Rover stabillity sucks
How do I put this politely?
Somewhere in the physics between wheels, gyros, mass and thrusters, rovers in SE2 are not playable.
Right siding a rover without access to permanent magnets makes the play much worse.
It is like the game is trying to put me off by letting me spend the time and resources to build a rover, then me see it drive like the wheels are made of bananas and toffee. From what I can tell rovers prefer to drive with the wheels in the air, going nowhere. In open country a vehicle can drag itself along its way like a tired tortoise, yet In woodland a rover can suddenly discover enough energy to propel it self forward at high speed whilst loosing parts and tumbling around, where was all that speed earlier.
Well I know, I can play SE1 instead if I want to build a stable rover, because SE2 is not ready yet.
The stability is so bad that being able to pin point the cause is probably rocket science.
I would guess that there are multiple causes for the stability issues.
It looks like there is lag in the physics between action and reaction.
When combined, the main elements used in a rover build manages to create the common all garden cluster fuck, with all but the most curated form of driving becoming a joyless futility.
A folly so useless as cause one to blow air and think of something else to do.
Please correct and make better ASAP, thank you.
I like this feedback
I have been looking forward to building rovers in SE2.
Today was a bad day for rover building.
SE2 rovers are not fun yet.
I have been looking forward to building rovers in SE2.
Today was a bad day for rover building.
SE2 rovers are not fun yet.
My experience so far is that the SE2 physics engine treats a rover grid as though the grid were a rover-shaped helium balloon instead of metal and the wheels are the only thing that gravity is pulling on. These things need to have MASS, the suspension needs to travel and respond to obstacles and the whole thing shouldn't bounce in the air when hitting a pothole. My giant rover (think Grover) at 245 tons hits a small rock, the entire vehicle bounces off of it and at least five of the six wheels go airborne. This is the core problem I see so far, these rovers shouldn't go flying, the wheels should all maintain contact with the ground and the suspension should move up/down to maintain that contact.
My experience so far is that the SE2 physics engine treats a rover grid as though the grid were a rover-shaped helium balloon instead of metal and the wheels are the only thing that gravity is pulling on. These things need to have MASS, the suspension needs to travel and respond to obstacles and the whole thing shouldn't bounce in the air when hitting a pothole. My giant rover (think Grover) at 245 tons hits a small rock, the entire vehicle bounces off of it and at least five of the six wheels go airborne. This is the core problem I see so far, these rovers shouldn't go flying, the wheels should all maintain contact with the ground and the suspension should move up/down to maintain that contact.
I dunno, I've driven hundreds of kilometers with rovers now and while the rock thing ... definitely is an issue, trees aren't too bad for the most part and the while they're far from perfect, they are definitely useable. Don't put gyros on them, or turn them off when you don't need them, and turn off the gyro based steering thing and they should be pretty much fine
I dunno, I've driven hundreds of kilometers with rovers now and while the rock thing ... definitely is an issue, trees aren't too bad for the most part and the while they're far from perfect, they are definitely useable. Don't put gyros on them, or turn them off when you don't need them, and turn off the gyro based steering thing and they should be pretty much fine
Yes, Rovers are pretty much unplayable.
It gets even worse when you have hinges, rotors, or anything on it that creates a separate/sub-grid.
Built a rover with 2 drill "arms" left & right with the cockpit in the center. Each arm had a rotor for swinging up/down & a hinge for swinging left/right.
Idk what the result is called but certainly not "rover". It was very good in brake dancing tho, ngl.
Yes, Rovers are pretty much unplayable.
It gets even worse when you have hinges, rotors, or anything on it that creates a separate/sub-grid.
Built a rover with 2 drill "arms" left & right with the cockpit in the center. Each arm had a rotor for swinging up/down & a hinge for swinging left/right.
Idk what the result is called but certainly not "rover". It was very good in brake dancing tho, ngl.
Video of axles and half-axles from various vehicles
https://vid-hot.pr0gramm.com/2026/10/09/9ec032d2e627298d-h264-hd.mp4
Video of axles and half-axles from various vehicles
https://vid-hot.pr0gramm.com/2026/10/09/9ec032d2e627298d-h264-hd.mp4
Has anyone investigated the functionality of rovers in reduced or artificial gravity ?
For rovers to be on a par with SE1 they need to function on the planetary moons well.
For rovers to exceed SE1 they need to work on capital ships with artificial gravity and a relative lock.
Every wheel size of rovers has to work well enough to be enjoyed, otherwise what is the point ?
Has anyone investigated the functionality of rovers in reduced or artificial gravity ?
For rovers to be on a par with SE1 they need to function on the planetary moons well.
For rovers to exceed SE1 they need to work on capital ships with artificial gravity and a relative lock.
Every wheel size of rovers has to work well enough to be enjoyed, otherwise what is the point ?
Replies have been locked on this page!