Dr. Walther

Is somebody using this mod with the current version of RSS? It works fine with the Moon, but when I zoom at planets they just dissappear. Unfortunately this is something that makes the Pictozoom 2000 somewhat useless. Perhaps someone has an idea what to change, also with regards to distant object enhancement. Anyway, fantastic mod.

@Angorek, people need to create a Dropbox account to download that file. Can you upload it somewhere else?

I watched the video and it's something that I will consider, once I ever go that far out. What I like is that it adds new things like the unexpected orbits of Neptunian moons. What about Ceres, Vesta etc? I personally find the asteroid belt at least as important as a whole bunch of moons on Neptune. Also because there is still new research going on in our lifetimes, Uranus/Neptune is what we got from Voyager and that's that.

At this moment in time, is there a way to get Earth clouds at least? RSS 10.1 is really beautiful and stable, it just feels a little incomplete without clouds. Reading this thread is confusing me, it sounds like some people have already done it, while others deny that it works (?)

Is it normal that there is no terrain scattering on the Moon?

Otto, you don't need it, only if you have Windows XP. 3GB switch for Windows XP. (I can't upgrade this computer for some special reason) What matters is that the game needs more than 2GB once I enter Moon's SoI. I use the 8K version of the Moon, all other planets are 2K.

I noticed that I had crashes when entering the Moon's SoI, which only went away when I enabled /3GB. It's still crashing sometimes, but less than other mods.

I'd wait until after the New Horizons flyby. My feeling is that the Pluto system won't the the same as it is now. There should be more smaller moons and interesting new features on Pluto and Charon. Although we could all be dissappointed. If we are honest, Pluto may just look like another cratered moon, and it isn't large, smaller than Europa in fact.

OK. Of course, I should have known, gravity is not simply linear to mass. I realized that, just looked at your XYHeight.dds, you already use the best available data, of course you do .. Sorry for being so much behind things x) I'm still catching up .. At least I understand what Blacks is trying to do, he wants the terrain more lively. But I think it can only be done with how KSP renders terrain (i.e optimized for smaller planets), with the same map resolution we have the problem that noise/resolution is not available when we get really close, resulting in large flat areas. Stock KSP looks of course better at least altitude. Probably have to live with the fact that that's the way it is with 8K maps. - - - Updated - - - Exciting times, isnt it? We get to see Pluto this summer I wouldnt be surprised if New Horizons doesn't also discover a bunch of small moons. But since data transmission is supposed to take over a year (high resolution), we will at best have a lowres version for quite some time. The question to Nathan would be if the moons of Pluto will be done too (Charon at least), that would make for a super interesting mini system! If the Pluto/Charon barycentre cannot be modelled, it would not be the end of the world.

@Blacks. I think I get it now. If you increase the values in EarthHeight.dds you are making everything higher. If you multiply values by 2, you are making Mount Everest 17.6 km high, and so on.

To be honest I don't understand what you're doing, but I probably will some time from now .. I just thought .. Can't you simply use a heightmap EARTH http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view.php?id=73934 MOON http://astrogeology.usgs.gov/search/details/Moon/LRO/LOLA/Lunar_LRO_LOLA_Global_LDEM_118m_Mar2014/cub at least for Earth and Moon they are available, in every resolution you want

http://imgur.com/a/mnFyM Blacks: Nice, that's what I was talking about! Have you released something yet, or are you just teasing us?

I think that no one asks you to do such "secondary" work, since you are much more needed for making the important foundation. However, would it still possible that you provide the necessary hints, how to scale the thing back?? I am saying that because without this knowledge a proper scale could drive people crazy. I.e. they will be making too many mistakes, and probably give up when the next version number arrive (like the people who tried it before). Now if we had a few simple formulas, basically the form of: c2 = 1/c1 with c1 the coefficient you have use in scaling the universe up (i.e. RSS=KSP*c1) and c2 the ones that we need to invert the scale back to KSP .. then my hope would be that the whole process could be automated. We only need to replace variables according to a certain known formula. (For the sake of feasibility I refuse to go through dozens of files and do the math at a hundred individual places, if the factors must be figured our or guessed.) A program generated scaling would have the advantage of being error free. But if it's done the "little-old-lady" method of doing all by hand, and figure it our by try and error, in my experience it would never be bug free If it's not clear what I mean, I am talking about something elegant like your MiniRO.cfg, just this time it's "MiniRSS_1_10th.cfg" P.S. I am currently using MiniRO.cfg and I like it. Getting payload into orbit has become a new challenge, but not unfair as doing it with the stock parts! - - - Updated - - - And something else. If there are more Windows XP users here, and who also happen to have problems with crashes (for example, yesterday my game CTD'd everytime entering Moon's SOI with the "too man heap sections" error) I could fix that by the good old 3GB fix to boot.ini multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP Professional" /fastdetect /NoExecute=OptIn /3GB /USERVA=3000 I don't know if it's necessary, but some people also recommended to disable thermal gauges by hitting F10, and disable PPX in graphics settings. The reason is that those two features ALLEGEDLY cause a memory leak (KSP 1.0.2) Now everything runs smooth again, and I may even be able to use more 8K textures and stuff!

Oh and one more thing. Can I simply use the deltaV map of the real thing? I am not sure, figures seem to match reality of course, but I would like a confirmation. So far, it seems to be all right though. I got on an orbit with the right inclination, and Trans Lunar Injection was something like 3400 m/s, which is more or less correct.

This was not the question. The question was if someone is creating the 1/10 rescale (the one on the first page doesn't work anymore). I think there are a lot of people who would want that, who don't want the kind of domino effect where everything else in the game needs to be modded too. Stock scale would also improve the ground detail on planetary landings, which is currently not designed for such huge planets. I am personally trying to learn the game from scratch, and I like it. But there are many things not working right for me now (deltaV and clouds is one thing). At least I would like to have an alternative, if RSS scale does not work for me. I would do it myself, but currently lack the knowledge ..