things right myself, altho ill happily click Rigid Attachment option all day long  

[Terwin]

1 hour ago, 5thHorseman said:

I've found some great "grandparent" tricks, like translating SRBs down on the decouplers so the "root to root" autostruts make a triangle of stability instead of a line. Also, strutting everything (that is strutted, I'm not saying to strut everything :D) to the same thing, be it root or heaviest part, is a boon.

I have seen some examples that indicate that a single strut will secure the entire part as if a lattice is in place, as opposed to a single point of reinforcement.  

May be worth testing to see if your triangle is needed.

[klesh]

I dont use them because I dont know if they add drag, where they go, and what they'll interfere with.  I trust the struts I place myself, as I can see them.

[monstah]

6 hours ago, Streetwind said:

I feel like autostruts belong into the debug menu category of features. They are a crutch that was implemented to work around edge cases with Unity's attachment nodes in very specific instances (wheels)

(emphasis mine)

I couldn't agree more. I feel they are a kludge to fix a worse kludge, and I don't ever ever touch them. They are not like anything else in the game, they don't add mass, and they can magically appear anywhere, anytime. Like, 'heaviest part'? So, as you drain your fuel tanks, they change to a different part? They're a ridiculous addition to the game, in my opinion (if you think of them as a game mechanic, as opposed to a... kluge of a fix for edge cases).

[TheGuyNamedAlan]

4 hours ago, klesh said:

I dont use them because I dont know if they add drag, where they go, and what they'll interfere with.  I trust the struts I place myself, as I can see them.

i dont think they do add drag at all. if gou use the autlstruts in the vab, there will be a line going to the part your strutting it to.

[fourfa]

8 hours ago, Majorjim! said:

These days? :-) they've only just been released!

...

 Does anyone know if they cause any lag like a visible part does? They must have at least a small impact. 

They've been in the 1.2 prerelease since it started, and they were in 1.1.3 with all the landing gear and legs - I and others were throwing unnecessary legs all over big ships to shore them up.

Physics-wise, they're apparently exactly the same as visible struts (according to devs in DasValdez stream chat).  But no mass and no cost.  I expect some mass and price penalty to eventually be incurred with autostruts, at least in career mode

[Terwin]

4 minutes ago, fourfa said:

They've been in the 1.2 prerelease since it started, and they were in 1.1.3 with all the landing gear and legs - I and others were throwing unnecessary legs all over big ships to shore them up.

Physics-wise, they're apparently exactly the same as visible struts (according to devs in DasValdez stream chat).  But no mass and no cost.  I expect some mass and price penalty to eventually be incurred with autostruts, at least in career mode

I had not realized they were massless, I may need to look for opportunities to replace my struts with auto-struts.

I have yet to have a career game where the cost of struts matters, but every ounce of mass matters to the rocket equation.  (I almost wish I used struts on non-launch stages so I could get even bigger benefits)