Cat's Eye

Please, increase traction for the rover.

Recommended Posts

Is it possible to increase traction for the rover? 

With the latest update, my train-rover was unable to cross the route through the caves,  which it previously passed without complications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The medium rover was terrible and they fixed it but then made the large rover hopeless.

Hit a rock? Sorry, now you are stuck.

Get in s small gully?  Spend 10 min making a very smooth, perfect ramp to get back out. 

It went from monster truck to being worse than the old medium rover; undrivable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, I didn't like the fact that the torque of the rovers has been reduced. But now I am actually fine with it. I noticed that the incline of cave tunnels is never steeper than what the rovers are able to cope with. It seems that this is intentional and I take this now as a limit for ramps that I build myself.

It used to be fun to climb mountains with a rover as if it was a mountain goat. But I remember that when i first discovered what the rovers were capable of (especially the medium one) that i thought this to be overpowered. I got used to this feature and now it is gone. That's actually fine with me. However, I hope that they will add another vehicle with fun capabilities similar to what the rovers used to have, but maybe on a smaller scale. For example, a small rover which allows you to conquer steeper inclines for exploring mountainous landscapes or rough cave systems. As a trade-off, such a vehicle could offer only limited storage capacity or none at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@MarckI disagree - when they give us more options to get a FLAT* surface than horizontal or 60 degrees from horizontal - THEN you can keep the low torque. If I create a flat angled surface, a large rover cannot haul a medium rover up it. and that's broken.

now, if we could nicely create 10/15/30/45 degree slopes, fine, kill the torque as we don't need it.

and when I say FLAT, I mean FLAT - not fake flat with ripples. FLAT.

Edited by Vicomt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's alot of improvement width for the rovers. 

Traction on the surfaces might be a terrain issue.

The torque/power ratio needs to be consistent, adding more vehicles needs to increase control and power ratios, however argument could be made for weight to reduce it.

Atm there is no braking in the system, no blind reverse and no handbrake.   To reverse you turn the camera to facing backwards, then drive forwards.  For some this is an acceptable system, for others it's confusing.  But I don't see why both systems cannot be used.  If there was a blind reverse, it could be used to brake the vehicles.  There is a sort of hand brake system, but it requires the player to exit the vehicle. 

Perhaps the torque / power ration could be effected to the power usage, allowing a manual increase, then more readily uses battery power, so when extra effort is used, the battery drains faster, if more speed is used, battery is drained, but control is lost.. slow speed more traction, more control.

Maybe a forward button double tap, could be used to sprint the vehicle or add power, to increase traction/torque/power usages or speed over even ground.

Edited by Martin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/21/2018 at 8:03 AM, Martin said:

Atm there is no braking in the system, no blind reverse and no handbrake.   To reverse you turn the camera to facing backwards, then drive forwards.  For some this is an acceptable system, for others it's confusing.  But I don't see why both systems cannot be used.  If there was a blind reverse, it could be used to brake the vehicles.  There is a sort of hand brake system, but it requires the player to exit the vehicle. 

Um...what? ASDW are: Left, Back, Right, Forward... If you are driving forward (hopefully with the front of the rover pointing forward- I'll be glad when they fix that part) and need to decelerate, push the S key... like you were going to back up? It's no instant stop, but neither are brakes. I use it all the time, and it works fine... The rover doesn't accelerate to top speed instantly, so it's not going to decelerate that fast either.

Try it out sometime when you don't need it RIGHT NOW. Practice will show you how fast you can stop. Driving rovers used to be much worse (well, except that REALLY early on, pushing forward actually sent the FRONT of the rover moving away from the camera, even if it had to turn to do so), so while there is still work to be done on them, they are actually pretty usable...you just gotta practice a bit. (^_^)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've found that pushing S doesn't really stop the vehicle nor reverse it, but make it act weirdly.  Lately I've just been using forward, left/right.

I think my issue is that now mainly using trailers, I keep hitting the next trailer in reverse, which causes the vehicle to react fairly randomly, it isn't like reversing irl with a truck and trailer. You can push back and sometimes it actually goes backwards, other times it swings left or right then tries to do a sort of circular reverse.. With a single vehicle it's fine, but given the physics of single vehicles and their tendency to fly off into space, I tend to use a trailer, to help reduce the take off effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that problem with traction is real and won't be solved via torque.

Someone wrote on the Steam discussion that it was like driving on glass with beach balls for tires ;-)

And before someone blasts me, yes I know it is Alpha and when I bought it I knew it was Alpha. I am not slamming the game only making an observation.

I a play quite a lot of survival games (The Forest, No Man's Sky...) and I have to say that have found this game to be quite refreshing in it's "uniqueness" both visually and otherwise.

Tack (Swedish for thanks) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/21/2018 at 10:03 AM, Martin said:

The torque/power ratio needs to be consistent, adding more vehicles needs to increase control and power ratios, however argument could be made for weight to reduce it.

 

I disagree.  If you hook two rovers together you now should have 2x the power, 2x the traction and 2x the torque and less than 2x the weight (assuming 2nd one is empty and 1st one has 1 1s seat).  The motors and batteries are still present in the non-driving member of the train precisely as modern trains use multiple engines being RC'd from the front engine.

Not sure if Astroneer treats the attached (non-driven) trailer as dead weight or if it utilizes its torque and power or not.  I suspect it does not which, IMHO is wrong.  Two attached rovers should traverse the same incline at the same speed as one single rover would.  In fact two should do it better than the one because the 2nd one doesn't have the 1s or 3s for the driver (assume the trailer is empty) so the trailer has less weight to carry than the driven rover with its seat.  However, I have noticed that when 2 rovers are attached, they appear more sluggish, and slower to start/stop.  Which, again, is wrong since both rovers contain power and motors on the wheels, each responsible for its own weight carrying.

 

So, IMHO, the game should not treat rovers like space semi-trucks where there is a powered tractor and an unpowered trailer being towed by it.  Unfortunately it seems to treat every attached rover as dead weight being towed by the single driven rover.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think with this first iteration of the new vehicles it probably isn't really an issue.  But on the original vehicles, the tether connector, seemed to act like a hinge on the trailing vehicle, so that following vehicles turned where the lead vehicle turned.  When moving around in caves around stalagmites for example or around sharp corners or sloping paths you might have cut into tunnels to exit a cavern etc.  This hinge enabled better movement of the overall vehicle.

With the new iteration of vehicles, this hinge doesn't exist, the power connection, just seems to be a power cable, the trailing vehicles turn inconsistently, often getting stuck on corners as they try to cut/drag across the angle of turns and get stuck on stalagmites more often.

There is no doubt that driving is very much like "driving on glass" esp when going up a slope that isn't flat.  The entire trailing train, can slide downhill, sideways.  Which can make driving next to open canyons very hazardous.  As trailing vehicles don't progress forward, they just tend to slide with gravity. 

Edited by Martin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Martin said:

There is no doubt that driving is very much like "driving on glass" esp when going up a slope that isn't flat.

Ok, thats funny right there.  I don't care who ya are!

Slopes, by definition aren't flat :)  Thanks for the morning ROFL.

But to get the full glass effect, try driving DOWN a slope with any desire what so ever to stop any time before reaching the bottom.  Or drive down an elevated slope with any desire at all to stay on the narrow slope without falling off.

Breaks?  Pfft.  We don't need no stinking breaks! (best Mexican accent I can muster in text.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now