Русский New site

Advanced search

[ New messages · Forum rules · Members ]
Page 205 of 221«12203204205206207220221»
Forum » SpaceEngine » Archive » Work progress and public beta test - 0.9.7.4
Work progress and public beta test - 0.9.7.4
JCandeiasDate: Thursday, 07.07.2016, 18:09 | Message # 3061
Pioneer
Group: Translators
Portugal
Messages: 382
Status: Offline
Quote Mosfet ()
I copy pasted your code in a new script file, placed in addons\catalogs\stars, then I visited Kiru in SE 0974 RC3.
This is what I got, seems nothing out of order


And after this I tested my scripts by removing kiru's planets, and yes, the star is back to normal.

With planets back on, it's not. And yet I can see no problems in the scripts, which are basically the same as other system's scripts that are not causing any problems (they all come from a system-building excel spreadsheet I have been using). I'm attaching Kiru's scripts here.

Can there be issues with the comments? That's the only thing I can think of.

(and how can the adding of planets change the star they're orbiting, anyway?)

Attachments: kiru.sc(113Kb)





They let me use this!
 
JackDoleDate: Thursday, 07.07.2016, 20:14 | Message # 3062
Star Engineer
Group: Local Moderators
Germany
Messages: 1734
Status: Offline
JCandeias,
Use a 'StarBarycenter'.
Put this script in 'addons\stars':

Code

// KiruBC.sc

StarBarycenter "Kiru BC"
{
    RA      20 0 48.624384
    Dec     -72.273373
    Dist    7069.493936
}


Then add the star in your system script, along with the planets:

Code

Star  "Kiru"
{
    ParentBody  "Kiru BC"
    Class       "M5V"
    AbsMagn     14.42627959
    
    Obliquity       18.73848696
    EqAscendNode    2.700162405
    
    StaticPosPolar   (0.0 0.0 0.0)
}


For me, the system looks like this:


Attachments: 7442484.jpg(294Kb)





Don't forget to look here.

 
SpaceEngineerDate: Thursday, 07.07.2016, 20:41 | Message # 3063
Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4795
Status: Offline
Latest updates:

1) Added support of custom subdirectories inside "addons/" directory. Now mods can be located in its own folders. This is useful for data organization, for example you can create a folder "addons/StarTrek/" and save all Trek addons there. Both packed and unpacked solutions are possible. The root addons directory ("addons/") also could have addons, as before.

2) Solar system textures are repacked to use with new addons system. Updated Mercury, Ceres, Saturn moons etc are included by default. Total size is 45 Gb, but I split it into "HD" (17 Gb) and "Ultra" (28 Gb) addons. The second is ultra-resolution addon to the first. It have the latest (upscaled) levels for "heavy" planets such as Earth, Mars and some others. These additional levels does not increase resolution twice, as all previous levels, but by a factor of ~1.2-1.5. This is because original Earth dataset had resolution of 86400*43200, while SE requires power-of-two, so they was upscaled to 131072*65536. Upscaling doesn't add new information to the textures, so real surface quality corresponds 86400*43200. But file size was increased drastically, this is why this "Ultra" addon is even larger, then "HD", despite on what it have all previous levels (65536*32768) and all other Solar System worlds. Difference in planet appearance in SE between HD and Ultra is not very big, but can be seen; Ultra pack could be useful to whose who needs all possible data, while majority of users can download only HD pack.

3) Changed config files structure and behaviour, user configs does not got overwritten by the patch. Now SE will be distributed with two configs: main-def.cfg and save-def.cfg, the first have all SE parameters, the second only saved player coordinates, time and camera binding. After first start, SE creates the files main-user.cfg and save-user.cfg, and writes parameters only to them. When next patch will out, SE will not overwrite these user configs, but updates them with some new parameters, which I could add during development of the patch. It's also easy to "reset settings" by simply deleting user configs.

Updated RC3 is in Steam (except Solar System addons). Full list of changes after RC3:





 
JCandeiasDate: Thursday, 07.07.2016, 20:52 | Message # 3064
Pioneer
Group: Translators
Portugal
Messages: 382
Status: Offline
Quote JackDole ()
Use a 'StarBarycenter'.


Why?

I mean, OK, it works. And using a barycenter also works with the issue of contaminating brown dwarfs -- I already knew that. But why must one use such a convoluted method to make the systems work, when they don't change anything significant? Why should we need to add extra and rather redundant snippets of code to make the program comply to instructions that were clearly stated to begin with? So much so, in fact, that until recently it did comply to them.

A barycenter makes sense when the stars move around, when they actually orbit it. But why must we use one for static stars? It's crazy. It doesn't even begin to make sense.

Also, this doesn't solve everything. The planets are being lit by stuff that isn't there. In some positions, at least near Doradma, the first planet, you see a luminous star shining nearby, which comes and goes. If you click on it, you're informed that it's 24 Draconis, or Kuma1, which apparently is at a mere 941 UA from Kiru:



However, if you remove Kiru and try to find 24 Draconis, you'll find it within the disc of the galaxy, more than 20 thousand light-years away (and you also find two instances of 24 Draconis in the object browser, one with primary -- Kuma -- the other without; apparently one is the star itself, the other one is its barycenter).

Somehow, this star is being highjacked by the Kiru system. And I just found out why: there's a small moon called Kuma in it. Renaming it solves all issues and makes the barycenter unnecessary.

SpaceEngineer, I guess we need the log to include a report about possible naming conflicts. Sometimes identical names don't cause trouble, but sometimes they do.

Attachments: 4630148.jpg(224Kb)





They let me use this!
 
DeathStarDate: Thursday, 07.07.2016, 21:10 | Message # 3065
Pioneer
Group: Users
Croatia
Messages: 515
Status: Offline
I've just realized that white/blue super/hypergiants FINALLY generate procedurally. Hooray! Only issue I've noticed so far is that blue supergiants have... improbably large masses(over 1000 solar masses)
 
JCandeiasDate: Thursday, 07.07.2016, 21:23 | Message # 3066
Pioneer
Group: Translators
Portugal
Messages: 382
Status: Offline
Quote SpaceEngineer ()
- Installer does not delete addons and other user files during installation/uninstallation


This includes files in the screenshots folder, right? My latest installation meant losing every single image I had done since rc2 came out. sad





They let me use this!
 
HetairosDate: Thursday, 07.07.2016, 21:47 | Message # 3067
Observer
Group: Users
Poland
Messages: 18
Status: Offline
I hope it does. I lost my screenshots once too.

Quote DeathStar ()
Only issue I've noticed so far is that blue supergiants have... improbably large masses(over 1000 solar masses)

I found one over 2500 solar masses.
 
MosfetDate: Thursday, 07.07.2016, 22:26 | Message # 3068
World Builder
Group: Users
Italy
Messages: 713
Status: Offline
Quote SpaceEngineer ()
Latest updates:
[...]


LOL you said bugfixes only, then:
Quote
- Added support of custom subfolders for addons (nested set of any depth is possible)
- Changed config files structure and behaviour, user configs does not got overwritten by the patch
- ...
- ...

biggrin





"Time is illusion. Lunchtime doubly so."
Douglas N. Adams
My mods
Asus x555ub: cpu i5-6200u - ram 4gb - gpu nvidia geforce 940m 2gb vram
 
ShadowRaikouDate: Friday, 08.07.2016, 01:44 | Message # 3069
Astronaut
Group: Users
India
Messages: 53
Status: Offline
Did something change in the debug mode in RC3? I remember that if I wanted the RA/Dec/Distance for any given empty space (to place custom stars), I'd select the sun and look at it's coords in debug mode. But it's not showing any coords at all, and certainly not in RA/Dec/Distance. =/
 
SpaceEngineerDate: Friday, 08.07.2016, 08:08 | Message # 3070
Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4795
Status: Offline
Quote JCandeias ()
This includes files in the screenshots folder, right? My latest installation meant losing every single image I had done since rc2 came out.

Yes. The problem is version number - it is 0.974 for all RCs. So installer attempts to install in the same directory. But now I configured it more accurately, so it will uninstall only files which was previously installed. So screenshots, addons and user configs (new thing) will be preserved.

Quote Mosfet ()
LOL you said bugfixes only, then:

This is needed for Steam.

Quote ShadowRaikou ()
Did something change in the debug mode in RC3? I remember that if I wanted the RA/Dec/Distance for any given empty space (to place custom stars), I'd select the sun and look at it's coords in debug mode. But it's not showing any coords at all, and certainly not in RA/Dec/Distance. =/

"Sol/Sun" is now the Sun's body itself. To select the star system, enter "Solar System".





 
ShadowRaikouDate: Friday, 08.07.2016, 08:20 | Message # 3071
Astronaut
Group: Users
India
Messages: 53
Status: Offline
Quote SpaceEngineer ()
"Sol/Sun" is now the Sun's body itself. To select the star system, enter "Solar System".


Oh, I see. Yes, works perfectly now, thank you. =)
 
JCandeiasDate: Friday, 08.07.2016, 14:37 | Message # 3072
Pioneer
Group: Translators
Portugal
Messages: 382
Status: Offline
Quote JCandeias ()
A barycenter makes sense when the stars move around, when they actually orbit it. But why must we use one for static stars? It's crazy. It doesn't even begin to make sense.


Meanwhile this got me thinking and I had a bout of understanding. Maybe.

Is the barycenter in the stars catalog being used as sort of a warning, telling the program to expect stars in the planets catalog?

These problems with stars seem to come from unexpected stars in planet catalogues, weather they are really there or pop up due to some other inconsistency.

Also:

Quote JCandeias ()
SpaceEngineer, I guess we need the log to include a report about possible naming conflicts. Sometimes identical names don't cause trouble, but sometimes they do.


Meanwhile I did a few more tests and found out that the names that can cause trouble if they are identical are main names that have no alternative names to distinguish one from the other. I.e., defining this dwarf moon of mine as

Code
DwarfMoon "Kuma"


puts it in direct conflict with the Kuma star, but defining it as

Code
DwarfMoon "Kuma/Goyra 23"


doesn't, despite the fact that the main name stayed the same.

This is a problem that should be solved, because addon makers won't know every name in use in actual celestial objects or in other people's addons and therefore will inevitably create duplicate names (and those of us that use sutomatic naming in vast quantities don't even know every name their own addons use). If I can make a suggestion, this issue would be solved, if not totally at least mostly, if the program automatically assigned alternate names to catalogue objects, based on their hierarchy, in the likes of Goyra 23 (Kuma is the 23rd moon of planet Goyra).





They let me use this!
 
MosfetDate: Friday, 08.07.2016, 15:47 | Message # 3073
World Builder
Group: Users
Italy
Messages: 713
Status: Offline
A BaryCenter in the stars catalog with a well thought name solves this problem as well, isn't it?




"Time is illusion. Lunchtime doubly so."
Douglas N. Adams
My mods
Asus x555ub: cpu i5-6200u - ram 4gb - gpu nvidia geforce 940m 2gb vram
 
JCandeiasDate: Friday, 08.07.2016, 16:14 | Message # 3074
Pioneer
Group: Translators
Portugal
Messages: 382
Status: Offline
Quote Mosfet ()
A BaryCenter in the stars catalog with a well thought name solves this problem as well, isn't it?


Not really, since names in the catalogs of existing objects are not arbitrary. You can't really invent them. That would only help with custom objects.





They let me use this!
 
MosfetDate: Friday, 08.07.2016, 17:11 | Message # 3075
World Builder
Group: Users
Italy
Messages: 713
Status: Offline
I'm afraid I'm lost. If you add a custom object which has the same name of a real object, as long as you have a different barycenter declared in catalog\stars it should not merge with existing data... You'll find it in the object browser with the same name and different parentbody. If it has the same parentbody, on the other hand, it'll merge. At least it's what I've grasped from "adding a star" and "adding a planet" mod threads.




"Time is illusion. Lunchtime doubly so."
Douglas N. Adams
My mods
Asus x555ub: cpu i5-6200u - ram 4gb - gpu nvidia geforce 940m 2gb vram
 
Forum » SpaceEngine » Archive » Work progress and public beta test - 0.9.7.4
Page 205 of 221«12203204205206207220221»
Search: