Jump to content

[KSP 1.12.1+] Galileo's Planet Pack [v1.6.6] [23 Sept 2021]


Galileo
 Share

Recommended Posts

Encountered something that I suspect is a bug or oversight, but wanted to make sure. I'm running my new career save with GPP and Stategia, among other mods. GPP's custom config for Strategia introduces a new strategy called Private Sector, which at its most basic level adds 1.5 science per unresearched technology to each contract completed. This means that for an initial one-time investment of 150 science, you can get upwards of 200 science for every contract completed, even if it's just testing a part on the launchpad.

I looked in the config file itself, and the effect is described there as a multiplier rather than a direct addition, so maybe it was intended to work differently than it is? It's by no means gamebreaking, and people who don't want to use it can just ignore it, but it does seem extremely overpowered next to all the other, balanced strategies that the GPP config introduced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, billybob579 said:

Encountered something that I suspect is a bug or oversight, but wanted to make sure. I'm running my new career save with GPP and Stategia, among other mods. GPP's custom config for Strategia introduces a new strategy called Private Sector, which at its most basic level adds 1.5 science per unresearched technology to each contract completed. This means that for an initial one-time investment of 150 science, you can get upwards of 200 science for every contract completed, even if it's just testing a part on the launchpad.

I looked in the config file itself, and the effect is described there as a multiplier rather than a direct addition, so maybe it was intended to work differently than it is? It's by no means gamebreaking, and people who don't want to use it can just ignore it, but it does seem extremely overpowered next to all the other, balanced strategies that the GPP config introduced.

I had the entire CTT tree filled out before leaving the Gael system.  Overpowered?  Just a bit.

On the other hand, it's actually a decent way to play.  You still get contacts (which you don't get in sandbox mode), but it does away with the science grinding.  It's a fine line between "fun" and "grind".  Especially when you're restarting often because of game-breaking mod updates, or changing which mods you're using, or the next major KSP release, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, billybob579 said:

Encountered something that I suspect is a bug or oversight, but wanted to make sure. I'm running my new career save with GPP and Stategia, among other mods. GPP's custom config for Strategia introduces a new strategy called Private Sector, which at its most basic level adds 1.5 science per unresearched technology to each contract completed. This means that for an initial one-time investment of 150 science, you can get upwards of 200 science for every contract completed, even if it's just testing a part on the launchpad.

I looked in the config file itself, and the effect is described there as a multiplier rather than a direct addition, so maybe it was intended to work differently than it is? It's by no means gamebreaking, and people who don't want to use it can just ignore it, but it does seem extremely overpowered next to all the other, balanced strategies that the GPP config introduced.

This was intentional. I wanted to encourage the exploration of the entire system, not just Gael and its moons. What I may do is make the initial price much higher so it adds a little more grind or challenge initially. In my experience, people tend to get burnt out after exploring the home body system, and restart careers far too soon. What I wanted to do was give players the opportunity early on to explore further,and I figured that would be a discreet way of doing it. It's not for everyone, so like you said, you can ignore it for now

Edited by Galileo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I definitely want the default setup to force me to multiple planets (I even choose ~30% science payout to make it harder, and use CTT which costs tons more to fill out).  But I think it does make sense to have a bail-out strategy available for other kinds of players.  I'd maybe like to see the wording on that strategy more clear about what it is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Grannus Flyby ship has now returned home. Here is the link:

Grannus Return and a picture:

r7wMuOv.jpg

 

Conclusion:
Originally, I had assumed that the mission would take 90 years. Then I found out that one can reduce the flight time by cleverly planned
maneuvers. Thus the entire mission could be carried out in only 37 years. Here is a brief summary of the entire maneuvers:

Start towards Grannus: approx. 6000 m/s
Correction for lowering PE at Grannus 68 m/s
Correction in the middle of the flight by 7.1 m/s
Accelerated at Grannus SOI for 5100 m/s
Accelerated at Grannus PE for 4844 m/s to get Intecept with Gauss
Correction at Gauss SOI for 2.3 m/s to reach low PE at Gauss.
Correction at SOI Catullus for 390 m/s to reach PE at Gauss of 430km
Braking maneuver after Gauss PE for 11814 m/s to get Gael Intercept.
Brake maneuver at Gael for 4919 m/s to reach orbit of 500 km.

I have a total of 33000 m/s dV needed. This is however substantially cheaper if one takes the long flight time in the purchase. It is
certainly possible to stay below 10000 m/s dV.
 

Edited by astroheiko
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My lag generator asteroid tug has 127 km/s in LGO - why do these complicated gravity assists when you can just torch ship it to Grannus with 50 km/s, refuel using a Grannus-orbiting asteroid then return?

Maxtech Aerospace has a fetish for insane torch-ship designs - our crew want to be home for supper no matter where they eat lunch!

Edited by MaxL_1023
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm experiencing the problem of GPP forever loading after installing.

 

I'm using a fresh KSP install (run once), installed the version of Kopernicus from the GPP GitHub page and run it again before copying the GPP content to my Gamedata folder. 

 

The loading screen works and I can see Gael on the game screen, but as soon as I start a new game... Nothing.

 

Any ideas?

 

running KSP 64bit with 8GB ram if this helps.

 

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Galileo Hey quick question, why doesn't KSP work like, like not load up an area until you reach a certain range? Like when you get close to it? Why does it load the entire star systems? Is there a way to make it not do that?

My experience with KSP is regardless of if you have mods installed or not, it will use all the ram available for it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more I play, the more I realize that I'm not very fond of the graphical updates I get from EVE and scatterer, but I would still love to have rings around the planets that are supposed to have them. Just out of curiosity (and in preparation for my next career), what would be the best way to minimize usage of those mods while still getting planet rings? What could be ignored (i.e. not installed at all), what settings could be tweaked, what would be absolutely necessary in order to get the rings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Grinningthing said:

I'm experiencing the problem of GPP forever loading after installing.

 

I'm using a fresh KSP install (run once), installed the version of Kopernicus from the GPP GitHub page and run it again before copying the GPP content to my Gamedata folder. 

 

The loading screen works and I can see Gael on the game screen, but as soon as I start a new game... Nothing.

 

Any ideas?

 

running KSP 64bit with 8GB ram if this helps.

 

Thanks

No ideas without your output log or a screenshot of your gamedata.

20 minutes ago, The-Doctor said:

@Galileo Hey quick question, why doesn't KSP work like, like not load up an area until you reach a certain range? Like when you get close to it? Why does it load the entire star systems? Is there a way to make it not do that?

My experience with KSP is regardless of if you have mods installed or not, it will use all the ram available for it

There is, but it's not possible with if you use scatterer. 

You can use this cfg if you don't use scatterer and the planet textures will only load when they are needed. https://www.dropbox.com/s/xjqjnukzni04qh2/GPP_Settings.zip?dl=0

NOTE: This only works if you DO NOT have Scatterer installed.

18 minutes ago, JohnnyPanzer said:

The more I play, the more I realize that I'm not very fond of the graphical updates I get from EVE and scatterer, but I would still love to have rings around the planets that are supposed to have them. Just out of curiosity (and in preparation for my next career), what would be the best way to minimize usage of those mods while still getting planet rings? What could be ignored (i.e. not installed at all), what settings could be tweaked, what would be absolutely necessary in order to get the rings?

Just don't install EVE or Scatterer. You'll still have rings. What don't you like about the visual mods? They are kind of the best thing about GPP, and add so much more immersion to the game in my opinion. If it's a performance thing, I can't really help you there.

Edited by Galileo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Galileo said:

Just don't install EVE or Scatterer. You'll still have rings. What don't you like about the visual mods? They are kind of the best thing about GPP, and add so much more immersion to the game in my opinion. If it's a performance things, I can't really help you there.

To be honest it's mostly scatterer I think. The reason I asked is because I'm a bit hazy as to which mod does what, and I was under the impression that one of the mods was required for the rings. But to answer your question:

1. I don't like the clouds.The volymetric clouds are fine, but the texture layer is an eye sore in my taste. It's too opaque, reacts weirdly to various lighting situations (i.e. dark clouds with a crisp, clearly visible border) and the have quite a few bugs for me. Sometimes they just appear on half the planet, other times they appear to be superimposed on the planet without following perspective. Simply put, they add very little to me but cause quite a lot of distraction.

2. The water level being randomly raised or lowered with as much as a few hundred feet with each scene load is distracting. Sure, I could go back to the tracking station to force a scene reload, but it's still annoying.

3. The sunsets can be amazing, but the are just as likely to be ruined by having black lines at the horizon, depth issues or any other number of glitches.

4. The improved terrain textures (I assume this is EVE?) are great, but they frequently produce geometrical, hypnotic patterns when viewed from orbit from certain angles. So everything will look fine and then you pan the camera and all of the sudden the whole planet surface will have flickering tweed-like patterns going on.

5. The same textures will also jitter a lot when viewed from the ground, so it appears as if you're holding an electric toothbrusch to your temples while looking at the screen. The ground simply vibrates. It's... headache inducing.

Performance is not really an issue. I have a decent system and the mods don't produce much lag for me. Part packs are much worse for performance in my experience.

TL;DR They can be gorgeous at times, but they simply produce too many glitches for me to consider the trade-off worth it. It's a matter of taste I think. A similar example would be how some people will rather run games on low settings with great framerate, while others prefer crisp visuals with a frmaerate of 10fps. Me, I'm sensitive to graphic glitches. I get so distracted by them that I can't enjoy even the greatest visuals.

(Also, I'm not trying to complain. I can see the allure of the mods, and the great effort and skill that went into making them. I just wanted to answer your question. :) )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Grinningthing said:

I'm experiencing the problem of GPP forever loading after installing.

This could be the same problem someone else had, recently. A planet config may have corrupted in your dowload. Please try again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SpaceIsCool said:

Great planet pack, I love it. One question though, are you planning on adding planets around that red star Grannus?

That was the plan, but due to the limitations of KSP/Kopernicus and multiple stars, the idea has been shelved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope the multiple stars issue will be fixed eventually - binary systems make up something like half of all decently-large stars (not late-M types). 

I'll have to settle with lagged-out 24 hour long asteroid redirection burns - maybe if I bring enough to Grannus I can form my own planet!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, MaxL_1023 said:

I hope the multiple stars issue will be fixed eventually - binary systems make up something like half of all decently-large stars (not late-M types). 

I'll have to settle with lagged-out 24 hour long asteroid redirection burns - maybe if I bring enough to Grannus I can form my own planet!

Well, maybe if there was enough demand for it, the kopernicus dev might be willing to look into it sooner rather than later. Currently, it doesn't seem there is enough interest in the problem to warrant a fix.

Edited by Galileo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Grannus would have to get its own partner to be binary with (and observe at a comfortably small scale). Between Ciro and itself and its vast orbital period, the scale is too great to really bother to think of the system as binary.

I'd sure as heck like to think enough interest has been shown towards fixing the multiple star issue. Everyone who knows their excrement™ about planet packs knows the problem is there. But I could be horribly wrong.

Edited by JadeOfMaar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, JadeOfMaar said:

Grannus would have to get its own partner to be binary with (and observe at a comfortably small scale). Between Ciro and itself and its vast orbital period, the scale is too great to really bother to think of the system as binary.

I'd sure as heck like to think enough interest has been shown towards fixing the multiple star issue. Everyone who knows their excrement™ about planet packs knows the problem is there.

True but the thing is, I don't the the dev bothers to look at the thread anymore due to the amount of mind numbing question and "WHY DIS BRKEN" comments. I don't blame them for steering clear. For all we know, KSP might be the issue here, as it doesn't support multiple stars to begin with, so maybe it's just not something that can be fixed at all.

Edited by Galileo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Galileo said:

True but the thing is, I don't the the dev bothers to look at the thread anymore due to the amount of mind numbing question and "WHY DIS BRKEN" comments. I don't blame them for steering clear.

You've mentioned this before and I wholly agree with it. :( I also agree KSP itself may be a problem, but then there's @OhioBob's discovery that if some dividing factor was applied it would make all stars output the correct amount of solar flux but solar panels would show a tiny number for Ec output in their part description. I think something could be coded between the effective luminosity of a star and the perceived Ec output of a solar panel.

Edited by JadeOfMaar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Galileo said:

No ideas without your output log or a screenshot of your gamedata.

@Galileo Gamedata folder http://imgur.com/a/2GvVW

Output log... https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0ehLhIOk9G4ZHJXQ0dWcVdHZUk

I have tried a fresh download and install again from extracting the zip fully, but I get the same issues

Cheers dude

 

Edited by Grinningthing
More info
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Galileo said:

Well, maybe if there was enough demand for it, the kopernicus dev might be willing to look into it sooner rather than later. Currently, it doesn't seem there is enough interest in the problem to warrant a fix.

I don't know if the multiple star/luminosity/solar panel problem is something in Kopernicus or something in KSP itself.  Either way, it's frustrating.  I recently exchanged PMs with one of the KSP devs and gave him a wish list of fixes.  One of these was the multiple star problem.  I was told that they'd discuss it and possibly put it on their bug tracker.  I have no idea if anything will ever become of it.
 

Edited by OhioBob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The-Doctor said:

@Galileo why does it not happen for scatterer? Is there no way to do it?

Because scatterer and kopernicus call the same textures at the same time if you use it with scatterer, resulting in white, "snowball" planets. There is no other way. I brought it up to the scatterer dev a while ago but it's not something that can be fixed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...