Llamageddon

Edit: Panic over, sort of. Upon closer inspection, OPM numbers, in fact, seem to give a high margin of error for delta-v requirements, though that might be down to me needing to get better averages. Either way, it seems like you shouldn't need to worry about getting stranded, at least. Just posting sort of PSA: It turns out the outer planet delta-v totals are not very perfectly accurate at all. For the most part, they are much lower than the minimum actually required. (I need to replicate how averages were originally worked out, but they seem to give a very high margin for error). Keep this in mind if you are using the current map for reference. Adding at least an extra 20% is recommended. I'll see if I can do a quick hotfix update to at least get these closer to a ballpark figure. It will take a while to get them as accurate as they were for previous versions of OPM, but hopefully that can be done for a major update at a later date. So, after a brief investigation into the current delta-V numbers, as far as I can tell: In general, I think it is probably worth running all the numbers again. I need to spend some time considering which calculations/calculators are the best options available to use by default. Most of the outer planet numbers are way off marginally off, even taking into account only really significantly, where the orbit has been raised to new atmosphere heights. The inner planet numbers are all pretty accurate, but need to be standardised. None are obviously wrong, but they match different delta-v calculators' numbers. Also, some of the totals are summed incorrectly (still accurate to within 50 m/s). All of these minor errors are a result of my mixing and matching, not the original authors' mistakes. I'm not sure the best way to work out SOI intercept delta-v and elliptical orbit delta-v totals. Looking into various options for this. If anyone knows a good way of calculating delta-V to elliptical orbit, especially if this data can be extrapolated using Alex Moon's planner, I'd be very grateful for any pointers. Some nuance may be needed for calculating the delta-V requirements for landing on bodies with atmospheres. This is something I've not looked at closely before. I probably need to carefully consider what is, and what isn't worth spending a lot of time on, or prioritising. E.g. - Forking Alex Moon's window planner looks very tempting, and easy, and would let me customise the atmospheres for related OPM bodies, but is probably a terrible idea as I know nearly nothing about coding. The current numbers are based on the most recent delta-V numbers I could find here, but do keep in mind (especially regarding OPM) that the current numbers are not guaranteed to be accurate for high precision mission planning. They should be good enough for "government work" though.

I hope it's alright posting to an old thread in this case, as I couldn't see anywhere better to post it and much of the information here is still relevant. I just thought I may as well share an updated OPM map I made for myself. I've no idea what I'm doing with vector graphics, but it seems to have turned out OK. Mostly I've just updated some numbers (particularly orbits taking into account upper atmospheres) and added Karen to the Plock system. I also uploaded it as a KSPedia mod, as that was the reason I wanted this in the first place. If I've made any glaring errors, let me know. I've not done nearly as good a job as u/s13g3 at making a dark theme, but did what I could with the assets I could find to work with. It uses the same Creative Commons licence, though, so at least someone can use any of the updated data that might be useful, and improve upon this if they want to. Don't feel you need to credit me if you use this, I just credited myself, so people knew who to blame for any mistakes in this version. I accidentally made a thicc kraken, so had to add it in there. All credit goes to everyone who already worked on the community Delta-V maps.* *I decided to look into this further, as this has been an ongoing for community effort for almost 10 years. I found it quite interesting, but got a bit carried away, then decided I might as well include my own notes in a narrative fashion, as this amused me. The following is a timeline and credits for the Community Delta-V Maps as best as I can make them out. Anything encased in "---" or "[" / "]" can be ignored, and are just poetic licence and/or an attempt at humour. As more than one person has liked this, I feel it is worth my time at least making a to-do list for potential improvements. I'm not guaranteeing anything, but if nothing else, the following might be some ideas for anyone else who wants to expand upon this in the future: Release the current .svg source on github, in the spirit of the Creative Commons licence. Tidy up the Plock/Karen branch, to make it a bit less aesthetically erratic. Independently verify the current Delta-V values, especially where/if there is any clear consensus they are flawed (or if there is a notable lack of consensus). Double check values are correct for latest OPM release. Add the Space Walrus back in, for nostalgic reasons. Release a "companion" almanac expansion for the KSPedia, with useful, related information (such as a transfer guide for transfers between the Joolian moons). Edit: Updated Delta-V totals for Karen, which were off by -40. Edit2: Update to credits

On the surface, this could appear to be slightly off-topic, but so many little details, particularly of the traditions in the order of ceremony, can be traced back by centuries, and often have not deviated from the canon established at that time. Whilst, in this case, to my knowledge, none of it dates back as far as to fall into the context of 'ancient' history, doubtless many ancient civilizations and ceremonies were also influenced by relatively coincidental or even accidental traditions established centuries before. I bet there are some particularly bizarre/irrational examples. Though, not entirely unreasonably, I imagine a lot of people consider the ones being enacted today in the UK today are equally bizarre. Come to think of it, I'm probably one of them. Actually, upon further reflection, I recently heard of one interesting superstition that has become a rule. Supposedly any male ruler who has used the Kohinoor in their regalia, has met an untimely death or suffered some other misfortune, so now only women will be presented with it. AFAIK, this does not necessarily limit it to only being used by a ruling queen, though the ins and outs of why, or when, certain regalia is given to a member of the royal family is unknown to me. Also, on a site note, I find it quite amusing that both people wearing the ceremonial crowns, daren't even move their heads more than a fraction of an inch, and certainly won't look down, for fear of the crown slipping off their heads. I wonder if this has been a common problem for ruler's throughout history, who were expected to wear outlandishly elaborate crowns. I also wonder how much of a faux-pas/ill omen this might be considered to be. Unlike today, there were periods of history where it was essential that a king be crowned as soon as absolutely possible to establish their claim, rather than waiting for months or more to have a coronation ceremony. I'm pretty sure that in relatively recent history, the UK has had at least one ruling monarch that was never officially crowned. Do any historians here know when crowns became synonymous with the ruler of a kingdom or empire? Can it be dated back to ancient history?

I couldn't find any info on double posting etiquette here, so as this is unrelated to the above: Has anyone made or does anyone know of a mod for Final Frontier that adds ribbons for Other Worlds? If not, I might make my own, and post it if I think it is reasonable quality for anyone else to enjoy. Also, avoiding spoilers, how essential is something like Far Future Technologies for this planet pack; do the new tech/parts included with the mod cover this adequately already? I was hoping to get by with some of the Near Future tech, but happy to install something more advanced if it is highly recommended. -Re-reading the thread, it seems that this has been answered and is a question of how much of a masochist you are, or if you would rather rely on Better Time Warp rather than high-powered engines. @indyy -FYI the screenshot is so low resolution I'm not sure anyone can read the warning message, though this might just be me, and I don't know if it is important that it can be read. @DocMike I might be misunderstanding, but RE: the main menu screen bug - If you mean the mouse highlighting/clicking of the buttons being offset, then this is a known bug, and from reading the thread, AFAIK, there is still no immediately obvious fix. Also, I think, but am not certain, that the solar panel retraction is related to how Kopernicus deals with multi-system solar power updates, rather than this mod specifically.

@lingfors Thanks for some counter-perspective, too. I certainly didn't expect KSP, and especially it's mods, to have no bugs whatsoever. Most games aren't as open as KSP on reporting minor glitches to the player via a log, especially if those are practically unavoidable, Unity centred bugs. KSP seems refreshingly forgiving; any other game I've modded that threw up a fraction of these errors would either crash in short order, or even worse, add game breaking bugs that weren't immediately apparent, or delayed but inevitable save corruption. This is one of the reasons I was a bit alarmed when I first looked at the logs. The fact that a lot of mod makers will have something along the lines of "NO LOGS, NO SUPPORT" in big red letters on the first post, made me think the smallest error could be of concern, at first. Now I realise that those statements are far more to do with the common phenomenon in most games, of users reporting bugs, with little or no pertinent, contextual, or actionable, information included. I'm trying not to worry too much, but after installing a handful of mods, near the end of my currently planned selection, my exception/warning filtered log has suddenly ballooned to about 10x in size to almost, 20000 lines of errors from just loading into KSC and making one 3D scene change. In this case, I think I might revert the last handful of additions and see if there is a way of reducing this to less concerning levels; rather than find out something critical isn't working after playing for a couple of hours. For reference, the following error types seem to account for the vast majority of this sudden increase: I'm guessing that RemotTech and some new Kerbin structure/location mods, aren't installed right/playing nicely with other mods, or else, aren't working with the latest KSP version (I did check the forums for confirmation that they did seem to be working). I think it seems reasonable to at least check the logs when a scene change starts adding MB or more to the log size. At the very least, I don't want that CTD caused by the log getting vastly larger than the KSP install itself. As I'm mentioning errors in directly again, I don't suppose anyone is familiar with this one, which seems to crop up from EVE/Scattterer related mods installed right at the start of my modding step-by-step install process: - with a suffix of a planet name, or similar. I'm assuming it is not a big deal, but as it seems to relate to custom EVE settings (probably cloud layers) and either Jool or planet pack planets, I probably won't know for sure until I get to that part of the game. Also, it sounds like something that ought to be fixable with a pretty simple config edit or a minor dependency added (or just me following a key instruction on install that I missed). I think PQS is related to Kopernicus, but get the impression, is something that can be implemented in other mods without Kopernicus needing to be a dependency. I may well be completely wrong, though.

@linuxgurugamerThanks for adopting and updating this mod. I also came here due to extreme log spam, so thanks also for the clear explanation on how to fix it (not sure how I missed that when looking at the UI in the first place). I know it doesn't seem like a critical issue, but could you prioritise lowering the default logging level for the next update? Your mod was by no means the primary cause (probably a drop in the ocean), but I've had issues with some pretty brutal CTDs (crashing the windows interface/display driver), and it turns out it was due to my log file bloating to GBs in size on an SSD with limited space.

This looks like a great mod, I just wondered if it is compatible with Custom Asteroids. I gave it a test run, and it looked like the logs were reporting these mods both altering asteroid spawn rates, but I don't really know what I am looking at to be honest. For reference; in case it makes a difference, I have Kopernicus set to use stock asteroid behaviour, so I can get vanilla comets with custom asteroid spawns.

Thanks for the clarification. The game crashing because my log file was bloating to GBs in size got me a bit spooked, but I can at least check for errors to that extreme before getting too invested in a game. Looking up the error messages online, I came across mentions of save corruption etc. but I suspected they were probably rarities, considering as many people were talking about happily playing with 100s of mods installed. And you're right, a lot of the errors, or even just debug text does sound quite dramatic. I've already got so many just getting to the main menu, with about half my planned mods installed, that it is pretty much impossible to keep track of anyway, so as you say, probably best to leave it up to someone who knows what they're looking for to decipher if something does go obviously wrong. I've been a bit picky about pruning mods with confirmed bugs, just to be sure.

Done a minimal mod setup with OWR included and just wondering if any of the following errors are of concern and/or just posting them here in case they are useful to know of:

Sounds like you've worked it out, but after looking into this myself recently, and in case anyone else reads this, I thought I'd add that while a circular orbit seems the most obvious choice, an eccentric orbit can vastly speed up completely mapping the surface. I imagine doing it wrong can also cause problems similar to a 0 inclination orbit, though.

Now you mention it, I might try out your Less real mods myself, to get a taste for that side of things, before jumping straight into the deep end with real solar system stuff. This is a fair point, I added them as I have made a lot of custom tweaks in my current set up, but it was hardly straightforward compared to using a mod with a custom settings interface. On those grounds @OmegaAlbert might want to ignore them as individual mods; if they are a dependency, that mod will be doing the config for you, most likely.

I've not actually tried a game modded heavily for realism yet, but there are a few mods I've noticed recently and made note of for when I do. Right now, the only realism related mod I used is USI Life Support, specifically because by default it is probably one of the most forgiving life support mods. I mention it because it is also the easiest I've found to customise, from extremely forgiving, to brutally cruel levels of difficulty. It is quite limited in what it considers life support, compared to others, though. And if I do upgrade my life support mods, I am completely on the fence when it comes to a lot of interesting sounding options out there. To answer your question, regarding life support, here are some that have caught my eye, in no particular order or preference: USI Life Support - Already mentioned and linked to above. TAC Life Support - Seems like it has quite a robust life support simulation, with a reasonably high difficulty level, but also quite customisable. IFI Life Support - Not looked into this much, but made note of purely because linuxgurugamer who has adopted and updated this mod, has yet to disappoint me in terms of quality and stability of their work, and seems to choose quality candidates to adopt and update. Kerbalism - This seems to be one of the most in depth life support mods out there, but actually covers "realism" in many more areas, quite comprehensively. It might even tick off most items on your realism checklist. For this reason, the mod recommends taking care and checking for compatibility problems with other mods, but as a counterpoint, seems to have very good compatibility and integration with mods that it does work well with - including Realism Overhaul that @Pehvbot mentioned above. I like the look of this, but suspect those compatibility issues might cause problems with some other mods I would have difficulty giving up. As I said before, no particular preference from me, but it sounds like you would be interested in looking up all/any of the mods mentioned above. I may as well mention those other mods I've bookmarked for a future realism playthrough. One of the reasons I've made note of these is that they seem to be currently working will with the latest versions of KSP, and have some new-ish/original ideas, or promising ongoing development. Like the rest of this post, this is entirely subjective, and I haven't actually extensively tried them out recently, but as with the life support mods I mentioned, I expect they might interest you as references/guidance for your own research of what you might be after: Kerbal Health - Somehow, this had not been on my radar until very recently. Seems to fill a bit of a niche or bridge a gap between some of the other realism mods. For the more literal/traditional "health" aspect, it makes use of a health bar system, which seems to be a bit more comprehensively/rationally integrated than with some other mods I've looked at in the past. On the less stereotypical side of its health remit, it simulates kerbal stress/comfort, and particularly of interest to me, how ship design and mission scope and length needs to be factored in with regard to this. Kerbal Launch Failure - Pretty self-explanatory and I think it also features possible catastrophic failures, to complement emergency escape, snd other related systems. Dang It! Continued - Part Failures, adds a % chance for random part failures, taking into account how much those parts are being used. Custom Barn Kit - Really a dependency for other realism mods relating to administration, costs, science and other things related to the KSC. I mention it specifically because it allows you to customise all these values for yourself if you don't mind tweaking config files. (Used in my current mod setup) Contract Configurator - Similar to Barn Kit but for contracts specifically, at the most basic level lets you individually disable vanilla contract types. Various contract packs - Probably better to search for yourself, there are a lot, and caution is advised as many are outdated or have bugs, not all are realism related, but quite a few are an improvement on the vanilla equivalents, in terms of realism. To get you started, I recommend searching for "Contract Pack" plus "Research", "Bases and Stations", "Exploration Plus", "Kerbal Academy". (Used in current setup) History of Spaceflight - This is the one contracts pack I will mention directly, as it seems particularly relevant to your question, It tries emulate what the title suggest, via contracts, and is also compatible with some part mods that offer analogues to rockets that were traditionally designed and built during the space race, which may also be of interest to you and are linked on that mod's forum post. Komplexity - Adds ten building upgrade levels to facilities instead of three, and is quite well-balanced, but also easily customisable using with Barn Kit. Might need tweaking when adding some mods related to building upgrades, to avoid inconsistencies in this regard. (Used in current setup) Strategia - A complete overhaul of the game's current strategy system, though not ultra-realistic, is a big improvement in this regard over vanilla. I find it compliments a more realistic selection of mission packs, too. (Used in current setup) Outer Planets Mod - Adds analogues to the planets from our solar system that are "missing" in KSP. It massively expands the scope of the vanilla system without completely making the game unplayable with most conventional mods, or requiring things that are arguably not realistic, such as wormholes and FTL travel. (Used in current setup) Remote Tech - Ups the difficulty, but adds a lot a realism, to the games' current remote control/CommNet system, also pairs well with the most realism focussed mission packs I do regularly use. CommNet Relays - Works well with Remote Tech, and I am particularly impressed with, given the limitations of the mission system, it sets such complex, yet functional objectives to achieve its remit. It rewards you for setting up uninterrupted relays for comms from and to other bodies and specific locations. Trying to set up 3-4 relay satellites in a perfectly stable orbit for unbroken comms, indefinitely, is practically impossible in the long run without some mods to help with things like resonant orbits, but if you like a realism related challenge, it's fun trying, and certainly possible to eyeball it to last for a hundred years or more, with a bit of skill and planning. Near Future Mod Series - This might not fit your criteria of realism but seems worth a mention. Adds a lot of theoretical technology and parts to the game, without drifting too far into the realm of science fiction. I think it does a great job of both adding a lot of new possibilities without completely overwhelming your parts list, but also, limiting its scope to concepts that are generally agreed to be both plausible and practical, have demonstrated proof of concept, or have just not been used yet or given the go ahead for funding of development programs. Often essential for use with mods that expand the scale of the Kerbol system, but adds a lot to the late-game experience, regardless. Related mods not included above for "reasons": Real Solar System - Arguably you can't get more realistic than our actual solar system, but in terms of realism, I am put off for two reasons. Firstly I feel this is taking realism too far for me, I want realism within the setting of Kerbal Space Program, and feel this is taking the game too far from what it was actually envisioned to be. Secondly it expands the distances involved to such extremes, you need to very carefully think about what other mods you might be using with it. The game will just be completely broken without quite a few essential mods to compliment this, and with a lot of mods you might not have thought of that completely mess up the game with this installed as well. That being said, it's certainly one of the more impressive modding achievements, and at some point I plan to make a second modded version of the game, purely centred around this one, for a completely different KSP experience. RSS related realism mods - Similar to the previously mentioned RSS, these are such extreme overhauls in general, that you are locking yourself into a completely different modding ecosystem, which would invalidate many of the suggestions I made above. Again, not claiming these are in any way flawed or inferior, just with realism turned up to 11, you are playing with such fundamental alterations to the core game's design, that you need to re-evaluate your mod choices purely from that perspective. Other Parts Mods - These are not excluded because I think they are invalid choices for improved realism, or that I am biased towards the Near Future series (I thought I ought to include at least one example), but because there are so many to chose from, and preferences are inevitably very subjective. It's worth noting that if you try to add them all, your game initialisation can quickly exceed ten minutes (or even with just one or two of the larger ones), and this will also translate to much longer scene changes in the game. In this scenario, it can take a lot of work to get your parts list to a readable state, probably requiring a couple of utility mods just to manage this. Also, I think there are others who might post here who would be much more knowledgeable about this category of mods than me. Mods that have slipped my mind - There are so many out there, don't take this as a comprehensive or ultimate list of mods, even within the categories of those I have mentioned. A long post, but I've been thinking about, and looking into this myself recently, so if nothing else, this will be quite a useful summary for me to check when I start my next game. As I hinted at, I'll probably re-read this and be slapping my forehead, thinking, "How could I have forgotten to mention that mod."

Firstly, are you sure you have the dependencies installed, I think they are Module Manager, KSP Recall, and the TweakSacle Redistributable. There are also compatibility patches, which might be relevant if you are adding this to an already modded game, I think there is an all-in-one version called something like the "Uber Paket", which should cover all bases. If that is all accounted for, and keeping in mind that I saw this error crop up recently, but only once, when reinstalling mods in different orders/stages (and I didn't actually have tweakscale installed at the time); I think you might be able to fix this by changing the order you install mod manager and any fix/compatibility mods you might be using (like KSP Community Fixes/Harmony/Patch Manager). Sorry I can't be more specific. If that isn't a quick fix; given that some of the mods I mentioned, or similar ones, might patch or add new files, variations on this theme might also yield results. In order of troubleshooting efficacy (though not necessarily practicality), I would: Completely delete your KSP directory (backing up saves you might want to keep, the main config if you want to save current menu settings, and any zipped mod installation files that you really don't want to redownload), then reinstall KSP. Adding just TweakScale and it's dependencies to and unmodded game and confirming that the error is not logged any more. Adding Module Manager and other patches/fixes to an install with only Tweakscale (and dependencies) installed, and running the game once to generate any patches, and check the log. The above two steps but reversed. Keep searching the internet/TweakScale forum posts/github development page for any mentions of this issue, and try not to give up in exasperation. (Ideally after trying all the above) Report it as an issue on the development page/forum thread and hopefully get a solution or bug confirmation and fix. I've heard people claim, quite a few times, that some errors are fine to ignore. However, without confirmation of this, the least recommended "solution", if you don't mind losing a game in progress, and the mod seems to be working, is; Hope the error isn't causing save corruption, and keep playing. (Backup a save from before you installed TweakScale). Hope this helps, but at least I confirm I have seen this error crop up and go away, even if I can't actually tell you how or why.

I just got back into KSP, and particularly modded KSP, after years away. Dived right in, installed almost a hundred mods that were reported as compatible, for my first playthough. Everything was going fine until the game started crashing. Before even looking at the logs, I discovered it was related to my log file... which was multiple GB in size. This led me to start carefully reinstalling mods and checking the log each time, it took me ages to realise that even on a fresh, unmodded install, there would still be some error messages (I don't know why I expected otherwise, from my own experiences using Unity). Despite this, I tried to address every new error that cropped up as I added new mods to the game. Well, it's been about a week now, and I've not actually played the game properly again yet, and have come to the conclusion that a modded game without any new errors will require both a very exclusive approach to mod selection, and an inevitable limit on the number of mods installed. With that conclusion, I thought it was probably actually time to ask about this rather than keep muddling on through. TLDR: So you don't feel the need to spell everything out, you can keep in mind that I am relatively computer-literate and love playing modded games; My main questions are: Am I right in thinking that CKAN is not always reporting mod incompatibilities accurately? As above, but specifically: some might be incompatible and missing relevant metadata? As above, but specifically: some might be perfectly compatible but just referenced to an older KSP release (especially if either from v1.8+ or 1.12+, depending on the kind of mod)? How much should I worry about errors if I am installing 100+ mods that are reported as compatible and working together? Are a certain number of warnings/errors pretty much inevitable with a heavily modded KSP install? I'm assuming Exceptions are usually something you want to at least double check on. How concerned should I be if searching doesn't lead to conclusive information about these errors? Generally speaking, what sort of errors are of least/most concern, and/or are there any good general guidelines to follow in this regard? As above, but with regard to reporting bugs, and posting on mod development threads? If anything, I'm grateful that Squad hasn't hidden all this away from the user. If I can actually get around to playing again, and stop giving myself a nervous breakdown every time I see a new error, I am hoping to find the time to work on patches for some mods that seem to have a potentially quick fix. I've already worked out that, at least a few errors, seem very dramatic to the untrained eye , but upon further research are really the log (understandably) lacking the ability to differentiate between specifics or different contexts. Thanks in advance for any insight, and don't feel the need to answer all of these questions, or answer them utterly comprehensively. I am more concerned that, given my temperament, and without some answers, I will either just give up, or I will spend weeks getting my perfect modded game setup, decide to take a short break from KSP, and never actually come back and play the game (I somehow almost forgot how great it was).

@Vabien I've had a bit of a breakthrough, and though it possibly raises more questions than it answers, the good news is it might not be directly related to KEX continued-er. As I've been away from the game for a few years and only started heavily modding again since the 9.1 beta was released, I decided to test out the previous release from github. It still had the same problem, so to be certain I wasn't going to cause more problems with leftover files etc. I decided to reinstall everything from scratch again, this time I didn't install anything that wasn't strictly a dependency to get Kopernicus and your mod functioning, (KSP Community Fixes, Click Through Blocker, Patch Manager and Toolbar Controller), and this time the error didn't appear. In fact, I've had a couple of other minor warnings disappear for the first time, so I'm going to review my step by step load order, following the procedure for minimum requirements for GFX/Environment mods, before installing anything else. I'll get back to you if anything crops up again that might be related to the above issue, and although I have no real idea, I suspect it must be something to do with Mod Manager/KSPCF/Patch Manager, altering something before Kopernicus/KEX continued-er is installed. Hopefully some of this information is helpful if anyone else reports similar errors. At least you know it might not be directly caused by Kopernicus/KEXC-er doing something unexpected. Thanks for the prompt reply by the way. Even if not the fault of your mod, this lead me to getting rid of an error that has been bugging me, and seemed unresolvable, since I first started modding KSP again. @VabienUpdate: I reinstalled my mods again due to a more severe problem down the line, unrelated to KEX-er. I assumed I could reinstall this, reproducing the steps to remove the Runsharp exception, but nothing I did could stop it cropping up again. Just letting you know it is still there. I assume it is not critical -I've come to realise a lot of logged errors, even exceptions, can be irrelevant to mods functioning correctly; besides, this is a beta, mostly for use as a modding tool, as I understand it. As it was not a dependency (recommended, by Other Worlds, FYI), I have removed it for now, assuming I will hopefully just be missing out on something like footprints. If, further down the line, this turns out to be something that might warrant further investigation, let me know, and I'll be happy to set up an instance of the game to test this further, under your direction, if that would be of help.

I'm pretty sure that if you download Spectra Scatterer on CKAN and just install the dependencies it asks for, it will work nicely. Spectra Scatterer vibrant sunsets would be an optional extra that I don't use because it says it can cause artifacting, but it might be worth it if you want to prioritise planetside aesthetics. I actually came to post to ask if this error is related to Spectra? It seems to be to my untrained eye: [LOG 01:34:00.335] [EVE CloudsManager]: Applying 2D clouds... [LOG 01:34:00.342] [EVE CloudsManager]: Clouds2D is now SCALED [LOG 01:34:00.342] [EVE CloudsManager]: CloudsPQS: (EVE Clouds: JoolAtmoGreenStock) OnSphereInactive [LOG 01:34:00.342] [EVE CloudsManager]: Clouds2D is now SCALED [WRN 01:34:00.346] Cannot find preset 'High' for pqs 'EVE PQS' [LOG 01:34:00.359] [EVE CloudsManager]: Cannot find Jool to apply to main Menu! [LOG 01:34:00.359] [EVE CloudsManager]: PQS Applied Should I worry about this? It seems like it could be important. Just happening to Jool when a cloud layer is being applied. I get the error 5 times in total after getting to the menu screen. Edit: I forgot about this, and originally was why I decided to carefully reinstall all my mods. After installing Spectra Scatterer I get this Exception after every 3D scene change: [WRN 02:19:25.378] File 'F:\SteamLibrary\steamapps\common\Kerbal Space Program\GameData\Scatterer/config/PluginData/pluginData.cfg' does not exist [ERR 02:19:25.379] [Scatterer][Error] Couldn't load pluginData System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object at KSPCommunityFixes.Modding.TypeCache.Read (System.Object host, ConfigNode node) [0x0002e] in <1ab895c297764334bc8ca0487ca3a837>:0 at KSPCommunityFixes.Modding.PersistentIConfigNode.ConfigNode_ReadObject_Prefix (System.Object obj, ConfigNode node, System.Boolean& __result) [0x00014] in <1ab895c297764334bc8ca0487ca3a837>:0 at (wrapper dynamic-method) ConfigNode.ConfigNode.ReadObject_Patch1(object,ConfigNode) at (wrapper dynamic-method) ConfigNode.ConfigNode.LoadObjectFromConfig_Patch2(object,ConfigNode,int,bool) at ConfigNode.LoadObjectFromConfig (System.Object obj, ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <4b449f2841f84227adfaad3149c8fdba>:0 at scatterer.PluginDataReadWrite.loadPluginData () [0x00015] in <684aa87c0d2345f8a9e4739403f4afff>:0 I have installed via CKAN, following the instructions from this page, so at first I assumed this was expected behaviour, but as it happens so often and I have not seen this reported by anyone else, I assume it must be just happening to me. A similar message also fills up the logs when it tries to save, also after a scene change. After a while I also seem to get this being Spammed more and more frequently: [ERR 02:33:38.463] [Scatterer][Error] Destroying duplicate instance, check your install for duplicate scatterer folders, or nested GameData folders I tried just adding the config file from scatterer, assuming maybe it was just an oversight, but that causes the game to spam even more messages about multiple instances. Tried a lot of similar solutions and this seems to be the least error ridden setup; so is this intended and people have just got so jaded about error messages in KSP logs that I am the first to ask about it? If not, I'll submit my logs with a bug report. Update: I seem to have managed to get rid of, or reduced, some of these errors by manually installing Spectra and then copying the spectra_scatterer files into Scatterer's directory, as the zip file documentation says is an option; though some of the directory structure seemed to need a bit of tweaking to match scatterers. @HafCoJoe are you sure you have the CKAN files set up to install as intended alongside scatterer or have I just made the error log happy, without actually improving things? For instance, am I not supposed to have a PluginData\pluginData.cfg as the mod is packaged on CKAN? Update v1.0.1: @HafCoJoe Sorry for bothering you, I think most of the information I've posted here is irrelevant, unhelpful, or inaccurate. To save you time and confusion if you haven't read this yet, I just wanted to let you know that: The duplicate/destroying instance error seems to only appear when switching to the VAB/SPH, logging twice in a row, as far as I can tell. Probably insignificant/expected, but thought I should mention it. The loading/saving exception that happens on most scene changes, usually once or twice for each one, goes away if I add the default pluginData.cfg from the Scatter Default Config. Sorry if the following was nothing to do with your mod: I got a bit obsessed with trying to work out the 'Cannot find preset 'High' for pqs 'EVE PQS' errors, which seem to be exclusive to custom Jool cloud layers (JoolLightning/JoolAurora etc), but also crop up for specific gas giants in some planet packs and Spectra is not a dependency of these. Moving the spectra_scatterer files over to Scatterer was probably a bad idea, as it needs custom editing of the paths referenced in one or two of the sprectra_scatterer config files (at the very least) to function correctly. Just moving copying the pluginData.cfg to Scatterer and leaving everything as-is after the CKAN install seems to achieve the desired result. A couple of questions related to all this; Is the omission of plginData.cfg from the Spectra Scatterer CKAN install intentional? Is the omission of Caustics.png and Caustics2.png also intentional? If yes to pluginData, is there are way to stop those repeated exception errors being logged, even if (or because), they are not relevant. Lastly, I never mentioned how much I liked this mod. It really spruces up the aesthetics/GFX in subtle yet significant ways, and the fallback atmosphere if scatterer isn't installed is a really nice feature too. Thanks for the time and effort you put into this.

I've not been able to find anything relating to this through searches, so I thought I'd ask here before submitting a bug report. This exception in the logs has been bugging me for ages, as it seems to come from nowhere and be asking for a file that doesn't seem to exist, and is possibly unity related rather than directly KSP related (though I am not expert): [LOG 00:34:08.876] [AddonLoader]: Instantiating addon 'PQSModCreator' from assembly 'KopernicusExpansion.RegionalPQSMods' [ERR 00:34:08.880] ADDON BINDER: Cannot resolve assembly: RunSharp, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=be9f22c3116c2290 [ERR 00:34:08.881] ADDON BINDER: Cannot resolve assembly: RunSharp, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=be9f22c3116c2290 [EXC 00:34:08.884] FileNotFoundException: Could not load file or assembly 'RunSharp, Version=1.0.0.19, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=be9f22c3116c2290' or one of its dependencies. UnityEngine.DebugLogHandler:LogException(Exception, Object) ModuleManager.UnityLogHandle.InterceptLogHandler:LogException(Exception, Object) UnityEngine.GameObject:AddComponent(Type) AddonLoader:StartAddon(LoadedAssembly, Type, KSPAddon, Startup) AddonLoader:StartAddons(Startup) <LoadObjects>d__90:MoveNext() UnityEngine.MonoBehaviour:StartCoroutine(IEnumerator) <CreateDatabase>d__71:MoveNext() UnityEngine.MonoBehaviour:StartCoroutine(IEnumerator) GameDatabase:StartLoad() <LoadSystems>d__11:MoveNext() UnityEngine.MonoBehaviour:StartCoroutine(IEnumerator) LoadingScreen:Start() I've just been doing a mod by mod fresh install of KSP and checking for errors and this comes up after installing KEX continued, right after adding Kopernicus, as the only graphical mods and with only a few basic/common bugfix/utility mods before them. If nothing else I'd at least like to know if this is a "safe" to ignore exception, and if it is of interest to @Vabien, I am happy to submit the full log file and fill in a bug report on github.

Also discounting, that at least in my opinion, the Byzantine Empire was a pretty clear and unbroken continuation of the Roman Empire, that had, arguably, already moved its centre of power out of Rome to Constantinople, survived in pretty convincing shape as a credible regional power, at least until the mid 1300s, and even if taking into account the fall of Rome against its track record, really did pretty exceptionally well in comparison to the vast majority of powerful states that have survived for anything even close to 1000 years. I am obviously grossly oversimplifying, but I still think the core concept is a perfectly plausible interpretation in general. I've even heard quite a few historians posit that, one of the reasons the "Dark" ages are both a misleading name, and not nearly as dark, as we were until recently led to believe, is because the Roman Empire, did at least continue in some form as a powerful centre of learning, technology and stability in the general region for so long. Though, of course, over such a long period of time, it did morph into something, that was culturally, nearly unrecognizable in comparison to its roots, starting with the fall of Rome.

Dyslexia attack; I kept reading Mesopotamia as Mesoamerica, so when I did actually see a South American culture mentioned, my brain auto-filtered it out. I've also often wondered about "we found a mud bowl, this is officially a 5000 year old civilization!" tendency. Makes sense when you mention it in the context of prestige/bragging rights though, we're only human after all. Along with the surprising list of things that seem to be (or not be) cultural constants, I've often wondered about huge cultural advances that seem to have happened spontaneously between cultures that couldn't plausibly have had tangible contacts between each other. Pyramids are another example you touched upon, although at least a bit more plausible, at least as an almost guaranteed early architectural advance towards '*insert civilization here*'s first mega-construction'. On a slightly less serious note, I've often wondered just what it is about dragons that make them a near universal element of folklore in some form or other between so many major cultures around the world, and seemingly independently of each other. I suppose that supposition might partly answer why this is surprisingly common with other folklore examples as well; we have quite fanciful, but still, broadly, somewhat predictable imaginations and shared fears. It probably goes some way towards even explaining the writing phenomenon, though hardly serves to make it less of an apparently bewildering coincidence. As you also mentioned the subject of writing in that post, what do you think about quipu (or is it quipus?) as a possible candidate for an alternate evolution of what, in most other cultures, became the written word? I realise my enthusiasm for the idea does possibly run a bit ahead of clear consensus, even now, but I certainly think, at the very least, it was never very convincing to dismiss the idea out of hand. Especially considering (as you also mentioned), how brutally and effectively, most cultural expressions and norms were expunged or suppressed throughout that region for an extended period of time. Not to imply that similar episodes are, by any measure, an unpredicable historical occurrence. I'm sure for that reason in general, there are a lot of astounding historical facts, that we don't even know we don't know... This reminds of a game that came out recently, set thousands of years in the future, where you might find a set of keys or something, and an expert on the history of "the ancients" will authoritatively explain, entirely plausibly, what they were used for, with the only problem being that you know perfectly that, that whatever mundane item is being talked about, it most certainly is not used in that way at all. Made me chuckle every time.

Well, I was searching the forums to see if there were any user defined languages for notepad++ and KSP, and it led me here... oh boy. I'll have to try and resist posting a wall of text; so just to steer the conversation back towards a personal bias of mine that was touched upon once or twice earlier; has anyone else been doing any reading up on the various ancient Andean and Mesoamerican civilizations? I'll give, what I think, are some particularly notable (and probably somewhat exaggerated/oversimplified by me) examples of why this specific socio-historical region fascinates me, particularly in the Andean region. Before I touch on language, I'll just season with a few oddities, which are probably closely related to this being the region with the most "pristine" civilizations known to historian so far (i.e. springing up, metaphorically, out of nowhere. In this context, having no obvious reliable or extensive influence from outside cultural influences before suddenly blossoming). I assume partly because of this, pretty much all these civs developed in ways that are notably 'off kilter' compared to, previously, more conventionally studied ancient civs in the Old World: often centred around Asia/Eurasia and the 'Near East'. Amongst other things, pretty much all these civilizations expanded their influence North/South rather than East/West, which although somewhat understandable due to geography, still appears to run contrary to expected natural evolution/entropy in this context. In a similar vein, by many standards of western civilizations, they appear to be woefully backwards technologically, especially in regard to infrastructure, materials science, and logistics. However, upon closer inspection they were often just as accomplished in less conventional advancements. In this case, often, either in socio-economic terms, such as methods of taxation and record keeping, or in "alternative" materials science and solutions to logistical problems. For instance, most people are probably familiar with the Aztecs' somewhat legendary reputation for working with gold and silver, and the equally notable lack of evidence that their smelting techniques, that were in many ways far in advance of anything comparable in the west, ever advanced to reliable or wide-scale smelting of either iron or various alloys that were seemingly just within conceptual and practical technological reach. This is just one example of how (partly in my personal opinion) technology and society can evolve in a supposedly unconventional way, but is demonstrably, just an alternative example of advancements following a mix of the path of least resistance as time marches on, and historical coincidence leading entire nation-states down otherwise unforeseen paths of enlightenment and prosperity. Without going into too much detail, and specifically focussing on the Aztecs, there are many primary conquistador sources reporting that the Aztec macuahuitl, which were ostensibly a primitive club/sword hybrid made of stone and wood, could be just as effective as a fully armoured Spanish soldier as a steel weapon. Of course, upon closer inspection, this isn't that surprising when it turns out these were the cutting edge (pun sort of intended) of advancing this technology using both some of the densest wood that has been discovered to date, and the 'stone' being obsidian: a volcanic glass is both higher than steel on the Mohs scale of hardness, and can hold one of the sharpest edges of anything that isn't made in a laboratory or manufactory. Finally, to get to the reason I started writing all this in the first place, and taking things in a completely different direction—yet still backing up what I have posited above about natural evolution and technological progress in any given civilization—it is the Incas and the preceding Andean civilizations, that really blow my mind as not only ancient, but particularly, as 'pristine' civs go. I will skip straight over how they managed to have both one of the widest ranging empires of the time, along with a similarly advanced system of censorship and taxation, yet appear to have had little use for any regulated, or even discernable currency, road networks or advanced agriculture; but on top of all that, are practically the only century spanning empire, that has given the status of 'cradle of civilization' to a region independent of any notably large swathes of arable land, and pretty much uniquely, independent of any major river networks, let alone the extensive, fertile, river deltas that pretty much every other civilization known to historians and anthropologists has ascended the annals of history alongside. I still haven't quite got to my point for writing all this, so- TLDR: One of the many notable things Andean civilizations, and particularly the Incas are known for, is that they developed a continent spanning empire without having ever developed the written word. Or at least until literally a couple of years ago, this was the accepted wisdom of the majority of academia... Have you ever heard of quipu? They are a historically unique and quite brilliantly creative means of recording and conveying relatively vast and complex amounts of numerical information, using, of all things, braided and knotted fibre cords. In a (rather hyperbolic, admittedly) sense, they were an ancient combination of a calculator and tapestry. Of course, this is not the same as a book, let alone the written word or practical language; or at least that is what "they" thought until very recently! I remember researching this years ago, and the more I learned, the more I was astounded how the vast majority of historians and anthropologists, seemed to dismiss out of hand, that this could be used for little more than recording a village's tithes or population numbers. Over the last few years, it seems there has been a slow but steady re-evaluation of evidence and centuries old assumptions that they were little more than floppy abacuses. It turns out that the incas are quite possible the only civilization we know of, to have invented 'writing' without ever putting pen to paper, so to speak (or in this case, quite literally). If you are interested in linguistics and/or the evolution of language and writing, I highly recommend some further reading on the subject, I doubt you will be disappointed, if you are really interested in the subject, there are an increasing number of, in the context of linguistics and similar fields, cutting edge academic papers being written on the subject. Not surprisingly, if it does turn out that this is the anthropological breakthrough I really hope it is, it is probably the most exciting thing to happen to this branch of academia since the discovery of the Rosetta Stone. Anyway, whoops... I probably should have gone to sleep instead of writing this, and I could go on, but I'm a bit scared I already might break the internet when I submit this monstrosity. With that sentiment, and as this seems like the most appropriate place I could find to post this sort of stuff on a whim, I'll leave with you a couple of wiki links, relating to the topic of this thread, that I still go to when I am twiddling my thumbs and idly musing about this sort of esoterica. I've read up on the basics of most of this multiple times by now, but these are some of my favourite wikipedia pages to head to when feeling otherwise idle, due to the high chance of finding myself going down the rabbit hole to something seemingly completely unrelated but, at least to me, fascinating and novel to be learning about, whether is at least regionally related the above, such as the Mayan vigesimal numeral system, that Vicuñas have some of the finest wool fibres in the animal kingdom, or something far, far, more esoteric and entirely off-topic. If you are still reading, how and why? But also, well done, as I don't know how or why I am still typing. I literally registered on the forums an hour or so ago, and certainly wasn't expecting to be delving into this topic at any point, so thanks for humouring me, and to the forum in general for providing an unexpectedly interesting topic for discussion; not to mention letting me spontaneously vent some of my enthusiasm for one of many niche topics, even if I am far from an expert on the subject, and quite possibly require some fact checking. I'm going to scroll back through this thread now and give it a thorough perusal, but first, for those with any stamina left of reading, here is my personal, and on-topic, holy grail of wiki pages to lead you to unexpected trivia at the drop of a hat: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cradle_of_civilization Just and edit to add: Admittedly, that was a long post that didn't actually mention a specific "ancient" civilization by name, though as an excuse for this I will point out, that just like many civilizations, and particularly in the case of the Incas, they were built on the foundation of a multitude of civilizations that rose, fell or morphed one to the next over millennia; almost continously or at least arguably, with relatively unabridged successions, depending on your definition of "civilization". Partly for this reason, the various Andean civilizations, "proto"-civilizations, kingdoms and "cultures" are, in my opinion, well worth taking note of in the context of "ancient civilizations". Things like the first ritual burials in prehistoric egypt, or some of the earliest pottery in japan appear to have been a cornerstone of what eventually became something that would eventually inspire other cultures for centuries after their rise and (pretty much inevitable) fall. In the context of the Andes, whilst not the very oldest in the world, there is evidence of some of these key developments tracing back to (possibly) as far back as 10000 years ago, which is pretty mind boggling in the context of the Central and South America, as over that time span you are getting close to overlapping with the tail end of the theorised prehistoric mass migrations (relatively speaking) of humans from Asia to South America. In this case there is compelling evidence for the domestication of squash as an agricultural crop, along with ritualised burial, both of which seem to be a common theme for the "seeds" of what would later become widely referenced as a "cradle of civilization" regardless of whether on not that term is considered academically rigorous or not.

"Heightmap" is a very broad term, and I don't know how it works the topography of the surface of planets on such an elaborate scale as it does, so it is not beyond the realm of possibility that it is the same image, though that would raise some questions about fidelity with vanilla when using something like this if so. It would certainly raise my eyebrows if this was the case though. Regardless, going by the first two images, this is quite an astounding leap forward in rendering the surface of bodies in KSP. I would also love to see some more examples though, one point of reference is hardly much to go on. Unfortunately, the KSP modding community seems far more lax about posting (or maybe just maintaining) images of their work than a lot of other modding communities. Though admittedly, this is often because their work usually speaks for itself once you decide to give it a go regardless. I've just been trying to setting a relatively error free newly modded playthrough of KSP with Other Worlds installed, which I get the impression is one of the more prominent mods that it is using this new mod/feature, so I'll be sure to report back if ther is anything to report. Though I've been away from the game for years, so don't really have a point of reference. I'll try and remember to take some screenshots at least... when I get to the new content without killing too many Kerbals. If @Pkmniako is around, I'd certainly be interested in either getting some more pics to look at, or some directions to some further reading on this cubic filtering method, as, after doing some searching, I have not been able to find any reliable sources or references for it beyond this specific use in KSP. It certainly looks very promising, and I was thinking about doing some tweaking to a planet pack ( even if just for personal use to start with), that, unwarrantedly, appears to have been left by the wayside for a while; especially considering recent updates and releases, incorporating promising new techniques, like the one being promoted here.