Does the Community Want Better Aerodynamics?

[NASAFanboy]

Just so we're clear before we start: Spud, I'm quoting you, but this is NOT directed at you personally. Your statement is a fair representation of something I am going to rant about now.

[rant]

If you look at the webpage for KSP, you will see, "KSP is a game where the players create and manage their own space program." It does NOT say it's a spaceship simulator, a flight simulator, or an space-based resourcing simulator.

There is an ongoing, maddening clamor on the main forum page for Squad to implement feature x, because without it the game is broken. I am heartily sick and tired of it because for each and every "Gimme NOW" feature, there is a mod available that meets that need to some extent. Advanced aerodynamics is a perfect example. We all know that the current aerodynamic model will be updated. It's called a placeholder for a reason! This poll is useless because we are going to get better aerodynamics as soon as the devs decide it's time to work on it. Farem's question is far more relevant: "What bits of aerodynamic modeling should be included when the devs replace the placeholder?" This would allow a good discussion, instead of this divisive all-or-none.

Furthermore, when someone questions the advisability of implementing feature x for everyone as an in-game mechanic, or points out that feature x is already available as a mod, the response is, "Yeah, but the game is supposed to have it. Look, see how cool it is?" I am sure you think it's cool. That doesn't mean that everyone does. Believe me, if I wanted more accurate modeling of aerodynamics I already would have installed FAR. If I wanted to manage air and food, I would have installed IonForge. If I wanted to design realistic spacecraft and aircraft, I would do so. I do want resourcing, so I have installed Kethane. See? I have the option I want, and don't bother with the ones I don't.

Squad has to concentrate their small development team ensuring that their game is fun for everyone, not just the subset of the community who are frothing for feature x. So please, please stop whingeing for these niche features to be implemented in the game on the main forum page. Put them into the Suggestions and Development page where they belong. Better yet, go to Addon Request and Support.

[/rant]

Whew! I feel sooo much better now that I've gotten that off my chest. I'm heading back to the game and get my science station set up around Minmus. Cheers!

Thank you! You've said it better on one post than I said it in five.

[I_Killed_Jeb]

Just so we're clear before we start: Spud, I'm quoting you, but this is NOT directed at you personally. Your statement is a fair representation of something I am going to rant about now.

[rant]

If you look at the webpage for KSP, you will see, "KSP is a game where the players create and manage their own space program." It does NOT say it's a spaceship simulator, a flight simulator, or an space-based resourcing simulator.

There is an ongoing, maddening clamor on the main forum page for Squad to implement feature x, because without it the game is broken. I am heartily sick and tired of it because for each and every "Gimme NOW" feature, there is a mod available that meets that need to some extent. Advanced aerodynamics is a perfect example. We all know that the current aerodynamic model will be updated. It's called a placeholder for a reason! This poll is useless because we are going to get better aerodynamics as soon as the devs decide it's time to work on it. Farem's question is far more relevant: "What bits of aerodynamic modeling should be included when the devs replace the placeholder?" This would allow a good discussion, instead of this divisive all-or-none.

Furthermore, when someone questions the advisability of implementing feature x for everyone as an in-game mechanic, or points out that feature x is already available as a mod, the response is, "Yeah, but the game is supposed to have it. Look, see how cool it is?" I am sure you think it's cool. That doesn't mean that everyone does. Believe me, if I wanted more accurate modeling of aerodynamics I already would have installed FAR. If I wanted to manage air and food, I would have installed IonForge. If I wanted to design realistic spacecraft and aircraft, I would do so. I do want resourcing, so I have installed Kethane. See? I have the option I want, and don't bother with the ones I don't.

Squad has to concentrate their small development team ensuring that their game is fun for everyone, not just the subset of the community who are frothing for feature x. So please, please stop whingeing for these niche features to be implemented in the game on the main forum page. Put them into the Suggestions and Development page where they belong. Better yet, go to Addon Request and Support.

[/rant]

Whew! I feel sooo much better now that I've gotten that off my chest. I'm heading back to the game and get my science station set up around Minmus. Cheers!

This a big mound of strawman, nobody here that I've seen is demanding that it be fixed now, or even soon, or that they're not expecting squad to get around to it eventually. The OP was trying to gauge whether this feature was something people care about, and it seems clear that it is. Regarding mods, just because there are mods out there, it doesn't mean the features they address should not be made stock. And aerodynamics is not a niche feature, considering it affects literally every single mission you do as a space program.

[NASAFanboy]

This a big mound of strawman, nobody here that I've seen is demanding that it be fixed now, or even soon, or that they're not expecting squad to get around to it eventually. The OP was trying to gauge whether this feature was something people care about, and it seems clear that it is. Regarding mods, just because there are mods out there, it doesn't mean the features they address should not be made stock. And aerodynamics is not a niche feature, considering it affects literally every single mission you do as a space program.

So what?

That 10% are still part of the playerbase, and deserve to be valued as such. Make it an option to be turmed on and off, as it is a big feature (Or by my terms, downgrade). Probelm solved, everyone is happy.

An simple option in the settings would fix all this.

[Wahgineer]

I think the main reason I and maybe several others would like better aerodynamics is so that we can basically make a carbon copy of an airplane in real life and know it will fly. Either that, or we can design our own planes and, with little knowledge of aerodynamics, know that the more the plane looks like a plane, the better it will fly. Also, we want our rockets to look like rockets with fairings, looking like a rocket rather than a cluster of flaming tubes that for all intents and purposes shouldn't get any where near orbit. And with the whole 'Just get FAR' argument, the reason we want better aerodynamics to be stock is because since FAR is a mod, it is highly subject to being dropped, outdated, or replaced. Also, if it is already stock, that is one less mod we have to worry about updating.

[Jacob01]

I don't particularly mind when they come into the game. I think there are a few more important things Squad should focus on before improving atmosphere realism though.

[I_Killed_Jeb]

So what?

That 10% are still part of the playerbase, and deserve to be valued as such. Make it an option to be turmed on and off, as it is a big feature (Or by my terms, downgrade). Probelm solved, everyone is happy.

An simple option in the settings would fix all this.

Jesus dude how many times do people have to say this - if making it an option is a simple thing to do, no one is against it. Given that this is a big feature it's probably not so easy to flick it on an off like a lightswitch. I didn't mention the 10% at all in my post so I'm not sure where that even came from. I think it's curious that you are demanding that everyone who wants advanced aerodynamics install FAR when you were breathing fire about possibly needing a mod to disable such mechanics in the future if implemented in the stock game. What makes more sense to you, 80% of the playerbase needing to install a mod to get the gameplay they want, or 10%?

This is a completely moot discussion regardless. The facts are these - the vast majority of people who voted think better aerodynamics would be cool. Stock aerodynamics as it stands has always been intended to be a placeholder to improve later. No one knows what form that will take or if it'll happen at all. You really need to chill out about this, I'm pretty sure at this point even Harvester knows you much you, NASAFanboy hate the idea of any change to the aerodynamics.

[Holo]

I'm here to build insane contraptions and impossible heavy lifters. I'm not here to play orbiter, and I'm not here for realism.

For gods sake, its a game about little green men having a space agency!

The same applies to removing orbits and adding cardboard parts.

EDIT: Anyway, I consider orbits to not be fun. I'd much rather like to just be able to point towards somewhere to reach it, so I can build crazy rockets without having to worry about orbital dynamics.

Edited December 20, 2013 by Holo

[regex]

And I also expect that a large number of people who want "better" aerodynamics don't actually want it, since their idea of "better" aerodynamics doesn't gel with what better aerodynamics actually entails.

So, wait, you're saying that FAR isn't better aerodynamics?

I guess I agree with you in a way because Kerbin is basically an impossible planet and once you add even a semblance of proper aerodynamics it makes the game downright silly for rockets, whereas the stock aerodynamics encourages pancake-stack wings and other stupidity (seriously, I look at stock spaceplanes and I'm like "That's not a real thing").

Now, FAR with RSS is another matter entirely...

Edited December 20, 2013 by regex

[Daze]

I think the main reason I and maybe several others would like better aerodynamics is so that we can basically make a carbon copy of an airplane in real life and know it will fly. Either that, or we can design our own planes and, with little knowledge of aerodynamics, know that the more the plane looks like a plane, the better it will fly. Also, we want our rockets to look like rockets with fairings, looking like a rocket rather than a cluster of flaming tubes that for all intents and purposes shouldn't get any where near orbit. And with the whole 'Just get FAR' argument, the reason we want better aerodynamics to be stock is because since FAR is a mod, it is highly subject to being dropped, outdated, or replaced. Also, if it is already stock, that is one less mod we have to worry about updating.

This is exactly why i want it

[arq]

I'm curious, what do you think should be removed from FAR to create a middle-of-the-road aerodynamic model?

Mach Number effects?

Body lift?

Wing interactions?

Drag changing with angle of attack?

You bring up a good point. It's early here so I lack creativity and will mostly steal yours, but a few things that come to mind to cut from FAR to be more casual-friendly would be:

-stalls (ofc lift drops off at high AoA, it does in stock too, but don't keep the 'state' requiring such a dramatic recovery)

-possibly body lift? (to keep designs understandable, otherwise you can get all sorts of weird behavior. but you'd also be giving up stuff like reentry control with pods, etc. perhaps just make it weaker than normal)

-mach effects

-wing interactions (what do you mean 'these wings are different?' they look the same to me?)

-CoL changes with speed (or at least tone them down - otherwise we'll need FAR-like tools to analyze stability)

Of course, it's likely one would need to sort through many contradictions in trying to design an aero model simpler than FAR, and that could create strange or nonsensical edge cases (it's much simpler to design an accurate model, since it already exists, than a simplified one).

Mostly I think that the less obvious effects should be trimmed down to keep the system understandable and mostly-intuitive to those that don't have engineering degrees or extensive experience, and to limit the need for complex design tools. A beginning player thrown into FAR's system would be much more likely to become frustrated and stop playing.

[vetrox]

Personally I love the current aerodynamics because its nice and simple. If i want to slap a plane together I can. I can also make the most unrealistic rocket known to man.

I also love FAR (to a degree as I feel you really need a joystick to "enjoy" FAR) because of that extra challenge it gives.

Wehn they do develope it I hope its part of a difficulty system so you can decide weather or not you want real aerodynamics or not.

[ArmchairGravy]

This a big mound of strawman, nobody here that I've seen is demanding that it be fixed now, or even soon, or that they're not expecting squad to get around to it eventually. The OP was trying to gauge whether this feature was something people care about, and it seems clear that it is. Regarding mods, just because there are mods out there, it doesn't mean the features they address should not be made stock. And aerodynamics is not a niche feature, considering it affects literally every single mission you do as a space program.

You must have skipped over this: "Advanced aerodynamics is a perfect example. We all know that the current aerodynamic model will be updated. It's called a placeholder for a reason! This poll is useless because we are going to get better aerodynamics as soon as the devs decide it's time to work on it."

For what it's worth, I would love to see nosecones actually do something. I currently use them for aesthetics.

[Spleenslitta]

I think it could get better but i don't see any need for that at the moment. They should prioritise career mode, resources and more parts.

[Libra00]

I would like (at some point) a proper aerodynamics model but only, as many others have said, if it doesn't significantly impact performance. And I say at some point because I don't even play with FAR right now, just haven't gotten around to checking it out, so aerodynamics are obviously not of paramount importance for me.

[Maxwell Fern]

it is a big feature (Or by my terms, downgrade)

How is making something better (as per the title of the poll) a downgrade ?

[Epthelyn]

How is making something better (as per the title of the poll) a downgrade ?

If someone votes no, that implies that better aerodynamics would be bad for the game, hence being a downgrading factor.

Just because something is better doesn't mean people automatically have to love it. Better aerodynamics would make far more sense when building aircraft and flying rockets in atmosphere, but FAR does tend to make the game slightly harder and the soupy atmosphere of Kerbin is fun to play with.

The title would probably be better written as "Realistic" for that reason. (And LameLefty said this just as I was editing this post )

[LameLefty]

How is making something better (as per the title of the poll) a downgrade ?

Because "better" is a qualitative term, and a subjective one at that. If a "better" aerodynamic model = "more realistic" one, then it may or may not make for a "better" game experience for most players. That's my take, anyway.

[Seret]

An simple option in the settings would fix all this.

Not from Squad's point of view. I doubt the devs would be keen to maintain two completely separate chunks of code that implement the same feature in slightly different ways unless there was a large and definable benefit to doing so. It would just add complexity and introduce bugs.

If you really, really like the current drag model then the most sensible place to maintain that functionality would be through a mod maintained by the community. Expecting Squad to do it is a strange request IMO, and I think you're going to be disappointed if you set your expectations that way. Placeholder features are normally removed from the codebase when the full version of them is implemented.

Edited December 20, 2013 by Seret

[SoldierHair]

This is how the current aerodynamics feel.

I don't even try the new updates until FAR is also updated.

[TMS]

Yes... so I can force my flying skips through the atmosphere and laugh heartily in the face of reason.

[gre8]

Honestly I don't see why an aerodynamic model such as FAR would complicate things like some people are saying. I think it actually makes things a lot easier. Launching rockets for instance. Not beacuase it takes less dV to get to orbit, but because flying them does not require and absurd 10km 90 degree launch to begin a gravity turn; you can do it earlier and more efficiently.

Also, planes actually fly easier. It is impossible to glide with the stock aerodynamics system unless you have unrealistically big wings. The plane also behaves extremely weird to those used to even the simplest flight simulators. The kinds of spins the planes get into with the current model feels incredibly unnatural and makes no sense, making flight something unpredictable and dangerous.

Really the algorythm is all there with FAR. SQUAD should just buy the rights to it, implement it and get over this aerodynamic issue once and for all.

[Sparker]

Although I voted 'Yes', I think that it is better to leave stock aerodynamics for new players to play with. After all the new players after playing KSP enough will find FAR and all other great mods which make the game more realistic, just like we have found. Probably aerodynamics isn't #1 priority for Squad...

[RocketPilot573]

Also, planes actually fly easier. It is impossible to glide with the stock aerodynamics system unless you have unrealistically big wings. The plane also behaves extremely weird to those used to even the simplest flight simulators. The kinds of spins the planes get into with the current model feels incredibly unnatural and makes no sense, making flight something unpredictable and dangerous.

This! This is why we need a new aerodynamics system!!

[Comrade Jenkens]

Both realistic aerodynamics and re-entry heat are things I'm looking forward to. Fairings and cargo bays would go very well with these as well.

I'm sure that new players could pick these up fine as it would just be part of the game to them. Its the veterans that would struggle as we are so used to things being how they are at the moment. I don't think that they should be added as massively realistic or difficult but introduced just enough that it was another design aspect you had to consider.

And can ppl please stop attacking each other. Everyone is entitled to their opinions on here.

[gre8]

And can ppl please stop attacking each other. Everyone is entitled to their opinions on here.

FAR and Vanilla Aerodynamics are like two distinct religions... LOL