Weather

[Julien Kerman]

I think weather, that effects the rockets would be pretty cool.

- thunderstorm: If a lightning hits the active vessel, the SAS turns off for a few minutes.

- fog: no effects, but could be visible before sunset.

- snow: engines do not gimbal correctly and decouplers have a random delay of a few seconds because they are "frozen"

- wind: thw wind shakes the rocket.

- rain: water effects on the screen.

 

So what do you think?

 

[NSEP]

This has been suggested earlier.

And in my opinion, as an on/off difficulty feature or a mod i would be happy.

But please do keep in mind that most weather like rain and thunder only applies below the clouds.

Edited July 7, 2017 by NSEP

[Tex_NL]

11 minutes ago, Julien Kerman said:

So what do you think?

I think you should search the forum before making suggestions.
This is such an old and common idea I am not even going to bother giving an honest reply.

[RatchetinSpace]

I started a topic like this not too long ago.

Check out this post, just quickly though I think weather would be a good addition to the game.

[weissel]

On 07/07/2017 at 6:03 PM, Julien Kerman said:

- snow: engines do not gimbal correctly and decouplers have a random delay of a few seconds because they are "frozen"

Engines are "frozen"?  Do you see your nozzles go white all over with frozen humidity, or are they starting to glow red if you run them?
Decouplers having a delay?  Decouplers use explosives.  Explosives do not care about deep temperatures: guns fire even in the Russian winters and the Antarctic.

You want something 'cool' which is fine --- but if it badly clashes with the type of reality the game has, it fails.  (This reminds me of Here's To The Heroes (lyrics), mp3.)

I think you should go back to the drawing board to find viable effects and explain why waiting a few days, weeks, months for more pleasant weather is not going to happen all the time, rendering all the weather mostly a non-issue or a nuisance at worst.

[CobaltShock]

A full scale weather system would probably be way too complicated, unless the weather was all pre-determined and went on a cycle. Maybe something easier to account for would be not only heat, but cold temperatures as @Julien Kerman mentioned, which could shutdown parts or make them less efficient. Just like radiators, heating systems could be added to spacecrafts to ensure they both can survive cold climates & the night sides of moons/planets. Just like the pressure & re-entry heating settings on career mode, this could be toggled on and off, and perhaps at what intensity. 

 

Also, maybe something more random that wouldn't vary on location could be wind speed. Not really something you can add parts to prevent (especially since it wouldn't be too intense), but this could allow a new science material to be added: The anemometer. Since anemometers analyze wind and wind pressure, this could be both a useful tool and a material to gather additional science on any planet/moon with an atmosphere. 

 

And since these things don't really need clouds or any graphical additions to make the users feel immersed into these systems. Also, the cheats menu could allow toggling wind speed (similar to the hack gravity system) to allow players to mess around with it as well for things such as plane landings in 250 km/hr tail winds. Dunno, would be fun and would fit the theme of KSP without seeming like an outlandish addition. 

 

Edited July 10, 2018 by Steeeeve

[FireKerb]

Oh no, a snowstorm!

*Presses next day*

[Tyko]

On 7/7/2017 at 10:03 AM, Julien Kerman said:

I think weather, that effects the rockets would be pretty cool.

- thunderstorm: If a lightning hits the active vessel, the SAS turns off for a few minutes.

- fog: no effects, but could be visible before sunset.

- snow: engines do not gimbal correctly and decouplers have a random delay of a few seconds because they are "frozen"

- wind: thw wind shakes the rocket.

- rain: water effects on the screen.

 

So what do you think?

 

Kind of cool, but...  1) the game would need a part failure system which it doesn't have and 2) In most cases launches are just delayed during inclement weather which means hitting the "advance a day forward" button a couple times til the weather clears - not really much fun.

It would be interesting to see it added to the Mission Planner because MP does have a failure system and the mission designer can give reasons why you can't delay - rescue missions, pressure from leadership, etc.

Edited July 11, 2018 by Tyko

[Xd the great]

If you are doing weather, add ocean currents.

[ZooNamedGames]

I’ve suggested a full weather system that KSP should utilize in the past. Where that post is I don’t know.

[StarStreak2109]

Weather would also be tremendously interesting when thinking of Eve and Jool...

[KerbolExplorer]

There was once a mod that added wind to ksp but I think is dead.

I have more suggestion:

Snow should make the runway and launchsite need maintenance.

In duna there should be sand storms that would make the windows and solar panels dusty(solar panels don't work and windows are blocked)

Eve has sandstorms like duna And has acid storms that will slowly kill kerbal.

Laythe:has massive storms that could lift light spacecraft.

[FireKerb]

The problem is that it would just make KSP even more unfriendly.

Oh, nice! You landed on Duna! Oh, by the way, your solar panels don't work. And you won't notice until you run out of power. Have fun!

[Xd the great]

On 7/18/2018 at 4:22 PM, FireKerb said:

The problem is that it would just make KSP even more unfriendly.

Oh, nice! You landed on Duna! Oh, by the way, your solar panels don't work. And you won't notice until you run out of power. Have fun!

Toggleable in difficulty settings?

[StarStreak2109]

On 7/18/2018 at 10:22 AM, FireKerb said:

The problem is that it would just make KSP even more unfriendly.

Oh, nice! You landed on Duna! Oh, by the way, your solar panels don't work. And you won't notice until you run out of power. Have fun!

I think KSP is not unfriendly. If you find the game too hard, you can always change your difficulty settings. And of course having adverse climate conditions on other worlds is something real world space programs have to deal with as well...

[FireKerb]

But the problem then returns to my first post. You can just skip it, pretty much making it "you can't land here yet cuz weather but you can land tomorrow which you easily time warp to".

[Xd the great]

22 hours ago, FireKerb said:

But the problem then returns to my first post. You can just skip it, pretty much making it "you can't land here yet cuz weather but you can land tomorrow which you easily time warp to".

Thats what real space agencies do. Wait for good weather.

[FireKerb]

But that just creates waiting for no reason. And KSP is a game, not a simulator. Realism shouldn't get in the way of fun.

Take atmospheric heating. It provides realism and something to plan around but doesn't reduce fun significantly because most things people drop out of orbit (pods) can easily survive low Kerbin orbit reentry.

Now think about weather. Sure, it provides realism, but does it effect fun?

As an aesthetic thing, or during missions, sure. I'd love to see weather effects in stock (my computer would disagree). But I don't think it would make a good core game mechanic.

[Cassel]

4 hours ago, FireKerb said:

But that just creates waiting for no reason. And KSP is a game, not a simulator. Realism shouldn't get in the way of fun.

 

There is reason, landing without wind makes it easier?
 

I would suggest sea currents and air breezes that are not random.

Sea currents can be constant, if the ship will affect such a current, with the engines turned off it will be able to circumnavigate a large part of the planet (even in warp mode).
As for the wind, I do not know, but also some constant breeze would come in handy, we could build gliders and take them from the top of the mountains.

Edited July 24, 2018 by Cassel

[weissel]

9 hours ago, Cassel said:

There is reason, landing without wind makes it easier?
 

I would suggest sea currents and air breezes that are not random.

Sea currents can be constant, if the ship will affect such a current, with the engines turned off it will be able to circumnavigate a large part of the planet (even in warp mode).
As for the wind, I do not know, but also some constant breeze would come in handy, we could build gliders and take them from the top of the mountains.

Question: What in "wind" makes the game more fun, gives additional options (that are fun) or makes it harder (for those who want that)?

Answer:

• It might influence planes (crosswind landing)
  • Fun?  No.
  • Options?  Minimal.
  • Harder?  Yes, but not much and if you want hardcore planes, there are a number of hardcore plane simulators.
• It might influence hitting the exact spot --- when the parachutes are deployed and you are moved
  • Fun? No.
  • Options?  Minimal.
  • Harder?  A bit --- unless you really go for a spot landing with parachute descent and no corrective possibilities (rover, chute + powered descend, ...) it at most will cause a few funds less on recovery.
• Updrafts might allow gliders to be more viable
  • Fun?  Some for some part of the players: those that are into hang gliding in KSP --- outside a novelty use.  Potentially tiny.
  • Options?  Minimal, maybe some glider landing mechanisms could use the updraft.
  • Harder?  No.
• Might prevent a launch/deorbit
  • Fun? None.
  • Options?  None?
  • Harder?  Not harder than pressing the "next day" button or advancing time by other means.  A nuisance, basically, since you are not limited by life support (not in KSP) nor electricity (if you have solar panels or RTGs).
    [I remember my "first" Mun-probe back when w/o solar cells or RTGs (didn't have the technology) and how it was packed over and over with batteries to be able to live to Mun and send back science reports.  That was fun --- I had to plan a power budget (which worked) and got all that lovely science, but also the probe was no more (except as a landmark) as batteries ran out ... bitter-sweet!
• Might move clouds and balloons
  • Fun?  Optics only (no balloons in KSP), though looks can be important.
  • Options? None
  • Harder?  No
• Sea ccurrents
  • Fun? Nope.
  • Options?  You can have an object drift to a different continent in just a few months time.  Or take a plane for a few hours.  Or a rocket and some minutes.
  • Harder?  No, the opposite: you get to different biomes on the cheap.

In short, minimal gains.  Clouds can "move on their own", without implementing any kind of wind.  Quite some work, especially if you want variable updrafts based on low wind direction and speed and the surface of the planet.

But feel free to prove me wrong by making a mod (or paying someone to do it) and showing the world at least a bit of your vision.

 

15 hours ago, Xd the great said:

Thats what real space agencies do. Wait for good weather.

Real space agencies do not fly their rockets by hand and deal with the light lag between home and wherever the probe may be.  Real space agencies deal with nasty rocket fuels.  Real space agencies deal with failing technology in satellites from several decades ago.  Real space agencies do rarely have cameras watching their vessels take off, land and perform that are well outside said vessels.  Real space agencies do tons and tons of math to make things happen right, have to work with real world. imperfect material and political interference.

If you really want all that (and a few million more real life space agency problems) to be in KSP, I accept your argument.  Oh, and why are you playing KSP instead of Orbiter --- the latter is much more realistic, not some silly patched conics and 2 body gravity --- and therefore missing the Lagrange points. They are important for science and L4 and L5 for almost any permanent space outpost still "near" Earth.  Or Kerbin.

Otherwise, please think "What does $FEATURE as a mod or inbuilt give KSP players that they will enjoy --- as fun or as challenge?" and not "B-b-but it is re-a-lis-tic..."

PS: the Earth's moon's gravity is lumpy.  This has serious effects on long term orbit stability.

[Cassel]

@weissel Maybe for you what you mentioned as difficult is not fun, but for me it would all be interesting.

People do not play so that each time they repeat the same activities and receive exactly the same results (unless someone likes games on facebook), look at such titles as Diablo, a game in which finding a valuable item is random can provide good fun?

It might influence planes (crosswind landing)  - It would be a good game that would guarantee new skills.
It might influence hitting the exact spot --- when the parachutes are deployed and you are moved - That is realism, which requires the player to think about how to accomplish a given mission, for example by creating a rover
Updrafts might allow gliders to be more viable  - fun and many new possibilities
Might prevent a launch/deorbit - How? The fact that you will not land at exactly the point where you would like to not interrupt the mission. It's just like in reality, the capsule lands on the sea, but there is no exact location just an area.
Rocket launch is also not a problem, unless you use rockets that can fall apart for any reason.
Might move clouds and balloons - Balloons would be a very interesting addition. A new type of mission, weather balloons, communication, new research, a new way of placing small satellites in orbit (www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXuU275TObg).
Sea ccurrents - New possibilities, new missions, for example, throw out the buoys at the point and follow the currents of the sea, it would be useful to anchor for ships.

[FireKerb]

1 hour ago, Cassel said:

It might influence planes (crosswind landing)  - It would be a good game that would guarantee new skills.

That sentence is extremely clumsily worded that I have no idea what it means.

1 hour ago, Cassel said:

It might influence hitting the exact spot --- when the parachutes are deployed and you are moved - That is realism, which requires the player to think about how to accomplish a given mission, for example by creating a rover

Oh no! My rover landed 5 cm away from where I planned it to land!

1 hour ago, Cassel said:

Updrafts might allow gliders to be more viable  - fun and many new possibilities

Gliders might be fun. At least, if engines didn't exist.

1 hour ago, Cassel said:

Might move clouds and balloons - Balloons would be a very interesting addition. A new type of mission, weather balloons, communication, new research, a new way of placing small satellites in orbit

Time is the most valuable resource in KSP. Rockets are fast. Balloons are not.

1 hour ago, Cassel said:

Sea ccurrents - New possibilities, new missions, for example, throw out the buoys at the point and follow the currents of the sea, it would be useful to anchor for ships.

Why would you want to follow sea currents?

What I would like to hear about though are these "New possibilites".

[KerbolExplorer]

On 7/18/2018 at 9:22 AM, FireKerb said:

The problem is that it would just make KSP even more unfriendly.

Oh, nice! You landed on Duna! Oh, by the way, your solar panels don't work. And you won't notice until you run out of power. Have fun!

That's why probes exist.to see the dangers a planet has before sending kerbal there.And my idea is not to have the solar panels instantly bloked.the idea is that they will block during sandstorms.And there wouldn't be a sandstorm all day.They would come randomly.This could aswell give way to new parts to predict sandstorms.

Oh and space in real life isn't friendly either

[Lego_Prodigy]

On 7/7/2017 at 12:03 PM, Julien Kerman said:

 

- thunderstorm: If a lightning hits the active vessel, the SAS turns off for a few minutes.

 

I would like to point out that IRL, there have been missions that have been struck by lightning more than once and had only pretty minor issues. Example: Apollo 12.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_12 

[Cassel]

4 hours ago, FireKerb said:

That sentence is extremely clumsily worded that I have no idea what it means.

Oh no! My rover landed 5 cm away from where I planned it to land!

Gliders might be fun. At least, if engines didn't exist.

Time is the most valuable resource in KSP. Rockets are fast. Balloons are not.

Why would you want to follow sea currents?

What I would like to hear about though are these "New possibilites".

I meant that it would be a good game that would increase the player's skills.

So what is the problem? Sometimes the wind would slightly change the course of the vehicle, sometimes a little more. The game would be more interesting because some things would be unpredictable. Just like in Diablo (or any other game) there are random dungeons and items so that the player can do several approaches with different characters and not get bored.
It is like in KSP we have several characters (vehicles) and visit the planet (we visit the dungeons), but at the moment the planets are dead. Nothing changes, does not move, there are no random events that would increase the attractiveness of the game.
How many characters in Diablo would you check if each time the dungeons in the game were identical and would drop the exact same items each time? This is how in KSP works, after visiting each planet the game becomes boring, because it was all there. The fact that you use a slightly different vehicle does not change much.

If time is a resource, the weather has a simple justification. If you are in a hurry, try to land in more difficult conditions, if you have a lot of time, wait for the moment when landing will be easier.
Weather effects should always be present in the game, the player would be able to choose the level of difficulty (their strength) with the help of a 50-150% slider.

I want the planets to have some life in them, I'm not talking about animals here, because it's a loss of CPU and memory, but weather phenomena could be explored, which in this game has a justification for exploration. After all, in a real space program, it's not about how much fuel we'll burn just about what we'll investigate and what we'll find out about distant places.

You could create some kind of passive mission, for example, drop a buoy in the area of X and take it away from the Y area in a week. In time, as you gather a lot of data from the planet, you can view the planet with its constant sea and air currents.
But to do this you would need a lot of buoys, weather stations on land and balloons exploring the atmosphere, weather satellites would also be useful. It would basically add another layer to the game and give justification for new missions that combine with each other in a logical whole.