Sigma Dimensions

[Scaprod]

On 11/30/2015 at 5:40 PM, daniel l. said:

ikr, I thought so. Is it possible to make planets glow like stars though? could i make a gas giant that emits light?

OO OO I HAVE A GAS GIANT that has a star orbiting it. wow.

[Sigma88]

6 hours ago, Sigma88 said:

Here's the updated update:

 

For all of you impatients that can't wait for a proper release to be out, you can try to download and install this

USE AT YOUR OWN RISK

any feedback provided on SD issues is much apreciated and (if done properly) will reduce the time required to make a proper release

 

[Eklykti]

OK, the good news are that the newDimensions branch appears to be basically working at 1.2.

5 hours ago, Sigma88 said:

But if you send me a screenshot of the issue and the coordinates to land there I will take a look

There's 2 screenshots with Waypoint manager showing coordinates

[Sigma88]

2 minutes ago, Eklykti said:

OK, the good news are that the newDimensions branch appears to be basically working at 1.2.

There's 2 screenshots with Waypoint manager showing coordinates

ah yes, that's what I feared, no way for me to fix it now, and I am not even sure I can fix it in the future

it's an intrinsic issue with the idea of resizing planets, no matter the tools some issues cannot be solved

(the only way would be to resize buildings with the planet, but at that point it wouldn't make much sense)

[Norcalplanner]

11 hours ago, Sigma88 said:

ah yes, that's what I feared, no way for me to fix it now, and I am not even sure I can fix it in the future

it's an intrinsic issue with the idea of resizing planets, no matter the tools some issues cannot be solved

(the only way would be to resize buildings with the planet, but at that point it wouldn't make much sense)

Or, one can just chalk this up to being one of the charming quirks of Sigma Dimensions.  When it comes to anomalies, I go where I'm supposed to go, but if the system doesn't show the contract as fulfilled, then I have no compunction about going into the Alt-F12 menu and marking the contract as completed.

And thanks so much for updating this, even if it's not 100% polished!  Love this mod!

Edited October 22, 2016 by Norcalplanner

[Eklykti]

Another thing I just noticed is that atmosphere appears to no longer be correctly rescaled, at least for Kerbin. The tracking station still displays rescaled value of about 93 kilometers, 'Escape the atmosphere' contract also uses rescaled value, but in fact atmosphere disappears at 70, KER and [x] Science display 'In space low' situation, and experiments run as 'In space low' instead of 'Flying high'

That was working on 1.1.3, but not on 1.2.

Edited October 22, 2016 by Eklykti

[Sigma88]

2 minutes ago, Eklykti said:

Another thing I just noticed is that atmosphere appears to no longer be correctly rescaled, at least for Kerbin. The tracking station still displays rescaled value of about 93 kilometers, but in fact atmosphere disappears at 70, KER and [x] Science display 'In space low' situation, and experiments run as 'In space low' instead of 'Flying high'

That was working on 1.1.3, but not on 1.2.

Thanks

I'll take a look when I have some time

[Yargnit]

Yeah, atmosphere scaling doesn't work (and funny enough scales time-warp altitudes instead?) but otherwise everything else appear to work, with the previous noted issues of slight height mis-matches occasionally. (The ocean seems to render about 3/4 of a meter higher than you actually float on my 3.2 scale)

Overall it's totally playable though now that Kopernicus is updated to 1.2  

[Sigma88]

1 hour ago, Yargnit said:

Yeah, atmosphere scaling doesn't work (and funny enough scales time-warp altitudes instead?) but otherwise everything else appear to work, with the previous noted issues of slight height mis-matches occasionally. (The ocean seems to render about 3/4 of a meter higher than you actually float on my 3.2 scale)

Overall it's totally playable though now that Kopernicus is updated to 1.2  

yes, one of the effects of atmosphere scaling includes changing time-warp altitudes since they are linked to the atmosphere height as well

I didn't have time to look into the atmosphere rescaling bug yet, are you sure it's a proper issue with the atmosphere?

could it be that the numbers in the tracking station are just wrong?

[Yargnit]

I'm sure, I can use regular time warp at just above 70km no matter how I set it. (also changing the 70,000 in the kerbin_atmo config doesn't do anything except change the listed value in the planet info panel, the actual height doesn't change)

Like I said not a huge issue for me as I'm not sure how much I'd tweak it anyways (was thinking about just bumping it to like 90 something km), but just for your info.

[Sigma88]

2 hours ago, Yargnit said:

I'm sure, I can use regular time warp at just above 70km no matter how I set it. (also changing the 70,000 in the kerbin_atmo config doesn't do anything except change the listed value in the planet info panel, the actual height doesn't change)

Like I said not a huge issue for me as I'm not sure how much I'd tweak it anyways (was thinking about just bumping it to like 90 something km), but just for your info.

ok thanks, I'll look into it

[[The]KLARKEN]

 

It's been updated!!  This will be my first Career on KSP with a larger planet, so thank you for your hard work!  I joined the forums just to say thanks for your efforts!

Edited October 24, 2016 by [The]KLARKEN
Now with Advanced Gratitude!

[Sandworm]

Having some trouble getting sigma dimensions to load with anything other than defaults.  With no resizing it seems to work, but lots of null reference exceptions followed by hanging on load on anything other then 1.

 

[EXC 11:52:16.605] ArgumentNullException: Argument cannot be null.
Parameter name: source
    System.Linq.Check.SourceAndPredicate (System.Object source, System.Object predicate)
    System.Linq.Enumerable.All[KopernicusStar] (IEnumerable`1 source, System.Func`2 predicate)
    Kopernicus.Components.KopernicusStar.GetNearest (.CelestialBody body)
    Kopernicus.RuntimeUtility.LateUpdate ()

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/hv4y6bk97q9bzra/KSP.log

Update: 'Rescale' seems to work.  The distances between bodies scales.  It is the 'Resize' setting causing me problems.

Update 2: 'Atmosphere' and 'dayLengthMultiplier' also seem to work.

Edited October 26, 2016 by Sandworm

[Sigma88]

1 hour ago, Sandworm said:

Having some trouble getting sigma dimensions to load with anything other than defaults.  With no resizing it seems to work, but lots of null reference exceptions followed by hanging on load on anything other then 1.

 

[EXC 11:52:16.605] ArgumentNullException: Argument cannot be null.
Parameter name: source
    System.Linq.Check.SourceAndPredicate (System.Object source, System.Object predicate)
    System.Linq.Enumerable.All[KopernicusStar] (IEnumerable`1 source, System.Func`2 predicate)
    Kopernicus.Components.KopernicusStar.GetNearest (.CelestialBody body)
    Kopernicus.RuntimeUtility.LateUpdate ()

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/hv4y6bk97q9bzra/KSP.log

Update: 'Rescale' seems to work.  The distances between bodies scales.  It is the 'Resize' setting causing me problems.

Update 2: 'Atmosphere' and 'dayLengthMultiplier' also seem to work.

thanks for the report,

currently I'm busy with SigmaBinary, but dimensions is next on the list

[Sandworm]

42 minutes ago, Sigma88 said:

thanks for the report,

currently I'm busy with SigmaBinary, but dimensions is next on the list

Now I'm not sure that the problem is with SigmaDimensions.  I decided to try making my own system using kopernicus and am seeing similar problems.  So it may be in kopernicus.

[Vegetal]

Just to give my 2 cents (of help)

On the first try, resize worked ok (6.4x), but rescale didn't, so everything was huge and quite close. Reinstalled Sigma, this time I changed every setting one by one, started the game everytime. Mostly seems fine now, except for atmo rescale, which doesn't work in any way, it's still at 70k.

Don't have logs, but I hope this helps a little.

[Streetwind]

I noticed a peculiar interaction with EVE: the cloud altitude obeys the resize parameter. If you do a five-fold planet size multiplier, you get clouds at 30 km altitude instead of 6 km. I recall that, in the past, cloud altitude was unaffected by planet resizing. At best, it would make sense for them to respond to the (currently defunct) atmosphere rescaling instead.

I cannot even begin to suspect what particular interaction in the trifecta of Kopernicus, EVE and Sigma Dimensions causes this, so I'm just going to mention it here.

[Sigma88]

23 minutes ago, Streetwind said:

I noticed a peculiar interaction with EVE: the cloud altitude obeys the resize parameter. If you do a five-fold planet size multiplier, you get clouds at 30 km altitude instead of 6 km. I recall that, in the past, cloud altitude was unaffected by planet resizing. At best, it would make sense for them to respond to the (currently defunct) atmosphere rescaling instead.

I cannot even begin to suspect what particular interaction in the trifecta of Kopernicus, EVE and Sigma Dimensions causes this, so I'm just going to mention it here.

that's actually on purpose. (just for the non volumetric clouds)

it's because cloud altitude in EVE was never intended as a real indication about the actual altiude of the clouds, it's more a tool to define the order and to avoid z-stacking (or at least it was back when I made the cfg, no idea about now)

it makes sense to make the clouds follow the planet size because you need them at a certain relative distance from the center of the planet.

[[The]KLARKEN]

32 minutes ago, Streetwind said:

I noticed a peculiar interaction with EVE: the cloud altitude obeys the resize parameter. If you do a five-fold planet size multiplier, you get clouds at 30 km altitude instead of 6 km. I recall that, in the past, cloud altitude was unaffected by planet resizing. At best, it would make sense for them to respond to the (currently defunct) atmosphere rescaling instead.

I cannot even begin to suspect what particular interaction in the trifecta of Kopernicus, EVE and Sigma Dimensions causes this, so I'm just going to mention it here.

Hey, Streetwind! I like your profile pic, by the way, it's quite unique. I, too, encountered this strange thing, also on Laythe and Jool. It's the resizeClouds config file in Sigma Dimensions that causes this (it's actually supposed to do that, for reasons). Rather than finick with it, I commented out each line of that file, which you can have, here (disabling the file will prevent you from having to resize your clouds manually each time you boot up KSP):

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B2RU6X5cw9o2cDlaZmM3Sm1xeGM

After that, just boot up KSP and patiently resize your EVE clouds on each planet (which you can do by pressing Alt+0 to bring up the config menu and finding the "CloudsManager," then going to Eve, Jool, Kerbin, Laythe, so on and so on) in the tracking station). They'll go from this:



(Yes, my Eve clouds are pink, I like them like that.) Back to this!!:



Hope that helps!!!

Edited October 27, 2016 by [The]KLARKEN
for reasons; misspelled Eve; needed clarification; misspelled Eve AGAIN

[Sigma88]

3 minutes ago, [The]KLARKEN said:

Hey, Streetwind! I like your profile pic, by the way, it's quite unique. I, too, encountered this strange thing, also on Laythe and Jool. It's the resizeClouds config file in Sigma Dimensions that causes this (it's actually supposed to do that, for reasons). Rather than finick with it, I commented out each line of that file, which you can have, here:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B2RU6X5cw9o2cDlaZmM3Sm1xeGM

After that, just boot up KSP and patiently resize your EVE clouds (which you can do by pressing Alt+0 to bring up the config menu and finding the "CloudsManager," then going to Eve in the tracking station). They'll go from this:

(Yes, my EVE clouds are pink, I like them like that.) Back to this!!:

Hope that helps!!!

no need to do that, there's an option to customize EVE cloud rescaling

just add a parameter called "customResize" inside each EVE_CLOUDS/OBJECT node.

this parameter will be used instead of the Resize paramter to change the altitude of the clouds

[[The]KLARKEN]

Just now, Sigma88 said:

no need to do that, there's an option to customize EVE cloud rescaling

just add a parameter called "customResize" inside each EVE_CLOUDS/OBJECT node.

this parameter will be used instead of the Resize paramter to change the altitude of the clouds

Oh... haha! Man, that makes this a lot easier.  Thanks!

[Sandworm]

I'm still struggling with null reference exceptions.  Can those of you who have gotten SigmaDimensions working please share which versions and which OS you are using?  I've tried every branch of SigmaDimensions and Kopernicus I can get my hands upon and all create the same issues.  I suspect it has to do with a capitalization error, a question which could be put to rest if someone else has managed to get it running on mac/linux.

Edited October 28, 2016 by Sandworm

[komodo]

2 hours ago, Sandworm said:

I'm still struggling with null reference exceptions.  Can those of you who have gotten SigmaDimensions working please share which versions and which OS you are using?  I've tried every branch of SigmaDimensions and Kopernicus I can get my hands upon and all create the same issues.  I suspect it has to do with a capitalization error, a question which could be put to rest if someone else has managed to get it running on mac/linux.

I don't have it on linux at the moment, but it does run on osx 10.10.5 for me. Although I don't think I have case sensitive HFS+ on this machine. NewDemensions branch of SigDim, latest release of Kopernicus. (Was it today, a new one came out?) (Also the newest release of MFI as well.)

 

I looked over the log you posted in the kopernicus thread, and only one thing jumped out at me: 

[LOG 11:51:01.567] [ModuleManager] Applying node Sigma/Dimensions/Configs/ReDimension/resizePQSMods/@Kopernicus:FOR[SigDim2] to Kopernicus/Config/System/Kerbol System
[LOG 11:51:01.599] [ModuleManager] Applying node Sigma/Dimensions/Configs/ReDimension/setAsteroids/@Kopernicus:FOR[SigDim2] to Kopernicus/Config/System/Kerbol System
[LOG 11:51:01.602] [ModuleManager] Applying node Sigma/Dimensions/Configs/ReDimension/setDimensions/@Kopernicus:FOR[SigDim2] to Kopernicus/Config/System/Kerbol System
[LOG 11:51:01.618] [ModuleManager] Applying node Sigma/Dimensions/Configs/ReDimension/setPQSlevels/@Kopernicus:FOR[SigDim2] to Kopernicus/Config/System/Kerbol System

I don't have that path in my kopernicus folder. Under Config, is only System.cfg. If that is a path that exists on your machine, it almost certainly is freaking out about a path with an unescaped space in it. (Needs to be one word, ideally, as i'm not sure how to escape it in ksp/MM)

No, never mind, that apparently is normal. I have it in my own log, so it must be a MM path, not a file system one. Although, check that you have a System.cfg file in your kopernicus? That could be a simple thing to overlook.

Edited October 28, 2016 by komodo

[Eklykti]

17 minutes ago, komodo said:

I don't have it on linux at the moment, but it does run on osx 10.10.5 for me. Although I don't think I have case sensitive HFS+ on this machine.

Linux file systems are all case sensitive, and there are no exceptions related to Kopernicus and no visible issues except the atmosphere height. So it must be something else.

[Streetwind]

9 hours ago, Sigma88 said:

that's actually on purpose. (just for the non volumetric clouds)

it's because cloud altitude in EVE was never intended as a real indication about the actual altiude of the clouds, it's more a tool to define the order and to avoid z-stacking (or at least it was back when I made the cfg, no idea about now)

it makes sense to make the clouds follow the planet size because you need them at a certain relative distance from the center of the planet.

Ah, I see. Still, it's a bit silly to see clouds closer to space than to the surface with larger resize factors   I'm going to play around with the customResize option you mentioned.

 

9 hours ago, [The]KLARKEN said:

Hey, Streetwind! I like your profile pic, by the way, it's quite unique.

Thanks, I stole it off of the internet myself!