Map view, satellite mapping and how it should work.

[Kasuha]

Just want to give this a gentle *bump*, anyone have anything more to add?

I think bumping your own suggestion is bad practice, especially if you don't have anything new to say. Imagine how the suggestions forum would look like if everybody did that. There are at least five suggestions of mine which I would still like to see in the game, for instance.

[zxczxczbfg]

How about the thicker the atmosphere on an unmapped planet, the greater the distortion, because telescopes trying to peer through the muck of, say, Eve's atmosphere would only see the not-rendered-in-the-game-yet cloud layer.

Edited August 20, 2014 by zxczxczbfg

[Capt Snuggler]

I think bumping your own suggestion is bad practice, especially if you don't have anything new to say. Imagine how the suggestions forum would look like if everybody did that. There are at least five suggestions of mine which I would still like to see in the game, for instance.

sorry dad.

How about the thicker the atmosphere on an unmapped planet, the greater the distortion, because telescopes trying to peer through the muck of, say, Eve's orbit would only see the not-rendered-in-the-game-yet cloud layer.

yes! more advanced mapping tools should be required to reveal the surface below the clouds. again, you should be able to land and the visible, surrounding area should be revealed/added to the map.

Maybe the same tools could be used to detect the core of Jool?

Edited January 30, 2014 by Capt Snuggler

[UH60guy]

Some terrain mapping stuff would be a good addition if cloud cover ever gets implemented. Imagine if all you could see at Eve was the cloud tops on the map view. Even from a ship in orbit, you still have no idea where it will land (splash?) unless you had the right instruments along for the ride. It would certainly bring a little more life into the necessity of probes, which many argue are too weak in the science system- with probes, you're more likely to risk a blind landing.

That could open up some new planning tools on the map window. Similar to how the Kethane mod toggles the scan view, maybe the planets could appear as fuzzy atmospheres on the map, and the player could toggle through science instrument/telescope views to plan their landing, and if necessary, "see" through the clouds.

[technicalfool]

In regards to ScanSat. As I understand it, it generates topographic data rather than reveals it (with ray-tracing?). while I appreciate this is very clever and technically cool, it is resource hungry and not friendly to lower end PCs. I propose to "fake it" by just revealing texture/geometry in the game it self. ether covered with a blur layer or by actually increasing texture/mesh resolution.

Ray casting perhaps. Ray tracing is something else, and yes, is vastly time-consuming.

And yes to the Planetary Mapping mechanism, and everything else. I think the devs should have a chat with the SCANsat guys and see about integrating it officially. That's a very pretty mod.

[hawk_za]

I think the devs should have a chat with the SCANsat guys and see about integrating it officially. That's a very pretty mod.

agreed 100% as it stands map sat helps you plan missions better with the biome map and dose nothing to punish players but instead helps more thorough players be more efficient witch is always a good thing especially if rockets are going to start costing money.

[CaptRobau]

I suggested something similar before and made a mockup of it. I made it pixely because a blurred planet feels much more like it's a bug and the planet's texture is rendered at a low resolution. This looks strange enough that newbies might not immediately go to the forum and say 'why are all my planets so blurry?'

[Capt Snuggler]

I suggested something similar before and made a mockup of it. I made it pixely because a blurred planet feels much more like it's a bug and the planet's texture is rendered at a low resolution. This looks strange enough that newbies might not immediately go to the forum and say 'why are all my planets so blurry?'

http://i.imgur.com/3cXonsB.jpg

this is exactly what im thinking! thats perfect! but the edges should be pixelated too, as if to say "this is the clearest picture we have so far"

[Majorjim!]

I would love to have telescopes to discover the planets.

It could even be a kind of mini game.

MJ

[Kruleworld]

the biggest issue with Satellite scanning that Kethane has highlighted for me, is the need to 'let it do a few orbits to scan'. to do a complete planetary scan takes hours. it can't do it when you're not focused on that ship.

[Majorjim!]

the biggest issue with Satellite scanning that Kethane has highlighted for me, is the need to 'let it do a few orbits to scan'. to do a complete planetary scan takes hours. it can't do it when you're not focused on that ship.

Yeah this is a problem. I don't think many people will find

Mapping fun.

If you're going to a planet you should know what's there.

I think telescopes are enough.

MJ

[Capt Snuggler]

Yeah this is a problem. I don't think many people will find

Mapping fun.

If you're going to a planet you should know what's there.

I think telescopes are enough.

MJ

the telescopes would just be one method of sharpening the image resolution. you could also sent a probe with a camera. hell, send a manned mission if you like. they can take pictures out the window like the Apollo astronauts.

different types of scanners would provide different data. when you combine the data (image + infrared + thermal imaging + altimetry + spectrometry etc etc) all the data would be viewed as "layers" (like photoshop) in the map view and tracking station. then the biomes can be identified so you know where you need to land for your next mission. (and simply if it is flat or underwater)

rather than requiring a certain number of orbits (which I agree could be very tedious), another option could be that each scanner device would need to be placed in a certain orbit range.

eg: the spectrometer needs to be between 100 to 200km orbit at 45°~70° inclination. or something like that.

Also if photography is ever added (that has been suggested elsewhere), when a picture is taken and saved, a marker could appear at the location on the map. by clicking on markers, the photos could be viewed.

edit: I think this could help to re-enforce the difficulty scale for different planets. eve might not be the bast place for your first interplanetary mission as you can't see through the clouds (when they are added). you wouldn't know if you were headed for flat ground, a steep cliff or a vast mercury lake.

Edited April 5, 2014 by Capt Snuggler

[Majorjim!]

KSP needs a camera for the Kerbals.

It would be in first person and the photos would be stored in the crew lounge. On the walls maybe??

Photos would also give science. More if you snap an anomaly.

MJ

[r4pt0r]

KSP needs a camera for the Kerbals.

It would be in first person and the photos would be stored in the crew lounge. On the walls maybe??

Photos would also give science. More if you snap an anomaly.

MJ

yes, agreeed. also, i think placeable cameras would be nice for unmanned rovers, and helpful for docking.

i would also like a stock biome scanner so i can see biome boundries on my map and plan missions for areas where biomes are near each other or where multiple biomes intersect.

"Knowing is half the battle"

[Capt Snuggler]

"Knowing is half the battle"

http://myshopdiscountsblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/knowing-is-half-the-battle.jpg

lol, sums it up beautifully.

[Raptus86]

I like the idea of fog of war.... to explore the kerbal universe with hubblelike satellites to find other planets and discover a rough surface texture like CaptRobau´s left picture above. And later discover details like the right picture with satellites.

The fact all planets are already discovered is... I dont know.. to easy!? The same with transmission data back to kerbal without planting some satellites in the UV to redirect the signal around the sun or planets. I hope this all will be implemented in later versions.

[CaLVin-K]

Perhaps a new building, (or in the tracking station) with an "explore planet" feature which would allow a player to view in detail what they have or haven't discovered about a given planet. this view could include a biome view that shows each biome discovered, a height map density map, and/or a rock composition map. I have a feeling that this feature would be popular with many veteran players, and it would give a reason to do some exploring as the space based telescope data could be complemented by ground based observations.

[tater]

Yeah, this is a great idea, I agree completely. It provides a reason to do things, which is what "gameplay" is in a career game, reasons to do things. It is also a reason for probes (much of the science of real early space probes was photographic in nature).

So you have only gross ideas about planets that are far away, though the Mun and Minmus would be pretty well mapped telescopically. Biomes might be put in two, broad categories. Those that can be mapped via remote sensing, and those that require surface data/collection. The first might suggest areas for further study, that can only be determined to be a unique biome via landing.

[hawk_za]

you should start at ksp with an idea or just a white dot for were all the planets are then give the telescope capability in the science department and as you visit the planets with various experiments then temp info is added to your main screen as you discover it so when you start the game you start with just a bunch of question marks on the planet then by the end you land up with the full spec of the planet and a high res image ect ect ect

[rkman]

the biggest issue with Satellite scanning that Kethane has highlighted for me, is the need to 'let it do a few orbits to scan'. to do a complete planetary scan takes hours. it can't do it when you're not focused on that ship.

The ScanSat mod does "background scanning" (although with some limitations), so it is in principal possible to scan while not focused on the vessel that has the scanner.

[John FX]

you should be able to detect surface colour with low res from LKO (like captrobau showed) with finer detail the closer you get. You should get an altitude map from high orbit and biomes and degree of slope from low orbit. You could even have a `only works under 10km and faces a bit forward` very high res scanner for choosing a landing site.

Mapping should work when not focused on any vessel like scansat already does (except for the landing scanner). I support scansat becoming stock especially as it integrates well with RasterPropMonitors.

[Capt Snuggler]

seeing as John has revived my thread I figure I should add another idea I though of.

The more advanced the scanning/imaging equipment the more power it should require. The data collected should be stored on the craft and require transmission back to KSC before being uploaded to the map view.

[Samniss Arandeen]

I like all of it except for the "discover new planets and bodies" part. Leave that to asteroids. (Have a proper frickin asteroid belt while we're at it. Dres should be the Ceres equivalent.)

Besides, this might, just might, make finding the Monoliths easier.

Oh! On transmitting map data back to KSC: add the ability to transmit Science as well as Map Data to any ship instead of to KSC directly. It would cost the same amount of Electric Charge but you'd lose less Science and Map Data to background interference. Any vessel with the requisite map data will have it available to them immediately, or they can return it via transmission or physical return to KSC to make it available to everyone.

Edited September 4, 2014 by Samniss Arandeen

[Capt Snuggler]

I like all of it except for the "discover new planets and bodies" part. Leave that to asteroids. (Have a proper frickin asteroid belt while we're at it. Dres should be the Ceres equivalent.)

I'm not really too keen on discovering new planets, at least not in kerbols SOI. i'm not suggesting interstellar travel. we are finding other planets outside out solar system, that we cant get to, why cant the kerbals?

I'm mainly interested in gathering higher quality and more complex image data over time, and displaying them as overlays in the map view.

Oh! On transmitting map data back to KSC: add the ability to transmit Science as well as Map Data to any ship instead of to KSC directly. It would cost the same amount of Electric Charge but you'd lose less Science and Map Data to background interference. Any vessel with the requisite map data will have it available to them immediately, or they can return it via transmission or physical return to KSC to make it available to everyone.

yup, though id like to have something similar to remote tech. you would need to transmit control signals for probes. each of the antennas would have a separate purpose.

science value diminishes over range until its eventually 0 (out of range). signals are also blocked by planets. visual indicators in map view will let you see whats going on or going wrong.

the Communotron 16 is a basic, short range, VHF transmitter/receiver. its very energy efficient making it perfect for small probes and rovers. transmission speed of data is effected by atmosphere. range is roughly KSC to minmus with line of sight. cannot transmit and receive at the same time. probes with only one antenna will become unresponsive while transmitting data.

the Comms DTS-M1 could be a more advanced, high gain, VHF transmitter/receiver. higher power requirement but less affected by atmosphere making it suitable for powered aircraft and ground vehicles with large batteries. it can also transmit and receive at the same time. range is roughly the diameter of the Jool system with LOS.

the Communotron 88-88 is very advanced, hi power, UHF transmitter/receiver. very high power drain but fast data transmissions. range and transmission speed is severely effected when in atmosphere making it more suited to orbital relay roll. range is roughly the diameter or kerbins orbit LOS.

in short, the little one is for probes or in vacuum. the medium one is for aircraft and big landers/rovers/bases. the big one is for long distance relays or bases. VHF talks to VHF, UHF talks to UHF.

*edit: oh and as for the science value, it would be governed by the effective range of the transmitter and the distance to the receiver.

maybe you could unlock digital signals on the tech tree too, for a bump in transmission value.

Edited September 6, 2014 by Capt Snuggler

[rkman]

It would cost the same amount of Electric Charge but you'd lose less Science and Map Data to background interference.

Not to say that is wrong simply because it is not realistic, but for your consideration:

In reality no data is lost to background interference, but rather datarate is reduced to ensure no data is lost.

the Communotron 88-88 is very advanced, hi power, UHF transmitter/receiver. very high power drain but fast data transmissions.

In reality the high gain from a dish antenna is not a result of it using more power, but is a result of its shape and size relative to the wavelength of the frequency range that it that is designed for. Such antennas operate not in the UHF range (up to a few GHz) but in SHF and EHF (10's to 100's of GHz).

I'd suggest that if KSP can get something like rocket science largely correct, it would be fitting if it gets related but simpler technology such as electricity and radio communication correct, insofar that it fits with the gameplay.