KillAshley

Yes I don't know, I personally won't even be looking at 1.1 until it's fully released. So everything I do will be for 1.0.5 until there's a formal 1.1 release of kopernicus

Well mine can be used for both when it's done, as conditional paths can be used for the orbit to change it based on either stock or rss. And yeah your maths for the rotation is a little off, it's rotational period is approximately 4hrs, 17mins

Well kopernicus has its own examples, made by this awesome dude called KillAshley, there's also a few tutorials written in the add-on forums somewhere...plus there are numerous packs out that can be used for reference too (like in my Sig)

yeah i know i can restore it, but im on my phone so cbf right now.... plus when i re-upload the file tomorrow it wont be a simple Gilly clone, and will actually look like Bennu instead \o/

just deleted the file by mistake while cleaning my dropbox account, my bad...ill reupload it tomorrow with a heightmap for the body to reflect it's actual terrain

Yeah i started making a tiny heightmap to try and get the shape right, but for now its just a mini gilly lol. I'll hopefuly have time to shape it tomorrow

well here's a first pass at it, still basically a recolored Gilly clone for now.....think I got most things correct, however there still some tweaking to do. Drop the cfg file into your GameData folder with RSS and it should work fine, however it will change the epoch of all planets to (what i hope is) about sept 2016 so maybe don't play an existing save with it . Mass and gravity still needs to be done, and maybe a little terrain pass to get it less gilly-like. Have to leave for work so will look at it again tomorrow....maybe i shouldn't have spent my time watching tv instead lol https://www.dropbox.com/s/k6ix4qj368j6omw/Bennu.cfg?dl=0

yup, just trying to get orbital parameters right....pain in the ass to find it all

maybe ...i decided to make it look a little nicer, a gilly clone makes me cringe inside lol

EDIT; OK so read some of the posts, and i think I understand what you guys need, should be pretty simple. I'll grab a quick cfg that'll do what you want. A cfg like this is simple and should only take 5 mins....unless i get distracted lol

Not really, seeing as what you replied. You say you want to get the whole community in on the project. Thats cool, if you actually read what I wrote then you'd know that I'm not discouraging it at all, however until you actually get people familiar with Kopernicus then you are opening yourself to all hosts of issues from general PQS issues plaguing the resulting pack, or persistant bugs in the cfgs that are easily avoidable. Also I still have no clue why you are so insistant on comparing this to CRP, as they are nothing alike. Like i said, CRP is a LIBRARY mod. It doesnt actually add ANYTHING. Its just a community library to ensure mods play well together. If you are trying to make a CRP for planet packs, then what are you suggesting? Designated/restricted orbital bands? user specific planetary designations? What you are suggesting has nothing to do with CRP so i wish that you'd stop referring to it. A community project is a good idea, however as i said above (as you obviously haven't read it i'll quote it for you) This is because creating a planet is simple and easy, however creating a planet that looks good, and is free of bugs is complicated and quite difficult (unless you want everyone to go down the path of direct SE exports, in which case thats even worse than bug riddled planets) If you go back and re-read what I wrote previously you'll understand where I'm coming from, however simply saying "its a community project, send me planets and I'll release it" does nothing and will result in a pretty horrible experience all around.

i think you haven't understood what i said

To be honest, this is a terrible idea. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for more people with talent adding interesting things to the game, however I think that its just a terrible concept and your comparison to CRP is a really weak one at best. CRP is a base guide, to help mods work together by providing cfgs so that resources can be unified into a single & effective utility for all modders to use, whereas this would be simply a free-for-all collaboration pack. The main reason why I object to this is for one simple thing: the skill level of people contributing to it. For example, if I was to contribute a planet to this, it would look SIGNIFICANTLY different to other people's creations. This is mainly due to the fact that we, as people, all have different visions of what would not only look good, but play good too. Some people's "fun" or "wacky" ideas (like " including a planet with text-shaped islands") would be absolute hell for others. What you'll end up with here is a mixed up pack containing planets that; might look significantly different from one another, might be riddled with numerous bugs (seeing as noone here has any real experience with PQS modification nor Kopernicus's numerous configurations) or simply falls into another pack that appears in the development forums and never goes anywhere. I'm not here to rain on your parade though, and if you want to do something like this then why not simply collaborate with a few select people instead of opening it to everyone? As if it was to truly be a "Community Planet Pack" then surely someone with a lot more experience with Kopernicus would be leading it, and there should be clear rules on what is (and isnt) acceptable.

sry for the late reply, missed the posts to this thread... TBH i only work for stock worlds, I try and make planet look as good as they can without any additional mods. That being said I'm definitely not against other people creating clouds and linking them so i can put them in the OP for others To be fair, Fosno appears to not even have an atmosphere...maybe I'll look into it, as the old one did. As long as it actually adds something to the game, I'm happy adding it back in.

thats odd, I'll add it to the list for when i start messing with the planets again. Thanks for reporting it!

Comic Sans??!? NOOOoooooooo... guess I'll take a look then

yeah biomes is on the to-do list along with scatter science experiments and general tweaks, but i have a lot of current projects so no ETA of when it'll be addressed tbh

That is strange. I honestly have no clue what could eb the issue there. Could i ask where you're KSP folder is located? I know that sometimes have the folder in your ProgramFiles folder can cause weird behaviours, but at this point in really just clasping at straws lol. At least the 4K works for you

very odd, been trying for last 30 mins to get this to happen and cant seem to get it to occur. I did notice some slight differences from my logs to yours. was this a manual install? did you remove the old folders before updating?

na, bugs been around for a long time. Just having a repeatable save is enough to help me look into it better

very odd, is it there all the time? or does entering & exiting scenes reset it?

thanks, especially for the persistence file, ill look at it closely

yeah its still going strong, just no need for update anytime soon...everything works perfectly

SE? ewwwwwwwww no no no no no no no no please dont use them unless you edit them A LOT by hand to get them looking good for KSP. SE export packs are something that we try to discourage as it show nothing but laziness and a lack of creativity when creating a pack. It's not hard to create heightmaps, hell you don't even need a heightmap at all for a planet! not really, have you seen the bodies in our own solar system? look at all the bodies like Iapetus, Europa, Mimas, etc, they aren't exactly generic bodies

that would be the color map as i said if you grab it from the download in the directory i stated before you can use it however you wish, There isn't any transparency on the map, it's actually a representation of the alpha channel being displayed on the image. You can delete the alpha layer and the false "transparency" will be gone.