[WIP][0.90?] PlanetFactory CE

[_Augustus_]

Start doing some basic contracts with a planet pack that has Kerbin for a template. After a little while it will start giving you contracts for it, even if it's in another solar system.

And for the science archives, if they work fine perhaps you might find a way to add icons for new planets to the archives? Kopernicus did it with one snippet of code.

[Borisbee]

I'v always been a fan of this mod. It's the one planet mod that has actually done what it set out to do, which was to create planets from configs. Kopernicus got a lot of hype but as far as I'm aware it seems dead. Hasn't had any work done on it in about a month. I just wish there was a mod that allowed creating planets with the quality of stock planets through config editing. I know Krag's has some rather well done planets but I think most were done through code editing. Kopernicus had a Mars clone that was amazing but it was removed in favor of the config editing options, which doesn't even let you change terrain on new planets you create.

[Kragrathea]

Start doing some basic contracts with a planet pack that has Kerbin for a template. After a little while it will start giving you contracts for it, even if it's in another solar system.

And for the science archives, if they work fine perhaps you might find a way to add icons for new planets to the archives? Kopernicus did it with one snippet of code.

Using Kerbin as a template isn't a good idea for a lot of reasons. Messing up contracts being one of them. Now I expect if you use Mun for a template that wont happen. If I am wrong let me know and I'll take a look.

The Science Archives I think I can fix.

Krag

[nismobg]

Krag what about the orbital rail wobble in map view ? It can be pretty crazy and its been there since .23 if I am not mistaken.

[Kragrathea]

Krag what about the orbital rail wobble in map view ? It can be pretty crazy and its been there since .23 if I am not mistaken.

I haven't seen that problem. Are you using Hyperedit by chance?

Krag

[_Augustus_]

I have ported everything over to Kopernicus, Krag. Would you like to take a look? http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/102363-Planet-Factory-Revived-Version-2-1-Dependencies-Now-Included%21

[Borisbee]

I don't mean to come across rude or anything but it bothers me you call your mod Planetfactory Revived when Planetfactory still works as it is, and the first thing I see in your thread is a picture of a very weirdly shaped Ablate. Ablate should be...ablated. If your goal is to recreate the planets in this mod to Kopernicus, I'd suggest actually doing a 1:1 copy of each planet.

[AlonzoTG]

Yeah, that planet factory revived guy just can't code... As for me, I can't find a working monodevelop for my linux distro. =P

Anyway, the brokenest thing with PF is probably how gravity is defined. The only configurable variable should be MASS, ie 1e20kg or something. Letting people specify a gravity might be intuitive but it creates this deal where SoI's get foobared and things like navigation don't work or create really odd effects. So yeah, try to get rid of that code and simply provide a calculator utility to help users achieve a desired surface gravity, sanity checked against a reasonable density number.

Planet Yukon in kerbin+ is a noteworthy example.

[Kragrathea]

The way gravity is defined with "GeeASL" (G's at sea level) is the way KSP does it internally.

This wobbly orbit thing concerns me. Anyone else seeing misbehaving orbits? It might be related to use of HyperEdit or using the 64bit version. If it happens QuickSave and reload and see if it fixes itself.

Krag

[Borisbee]

I think people are getting weird orbits or SoI's because of lack of playtesting when creating planets. People seem to want to shotgun as many planets as they can instead of stopping to playtest and check each one for bugs such as that. I tried some planetpack and the first planet I went to had a SoI out of whack because they didn't set the gravity right and it set the SoI too small/large.

I just wish more people would go for quality over quantity. Work on a single planet and make it as interesting and fleshed out as you can with biomes and science, make sure the SoI is good, the atmosphere works, it's landable, and then move on to the next planet.

[nismobg]

I haven't seen that problem. Are you using Hyperedit by chance?

Krag

No Hyperedit, and it's just your default planet pack . No custom planets.

[KCreator]

Krag what about the orbital rail wobble in map view ? It can be pretty crazy and its been there since .23 if I am not mistaken.

Are you using the 64bit version? I noticed the same error with my custom planets (using instantiation) in 64 bit, but in the 32 bit version it seems ok. (As of .90 at least)

[Kragrathea]

Are you using the 64bit version? I noticed the same error with my custom planets (using instantiation) in 64 bit, but in the 32 bit version it seems ok. (As of .90 at least)

Ah ha. Tried the 64bit and did indeed get some "wobbly" orbits. No idea why that would be. Do plugins have to have 64bit versions as well?

Update: After I reloaded the orbits were solid again. It probably takes some steps (like an orbit transition) before the bug happens. Please let me know if you can reproduce it reliably.

Krag

Edited December 23, 2014 by Kragrathea

[biohazard15]

Ah ha. Tried the 64bit and did indeed get some "wobbly" orbits. No idea why that would be. Do plugins have to have 64bit versions as well?

Update: After I reloaded the orbits were solid again. It probably takes some steps (like an orbit transition) before the bug happens. Please let me know if you can reproduce it reliably.

Krag

Don't bother with 64-bit - it's pretty much unusable ATM. In fact, many plugins disable themselves on 64-bit, because it's almost impossible to tell the difference between stock bug and plugin bug.

[Kragrathea]

Don't bother with 64-bit - it's pretty much unusable ATM. In fact, many plugins disable themselves on 64-bit, because it's almost impossible to tell the difference between stock bug and plugin bug.

Ah, Good to know. Thanks Biohazrd15! As far as I can tell there is a bug that somehow can cause wobbly orbits. But you should be able to quicksave and reload to "fix".

Ok, if the Kerbals want me to fix PF you are going to have to help out with some bug reports. :-) Too much has changed for me to figure out what is broken without replaying the whole bloody game.

Take career. As far as I can tell everything works except the expansion planets do not appear in the science archives. Is that right? If not tell me the steps to break it and I will try to fix.

Krag

Edited December 23, 2014 by Kragrathea

[biohazard15]

Take career. As far as I can tell everything works except the expansion planets do not appear in the science archives. Is that right? If not tell me the steps to break it and I will try to fix.

Krag

In fact, there is no planets in science archives at all - just an empty place.

Replication is simple - install PF, start a new career and go to the science archives (they're independent of tiers and are always open).

Didn't tried PF with contracts, though - but I believe that they might also be bugged (I don't know how "Explore planet" contracts are implemented, so there may be no "Explore Sentar" contracts, for example)

[_Augustus_]

Yeah, that planet factory revived guy just can't code...

Which is why I didn't code. It's all in the configs... Ablate is less spiky than in the pics, but I can't make it not spiky without a heightmap, which I don't have. I'll try to make one using the normal map.

[nismobg]

In fact, there is no planets in science archives at all - just an empty place.

Replication is simple - install PF, start a new career and go to the science archives (they're independent of tiers and are always open).

Didn't tried PF with contracts, though - but I believe that they might also be bugged (I don't know how "Explore planet" contracts are implemented, so there may be no "Explore Sentar" contracts, for example)

There are the stock planets but they have no description on finished science missions

[Kragrathea]

There are the stock planets but they have no description on finished science missions

Ah, much better! That is what I see. Now to the why....

Krag

[KCreator]

Ah, much better! That is what I see. Now to the why....

Krag

I few pages back I had some preliminary findings, and (At least back then) I found that the archive dynamicly generated the list, and that the errors were caused by duplicate dictionary names, and some kind of missing asset. Defiantly a side-effect of the instantiation process.

I have since not done too much research on this matter due to the very little public information and source code regarding the archives button list. I'm not too sure where to start, but my advise would be trying to rename the duplicates subobjects, and try preventing anything from being destroyed by the garbage collector or something.

[Kragrathea]

I few pages back I had some preliminary findings, and (At least back then) I found that the archive dynamicly generated the list, and that the errors were caused by duplicate dictionary names, and some kind of missing asset. Defiantly a side-effect of the instantiation process.

I have since not done too much research on this matter due to the very little public information and source code regarding the archives button list. I'm not too sure where to start, but my advise would be trying to rename the duplicates subobjects, and try preventing anything from being destroyed by the garbage collector or something.

Ah! Can you link me to these "preliminary findings"? Need Mor Data!

Krag

[KCreator]

Sure, my original findings were at page 37, and here is the source-code to my test plugin where I got a new (invisible) button to spawn: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/80556647/Relsah/RelsahSrc.zip .

[Thomas988]

I've been working on a planet pack lately and up until now I've been using Kopernicus. Kopernicus doesn't support terrestrial bodies, which I want in my pack, so I ported it over to PlanetFactory CE. So far, I have one 5,000 kilometer wide gas giant (so slightly smaller than Jool) and another, 2,000 kilometer ice giant orbiting it. However, once I got both planets ported over to PF:CE, both were the same size: 6,000 kilometers. Can I change these gas giants' diameters at all?

[Vaporo]

Take career. As far as I can tell everything works except the expansion planets do not appear in the science archives. Is that right? If not tell me the steps to break it and I will try to fix.

In Kopernicus thread, they figured out how to get the science archives working:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/88168-Early-development-0-24-Kopernicus-Planetary-System-Modifier?p=1318307&highlight=science#post1318307

Not sure if the same thing would work here, but it's worth mentioning.

EDIT:

Here's what appears to be the code that makes the science archives work in Kopernicus.

            // SEARCH FOR THE ARCHIVES CONTROLLER PREFAB AND OVERWRITE IT WITH THE CUSTOM SYSTEM
            RDArchivesController archivesController = AssetBase.RnDTechTree.GetRDScreenPrefab ().GetComponentsInChildren<RDArchivesController>(true)[0];
            archivesController.systemPrefab = PSystemManager.Instance.systemPrefab;

Edited December 26, 2014 by Vaporo

[_Augustus_]

I brought Planet Factory back using Kopernicus. I'm assuming it's OK for me to use the same title and remove the "Revived" label?