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

[Akira_R]

46 minutes ago, eddiew said:

Hey peeps,

Any thoughts on this Othovian oddity? Planet does not look happy... effect persists over time and different angles.

Spoiler

(To my annoyance, the most efficient shape for a cargo plane has turned out to be one that looks like a cargo plane   But those wings turn out to be OP. Way more lift and way less drag than stacked Big-S deltas.)

Also, was I dreaming it when I concluded Augustus had oceans? Can't find any sign of them, but my memory is telling me they should be there 

Have you ever looked at Nertea's mk4 expansion? Got some good big cargo space plane parts in there.

Also OPT has lots of big space plane parts as well, but I haven't used it in a while.

 

[Crimeo]

8 hours ago, Galileo said:

Logs and a screenshot of your gamedata would be helpful bud

Sure thing, here's a screenshot below. For logs, I'm not sure what you're looking for, as the game is not crashing. Here is the kopernicus log for kerbin? https://pastebin.com/h11HskvP and my config for rescaling is just the one you sent out in your zip file, but I've been manipulating "building scale" (tried 0,1, and 3.2, none have an effect) and "EVE Cloud multiplier" (tried 0.3, 0.44, 0.5, and 1, none worked)

Both the clouds and those outlying buildings did look perfect at 1x scale.

 

Edited March 31, 2017 by Crimeo

[Galileo]

8 minutes ago, Crimeo said:

Sure thing, here's a screenshot below. For logs, I'm not sure what you're looking for, as the game is not crashing. Here is the kopernicus log for kerbin? https://pastebin.com/h11HskvP and my config for rescaling is just the one you sent out in your zip file, but I've been manipulating "building scale" (tried 0,1, and 3.2, none have an effect) and "EVE Cloud multiplier" (tried 0.3, 0.44, 0.5, and 1, none worked)

Both the clouds and those outlying buildings did look perfect at 1x scale.

 

Kerbal konstructs does not scale with sigma dimension correctly and is only to be used in a 1x scale system. Also I asked for a picture of your GameData folder so I can see if you installed anything wrong. And a kopernicus log won't help me here either. The game does not have to crash to produce an output log.

i can only assume you installed something wrong.

Edited March 31, 2017 by Galileo

[Crimeo]

7 minutes ago, Galileo said:

Kerbal konstructs does not scale with sigma dimension correctly and is only to be used in a 1x scale system. Also I asked for a picture of your GameData folder so I can see if you installed anything wrong. And a kopernicus log won't help me here either. The game does not have to crash to produce an output log.

i can only assume you installed something wrong.

Oh honestly I think I care more about Kerbal Konstructs than I do about the scaling, so just nevermind then, I think I'll play at 1x where everything is working, if KK is not supported at other scales.

Thank you for the help, and the mod looks amazing!

[Starfire70]

Wow, Thalia's moon Eta is a breathtaking little moon. Not going to spoil it, but if you haven't explored it, you should.

Edited March 31, 2017 by Starfire70

[OhioBob]

I take responsibility for the lake snafu.  There was a flaw in my early analysis that led to the mistaken conclusion that Niven could support lakes of water and Augustus lakes of liquid methane.  When the mistake was discovered, we realized that neither body could realistically have lakes, so they were removed them.  But a new analysis showed that, with some changes to the atmospheres, the conditions could be right on Tarsiss for methane lakes, and on Hadrain for a liquid nitrogen ocean.  So Tarsiss and Hadrian both got thicker atmospheres and liquid on their surfaces, while Augustus got a thinner atmosphere.

[Norcalplanner]

Just for the record - I've decided I'm going to do two more things in my 3.2x career. First, a Kerballed trip to the surface of Icarus and back; the Ace needs a shakedown cruise. Second, a Kerballed trip to the surface of Tellumo and back in my Karbonite-powered spsceplane. Once those two items are done, we'll close the book on that career, then crank up the 10.6257x one with a very different mod list.

[JadeOfMaar]

@Norcalplanner I'm intrigued with what you have planned, namely the modlist.  

[Norcalplanner]

58 minutes ago, JadeOfMaar said:

@Norcalplanner I'm intrigued with what you have planned, namely the modlist.  

Were going to go full Roverdude, with MKS, Karbonite, and USI-LS. I'm also going to forgo SpaceY and SpaceY expanded in favor of BDB and SSTU. Basically getting away from my comfy place and trying something new.  SMURFF at full lever, no KRnD, with Real Scale Boosters waiting in the wings if the other lifter mods can't cut it.  I'm also going to throw in MKIV spaceplanes for the heck of it - not that I think I'll be using them for SSTOs, but it might be an interesting dynasoar-like thing for taking cargo up and then reentering. 

I'm also considering deleting the exospheric Karbonite/Karborundum collectors. Being able to fill up a fuel depot in orbit with little to no effort was just too easy - I need to work for my fuel.

And if 10.6257x becomes too tedious, then the plan is to bring everyone home, remove SMURFF, and give 2.5x a try.

Edited March 31, 2017 by Norcalplanner
Added bit about 2.5x

[Shnyrik]

@Galileo Thank you for the new version. Everything looks even better than before

I'm sorry to report, but there seem to be a problem with KSC++ I get the second set of runway lights and some small building hovering over Communications Center. I followed the installation instructions and I have versions of Kerbal Konstructs and KSC++ from 1.2.0 pack. I' ve also tried reinstalling those mods, but it does not help.

[Galileo]

7 minutes ago, Shnyrik said:

@Galileo Thank you for the new version. Everything looks even better than before

I'm sorry to report, but there seem to be a problem with KSC++ I get the second set of runway lights and some small building hovering over Communications Center. I followed the installation instructions and I have versions of Kerbal Konstructs and KSC++ from 1.2.0 pack. I' ve also tried reinstalling those mods, but it does not help.

have a screenshot?

Edit: i just checked, and i don't have those issues.

Edited March 31, 2017 by Galileo

[Galileo]

10 hours ago, eddiew said:

Hey peeps,

Any thoughts on this Othovian oddity? Planet does not look happy... effect persists over time and different angles.

(To my annoyance, the most efficient shape for a cargo plane has turned out to be one that looks like a cargo plane   But those wings turn out to be OP. Way more lift and way less drag than stacked Big-S deltas.)

Also, was I dreaming it when I concluded Augustus had oceans? Can't find any sign of them, but my memory is telling me they should be there 

OK i see the issue too and i figured out what is causing it. The bundled EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements became corrupted during the upload process. Replace it with a fresh copy and the issue will go away. I will upload a proper working version. 

EDIT: I will be turning the GPPVE cfgs into MM cfgs. That will force everyone to download fresh copies of EVE so that this sort of thing won't happen again.

Edited March 31, 2017 by Galileo

[eddiew]

1 hour ago, Galileo said:

OK i see the issue too and i figured out what is causing it. The bundled EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements became corrupted during the upload process. Replace it with a fresh copy and the issue will go away. I will upload a proper working version. 

EDIT: I will be turning the GPPVE cfgs into MM cfgs. That will force everyone to download fresh copies of EVE so that this sort of thing won't happen again.

Marvellous, thank you. Will be just in time for my proper mission 

Now I just have to decide whether I want to tow one of my bulky ISRU units and take a miner out there with me...

Edited March 31, 2017 by eddiew

[4d4Garrison]

Just found the really big surprise - not going to spoil it though.

Spoiler

My Grann(US)y always used to say to pay attention to the map.

 

Edited March 31, 2017 by 4d4Garrison

[TheRagingIrishman]

@Galileo quick question about the Easter eggs. Are they discoverable with KerbNet/ScanSat or do you have to go find them the old fashioned way? 

[Tuko]

6 hours ago, Galileo said:

OK i see the issue too and i figured out what is causing it. The bundled EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements became corrupted during the upload process. Replace it with a fresh copy and the issue will go away. I will upload a proper working version. 

EDIT: I will be turning the GPPVE cfgs into MM cfgs. That will force everyone to download fresh copies of EVE so that this sort of thing won't happen again.

Galileo,

How should we proceed to get the fix?  Should we just re-download GPP and paste in the new files or do we need need to grab EVE and paste in files; if so, which ones?

I'm just not sure what we need to do.

[JadeOfMaar]

4 hours ago, eddiew said:

Marvellous, thank you. Will be just in time for my proper mission 

Now I just have to decide whether I want to tow one of my bulky ISRU units and take a miner out there with me...

Your pursuit of Hydrogen continues to fascinate me. I keep getting ideas for things to suggest or try out.

3 minutes ago, TheRagingIrishman said:

@Galileo quick question about the Easter eggs. Are they discoverable with KerbNet/ScanSat or do you have to go find them the old fashioned way? 

SCANsat sees them. They should appear just fine in KerbNet.

[Shnyrik]

9 hours ago, Galileo said:

Edit: i just checked, and i don't have those issues.

That is really strange, but after I've deleted everything again and reinstalled on a new clean install, everything seems to be normal. So I must have broken something myself.

[Poodmund]

As posted here: 

We are looking for community contribution to the Science Definitions around the Gael Home-worlds.

GPP Homeworld Science Definitions - Please submit your own Science Definitions as comments against the relative spreadsheet cells to add to the database as a community project.

If anybody wants to contribute it would be fantastic and all of us involved with the GPP would be very grateful.  

[4d4Garrison]

Spoiler alert this is a question for JADOFMAAR and Galileo regarding a new easter egg/ feature.

 

Spoiler

 

I have been getting many atmospheric survery contracts for Grannus, without even having gone near its SOI (I haven't even gone out of the Gaelean system yet as its 10% science mode).

Any way to fix this or is it because Grannus is a "planet"?

 

 

[Urses]

@GPP_Team

If i may insist. After you integrated GPP unic Eastereggs would it not be good to have a "GPP-Expirience"/"GPP-Explorer"-Tread to exchange this informations. Before we begin to Spam all around here or in Dev or in Colaboration?

And Nope i did not find a unic at the moment

Funny Kabooms

Urses

 

Edited March 31, 2017 by Urses

[adsii1970]

@Galileo:

I'm not looking for something that replaces the stock system. And I figured I would ask you because you seem to know the most about creating planets. How hard would it be to create a binary planet system? No moons, just a binary planet system, two rocky worlds...? Ideally it would be able to be used in a system using OPM, but with a more elliptical and polar orbit...

Edited March 31, 2017 by adsii1970

[eddiew]

1 hour ago, JadeOfMaar said:

Your pursuit of Hydrogen continues to fascinate me. I keep getting ideas for things to suggest or try out.

If there was an atmospheric scoop for it, I feel like I should be able to skim gas giants' upper layers   I don't have a clue how to make anything like that though, so for me it's just fissioning ore down to individual protons and trying not to kill the crew with the free neutrons  

[OhioBob]

1 hour ago, adsii1970 said:

@Galileo:

I'm not looking for something that replaces the stock system. And I figured I would ask you because you seem to know the most about creating planets. How hard would it be to create a binary planet system? No moons, just a binary planet system, two rocky worlds...? Ideally it would be able to be used in a system using OPM, but with a more elliptical and polar orbit...

Creating binary planets is really no different than creating a planet and a moon.  You would just set up the configs so that the referenceBody for the larger of the two planets (the primary) is the Sun, and referenceBody for the smaller of the two planets (the secondary) is the primary.  Now if you want the bodies to orbit as binaries, with the barycenter somewhere along the line connecting the two bodies, then you need to install Sigma Binary and add a little code to the config of the secondary.

(edit) We actually have Gauss and Catullus configured as a binary system in GPP, but it didn't make it into the latest release.  There is a minor update coming soon that I think adds this back.  When the update comes, just look at what we did for those two bodies as an example.  If you install Sigma Binary you'll see how their orbits are altered.  (However, Sigma Binary is disabled if RemoteTech is also installed - those mods don't play well together.)
 

Edited March 31, 2017 by OhioBob

[JadeOfMaar]

 

17 minutes ago, eddiew said:

If there was an atmospheric scoop for it, I feel like I should be able to skim gas giants' upper layers   I don't have a clue how to make anything like that though, so for me it's just fissioning ore down to individual protons and trying not to kill the crew with the free neutrons  

I've already thought of, and I'm pretty sure I can do the scoop thing. I'm looking to make another little part pack soon and it will need atmosphere scoops. While you're at Gauss you may want to visit Catullus as well. It stands at the line between super-Terra and gas giant and hence may be worthwhile.  There's also the option of processing Methane (CH₄) and Ammonia (NH₃) which will make Tarsiss very useful to you as well, and useful in general without needing to install Karbonite. If you have Near Future Propulsion installed I'll simply add these modes to the existing intake and gas converter parts in there. Otherwise I'll have to clone and re-texture some stock parts (which I might do anyway for my mod).

@4d4Garrison We're going to deal with that. It's indeed a big problem.