eddiew Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 Suspicious landform on Niven... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddiew Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 (edited) Guess who put the radiators for his Thalia probe on the transfer stage? Oh well, 750x750 doesn't seem to be exploding anything. 20m/s left due to suboptimal insertion burn, so can't even get an end-of-life dip for low science. On the up side, transfer windows come round fast, and I can do Scansat mapping from up here. If only it also had a relay antenna x( Edited February 5, 2017 by eddiew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norcalplanner Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 48 minutes ago, eddiew said: Guess who put the radiators for his Thalia probe on the transfer stage? Oh well, 750x750 doesn't seem to be exploding anything. 20m/s left due to suboptimal insertion burn, so can't even get an end-of-life dip for low science. On the up side, transfer windows come round fast, and I can do Scansat mapping from up here. If only it also had a relay antenna x( I love how your probe looks like an unhappy emoji. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddiew Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 20 minutes ago, Norcalplanner said: I love how your probe looks like an unhappy emoji. I didn't even notice that until now... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkFighter Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 16 minutes ago, eddiew said: I didn't even notice that until now... Then you can make happy ones next time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retrograde115 Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 @DarkFighter What sunflare were you using for that GORGEOUS post? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tynrael Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 Finally sent a small probe to Iota to satisfy a Strategia contract, it is gorgeous. My poor little lander was setup with an inverted decoupler to make use of stack mounted fuel flow with tanks that had struts on them to serve as landing legs since I haven't unlocked any legs or external fuel ducts. Managed to find all 5 biomes, Skids and Droops being much harder to locate! I'm not saying this is an issue, I know LOD is in place for performance reasons I just feel the contrast between the two is fairly sharp and I'm interested in tweaking some settings to raise up the height at which the transition occurs so that it is more aligned with lower orbit heights to see what kind of impact it has on my fps. I've looked at the cfg and if I had to guess I'd assume it would be making a few tweaks in the ScaledVersion, PQS, or both. Any tips are appreciated! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddiew Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 58 minutes ago, DarkFighter said: Then you can make happy ones next time The radar would look pretty silly backwards, but I like the concept Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileo Posted February 6, 2017 Author Share Posted February 6, 2017 1 hour ago, Tynrael said: Finally sent a small probe to Iota to satisfy a Strategia contract, it is gorgeous. My poor little lander was setup with an inverted decoupler to make use of stack mounted fuel flow with tanks that had struts on them to serve as landing legs since I haven't unlocked any legs or external fuel ducts. Managed to find all 5 biomes, Skids and Droops being much harder to locate! I'm not saying this is an issue, I know LOD is in place for performance reasons I just feel the contrast between the two is fairly sharp and I'm interested in tweaking some settings to raise up the height at which the transition occurs so that it is more aligned with lower orbit heights to see what kind of impact it has on my fps. I've looked at the cfg and if I had to guess I'd assume it would be making a few tweaks in the ScaledVersion, PQS, or both. Any tips are appreciated! This is the closest you will get. For it to be even more detailed, like you want, that would require higher resolution color map and a more detailed height map. There is nothing in the cfgs that can help make it look like you want. Making heightmaps more details causes blocky terrain and looks awful. This is the reason I had to make them less detailed than the color map. Stock does the same thing. Tweaking the setting to show the pqs at lower altitudes would result in unsightly, scaled space textures up close.. feel free to change whatever you want, but this is the best you can get it looking without sacrificing quality somewhere else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tynrael Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 17 minutes ago, Galileo said: This is the closest you will get. For it to be even more detailed, like you want, that would require higher resolution color map and a more detailed height map. There is nothing in the cfgs that can help make it look like you want. Making heightmaps more details causes blocky terrain and looks awful. This is the reason I had to make them less detailed than the color map. Stock does the same thing. Tweaking the setting to show the pqs at lower altitudes would result in unsightly, scaled space textures up close.. feel free to change whatever you want, but this is the best you can get it looking without sacrificing quality somewhere else. I wasn't looking for more detailed maps or extra LODs or for psq at lower altitudes. Just to have the higher resolution terrain pop in at higher altitudes. E.g. instead of at 30k transition at 60k or something like that. I tried changing a few settings and the results are basically what I want except there are glitches at certain camera angles. I'll leave it the way it is because it doesn't bother me, it just didn't seem like something too far out of realm of possibility for the LOD swap to happen at higher altitudes so I thought I'd ask. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileo Posted February 6, 2017 Author Share Posted February 6, 2017 16 minutes ago, Tynrael said: I wasn't looking for more detailed maps or extra LODs or for psq at lower altitudes. Just to have the higher resolution terrain pop in at higher altitudes. E.g. instead of at 30k transition at 60k or something like that. I tried changing a few settings and the results are basically what I want except there are glitches at certain camera angles. I'll leave it the way it is because it doesn't bother me, it just didn't seem like something too far out of realm of possibility for the LOD swap to happen at higher altitudes so I thought I'd ask. Those glitches are caused by scatterers terrain shadows. Disable them in the main menu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 Sent a test probe to Tellumo to verify that my game is working as it should be. Kerbalsm antennas needed a tweak, glad I checked it now. Almost ready to start playing for real. Just gotta say, those visuals... Dayum. Just, dayum. Unfortunately, slamming into the 6.4 scale atmosphere at over 15km/s, my lander evaporated like a certain team's chances of winning a certain game... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JadeOfMaar Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 (edited) 11 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said: Unfortunately, slamming into the 6.4 scale atmosphere at over 15km/s, my lander evaporated like -snip- Worth it!™ Edited February 6, 2017 by JadeOfMaar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkFighter Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 11 hours ago, Retrograde115 said: @DarkFighter What sunflare were you using for that GORGEOUS post? I was using the Eden sunflare and Galileo's blue skybox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkFighter Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 4 hours ago, CatastrophicFailure said: Sent a test probe to Tellumo to verify that my game is working as it should be. Kerbalsm antennas needed a tweak, glad I checked it now. Almost ready to start playing for real. Just gotta say, those visuals... Dayum. Just, dayum. 2 And I'm just flying my planes around Gael, like I would normally do when I start a career. {Kraken Science is sooooo good. I mean, it gives 10 more science things at the start, all of them do 5+ science at launchpad.} {Have just figured out how I can configure Elevons right.} {Don't mind the 10+ crashes which I caused because I forgot some stuff that could work like an A.I.R.B.R.A.K.E. {I need an acronym for such a long word}} {Why am I using so many brackets?} Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JadeOfMaar Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 (edited) [ mode ] Did my Ceti probe right (actually captured around Ceti). I got a good deal of science points, taking a page out of @Norcalplanner's book with this and the identical Iota probe but I wasted some on a node that had no parts in it and wasn't vital. Now I'm < 1 point short of unlocking another node with a lot of parts I want. Such include the klaw so I could retrieve and recover the probes (and the lander that I have sitting in Gael's volcano). Edited February 6, 2017 by JadeOfMaar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkFighter Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 Back from my 2nd orbit, this time with more science And I tinkered some settings in Distant Object Enhancement, now my skybox looks even more gorgeous: (deactivated dimming) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OhioBob Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 10 hours ago, CatastrophicFailure said: Kerbalsm antennas needed a tweak Can you explain about this a little more. We're in the process of creating a Kerbalism config to add to GPP. If we need to tweak antennas, I'd like to know more about the problem you've experienced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 1 hour ago, OhioBob said: Can you explain about this a little more. We're in the process of creating a Kerbalism config to add to GPP. If we need to tweak antennas, I'd like to know more about the problem you've experienced. This was because of the 6.4x scaleup, ran out of range real quick. Just had to make up a very simple config below. I can at least confirm two antennas work out as far as Tellumo. // ============================================================================ // Tweak antenna distances // ============================================================================ @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[Antenna]]:NEEDS[FeatureSignal]:FINAL { @MODULE[Antenna] { @dist *= 6.4 } } Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OhioBob Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 @CatastrophicFailure, thanks. I was not aware you were using 6.4x (though I should have known from previous conversation). That makes sense why you needed to boost it. An antenna tweak is probably not needed for our 1x scale system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyko Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 17 hours ago, eddiew said: The radar would look pretty silly backwards, but I like the concept It would be happier if it wasn't being baked for lack of radiators How are you estimating radiator needs? are you running simulations or is there a mathematical way to figure it out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddiew Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 Just now, Tyko said: It would be happier if it wasn't being baked for lack of radiators How are you estimating radiator needs? are you running simulations or is there a mathematical way to figure it out? For Thalia, I have no idea. In general, I attach two extendy small ones per nerva, and stick them on the tank that the engine is attached to. Thus far it's been fine for burns up to 7-8 minutes, and I suspect it's good for as long as there is fuel. Maybe @Galileo could suggest the right number of rads for a low Thalia orbit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkFighter Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 I can't decide between KSP with my GPP based modpack and Hoi4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norcalplanner Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 10 minutes ago, Tyko said: It would be happier if it wasn't being baked for lack of radiators How are you estimating radiator needs? are you running simulations or is there a mathematical way to figure it out? I'm doing it by trial and error, although I am stacking the deck a bit and increasing the heat resistance on many parts by at least one level using R&D. My new probe lander with two small radiators did OK (just barely) on Icarus. However, at the risk of giving away part of my next mission report chapter, one small radiator was not enough for my Thalia lander. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddiew Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 Does anyone know why this happens when I turn on d3d11? ...only the textures at KSC seem affected. Other planets are fine. (My game is tending to crash when memory use exceeds 9.8gb, d3d11 knocks it down by about 30-40% so I'd really like to use it if possible.) In other news, I'm eyeballing 3.2x again. Don't think the upscaled system is playing to my strengths, i.e. sending weirdass stuff to weirdass places. Everythings very utilitarian out of necessity... I'll see what comes back from the Gratian probes, and maybe do a flyby of the nearest gas giant, but if I can't manage a kermanned Niven landing and return after that then I'll be bringing it down to 1x for my sanity. 4 minutes ago, Norcalplanner said: I'm doing it by trial and error, although I am stacking the deck a bit and increasing the heat resistance on many parts by at least one level using R&D... Tbh, I dropped heating to 40% from the start to compensate for 3.2x. It might actually be too low now, I can come down from LGO without burning more than a few units of ablator... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.