Frederf Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 Just to let you know I couldn't get RemoteTech and Galileos to work together and I ended up having to change the config to Body = 6. Body = 5 was Niven. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JadeOfMaar Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 @Frederf Thanks for the notice. I'm about to sign off right now so I will investigate this ASAP, later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 2 hours ago, JadeOfMaar said: Yes, the part alone that I wrote for you is patch style with the @ prefixes but I didn't confirm how to add to an existing scattererCelestialBodies item (that is, use MM to add to Gael's entry). Any ideas on the eclipse not working? Can moons cast eclipses on other moons or just the parent body? Maybe that's throwing it off... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileo Posted February 12, 2017 Author Share Posted February 12, 2017 28 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said: Any ideas on the eclipse not working? Can moons cast eclipses on other moons or just the parent body? Maybe that's throwing it off... moons can cast eclipses on moons. take a look at the syntax in the GPP scatterer planetList cfg and make sure it looks the same for rald Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 1 minute ago, Galileo said: moons can cast eclipses on moons. take a look at the syntax in the GPP scatterer planetList cfg and make sure it looks the same for rald Can the parent body cast an eclipse on a moon? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileo Posted February 12, 2017 Author Share Posted February 12, 2017 13 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said: Can the parent body cast an eclipse on a moon? yep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 So, apparently for eclipses to work at all, first you have to turn them back on in the main menu. I know, right?? I'm completely shocked! Er... Tho they're not quite eclipsing... more like, making a big hole in the scatterer effect? Do terrain shadows need to be on too or am I missing something else ridiculously obvious? (Rald is behind the barrel. It's not a big barrel.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileo Posted February 12, 2017 Author Share Posted February 12, 2017 (edited) 1 minute ago, CatastrophicFailure said: So, apparently for eclipses to work at all, first you have to turn them back on in the main menu. I know, right?? I'm completely shocked! Er... Tho they're not quite eclipsing... more like, making a big hole in the scatterer effect? Do terrain shadows need to be on too or am I missing something else ridiculously obvious? (Rald is behind the barrel. It's not a big barrel.) no thats just how scatterer does ecplises. Looks pretty realistic to me. Edited February 12, 2017 by Galileo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 Just now, Galileo said: no thats just how scatterer does ecplises. Did that change quasi-recently? I seem to remember seeing a big black blotch before? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileo Posted February 12, 2017 Author Share Posted February 12, 2017 Just now, CatastrophicFailure said: Did that change quasi-recently? I seem to remember seeing a big black blotch before? no, the black dot you used to see is how EVE does eclipses. I hated the way it looked, so i have them disabled in SVE 3 hours ago, Frederf said: Just to let you know I couldn't get RemoteTech and Galileos to work together and I ended up having to change the config to Body = 6. Body = 5 was Niven. this probably means that Ciro is given an index of 0 which would make Gael the 6th body... I had tested it before the release but because Ciro does not have an index number in the cfg, kopernicus randomly generates on for it and gave game a higher number. I will designate an index number for Ciro next update Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astroheiko Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 (edited) This offer always comes back to me. The order I have already done 2 times. Is this an error of the program or the mod? It is not bad, I just want to know. If you are waiting there are also new ones. Something else: I am now back from my Thalia, Eta, Icarus Trip - no disturbances with the Mod so far. 290 records and 16431 science harvested, at 30%. In the end, it was very close - the Mothership was completely dry - no more fuel. AP in the Gael system was at 71000km. But they are all well. Greetings Edited February 12, 2017 by astroheiko Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luovahulluus Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 Speaking of strange missions: I recently got my first probe to Niven orbit. Shortly after that I noticed I have some new missions to accept. Everyone of those six stock missions had the same requirements: fly by Iota, Ceti and Niven. They were all by different company. I have the contract configurator and some contract mod packs installed so it could be a problem with something else than the GPP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileo Posted February 12, 2017 Author Share Posted February 12, 2017 14 minutes ago, Luovahulluus said: Speaking of strange missions: I recently got my first probe to Niven orbit. Shortly after that I noticed I have some new missions to accept. Everyone of those six stock missions had the same requirements: fly by Iota, Ceti and Niven. They were all by different company. I have the contract configurator and some contract mod packs installed so it could be a problem with something else than the GPP. That happens in stock too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luovahulluus Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Galileo said: That happens in stock too Ok, good to know, thanks. I had a break from KSP for some time. The last time I played career, that didn't happen. Edited February 12, 2017 by Luovahulluus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileo Posted February 12, 2017 Author Share Posted February 12, 2017 1 minute ago, Luovahulluus said: Ok, good to know, thanks. I had a break from KSP for some time. Thelast time I played career, that didn't happen. The more agencies you add, and the more contract packs you add, forces it to happen more often then stock but it does happen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 Quick question @Galileo: The GPP sub-group for Decal Stickers, how'd you do that? Is it an add-on MM config or something the other author included? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddiew Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 13 hours ago, Galileo said: no, the black dot you used to see is how EVE does eclipses. I hated the way it looked, so i have them disabled in SVE Strange, I've installed only the visual extras that came with GPP, but my eclipses are black blots... In other news, I'm teetering on the edge of kicking out 3.2x again. Doesn't really mesh with my play style because it's making me be a lot more utility driven rather than having fun with designs. Also, I haven't flown a plane since leaving LGO for the first time. Hitting a motivation slump now Might try with 1x planets, but 3.2x or even 6.4x orbital radii. Would need good transfer stages and make it a better idea to have ISRU, but it would get the landers themselves back to fun sizes. Not sure what that would do to the maths though. I've gotten used to multiplying delta-v by around 1.8, but would that still be true for transfers with stock size planets? Paging @OhioBob because he seems to know orbital math (That or I dig out the jump beacons mod so's I can *blip* vessels to anywhere that I've already sent a beacon...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileo Posted February 12, 2017 Author Share Posted February 12, 2017 24 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said: Quick question @Galileo: The GPP sub-group for Decal Stickers, how'd you do that? Is it an add-on MM config or something the other author included? That's for @JadeOfMaar to answer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norcalplanner Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 8 minutes ago, eddiew said: Strange, I've installed only the visual extras that came with GPP, but my eclipses are black blots... In other news, I'm teetering on the edge of kicking out 3.2x again. Doesn't really mesh with my play style because it's making me be a lot more utility driven rather than having fun with designs. Also, I haven't flown a plane since leaving LGO for the first time. Hitting a motivation slump now Might try with 1x planets, but 3.2x or even 6.4x orbital radii. Would need good transfer stages and make it a better idea to have ISRU, but it would get the landers themselves back to fun sizes. Not sure what that would do to the maths though. I've gotten used to multiplying delta-v by around 1.8, but would that still be true for transfers with stock size planets? Paging @OhioBob because he seems to know orbital math (That or I dig out the jump beacons mod so's I can *blip* vessels to anywhere that I've already sent a beacon...) Have you gotten up to any of the fun overpowered engines yet from Near Future, Karbonite, or Kerbal Atomics in the tech tree? I seem to remember you saying that you were holding off on upgrades so you'd be forced to use the new stuff. That said, GPP is already much larger than stock even without a rescale, so I totally understand if you want to scale things back (ba-dum) a bit. Do what's fun. I miss some of your awesome spaceplanes, and they're the things that probably suffer most with an upscaled system. Honestly, 3.2x in GPP feels a lot like a 6.4x game in stock. I'm still a bit intimidated by Tellumo in 3.2x, and haven't figured out how to attack it - 11 km/s to get back to orbit, going through some very thick atmosphere for the first part of the ascent... [shudder] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OhioBob Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 8 minutes ago, eddiew said: Might try with 1x planets, but 3.2x or even 6.4x orbital radii. Would need good transfer stages and make it a better idea to have ISRU, but it would get the landers themselves back to fun sizes. Not sure what that would do to the maths though. I've gotten used to multiplying delta-v by around 1.8, but would that still be true for transfers with stock size planets? Paging @OhioBob because he seems to know orbital math You have to be a little careful there because you could get some unintended consequences. For instance, if you scaled up the orbital radii without making any change to the Ciro, all the planets' orbital periods are increased by (rescale)^1.5. This would produce very long transfer times and wait times between transfer windows. Even if you don't resize the planets, I think you would have to modify Ciro to make the game playable. You could either resize Ciro or just increase it's gravity. For Ciro only, I would recommend doing one of the following: (1) resize = rescale, or (2) geeASLmultiplier = rescale^2. If you don't change the size of the bodies, then getting to orbit and transferring from orbit to orbit within a body's sphere of influence would be the same as 1x stock sized. However, if you increase Ciro's size or gravity, then the delta-v for interplanetary transfers would increase. However, the amount of increase is probably not very predictable. The delta-v needed for an interplanetary transfer is in part the amount needed to escape the planet, and in part the amount needed to modify the solar orbit to intercept the target planet. The first part is a function of the planet's resize factor, and the second part is a function of Ciro's gravity and the rescale factor. When you start mixing and matching factors as you suggest, then all the currently available delta-v data gets tossed aside. You'd have to reinvent it from scratch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4d4Garrison Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 Will Rald be added in Tellumo orbit or as its own body in a future update? If it is added will a captured asteroid be added as a moon - as of yet there are no very small moons of a Pol, Gilly, or Bop sized body so I am wondering if there are plans to add one/some. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileo Posted February 12, 2017 Author Share Posted February 12, 2017 6 minutes ago, 4d4Garrison said: Will Rald be added in Tellumo orbit or as its own body in a future update? If it is added will a captured asteroid be added as a moon - as of yet there are no very small moons of a Pol, Gilly, or Bop sized body so I am wondering if there are plans to add one/some. No, Rald is not one of our planets and it won't become one. As for a bop or gilly size body, we have plans for that either. The closest is going to be Eta or Lili. We are adding something that will allow other planet pack makers to add on to GPP though and a gilly or bop sized body might show up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddiew Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Norcalplanner said: Have you gotten up to any of the fun overpowered engines yet from Near Future, Karbonite, or Kerbal Atomics in the tech tree? I seem to remember you saying that you were holding off on upgrades so you'd be forced to use the new stuff. That said, GPP is already much larger than stock even without a rescale, so I totally understand if you want to scale things back (ba-dum) a bit. Do what's fun. I miss some of your awesome spaceplanes, and they're the things that probably suffer most with an upscaled system. Honestly, 3.2x in GPP feels a lot like a 6.4x game in stock. I'm still a bit intimidated by Tellumo in 3.2x, and haven't figured out how to attack it - 11 km/s to get back to orbit, going through some very thick atmosphere for the first part of the ascent... [shudder] I've gotten the first tier of NF and Kerbal Atomics, yus - in fact my Otho probe is using an Ion engine and tiny nuclear reactor from those. Turns out to be really relaxing when your probe isn't solar powered. Now I don't have to worry which way it's facing, and I can terminate it without guilt when the uranium runs out Tbh, I dropped Karbonite because it seems to be more about high power/low ISP launchers, which isn't really what I need. Also my game crashes when over about 10.5gb memory in use, so I'm trying to avoid mods I won't use. (I wish I knew what causes the crash, but the output log doesn't contain anything relevant. I'm too deep in to binary search the offending mod - if it even is a mod ) And yeah, spaceplanes... don't work. I tried, really. I had a basic mk2 stock plane that could shift a tiny cargo to LGO - but only if the atmosphere was 70km. When @Galileo set it to 98km, that destroyed all my designs. I miss launching from the runway 11km/s... not so hard, especially if you have Space Y Heavy Lifters. Getting that to Tellumo, then launching at 5atm and 1.8g? That's hard. Yeah, I'd been relying to KR&D to bail me out of that, but I'm still pondering whether I'd have more fun back at 1x. I enjoyed doing silly looking designs, and 3.2x is forcing me to be very utilitarian. I am enjoying the fact that it makes it sensible to do separate transfer/descent stages though. But to be fair, I spent ages using that in OPM without it needing to be any harder. Maybe I just need to skip KR&D this time. I haven't touched it yet since my personal rule was to be at the end of the tech tree before touching it, so that would force me into using the efficient modded engines and whatnot. Although what I will do with all that science once the tree is over is a mystery. Right now, one surface sample from Niven is worth as much as a probe around all the moons of Otho, so I suspect that if I farm Niven and Gratian, possibly with either Thalia or Augustus, I'll have it done. Not that this really needs to stop me, I can fall back on the old god-tier tech item requiring half a million science points if I have to 32 minutes ago, OhioBob said: You have to be a little careful there because you could get some unintended consequences. For instance, if you scaled up the orbital radii without making any change to the Ciro, all the planets' orbital periods are increased by (rescale)^1.5. This would produce very long transfer times and wait times between transfer windows. Even if you don't resize the planets, I think you would have to modify Ciro to make the game playable. You could either resize Ciro or just increase it's gravity. For Ciro only, I would recommend doing one of the following: (1) resize = rescale, or (2) geeASLmultiplier = rescale^2. If you don't change the size of the bodies, then getting to orbit and transferring from orbit to orbit within a body's sphere of influence would be the same as 1x stock sized. However, if you increase Ciro's size or gravity, then the delta-v for interplanetary transfers would increase. However, the amount of increase is probably not very predictable. The delta-v needed for an interplanetary transfer is in part the amount needed to escape the planet, and in part the amount needed to modify the solar orbit to intercept the target planet. The first part is a function of the planet's resize factor, and the second part is a function of Ciro's gravity and the rescale factor. When you start mixing and matching factors as you suggest, then all the currently available delta-v data gets tossed aside. You'd have to reinvent it from scratch. Good advice, thank you. I suspect I will either stick with full 3.2x or roll back to 1x then. Transfer time isn't really an issue since I don't use any life support mods, but I don't really fancy having to fly blind with regards to delta-v. Better to have a predictable 1.8x (which I read as 2x) than I-dunno-x 20 minutes ago, Galileo said: No, Rald is not one of our planets and it won't become one... On the other hand @4d4Garrison, @KerikBalm might perhaps be persuaded to furnish us with a GPP compatible config for Rald if we keep using it in combo with this pack and proving how awesome it is I think @CatastrophicFailure posted a config to put it in Gaellostationary orbit a few pages back. It's easy to adapt that to put it anywhere around Tellumo that you feel is sensible. I gave it the standard Kerbin-Mun orbital radius, and let 3.2x scale it. Edited February 12, 2017 by eddiew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OhioBob Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 4 minutes ago, eddiew said: Transfer time isn't really an issue since I don't use any life support mods... I don't use life support mods either. However, I'd still be worried about the time warp factor. With just a 3.2x rescale factor, all the orbital periods and transfer times get increased by about 5.7 times. That's a lot of just sitting around and waiting. I think it could make the game agonizingly slow to play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddiew Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 38 minutes ago, OhioBob said: I don't use life support mods either. However, I'd still be worried about the time warp factor. With just a 3.2x rescale factor, all the orbital periods and transfer times get increased by about 5.7 times. That's a lot of just sitting around and waiting. I think it could make the game agonizingly slow to play. Warp Everywhere, good sir Adds a couple of timewarps beyond 100,000x, takes off the annoying altitude limits. On another note, I do use Transfer Window Planner... technically a resized Ciro should be calculated by that, so's I'd know the transfer costs ahead of time, while the in-SoI costs for everything else would stay default. My brain is too tiny for this sort of thing 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.