EVE Lander: Landing Strut Spring/Damper setting?

[TokiGlassBlower]

Hello Kerb's

I'm working on my 5th attempt at landing on EVE,  gonna make it this time , made it there 4 times so far and have attempted landings twice with 1 being successful but my landing struts were destroyed on the successful landing booo even though my speed was less than 5 m/s, and making it impossible to get the rover out from underneath my ship as it was what was keeping the ship upright haha and then without thinking I put Jeb on the surface (no ladders) not realizing the gravity would keep him from using his jet pack, again haha but I do a quicksave on the launchpad every time and revert and recover and start over. Soooo I'm wondering if I should increase? or decrease? the spring or damper strength for an EVE landing? I added 4 more struts and now have 12 total (LT-2) I'm sure #5 landing will be the one.

 

Toki

[king of nowhere]

if you have jeb on the surface, then i assume you plan to return to orbit. then your lander must be pretty big. chances are it's got a mammoth engine. if that is the case, i recommend not using any landing struts, the mammoth is very sturdy and well suited to the task.

otherwise, it's really impossible to give feedback without knowing how your lander is made and how heavy it is. anyway, i recommend increasing the value

[jimmymcgoochie]

Maximum spring, maximum damper. Soft springs just wallow under load, which with Eve's high gravity just means they'll bottom out and break; but you don't want to get bounced back into the air and fall over, so high damper strength to stop the legs just pogo-ing you off whatever hill you land on and faceplanting.

Jetpacks don't work on Eve because a) they don't work in atmospheres and Eve's is the thickest of all the stock planets, and b) they barely have the thrust to fly in Duna's gravity (0.3g), let alone Eve's (1.7g). Jumping won't help either, your only option is climbing with lots of ladders and making absolutely sure they reach all the way to the ground...

[TokiGlassBlower]

5 hours ago, king of nowhere said:

f you have jeb on the surface, then i assume you plan to return to orbit

Jebs not on the surface I used my quicksave  from the launch pad and started over so jeb is back on Kerbin with me, I was just explaining why I abandoned my 1 sort of successful landing  on EVE because of the broken landing struts and the high gravity and I might add that as a pro skydiver I would hate EVE's gravity its to much, the perfect skydiving gravity would be .80% or 80% of what earths gravity is.

I need the struts because I have my Rover under my ship and need the clearance to drive out from  under the ship after landing, and my struts where at Springs=1 and Dampers=2 I think just need more struts as I only had 8 and its double now to 16 with the Springs at 1.5 and Dampers still at 2,  guess will see soon I'm plotting my way back to EVE now, should be back there in a few hours I'm guessing?.

[TokiGlassBlower]

5 hours ago, jimmymcgoochie said:

Maximum spring, maximum damper. Soft springs just wallow under load, which with Eve's high gravity just means they'll bottom out and break; but you don't want to get bounced back into the air and fall over, so high damper strength to stop the legs just pogo-ing you off whatever hill you land on and faceplanting.

Jetpacks don't work on Eve because a) they don't work in atmospheres and Eve's is the thickest of all the stock planets, and b) they barely have the thrust to fly in Duna's gravity (0.3g), let alone Eve's (1.7g). Jumping won't help either, your only option is climbing with lots of ladders and making absolutely sure they reach all the way to the ground...

Normally I run my struts at Springs=1 and Dampers=2 after thinking about it I went with more struts, I only had 8 and went to 16 with Springs=1.5 and Dampers=2 my landing craft is real heavy as you  might guess I was aware of the high gravity but under estimated it duhhhh lol. I have been to Duna Twice so I  get the just barely  working jet packs I just did not think of it when planning my EVE trip, live and learn huh just like all the great Kerbonaughts have had to in kerb history, I guess Kerbs  like to skydive as much as I do they wear a chute 24/7. but anyway I added more struts and plenty of ladders and am plotting back to EVE as I wright this..... the wright joke is because I live in Dayton, OH. wish me luck.

 

Blue Skies

[king of nowhere]

15 minutes ago, TokiGlassBlower said:

Jebs not on the surface I used my quicksave  from the launch pad and started over so jeb is back on Kerbin with me, I was just explaining why I abandoned my 1 sort of successful landing  on EVE because of the broken landing struts and the high gravity and I might add that as a pro skydiver I would hate EVE's gravity its to much, the perfect skydiving gravity would be .80% or 80% of what earths gravity is.

 

Yes, but the simple fact that you did send jeb on the surface make me think that you plan to land a kerbal on eve and bring him back. your lander is a big rocket meant to carry a kerbal back to orbit - as opposed to a small, lightweight mission meant to send a disposable unmanned rover on the surface. am i wrong?

Quote

I need the struts because I have my Rover under my ship and need the clearance to drive out from  under the ship after landing, and my struts where at Springs=1 and Dampers=2 I think just need more struts as I only had 8 and its double now to 16 with the Springs at 1.5 and Dampers still at 2,  guess will see soon I'm plotting my way back to EVE now, should be back there in a few hours I'm guessing?.

now, some people consider it cheating while others consider it a fundamental part of testing, but are you aware that you can alt-f12 your rover directly on eve to make sure that the struts do their job? it saves the hassle of replaying the entire mission

 

[TokiGlassBlower]

30 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:

Yes, but the simple fact that you did send jeb on the surface make me think that you plan to land a kerbal on eve and bring him back. your lander is a big rocket meant to carry a kerbal back to orbit - as opposed to a small, lightweight mission meant to send a disposable unmanned rover on the surface. am i wrong?

Your right I'm sending 3 Kerbs and my landing ship is larger than any I've built before due to the high gravity, I tell you what when I'm successful I post a pic here of my lander, I'm not sure how to post the pic but ill figure it out?..

 

30 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:

now, some people consider it cheating while others consider it a fundamental part of testing, but are you aware that you can alt-f12 your rover directly on eve to make sure that the struts do their job? it saves the hassle of replaying the entire mission

Well I'm on a console PS and we get trophies/achievements but cheating/testing. which I can do will void any trophies, I'm trying to platinum this game so I cannot do testing without having too build 2 craft exactly the same in 2 different saves 1 for trophies no cheating and 1 for testing and thats kind of a pain to do as this whole  mega ship for my EVE trophy has like 270 something parts, so going to EVE and trying then reverting back to fix stuff and trying again is the best way I feel can get this and other game trophies for my platinum, I heard this was the hardest planet so once out of the way I can do less strenuous missions??maybe. haha.

Edited May 7, 2022 by TokiGlassBlower

[TokiGlassBlower]

Its funny how every time I say I'm on a Console everybody stops talking to me as if my game is somehow different than there game or maybe its the smug nature of some PC players?..... Elite Dangerous (Frontier)  just screwed there Console community over sooooo maybe Squad or Private Division are the same?, I would like to point out that Consoles came out for homes in 1977 probably before most of you were born, I got one that year and played the excrements out of it, the concept of a "PC" or even a game for PCs didn't happen till decades later, so some of us like Consoles better but there is a smugness from some PC people that there game is dumbed down because of us console players and we should be gotten rid of for there sake and I don't agree, the PC manufactures are the ones who don't get the consoles and seem to act like consoles are hard to work with when there are many games that are as complicated as Kerbal and they run fine on a PC or a Console, what the people at Squad need to do is hire the right company to do the Console version of the game and not do it in house like all of the failed games are done, ED has failed because they refuse to farm it out and there programers are combative about having to know how to program for a console so it is sort of in house sabotage that ruins the console games most time and bad management, BLAH! BLAH! BLAH! BLAH!........... I look forward to the comebacks every time seriously......

[king of nowhere]

3 hours ago, TokiGlassBlower said:

Its funny how every time I say I'm on a Console everybody stops talking to me

I don't know of other instances, but simply there isn't anything more to say for this question.

you asked how to improve your landing struts. you got a bunch of answers of things to try. that's it. your question was answered. the console business came as a consequence of me suggesting alt-f12 to test faster, and that's answered too. 

[TokiGlassBlower]

my question was not answered you said it yourself "I got suggestions" which are not answers if you think I got an answer ill disagree, every question I've asked since joining this forum have not been answered with a solid answer and an explanation as to why or the physics of why something should be done a certain way, I get suggestions or a well I've never had that problem but here's what I would do or even I don't know but here's what I would do which are not helpful at all. who's the PS Moderator for this site? or where are the experienced PS for Xbox players?, this site needs a separate Console only forum  I feel?....

[king of nowhere]

11 hours ago, TokiGlassBlower said:

my question was not answered you said it yourself "I got suggestions" which are not answers

they are answers. perhaps not the kind you expected, but the only kind you can get.

First, all we have are suggestions because there isn't one single correct way to do things. if it was the case, then this game would be boring indeed. there is a problem, and there are many things you can try to fix that problem. You pick what seems most convenient, and you try until it works. that's how you troubleshoot.

Second, we ourselves are not sure what could work and what couldn't. especially if you don't post pictures. making a spaceship work is complicated. an experienced player can put together a simple design that will do something simple and will work at the first try. For anything more complicated, we must go by trial and error too. We start with a design, and we refine it along the way. So we cannot just tell you how to make your eve lander works. how do you expect us to know how many landing legs you need for your lander when we don't know if you lander weights 5 tons or 50 or 500? If you want more detailed instructions, you have to give us more detailed information. Else, if you just want to see a design that works, go on spacecraft exchange subforum and ask for some ready-to-use eve landers.

Third, even if we actually knew exactly how to fix your problems, we wouldn't tell you "just do X". This is your game, your choice. And as I said, there isn't one single way of doing things, so we present you with the different options on how you can do things.

Fourth, you say you don't get an explanation of the physics of things and why they should be done a certain way? I see those explanations scattered around the answers, maybe just because I know to recognize them? " the mammoth is very sturdy and well suited to the task. " is an explanation. it explains that you can land a ship on a mammoth engine because that engine is very resistant. "Soft springs just wallow under load, which with Eve's high gravity just means they'll bottom out and break;" is another perfectly good explanation for why spring load settings work how they work. that's just in the first two posts. I don't know what more explanations you could want, but if you do want them, then you should make more accurate questions.

Fifth, you get "I've never done that but I would try X" answers because this game is so vast, chances are nobody is doing what you are doing. A lot of people have landed on eve, but none of them has used your specific design. As for "I don't know but I would do X", the first point should already cover why we answer that. those are very useful answers, and the best answers you can get. For reasons explained in the previous points.

Sixth, you using a playstation does not matter. as far as I know, it makes almost no difference. it certainly makes no difference on what ships work and what don't, and it makes no difference on the answers you can get. You may also notice that there's only a handful of people regularly answering questions in this subforum, if you want someone using your same console you may not find one. you using ps makes no difference anyway in the kind of answers you are getting.

Seventh, you started the thread by asking "wondering if I should increase? or decrease? the spring or damper strength for an EVE landing? ". @jimmymcgoochie answered immediately "Maximum spring, maximum damper". As in, increase them to maximum level. that answers your specific question fully. So, you can't even say we're not answering your questions.

Eight, when you answer someone by asking additional details, you should quote them in your post. Your quoting ensures that they get a notification that you quoted them, making them more likely to read. if you just answer in the post, many people will simply never read your new question, because they already answered this thread and have no reason to look at it again.

 

In short, you come here asking vague questions without giving us any details, and you somehow expect us to know exactly how your ship is made and how to fix it just by looking. You expect us to read your mind and give you exactly the answer you want. Even when you get an answer that tells you exactly what you were asking - a simple binary answer to a simple binary question you bolded - you are still somehow dissatisfied. You claim to want explanations for how things work, though you did not ask for them, but when you get them you are still dissatisfied. No, you do not make additional inquiries, or new requests for more details or explanations; you still expect us to somehow read your mind and answer you the way you expect. And you are now blaming us, and making up far-fetched conspiracies where we discriminate you because you're using playstation.

Ask better questions, and you will get better answers.