Biome Maps for KSP 1.2.x?

[Srpadget]

In general, I approve of the rework of the biomes in KSP V1.2.  I also rather like the way biomes have been worked into the Kerbnet/Commnet system, so there is a way for people to see them without mods or cheats.

However, I am not one of those people.   I see no reason (especially after I've got a global resource map of a body) not to use the Cheat menu to show me biomes so I can target a landing for a new, not-yet-visited biome.

And I have to say, the new colors in the biome maps are a mixed blessing. The muted "earth tones" (erm... so to speak... "kerb tones"? "Mun tones"?) are much prettier when laid out across a world's surface in Map view...but they also make it much more difficult (for me and my aging eyes, at least) to actually USE them.  Even on my printed-out copies (which, admittedly, are lovely works of art, worth framing and displaying for their own sake), I have trouble distinguishing between some of the very similar colors.  So, for purposes of UTILITY, I rather prefer the older-style biome maps with their jarring loud primary colors--they may have been ugly, but by gum it was EASY to tell highlands from lowlands!

So does anyone have an online reference to a set of LESS attractive (but more utilitarian) color biome maps for 1.2.x biomes?  Or some way to remap the in-game biome colors?  My old weak eyes would appreciate it, and my kerbals would also like to skip the tedium of landing in the same few biomes by mistake over and over.  (They're starting to demand extra snacks as a "boredom bonus"!)

[DD_bwest]

if your having a really hard time distinguishing the difference. one thing that can be done is to copy and paste the map into paint.  then make a small rectangle with 2 smaller squares inside. you can then use paints tool to sample a color and fill the squares with the 2 you are having trouble with.   any contrast will become apparent right now to eachother.

 

the ksp wiki if you google it has some decent biome maps

Edited December 18, 2016 by DD_bwest

[bewing]

I filed this issue in the bugtracker already myself. My suggestion was for Kerbnet to allow you to choose one biome and then false-color it to something bright. To make KerbNet even more useful than the biome cheat.

[Srpadget]

21 minutes ago, DD_bwest said:

the ksp wiki if you google it has some decent biome maps

The biome maps on the ksp wiki are actually a good illustration of my problem.  Take, for instance, the Mun wiki entry.  It's got the old (pre-1.2) Mun biome map with its default colors:  ugly as sin, but SO EASY to see which biomes are which.  It also has the new (V1.2) biome maps: oh so pretty, but EVERYTHING is in a narrow color band of grays for non-craters and purple-grays for craters.  If I leave the wiki and do a general Google search, I can find that same map in a larger format and with a legend showing me that Highlands are gray, as opposed to Midlands (which are gray) and Lowlands (which have been colored gray so as to easily distinguish them from the prior two).

The purple tints make it easy to tell the various crater biomes from the various non-crater biomes, but that's not so terribly helpful (seeing as I don't particularly need anything other than the surface of the Mun itself to do THAT).

I can make the same observation about Minmus (replace "purple" with "green", "gray" with "green", and "crater" with "flats"), though it uses a broader palette of light-to-dark (and there are fewer biomes in total) so it's not quite so bad.

I am not color blind.  But these maps give me a much greater appreciation for the difficulties faced by those who are....

[DD_bwest]

the wiki maps are the nost up to date versions of biome maps.  just copy and paste it into MSpaint and either edit the colors or use its tools to better differentiate.  but ive been able to visually tell without issue.   if you want to know which one corresponds to each, you can cross reference with older maps, or do a low orbit eva fly over before you head down.  set the view/navball so you are looking straight  down at the spot your flying over, and do reports after report making your own log of which spots are which biome, creating your own legend.

 

it's  difficult and not optimum for sure, but it can still get the job done. 

[bewing]

I disagree with DD_bwest to some degree. Even in KerbNet, the biome display shows a combination of biome data and surface lighting. So you see 4 billion shades of gray on the Mun. After an hour of close attention, you can distinguish "polar lowlands lit" vs "polar lowlands unlit" vs "poles lit" vs "poles unlit" -- "highland crater lit" vs "midlands crater unlit". It's only if you cheat a biome map and recolor it that you can find things quickly. The lighting problem is even worse on Minmus, where the daylight solar glare makes everything white. Very hard to distinguish regular flats from all the other flats. There are a bunch of stray pixels of flats all around, but since they are the same color you'd never know they are there unless you go looking for them.

[DD_bwest]

12 minutes ago, bewing said:

I disagree with DD_bwest to some degree. Even in KerbNet, the biome display shows a combination of biome data and surface lighting. So you see 4 billion shades of gray on the Mun. After an hour of close attention, you can distinguish "polar lowlands lit" vs "polar lowlands unlit" vs "poles lit" vs "poles unlit" -- "highland crater lit" vs "midlands crater unlit". It's only if you cheat a biome map and recolor it that you can find things quickly. The lighting problem is even worse on Minmus, where the daylight solar glare makes everything white. Very hard to distinguish regular flats from all the other flats. There are a bunch of stray pixels of flats all around, but since they are the same color you'd never know they are there unless you go looking for them.

i dont consider grabbing wiki maps as cheating. i think if it as harnessing a planet full of universities, with smart kerbal astronomers who have figured it out for me already lol

[Kryxal]

It's their job to figure out where you're going, and yours to get there?