Why does my SRV have such terrible traction?

[Alodia]

Since you can already set the default function (and know about it) I don't really understand what you are trying the tell me.
"Physically going into options..."
Wow. What a task. Do you need to take a break between hitting 2 buttons? It's not that difficult.

Then you're fully aware that unless you know it can be disabled as the default- and i only found this out myself recently - almost every new player and even some experienced ones will assume drive assist is designed as the optimal srv control method for everyone. They'll then come away wondering why the thing handles so poorly.

But sure, you could be deliberately obtuse and focus on the non existent manual work implied by "physically" instead of what it actually means - that you have to go hunting in a pile of control options to disable it, all the while without knowing what drive assist does, or that its for hotas, which the game doesn't actually tell you.

 

[Vandaahl]

Except that these same handling characteristics occur on high-gravity worlds as well.

Yes, beause of this (pro tip, look at the angle of the wheel thrusters):

Low g world

High g world

There is also no logical reason to design the SRV to have better traction when moving backwards than moving forwards.

The better traction going up hill in reverse is a simple physical effect called weight shifting. Going up forward 4 wheels carry most of the weight, going up backwards 6 wheels carry most of the weight. This is first grade physics btw. If you don't understand this then yada yada, and all that...

 

[babelfisch]

Then you're fully aware that unless you know it can be disabled as the default- and i only found this out myself recently - almost every new player and even some experienced ones will assume drive assist is designed as the optimal srv control method for everyone. They'll then come away wondering why the thing handles so poorly.

But sure, you could be deliberately obtuse and focus on the non existent manual work implied by "physically" instead of what it actually means - that you have to go hunting in a pile of control options to disable it, all the while without knowing what drive assist does, or that its for hotas, which the game doesn't actually tell you.

You could always just read the manual. Or take a look at the options menu. IIRC the default option actually is drive assist off... You are right, default is on. I think it used to be the other way around, not sure why they changed it.

 

[Hadarmil]

Which input device do you use?

CH Fighterstick. Handles OKish but the vehicle itself I feel should handle better...starts spinning much too easily.

 

[Hadarmil]

Yes, beause of this (pro tip, look at the angle of the wheel thrusters):

Low g world
https://i.imgur.com/GFERZsk.jpg

High g world
https://i.imgur.com/hdMFBTz.jpg




The better traction going up hill in reverse is a simple physical effect called weight shifting. Going up forward 4 wheels carry most of the weight, going up backwards 6 wheels carry most of the weight. This is first grade physics btw. If you don't understand this then yada yada, and all that...

So it's a simple problem of the designers' form over function. Same as the type7 being just a tad too tall for medium bays. Better weight distribution n all that.

MOAR SRVs could fix that .Did I mention I would like more SRVs? I bet I haven't. So I want MOAR SRVs PLZ.

 

[babelfisch]

CH Fighterstick. Handles OKish but the vehicle itself I feel should handle better...starts spinning much too easily.

And you are sure there isn't something wrong with your settings? Like using digital rather than analogue axis?

BTW
The no. 1 reason for spinning is not steering but the throttle...
Using pedals + wheel / joystick or triggers with a gamepad and drive assist off works like a charm. A throttle + drive assist on applies way too much force to the wheels in certain situations. Immediately cut speed when you loose control and you should be able to avoid spinning around.

 

[Alodia]

You could always just read the manual. Or take a look at the options menu. IIRC the default option actually is drive assist off... You are right, default is on. I think it used to be the other way around, not sure why they changed it.

c'mon, credit me with some due diligence - i'd already read the (in their own words) "living manual", which they've already apparently stopped updating (there's long explanations of powerplay and the cqc stuff, but nothing about srvs anywhere that i can find). if the game just said something about drive assist being on not being good for mouse&kb, i'd be fine with that - unfortunately i spent a long time avoiding planet stuff because i just couldn't control the buggy at all. (in fact the only reason i found out in this forum that you can kill it from defaulting each time is because i couldn't find it mentioned in the manual!)

as for options menu, all it says is "set drive assist to on or off after deploying". really not trying to start an argument over this, i just think the game currently does a terrible job of the out of the box car functionality, and small improvements in control scheme explanations would go a long way towards making srv driving better for everyone regardless of control method. fwiw i (mostly) have no issues now with srv driving with mouse&kb since disabling assist, but i'd never have known only for asking on here about it.

 

[babelfisch]

c'mon, credit me with some due diligence - i'd already read the (in their own words) "living manual", which they've already apparently stopped updating (there's long explanations of powerplay and the cqc stuff, but nothing about srvs anywhere that i can find). if the game just said something about drive assist being on not being good for mouse&kb, i'd be fine with that - unfortunately i spent a long time avoiding planet stuff because i just couldn't control the buggy at all. (in fact the only reason i found out in this forum that you can kill it from defaulting each time is because i couldn't find it mentioned in the manual!)

as for options menu, all it says is "set drive assist to on or off after deploying". really not trying to start an argument over this, i just think the game currently does a terrible job of the out of the box car functionality, and small improvements in control scheme explanations would go a long way towards making srv driving better for everyone regardless of control method. fwiw i (mostly) have no issues now with srv driving with mouse&kb since disabling assist, but i'd never have known only for asking on here about it.

Yes, I think it would be better if drive assist default would be off for gamepad and keyboard.

 

[Maximus Excelsior]

Look, FD are just being historically accurate. Since the dawn of space exploration, mankind has had trouble driving on every planet except Earth:

https://i.imgur.com/JPbhGU8.jpg

As this NASA picture clearly shows, even the low powered Mars Rover would spin out uncontrollably if it hit a rock!

What a beautiful find!

I drive the SRV with just a flight stick and it works well. Barrel rolls and airtime adjustments are made easier with the twist action on the stick but I still lose control frequently. The main grips I have is the common one; that being the impossibly deadly rock of obstruction!

 

[Barking_Mad]

If you insist on driving the same way on every planet, on every surface, with pips at full, engine at top speed and ragging the SRV about like it has no limitations you will spin out and crash.

If however you learn the use of pips to engine, speed control in relation to the individual gravity and surfaces, whilst also using the handbrake (important!) then you can get good at it. Throw in some use of the thrusters and it's immensely satisfying. I use mouse and keyboard btw.

 

[M00ka]

If you insist on driving the same way on every planet, on every surface, with pips at full, engine at top speed and ragging the SRV about like it has no limitations you will spin out and crash.

If however you learn the use of pips to engine, speed control in relation to the individual gravity and surfaces, whilst also using the handbrake (important!) then you can get good at it. Throw in some use of the thrusters and it's immensely satisfying. I use mouse and keyboard btw.

How dare you insinuate that a problem might be a players fault. Don't you know the forum's Number 1 Rule - everything is FD's fault, it is all a conspiracy against the players!!!!!

Now that you have hopefully had a chuckle, I fully agree with you, different planetoids require different driving techniques and an SRV is not supposed to be driven like an F1 racing car. They are exploration vehicles first and foremost, just a means to get around on the surface.

 

[Chris Simon]

You could always just read the manual. Or take a look at the options menu. IIRC the default option actually is drive assist off... You are right, default is on. I think it used to be the other way around, not sure why they changed it.

I think it depends on what control device you have plugged in. When I revert to defaults with my FCS, it's off.

 

[mojonaut]

You can actually drive steeper slopes backwards than forwards. Logic! Climbed a mountain with it at 70° in reverse where forward it would stall at 60-65°

Ha Reminds me of one the tales an old college lecturer used to tell when he was maintaining remote telecom stations driving an old Austin Morris (I think), they were always on top of a hill and the only way to get to some of them was in reverse due to the lower gearing and the under powered engine.

 

[Barking_Mad]

I too found it frustrating to spin out all the time. Then I stopped repeating my actions in the hope of getting differing results.

Best way is to pick a Buckyball map round a station and do it over and over. Learnt a lot about turning, speed, jumping and boosting that way.

There are some annoying things. Collision detection at edges of the vehicle feels too close and hitting a pebble at 5mph shouldn't get me a 'chassis integrity compromised' message

 

[Devari]

I don't have problems with excessive oversteer since I use an analogue input device. As said above, I can't comment on your backwards traction problem.
Which device are you using and what mode are you driving in?

The backwards traction issue has nothing to do with input device. It's an issue with how FD programmed the driving characteristics of the SRV. The way that a driver manages the oversteer is going to be somewhat dependent on input device, I usually drive using the keyboard with FA-Off, but the tendency to have excessive oversteer is inherent to the driving characteristics of the vehicle regardless of the control method.

A real life vehicle wouldn't survive the stress we put our SRVs into for 5 seconds.

That's true for the ships as well, it doesn't have anything to do with FD intentionally making the driving characteristics of the SRV markedly sub-optimal for off-road use.

Once I had opportunity to check ingame we can continue the discussion about backwards driving. But if it turns out that I agree with you

There's no chance of the issue of backwards driving not being reproducible, several other posters have noticed this tendency as well in this thread alone. If you don't notice it yourself in-game then you are simply not testing the issue correctly. I've maintained a 52 page thread and the topic of SRV driving issues is discussed there all the time, you can check the link in my sig. There is even a high-G planet (Sawyer Beacon on Kokary 3) that frequently has steep slopes where driving up the slope backwards allows gradual progress but you can't move up the slope at all driving forwards. I often mention this aspect of SRV traction in the thread as it's sometimes the only way to reach that base depending on where you land.

this would be the 'almost' part. And if that's your biggest issue with the driving model I'd say it is almost perfect...

By "perfect" you mean "you personally enjoy driving the SRV". By "perfect" I would mean that it properly reflects the driving characteristics of a vehicle designed with an AWD system that responds appropriately to loss of traction. We are talking about completely different concepts here.

I didn't. I only replied to those that I read, knowing that you are repeating the same thing over and over again.

Well like I said, when someone doesn't read my posts or other posts in the thread that means I am going to repeat myself if I respond to that person because they literally did not read what I said the first time. I can stop repeating myself by simply instructing those individuals to read my posts rather than trying to engage in a discussion with them. In fact I think that will probably be a good policy from now on considering the recent tendencies I've noticed for certain posters to click the "reply" button before properly reading what I typed.

 

[Siranui]

What rally car or dune buggy is designed to have better traction going backwards than it does forwards? Do you routinely see rally drivers needing to drive backwards up a slope? Because I routinely use reverse traction to get up steep slopes in the SRV.

None, but many do. Most cars will get up an ice-covered slope better in reverse. It's physics, not an intentional design perimeter.

 

[Stealthie]

The funny thing is, given all the shenanigans that go on with our ships automatically controlling thrust depending on gravity, proximity to a planet and to other objects in space, you'd think the same technology might be used to create a traction-control system for a dune-buggy.

I'm not complaining though.
I love the way the SRV handles... except when I screw up.

First step toward SRV bliss is to turn off "drive assist" and never think of it again.

 

[Devari]

Yes, beause of this (pro tip, look at the angle of the wheel thrusters):

Yes, I'm aware that the thrusters don't need to apply full downforce on a high-g planet, especially when the SRV is standing still and isn't actively dealing with any traction issues. That doesn't mean that the SRV shouldn't be programmed or designed to change how it applies downforce on a moderate-g or high-g planet when the wheels slip, which is how any properly designed AWD system would incorporate the thrusters to optimize traction control.

The better traction going up hill in reverse is a simple physical effect called weight shifting.

First, the term you're referring to is not actually called "weight shifting". It's called "weight transfer". Second traction in cars going up hills is more complicated than simple weight transfer effects. It also reflects differences between FWD/RWD/AWD vehicles, differences in torque/gearing in forward vs. reverse gears as well as weight distribution issues. It's not just "weight shifting" as you like to put it. Most of those issues however wouldn't be as relevant for the SRV which use a power plant that is driving individual electric motors on each individual wheel. There is no "gearing" to deal with as the individual electric motors on the wheels can generate maximum torque from a standstill. It also should be a simple matter to transfer power as needed to any individual wheel as it would be controlled electrically and the torque to each wheel is completely independent. The SRV can also generate its own active downforce which means that weight distribution is not as relevant since we know the thrusters can produce several g's of acceleration when needed which can easily optimize the weight distribution. Essentially the SRV should drive much better than it does considering the capabilities of its electric motors and thrusters.

Going up forward 4 wheels carry most of the weight, going up backwards 6 wheels carry most of the weight. This is first grade physics btw. If you don't understand this then yada yada, and all that...

Are you even looking at the same SRV picture that I am? The SRV has far more ground contact at the front of the SRV than it does at the rear of the SRV because it has four wheels at the front and only two wheels at the rear. The centre wheels are near the centre of mass of the SRV. The SRV should also be able to generate sufficient downforce with its thrusters to optimize ground contact at the front wheels as needed especially given their larger surface area. This actually means that the SRV should be getting more traction at the front than at the rear. So your "theory" is completely backwards.

 

[babelfisch]

The backwards traction issue has nothing to do with input device. It's an issue with how FD programmed the driving characteristics of the SRV.

Please read my post again, I never said it does.

There's no chance of the issue of backwards driving not being reproducible, several other posters have noticed this tendency as well in this thread alone. If you don't notice it yourself in-game then you are simply not testing the issue correctly. I've maintained a 52 page thread and the topic of SRV driving issues is discussed there all the time, you can check the link in my sig. There is even a high-G planet (Sawyer Beacon on Kokary 3) that frequently has steep slopes where driving up the slope backwards allows gradual progress but you can't move up the slop at all driving forwards. I often mention this aspect of SRV traction in the thread as it's sometimes the only way to reach that base depending on where you land.

Again, please read my post. I never said it isn't reproducible.

By "perfect" you mean "you personally enjoy driving the SRV". By "perfect" I would mean that it properly reflects the driving characteristics of a vehicle designed with an AWD system that responds appropriately to loss of traction. We are talking about completely different concepts here.

Again, please read my post. I didn't say it's perfect.

Well like I said, when someone doesn't read my posts or other posts in the thread that means I am going to repeat myself if I respond to that person because they literally did not read what I said the first time. I can stop repeating myself by simply instructing those individuals to read my posts rather than trying to engage in a discussion with them. In fact I think that will probably be a good policy from now on considering the recent tendencies I've noticed for certain posters to click the "reply" button before properly reading what I typed.

Again, you are the one not reading my post. Stop trolling.

 

[Cosmo]

Because it doesn't have Michelin tires.