Nertea

Members
  • Content Count

    2,539
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

8,324 Excellent

About Nertea

  • Rank
    TIE/sa Pilot

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Looks like a far better detail density than last week. Nice job. Still going to wonder about the reflectivity on the new new revamps vs the old new revamps though!
  2. Why yes, it is Thursday. Apparently Squad does their stuff today too now, too bad. So this week we're going to dump a whole lot of parts. Almost the entire remote guidance lineup to be exact (the RoveMate didn't quite make it in under the wire). Firstly, the QBE, HECS, OKTO, OKTO2 and HECS2 have all been reworked to fit with our stylings. We kept the Mariner probe inspiration from the more recent Squad revamp for the hexagonal and octagonal cores, pulling in more details and surface features like micro-antennae and modeled heat-rejecting louvers. The QBE takes inspiration from RADARSAT-2, which has a nice rectangular prism bus. All of these smaller cores share lots of textural and model features so really look like they come from the same manufacturer. The HECS2 is a little different - due to its larger size it has got a whole lot more detail, including an open, modeled set of louvers that you can peer into and see some internal hardware. It's also kinda rough to get a good idea of how these look ingame - apologies for the lower reflection quality here. The Stayputnik is not that different than stock, the main difference is that the reflectivity levels have been normalized, and a bare variant has been added so you can build a very Sputnik-like vessel. Lastly, the two Remote Guidance units have been completely redone, and now sport detailed interiors with lots of interesting greebles. We decided on a greenish colour scheme for all our RGUs from small to large, as it is a tone quite underused in the game right now. I could also mention that the units are now precisely stack size in width, so they no longer bulge out of a rocket stack. This, when combined with their external grey-painted tones, makes them match much better than the old ones. Now, enjoy a selection of nice screenshots by @Poodmund and @Rock3tman_. And a pretty little Stayputnik video!
  3. This error is actually coming from FuseBox - the class that's throwing it is not part of DBS. Won't say I'm not completely responsible, but I do than insight on what it would take to fix that.
  4. @steve_v No need to come off so strong. I paged back a few times and found no indications of any bugs with this, nor are there any issues raised in the repository for either mod. This means I am unaware of the problem. There was an issue some time back (probably around KSP 1.2) that had a similar problem, which is why incidentally you are looking at something called ModuleCoreHeatNoCatchup in the config. This was solved, it's possible that something similar is occurring again. The thermal code, particularly when loading, saving and timewarp occurs, is very difficult to work with. Please bear with me as this is quite some work to deal with. The best way for you to help me is to give me a test case with 100% reproduction rate that involves a minimal recycle time (load, test, try again).
  5. Yeah, at my day job we call this "rework" and avoid it like the plague. It costs the company and by extension our customers money, eats dev time and we engineer very carefully to minimize it.
  6. You're right actually! This is why you generally wouldn't put things like this in the game. The second you insert that level of detail, you are placing a new high bar that the art will be compared to on all the other components - and really, we should say that we're not just comparing parts, we should also compare parts <-> environment, UI, etc. This is how you create a consistent feel in the game. So personally, I would not have placed this much detail on this part, particularly given how small it is. I'm not the art lead though so meh. I would just like to understand the why here, based on the 3 points enumerated earlier. Now, based on what I quoted there, I guess you are of the camp that would prefer the game have 2 really detailed parts and hundreds of low detailed parts. That is an opinion that you can hold, but I am free to express my own too, which is that I prefer consistency over pure detail.
  7. I want them all to be good! I don't want one metallic engine here, one plastic engine there, one faked metallicity engine over on the right. If this is the new style, bloody great! However, I would like to know What was going on before? (ie, 2 weeks ago) What the goal is for the future (is it to make everything shiny?) How does this help me make nice looking rockets? (currently, it helps me make one nice looking part. Imagine slapping that engine on a nasty looking FL fuel tank)
  8. I snorted coffee out my nose, and I really like my coffee, so that was sad. The mini engines are actually good, which is hilarious. Do you have like... rogue artists that go off and do their own thing and return triumphantly, having defined yet another art style? Then fire them and hire more? I'd love your art lead to sit down, write a blog post and explain what on earth is going on with these revamps. I'm sure it'd be informative.
  9. I should mention that those numbers are customized for a lowish detail 1.25m scale part that is mostly fictional - ie, i'm not spending time researching the engine, ensuring the cycle is perfect and things like that. That kind of work easily kicks the effort numbers up ridiculously, I easily spent upwards of 36 hours total on the SSME. But yes. This week, five parts! RCS parts. They're not very large or fancy, but they're important to get right, as they'll be on a great number of ships. The RCS thrusters themselves were pretty easy - kick up the interest by adding details from the classic Apollo RCS blocks. I got the opportunity to deal with a part I personally hate here, which was the linear RCS port - an ugly thing that I can never make look right. Now, you have the ability to toggle the aeroshell off to get a bare engine, which you can use more easily to customize the RCS layouts of your vacuum-going ships. The RCS tanks were a bit more of a bother. The stock art for these is a bit all over the place, from the bulgy tiny stack tank to the egg-carton 2.5m tank. The radial tanks are relatively inoffensive though, so they just get a cleanup pass with some improvements to their attachment hardware. Drawing from these radial tanks, stack tanks were all built as enclosed sets of spheres - different numbers per size class. This does however have the effect of creating tanks that really just looks like a bunch of eggs in a styrofoam carton, so I went hunting for upper stage rocket pictures are reproduced some of the piping, greebling and pressurant tanks to break up the surface. Next, a potentially controversial design decision - the tank externals. Many people may be used to the idea that monopropellant == yellow, but we should also note that in KSP, yellow == SRBs, monopropellant, batteries and xenon tanks. That is quite overloaded and should probably be addressed. Because of this we chose to remove the yellow striping and replace it with a consistent checkerboard pattern, which is immediately identifiable and consistent over all 3 stack tanks but also subtle and doesn't look out of place on a rocket or plane, like the old yellow tanks did. This album also has the largest collection of unshown and Restock+ parts we've shown in it, so happy checking :P.
  10. Nothing is immune to criticism, ever. I would like to say that I think I could do better now than the PJ overhaul engines in a few ways. There is a slightly inconsistent detail level and some of the boattails in particular could use a full repaint at the very least. However, there's always a cost benefit analysis that needs to be done with these decisions. Is it better to have completed, slightly lower detail assets, or add an estimated 4 hours modeling, 3-4 hours unwrapping, 4 hours texturing , 1 hour integration, 2 hours QA per part? That's a lot of work - engines are very much the most time consuming pieces to do. At the moment, the equation is pretty clearly weighted on the re-use side. We do want the mod to be released this decade, after all.
  11. I mean at the moment the Porkjet revamp stuff is basically the lowest quality content in the mod. So it's not really to get excited about (and the Pug emissives are just garbage)
  12. Hi I was on the Real Plume topic thing to ask if I could get green plume. And @woeller told me that I can create one for myself but since idk how he told me to come to you so you can explain to me how to do it. Could you help me please?

  13. Definitely not going the KSPI route. Also not intending to make a fusion jet. It's not... different enough from an atomic jet.
  14. This is probably the most detailed engine with have in Restock. Based off the Porkjet design sheet's LE-7A, it was modeled by @riocrokite and textured by myself. It is pretty cool and completes our lineup of 2.5m engines. The usual compact, regular and boattail variants are present, with all the hallmarks of our team - high quality animated gimbals, artful emissive textures and engine-specific custom particle effects.
  15. I like how this upgrade didn't completely change the character of the engine! Emissives definitely a bit much on there though.