Jump to content

DangerouslyDave

Members
  • Content Count

    27
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

119 Excellent

About DangerouslyDave

  • Rank
    Rocketeer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hmm, I'm not able to replicate that problem. Yes, the thrustTransforms on the RCS module should be "RCS". Let me know if the problem persists- I'll look back into the Unity project. On another note, I've added 1m fuel tanks to the repository. Please take these with a grain of salt, as they aren't built for the current shaders. On the bright side, they stack really well with one another. I've left markings on the 2 larger tanks, as I figure you can duplicate the 2 smaller tanks if you want a clean, seamless appearance.
  2. You beat me to it! I've updated the repository to only include the necessary parts of SSTU, down to 2.2MB. Also switched the textures out to DDS and updated the CFG file for the pod. I should have a set of fuel tanks up this evening if life allows, and hopefully an engine or two over the weekend. Another question: Would you rather see more new parts (filling out the rest of the 1m parts and some new science parts) or IVA's for the existing pods?
  3. Awesome, thanks for directing me their way, that was exactly what I was looking for! A humongous thanks to @Shadowmage for the use of their plugin! I finally got the first part working mostly/fully in-game. Here's a download link to the work in progress: https://github.com/DangerouslyDave/StockRefresh Please note that for now SSTULabs is required for some of the parts to work. Right now the only part available is the command pod based on the Dragon capsule. I'll be adding additional parts as soon as they're ready. Please let me know if you tried it out and encountere
  4. @ShotgunNinja Thanks for the thorough explanation! The take away seems to be that deferred decals aren't possible in KSP. That's a shame but it makes sense. I'll have to be smarter about combining parts to minimize the performance impact. Looking at @Ven's project boggles my mind with its efficiency. I got some feedback from @Dragon01 that rang true to me, so I went back to revise some of the parts. To force forward progress though, I got the revised parts working in game. I'll be releasing some of the parts soon if people are willing to test these things (knowing that the PBR shad
  5. Hello again. Sorry for the long absence, but things are back in action. The 1m fuel tanks and 1m decoupler are now complete. The design of the decoupler loosely pulls from the separation points (excuse my ignorance of the correct terminology) on the Falcon 9 (see their official Flickr account for reference). I'm still working out the kinks in the materials, but I've finally landed on a 'space grey' with the right amount of specular breakup. This, and different shades of the same material, will be the backbone of future texturing endeavors. Please note that I'm using a new rendering engine
  6. I'd argue you leave the side tanks like they are. You might get away with reducing the number of sides by a couple spans in each direction, but you'll only save a couple hundred polygons, tops, and you'll start getting some pretty severe faceting. Try to remove polys from places that are going to affect the silhouette the least (i.e. areas with the least curvature). If they're not already, reduce all the pipes and struts to 8 or even 6 sides. Like @CobaltWolf said, 5k should be just fine for an engine.
  7. Docking ports are indeed on the long term list. I'm looking at the IBDM as a design guide. This is an awesome gem I hadn't seen before, so thanks for the ping. I wonder if the collider would be able to restrict the rotation to a specific degree of freedom. In the image above, for example, you would have to align the craft to within 120 degrees or so, and then fine tune once soft docked.
  8. I was basing the design off of the reference I found for the 8096 with a vacuum nozzle. Most places that showed one in use on an Agena D has this style. Eg: I'm not sure what it's utility is though. I was thinking about doing just this! The mounting ring will probably be a second .mu (along with some sort of cover just above the Pistons), toggled on only if you use the lower attachment node. Question to the gallery, is it possible to have more than 2 nodes on a part?
  9. Finally got some time to do a little more work on the LV909 refresh part. As suggested by @cfds and @GregroxMun, the nozzle has been extended and the combustion chamber has been shortened slightly to compensate. This is about as far as I want to push it, as I still want it to stay as close as possible to the form factor of the stock 909 below the mounting ring. Also took the opportunity to do a revised material pass, and the results are much closer to my target for these. All that's left is adding some hand-painted overlays to match the stock look closer. I'm sure once 1.1 is o
  10. This is one of the best looking models I've seen for KSP! Can't wait to see it textured up.
  11. Those landing legs are fantastic! The lights are a great touch, too. I'd love to see these in action during a night descent.
  12. After further thought, I'm kind of attached to the look of the full Bell engine. Once the cover is in place and/or its part of a larger assembly, it shouldn't look so long in the tooth. I've done a quick sculpt and normal overlay as a test for the cover when radially attached. Please ignore the seam, this is for mockup only. Whats the general opinion of something like this, versus something closer to a stock interstage look, as @sashan suggested?
  13. This is a fantastic idea! The thought briefly crossed my mind but I didn't think it would be possible. I'll definitely be taking a close look at how do achieve this. Although I don't have much programming experience. Can you/anyone point me in the right direction? Thanks for the images, that's a helpful visualization of what NathanKell and ferram4 were describing. I'm definitely open to releasing the parts in branches. It's still pretty early in the process, and I'll need some help down the line with balancing the parts and figuring out how everyone wants things packaged up. I'
  14. Thanks for the feedback! I agree that I may have missed the mark on the first outing trying to texture these things. In fact, one of the things coming up on my to-do list is to create a material library to use across all the parts so I can keep a consistent look. I'll post a set of images once I have something cohesive down to see what people think. I've been using heroicrelics, historicspacecraft, and b14643 as my main reference sources. They seem to show a variety of different materials, from matte to very glossy, even used on different builds of the same engine. I guess that's chalked
  15. The hit on performance won't actually be as bad as you think. Without knowing the details of the KSP shader, map for map the performance of a PBR shader should be pretty much the same as a traditional specular shader. You're essentially just trading diffuse/gloss/specular/normal maps for albedo/gloss/metalness/normal maps. So in comparison to the KSP shader specifically, you'll need an additional 1-2 maps, but as @*Aqua* mentioned, the hope is that the gains from moving to 64bit will offset that requirement. Also, with smart re-use of texture maps between parts, you can really get away with a
×
×
  • Create New...