Building "level" bases.

[strider3]

Another thing I would like to see...the ability to build a level base on a celestial body...especially a landing pad. Mining, especially, would be greatly improved if we had the ability to do some "earth work" and create a relatively level area. I'm not asking for it to be easy...just doable. Most resources, like "ore", are more prevalent in rugged, sloped terrain. That's never stopped humans, in the real world, from going there and carving out a foothold. I would like to suggest that a celestial body's surface could be "flattened", in a small area?

Edited September 1, 2019 by strider3

[GoldForest]

27 minutes ago, strider3 said:

Another thing I would like to see...the ability to build a level base on a celestial body...especially a landing pad. Mining, especially, would be greatly improved if we had the ability to do some "earth work" and create a relatively level area. I'm not asking for it to be easy...just doable. Most resources, like "ore", are more prevalent in rugged, sloped terrain. That's never stopped humans, in the real world, from going there and carving out a foothold. I would like to suggest that a celestial body's surface could be "flattened", in a small area?

There's no mention of a terraforming system, but there are legs shown in the trailer and these might be procedurally generated to make the colony level itself out. 

[NHunter]

52 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

There's no mention of a terraforming system, but there are legs shown in the trailer and these might be procedurally generated to make the colony level itself out. 

Yeah, I got the same impression: the groundside buildings will have either dynamically-adjusted "legs" they stand on. Hopefully, they would also solve the problem of sliding bases. As fun as terrestrial sculpting might be, I don't think that this game will have it beyond whatever the modding community creates in KK-KSP2

[kerbiloid]

KSP 1 + KerbalConstructs allows to put a flat platform on ground and place base crafts on it, like in KSC. So, cover the roughnesses with flat embankment.
So, probably they could implement something like that. Of course, it wouldn't allow to make trenches, but would be enough good for building.

Several embankments connected with long flat bridges/roads - a base (one for habitats, one for launchpad, one for ISRU facilities).

So, basically it's a question of KerbalKonstructs in KSP 2.

Edited September 1, 2019 by kerbiloid

[magnemoe]

38 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

KSP 1 + KerbalConstructs allows to put a flat platform on ground and place base crafts on it, like in KSC. So, cover the roughnesses with flat embankment.
So, probably they could implement something like that. Of course, it wouldn't allow to make trenches, but would be enough good for building.

Several embankments connected with long flat bridges/roads - a base (one for habitats, one for launchpad, one for ISRU facilities).

So, basically it's a question of KerbalKonstructs in KSP 2.

Think the dynamic legs act the same way, you can not flatten terrain but build an flat platform on top of it. 
And i think an gravel embankment should work the same and would often make more sense as foundation. 

[kerbiloid]

1 hour ago, magnemoe said:

Think the dynamic legs act the same way, you can not flatten terrain but build an flat platform on top of it. 
And i think an gravel embankment should work the same and would often make more sense as foundation. 

Dynamic legs adjust themselves, why Kerbal Konstructs embankment just pierces the landscape.
Of course, the embankment model should have greater walls height than the landscape roughnesses, as it's partially sunk in ground.

And anyway I remember the USI/MKS early days (don't know how is it now), when lunar bases were exploding due to minor difference in angles of the crafts tilt, when there was 10-20 modules (and angles between them).
So, I was considering such platform from KerbalSide and its family as a must have for long live.
Though of course it was a cheating as I couldn't manufacture them by ISRU, so was made to put the embankments manually.

Edited September 1, 2019 by kerbiloid

[Snark]

10 hours ago, strider3 said:

Another thing I would like to see...the ability to build a level base on a celestial body...especially a landing pad. Mining, especially, would be greatly improved if we had the ability to do some "earth work" and create a relatively level area. I'm not asking for it to be easy...just doable. Most resources, like "ore", are more prevalent in rugged, sloped terrain. That's never stopped humans, in the real world, from going there and carving out a foothold. I would like to suggest that a celestial body's surface could be "flattened", in a small area?

They absolutely allow building bases on non-level terrain, and specifically called that out as a feature-- i.e. "you get a spectacular view if you choose to build overhanging the lip of a crater rim, but then you need to account for terrain when building".

They want people to be able to build colonies pretty much anywhere, and they know that flat/level ground is scarce on most bodies.  Launchpads are definitely a thing, and obviously no one ever wants a launchpad that's not level.

So I don't know exactly what their mechanism for allowing the player to build a level base will be... but I think it's safe to assume that there will be a reasonable one.  I expect they're addressing this concern; just don't know exactly how, is all.

[magnemoe]

1 hour ago, kerbiloid said:

Dynamic legs adjust themselves, why Kerbal Konstructs embankment just pierces the landscape.
Of course, the embankment model should have greater walls height than the landscape roughnesses, as it's partially sunk in ground.

And anyway I remember the USI/MKS early days (don't know how is it now), when lunar bases were exploding due to minor difference in angles of the crafts tilt, when there was 10-20 modules (and angles between them).
So, I was considering such platform from KerbalSide and its family as a must have for long live.
Though of course it was a cheating as I couldn't manufacture them by ISRU, so was made to put the embankments manually.

Piercering the landscape should also work. Guess they went for legs as its something you can pack up and send to another planet and then deploy.
I'm pretty sure this structures are also not on legs in practice but fixed to the ground or rater at an position. 
It has an breaking force like other parts but are not KSP legs. 

KSP 1 has an long term issue with landing legs and ground docking. ISRU or even resource transfer during warp is an sure way to cause this. 
The issue is that the legs has to compensate for the weight change between the parts and how this affect various legs and wheels in an instance. 
This adds lots of forces making stuff flop around. 

[kerbiloid]

Maybe this video is more or less informative.

Spoiler

 

Looks like they allow to raise/low the building and then draw infinite vertical trusses like for launch clamps.

[Norcalplanner]

59 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Looks like they allow to raise/low the building and then draw infinite vertical trusses like for launch clamps.

Yep!  For those who aren't sure what they're looking at, here's a still from the video:

That fat center tower is some sort of launch/landing pad with a rocket on top of it.  The terrain slopes down from right to left, and you can see different lengths of some sort of fat truss or column supporting the portions of the base on the left  and right hand sides.  A little earlier in the video, there were smaller supports holding up portions of the solar panel array.

Edited September 1, 2019 by Norcalplanner
typo

[Guest]

15 hours ago, Snark said:

Launchpads are definitely a thing, and obviously no one ever wants a launchpad that's not level.

Or do we..?

Your quote of the view from crater rims makes me want to try rolling something down to gain some free horizontal speed for launch.

[Xd the great]

24 minutes ago, Rocket Witch said:

Or do we..?

Your quote of the view from crater rims makes me want to try rolling something down to gain some free horizontal speed for launch.

You, good sir, have just reinvented the rover and the wheel.

[GoldForest]

43 minutes ago, Rocket Witch said:

Or do we..?

Your quote of the view from crater rims makes me want to try rolling something down to gain some free horizontal speed for launch.

Why would you launch rolling down a slope?

Edited September 2, 2019 by GoldForest

[Superfluous J]

37 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

Why would you launch rolling down a slope?

SCIENCE!

[magnemoe]

50 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

Why would you launch rolling down a slope?

Good question
I did it once, Mun mission to gather science in biomes around the canyon biome intersection. 
Lander with wheels so I could drive around, went to fast and started to tumble down an steep hill. 
Craft took damage as in loosing wheels so I just staged and burned then I pointed kind of upward. 
It worked 

[adsii1970]

41 minutes ago, magnemoe said:

Good question
I did it once, Mun mission to gather science in biomes around the canyon biome intersection. 
Lander with wheels so I could drive around, went to fast and started to tumble down an steep hill. 
Craft took damage as in loosing wheels so I just staged and burned then I pointed kind of upward. 
It worked 

And that sounds completely Kerbal! I love it!

[Guest]

16 hours ago, Norcalplanner said:

That fat center tower is some sort of launch/landing pad with a rocket on top of it.

That should be the buildable VAB for colonies if I'm not wrong.