Ven

[1.2.2] Stock Part Revamp, Update 1.9.6. Released Source Files!

3451 posts in this topic

A possible way to make this mod compatible with the other mods that use squad assets would be to place these new models in a separate addon folder and use MM to make the changes to the squad parts that would force them to use the new models instead. One possible issue here could be that many of the squad configs use the simple "mesh" parameter instead of the more complex "MODEL" node. Mods like CoolRockets force the squad configs to switch to using the "MODEL" node so that they can add a second "MODEL" node for the launch-effect mesh. Now, taking into account that we have yet to see changes to the models that are affected by CoolRockets, I assume that eventually you may decide to upgrade engines and large fuel tanks. If and when that happens, the module manager configs would have to check for whether or not the "mesh" parameter is being used or the "MODEL" node is being used and update the appropriate fields. Update: I just realized you could just have two module manager setups, one which has a "NEEDS[CoolRockets]" and one with a "NEEDS[!CoolRockets]" to be sure of what you're editing. Either way, your configs should be set to run "AFTER[CoolRockets]" and whatever other mods we can discover that make changes to the squad mesh-referencing formats.

So... yeah, mod compatibility is a pain in the arse.

NOTE: "CoolRockets" is just a mod name I threw in there for convenience. I believe the actual mod name has since been wrapped into the "Klockheed_Martian" stuff and cannot be referenced with the original mod name. I have yet to really dig into that, I just wanted to make the suggestion and/or voice my concerns.

EDIT: I was just looking at the last pictures you posted and that "landing antenna" image is hilarious.

Edited by Gaalidas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is really well done, that's the quality level I would expect from Squad team. It's B9 like but keeps things stockalike, the best mix possible in my opinion.

In short, it's perfect, Thank you.

"at least 20% cooler", oh you. /)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, just droping by to say thank you for those well crafted parts, they fit so good with stock and show off how squad parts should really look like!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for posting about that, I've added The MM CFG's.

You need MM 2.4.x for those to work.

Also, you know about the 'NoAttach' tag, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A possible way to make this mod compatible with the other mods that use squad assets would be to place these new models in a separate addon folder and use MM to make the changes to the squad parts that would force them to use the new models instead. One possible issue here could be that many of the squad configs use the simple "mesh" parameter instead of the more complex "MODEL" node. Mods like CoolRockets force the squad configs to switch to using the "MODEL" node so that they can add a second "MODEL" node for the launch-effect mesh. Now, taking into account that we have yet to see changes to the models that are affected by CoolRockets, I assume that eventually you may decide to upgrade engines and large fuel tanks. If and when that happens, the module manager configs would have to check for whether or not the "mesh" parameter is being used or the "MODEL" node is being used and update the appropriate fields. Update: I just realized you could just have two module manager setups, one which has a "NEEDS[CoolRockets]" and one with a "NEEDS[!CoolRockets]" to be sure of what you're editing. Either way, your configs should be set to run "AFTER[CoolRockets]" and whatever other mods we can discover that make changes to the squad mesh-referencing formats.

So... yeah, mod compatibility is a pain in the arse.

Ugh. Now I'm confused, but I'll try do do that over time.

It seems your folder for the radial engine is named Radial.. instead of radial..., this made the contents not write over the vanilla part and i ended up with two copies of the same part, probably screwing with ksp. Also, ven.cfg seems superflous as most of it is present in the part.cfg file.

oops, sorry about that. I changed the name so it'll now overwrite the folder. But the CFG is needed for the emmissive and to correct some alignment mess-ups that occurred when I made the part.

You need MM 2.4.x for those to work.

Also, you know about the 'NoAttach' tag, right?

I've included Module Manager 2.4.4 in the download. No, I have not heard of the no attach tag and I get the feeling that I've said something horrible...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its something you can add as a tag to a collider in Unity, and it tells KSP you cant attach things to them - useful when you're doing stuff like the shielded Mk1 Clamp-O-Tron, because you tag the colliders on doors with that, and you can still attach stuff to the rest of the part.

Not sure if that's only 0.25. Also, the MM files replicate everything you did in the replacement .cfgs - there should be no need for the part.cfg files. Will look at the new version soon :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Its something you can add as a tag to a collider in Unity, and it tells KSP you cant attach things to them - useful when you're doing stuff like the shielded Mk1 Clamp-O-Tron, because you tag the colliders on doors with that, and you can still attach stuff to the rest of the part.

Well it looks like I'll be redoing the parachute colliders. Originally I had two collision meshes that formed closely to the actual model, but I went back and made a single collider once I noticed things like RCS thrusters would be floating on a cap that no longer exists.:P

Know of any other tags? Or maybe a place where I can find them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None apart from the ones you already know of for making engine autoshrouds not appear in parts list and the ladder/hatch ones.

Ah btw, don't use .tga unless you really have to - its not compressed to .dxt on load, and ends up using ~3x as much memory.

Your choices are

  • .png: small on disk, makes small zips, no mipmaps unless ATM is installed, full color accuracy.
  • .mbm: small-ish on disk, good load time, mipmaps, but huge zips, lossy compression - .dxt with custom header - will not respect truecolor flag in unity, always uses compressed color formats.

ATM fixes the TGA compression bug and the png mipmap bug, of course.

Edited by Taverius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are the fixes for 1.2.

MM class is in session again!

Squad/sepMotor1:

  • Don't add an old-style FX when you're switching to the Part to ModuleEnginesFX. Well, the new module will ignore it, but if you want be neat, delete the old ones.
  • Wipe EFFECTS with !EFFECTS {} if you're going to re-create it - and EFFECTS is a mess to edit so its best to just wipe and replace unless you know exactly what's getting handed to you.
  • No need to kill the old ModuleEngines, and anyway you do that with !MODULE[ModuleEngines] {}.
  • No need to re-create ModuleEnginesFX.
    • Edit ModuleEngines* - in case Squad changes it to ModuleEnginesFX on their side, this catches both and you don't even need to update - change the module name to ModuleEnginesFX, and change only what you need.
    • I've got it down to 2 lines (could be 1, the engineID isn't used unless its a MultiModeEngine), bar the clearing of any custom FX names.
    • The latter generally a good idea, since many people don't know the default FX nodes - see below - unless you're making a MultiModeEngine, you can just give your FX nodes the default names and never specify them in ModuleEnginesFX.

// Played once on flameout

flameoutEffectName = "flameout";

// Played on

// Ignition with power = 0

// Shutdown with power = 0

// while not ignited but active (?) with power = 0

// while ignited with power = current % of maxThrust

runningEffectName = "running";

// Played on

// Ignition with power = 0

// Shutdown with power=0

// On flameout with power=0

// while ignited with power = current throttle

powerEffectName = "power";

// Played on Ignition

engageEffectName = "engage";

// On proper shutdown (throttle = 0 and no flameout)

disengageEffectName = "disengage";

// while ignited with power = requested throttle

// On Flame out with power = 0

directThrottleEffectName = "directThrottle";

StructuralPylon:

  • This one is mine *blush*. It must have been late, because instead of @name = ModuleAnchoredDecoupler, I'm doing | = ModuleAnchoredDecoupler, which changes the node type.
    So instead of this:
    MODULE
    {
    name = ModuleAnchoredDecoupler


    It was doing this:

    ModuleAnchoredDecoupler
    {
    name = ModuleDecouple


    Which ooobviously doesn't work ...

Extras:

First thing first: Save yourself grief later and avoid spaces in folder names as well as part names. I speak from bitter experience.

Snubotron:

  • No need to recreate the whole damn thing. Make a new part based on another part with +PART[<original partName].
    Once you've done that, this is essentially the stock part edit with a few more bits.
  • Since you cant be 100% sure people will run it with your edit to the stock separatron installed, you have to make sure it would work with both, but this isn't very hard
    • Clear old-style FX groups for neatness, like the stock edit.
    • Target ModuleEngines* in when editing the engine so it works either way.
    • Like the stock edit, wipe the EFFECTS node and re-create, use stock effect node names, and clear any custom effect names from ModuleEngines*

    [*]Since its just half a separatron, use /= 2 to just divide mass, cost and resource amounts by 2 - that way if Squad changes those values, yours are still correct. Work smart, not hard ;)

Parachutes:

  • Rehash of the above. Fork the exiting part with +PART, and only edit what's needed.

P.S. Since all textures get loaded regardless of their being used in a model, you're best off naming the replacement textures with the same name & extension as the stock ones :)

P.P.S. Updated the file with some fixes for the extra parts. Hit me up on IRC if you have any questions, #kspmodders on espernet

Edited by Taverius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ven, this is the mod I've always wanted. Are you going to redo the new SP+ wing textures/replace them with versions of these? The smooth surface looks much better than the SP+ parts imo. If you want it, I can do a small 2-4 minute video review of these textures. I like them that much.

Edited by Avera9eJoe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ven!

I have some problems with the Radial engine:

-If I want to use it from directly the 1.2 version, the game won't load in (it's stop loading wne the radial engine files are coming)

-If I use the version 1.1 files the overheat textures are glitched(i can see green and white lines in the engine body, and if i wath the ship from far its greenish)

What should I do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ven, this is the mod I've always wanted. Are you going to redo the new SP+ wing textures/replace them with versions of these? The smooth surface looks much better than the SP+ parts imo. If you want it, I can do a small 2-4 minute video review of these textures. I like them that much.

I could do the SP+ parts when they come out in .25. I need to darken the wing parts to match the fuselages anyways. But not right now, because I'm currently working on the jet engines and maybe a alternate version of the MK1 that has a .625m mount on front.

If you want it, I can do a small 2-4 minute video review of these textures. I like them that much.

Go ahead.

Hi Ven!

I have some problems with the Radial engine:

-If I want to use it from directly the 1.2 version, the game won't load in (it's stop loading when the radial engine files are coming)

-If I use the version 1.1 files the overheat textures are glitched(i can see green and white lines in the engine body, and if i wath the ship from far its greenish)

What should I do?

Try downloading my mod again, I updated the file last night to try to prevent this. (I messed up the name of the folder, so there would be two radial engines instead of one). Also, do you have multiple MM.dlls in your gamedata folder? I get a similar error If I didn't delete all but the most recent versions.

If all else fails just remove the ven.cfg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glowing command pod SOLD ME! I can't believe its taken THIS LONG for someone to do that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I could do the SP+ parts when they come out in .25. I need to darken the wing parts to match the fuselages anyways. But not right now, because I'm currently working on the jet engines and maybe a alternate version of the MK1 that has a .625m mount on front.

Very cool! A note for if you do end up redoing the SP+ parts in the future, I suggest you remove the black outlining of the wings. I've always hated the black outline on the SP+ wing parts. Just me?

On the jet engines being remade at the moment, sweet!

And about the Mk2 capsule, I wish you had an alternate version that didn't have the door/ladder in the middle. I'll need to redesign all my landers and capsules now.

Go ahead.

Alright I shall begin recording... now actually :P. I hope to have you a short video within the week.

Edited by Avera9eJoe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First thing first: Save yourself grief later and avoid spaces in folder names as well as part names. I speak from bitter experience.

Oh god yes, no spaces. Every time you use a space in a part name or folder name, a kitten cries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Try downloading my mod again, I updated the file last night to try to prevent this. (I messed up the name of the folder, so there would be two radial engines instead of one). Also, do you have multiple MM.dlls in your gamedata folder? I get a similar error If I didn't delete all but the most recent versions.

If all else fails just remove the ven.cfg.

I have only one MM.ddl (2.4.4). Still the same: With the ven file it can't load tha game, bcouse of the Radial engine 1-2. And if i remove it, the engine have some overheat glitch (texture glitch).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have only one MM.ddl (2.4.4). Still the same: With the ven file it can't load tha game, bcouse of the Radial engine 1-2. And if i remove it, the engine have some overheat glitch (texture glitch).

OK, so try deleting the RadialLiquidEngine folder entirely, and (if you havent already) reinstall the mod. I think that you have two engines (the above and radialLiquidEngine) that are probably conflicting with each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, so try deleting the RadialLiquidEngine folder entirely, and (if you havent already) reinstall the mod. I think that you have two engines (the above and radialLiquidEngine) that are probably conflicting with each other.

Whitout the Ven file, the engine works fine. Only the overheat effect glitched on the enine body. Instead of being redish, the engine body's texture become buggy. Everything else working fine and the other part of the heat animation is working fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for leaving you with empty promises, but I can't make that video review. School's taking priority. Writing college applications. I am quite a fan of these textures though. I wish you had a texture only version of the parts too :). It'd be nice if it didn't redo the collision meshes imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whitout the Ven file, the engine works fine. Only the overheat effect glitched on the enine body. Instead of being redish, the engine body's texture become buggy. Everything else working fine and the other part of the heat animation is working fine.

Well I'm just about at the end of my rope here. Do you have any mods installed?

...It'd be nice if it didn't redo the collision meshes imo.

Which ones are bugging you?

Anywhom, here's an early mockup of the LV-T30:

9T8fpmT.png

Any thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HOLEEE CRAP.

There are not enough <3s in the world.

One suggestion: that upper ring on the nozzle looks a bit too thick to be for regenerative cooling; since there's already an exhaust pipe, it wouldn't be piping turbine exhaust into the nozzle. Well, ok, actually two: you can take this opportunity to remove that cylinder on the far side of the engine from the gas generator and the exhaust; there's no reason to have *two* gas generators (or that third one?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're interested in the /correctness/ of it w.r.t a real rocket engine, ask NathanKell.

Other than that ... looks good to me. Remember to model for a possible change in gimbal angles to more realistic values - the RD-180 used on the Atlas III and V have a gimbal range of 8 degrees, for example.

Also, real engines don't gimbal at the nozzle - the whole assembly moves. Example (SpaceX Merlin 1D):

index.php?action=dlattach;topic=26388.0;attach=424051;image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It might also be nice to have some exhaust effects coming from the exhaust pipe. That's what it's there for, at least, so it would be nice to see it actually doing something. Looking good!

Edit: here's an image of the Merlin engines undergoing a test. The Merlins are a gas-generator cycle engine like the LV-T series, so it should be a good comparison/reference if you decide to do the exhaust effects.

tumblr_m67uwzl0N01rti11fo1_1280.jpg

Edited by OrbitusII

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now