Why do rovers suck so much?

[ShadowZone]

Odd, because in my truck and my car I have to hold the gas pedal down.

Not unless you have cruise control. And in a few years we will all own cars that can or could drive themselves.

[cpast]

Not unless you have cruise control. And in a few years we will all own cars that can or could drive themselves.

Citation needed on drive themselves, and you don't use cruise control offroad, and not all cars even have it, and not all drivers use it (a fair number don't, in fact). The real difference between rovers and cars is that a gas pedal isn't on-off. If the pedal has a range of motion, holding it down can work fine. If it's on-off, then it's a lot more aggravating.

[Renegrade]

and you don't use cruise control offroad, and not all cars even have it, and not all drivers use it (a fair number don't, in fact).

I don't. It dulls the mind (which can lead to accidents) and can create moments of confusion in the event of emergency maneuvers (also leading to accidents).

I also agree that the rover driving system could use proportional throttle, although doing that meaningfully on mouse+keyboard might be a bit challenging (I assume joystick people already have that?).

[cantab]

I very much suspect that Squad's made a math booboo when it comes to wheels... wouldn't be the first time

I very much suspect Unity made a math booboo when it comes to wheels and Squad just used the stuff that comes with Unity.

Frankly Unity is a shonky physics engine. It's cheap and it works for the majority of games that just need something that works, but it's not very realistic.

[keeper]

The term rover is so undermining.

I also think throttle should be for wheels energy / speed /power for land vehicles.

I ALso think that the wheels and legs should have adjustable height and suspension.

I enjoyed making land vehicles, never really tested them much at kerbin, but got it to minmus or something then have fun.

I hear ya on the brakes thing, its a fine balance, depends on the vehicle, like a big 40 tonne thing will take longer to slow down then the wheels will lock, but a little "rover" will stop more or less immediately, I'd press W to slow down first if your going fast then just mostly using the brakes to keep it still.

I made some long vehicles that could tow each other, it turned into a 200 tonne rolling train, but could get to 30m/s on minmus flats. Again that was with mods modular multiwheels or something like that, made some wicked lorry wheels.

Making a crane thing now using stock wheels, just a little disappointed about the adjustables :/

[Renegrade]

I very much suspect Unity made a math booboo when it comes to wheels and Squad just used the stuff that comes with Unity.

Ah. Well, definitely some sort of booboo happened hehe.

Frankly Unity is a shonky physics engine. It's cheap and it works for the majority of games that just need something that works, but it's not very realistic.

Yeah, I've heard the heat transfer nonsense is a Unity thing too (like how you'll get less overheat if you attach a Mainsail/nuke/etc to an X200-8 instead of the Jumbo64 etc), so the above would not surprise me at all. :/

[Turbojohn]

Go to your action groups, select the brakes action groups, and disable the front wheels. There you go. You won't have problems anymore.

[SorryDave]

OP, yeah rover physics is horrible. The work arounds mentioned in this thread helps. Rover mishaps are my most common way to loose a Kerbal. I flip rovers far more often than I tip a lander.

If I cared more about Kerbals I would not use them. The Kerbals don't like it either because they become frozen with fear or something and they become unplayable when knocked off the seat.

Isn't it strange that during a RSC backpack mishap a Kerbal can slide 1km on his face through the thick dust of the Mun. But a rover flips over when you try a shallow turn at 2m/s?

[Aegrim]

Terrain level of detail at the moment kind of spoils rovers. Can't blame them though, it would take a ton of work with procedural terrain to make it better.

[pincushionman]

Throttle would be good, not just full throttle or nothing.

As an addendum to this, rover's need their own throttle control.

Second the throttle control.

You guys realize this is already a thing, right?

...in a sense. It does work, but you need a stick. If you have a throttle on the stick, it'll stay at the setting you use instead of having to hold it. Gotta play with the dead zone or have a throttle with a mid-way "click" or you'll have trouble zeroing it out.

but getting back to the point, I agree even this could be better. If there were an "incremental throttle" (like is available for the "real" throttle controls) you could do even better and have a controller stick map to "go faster/slower" and it would stay constant when you let go. And I understand what you really meant was "have a 'go faster' and 'go slower' key like the real throttle controls.

And brake is still on/off too. I've driven a go-kart that had brakes like that before...and would not recommend that to anyone. It sucked hard.

Edited February 18, 2015 by pincushionman

[cpast]

It being a thing for joysticks isn't enough for the game; you can't assume people have joysticks (you pretty much can assume they have keyboards).

[Aragosnat]

Disable front braking, have 6-8+ wheels (depends on how big, long, and heavy it be; heavier needs moar wheels just to get it moving up hills), build long, try to keep it under 30 m/s (22 m/s is decent), use reverse to help slow down without needing to brake much, also remember to slow down well before you think you are going to go up over a hill/crater/mountain, when going down hill never go above 12 m/s if you can help it. As it is easy to suddenly be going 30 m/s+.

For me the only reason to build and use a rover is to do an all in one mobile science gathering lab that can clean out the science parts as well as store infinite data. I did a Mün drive where I basicly gathered all the science I could gather from there using 2 rovers. Second reason to use rovers is for the challange of using them under such weird conditions. Rover on Gilly any one? =^.^=

[Renegrade]

For me the only reason to build and use a rover is to do an all in one mobile science gathering lab that can clean out the science parts as well as store infinite data. I did a Mün drive where I basicly gathered all the science I could gather from there using 2 rovers.

Geez - I'd call that a 'quality of life' problem and abort the mission. While reasonably cash-efficient, that would be very time-inefficient. An antipodal target would be like 1,256 and change km to drive to and from... :/

I grant you +1 internets for extreme patience~

[IllicitMedic]

They don't.

[Thanny]

If you can't build low, because the whole point of a rover is carrying (sometimes large) bits where you want them, try outriggers with wheels off the ground to prevent tipping. Works reasonably well on my current Minmus rover. I'd probably add them to the front and back as well next time, as I neglected to disable the front brakes, so it's challenging to stop it.

Always have reaction wheels. Put SAS on when moving fast, but remember to reset it (with the momentary SAS key) periodically so it stops trying to pitch into the ground when the slope changes. It's main use is to keep the rover pointed the right way when it gets chucked skyward from bumps, turning, braking, etc.

And if you're already going to be adding big objects, throw in a fuel tank and some engines. You might need to jump fissures in the geometry on Minmus, or power out of a crater on the Mun that you just can't drive up. Also handy for those scanning missions where you need to be above a certain altitude -drive to the spot, then shoot straight up to the correct altitude. For below a certain altitude in flight, just leave the ground for a second.

Stick with either the small gear bay or the Ruggedized wheels. The RoveMax wheels are great at absorbing terrain changes, but their absurdly low top speed of 30m/s, coupled with a complete lack of wheel friction on hilly terrain, means you'll be spending a lot of time trying to brake without crashing.

Probably the best advice is to save often. Use Alt-F5 to make named saves, so if you want to revert some driving you can. If you're going at a good clip, you can often still save when the rover leaves the ground. Make sure it's going to be above the surface for at least a couple seconds, and use Alt-F5 instead of just F5, so you don't kill a good quicksave with a potentially disastrous one. The reason you need a couple seconds of air (or vacuum) is that on reload, the physics engine doesn't work properly for those couple seconds, and if your rover touches the ground, it will bottom out and be destroyed.

[Corw]

Is there a mod that links throttle level to wheels?

[Van Disaster]

Is there a mod that links throttle level to wheels?

TT Modular Wheels have a toggle to work with the throttle or whatever your forwards-back keys are.

[LethalDose]

Odd, because in my truck and my car I have to hold the gas pedal down.

Sorry you don't have cruise control. =P

[wumpus]

Can I gripe about survey missons (assuming they require samples or other "really on the ground, we mean it this time" missions? I'm presently ignoring my career mode due to a mission that requires my rover to escape a crater on the Mun. I don't really have an issue with rovers on thier own (especially after some of the ideas here about 6 wheeled landers), just the traction issues and how surveys seem to be randomly laid out with "you can't get there from here" issues (I could make flying rovers, but am too much of a lousy pilot to expect to survive often).

[Roflcopterkklol]

Personally i like my rovers, something about driving things around on the surface makes the game more satisfying.

One for fun

one for science... that and because i really wanted a mobile base with an interior.

Edited February 18, 2015 by Roflcopterkklol

[tater]

I made a couple to do seismic surveys on the Mun and Minmus, the latter being tricky, gravity wise (this is a Jumbo32 career, though, so the worlds are bigger and maybe more gently sloping). I used a mk1 lander can as the cockpit (I wanted some life support). I ended up trying something new and used 4 aircraft landing gear, and then a winch (I have KAS in this game) underneath with 2 rover wells stuck to that for propulsion (so it has 6 wheels, with the middle pair driving). I rarely go very fast, maybe 8m/s, max, usually more like 5. As a result, on some long moves to a survey site, I used time compression. Long story short, I braked under physics warp (as I have done many times), while almost simultaneously dropping to 1:1 time. Rover hit a bump or something. Cartwheeling wreck (though moving quite slow at that point). Knocked solar panels off, but I have 1600 battery. Knocked the winch and the driver wheel pair off, and the docking ring on top.

I'm maybe 10km from my lander/base, and thinking about rescue options given life support issues (can fly the lander that has a probe core if need be, and it should still make orbit for Minmus Station above, so it's not a huge emergency). I remembered KAS and had a thought (this is the first time I've used that mod, and I added the winch just cause it was cool, and the right height for the wheels). I EVAed, and decided to try to fix the rover. I ended up attaching the 2 small rover wheels to the side of the rear 2 aircraft gear fairings, then retracted the rear gear. The rover was able to function, and made the 10km back with a little juice in the batteries to spare.

I'd still prefer to be able to have them be more, well, stable, and right now the gyros flipping them is at least as goofy as them flipping so easily. Every rover I have made has had a nasty crash at some point---though I only make small rovers that I can transport on rockets that look like rockets with reasonable fairings, so that's a caveat.

[Ten Key]

There is some weird lag involved with brakes (if you set them and leave 'em on for a while, they seem to take forever to disengage).

I have a thought on this-- I think the issue is that design for the wheel brakes was intended for aircraft, not rovers.

I can remember playing my first semi-realistic flight simulator, many, many years ago, and for the life of me I just could not get the plane in the air. How hard could it be, really? Point it at the end of the runway, throttle up and pull back on the stick, right? It worked in other games. But no matter what I tried, the runway provided was just too short.

Somewhere along the way, I realized that in the real world pilots "stand on the brakes" to hold their aircraft in place while the engines come up to full power. I think the release delay on the brakes in KSP may be the game's way of giving jet engines a little bit of extra time to spin up before the aircraft starts rolling down the runway on take off. Kind of like the way rockets rotate 90 degrees when they move out of the VAB. . .the game is trying to say, "Hey rookie, you need to pay attention to this!"

[ShadowZone]

Actually I did some fiddling with rovers and cranes yesterday.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/110972-A-tale-of-two-rover-cranes?p=1742653

[Gerandar]

Why waste time with rovers when you can get more science for your buck with a just as easily planned manned mission.

[Van Disaster]

Why waste time with rovers when you can get more science for your buck with a just as easily planned manned mission.

There's many more things to do than get science.