Jump to content

[PLUGIN+PARTS][0.23] SCANsat terrain mapping


damny
 Share

Recommended Posts

Question; does the BTDT thing actually -do- anything? I've tried using it but I can't seem to figure out what it does when active...

[Edit] F*Cking derp, I figured how to get it open. Now; how do I change the target...?

Edited by Tassyr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question; does the BTDT thing actually -do- anything? I've tried using it but I can't seem to figure out what it does when active...

[Edit] F*Cking derp, I figured how to get it open. Now; how do I change the target...?

You can't. Use your existing map to locate anomalies. Once you're within a couple thousand meters, the BTDT will pick up a signal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't. Use your existing map to locate anomalies. Once you're within a couple thousand meters, the BTDT will pick up a signal.

Hm. That's mildly annoying... I was hoping I could somehow select them and home in that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hm. That's mildly annoying... I was hoping I could somehow select them and home in that way.

nope, but with MechJeb you can set the coordinates as your target and have it show up on your NavBall, then just drive there with a rover.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strange problems:

1. Put a MapTraq + BTDT on a rover & launched it to runway. Turned on scanning and drove to the nearest Anomaly (which is at KSC main hangar). However, I cannot reach it close than 35m. And ">scanning" is permanently on in scan instruments panel.

2. With a small science gained from other experiments and MapTraq turned on I've decided to retrieve the vessel and finish "a mission". But gained no science at all. Decided to check it again, but turned off MapTraq before retrieval - works like a charm, the science gained.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apologies if this has been suggested already, but would it be possible to cover planets with a non-transparent texture in map view, which is then removed as the mapsats do their work? Sort of a "fog of war", implemented like the Kethane mod, except that hexagons start out grey and then expose their underlying terrain as the mapsats work.

Obviously you should be able to see things visually, but on the map view, you shouldn't be able to see them until they've been properly mapped.

Bonus points for not being able to see the terrain unless you have a MapTraq module on your ship. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good work, Damny!

Thank you for this amazing addon.

Would be great if you separated anomaly scanner from multispectral one or at least added an option to turn anomalies off on the map and keep it as a default state.

I am one of that realism-sick guys and I really love the stuff that adds a bunch of realworld-like features in the game. But one of totally unrealistic things inspired by the Game's developers is anomalies. There are NO monoliths, misterious buildings and stuff on any planets of Solar system so I don't want to know anything about'em and want to keep finding them a matter of a bunch of luck.

So here's a tip for those who want anomalies to stay hidden on sensor map by now:

Thanks to sources provided, it's clear that types of sensors embedded in a certain part are coded with a bit mask. So you may go to the "Parts\Sensor 8" folder of the mod, open parts.cfg and change sensorType value from 24 (which stands for Anomaly + Biome) to 8 (just Biome, which it firstly supposed to be like the folder name says :)). That should work.

If it's using anything from Mapsat, the license for Mapsat doesn't allow for that. If there is something you use that's critical but is a snippet from mapsat let me know and we'll work it out.

I think you shouldn't worry even if somebody is using parts of your work as long as he doesn't make money with that. We are all interested in just making the game better, aren't we? Unless your ambitions extend to be a Monopolistic Developer of mapping addons, of course :)

And guys, please be gentle with developers. They are investing their own time and effort for free to bring fun in our life and protecting their own work is absolutely their own right. So instead of attacking say THANKS A LOT.

Edited by Ser
verified the scanner name
Link to comment
Share on other sites

....They are investing their own time and effort for free to bring fun in our life and protecting their own work is absolutely their own right.....

I apologize for injecting the below into any discussion on this forum but it needs to be said because the above is a very wide-spread misconception.

[LEGAL STUFF]

Um, no, it's not. Modders have exactly zero ownership rights to their mods. Mods are derivative works of the base game and the ownership of all derivative works vests with the devs of the original game by default. And the game devs retain this ownership unless and until the game devs sell or license this ownership right off to modders, which never happens.. When it comes to ownership, modders are treated as unpaid employees of the game company, so their mods are considered work-for-hire. With work-for-hire, ownership vests with the employer, meaning the game devs. All court decisions on the issue of mods say this. Bottom line is, modders have only the bare permission to make mods but do not own them, so have no say in what others do with them.

[/LEGAL STUFF]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[LEGAL STUFF]

Um, no, it's not. Modders have exactly zero ownership rights to their mods. Mods are derivative works of the base game and the ownership of all derivative works vests with the devs of the original game by default. And the game devs retain this ownership unless and until the game devs sell or license this ownership right off to modders, which never happens.. When it comes to ownership, modders are treated as unpaid employees of the game company, so their mods are considered work-for-hire. With work-for-hire, ownership vests with the employer, meaning the game devs. All court decisions on the issue of mods say this. Bottom line is, modders have only the bare permission to make mods but do not own them, so have no say in what others do with them.

[/LEGAL STUFF]

...except Squad's lawyer directly contradicts you on this point. Even if that wasn't the case, the loosely coupled nature of KSP mods puts them into a different category than the mods you're talking about (which actually derive from game assets). If writing a program to be compatible with an interface gave ownership of that program to the owner of the interface, nearly all programs on Earth would be owned by Oracle, Intel or Microsoft.

Give it up. You've pasted this rant over and over, and it's only becoming more wrong over time.

-------

To get this thread back on topic: Kethane is mentioned here periodically, so I want to clear up a point of confusion. In Kethane (and probably also in SCANsat) the scanning mechanic is separate from the display mechanic. For users who prefer 2D maps, SCANsat could indeed display Kethane's data, and this is an addition I'd like to see (but it would need to happen from SCANsat's side). Making the Kethane scanner behave like SCANsat's is something that would happen on Kethane's end.

Displaying SCANsat data in 3D is interesting. In theory, SCANsat should just do that, but Kethane already has a lot of the facilities in place (including some unreleased WIP stuff). If there's interest from damny, I think it would work nicely for the Kethane overlay to support displaying SCANsat data if the user so desires. Difficult problems like mouseover detection on non-spherical bodies have already been solved, and it would allow players to use either a 2D or 3D view for all the scan data they need to see.

I hadn't planned to do much work on that in the near future, but damny could potentially change that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One more suggestion, if anyone hadn't posted it already:

It would be nice to have some bearing tool in GPS map because its general usage is to know the direction to go (to make a good way around an edge of a crater for example).

May be even setting a waypoint on the map and showing the distance and direction towards it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...except Squad's lawyer directly contradicts you on this point.

Then that's Squad given you special dispensation. The law says the default setting is modders have no ownership. Period, end of story, and there is quite a lot of case law demonstrating this. Of course, the law also allows Squad to give, license, or sell ownership in derivative works. If they have chosen to do so, then count yourself lucky because that is far from the usual outcome.

Even if that wasn't the case, the loosely coupled nature of KSP mods puts them into a different category than the mods you're talking about (which actually derive from game assets). If writing a program to be compatible with an interface gave ownership of that program to the owner of the interface, nearly all programs on Earth would be owned by Oracle, Intel or Microsoft.

Apples and oranges. As I have explained in great detail. Go ahead and doubt what I say all you want. Everybody's free to have their own opinion. But I'm a licensed attorney with a specialization in intellectual property. As was my father before me. So I think I know a bit more than you on this particular subject, just as you know way more than me about the nuts and bolts of making mods.

The mistake you're making is assuming there's any scintilla of common sense in the law. Laws are made by politicians. Politicians are idiots whose only marketable skill is convincing the ignorant masses to vote for them. Politicians are incapable of understanding the practical, real-world consequences of the laws they make, except in terms of how this affects their re-election chances, because they are unable to survive in the real world, let alone understand how it works.

---------------------------------

But our disagreements on legal matters aside, I greatly appreciate your work with Kethane, KAS, and all else you do. KSP would be far less fun without you and I wish you nothing but success. And I sincerely hope some sort of joint display system between SCANsat and Kethane can be worked out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apples and oranges. As I have explained in great detail. Go ahead and doubt what I say all you want. Everybody's free to have their own opinion. But I'm a licensed attorney with a specialization in intellectual property. As was my father before me. So I think I know a bit more than you on this particular subject, just as you know way more than me about the nuts and bolts of making mods.

The fact that he knows more about the nuts and bolts here is why he's pointing out the false equivalency you're making because you don't understand the distinction in question. Most plugins are not derivative works, and neither are many parts mods, and although everything you posted is true with regards to mods that are derivative works, you continuously make the mistake of categorizing all KSP "mods" as if they are all of that type, when many are not. Properly speaking, many of the so-called "mods" are, in fact, not mods at all, they're more properly called plugins or addons, and just as Adobe cannot claim ownership of a Photoshop addon developed by someone else, Squad cannot claim ownership of addons not developed by themselves when they are not in any way, shape, or form a derivative work.

Even attorneys are can be wrong, and often are when they speak on a subject without being fully acquainted with the facts, unlike Squad's attorney, who understands the situation and disagrees with you because of that. It's not a matter of special dispensation here, it's a matter of their attorney understanding the law as it applies in this case, and understanding the distinction you're failing to grasp when you throw two entirely different kinds of software together and treat them as one. Particulars do matter in the law, and you're either unaware of or are ignoring the relevant particulars here. You're the one treating oranges as apples here, and claiming laws about the handling of oranges also apply to apples in cases when, in fact, they do not. Wave your bona fides in the air all you want, better lawyers than you have already said differently.

Not all "mods" are apples, and Majiir is indeed right that many mods are things Squad could not claim ownership rights for, any more than Microsoft can claim ownership of Windows version of iTunes because it runs on Windows. Same is true for Photoshop plugins, many of which are not in any way owned or claimable by Adobe, or the thousands of Java libraries and programs not in any way owned or claimable by Oracle, or the thousands of Windows programs not owned by Microsoft. Everything you say may very well be true of derivative works, but not all KSP plugings or parts are derivative works. You may know the law, but you obviously don't understand software, and are attempting to apply laws that cover one kind of thing to something entirely different.

Edited by Gaius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

Displaying SCANsat data in 3D is interesting. In theory, SCANsat should just do that, but Kethane already has a lot of the facilities in place (including some unreleased WIP stuff). If there's interest from damny, I think it would work nicely for the Kethane overlay to support displaying SCANsat data if the user so desires.

....

Majiir, that is a very important point. The 3D display of scans from kethane is one of the finest in the KSP world.

But, may I understand from your post, that Kethane may allow displaying 3D data outside of the (nice, but limited) cells used with your fine mod (including those even finer and nicer triangular cells in that WIP stuff)? ScanSat, I am sure you know, makes for different swaths with each sensor; and data on its maps has finer granularity than the cells on a kethane 3D overlay allow (be those hex or triangles) (I have no hard data, but ScanSat maps seem to be 1080x540 pixels wide, quite a lot more than the kethane cells are). Not that I am suggesting to increase granularity even further with Kethane, I am sure it is fine already. But, IMO, it would not feel as good to see maps with ScanSat where the elementary unit scanned is as large as a kethane cell.

Therefore, I would like if you could shed some light about that support kethane may offer. Drawing 3D SCANSAT maps on map view would be something glorious, if they can retain the granularity they have now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that he knows more about the nuts and bolts here is why he's pointing out the false equivalency you're making because you don't understand the distinction in question. Most plugins are not derivative works, and neither are many parts mods, and although everything you posted is true with regards to mods that are derivative works, you continuously make the mistake of categorizing all KSP "mods" as if they are all of that type, when many are not. Properly speaking, many of the so-called "mods" are, in fact, not mods at all, they're more properly called plugins or addons, and just as Adobe cannot claim ownership of a Photoshop addon developed by someone else, Squad cannot claim ownership of addons not developed by themselves when they are not in any way, shape, or form a derivative work.

You obviously have not read the applicable case law. The law is what a court of competent jurisdiction has most recently declared it to be. ALL mods, of whatever type, were declared derivative works long ago and all cases since have followed that precedent. Thus, ALL mods, in the absence of an explicit declaration by the game devs to the contrary, are copyright violations in the eyes of the law, and the game devs can choose to drop the hammer on unlicensed modders any time they want to. Even videos and screenshots have been held to be copyright violations.

I'm not at all saying I agree with this. I'm just reporting the facts. Disregard them at your peril.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Majiir, that is a very important point. The 3D display of scans from kethane is one of the finest in the KSP world.

But, may I understand from your post, that Kethane may allow displaying 3D data outside of the (nice, but limited) cells used with your fine mod (including those even finer and nicer triangular cells in that WIP stuff)? ScanSat, I am sure you know, makes for different swaths with each sensor; and data on its maps has finer granularity than the cells on a kethane 3D overlay allow (be those hex or triangles) (I have no hard data, but ScanSat maps seem to be 1080x540 pixels wide, quite a lot more than the kethane cells are). Not that I am suggesting to increase granularity even further with Kethane, I am sure it is fine already. But, IMO, it would not feel as good to see maps with ScanSat where the elementary unit scanned is as large as a kethane cell.

Therefore, I would like if you could shed some light about that support kethane may offer. Drawing 3D SCANSAT maps on map view would be something glorious, if they can retain the granularity they have now.

Sorry to knock the foot out from under your post but this is entirely based on a common misconception; that Kethane's datastructure and visualizer are the same thing.

The hex grid is intentionally vague, in Kethane at this point it simply isn't important to have the fine grain data that SCANsat deals with; I've participated in many conversations with Majiir about finer grain data to enhance and complicate certain aspects of how Kethane is played, and predominantly add optional complexity where you'd be able to survey a local region and find places with more, easier, or better resource; but anywhere in that block would have resource. At this point it's very much about finding the best way to implement the gameplay, not about the code to visualize it.

Behind the hexgrid is the Geodesic something something octree quadsphere binary fancy pants thingamajig. I can't keep track of exactly what it is that Majiir is doing but it's a data structure intended for containing data based on spherical coordinates; this is way better than rendering sphere coordinated data onto a square; but I don't believe SCANsat does that; just like Kethane the 1080x540 pixel map is a visualizer; this is why SCANsat can render that data in different ways without two of them being significantly deformed.

What SCANsat would need to render Kethane data in it's map is some code to decide where a pixel on the map is on a sphere and then ask for the right data out of the geodesic somethingerother.

And what it would need to go the other way is an alternate visualizer that renders the data onto a sphere like the hexgrid does; but at a higher resolution.

As for the light; Majiir has a lot of experience in doing both of these things, don't underestimate the amount of effort that was put into figuring out how to build an tree out of square octagonal bins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then that's Squad given you special dispensation.

The policy applies to the general public, however I don't know that it's been communicated to anyone else.

Most plugins are not derivative works, and neither are many parts mods, and although everything you posted is true with regards to mods that are derivative works, you continuously make the mistake of categorizing all KSP "mods" as if they are all of that type, when many are not. Properly speaking, many of the so-called "mods" are, in fact, not mods at all, they're more properly called plugins or addons, and just as Adobe cannot claim ownership of a Photoshop addon developed by someone else, Squad cannot claim ownership of addons not developed by themselves when they are not in any way, shape, or form a derivative work.

This. Geschosskopf, you seem to be operating under a definition of "mod" which presupposes that they're derivative of Squad's work.

Consider my geodesic grid code. It was developed and tested in complete isolation from KSP. It's clear that this code is my own intellectual property. So because that code was at one point loaded by KSP, the rights to that code are transferred to Squad?

Therefore, I would like if you could shed some light about that support kethane may offer. Drawing 3D SCANSAT maps on map view would be something glorious, if they can retain the granularity they have now.

Did you see the screenshot I linked in my last post? Displaying high-resolution data isn't as trivial as Kethane's overlay, but as that proof-of-concept demonstrates, it's certainly possible. My experimentation thus far has been in shader-driven heat maps, but a variety of shading techniques could be used for an overlay.

Sorry to knock the foot out from under your post but this is entirely based on a common misconception; that Kethane's datastructure and visualizer are the same thing. ... At this point it's very much about finding the best way to implement the gameplay, not about the code to visualize it.

Greys correctly points out that the geodesic grid (data structure) and the map overlay (visualizer) are separate things, and the organization of the code reflects that. The problem that's been (mostly) solved is: How do you store geographic data in a way that doesn't suffer distortion and seaming? Rectangular grids (which, as far as I know, SCANsat does use) have those problems, and geodesic grids do not. They're much more complex behind the scenes, but that work is already done. However, I should point out that there are all kinds of ways to visualize data contained in a geodesic grid, and the Kethane map overlay is just one. My work-in-progress overlay is another. The point I'd like to make here is that while gameplay is definitely important, there's a lot of room for more visualization work as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks both Greys and Majiir, your posts are clear enough. Of course who did not participate in discussions or development about Kethane has no knowledge about those points you wrote about. Yes, Majiir, I saw the screenshot in your other post: but that alone does not convey the full story. With what you wrote above, yes, that is clear now. And that is really what I was asking about.

Thansk again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was looking into both Kethane and SCANsat a bit (nicely commented codes btw ;} ). As far as I understand it from the code they use quite different data representation, but of course everything can be converted into another format.

As I see, SCANsat uses an UV texture that is visualized simply in a rectangle.

It is extremely simple in Unity to put it on a sphere. Just create a sphere primitive (few vertices, but with a texture it looks OK) and put the 2D texture on it. Well, almost, but fairly simple (even I could show Kerbin's biome)...

Procedural primitives can be done as well, and texturing is possible too.

What Majiir linked is a great development. It has a huge advantage, i.e., it fits to bodies that are far from being a sphere. however if you want to map a texture on it, you need to do it triangle by triangle. Not impossible, but quite a work.

Edited by kubi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does it mean when BIO and ANOM blinks orange and cyan?

If by Cyan you mean Green, then it means it's scanning. When it scans something it blinks green. If it's constantly green, it's constantly scanning. If it's constantly orange, it's not scanning, and is more than likely out of range.

Is SCANSAT still being developed? It's excellent as it is and just needs a few polished edges and some keeping-up-with-the-times to be perfect.

My own wishlist would be:

1. Toolbar integration

2. Scan Image Browser (i.e. viewing the static data you have collected, from other planets than the one you are orbiting, and if it's on the toolbar, without even needing a part or scanner.)

3. A third-party API for other cartographic mods to use the quite nice map viewing interface, as hinted by Majiir.

--Kethane

--Other resources

--clouds (useless and entirely aesthetic, but what are we doing if not playing make believe?)

4. Kethane-esque data overlay for useful things like biomes.

5. Total fluff: a little Panoramio style addition to the map screen that adds icons for the location where screenshots have been taken, and allows you to see the screenshot. Sometimes I don't want to fly and just want to look at pretty stuff. But that's just me!

Edited by GavinZac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just my 2 cents.

I see the talking about using Kethane style interface, but personally I prefer the SCANSat way of visualization, more realistic.

I preferred the old Kethane interface as well. Would be perfect if we could visualize Kethane as an overlay on ScanSat map for example.

It's a beautiful interface, but it's just not for my taste. I think it's ok as an option for the people who like it though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...