For god's sake, fix the "Floppy ship" problem.

[Talavar]

I've already seen one of your rockets in a KSP2 demo flopping around like flaccid junk. This problem was completely ridiculous in KSP1. Now I see it has also arrived in KSP2. Steel doesn't flop around like that. It bends slightly, then snaps. Also, the fact that you allow it to bend so much causes a physics calculation loop where it gets totally out of control, which we had to use a mod to fix - "Kerbal Joint Reinforcement" (Thanks to Ferram). You need something like rigid connection till 95% stress, then 85-99% a slight bend (incrementally increase to 5 degrees at the most), then snaps at 100% stress. Also, this would fix the physics easing problems at launch... I know it's a game, but it uses REAL physics. We shouldn't have to get a mod to fix the physics in a physics oriented game... This is a simple matter of tweaking a few numbers, so please, nip it in the bud before it's released!
Here is what I'm talking about!! (SKIP TO 4:40).
https://youtu.be/5uqpdoFCOMM?t=275

[A Terrible Modder]

laughs in struts

[Talavar]

Originally posted by Sparky:

https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/50911-13-kerbal-joint-reinforcement-v333-72417/

A fix shouldn't have to be modded in. That's the whole point. Stable "realistic" physics should be part of the base games since it's physics based.

[dolorem_itself]

Floppy rockets were one of the smaller factors that made ksp entertaining, some of Danny's Creation worked on the physics of flop. Though I'm sure they keep the rigid attachment option available.

[🦊Λℚ𝓤ΛƑΛᗯҜᔕ🦊]

Originally posted by Talavar:

A fix shouldn't have to be modded in. That's the whole point. Stable "realistic" physics should be part of the base games since it's physics based.

So let's get all of this right: You're complaining about the ships in KSP being "Floppy", yet if you just use struts the ships wouldn't be floppy anymore. Do you some how not even know that struts exist in KSP? I'm sure they will have struts in the new game too.

[Talavar]

Originally posted by Aquafawks:

Originally posted by Talavar:

A fix shouldn't have to be modded in. That's the whole point. Stable "realistic" physics should be part of the base games since it's physics based.

So let's get all of this right: You're complaining about the ships in KSP being "Floppy", yet if you just use struts the ships wouldn't be floppy anymore. Do you some how not even know that struts exist in KSP? I'm sure they will have struts in the new game too.

Aqua, have you ever seen a rocketship bend 90 degrees then straighten back out?... yeah.. me neither. It's a fundamental problem that can be fixed with a small amount of coding. I'm not sure why someone would even attempt to defend that kind of behaviour in a physics game, other than "it's funny"

[supersonic2233]

i've legit never had the floppy ship problem with auto struts

[🦊Λℚ𝓤ΛƑΛᗯҜᔕ🦊]

Originally posted by Talavar:

Aqua, have you ever seen a rocketship bend 90 degrees then straighten back out?... yeah.. me neither. It's a fundamental problem that can be fixed with a small amount of coding. I'm not sure why someone would even attempt to defend that kind of behaviour in a physics game, other than "it's funny"

I'm not defending anything but it's also all in the design of the ship. If you support half the ship by an explodable connection then of course it's going to be floppy.. that's not a rigid point of contact. There's two connectors in KSP that I'm aware of, rigid body connectors and soft body connectors. Don't connect half the ship with a soft body connector and it won't happen. That's one of the inharent issues with KSP. We as players totally have the ability to design a ship incorrectly that won't fly. If you design it wrong and it ends up floppy then that's your problem (whom ever made the ship) not the game's fault.

[Talavar]

Originally posted by Aquafawks:

Originally posted by Talavar:

Aqua, have you ever seen a rocketship bend 90 degrees then straighten back out?... yeah.. me neither. It's a fundamental problem that can be fixed with a small amount of coding. I'm not sure why someone would even attempt to defend that kind of behaviour in a physics game, other than "it's funny"

I'm not defending anything but it's also all in the design of the ship. If you support half the ship by an explodable connection then of course it's going to be floppy.. that's not a rigid point of contact. There's two connectors in KSP that I'm aware of, rigid body connectors and soft body connectors. Don't connect half the ship with a soft body connector and it won't happen. That's one of the inharent issues with KSP. We as players totally have the ability to design a ship incorrectly that won't fly. If you design it wrong and it ends up floppy then that's your problem (whom ever made the ship) not the game's fault.

Watch the video in the OP, at the given timeframe... That's as realistic as starwars.

[Skyhigh]

It’s funny when it happens because I rarely dock large structures together BUT when it does happen and you put a fair amount of time into a build it is really disappointing. So yeah, hope they fix it as well.

[Patriot03]

Really not sure why people would defend this besides for the sake of funny youtube videos, but I use joint reinforcement for KSP 1 and it does exactly what you described, without auto-struts and I haven't looked back. The game is much more enjoyable when they aren't noodles even with struts btw, in the base game. Of course there are ways around it but why deal with the problem in the first place? Struts still have a purpose by the way, to keep the rocket from breaking up and to make it even more rigid, but we don't need full on noodle rockets, if they were ever to bend that much they would snap anyway.

the mod doesn't remove 100% of flop, but I would say it gets rid of 90% of it and makes large space ships built in orbit possible and the game overall more enjoyable.

Yes, we get it, you can put struts on everything to mostly solve the problem, but can we just avoid that mess? We'll still need struts for boosters and stuff but I don't see why anyone would actually want unrealistic flying noodles.

[Mr. Lo-Ki]

Originally posted by Harper S Locke:

Floppy rockets were one of the smaller factors that made ksp entertaining, some of Danny's Creation worked on the physics of flop. Though I'm sure they keep the rigid attachment option available.

No having floppy rockets is not fun it's completely unrealistic, emersion breaking and
and detracts signifyingly from the fun of the game. You would understand this if you actually built rockets meant to accomplish a mission instead of just messing around, this makes the actual fun parts of the game, doing missions and building bases, a pain in the @$$ for no reason whatsoever.

[Mr. Lo-Ki]

Originally posted by Aquafawks:

Originally posted by Talavar:

A fix shouldn't have to be modded in. That's the whole point. Stable "realistic" physics should be part of the base games since it's physics based.

So let's get all of this right: You're complaining about the ships in KSP being "Floppy", yet if you just use struts the ships wouldn't be floppy anymore. Do you some how not even know that struts exist in KSP? I'm sure they will have struts in the new game too.

You should not ever have to add struts to a rocket to keep it rigid this is a huge waste of weight and money as well as adding a ton of drag since struts have the highest drag coefficient of any part in the game. As an engineer actually working in aerospace I'll tell you rockets in real life are completely because if they weren't they would never make it to space! Any flexing of the rocket body would instantly cause the rocket to violently veer off course and be ripped apart my aerodynamic stresses. This is just completely out of place for a game which tries so hard to model realist physics.

[Mr. Lo-Ki]

Originally posted by Aquafawks:

Originally posted by Talavar:

Aqua, have you ever seen a rocketship bend 90 degrees then straighten back out?... yeah.. me neither. It's a fundamental problem that can be fixed with a small amount of coding. I'm not sure why someone would even attempt to defend that kind of behaviour in a physics game, other than "it's funny"

I'm not defending anything but it's also all in the design of the ship. If you support half the ship by an explodable connection then of course it's going to be floppy.. that's not a rigid point of contact. There's two connectors in KSP that I'm aware of, rigid body connectors and soft body connectors. Don't connect half the ship with a soft body connector and it won't happen. That's one of the inharent issues with KSP. We as players totally have the ability to design a ship incorrectly that won't fly. If you design it wrong and it ends up floppy then that's your problem (whom ever made the ship) not the game's fault.

You are defending it and you are wrong to do so all parts should connect rigidly like on real rockets no questions no options. As an aerospace engineer I can tell you rockets are and should be completely rigid and without any external support otherwise they are not flight worthy. Any flexing of the rocket body while in flight would cause the rocket to veer off course and be ripped apart by aerodynamic stresses. This is just completely out of place for a physics simulator and is 100% emersion breaking.

[🦊Λℚ𝓤ΛƑΛᗯҜᔕ🦊]

Originally posted by Badger6669:

You should not ever have to add struts to a rocket to keep it rigid this is a huge waste of weight and money as well as adding a ton of drag since struts have the highest drag coefficient of any part in the game. As an engineer actually working in aerospace I'll tell you rockets in real life are completely because if they weren't they would never make it to space! Any flexing of the rocket body would instantly cause the rocket to violently veer off course and be ripped apart my aerodynamic stresses. This is just completely out of place for a game which tries so hard to model realist physics.

Just so you know: In KSP struts have 0 weight. They don't contribute to the weight of the ship and they don't effect drag either. Struts in KSP have zero impact on ship performance what so ever. I get it that you design stuff in real life and it's great that you're a aerospace engineer and all of that. You're proud of that and happy to flap it around on the internet. Good for you. Unfortunately you don't seem to understand how you having that profession that doesn't mean anything at all in relation to KSP or how it works. You can't apply real life physics to KSP physics. It doesn't work the same in game as it does in real life.

Originally posted by Badger6669:

As an aerospace engineer I can tell you rockets are and should be completely rigid and without any external support otherwise they are not flight worthy. Any flexing of the rocket body while in flight would cause the rocket to veer off course and be ripped apart by aerodynamic stresses. This is just completely out of place for a physics simulator and is 100% emersion breaking.

You would completely laugh out loud at some of the stuff in game that I've managed to get in orbit. Things that have the aerodynamic drag of a flat side of a brick, yet I can still get it into space in-game. And things that should burn up on the ascent but yet some how they still make it into space in-game. KSP is weird and fun. You should seriously stop trying to be so super serious about it and just play the game.

[Talavar]

Originally posted by Aquafawks:

Originally posted by Badger6669:

You should not ever have to add struts to a rocket to keep it rigid this is a huge waste of weight and money as well as adding a ton of drag since struts have the highest drag coefficient of any part in the game. As an engineer actually working in aerospace I'll tell you rockets in real life are completely because if they weren't they would never make it to space! Any flexing of the rocket body would instantly cause the rocket to violently veer off course and be ripped apart my aerodynamic stresses. This is just completely out of place for a game which tries so hard to model realist physics.

Just so you know: In KSP struts have 0 weight. They don't contribute to the weight of the ship and they don't effect drag either. Struts in KSP have zero impact on ship performance what so ever. I get it that you design stuff in real life and it's great that you're a aerospace engineer and all of that. You're proud of that and happy to flap it around on the internet. Good for you. Unfortunately you don't seem to understand how you having that profession that doesn't mean anything at all in relation to KSP or how it works. You can't apply real life physics to KSP physics. It doesn't work the same in game as it does in real life.

Originally posted by Badger6669:

As an aerospace engineer I can tell you rockets are and should be completely rigid and without any external support otherwise they are not flight worthy. Any flexing of the rocket body while in flight would cause the rocket to veer off course and be ripped apart by aerodynamic stresses. This is just completely out of place for a physics simulator and is 100% emersion breaking.

You would completely laugh out loud at some of the stuff in game that I've managed to get in orbit. Things that have the aerodynamic drag of a flat side of a brick, yet I can still get it into space in-game. And things that should burn up on the ascent but yet some how they still make it into space in-game. KSP is weird and fun. You should seriously stop trying to be so super serious about it and just play the game.

We just want it to be functional, "rational", and enjoyable. There's no reason to be passive about that... at all.