[1.2] Galileo's Planet Pack (development thread) [v0.9]

[eddiew]

Dat 30 degree runway rotation doh... that's going to punish me every day 

[Galileo]

4 minutes ago, eddiew said:

Dat 30 degree runway rotation doh... that's going to punish me every day 

Makes things interesting doesn't it ? 

[eddiew]

1 minute ago, Galileo said:

Makes things interesting doesn't it ? 

One way of putting it...  As a massive spaceplane user... you might have to forgive me if I change the config and reorient it  

[JadeOfMaar]

2 hours ago, OhioBob said:

Doing what you describe should have worked, but clearly there is an error in there somewhere.  Your dossier shows Tellumo's mass as 1.435, but it should be over 5.  I didn't check all the bodies, but the ones that I did were all wrong as well.  You better check your formula, or perhaps something got corrupted in my spreadsheet.

By the way, if you measure it in Gael masses rather than Kerbin masses, the formula I gave you earlier becomes,

m = g * r² / 360000

The denominator is simply g*r² for the body in whose masses you are measuring the other bodies.  As you know, in KSP 1.2.1 they changed Kerbin's mass a little so it is no longer exactly 1 g.  So we have,

for Gael, 1 * 600² = 360000

for Kerbin, 1.00034160493135 * 600² = 360123

 

I'll leave the decision about including science multiplier and altitude thresholds to you and Galileo.  I think that is information that some people might find useful, but I also like the actions shots.

Do you know where to find that data in the .cfg files?
 

With such a tiny difference between Gael and Kerbin masses I'm tempted to switch to Gael masses and cling to all those zer0s on the end there. Yes, I know where in the cfg's the science and altitude thresholds are......Yes I also like the action shots. That alone makes this decision so hard. Speaking of... Now I'm secretly hoping eddie posts some screenshots so I can swipe them up and add them to dossiers like I do with Galileo.

 

50 minutes ago, eddiew said:

One way of putting it...  As a massive spaceplane user... you might have to forgive me if I change the config and reorient it  

Well you're such a frequent flier (I've gotten a good few glances at the kind of pace you move with. ) we can forgive you... But this code shall stay your secret aloooone.

On 10/27/2016 at 5:16 PM, Galileo said:

Muahahahahahaha

: D

Edited November 6, 2016 by JadeOfMaar

[Galileo]

1 hour ago, JadeOfMaar said:

: D

And I hid a moon in Tellumo . . . .  I really am the greatest villain in ksp

Edited November 6, 2016 by Galileo

[JadeOfMaar]

Lol. Your villainy extends to far more than just that. You've officially made a "tease" planet (Tellumo itself).

Oh... I've described Gratian as a "Dry Laythe."

Spoiler

And I saw Thalia's face in Hox. Now THAT is evil. o__o

 

[eddiew]

41 minutes ago, Galileo said:

And I had a moon in Tellumo . . . .  I really am the greatest villain in ksp

Should we taunt the moon of Tellumo?

[Galileo]

1 minute ago, eddiew said:

Should we taunt the moon of Tellumo?

Not if you value the life of your vessles 

[eddiew]

2 hours ago, Galileo said:

Not if you value the life of your vessles 

Probes are built to be expendable  

That moon's mother smelled of elderberries!

Said the probe.

Edited November 6, 2016 by eddiew

[JadeOfMaar]

On 7/25/2016 at 10:38 AM, Sigma88 said:

the requirements to get included in GN are:

1- the mod needs to be relatively finished (I don't want to go back and fix compatibility every time you add something)

2- the mod needs to work properly (I don't want to get bug reports because your mod doesn't work)

3- the mod needs to be relatively easy to add to GN, and it needs to fit in a sphere with a 2e12 meters radius (I usually exclude galaxy mods for this reason)

@Benji13 About your concern with Galactic Neighbourhood I don't think GPP is mature enough to qualify to join. We're still on high alert here for problems that will hamper the experience with GPP by itself.

I also had the thought... is there possibly some major, discrete technique that Galileo uses for SVE, SVT in GPP that may conflict with like features in other planet mods like what caused eddie's KSC abyss problem with Rald?

Edited November 6, 2016 by JadeOfMaar

[Galileo]

27 minutes ago, JadeOfMaar said:

@Benji13 About your concern with Galactic Neighbourhood I don't think GPP is mature enough to qualify to join. We're still on high alert here for problems that will hamper the experience with GPP by itself.

I also had the thought... is there possibly some major, discrete technique that Galileo uses for SVE, SVT in GPP that may conflict with like features in other planet mods like what caused eddie's KSC abyss problem with Rald?

I'll have a look at the rald issue later this week.  I have to update SSRSS first and foremost then I'll start work on this mod again. 

Edited November 6, 2016 by Galileo

[eddiew]

24 minutes ago, Galileo said:

I'll have a look at the rald issue later this week.  I have to update SSRSS first and foremost then I'll start work on this mod again. 

Will be most interested if you have a solution   Best I've got is to massively reduce the config distance at which Rald gets scatterered. Although I'm not sure this works properly, since my last descent to ground was in total darkness until 200m above the surface. The blackout is very real and very confusing. Maybe I need to alter the configs for both such that only one can ever be scatterered at a time?

But Rald can sit in keostationary orbit in stock without an issue, so there's definitely something different between the two homeworlds.

[Sigma88]

@Benji13 @JadeOfMaar @Galileo 

just fyi

 

I do like what I've seen on the OP of GPP so I am interested in adding it to the GN if Galileo is ok with it.

what I usually do is, I let the developer of the planet pack decide which type of star and which name the star will have.

(unless the name chosen won't fit GN)

Galileo, if you already have ideas feel free to tell me. I would apreciate if you were to choose a star which is underrepresented in GN

here are what currently there is :

 

as you can see orange/red stars are the vast minority (4), with yellow being the big favourite (11) and blue coming second (8)

also, we have a lot of main sequence stars, but few giants/subdwarfs/whitedwarfs

to choose your star type you can go here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_classification

when you have decided which type of star, you can also look for a real life analogue and send me its wiki page (like the ones linked in the GN OP)

 

other than that, I'd say that to be compatible with GN the mod needs to be playable even without other mods (like EVE, scatterer, stuff like that) since it could cause issues that are difficult to solve.

you don't need to remove features from GPP, just make sure that the system can load even if those third party mods are not installed

(or let me know if they can't)

 

cheers

[Galileo]

8 minutes ago, Sigma88 said:

@Benji13 @JadeOfMaar @Galileo 

just fyi

 

I do like what I've seen on the OP of GPP so I am interested in adding it to the GN if Galileo is ok with it.

what I usually do is, I let the developer of the planet pack decide which type of star and which name the star will have.

(unless the name chosen won't fit GN)

Galileo, if you already have ideas feel free to tell me. I would apreciate if you were to choose a star which is underrepresented in GN

here are what currently there is :

 

as you can see orange/red stars are the vast minority (4), with yellow being the big favourite (11) and blue coming second (8)

also, we have a lot of main sequence stars, but few giants/subdwarfs/whitedwarfs

to choose your star type you can go here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_classification

when you have decided which type of star, you can also look for a real life analogue and send me its wiki page (like the ones linked in the GN OP)

 

other than that, I'd say that to be compatible with GN the mod needs to be playable even without other mods (like EVE, scatterer, stuff like that) since it could cause issues that are difficult to solve.

you don't need to remove features from GPP, just make sure that the system can load even if those third party mods are not installed

(or let me know if they can't)

 

cheers

I will take a look at this later for sure. The only "feature" I don't want to remove is the ground textures.  Other than that the game looks great without scatterer or EVE so that's doable. 

[Sigma88]

2 minutes ago, Galileo said:

I will take a look at this later for sure. The only "feature" I don't want to remove is the ground textures.  Other than that the game looks great without scatterer or EVE so that's doable. 

yeah ground textures are part of KSP so that's totally fine

[JadeOfMaar]

@Sigma88 Ciro is the local star's name and its class is G0.

But hey it might change. That kind of thing is OhioBob's territory mainly. now I wish I had my planets. I'd put them around a K class star.

Edited November 7, 2016 by JadeOfMaar

[Sigma88]

6 minutes ago, JadeOfMaar said:

@Sigma88 Ciro is the local star's name and its class is G0.

But hey it might change. That kind of thing is OhioBob's territory mainly. now I wish I had my planets. I'd put them around a K class star.

well, unless it's strictly necessary for the mod to have a G0 star I think it would make sense to change it to something different.

I will take care of the changes once I am being told which type of star to make, you guys don't need to worry about that in GPP

if having a G0 star is strictly necessary for the mod, then I'll add it like that. but the number of main sequence yellow dwarfs is getting ridiculus

[OhioBob]

4 minutes ago, JadeOfMaar said:

@Sigma88 Ciro is the local star's name and its class is G0.

I estimated it closer to about a G6.

@Sigma88, I'm the one who sized GPP's sun.  I actually went out of my way to make certain that it's properties were in line with the normal mass-luminosity-radius relationships for main sequence stars.  The following post describes Ciro's properties in quite a bit of detail.

 

[OhioBob]

3 minutes ago, Sigma88 said:

well, unless it's strictly necessary for the mod to have a G0 star I think it would make sense to change it to something different.

We decided early on to make GPP's home planet a near identical twin to Kerbin.  We also had to give is an orbital period of 426 days to match the built-in calendar.  Given those restraints, the sun ended up having to be G-type star.  Changing the star type would have moved the habitable zone either closer to or farther away.  That would have messed with the orbital period so we would be out of sync with the calendar.  We didn't want that.

From all that I can tell, the calendar is hardwired to 426 days.  Do you know how to change that?  I wished it were linked to the orbital period of the home world, but from my experiments I found that that isn't the case.  If we could change the number of days in the calendar year, that would open up more possibilities to move home worlds around and use different class stars.

[Sigma88]

8 minutes ago, OhioBob said:

We decided early on to make GPP's home planet a near identical twin to Kerbin.  We also had to give is an orbital period of 426 days to match the built-in calendar.  Given those restraints, the sun ended up having to be G-type star.  Changing the star type would have moved the habitable zone either closer to or farther away.  That would have messed with the orbital period so we would be out of sync with the calendar.  We didn't want that.

From all that I can tell, the calendar is hardwired to 426 days.  Do you know how to change that?  I wished it were linked to the orbital period of the home world, but from my experiments I found that that isn't the case.  If we could change the number of days in the calendar year, that would open up more possibilities to move home worlds around and use different class stars.

it's not possible via cfg, it's probably doable with plugins but I've never looked into it.

in any case the home planet would be stock kerbin in GN, and all other planet packs are loaded around the neighborhood.

the whole system itself (GN system) has very little realism, so I don't think that you should worry too much about that side of things when considering how the system looks when loaded into GN.

Also, career is probably broken as well. it's intended to be a sandbox playground to do very endgamey stuff (such as going interstellar)

anyways, if you feel that that changing the type is unacceptable I'm fine with adding yet another yellow star

mine was just a suggestion to make the final galaxy more varied

Edited November 7, 2016 by Sigma88

[JadeOfMaar]

@Sigma88 I understand completely. The universe needs variety! Like flavors in snacks.
It's rather hard to find an existing analogue to Ciro, at least on short notice. I ended up at α Mensae, a G7 V, but that's no match either.

I'm betting Gael's SMA might be irrelevant in the neighborhood. All that would matter is if it's still in the habitable zone if/when Ciro is replaced... especially with a blue giant or red dwarf.

[Sigma88]

1 minute ago, JadeOfMaar said:

@Sigma88 I understand completely. The universe needs variety! Like flavors in snacks.
It's rather hard to find an existing analogue to Ciro, at least on short notice. I ended up at α Mensae, a G7 V, but that's no match either.

I'm betting Gael's SMA might be irrelevant in the neighborhood. All that would matter is if it's still in the habitable zone if/when Ciro is replaced... especially with a blue giant or red dwarf.

oh don't worry about "short notice" I won't work on GN for a while. I'm pretty busy with other stuff

 

also, I'd say your best bet would be a red giant, I don't know the math but I think you can find a transition period when ciro starts to go giant in which gael is still at the limits of the habitable zone (if that's really important for you)

unless you decide to go blue giant in which case it'll be clear it doesn't make any real life sense, and it's just supposed to be a fun system to explore.

Edited November 7, 2016 by Sigma88

[Galileo]

9 minutes ago, Sigma88 said:

oh don't worry about "short notice" I won't work on GN for a while. I'm pretty busy with other stuff

Just make Ciro whatever you want.  Like you said,  it not so much for a career game and more for fun,  so really the the sun type is irrelevant.  As long as GPP can load into GN and be playable,  I think that's all that really matters.  If people are really concerned with realism, they can always just play this as a stand alone

Edited November 7, 2016 by Galileo

[OhioBob]

31 minutes ago, JadeOfMaar said:

But hey it might change. That kind of thing is OhioBob's territory mainly. now I wish I had my planets. I'd put them around a K class star.

It is vital that all the planets maintain their current temperatures.  There is just way too much riding on that to change it at this point.  For example, all the atmospheric models are dependent on temperature.  Also the existence and location of lakes on Niven and Augustus are determined based on temperature.

We can change the star type, but I'd want to change the planets' semimajor axes to maintain the solar irradiance at current values.  That should be pretty easy to do.  Once we decide on a star type, I can compute the star's properties and then move the planets closer or farther away as applicable (closer if we go with K-type).  That will change all the planets' orbital periods, but their temperatures, atmospheres, and habitability would remain the same.

[Galileo]

1 minute ago, OhioBob said:

It is vital that all the planets maintain their current temperatures.  There is just way too much riding on that to change it at this point.  For example, all the atmospheric models are dependent on temperature.  Also the existence and location of lakes on Niven and Augustus are determined based on temperature.

We can change the star type, but I'd want to change the planets' semimajor axes to maintain the solar irradiance at current values.  That should be pretty easy to do.  Once we decide on a star type, I can compute the star's properties and then move the planets closer or farther away as applicable (closer if we go with K-type).  That will change all the planets' orbital periods, but their temperatures, atmospheres, and habitability would remain the same.

Let's not do that lol let's have GN have Ciro be its own thing and GPP stay the way we have it.  No need to create extra work for yourself.