Galileo

[KSP 1.4.5] Galileo's Planet Pack [v1.6.3.1] [03 Aug 2018]

Recommended Posts

So last night I had time to download and install everything just in time for bed. I did manager to have a quick look and it looked awesome! You've done one hell of a job with this one, no doubt about it.

From what little time I had, I was able to troubleshoot most systems, and as far as I can tell, the only thing not working "out of the box" is TextureReplacer. I suspect I downloaded the wrong version, but just to save me some time:

1. The regular gitHub download for TR Will not work with 1.2, is that correct?

2. As long as I have the right version of TR installed correctly, the rest is simply a matter of extracting your replacement textures into the TR folder structure, correct? No need for manual .cfg editing?

Thank you for the great work and any further help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JohnnyPanzer said:

So last night I had time to download and install everything just in time for bed. I did manager to have a quick look and it looked awesome! You've done one hell of a job with this one, no doubt about it.

From what little time I had, I was able to troubleshoot most systems, and as far as I can tell, the only thing not working "out of the box" is TextureReplacer. I suspect I downloaded the wrong version, but just to save me some time:

1. The regular gitHub download for TR Will not work with 1.2, is that correct?

2. As long as I have the right version of TR installed correctly, the rest is simply a matter of extracting your replacement textures into the TR folder structure, correct? No need for manual .cfg editing?

Thank you for the great work and any further help.

Glad that things are working out. Let me know if you run into the prominent resource problem. Make a sandbox game, then put a probe core with a surface scanner on just the KSC runway. If its window says "Ore(Surf): No Data" like this screenshot, that's bad and may be quite a bother for you. It seems to affect Gael and both moons, and some other worlds here and there.

RZiKDAK.jpg

As for TextureReplacer:

  1. That's right. Use RangeMachine's fork of it.
  2. It's that simple to change your skybox once installed correctly. Choose from Poodmund's own, my selection (linked in signature), or wherever else you know to get a good one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/16/2016 at 6:39 PM, Galileo said:
  • Sigma Dimensions does not play nice with KSCSwitcher AND KSC++. I recommend you remove KSC++ when using Sigma Dimensions

what kind of issues are there between SD and KSCSwitcher / KSC++ ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi.  So I have downloaded the new update and all of the recommended patches.  Everything works fine, and I love it - started new career.  This question is not directly related to this expansion pack, but as Kerbal Konstructs and KSC++ are recommended additions then I figure I may get the answer I want.

I have read up on Kerbal Konstructs but all information is pretty dated.  I have the various other bases that show up in my game.  When I go to tracking station I can select the base that I want to use, and because I like being on equitorial orbit, then I always have used Rooks Glory (I think its called from memory).  However when I select KK from the toolbar, none of the other bases show as open, and I cannot figure out how to open them, or what I need to do.  All I can select is the main KSC base as the primary base, which means that I only get that small runway icon showing as visible when I select show open bases, so its guess work when it comes to try and land on any other bases?  I am sure I am not doing something right, and its not a bug, but I cannot figure out how I can "open" any of the other bases?

 

Thanks :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sigma88 said:

what kind of issues are there between SD and KSCSwitcher / KSC++ ?

I don't know too much about it, but I know we're having problems getting all the building to resize correctly and remained grouped together.  @Galileo is currently on hiatus, but @Poodmund is working on the problem.  He could probably use your help. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, OhioBob said:

I don't know too much about it, but I know we're having problems getting all the building to resize correctly and remained grouped together.  @Galileo is currently on hiatus, but @Poodmund is working on the problem.  He could probably use your help. 

sure, for now your best bets would be to either be ok with the building to be resized as much as the planet, or alternatively, to have them spread around a bigger area.

altitude is what mostly I am concerned with for the current SD

the grouping algorithm is very bad, plus I need a better way to target PQSCity mods because all of those from KK have the same name which is a mess for targetting

 

@Poodmund tonight I should have some time to do this, if you join IRC we can try to find a solution that suits best everybody (tonight, ~9PM CEST)

Edited by Sigma88

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think i found a bug a RELLY BIG ONE:Began a carrer save and i finished exploring ceti but for some reason is sayin to EXPLORE GRANNUS.I hope its gets fix:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, KerbolExplorer said:

I think i found a bug a RELLY BIG ONE:Began a carrer save and i finished exploring ceti but for some reason is sayin to EXPLORE GRANNUS.I hope its gets fix:(

It's known and is working on being addressed in coming releases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sigma88 said:

sure, for now your best bets would be to either be ok with the building to be resized as much as the planet, or alternatively, to have them spread around a bigger area.

altitude is what mostly I am concerned with for the current SD

the grouping algorithm is very bad, plus I need a better way to target PQSCity mods because all of those from KK have the same name which is a mess for targetting

 

@Poodmund tonight I should have some time to do this, if you join IRC we can try to find a solution that suits best everybody (tonight, ~9PM CEST)

I can jump on, yeah. 

The issue with KK assets and SD rescaling is that the assets retain their Long/Lat coordinates... this is the correct behavior and I don't see how this could be changed in any way without unintended consequences and causing more issues. We are personally have issues with the KSC++ and KSC Floodlights spreading out as the body is upscaled (as you'd expect). What I am proposing to do is use the KSC PQSCity coordinates as an origin and find the x,y components of the coordinate offset between assets and the KSC coordinates, then divide the components by the resize factor, then add them back to the KSC origin coordinates to give the new Lat/Long coordinates of that asset.

In theory it should work, I just need to write the MM config so that it correctly affects only the assets that we want... shouldn't be too, too difficult.

As a footnote, due to them only being over short distances, the body curvature on adds in fractions of a millimeter in error which should not cause problems.

Edited by Poodmund

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Poodmund SD already contains the code to move all Konstructs relative to a center. The main problem is telling SD which Konstructs are part of a group, and where the center of that group is

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that makes it somewhat simpler. I'll hang out on IRC and wait for a ping. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main issue I have with rescaled systems is the extreme terrain distortion. You either have mountains reaching into the Ozone layer or a shield volcano next to the KSC. I am not sure what can be done from that end - KSP planet features have always been outsized relative to the body scale (especially depth wise) so a lot of visual appeal would be lost in stock scale if a terrain config was modified to suit 10x. 

Is there some sort of PQS algorithm that could take stock scale features and clone them/surround them with similar terrain in order to meet the area requirements of the upscaled system? Turn the mountain into a mountain range, for example. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, rasta013 said:

I think I mentioned this a while back when I first jumped on this thread but for complicated flight paths and multi-body encounters you can use @Arrowstar's KSP Trajectory Optimization Tool.  It is an external tool that interfaces with KSP to extract and inject information into the game.  With it you can plan literally any kind of flight path you want.  It is by far the most robust tool available for flight planning.  It works with GPP but you will have to create a custom Bodies.ini file for it although that is a very simple process.  The learning curve for this tool is steep but well worth the effort and time I've put into learning how to use it (although I'm no expert by any means :D).

 

Highly recommended. Mission Planning is tough to use, but the other utilities are amazing, especially Rendezvous Planner.

@rasta013, have you gotten TOT to calculate a good Grannus intercept? Mine seem to be no smaller than a few hundred years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, rasta013 said:

It's known and is working on being addressed in coming releases.

Ok gonna see what i can do now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today, I landed on Muse after upgrading my Lander with a narrow-band scanner. Here the link:

Muse Exploration

As always one picture:

rpiZcL6.jpg

Edited by astroheiko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the last several days I've been playing 2.5x GPP.  So far I really like it.  Has anyone else tried it yet?  If so, what are your impressions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MaxL_1023 said:

The main issue I have with rescaled systems is the extreme terrain distortion. You either have mountains reaching into the Ozone layer or a shield volcano next to the KSC. I am not sure what can be done from that end - KSP planet features have always been outsized relative to the body scale (especially depth wise) so a lot of visual appeal would be lost in stock scale if a terrain config was modified to suit 10x. 

Is there some sort of PQS algorithm that could take stock scale features and clone them/surround them with similar terrain in order to meet the area requirements of the upscaled system? Turn the mountain into a mountain range, for example. 

In the Sigma Dimension config there is a value you can tweak to help with this. The landscape parameter can be used to rescale the height of terrain features when rescaling a planet. You will have to mess around with it a bit but I was able to get my 3.2x rescale to look pretty good, obviously it's not super effective at 10x + but for 6.4x and under it is more than adequate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, astroheiko said:

As always one picture:

rpiZcL6.jpg

I ran out of likes to give. :( 

Your screenshots are always so awesome!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Akira_R said:

In the Sigma Dimension config there is a value you can tweak to help with this. The landscape parameter can be used to rescale the height of terrain features when rescaling a planet. You will have to mess around with it a bit but I was able to get my 3.2x rescale to look pretty good, obviously it's not super effective at 10x + but for 6.4x and under it is more than adequate.

The next GPP update will include some landscape changes to a few of the planets.  The mountains on Gael won't be quite so extreme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, OhioBob said:

For the last several days I've been playing 2.5x GPP.  So far I really like it.  Has anyone else tried it yet?  If so, what are your impressions?

I've created a 2.5x GPP install, and have played around with it a bit, in part to use both BDB and SSTU without any SMURFF considerations.  Haven't started a serious career yet, but I'll probably crank it up seriously in another week or so, when I have a bit more free time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pro: Nero in under 4 years!

Con: 11+ km/s braking burn!

Pro: Nero's Badass Precession

Con: Abysmal Data Rate

Pro: PROBE FRENZY!

Con: Jebediah feels left out...

Nero_zpsz5l2ni4w.png

 

Thank the Kraken for the NFP ion engines - I was NOT going to try any kind of normal transfer orbit and have my probe turn into a worthless hunk of metal before it even makes it close enough to spot Hadrian. Wherner wants to be alive when the probe gets there, thank you very much!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its from Strategia - it gives you a bonus to probe science transmissions, among other things. 

Share this post


Link to post
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.