Akira_R

Members
  • Content Count

    641
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

206 Excellent

1 Follower

About Akira_R

  • Rank
    Sr. Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

2,155 profile views
  1. So I'm having an issue with performance around added launch sites that seems to be related to terrain scatters. I am running a pretty heavily modded install. When I launch a plane from any of the airports around kerbin that JNSQ adds my frame rate tanks to 5fps. I am launching via the KCT menu but I don't think that should have much impact on this. If I fly far enough away (roughly 40km or so) from the launch site the frame rate comes up to 10-11. If I then quit and reload I'm up in the 20s but it will rapidly drop to 10-15, not ideal but doable. Flying back causes the frame rate to drop back to single digits, interestingly if I fly low and approach the center of the airport area frame rate comes up to like 10-15 in a very small area around the center and then craters again once I leave. There is no NRE or other exception spam. My system is a OCed i7 8700k, 32GB RAM and a gtx1080, the GPU is idling, CPU is around 20% utilization and none of the individual threads show utilization above that. I tried turning terrain scatter off (it was set to around 45%) and saw a massive increase in frame rate, 40fps while flying around and around a 36fps average when returning to the airport. Searching around I am seeing that some performance hit is expected with scatters on especially with kopernicus giving them collision. But this impact seems excessive? Especially since I'm on a pretty beefy system and in terms of resource utilization it is hardly even being taxed. Any one have any idea what is going on here? log if it'll help: https://gist.github.com/AkiraR/dbf2cee8b8e4ab47a7394544903f4f2d
  2. So I'm having an issue with performance around added launch sites. I am running a pretty heavily modded install, of note are JNSQ and KCT. When I launch a plane from any of the airports around kerbin that JNSQ adds my frame rate tanks to 5fps. I am launching via the KCT menu but I don't think that should have much impact on this. If I fly far enough away (roughly 40km or so) from the launch site the frame rate comes up to 10-11. If I then quit and reload I'm up in the 20s, not ideal but doable. Flying back causes the frame rate to drop back to single digits, interestingly if I fly low and approach the center of the airport area frame rate comes up to like 10-15 in a very small area around the center and then craters again once I leave. There is no NRE or other exception spam. My system is a OCed i7 8700k and gtx1080, GPU is idleing, CPU is around 20% utilization. log if it'll help: https://gist.github.com/AkiraR/dbf2cee8b8e4ab47a7394544903f4f2d Appears to be related to ground scatter and kopernicus, not a KK issue.
  3. Wow. This looks super awesome, unfortunate that the tessellation extent will need to be limited to prevent too much clipping as you can make really awesome looking terrain features with tesselation. In the last 4-5 years there have been some solutions that allow for performance friendly calculation of collisions with tesselated meshes but the ones I'm aware of were built in CryEngine and rely on RK and offloading the RK collision handling to the GPU. Stuff the would likely be completely impossible to implement in KSP by a modder lol. Wish you luck and really hope Galileo will consider incorporating this into JNSQ once it's ready.
  4. I kind of figured as much, but using MM to clone and patch template files is actually exactly what I wanted. I hadn't thought about it mostly because the "templates" that we get with RealPlume are actually just big MM patch files themselves, and as far as I'm aware you can't patch a patch file lol. I feel a little bit dumb now for not catching that lol
  5. So after looking through the documentation on GitHub it looks like this is going to be way easier to work with than the current standard of patching with SmokeScreen and RealPlume. I do have a question/feature suggestion @Nertea would it be possible when using templates to allow us to override or add specific parameters? An example to maybe help explain: so some one comes up with a template that we want to use with an engine, we use the position and scale parameters to get the effect lining up and looking good but what would make it look GREAT is if we could additionally just scale and reposition a specific bone just a bit but leave everything else as they are. What I would envision the Template section inside the moduleWatefrallFX module could look like: TEMPLATE { templateName = waterfall-hydrolox-upper1 overrideParentTransform = thrustTransform scale = 0.8,0.8,0.8 rotation = 0,0,0 position = 0,0,-0.4 OVERRIDE //we now want to change specific parts of the template being used { EFFECT[outerGlow] //specify which EFFECT in the template { SCALEMODIFIER[tExitScale]//we specifically want to change the tExitScale SCALEMODIFIER { xCurve //we just want to tweak the x and z curves a bit { key = 0 1.5 0 0 } zCurve { key = 0 1.5 0 0 } } NEW[POSITIONMODIFIER] //We want to create a new modifier of the type POSITIONMODIFIER { name = throatReposition controllerName = custom transformName = B_Throat combinationType = Replace useRandomness = False randomnessController = random randomnessScale = 1 xCurve { } yCurve { } zCurve { key = 0 -0.2 0 0 } } } } } This way we can have a bit more control over tweaking parts of a template with out having to create a whole new effect that only has a few changes from the previous one. This always was a problem I had with some of the RealPlume configs, where just changing the scale and position of the entire effect couldn't get me exactly where I wanted so I would have to just make a copy of the original effect and make a couple tweaks to the flare or the plume and then save that, it also made redistributing the patch more complicated as not only would one have to share the MM patch adding the effect but also the full template config that someone else wrote that only had one or two values tweaked. I anticipate that making this type of change probably isn't a simple task but I think it would be a really useful feature to have for those hoping to make a large number of compatibility patches for various different part packs and could help speed up adoption.
  6. Damn it Nertea, I finally get fluent and confident with customizing SmokeScreen configs so I can make all my engines have pretty plumes and you just have to come along with THIS and make all of that work mute. I swear you and ShadowMage just can't be content with the good-enough status quo can you guys, you just gotta come along with this "I can make a better system" big coder energy and give us fancy new stuff that blows the old way of doing things out of the water. Now I have to spend a bunch of my free time learning this new system and coming up with patches for all the various engines I use, thanks for monopolizing what little time I have between writing aerodynamics lab reports and random signals analysis homework, guess I won't actually be playing any KSP this semester
  7. Textures Unlimited comes in the SSTU download, if you don't put it in your game data folder then the SSTU parts wont have textures, also make sure you have CommunityResourcePack installed. Basically if it came in the downloaded zip put it in your game data folder or stuff wont work. Also SSTU only has like 5 tank parts, but they are highly modular with tons of different options.
  8. Which parts aren't showing up? Sounds like you either didnt install the bundled Textures Unlimited.
  9. Unlikely, when it happened it was during the launch of a satellite that I was putting up to meet a sat contract. I think I may have done one revert to launch which is why i tried that, but there had been no switching between any vessels. It was at the end of a close to 2 hour play session and multiple other vessels had been flown, but all had been recovered back to the space center, and all had been planes, this had been the first rocket launch during the session.
  10. So I just did some quick testing in my install and now I'm getting no NREs, I tried a couple of different test cases (revert to launch, jump to a ship in orbit in the save it happened in) and I'm not getting anything. I'll do some more testing later today to see if I can get it to happen again, since I enabled it last night it now defaults to on in all of my saves, I haven't had a chance yet to turn it off and restart the game, got class. But hopefully I can narrow it down a bit later today.
  11. Intuitive maneuvers option fixes the maneuver node gizmo relative to your current orbits orientation and makes it so that pulling on the normal or anti-normal gizmos will "only" change your orbits inclination, I say "only" because it isn't perfect. That way you aren't doing the dance of alternating between the normal and prograde gizmos. It appears to be working in my 1.9.1 install but turning it on did cause NRE spam which is why I had come here. I posted an issue on github if anyone else is experiencing this: https://github.com/linuxgurugamer/ksp-precisenode/issues/14
  12. Any tips for getting this to play nicely with a 3.2x rescale? SigmaDimensions is supposed to have a system that will keep individual KK groups from getting all spread out but I think you have to manually set up the SD groups via configs, there is an OLD mod that Sigma wrote called KKtoSD that is supposed to automatically make SD groups from the KK groups but it doesn't seem to be working in my install.
  13. Any one know if KKtoSD is working still?? Would like to get Kerbin Side Remastered working on a 3.2x rescale and despite stuff being grouped together they still end up getting spread out Hoping I can get things working so I just have to move each group around instead of having to reposition each individual asset.
  14. Can this be achieved using the TARGET GUI? I'm not really familiar at all with the TARGET script editor yet... EDIT: Ok pretty sure it can't, managed to figure out where the target.tmh is and have added the above change, the bit about changing something on line 620 though.... It seams that TARGET has changed a bit since this was written and I'm not sure what I should change there if anything.....
  15. @Shadowmage Can confirm what @Al2Me6 says, RealPlume seams to be causing the SRBs to not change their fuel amount when changing the core size, I'll go ahead and add my log to the github issue for you to peruse.