Jump to content

What planet or moon would you most like an analog of in KSP?

LordOfMinecraft99
 Share

Recommended Posts

RatchetinSpace

RatchetinSpace

Posted
Posted

I think Laythe is supposed to be an analogue for Titan.

Haumea could be cool, but I'd really like to see a Saturn analogue (with a massive ring system) and a Triton analogue (a large geological moon travelling retrograde).

If they ever add geysers and volcanoes then I'd love to see an Enceladus analogue but maybe that's pushing my luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RatchetinSpace

RatchetinSpace

Posted
Posted
45 minutes ago, [insert_name_here] said:

Also, I think a Charon analog would be nice - a moon orbiting Eeloo that is only a little smaller than the planet. It would be even better if Eeloo and this Charon analog formed a binary system.

If they could make barycenters work, the Duna/Ike system might be a binary. According to the wiki, Ike is about 1/16th the mass of Duna, whereas Charon is about 1/10th the mass of Pluto. I don't know if this would result in a binary system but it seems close to it!

I don't know if they would/could make binaries work though.

Fun fact: Duna is about 4x the mass of Pluto but is 3.7 times smaller in diameter!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NSEP

NSEP

Posted
Posted

I would really like an analog of Ceres. Lots of big craters, large mountains and bright surface features. Maybe even a small salty water lake?

I would really like a planet with high contrast in general, not just 'grey' planets with the same thing all over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ARS

ARS

Posted
Posted

Eris

Because... reasons...

Also, not really a planet, but dust clouds. I'm not wishing for an entire nebula, but is it possible to make clouds/dust effect on several graphic mods shows up in space independently? Like a region of space that's engulfed with dense dust cloud? That would make an awesome scenery seeing my ship flying through the space dust clouds with kerbol shimmering on the background

Link to comment
Share on other sites
[insert_name_here]

[insert_name_here]

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, NSEP said:

I would really like an analog of Ceres. Lots of big craters, large mountains and bright surface features. Maybe even a small salty water lake?

I would really like a planet with high contrast in general, not just 'grey' planets with the same thing all over.

Go to the KSP Wiki article on Dres. It says that Dres is meant to be a Ceres analog. I mean, Dres does have rough terrain, a few craters and high contrast. But for a planet literally surrounded in asteroids, I would expect it to have more craters and mountains.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Clonos

Clonos

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, [insert_name_here] said:

Go to the KSP Wiki article on Dres. It says that Dres is meant to be a Ceres analog. I mean, Dres does have rough terrain, a few craters and high contrast. But for a planet literally surrounded in asteroids, I would expect it to have more craters and mountains.

I think it was meant to be a joke...

And i would love to see Charon. Eeloo is just too lonely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NicholaiRen

NicholaiRen

Posted
Posted
On 10/17/2017 at 4:39 AM, RatchetinSpace said:

If they could make barycenters work, the Duna/Ike system might be a binary. According to the wiki, Ike is about 1/16th the mass of Duna, whereas Charon is about 1/10th the mass of Pluto. I don't know if this would result in a binary system but it seems close to it!

I don't know if they would/could make binaries work though.

Fun fact: Duna is about 4x the mass of Pluto but is 3.7 times smaller in diameter!

 

Well. I've been coding for a few years and maybe I'm missing something, but could a ghost center work?

 

To explain you'd create a single spot, it could be as small as 1x1 kilometers, but I mean you could make it just 1x1 METERS. Then, you could either make it all black, or invisible. Either way, it's pretty remote anyone will ever find it.

Next, you set its gravity insanely high. It's virtual. You can falsify it. The game doesn't care if it's just 1x1 meters, it just cares what number you put in the variable.

 

So now, effectively you have a gravitational "center" that nobody can see. You put two stars into orbit around this little guy(DO MATH so that they align with the center at all times of orbit), and you simply extend it's effective gravitational pull to that of Kerbol or something like that.

So now you have two stars, orbiting a single gravitational center.

Now when you "escape" a star, then actually you just escaped a star-sized planet with many "moons" and those moons would be "planets" and the planets could have "moons."

 

Basically, do a lot of embedding and messing around with unrealistic variables.

 

Now.

I know this wouldn't be really accurate because, in reality, the gravitational center would wobble, but it's a game. I could only change so much.

 

Now this is all based off of a few assumptions.

1: Planets use variables. If they don't, then that'd be insanely inefficient for the coding. SO they probably do.

2: Moons can have moons. It's possible they can't, but if I can read the code long enough I could probably imbed it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RatchetinSpace

RatchetinSpace

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, NicholaiRen said:

Well. I've been coding for a few years and maybe I'm missing something, but could a ghost center work?

 

To explain you'd create a single spot, it could be as small as 1x1 kilometers, but I mean you could make it just 1x1 METERS. Then, you could either make it all black, or invisible. Either way, it's pretty remote anyone will ever find it.

Next, you set its gravity insanely high. It's virtual. You can falsify it. The game doesn't care if it's just 1x1 meters, it just cares what number you put in the variable.

 

So now, effectively you have a gravitational "center" that nobody can see. You put two stars into orbit around this little guy(DO MATH so that they align with the center at all times of orbit), and you simply extend it's effective gravitational pull to that of Kerbol or something like that.

So now you have two stars, orbiting a single gravitational center.

Now when you "escape" a star, then actually you just escaped a star-sized planet with many "moons" and those moons would be "planets" and the planets could have "moons."

 

Basically, do a lot of embedding and messing around with unrealistic variables.

 

Now.

I know this wouldn't be really accurate because, in reality, the gravitational center would wobble, but it's a game. I could only change so much.

 

Now this is all based off of a few assumptions.

1: Planets use variables. If they don't, then that'd be insanely inefficient for the coding. SO they probably do.

2: Moons can have moons. It's possible they can't, but if I can read the code long enough I could probably imbed it.

 

Where are the SOI's in this scenario? Are you saying the SOI of the ghost is 1x1M or is it an infinite like Kerbol? It'd actually be pretty easy to find. Just slow your orbital velocity to 0, lowering periapsis to only a few meters and you'd shoot by a fake body getting an insane gravity assist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NicholaiRen

NicholaiRen

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, RatchetinSpace said:

Where are the SOI's in this scenario? Are you saying the SOI of the ghost is 1x1M or is it an infinite like Kerbol? It'd actually be pretty easy to find. Just slow your orbital velocity to 0, lowering periapsis to only a few meters and you'd shoot by a fake body getting an insane gravity assist.

 

That gravity doesn't have to be very high.

You could make it basically nothing. But even nothing would still get a capture if it had infinite Soi.

But as for finding it, it'd still be between two stars, which would take hundreds of years to get to.

So spending that time finding a gravitational center wouldn't be all that big.

You get two stars, in exchange you can go visit a fake center if you want.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GDJ

GDJ

Posted
Posted (edited)

Titan.

Just because it would be cool and scary as hell to plunge down that thick atmosphere, not knowing what's underneath you.

Io would be kinda cool as well.

Edited by GDJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites
KerikBalm

KerikBalm

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, NicholaiRen said:

You could make it basically nothing. But even nothing would still get a capture if it had infinite Soi.

No. Escape velocity is still escape velocity, even with no soi boundary.

To other points: yes the game supports moons of moons.

Binary planet support is added by the mod sigma binary.

Naked fake soi centers are very bad. The game treats all gravity sources as points. Getting to zero distance = infinite gravity. Velocity at pe would exceed light speed. You need a planetary surface to hide these singularities... Or ensure one always enters the soi of one of the binary bodies before one reaches the singularity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

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
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...