[KSP 1.12.1+] Galileo's Planet Pack [v1.6.6] [23 Sept 2021]

[CoriW]

7 minutes ago, Dafni said:

It will. And I believe it will be taken care of soon.

So I'd say hold off for a moment.

Same goes for SVE users too, btw.

Okay that's what I suspected, thanks for the quick reply.

[Galileo]

1 hour ago, CoriW said:

Quick question, Scatterer was just updated and it looks amazing.. But will GPP need some config updates for compatibility? Just want to know if I can update my scatterer or if I should hold off for now.

 

41 minutes ago, Dafni said:

It will. And I believe it will be taken care of soon.

So I'd say hold off for a moment.

Same goes for SVE users too, btw.

GPP is updated on my end, and will just need to be pushed as a release. We just need to do a little testing and shaking off the rust (it’s been over 6 mo the since I loaded up GPP).

[Freshmeat]

A maybe troublesome request: I am updating the software on my control panel and spreadsheet, and I would like to include the possibility of flying GPP. This means that I need the parameters of each body to encode. Looking through the GPP/GPP_planets cfg files, I can gather some, but not all. Most importantly, I miss the gravitational parameter and SOI radius of the bodies. I could calculate the gravitational parameter from geeASL, but two digit precision is on the low end. Do they inherit missing parameters from their template body, or can I look them up elsewhere, or get a data dump from the Gods of Creation? I must admit I do not feel inclined to do it experimentally.

[OhioBob]

7 hours ago, Freshmeat said:

A maybe troublesome request: I am updating the software on my control panel and spreadsheet, and I would like to include the possibility of flying GPP. This means that I need the parameters of each body to encode. Looking through the GPP/GPP_planets cfg files, I can gather some, but not all. Most importantly, I miss the gravitational parameter and SOI radius of the bodies. I could calculate the gravitational parameter from geeASL, but two digit precision is on the low end. Do they inherit missing parameters from their template body, or can I look them up elsewhere, or get a data dump from the Gods of Creation? I must admit I do not feel inclined to do it experimentally.

Gravitational parameter and sphere-of-influence are computed from the data in the configs.  If you use the following formula you'll be balls on accurate, because it's the same thing the game is doing.

gravParameter = 9.80665 * geeASL * radius ^ 2

sphereOfInfluence = semiMajorAxis * ( gravParameter_secondary / gravParameter_primary ) ^ 0.4

 

[Freshmeat]

7 hours ago, OhioBob said:

Gravitational parameter and sphere-of-influence are computed from the data in the configs.  If you use the following formula you'll be balls on accurate, because it's the same thing the game is doing.

gravParameter = 9.80665 * geeASL * radius ^ 2

sphereOfInfluence = semiMajorAxis * ( gravParameter_secondary / gravParameter_primary ) ^ 0.4

 

Thanks a lot, this will sort it out shortly. I knew GM, but the SOI calculation is new to me.

/me heads for the spreadsheet.

[Tyko]

On 3/15/2019 at 12:49 PM, Galileo said:

GPP is updated on my end, and will just need to be pushed as a release. We just need to do a little testing and shaking off the rust (it’s been over 6 mo the since I loaded up GPP).

@Galileo If you're tweaking GPP is there any chance you could take a look at a ReScale 2.5x issue? I've only observed it using GPP and it seems most prominent in 2.5x - if it's occuring in 3.2x it's not easily noticeable. It has to do with the transition from a distant view of the body to a closer view and it causes 2 layers of terrain, 1 being a "ghost" over the other.

I thought it was an SD issue originally and worked with @Sigma88 to try to fix. Here's a link to the issue log with details of what we've tried: https://github.com/Sigma88/Sigma-Dimensions/issues/77

I'm happy to do more legwork to troubleshoot. Thanks! 

[Galileo]

8 minutes ago, Tyko said:

snip

I’ll look into it and see what can be done

[Tyko]

6 minutes ago, Galileo said:

I’ll look into it and see what can be done

You're fantastic! please let me know if I can help validate fixes   

Edited March 23, 2019 by Tyko

[Freshmeat]

Now I am just being troublesome, but I compared my calculated orbital periods with the GPP wiki and github/CelestialBodies.pdf and found some discrepancies.

First of all, Nero is listed as having a period 0f 86y328d in the dossier. This is a typo, it should be 86y339d.

A bit more worrisome is Otho. It has its SMA listed as 72718700 km, but the config file reads 71718700000, leading to a shorter orbital period as well (4948d vs 5052d), and an SOI of 1,701,552 km instead of 1,725,278 km. While this probably is a typo in the config, correcting it would be save breaking(?). I do not know whether the original distance had some significance, and going through the file history, it has always been so. I have not checked all other dossiers, as I hope to get at least some surprises during play through. CelestialBodies.pdf seems in correspondence with the config file apart from Otho.

If you are preparing an update, you might want to update this. As the raw dossier images and kspedia files are not on github, I am afraid I cannot do more to help.

 

[OhioBob]

5 hours ago, Freshmeat said:

First of all, Nero is listed as having a period 0f 86y328d in the dossier. This is a typo, it should be 86y339d. 

If the dossier says 86y328d, then, yes, that's incorrect.  But I compute 86y335d.  Not sure why we differ.

5 hours ago, Freshmeat said:

A bit more worrisome is Otho. It has its SMA listed as 72718700 km, but the config file reads 71718700000, leading to a shorter orbital period as well (4948d vs 5052d), and an SOI of 1,701,552 km instead of 1,725,278 km. While this probably is a typo in the config, correcting it would be save breaking(?).

The documentation is based on a spreadsheet that includes all the values as we intended them.  Otho's SMA is suppose to be 72718700000, but we apparently made a typo when the number got transferred to the config.  It's much easier to change the config than it is to change the documentation.  Fixing it could break some saves, but people will get over it.

5 hours ago, Freshmeat said:

I have not checked all other dossiers, as I hope to get at least some surprises during play through. CelestialBodies.pdf seems in correspondence with the config file apart from Otho.

We tried to check the dossiers pretty closely, but many changes were made along the way.  Hopefully not much slipped past our proof readers.  (We got Nero's orbital period is wrong, so there could be other errors as well.)  But if errors are found, they're not likely to get fixed.  Editing those things is a pain in the neck, and anybody who had anything to do with it is likely very unmotivated to do anything about it.

CelestialBodies.pdf is linked directly to the numbers in the master spreadsheet, so it should be correct.  If you find any differences between the .pdf and the .cfg, please bring them to my attention.  It could mean errors in the configs, which are easy to fix.
 

Edited March 23, 2019 by OhioBob

[Friznit]

I appreciate there have been a flurry of updates to graphics mods in the last week or two, but which version of Scatterer should I be using with the current release version of GPP?  I assume it should be v0.0336 - is that correct?  The colours are looking a little odd and sun flares are not flaring. I'm not sure whether it's a GPP or Scatterer thing (or EVE) that I've messed up.

[Brigadier]

1 hour ago, Friznit said:

I appreciate there have been a flurry of updates to graphics mods in the last week or two, but which version of Scatterer should I be using with the current release version of GPP?  I assume it should be v0.0336 - is that correct?  The colours are looking a little odd and sun flares are not flaring. I'm not sure whether it's a GPP or Scatterer thing (or EVE) that I've messed up.

v0.0336 worked very well for me whereas v0.0540 created black clouds on Gael (see the Scatterer thread).  Galileo mentioned there that he's working on a GPP config update for v0.0540.

[Freshmeat]

17 hours ago, OhioBob said:

If the dossier says 86y328d, then, yes, that's incorrect.  But I compute 86y335d.  Not sure why we differ.

That one was a typo of mine when converting from days to years + days. Sorry.

[New Horizons]

I have an issue with Strategies and Kerbalism mod, at least I guess it is this. When I went out to Iota for the first time, I did not net get money (200,000 for body ad 50,000 for biomes) for newly discovered body or biomes, though I activated the proper strategie on level three. 

[Jim123]

Does this work with 1.6.1?

[Friznit]

6 minutes ago, Jim123 said:

Does this work with 1.6.1?

Yes

[Jim123]

Thank you:)

[Brigadier]

8 hours ago, Jim123 said:

Does this work with 1.6.1?

Be careful which version of Scatterer you install.  The GPP configs are not fully compatible with the latest Scatterer version (v0.0540).  It'll run but there could be a glitch causing black clouds.

Galileo has said on the Scatterer topic that he will look into it soon^TM.

[The-Doctor]

Would you guys say GPP scale is larger or as large as RSS?

[OhioBob]

1 hour ago, The-Doctor said:

Would you guys say GPP scale is larger or as large as RSS?

GPP is stock scale, so it's way smaller than RSS.  The home planet in GPP is the same size as stock Kerbin.

[The-Doctor]

47 minutes ago, OhioBob said:

GPP is stock scale, so it's way smaller than RSS.  The home planet in GPP is the same size as stock Kerbin.

I meant more like the furthest planet/star being as far as say pluto?

[OhioBob]

2 hours ago, The-Doctor said:

I meant more like the furthest planet/star being as far as say pluto?

Oh.  About the same.  The farthest planet in GPP is 38.8 AU, while Pluto is 39.5 AU.  But GPP has only three gas giants.  GPP has an ice planet where Neptune would be, and a second ice planet where Pluto would be.

[Jim123]

Any news on a update for this mod to 1.6.1 since id like to have a tested and working one before i start an outdated version of the mod i'm not asking for a release date and i'm trying to word this as nice as i can but will the update be soon since i love this mod and it's a new challage.

[Brigadier]

14 minutes ago, Jim123 said:

Any news on a update for this mod to 1.6.1 since id like to have a tested and working one before i start an outdated version of the mod i'm not asking for a release date and i'm trying to word this as nice as i can but will the update be soon since i love this mod and it's a new challage.

AFAIK, there is no requirement for an update to GPP for KSP v1.6.1 since it currently works.  Based only on my mod installs, only the latest Scatterer isn't entirely compatible.  The GPP team has indicated that they have a few things they might address but nothing that must be released.

[Galileo]

1 hour ago, Jim123 said:

Any news on a update for this mod to 1.6.1 since id like to have a tested and working one before i start an outdated version of the mod i'm not asking for a release date and i'm trying to word this as nice as i can but will the update be soon since i love this mod and it's a new challage.

Soon, it would have been done already, but real life is getting in my way. 

We are also working on something much bigger and better than GPP, which is typically using up my free time, whenever I get any, and has definitely taken precedence over almost everything else KSP related for me. But it will be worth it, I promise.