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

[OhioBob]

4 minutes ago, RocketPCGaming said:

The biggest decision I'd say is going hard core with Realism Overhaul or "less" hard core and go with SMURFF. The stock tanks and engines are extremely heavy (i.e. the Space Shuttle SLWT External Tank weighed 58,500lbs empty and 1,680,000lbs at lift-off, and a SpaceX Merlin engine weighs just 800lbs and delivers 845Kn of thrust at lift-off) to provide a bit of balance due to everything being 1/10 to 1/25th scale. Both of these mods try to bring the weights of tanks and engines back into line w/ reality in order to make 10X gameplay feasible. I would call one of these the base then visit the RSS thread and look at the recommended mods there.
Once I have mine set up, I will post a mod list of what I am using if you are interested. ;-) 

^^ I was just going to say this.

You don't just want bigger parts, but you want parts that are more mass efficient.  In stock, fuel tanks are 8 parts propellant mass for every 1 part dry mass.  That's a very poor ratio in real life.  It works for a 1/10th size universe, but wouldn't get you very far when you up the scale to 10x.  I real life we can easily get ratios of 20:1 or even better.  I haven't used SMURFF, but it's designed to modify parts to provide better mass ratios.

I typically don't play scaled up games, but I would guess you can probably manage to play with stock parts in a 3.2x system, though it will definitely be more difficult.  I wouldn't recommend a 6.4x or 10x game without modding your parts.

[Norcalplanner]

1 hour ago, OhioBob said:

^^ I was just going to say this.

You don't just want bigger parts, but you want parts that are more mass efficient.  In stock, fuel tanks are 8 parts propellant mass for every 1 part dry mass.  That's a very poor ratio in real life.  It works for a 1/10th size universe, but wouldn't get you very far when you up the scale to 10x.  I real life we can easily get ratios of 20:1 or even better.  I haven't used SMURFF, but it's designed to modify parts to provide better mass ratios.

I typically don't play scaled up games, but I would guess you can probably manage to play with stock parts in a 3.2x system, though it will definitely be more difficult.  I wouldn't recommend a 6.4x or 10x game without modding your parts.

The great thing with SMURFF is that it's adjustable using the "lever" variables in the config.  You can separately tweak how much the mass is reduced for each class of part. Full lever, or 1.0 value for the variables, is intended for 10x, while you can use 0.5 for 6.4x or 0.2 for 3.2x.  Just like the rest of KSP, SMURFF allows you to tweak the difficulty so it's fun for you particular playstyle. 

If anyone does choose to go 10x with SMURFF, I'd recommend adding Real Scale Boosters in addition to SpaceY.

[Chase842]

@Galileo and @JadeOfMaar

 

Ok I figured out how to make the atmospheric scoop work from KSP-I, as well as the other resources involved in KSP-I.

I've only implemented Gael so far, but I'm going to do all the celestial bodies in the Galileo Planet Pack.

Do you want to include it in your mod as a compatibility patch or something?

 

[eddiew]

Gosh darn it, the 98km atmosphere height of the official 3.2x GPP has broken my only working mk2 spaceplane   Trouble is that the rapiers still fizzle at the same altitude, but the drag keeps on for an extra 20km...

[MaxxQ]

8 hours ago, JadeOfMaar said:

 

@Amnesy Looking forward to those screenshots. Since you're interested in the curse, you might want to keep your eyes open for the the logs that'll come back from @MaxxQ's kerbals. They're blindly going in!

 

Ummm... yeah.  About that.

I did say that I COULD send them off there, but that they would arrive before the SCANSat mapping probe.  Never said I actually WAS going that route (although, I do have 15 Kerbals I can use - 5 groups of three with one each Pilot, Scientist, and engineer - so I could sacrifice send one of the other groups).  Now that I've read what some have said about Thalia, I may just send the crewed mission elsewhere, and wait for the mapping to be finished.

One question, though.*  I'm playing a strictly science game, and use no life support mods, or other mods where there is a chance Kerbals can have issues due to environment.  What might happen if I send a crew to Thalia?  I mean, is it so hot that ships will explode without radiators.  Is there some kind of new code in GPP that causes radiation damage?  The thing is, even in stock, I never went anywhere other than Mun, Minmus, and Duna, although I've heard about heat issues with... Moho, I think...?  I suppose once the probe gets there, I'll find out - after all, it's only a science game, so there's no contracts, cash, or rep to worry about.

*Okay, that was two-three questions.  No matter, really.  I'll probably just send what I have and see what happens.

[Galileo]

2 hours ago, Chase842 said:

@Galileo and @JadeOfMaar

 

Ok I figured out how to make the atmospheric scoop work from KSP-I, as well as the other resources involved in KSP-I.

I've only implemented Gael so far, but I'm going to do all the celestial bodies in the Galileo Planet Pack.

Do you want to include it in your mod as a compatibility patch or something?

 

yeah if you want to do that, it would be great. Im sure @JadeOfMaar would greatly appreciate it. you will get your credit of course

[Amnesy]

hey, it's me again. In a long and totally kerbal session I removed all of my base from the surface on Iota and put the parts in low-ish orbits between 20 and 50km. (imgur album coming soon)

Excited about that success I installed the update only to find out that all of my ships orbit totally different bodies now. (Stuff around Gael moved to Icarus e.g.)
Did you by any chance change some body indices?
 

[Galileo]

1 minute ago, Amnesy said:

hey, it's me again. In a long and totally kerbal session I removed all of my base from the surface on Iota and put the parts in low-ish orbits between 20 and 50km. (imgur album coming soon)

Excited about that success I installed the update only to find out that all of my ships orbit totally different bodies now. (Stuff around Gael moved to Icarus e.g.)
Did you by any chance change some body indices?
 

no not this update but it looks like you didn't update from 1.0.1 to 1.0.2, when we did change the indexes 

[Amnesy]

3 minutes ago, Galileo said:

no not this update but it looks like you didn't update from 1.0.1 to 1.0.2, when we did change the indexes 

actually the .version file from the old version states 1.0.2. But I probably didnt do a clean install during that update and just copy-pasted the update. Could this have broken something?

[Tyko]

41 minutes ago, MaxxQ said:

Ummm... yeah.  About that.

I did say that I COULD send them off there, but that they would arrive before the SCANSat mapping probe.  Never said I actually WAS going that route (although, I do have 15 Kerbals I can use - 5 groups of three with one each Pilot, Scientist, and engineer - so I could sacrifice send one of the other groups).  Now that I've read what some have said about Thalia, I may just send the crewed mission elsewhere, and wait for the mapping to be finished.

One question, though.*  I'm playing a strictly science game, and use no life support mods, or other mods where there is a chance Kerbals can have issues due to environment.  What might happen if I send a crew to Thalia?  I mean, is it so hot that ships will explode without radiators.  Is there some kind of new code in GPP that causes radiation damage?  The thing is, even in stock, I never went anywhere other than Mun, Minmus, and Duna, although I've heard about heat issues with... Moho, I think...?  I suppose once the probe gets there, I'll find out - after all, it's only a science game, so there's no contracts, cash, or rep to worry about.

*Okay, that was two-three questions.  No matter, really.  I'll probably just send what I have and see what happens.

I sent an unmanned probe out and it exploded. Adding 4 small radiators brought the core temp down to a cozy 225 degrees centigrade - which is a useful temperature for cooking a roast, but a bit much for kerbals. I did the testing in sandbox, but am about to start a career game. Not sure what I'll do about Thalia yet. In my GPP 1.x game Thalia gave me the first opportunity to do crewed interplanetary missions because it's so darned easy to get back and forth to.

I did discover how to turn off the Curse. My current game used a modded GPP which still had Kerbin instead of Gael, so I'm not above doing a bit of re-arranging to suit my play-style >:)

[Rocketology]

So in 10X Gael Volcano is a bit...tall....

 

On another note, many of the mods associated w/ RSS scale are not yet updated to 1.2.x, many are only 1.1.3 compatible and require more than a simple recompile to function fully. Many are in development, some are in limbo, so I am going to hold on really getting into this until updates are available.

[Galileo]

Just now, RocketPCGaming said:

So in 10X Gael Volcano is a bit...tall....

 

On another note, many of the mods associated w/ RSS scale are not yet updated to 1.2.x, many are only 1.1.3 compatible and require more than a simple recompile to function fully. Many are in development, some are in limbo, so I am going to hold on really getting into this until updates are available.

Are you using the cfgs included in GPP? 

I know the mountains are going to be massive,  but lowering the landscape in Sigma any further would make it look dumb

[JadeOfMaar]

3 hours ago, Chase842 said:

@Galileo and @JadeOfMaar

 

Ok I figured out how to make the atmospheric scoop work from KSP-I, as well as the other resources involved in KSP-I.

I've only implemented Gael so far, but I'm going to do all the celestial bodies in the Galileo Planet Pack.

Do you want to include it in your mod as a compatibility patch or something?

 

Yes. your configs would be very welcome for a bundle with future updates and even an early companion release so other GPP+KSPI-E users don't have to wait as long. I'd like to have a shot at them too, personally.

1 hour ago, MaxxQ said:

Ummm... yeah.  About that.

I did say that I COULD send them off there, but that they would arrive before the SCANSat mapping probe.  Never said I actually WAS going that route (although, I do have 15 Kerbals I can use - 5 groups of three with one each Pilot, Scientist, and engineer - so I could sacrifice send one of the other groups).  Now that I've read what some have said about Thalia, I may just send the crewed mission elsewhere, and wait for the mapping to be finished.

One question, though.*  I'm playing a strictly science game, and use no life support mods, or other mods where there is a chance Kerbals can have issues due to environment.  What might happen if I send a crew to Thalia?  I mean, is it so hot that ships will explode without radiators.  Is there some kind of new code in GPP that causes radiation damage?  The thing is, even in stock, I never went anywhere other than Mun, Minmus, and Duna, although I've heard about heat issues with... Moho, I think...?  I suppose once the probe gets there, I'll find out - after all, it's only a science game, so there's no contracts, cash, or rep to worry about.

*Okay, that was two-three questions.  No matter, really.  I'll probably just send what I have and see what happens.

It's not actual atomic radiation but (yes, newly introduced) a stock or stock-ish heat feature. Kerbals will get warm rather fast, especially when approaching a surface. The heat will carry over to them instantly on EVA if the ship is lacking in thermal protection. It's roughly the same as if Thalia was actually as close to the star as planet Ernus is in the New Horizons system mod...Except Ernus is far hotter/worse. Icarus will also slowly burn landers but only under a few kilometers from the surface.

 

35 minutes ago, Amnesy said:

actually the .version file from the old version states 1.0.2. But I probably didnt do a clean install during that update and just copy-pasted the update. Could this have broken something?

We did indeed had a hiccup or two with the .version file and that would would have thrown anyone off. You'd have been spared this problem if you updated (surely even just copy-pasting on top of the existing installation) and restarted your career back then as anyone else did when they learned of it.  

19 minutes ago, Tyko said:

I sent an unmanned probe out and it exploded. Adding 4 small radiators brought the core temp down to a cozy 225 degrees centigrade - which is a useful temperature for cooking a roast, but a bit much for kerbals. I did the testing in sandbox, but am about to start a career game. Not sure what I'll do about Thalia yet. In my GPP 1.x game Thalia gave me the first opportunity to do crewed interplanetary missions because it's so darned easy to get back and forth to.

I did discover how to turn off the Curse. My current game used a modded GPP which still had Kerbin instead of Gael, so I'm not above doing a bit of re-arranging to suit my play-style >:)

Four small radiators were enough to keep my test probe in the green too. I'm sure the much larger vessels will need proportionally more than this, haha. I'm a little surprised to hear about an extreme ease in getting to and from Thalia but I have yet to casually play GPP myself so I wouldn't know.  

You...you did such things to our lovely creation...and the fanbase is going to think *I'm* the evil one.  

[Tyko]

1 minute ago, JadeOfMaar said:

Four small radiators were enough to keep my test probe in the green too. I'm sure the much larger vessels will need proportionally more than this, haha. I'm a little surprised to hear about an extreme ease in getting to and from Thalia but I have yet to casually play GPP myself so I wouldn't know.  

You...you did such things to our lovely creation...and the fanbase is going to think *I'm* the evil one.  

The relative orbital periods of Gael/Thalia means you get frequent low DV transfers and it only takes a 100 or so days to get there. You should totally take a break and play in your awesome toy.

[Galileo]

5 minutes ago, JadeOfMaar said:

You...you did such things to our lovely creation...and the fanbase is going to think *I'm* the evil one.  

Yes.....yesssss

[Chase842]

@Galileo and @JadeOfMaar

I got the atmospheric resources from KSP-I to work with Galileo's Planet Pack now.

I was not able to utilize your specifications within the Distribution section, i.e. (PresenceChance, MinAbundance, MaxAbundance, and Variance).

However, I have tested it, and it seems to work well, and gives you the percentages you'd expect at any given altitude.

I think these resources are for KSP-I specific ISRU Refineries, and atmospheric scoops, so there may not be a way to integrate your specifications in the Distribution section without having to rewrite a large chunk of the core code.

But, on the upside the patch shouldn't mess with any of your specifications within the Distribution section, like ACTUAL atmosphere in the game, it just makes atmospheric scoop "think" a resource is at that height. I think this is the best approach, especially since so much time was spent making the planets exactly the way you wanted them to be. This way everyone wins

I'll start working on the surface and water resources later this week  

 

Here's a link:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1ilcl3AU3R0MEtUN084MURHQnM/view?usp=sharing

NOTE: The file goes in the GameData/WarpPlugin/PlanetResourceData folder.

Another Note: All the Galileo planets are at the bottom, and I labeled them at the top so the code is easier to navigate  

 

@Galileo

Thanks, it's always nice to get some credit for your work  

Edited January 19, 2017 by Chase842

[JadeOfMaar]

18 minutes ago, Tyko said:

The relative orbital periods of Gael/Thalia means you get frequent low DV transfers and it only takes a 100 or so days to get there. You should totally take a break and play in your awesome toy.

Epic.  I see your point. The transfer window ratio looks like 3:1 which makes things ever more interesting. I do really want to chill and just play. 

18 minutes ago, Chase842 said:

I got the atmospheric resources from KSP-I to work with Galileo's Planet Pack now.

I was not able to utilize your specifications within the Distribution section, i.e. (PresenceChance, MinAbundance, MaxAbundance, and Variance).

However, I have tested it, and it seems to work well, and gives you the percentages you'd expect at any given altitude.

That's a lot of resources and I've never seen that syntax. KSPI-E clearly applies resource distributions in its own way. After the [poop]storm @FreeThinker

18 minutes ago, Tyko said:

The relative orbital periods of Gael/Thalia means you get frequent low DV transfers and it only takes a 100 or so days to get there. You should totally take a break and play in your awesome toy.

Epic.  I see your point. The transfer window ratio looks like 3:1 which makes things ever more interesting. I do really want to chill and just play. 

18 minutes ago, Chase842 said:

I got the atmospheric resources from KSP-I to work with Galileo's Planet Pack now.

I was not able to utilize your specifications within the Distribution section, i.e. (PresenceChance, MinAbundance, MaxAbundance, and Variance).

However, I have tested it, and it seems to work well, and gives you the percentages you'd expect at any given altitude.

That's a lot of resources and I've never seen that syntax. KSPI-E clearly applies resource distributions in its own way. After the [poop]storm @FreeThinker and I went through to understand how values work for CRP, all kudos to him for inventing his own mechanism. My one question until I see samples of crustal, oceanic and exospheric distributions.... does Abundance = 1 mean 100%? I may change some to match the reference system image's table in this thread's OP.

[Chase842]

2 hours ago, JadeOfMaar said:

Epic.  I see your point. The transfer window ratio looks like 3:1 which makes things ever more interesting. I do really want to chill and just play. 

That's a lot of resources and I've never seen that syntax. KSPI-E clearly applies resource distributions in its own way. After the [poop]storm @FreeThinker

Epic.  I see your point. The transfer window ratio looks like 3:1 which makes things ever more interesting. I do really want to chill and just play. 

That's a lot of resources and I've never seen that syntax. KSPI-E clearly applies resource distributions in its own way. After the [poop]storm @FreeThinker and I went through to understand how values work for CRP, all kudos to him for inventing his own mechanism. My one question until I see samples of crustal, oceanic and exospheric distributions.... does Abundance = 1 mean 100%? I may change some to match the reference system image's table in this thread's OP.

 @JadeOfMaar

Ya it's got it's own way of implementing resources that shouldn't interfere with what's currently in place for a planet pack. Also, yes 1.0000 is 100%  

 

I'm not done yet, and I've noticed a couple bugs(duplicate resources) that I wanna work out before you post it on the main page as a patch  

[Galileo]

Is there anyone playing this on a slower, potato-type computer? I would like to know what the performance is like. I'm a really bad judge of performance because i have a pretty hefty rig, but i would like some stats for future reference. If you want to just PM thats cool. Just let me know what mods you are using from the pack, if any, and what kind of specs you have. Try not to use any other mods besides the one included in this pack.  If you can provide screen shots and FPS at different places around Gael and other bodies that would be awesome. Thanks in advance to anyone who actually does this.

[JadeOfMaar]

That's excellent, @Chase842. Take your time. There's no rush anywhere.

[FreeThinker]

3 hours ago, Chase842 said:

@Galileo and @JadeOfMaar

I got the atmospheric resources from KSP-I to work with Galileo's Planet Pack now.

I was not able to utilize your specifications within the Distribution section, i.e. (PresenceChance, MinAbundance, MaxAbundance, and Variance).

However, I have tested it, and it seems to work well, and gives you the percentages you'd expect at any given altitude.

I think these resources are for KSP-I specific ISRU Refineries, and atmospheric scoops, so there may not be a way to integrate your specifications in the Distribution section without having to rewrite a large chunk of the core code.

But, on the upside the patch shouldn't mess with any of your specifications within the Distribution section, like ACTUAL atmosphere in the game, it just makes atmospheric scoop "think" a resource is at that height. I think this is the best approach, especially since so much time was spent making the planets exactly the way you wanted them to be. This way everyone wins

I'll start working on the surface and water resources later this week  

 

Here's a link:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1ilcl3AU3R0MEtUN084MURHQnM/view?usp=sharing

NOTE: The file goes in the GameData/WarpPlugin/PlanetResourceData folder.

Another Note: All the Galileo planets are at the bottom, and I labeled them at the top so the code is easier to navigate  

 

@Galileo

Thanks, it's always nice to get some credit for your work  

Good work, I will put it in the next release

[JadeOfMaar]

GPP itself won't need to carry the configs then. Alright.

I should prepare a screenshot of the current atmosphere composition table to help you out and lend some direction @Chase842

[Chase842]

35 minutes ago, JadeOfMaar said:

GPP itself won't need to carry the configs then. Alright.

I should prepare a screenshot of the current atmosphere composition table to help you out and lend some direction @Chase842

@JadeOfMaar

That would be great! Thank you!

[Amnesy]

12 hours ago, JadeOfMaar said:

We did indeed had a hiccup or two with the .version file and that would would have thrown anyone off. You'd have been spared this problem if you updated (surely even just copy-pasting on top of the existing installation) and restarted your career back then as anyone else did when they learned of it.  

Ahh I just found out what happened. I did update to 1.0.2 as soon as it was released (been using KSC++ so it should be the right version) but I didn't update to the 'second' 1.0.2 update (see page 11 of the thread). Oh well I guess that's what you get for being hasty

Anyway could I just remove the flightglobals from the cfgs and expect things to be the same as before?

EDIT: I managed to get everything back to normal by playing around with the indices until I found the matching configuration for my ships! The new Iota looks beautiful and I can't wait to get my base back down and running.

Edited January 19, 2017 by Amnesy
success

[Spheniscine]

Pro tip for optimizers (or people who play with upscaled versions, where dV is even more precious):

If you want to get to Iota, target it, then turn on KER's "RDZV" menu and launch when "target phase angle" is approximately 205.2 degrees (value arrived through experimentation).

This places your Hohmann transfer node right on your descending node, thus eliminating the need for a potentially expensive plane-change maneuver. Your plane change effectively happens during Iota orbital insertion, saving dV by both taking advantage of the Oberth effect as well as being further away from Gael's gravity well.

Edited January 19, 2017 by Spheniscine