|
Work progress 0.9.7.1
|
|
| Salvo | Date: Sunday, 10.11.2013, 20:49 | Message # 346 |
 Star Engineer
Group: Local Moderators
Italy
Messages: 1400
Status: Offline
| Quote SpaceEngineer (  ) Gas giants now may have up to 100 moons, ice giants up to 40, small planets up to 20.
Are you sure this won't kill framerate?
Imagine a binary system with 10 gas giants or more, each of them have on average 50 moons, the result is 500 moons 
The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition.
CPU: Intel Core i7 4770 GPU: ASUS Radeon R9 270 RAM: 8 GBs
(still don't know why everyone is doing this...)
|
| |
| |
| Voekoevaka | Date: Sunday, 10.11.2013, 21:00 | Message # 347 |
 World Builder
Group: SE team
France
Messages: 1016
Status: Offline
| Awesome update !
Quote SpaceEngineer ( ) Another problem: moons numbering starting from inner moons, so main (big) moons often have huge numbers like "7.15". So maybe it would be good idea to change naming system: for dwarf moons using names like "7.d59" or so.
Quote HarbingerDawn ( ) Would it be possible to make names based on the moon "families", such as 7.a1, 7.b1, 7.c1, with increasing letter value meaning increasing family distance? That way small moons in close equatorial orbits can be easily distinguished from those in distant orbits.
Cool idea ! I think letters "i", "r", and "o" could fit for inner, regular and outer.
Question : are inner moons placed on rings holes (like shepherd moons does around Saturn) ?
Want some music of mine ? Please go here !
|
| |
| |
| SpaceEngineer | Date: Sunday, 10.11.2013, 21:13 | Message # 348 |
 Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4800
Status: Offline
| Quote Voekoevaka ( ) Question : are inner moons placed on rings holes (like shepherd moons does around Saturn) ?
No, I don't change rings code yet. Be patient!
|
| |
| |
| HarbingerDawn | Date: Sunday, 10.11.2013, 21:15 | Message # 349 |
 Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8717
Status: Offline
| Quote Voekoevaka ( ) I think letters "i", "r", and "o" could fit for inner, regular and outer.
That could be confusing since it might be hard to localize that, hence a b and c. Maybe even alpha, beta, and gamma.
All forum users, please read this!
My SE mods and addons
Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM
|
| |
| |
| DeathStar | Date: Sunday, 10.11.2013, 21:31 | Message # 350 |
|
Pioneer
Group: Users
Croatia
Messages: 515
Status: Offline
| Oh my, I am so excited right now, thank you so much SpaceEngineer, since you have, quite frankly, made my day!
I could have never hoped for the cap to be raised all the way to 100. This is becoming the best update ever: Higher surface detail, huge overhaul of catalog bodies, the music player along with music, increased detail of life-bearing planets, huge overhaul of spaceships and now massive overhaul of moon generation! You rock!
Edited by DeathStar - Sunday, 10.11.2013, 21:33 |
| |
| |
| JCandeias | Date: Sunday, 10.11.2013, 21:47 | Message # 351 |
 Pioneer
Group: Translators
Portugal
Messages: 387
Status: Offline
| Quote SpaceEngineer ( ) Ok, I upgraded procedural moon system generator.
I know I'm in the minority in this, but I think this is unrealistically neat. If exoplanets taught us something was that the universe is not neat, islands of neatness notwithstanding, and that if you model your ideas about extrasolar systems on solar examples, you're bound to be surprised.
Still, it's better than the current moon systems, which are way too dominated by large objects. True: they are more interesting than asteroidal ones. But these should exist in much larger numbers.
Quote SpaceEngineer ( ) With such huge amount of moons, Planet Browser becomes a mess
I think this is the right time to reinforce my suggestion, made earlier, of presenting some information as either a branching tree, or as a table.  Or maybe both. This could be the standard for small objects, leaving the Planet Browser for planets, dwarf or otherwise, and major moons.
They let me use this!
Edited by JCandeias - Sunday, 10.11.2013, 21:48 |
| |
| |
| werdnaforever | Date: Sunday, 10.11.2013, 21:51 | Message # 352 |
 World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 897
Status: Offline
| Quote Salvo ( ) Are you sure this won't kill framerate?
Imagine a binary system with 10 gas giants or more, each of them have on average 50 moons, the result is 500 moons
I don't think the orbits themselves are a problem for the CPU, and you'll never have to see all the surfaces of 500 rocky moons generated at once.
EDIT: Also that third picture is really perplexing. It's like a cosmic ball of yarn.
Edited by werdnaforever - Sunday, 10.11.2013, 21:54 |
| |
| |
| DeathStar | Date: Sunday, 10.11.2013, 22:10 | Message # 353 |
|
Pioneer
Group: Users
Croatia
Messages: 515
Status: Offline
| Quote JCandeias ( ) I know I'm in the minority in this, but I think this is unrealistically neat. If exoplanets taught us something was that the universe is not neat, islands of neatness notwithstanding, and that if you model your ideas about extrasolar systems on solar examples, you're bound to be surprised.
He specifically said that there is always a small chance for worlds that are a bit alien to that area to generate
Added (11.11.2013, 01:10)
---------------------------------------------
Also, in the defense of the new generation, although you can use exoplanets as some sort of claim, you should understand that we know very little about exoplanets. We know 700 exoplanets so far and know very little about them besides some basic properties.
Our Solar System, on the other hand, we have been observing since ancient times and know a huge amount of details about it. You could be surprised how neat our own solar system actually is. Look at Jupiters, Saturns or Neptunes moons, and you will see that it is very similar to SEs new generation.
Although certainly not everything should be perfectly neat, I think that the new system is very realistic and should be left as it is.
Edited by DeathStar - Sunday, 10.11.2013, 22:10 |
| |
| |
| JCandeias | Date: Sunday, 10.11.2013, 22:10 | Message # 354 |
|
Pioneer
Group: Translators
Portugal
Messages: 387
Status: Offline
| Quote DeathStar ( ) He specifically said that there is always a small chance for worlds that are a bit alien to that area to generate
I know. And if that chance weren't small, I'd be happier than I am.
And yeah, I'm fully aware how neat the Solar System seems to be... at least until you begin looking at the Tritons out there. That's exactly the problem: we already know, from exoplanetary studies, that it is in no way typical.
They let me use this!
Edited by JCandeias - Sunday, 10.11.2013, 22:16 |
| |
| |
| DeathStar | Date: Sunday, 10.11.2013, 22:24 | Message # 355 |
|
Pioneer
Group: Users
Croatia
Messages: 515
Status: Offline
| I do not understand what you mean by "Tritons". If you mean Neptunes moons, the categorization is roughly the same as the rest of the gas giants.
|
| |
| |
| HarbingerDawn | Date: Sunday, 10.11.2013, 22:34 | Message # 356 |
|
Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8717
Status: Offline
| Quote DeathStar ( ) I do not understand what you mean by "Tritons".
Large moons in retrograde orbits that were captured by the planet from a nearby population of objects.
All forum users, please read this!
My SE mods and addons
Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM
|
| |
| |
| Donatelo200 | Date: Sunday, 10.11.2013, 22:35 | Message # 357 |
|
Explorer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 261
Status: Offline
| I think he is referring to the fact that Triton is a captured moon. Thus disrupting any order in that moon system. Albeit Neptunes moons still seem to be relatively ordered even with Tritons intrusion.
EDIT: Ninjad 
CPU: Intel Core i7-4790K
GPU: Nvidia GTX 1080
SSD: Samsung 850 Evo 250GB
HDD: Toshiba DT01ACA200 2TB
HDD: WD Blue 1TB (2012)
RAM: Unknown 16G-D3-1600-MR 2x8GB
MBD: MSI Z97S SLI Krait Edition (MS-7922)
Edited by Donatelo200 - Sunday, 10.11.2013, 22:36 |
| |
| |
| XaxX-0 | Date: Sunday, 10.11.2013, 23:24 | Message # 358 |
 Observer
Group: Newbies
Canada
Messages: 7
Status: Offline
| Quote SpaceEngineer ( )
With such huge amount of moons, Planet Browser becomes a mess:
Indeed, and the favorite locations save list becomes a mess too, when you start to get hundreds of found planets. The browser should be made to easily navigate through thousands of saved locations, with icons and sortable lists.
Great stuff though! 
|
| |
| |
| neutronium76 | Date: Monday, 11.11.2013, 08:26 | Message # 359 |
 World Builder
Group: Users
Greece
Messages: 718
Status: Offline
| Quote Voekoevaka ( ) Cool idea ! I think letters "i", "r", and "o" could fit for inner, regular and outer.
Agree. Or if it is confusing for some: xx_inner1, xx_inner2, etc.. , xx_main7, xx_main8, ..., xx_outer15, xx_outer16, etc..
Quote HarbingerDawn ( ) That could be confusing since it might be hard to localize that, hence a b and c. Maybe even alpha, beta, and gamma.
I don't think it would be hard to localize. It's pretty obvious and it is described in this wiki article quite clearly as it can also be demonstrated from Space Engineer's pictures.
In contrast a, b, c, alpha, beta, etc.. would be even more confusing
Also something else that I just thought:
Gas giants whose orbits are next or close to an asteroid belt (aka Jupiter-type) would probably have many satellites that will belong to all three groups. As we move closer to a star (i.e hot jupiters), the satellites would be fewer or even none (in case of very close proximity to the star). In Uranus, Neptune orbits, satellites would be a bit less than Jupiter region and will increase slightly/moderately again in Pluto, Oort cloud region if a frozen gas giant exists there.
For ice giants, the algorithm should be modified to have a bit less satellites.
I don't know if this would be easy to implement or if it is scientifically correct but I think it is logically correct.
PC1:Core i7 970@3.34GHz, 6 cores/12 threads, 12GB DDR3 RAM@1.34GHz, 2x(SLI) GTX-580 GPUs 3GB VRAM(GDDR5)@1GHz, OS:Win7x64SP1
PC2:Core2Quad X9770@3.2GHz, 2 cores/4 threads 4GB DDR2 RAM@1GHz, GTX-285 GPU 1GB VRAM(DDR3)@1.24GHz, OS:WinVistax64SP2
Edited by neutronium76 - Monday, 11.11.2013, 09:16 |
| |
| |
| HarbingerDawn | Date: Monday, 11.11.2013, 11:16 | Message # 360 |
|
Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8717
Status: Offline
| Quote neutronium76 ( ) I don't think it would be hard to localize.
Currently there is no system by which procedural object names can be localized in any way, and I don't know how much work would be required to implement that. That's what I meant.
All forum users, please read this!
My SE mods and addons
Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM
|
| |
| |
ENG
New site
Italy 
France 
Russian Federation 
United States 
Croatia 
Portugal 
Pirate 
Canada 
Greece