Request: RCS thruster strength module for utility slots, or RCS engineering

[CMDR DERPY SMOOG]

so landing in high g planets is a thing. a difficult thing at the moment even for a very light ship. i would like to suggest that a module for the utility slot that adds strength to a ships control in gravity wells at the cost of heavily increased fuel usage and increased thermal load be developed. this would be for exploration ships and heavy trade vessels. there would be no increase in speed out of supercruise, no boost speed increase. just better control in high gravity. a stabilization booster module, or RCS booster module or something. idk its just a random idea i had while looking at the info on a 10 G landable planet i found.

an alternative would be a new bit of thruster engineering for this purpose, with the same consequences. (EDIT: it was pointed out to me that the drive tuning does this to a degree. ironicaly my exploration conda already has grade 4 clean drive tuning XD.)

o7

 

[varonica]

so landing in high g planets is a thing. a hard thing at the moment even for a very light ship. i would like to request that a module for the utility slot that adds strength to a ships control in gravity wells at the cost of heavily increased fuel usage and possibly increased thermal load be developed. purely for exploration purposes. there would be no increase in speed out of supercruise, no boost speed increase. just better control in high gravity. a combat version designed to give heavier ships a slight boost in pitch/yaw/roll would be cool too but might be unbalancing.

an alternative would be a new bit of thruster engineering for this purpose, with the same consequences.

o7

What sort of gravity are we talking about? I routinely land on anything up to 4.5g to 5g with ease, it only starts to get hard at very high G levels, and that's as it should be, you are entering a highly dangerous environment where you need to be extremely cautious, let's not remove all danger from the game by simply adding an extra module every time someone complains about a particular activity being a bit difficult. It's about the journey and the challenge, otherwise why bother about approach and landing at all, lets just teleport our ships straight to the surface.

 

[Captain Willard]

I tend to sneak up on hi g worlds. The pucker factor increases exponentially as the gravity goes up.

 

[Lestat]

so landing in high g planets is a thing. a hard thing at the moment even for a very light ship. i would like to request that a module for the utility slot that adds strength to a ships control in gravity wells at the cost of heavily increased fuel usage and possibly increased thermal load be developed. purely for exploration purposes. there would be no increase in speed out of supercruise, no boost speed increase. just better control in high gravity. a combat version designed to give heavier ships a slight boost in pitch/yaw/roll would be cool too but might be unbalancing.

an alternative would be a new bit of thruster engineering for this purpose, with the same consequences.

o7

Here an idea Watch a few Youtube videos on how to land on High G worlds. Another idea is to start off on Low G worlds like .5 and work your way up to High G worlds. Practice is the key here, not having it made easier.

 

[Maolagin]

an alternative would be a new bit of thruster engineering for this purpose, with the same consequences.

I don't know if you realize this, but this is already exactly what thruster engineering does now. Both the Clean and Dirty Drive recipes increase the "Optimal Multiplier" stat, which is roughly analogous to the acceleration the thrusters can provide. You also get better stats as you move up from E to A grade. Moreover, since thrusters have an optimal and maximum mass, you get better performance as you make your ship lighter or install larger drives. If you install the largest A-rated drives a ship can accept, and engineer them, any ship can handle 4-5g landings with ease. If you undersize and D-rate them, as some explorers like to do, then they will perform worse.

As always, tradeoffs must be made.

 

[CMDR DERPY SMOOG]

Here an idea Watch a few Youtube videos on how to land on High G worlds. Another idea is to start off on Low G worlds like .5 and work your way up to High G worlds. Practice is the key here, not having it made easier.

i know how to land on high g worlds. this was just a passing idea i had not the result of personal experience or frustration. neither me nor my exploration conda has any trouble landing on high g worlds. but thanks for the advice. o7

I don't know if you realize this, but this is already exactly what thruster engineering does now. Both the Clean and Dirty Drive recipes increase the "Optimal Multiplier" stat, which is roughly analogous to the acceleration the thrusters can provide. You also get better stats as you move up from E to A grade. Moreover, since thrusters have an optimal and maximum mass, you get better performance as you make your ship lighter or install larger drives. If you install the largest A-rated drives a ship can accept, and engineer them, any ship can handle 4-5g landings with ease. If you undersize and D-rate them, as some explorers like to do, then they will perform worse.

As always, tradeoffs must be made.

thanks for the info. i honestly didn't think it would affect things that much but i guess i was wrong. i do still think that utility slot equipment or engineering designed for exploration on high g worlds is something explorers would be interested in. it simply adds some options, which, in most cases, are a good thing to have. o7

 

[varonica]

i do still think that utility slot equipment or engineering designed for exploration on high g worlds is something explorers would be interested in. it simply adds some options, which, in most cases, are a good thing to have. o7

Just speaking for myself of course, but no this explorer is not interested in things simply designed to make the game easier, I want it more interesting, more exciting, even more dangerous, none of these things necessarily equate to easier, although in some cases it could.

 

[CMDR DERPY SMOOG]

Just speaking for myself of course, but no this explorer is not interested in things simply designed to make the game easier, I want it more interesting, more exciting, even more dangerous, none of these things necessarily equate to easier, although in some cases it could.

i agree on the desire for more interesting, exciting, even more dangerous content but this whole idea was just a passing thought on burning more fuel for better control in high-g as a option of some kind. supercruise assist and docking computers make things easier and i don't use them all the time but when i do want them they are there as a option. i like the slow glide down to the surface of a 7 g planet in large ship and knowing i have the skill to stick the landing with barely a tap on the shields. but that doesn't mean i want to feel like i am in the docking scene of interstellar when bringing a trade cutter down to the surface of a planet to deliver stuff. its use for exploration was just one use of a feature like this.

i do understand the desire to not make things easier tho. i have some fond memories of learning things the hard way. and of working to get the funds and equipment to make things easier.

 

[Amanojaku]

Class 1 Planetary Landing Assist Module

Mark my words. It will be a thing by the 2020 update

 

[Lestat]

i know how to land on high g worlds. this was just a passing idea i had not the result of personal experience or frustration. neither me nor my exploration conda has any trouble landing on high g worlds. but thanks for the advice. o7

Then ask your self this. Why add something that not needed and requires more space and weight?

 

[CMDR DERPY SMOOG]

Then ask your self this. Why add something that not needed and requires more space and weight?

i answered this 3 posts up in response to varonica.

EDIT: @varonica. i forgot to answer your first question. the gravity on the planet i was looking at was just over 10 G's. i considered landing on it because it was also a big planet, over 18000 km radius. but i had to get to work and decided to park in orbit. then forgot about it until i was scanning my logs with the observatory. thats when i had the idea about burning more fuel for better control.

i'm gonna edit my original post to be more a random idea then a request because that not really how i intended it. o7

 

[RamirezKurita]

The idea could be quite workable if it were to increase all realspace maneuverability and not simply within planetary gravity wells. It wouldn't need to increase boost speeds or anything like that (their thrust would be relatively minor compared to main ship engines), but instead be able to increase lateral and reverse thrust as well as improving turn rates. Explorers would like to use it for planetside work, miners could use it for maneuvering within asteroid fields and combat pilots would be able to make use of the increased thrust that they provide. Just as engineering and A-rating thrusters is useful for everyone, a supplementary thruster module could potentially see widespread use if the balance is right.