Kerbas_ad_astra
-
Posts
1,611 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Kerbas_ad_astra
-
-
I'm starting to develop on the 1.6 branch of my repository, and so far I've fixed the Rockomax tanks (and the small boosters). The rest are coming.
-
My main reason for not disentangling the two is
lazinessprioritization of development time. I'm not interested in investing time into 'fixing' something that is transparent to most users, when I've got other parts that need attention to return to functioning properly. I would very seriously consider a pull request if one were made, if for no other reason than respect for dedication and effort (by my count, there are sixty-four original parts whose models are in the VSR/Squad bin, thankfully none the other way), but it would only be accepted after a pretty long while, considering that one of the mods that refers to Ven's models is Realism Overhaul (I had thought they just used parts from this mod, but it also has parts of its own that refer to Ven's models). -
12 hours ago, Stone Blue said:
wait... no, theres a way to move/seperate models and textures around folders, without having to duplicate... (several ways, actually)
Now that you mention it, yes -- separate the models, give them single-pixel 'textures' to go with them, have the real textures in a common folder, and then specify the actual texture paths in the config file. Is it necessary to do this, though? Is there much demand for being able to delete the replacement models? I've found a couple of mods that link to VSR models and textures in their current locations (not huge ones, but enough that I'd rather not shuffle things and break compatibility).
-
That happens because some parts in the PartBin folder refer to models in the Squad folder (and some vice-versa). Many of Ven's parts share texture files, so parts that 'fit in' and share design elements with stock parts (such as many fuel tanks and solar panels) will have their models hang out together as well.
It's easy to find which ones are affected by this (search for instances of "VenStockRevamp/Squad" in the Part Bin configs, and vice versa), but moving the models from one folder to the other would require duplicating texture files, and would also break external configs that rely on those model locations.
-
On 1/3/2019 at 1:03 PM, pap1723 said:
That would be excellent!
I've made that change in the 1.4 branch (and carried it forward into the 1.5 branch, which will spawn the 1.6 branch before too long). When upgrading from stock, the extra length going from the (old) stock model to Ven's model will now be moved up, into the fuel tank above the engine, rather than down into the decoupler, which caused some explosions for @Delay and perhaps others. You may make a release for KSP 1.4.5 on CKAN.
Of course, now 1.6 has made the Poodle look more like Ven's first Poodle model (i.e. the Apollo Service Propulsion System)...I'm happy to put Ven's first model back, but that leaves the question of what to do with the 'ball' model. Squad says the original Poodle model was based on the Payload Assist Module; I suppose I could make it an SRB?
(Edit: also, what to do about the large monopropellant engine I made to use Ven's first Poodle model when it got replaced in the first place...)
(Edit 2: Maybe leave the new stock Poodle model alone, since it looks pretty nice, and keep Ven's SPS model as the monopropellant engine?)
-
14 hours ago, pap1723 said:
Would it be okay if we fork your 1.4.4(5) version into the Realism Overhaul repo in order to properly release it on CKAN so users can install easier?
There was a complaint in that 'issue' on GitHub about the new model for the Poodle (which I understand, it's quite a bit beefier than the stock model)...you want me to make the change I talked about a few posts ago first?
On 11/30/2018 at 10:31 PM, Kerbas_ad_astra said:Yeah, the positions of the part centers are 'fixed' at construction time, and then the models get draped around those points. Ven's Poodle model is longer than the stock model, and so for e.g. the Kerbal X, that length has to go somewhere. I chose to put it out the bottom, but that means that there is a risk of intersection between two parts in the moment the lower stage is ejected. I've never had them explode before, but I could believe that depends on the exact decoupler used below the Poodle and how its colliders are arranged. I'll try moving the model up (and testing what it does to vehicles in-flight) before too long.
-
4 hours ago, Rawenwarcrow said:
@scottadges as said before, the problems with the Mk2 Can and the engines isn't due to Ven's; there's not a lot of conflicts, exept for some textures on some tanks (2.5 m if I remember correctly, and even that could be caused by another mod...), and all in all, it still worth it; the new textures are not as bad as the old ones, and it's of course totaly subjective, but some of them are still a bit "clumsy", and it's still cool to have a bit of variety.
Talking about variety, as I love to have Ven's, Missing History and Partoverhauls, and there's some conflicts between the two first, @Kerbas_ad_astra, would you ever think, if it's not too complex, to make it, or a version of it, where all parts, including variants, could be separated, using the same model but with a slightly different name? I'd do it myself, if I knew how, but it's definitely not my thing
Some parts like engines can definitely be split up that way (I've done that with VSR couple of times, like with the O-10 and Comms 88 dish), but it's going to get impractical as Squad revamps more models, and if the IVA changes (as it has done for the Mk1-3 pod and Mk2 lander can) then something won't look right.
I won't be in a position to work diligently on this for a couple of weeks; we'll see how things stand then.
Also many thanks @Electrocutor for that heads-up...I don't think that will matter for any parts currently (Squad hasn't revamped their docking ports yet, so there's no reason to keep their models) but that should be handy going forward.
-
Huh, I thought 1.6 was coming in January. (It might take until then for me to get some dev time, but I'll be happy to review pull requests that come before then.)
Looking at the new parts, they're alright, but I will stick with the plan from before. Parts with static models (tanks and structural adapters) will have Ven's models added as default variants, engines will get overwritten, and the Mk1-3 pod and Mk2 lander can will be left alone. I'll have to do some more testing of the Mk1 pod -- Squad's new model is close to Ven's in size but not quite the same, so I need to see how it affects e.g. the IVA alignment and so on.
-
1 hour ago, Delay said:
@Kerbas_ad_astra Pre-revamp spacecraft engines seem to get covered by their shroud again. Is it possible to edit them out? I'm looking at the save file right now and it doesn't look like you can.
Looking through my saves, maybe if you add "isJettisoned = True" to that part's ModuleJettison block the shroud will go away?
-
On 11/29/2018 at 1:41 PM, Delay said:
Edit: Wait, do the node positions determine whether something clips to cause an explosion or not?
The "problem" I have is that I switched from the ancient version to your newest one, which had the newer Poodle instead of the older one. The result was an explosion as soon as I staged.
Yeah, the positions of the part centers are 'fixed' at construction time, and then the models get draped around those points. Ven's Poodle model is longer than the stock model, and so for e.g. the Kerbal X, that length has to go somewhere. I chose to put it out the bottom, but that means that there is a risk of intersection between two parts in the moment the lower stage is ejected. I've never had them explode before, but I could believe that depends on the exact decoupler used below the Poodle and how its colliders are arranged. I'll try moving the model up (and testing what it does to vehicles in-flight) before too long.
-
12 hours ago, Delay said:
@Kerbas_ad_astra Are you aware of the fact that your new Poodle is slightly taller than both the original and Ven's revamped Poodle? I installed your updated version and found out that due to its new height it may or may not cause explosions while decoupling.
Additionally, is it possible that you accidentally made some Making History parts available without needing MH at all? I don't have the expansion (yet), but I still have access to structural parts that were introduced in MH, or at least they look like these parts.
Well, it's not 'my' new Poodle; Ven changed which model he used to replace the stock model over a year ago. I will accept blame for changing the node positions so that the top node stays in place while the bottom node moves down; I did that because Poodles are generally used on upper stages and are only attached to things from below for the first few minutes of flight, but I could switch it to the other way to 'tuck in' the engine when VSR is installed.
It is not possible to make Making History parts available without getting Making History. Ven was just making triangular panels before it was cool. :)
-
10 hours ago, Vahnskir said:
Everything's looking pretty good on 1.5. Surprised stuff hasn't completely broken beyond any reasonable sense of repair lmao.
With 1.6 Part Revamp Update coming along will VSPR still be updated? I This mod is way more aesthetically pleasant to focus my ocular facial orbs on compared to current vanilla's parts and 1.6's updated parts.
Ven's structural parts and fuel tanks will be added as default variants, but functional parts (thrusters, engines, and presumably anything with animations like wheels or antennas) don't play very well with the part variant system. (I've figured out a way around the 'burning in the editor' bug from last page, but that required abusing the multi-mode engine module, and now the effects in-flight are missing...there may be a way to get them back, but it will take time to permute the effects config to find it. My efforts are cataloged in a new "KSP_1.5_experimental" branch -- not safe for careers!)
Currently, that only applies to the Mk1 and Mk1-3 pods and RT-5 and RT-10 boosters, but from the KSP blog we know that the Spark is coming in 1.6, and probably others as well. In general, I agree with you that I like Ven's parts better than the new Squad variants, so most of the time I will overwrite Squad's models if they can't coexist. (Pretty much how VSR has always worked, but now I'll feel just a little bit guilty.) That said, I'll evaluate everything on a case-by-case basis.
- I'm planning to add Ven's Mk1 pod as a variant to Squad's revamped pod, because the only friction between them is that the part action window has two Flag Toggle buttons (one that works for Squad's variants, one for Ven's).
- I'm planning to not overwrite Squad's Mk1-3 model, because both sets of RCS thrusters remain active even when one model or the other is disabled, and while I like Ven's thruster layout better, the model is too different for the IVA to look good (unlike the Mk1, which is basically unchanged).
- Last page I said I'd make Ven's RT-10 model into its own part, because it has gimbals and the stock thruster does not. I had thought to re-purpose Ven's RT-5 model as a tiny Size 00 (0.35m) motor, good for very small probes and so on, essentially a stack-mountable Sepratron. But...since I do like Ven's models better, I'm feeling more inclined to overwrite Squad's models.
Before I completely commit to overwriting one model or the other, I'll play around with B9 Part Switch to see if it disables variant models more firmly.
2 hours ago, Galland1998 said:I am using the mod for a 1.4.5 play through but I was trying to figure out how to eliminate one of the Ven Revamp textures for the service bays and go back to the stock service bays and leave the reset of them. How does one go about doing that?
You'll want to crawl through VenStockRevamp/PathPatches/All-PathPatches.cfg and remove the ServiceBay lines, and likewise VSR/Patches/Kerballoons.cfg and VSR/Squad/Data/Structural.cfg. The model and texture files themselves are in VSR/Squad/Parts/Structural.
-
I use Open Broadcaster Software, but surely there's a setting in Shadowplay to set the recording resolution. For this video in particular, it should be possible to crop it with Avidemux or the like.
-
46 minutes ago, Tyko said:
@Kerbas_ad_astra are the docking port lights fixed in the latest build? The build I'm using I can still light up the planet below with the docking light.
Should be. I made a change to that effect some time ago.
26 minutes ago, putnamto said:weird, when i got it to play withought force closing my ships became unstable and uncontrolable in my quicksave, in this video im hammering all the directions and nothing happens, then the landing leg just kind of pops off. and the shroud on the terrier wasnt their before i tried using the mod, but it just kinda showed up.
weird. any incite as to why this happened? could it have been that the ship was built before the mod was installed and included parts that the mod changes?
going to make a backup of the backup of the backup, then try loading the mod again and playing around abit.What is this, a video for ants?
It's hard for me to be sure with the low resolution, but those fuel tanks don't look like they come from this mod, and I've never had issues like that. I could believe that both of those issues are caused by upgrading a ship that was made already, if there are suddenly extra colliders and models which normally get disabled in the editor pre-launch. Could you get me a full-res screenshot?
-
17 hours ago, putnamto said:
safe to use in 1.5.1?
guess not, just encountered a windows error and the game had to be closed.I've been using it in 1.5.1 for a while now. Be sure you're grabbing the most up-to-date version from my repository (use the green "Clone or download" button): https://github.com/Kerbas-ad-astra/Stock-Revamp/tree/KSP_1.5
-
Could you show me a screenshot?
-
I've attempted to add some math to handle terminal velocity, but in testing it performed worse than doing without (I've left it commented in the code). It's on my list to improve...eventually.
I've said this before (on previous pages), but I don't want to add altitude or velocity offset targets until the code is better at targeting zero/zero, especially in the case of terminal velocity -- until then, adding additional controls feels dishonest (like presenting a measurement to the micron when it was made with a meter stick).
As for new parts, I do want to start making parts eventually, but I haven't yet. If you find some nice models, let me know and I'll see what I can do.
-
Good news: it's really easy to change transform names (thanks to @taniwha's io_object_mu library). However, it turns out that it's better to leave the flag and shroud transforms with different names, or otherwise only the first (on Squad's model) works properly. This has the unfortunate cosmetic side effect of putting two flag or shroud toggle buttons in the PAW, but oh well.
If that was the only problem, I'd consider them ready to release, but the RT-5 and Mk1-3 have other issues. Turns out it's harder to make multiple models play nice with the variant system when they're supposed to do things instead of just look good:
(As I said above, I've fixed the issue where Ven's variant, on the left, has its 'shroud' still attached.) Ven's model has an animation that Squad's does not, which I could believe is the cause of this issue, but I've tried ignoring it (i.e. not including the FXModuleAnimateThrottle in the part config), and I've tried writing a python script to snip it out of the model file, and neither approach has worked.
As for the Mk1-3, Ven's and Squad's models have different layouts for RCS thrusters, but both sets are used at the same time, even though only one or the other should be active. (Also, the new IVA obviously is only suited for Squad's model.)
-
A brief update on development: all of the revamped probe cores (Stayputnik, QBE, HECS/HECS2, OKTO/OKTO2, RoveMate) now have Ven's model coexisting with their Squad-revamped models, using the variant system. Same with the FL-T tank series. I've been making commits to a new KSP_1.5 branch on my repo: https://github.com/Kerbas-ad-astra/Stock-Revamp/tree/KSP_1.5
Still outstanding are the Mk1 pod, the Mk1-3 pod, and the RT-5 SRB. (Ven's RT-10 model has gimbals while the stock model does not, so I have made it a separate part, the slightly more costly RT-10-G.) These will require changes to Ven's models so that their flag and thruster transform names are consistent with the stock models, which will take a little longer.
-
On 11/5/2018 at 11:03 AM, Marandil said:
I think the problem is with Tundra using patches for everything, including "no fuel switch" case and/or using B9PartSwitch in my setup.
Yeah, because of the way Tundra tanks start 'empty' and then fill themselves if B9 is installed means that they fall through all of my patches, which are oriented around 'stock-like' parts. The easy fix is to add a patch like this:
@PART[TE_BFR_Tank|TE_BFS_Fueltank|TE_F1_S1_Tank|TE_F1_S2_Tank|TE_F9_S1_Tank|TE_F9_S2_Tank]:BEFORE[zzz_SMURFF]:NEEDS[B9PartSwitch,!Pathfinder] { @mass /= #$@SMURFFCONFIG/lfofactor$ @MODULE[ModuleB9PartSwitch]:HAS[#moduleID[TE_Fuel]] { @SUBTYPE[LH2/O]:NEEDS[CryoTanks] { %addedMass = #$../../mass$ @addedMass *= -1 } @SUBTYPE[LH2]:NEEDS[CryoTanks] { %addedMass = #$../../mass$ @addedMass *= -1 } @SUBTYPE[Oxidizer]:NEEDS[CryoTanks] { %addedMass = #$../../mass$ @addedMass *= -1 } } SMURFFExclude = true }I can't promise that it will be perfectly balanced, but it should be better.
-
4 hours ago, gamerscircle said:
okay.. thanks, well - something is very upset .. and only when a part fails.. I will figure it out.
Is it a solid rocket motor that's failed? I've had some of those make a bunch of noise because the ignition and combustion sounds keep looping.
-
3 minutes ago, KSPrynk said:
The "other parts to be deprecated and removed" has me a bit worried - you're not planning on dropping your Gemini- and Soyuz-analogue family of parts in deference to Making History's parts, are you? I actually prefer your parts to MH's, as yours are more properly sized and fall logically within the tech tree. Thanks for keeping this going; it's one of my favorite parts packs for the early game in the Kerbin the SOI.
No, I'm referring to things like the old stock fuel tanks and decouplers and such. Parts that have been replaced by new models. Changing a part name is a save-breaking change, so I want to have a period of time before I completely remove it.
-
HGR Community Fixes version 1.6.2 "Orange You Glad" is here!
-
02018 Nov 03 (1.6.1): Comrade Ogilvy
- Changing the internal name of the 1.875m fairings from "fairingSize1.5" to "fairingSize1p5HGR", to avoid any possible confusion with the Making History "fairingSize1p5" in Module Manager patches. The "fairingSize1.5" part still exists, but it's been marked as "TechHidden" like the stock Mk1-2 Pod and other parts to be deprecated, and it will be removed in the next release of HGR.
- Made the Lima pod a recolor of the Soy-Juice capsule. Recolored the Garlic pod to match.
-
02018 Nov 03 (1.6.2): Orange You Glad
- Added fairing color options to Heavy LES tower.
-
02018 Nov 03 (1.6.1): Comrade Ogilvy
-
Landertrons version 1.1.1 "From en-us With Love" is here!
- Confirmed to function in KSP 1.5.1.
- Added some strings to the localization file. Now the display strings from the code (e.g. mode names) can be localized as well.
[1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8+] Contract Pack: CommNet Relays 2.1.0 (2019 Jan 13)
in KSP1 Mod Releases
Posted · Edited by Kerbas_ad_astra
WISE FWOM YOUW GWAVE
I've finally implemented localization (and also added a 'title' field to the agent config, to reduce log file spam). CommNet Relays 2.1.0 is here!