the kerman club roving guide

[king of nowhere]

I like rovers and i spent a fair amount of time and effort building and driving them around. After leaving the kerbin system I quickly realized that every planet is a different driving experience, and I decided that someone should write a tourist review

Kerbin

Yes, you can drive a rover on your home world too. Kerbin is quite a nice planet. It has a wide variety of terrains and biomes, more than any other world. The giant quartz compete with Vall's criovolcanoes for the title of my favourite surface feature. On the down side, a habitable planet with large grassland but without trees feels a bit off. Also, the high gravity makes it difficult to go uphill with many of my favourite designs. All in all a balanced experience, three stars

 

Mun

Mun is a great place for rovers! The surface gravity is low enough to create stability problems, but still in the optimal window. The craters make the terrain interesting: if you have a cheap, frail rover, you can plan your way around them, while if you have a sturdy advanced rover you can use them for really cool jumps. The two canyons are great for racing circuits, and there are a lot of interesting places to visit. The gray surface would be a bit dull on any other place, but on kerbin's moon it gives a warm homey feeling. Definitely one of the best places to drive a rover

 

Minmus

Minmus has a nice coloring and nice terrain all around. The terrain is quite interesting, with all the big slopes up and down. Unfortunately, it has no special features worth visiting. But its major flaw is the gravity, too low to get any speed before capsizing. On the plus side, it is very easy to reach. Three stars, mostly because it looks good

 

Eve

The rating here is not for a rover but for a plane. But in the planet's thick atmosphere, a plane is actually much easier to use than a rover, and much faster. Most of the planet is dull, but some of the mountains are really wonderful, especially the massif around 30°S 150°W. I don't like the purple color, but twilight has the most beautiful green horizon.

 

Gilly

I never expected to give a high mark to a small moon without enough gravity to do anything, but Gilly positively surprised me. It took me several minutes to get the hang of driving there, and it certainly does not resemble driving anywhere else. It's all in slow motion, 3 m/s is the top speed before going suborbital. But this lumpy rock is so small, even going slow you can still reach places faster than on other planets. And the terrain is very interesting, full of up and down

 

Duna
 

Duna has a variety of terrains, mostly hilly; there are canyons, but they are too big to be striking like those on mun or dres. The gravity is fairly high, so rovers are pretty stable. On the down side, going uphill is quite expensive. the sun is more distant, but still close enough to make effective use of solar panels. There are interesting features to visit. The atmosphere also make it much easier to land. All considered, it's a nice place to drive around, though it lacks striking features like the mun's canyons. The major factor preventing me from giving it full marks is that I find its red color dull after a while

 

Dres

There are very few reasons to go to Dres, and driving a rover is not one of those! the surface is full of angles, and coupled with the low gravity it makes a rover much more unstable - and much more prone to damage if it flips. The canyon looks good and it would have a lot of potential, but its bottom is too irregular to drive through. Definitely nothing to recommend here

 

Vall

Vall has a very nice environment, I like the blue color and the criovolcanoes are spectacular, not to mention the dance of Jool, Laythe and Tylo in the sky. The gravity is in that optimal range where it provides stability without making it too difficult to go uphill. There are nice mountains to climb and slopes to tumble downhill. its only real flaw is the distance from kerbol, making it very difficult to get energy. rover wheels are quite expensive to operate when running uphill, and even multiple rtg may not be enough to power a rover. Still, one of the best places. I'd give it 4 stars and a half if it was possible, but if I have to choose, I'll give it full marks

 

Tylo

A strange world, difficult to sum up. Different areas have very different characteristics. Gravity is very high, meaning it will be possible to reach high speed (and in lowlands at least the terrain is flat enough for it), but it's also going to be very difficult to go up a slope. or to brake down a slope. The combination of high speed, false sense of security, and difficulty to brake, makes for a very dangerous combination; I don't think i crashed my rover nowhere near this often anywhere else. The landscape is not bad, but nothing special either; the best thing is the dance of the other two moons in the sky, aside from that it's mostly an uninteresting rock. But the most damning feature of Tylo is the fact that its unique characteristics basically force you to pick up speed moving downward and conserve it moving upward, and zipping at high speed with very little control. It feels less like driving a rover and more like throwing a bowling ball.  I'm giving it a low score as i'm not liking it; however, i have to admit that Tylo brings out the worse weaknesses of my rover and negates most of its pros, so perhaps it would be a better experience with something designed more specifically for this environment.

 

Other worlds I didn't visit extensively enough to rate
 

Moho

Moho is just so distant from everything else, I never visited except in tests, though I would like to. there are some nice hills and the place looks good. The large amount of solar power is convenient, and the gravity is just right. Looks very promising overall.

Ike has a very rugged terrain. It could be potentially interesting, but it does not mesh well with the low gravity. That, and the lack of notable features, never gave me much reason to drive farther than the closest surface features.

Laythe

Laythe looks really good, but there's too little land for a rover. I think they should have made a "hydrotermal vent" surface feature that only spawns on the ocean floor, that would have been really cool. Anyway, I will soon explore Laythe in depth with an electric plane. Maybe i should expand this guide to generally include "suborbital vehicles"

Bop

The low gravity is just meh. Quite unremarkable except for a couple nice easter egg (cough cough kraken cough), and those are reached more easily by suborbital jumps.

Pol

A gravity even lowest than minmus does not bode well; however, the peculiar landscape and very rugged terrain may actually make it fun. If they don't make it even more miserable.

Eeloo

Nice gravity, nice surface features, looks good. Not much variety to the terrain, though. those canyons look good on the map, but they are quite unremarkable when you are inside. I did land there with a rover, but I wasn't compelled to explore further.

 

You are welcome to post your own review of driving on various worlds. Let's expand this guide

P.S. perhaps it would fit better under fan works?

 

 

Edited April 11, 2021 by king of nowhere

[Corona688]

On 11/12/2020 at 12:48 PM, king of nowhere said:

On the down side, a habitable planet with large grassland but without trees feels a bit off.

I'ma stop you right there

This bad boy is Le Tree.  If he appears the same place in other saves, he lives here, some 50km West of KSC:

I happened upon him one pod-landing and left the entire pod there to mark it until I could invest in proper flags.

He is probably Breaking Ground DLC.  But a rover fanatic ought to have that.

Edited November 13, 2020 by Corona688

[king of nowhere]

50 minutes ago, Corona688 said:

I'ma stop you right there

 

This bad boy is Le Tree.  If he appears the same place in other saves, he lives here, some 50km West of KSC:

 

 

 

yes, i know. baobabs are surface features. but there are too few of them to feel right. in fact, they enhance the sense of wrongness. there's a tree every few km, enough to remind me there should be trees.

i know, it's subjective.

[sir rocket]

great idea. but i actually give eve 4 stars. the gravity allows for some really awesome racing

[king of nowhere]

i discovered that by activating ground objects, more trees spawn on kerbin. and shrubs too. it makes the place look much better. i'd revise my previous review to 4 stars

[Francois424]

Moho :
I roved over there three times, and the terrain is as challenging as the Mün, heck it's even HARDER.
For most of the time you'll have small craters and you could easily roll at 40-60m/s on a good rover ( above 40m/s at your own risks ).
But every now and then, you WILL meet hills you cannot scale, or almost not.  The view is great, but sun glare can be annoying and give the effect of having faux-colors and sometimes had a hard time to correctly judge the terrain before crashing into it.
Solar panels works really well tho, and you don't need retractable large panels unless you want to drill for ore to refill your tanks (and there seems to be more than enough ore, except some places where you need the large drills/converter).

I strongly suggest making your rover capable of vertical flight and once airborne,  to be able to propel yourself to front/rear, this is a good way to bypass some of the harsh terrain.
I am planning a 4th trip, so I rather enjoy the challenge, from time to time.

I would say, 3½ stars.  Since we can't have that then it's going to be 4 stars. 
That lack of a moon or planet to look at in the sky feels a bit lonely at times.


 

On 11/14/2020 at 11:37 PM, sir rocket said:

great idea. but i actually give eve 4 stars. the gravity allows for some really awesome racing

True but the place is absolutely gigantic.  I once did an expedition from the Equator to the north pole (who was impossible to roll over.. go find out why  )
In fact I don't think I'll make a rover again, I'd rather pack somekind of electric plane and fly that.  Unless you can safely cruise non-stop to 50m/s or faster it takes far too long to get to all biomes with a rover.
Tho a propeller minivan with floating capabilities could be just the thing to warrant another try at doing just that.  Ummm.... 

What safe speeds were you getting with your racing rover?  And did it use solar or fuel ?

Edited November 17, 2020 by Francois424

[sir rocket]

25 minutes ago, Francois424 said:

True but the place is absolutely gigantic.  I once did an expedition from the Equator to the north pole (who was impossible to roll over.. go find out why  )
In fact I don't think I'll make a rover again, I'd rather pack somekind of electric plane and fly that.  Unless you can safely cruise non-stop to 50m/s or faster it takes far too long to get to all biomes with a rover.
Tho a propeller minivan with floating capabilities could be just the thing to warrant another try at doing just that.  Ummm.... 

What safe speeds were you getting with your racing rover?  And did it use solar or fuel ?

RTGs. 30-40 meters per second, and I only drove a couple miles downhill to the rescue craft

[Urus28]

I had great time roving on the Mun with big rovers in particular with scansat to give a map for craters, it was nice to choose the best path to avoid a giant flying rover...

[Xavven]

Eve is good for rovers. Solar power is plentiful, and the high gravity gives you traction. Going up a mountain is kinda hard though if you don't have great power to weight. My first rover had to do lots of switchbacks and spent a lot of time recharging batteries. My Eve rover mission transmitted over 3000 science back because it was able to visit so many places!

Ultimately, however, I scrapped the Eve rover in favor of an Eve quadcopter. It can get around much faster.

Edited November 18, 2020 by Xavven

[king of nowhere]

On 11/17/2020 at 7:21 AM, sir rocket said:

RTGs. 30-40 meters per second, and I only drove a couple miles downhill to the rescue craft

my main rover has that speed too (i guess the ruggedized wheels are used), and despite having large wheels and low baricenter, it is fairly unstable at that speed. especially on low gravity world, but even on vall i am rarely able to drive more than 10 minutes without accidents. And i solved this problem by making an armor of landing struts around the rover, so that in case of accident it bounces around harmlessly.

 

and i thought i've been brilliant, but seeing as several people assume a normal driving speed of 30 m/s, perhaps my trick is quite commonplace. either that, or somebody figured out some ways to make rovers that are much more stable than mine.

[Xavven]

I frequently flip my rovers because I don't drive cautiously, so my designs include a roll cage and motorized hinges that flip the rover back over.

[TheFlyingKerman]

In my experience:

Gilly 0/5

Non starter, can't stay on the ground even at walking speed.

Pol, Dres 1/5

Both very low gravity and very bumpy.

Bop 1.5/5

Also very low gravity but less bumpy than Pol.

Eve 2/5

Literally a drag. With the dense atmosphere the battery runs down in no time (like 3000EC in an hour at 30m/s). Also the place is huge.

Laythe 3/5

Environment is similar to Kerbin but there aren't many places to drive. Nice view.

Kerbin 3/5

Jet engine works and fuel is not a problem. The mountains can be tough, though.

The Mun 3.5/5

There are craters everywhere but can be avoided.

Moho 3.5/5

The lowlands are smooth but the highlands are bumpy. Nice gravity.

Duna 4/5

The thin atmosphere is not a problem, and the planet is not too bumpy. Boring view.

Tylo 4/5

The equatorial area is a racetrack. Can easily roll downhill at 80m/s +.

Ike 4/5

The highlands often have smooth, gentle slopes. Nice view of Duna.

Minmus 4.5/5

There are plenty of perfect flats, and are connected by gentle mountain passes. The moon is small enough that it is feasible to drive everywhere. Also the curvy mountains are very pretty.

Vall 4.5/5

As the OP said.

Eeloo 5/5

The entire planet is a smooth, snowy racetrack! Gravity is also just right.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[sir rocket]

41 minutes ago, TheFlyingKerman said:

Gilly 0/5

Non starter, can't stay on the ground even at walking speed.

exactly. I did manage to pin myself to the ground with ant engines, though

42 minutes ago, TheFlyingKerman said:

Eve 2/5

Literally a drag. With the dense atmosphere the battery runs down in no time (like 3000EC in an hour at 30m/s). Also the place is huge.

exactly. I had to use 6 RTGs to drive with no battery loss (I have an irrational fear of not being at 100% battery). 

44 minutes ago, TheFlyingKerman said:

Laythe 3/5

Environment is similar to Kerbin but there aren't many places to drive. Nice view.

this is the only place that I have driven more than a mile or two, from an off-target lander to a crashed SSTO.  the pathfinding is hard, because mountains that you cant go up are common. you're almost always bounded in on both sides by hills (this is just for the mountains biome, have never driven anywhere else)

56 minutes ago, TheFlyingKerman said:

Duna 4/5

The thin atmosphere is not a problem, and the planet is not too bumpy. Boring view.

I agree but I would give it  for that

[king of nowhere]

2 hours ago, TheFlyingKerman said:

Eeloo 5/5

The entire planet is a smooth, snowy racetrack! Gravity is also just right.

 

this more than anything shows about different tastes!

to me eeloo is boring exactly for that reason

 

 

In other terms, i just mostly finished my exploration of laythe, and i liked it a lot. of course there's not much to rove around, i was using a seaplane - that can also double as rover or boat, if you stay on the ground. but i really liked it.

unfortunately, i discovered that to take all science measurements you must be touching ground, so for some of the biomes i would need a submarine to complete the science. and for such, i already have project for an underwater rover. who knows, maybe one day i'll do it and give a real report on laythe by rover