Nertea

[1.7.x] Restock - Revamping KSP's art (May 10, KSP 1.7 + fixes)

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Tommy59375 said:

 

I have found that even when I completely delete my KSP directory in steamapps\common after uninstalling the game through steam, if I re-install the latest version, 1.7.3, various old parts’ old CFGs still get downloaded (for example, the “non-v2” Mk 1 Command Pod, as well as the newer v2 version).  

Do you get this too?  And could it be causing any issues with ReStock?  Might this be the source of my problem a few posts up?

 

1 hour ago, Poodmund said:

As SQUAD revamp certain parts they soft-deprecate them for a few version/patch updates of KSP. This involves them making the old versions of the parts unresearchable/unplaceable in the Editor but the parts still exist in the game (so as to not make your existing vessels suddenly lose parts in flight). After a few versions/patches, these soft-deprecate parts are then hard-deprecated and completely removed from the game.

This is probably why you still have some older parts in your brand new install... however, Steam is not great at fully removing the old part files when they are hard-deprecated so milage may vary between users. This is why the warning popup was added when users may have leftover erroneous parts lingering in their install.

Don't all the old parts go into zDeprecated? There's a load of stuff in there which helps to make someones old craft files work if I'm correct. I have that folder and it causes no problems with ReStock or ReStock Plus. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, madindehead said:

 

Don't all the old parts go into zDeprecated? There's a load of stuff in there which helps to make someones old craft files work if I'm correct. I have that folder and it causes no problems with ReStock or ReStock Plus. 

Some do, not all though. The deprecation process is just that: a process. 

Basically: Anything in zDeprecated OR clearly shown as deprecated can be removed in future updates.

The folder thing is separate from that since it was done during a file structure reorganization, and not a deprecation AFAIK. 

Thats also why ReStock has that message: everyone has the same ‘deprecated’ parts, but only old installs have those old folders. 

Edited by Jognt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a special case where Squad created new part configs, deleted the old ones and placed the new ones in a different location. Importantly, they did not change the internal part name for these new configs for compatibility, which means that there is a chance that an install might have two copies of the same part in it. In this case, ModuleManager does not know which part to target, which results in weird behaviour. Deleting the old files resolves this ambiguity. Steam installs are particularly vulnerable to this, as it seems that the KSP Steam install does not delete extra files that aren't in its manifest when it installs an update - which makes sense, or else every update you'd have to reinstall your mods and possibly saves. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/30/2019 at 11:49 PM, Wyzard said:

I've noticed that too, but the impression I got is that it was just drawing all the available variant meshes at the same time.  I'm pretty sure I saw what looked like Z-fighting between different color variants on one of those tech-tree thumbnails.  (But I can't remember which part it was, and I can't find it looking through the tech tree now, so I might be mistaken.)

Well, what I thought was Z-fighting turned out to be a texture variant on a MissingHistory part that I mistook for a stock or ReStock one.  So nevermind that bit.

However, supporting the theory of all variant meshes being drawn: the ReStocked HG-5 antenna shows both the radial and axial variants in its thumbnail in the tech tree (in the "Basic Science" node).  Same thing happens with the ReStock+ HG-20 antenna (in "Electrics").  The thumbnails in the VAB are OK, as well as the larger thumbnail shown when hovering over the part in the tech tree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 8/11/2019 at 1:35 PM, Wyzard said:

Well, what I thought was Z-fighting turned out to be a texture variant on a MissingHistory part that I mistook for a stock or ReStock one.  So nevermind that bit.

However, supporting the theory of all variant meshes being drawn: the ReStocked HG-5 antenna shows both the radial and axial variants in its thumbnail in the tech tree (in the "Basic Science" node).  Same thing happens with the ReStock+ HG-20 antenna (in "Electrics").  The thumbnails in the VAB are OK, as well as the larger thumbnail shown when hovering over the part in the tech tree.

 

gjT3jXY.png

I see this too.

Does anyone else?

Edited by Tommy59375

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/9/2019 at 2:04 PM, Nertea said:

This is a special case where Squad created new part configs, deleted the old ones and placed the new ones in a different location. Importantly, they did not change the internal part name for these new configs for compatibility, which means that there is a chance that an install might have two copies of the same part in it. In this case, ModuleManager does not know which part to target, which results in weird behaviour. Deleting the old files resolves this ambiguity. Steam installs are particularly vulnerable to this, as it seems that the KSP Steam install does not delete extra files that aren't in its manifest when it installs an update - which makes sense, or else every update you'd have to reinstall your mods and possibly saves. 

I had this problem with the early fuel tanks. And yes, I'm on Steam. Problem fixed when I went into Windows and deleted the old part files.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/9/2019 at 10:04 PM, Nertea said:

This is a special case where Squad created new part configs, deleted the old ones and placed the new ones in a different location. Importantly, they did not change the internal part name for these new configs for compatibility, which means that there is a chance that an install might have two copies of the same part in it. In this case, ModuleManager does not know which part to target, which results in weird behaviour. Deleting the old files resolves this ambiguity. Steam installs are particularly vulnerable to this, as it seems that the KSP Steam install does not delete extra files that aren't in its manifest when it installs an update - which makes sense, or else every update you'd have to reinstall your mods and possibly saves. 

 

PYlMifV.png

 

When I create a clean installation, my GameData\Squad\Parts\Command folder looks like this, clearly showing that I have two versions of some parts, some of which aren't in the zDeprecated folder.

Could this possibly be causing the issue I'm having with some "test" and "haul" contracts being automatically failed?  The post where I originally talked about this is in the Spoiler below.  Since making that post, I have now had four contracts fail:

  1. Test RT-10 "Hammer" Solid Fuel Booster at the Launch Site,
  2. Test RT-5 "Flea" Solid Fuel Booster at the Launch Site,
  3. Test Mk1 Command Pod landed at Kerbin,
  4. Haul Mk1 Command Pod into flight above Kerbin.

Note that (1.) and (2.) both happened at the same time as each other.

Spoiler

 

On 7/31/2019 at 5:04 AM, Tommy59375 said:

I think I might have just discovered another issue, although I'm not yet entirely sure what's causing it and I'm fairly sure that this one's going to be much harder to diagnose.

Some of my "Test xyz" contracts are being failed, even though their timers are nowhere near running out and I haven't done anything wrong which would cause them to be failed.  This seems to only occur on a scene change.  So far I have had this happen with: RT-5 & RT-10 boosters, and Mk-1 capsule.

This gives me a somewhat garbled message through the in-game messaging system:

Uz39vRk.png

(Don't worry too much about the specific funds & reputation penalties, I'm using custom difficulty options.)

Here's a spreadsheet containing a list of my installed mods and their version numbers, as well as my KSP.LOG output_log.txt file: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1yLIyiIlQ2O76Bs8E1ela8dc5i3HzgsNW

I really have no idea how to read the log file but if anyone might be able to provide some insight, then I can try to reproduce the issue more reliably.

Performing a Google search for "Test No situation report available" (with the quotes) leads me here: https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/109145-17-mk2-expansion-v1841-update-4232019/page/23/&tab=comments#comment-2496595, where a user by the name of tfiskgul seems to be encountering the same issue as a result of renamed parts in one of his mods.

That's what made me think this was perhaps an issue with ReStock, rather than one of my other mods.  Would you be able to shed any light on this for me?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Tommy59375 said:

 

PYlMifV.png

 

When I create a clean installation, my GameData\Squad\Parts\Command folder looks like this, clearly showing that I have two versions of some parts, some of which aren't in the zDeprecated folder.

Could this possibly be causing the issue I'm having with some "test" and "haul" contracts being automatically failed?  The post where I originally talked about this is in the Spoiler below.  Since making that post, I have now had four contracts fail:

  1. Test RT-10 "Hammer" Solid Fuel Booster at the Launch Site,
  2. Test RT-5 "Flea" Solid Fuel Booster at the Launch Site,
  3. Test Mk1 Command Pod landed at Kerbin,
  4. Haul Mk1 Command Pod into flight above Kerbin.

Note that (1.) and (2.) both happened at the same time as each other.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

 

No. If it were, then nobody would have a working KSP. 

If you want them in zDeprecated, ask Squad. It’s their structure, we’re just along for the ride. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tommy59375 said:

When I create a clean installation, my GameData\Squad\Parts\Command folder looks like this, clearly showing that I have two versions of some parts, some of which aren't in the zDeprecated folder.

Could this possibly be causing the issue I'm having with some "test" and "haul" contracts being automatically failed?  The post where I originally talked about this is in the Spoiler below.  Since making that post, I have now had four contracts fail:

  1. Test RT-10 "Hammer" Solid Fuel Booster at the Launch Site,
  2. Test RT-5 "Flea" Solid Fuel Booster at the Launch Site,
  3. Test Mk1 Command Pod landed at Kerbin,
  4. Haul Mk1 Command Pod into flight above Kerbin.

Note that (1.) and (2.) both happened at the same time as each other.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

Nope, this is the *correct* way to do it. Note that each of those folders have a _v2 on the end of it. If you did into those part config files, you will find the part names for the replaced parts also has a _v2 appended it. These are complete copies with the new parts. The issue that has been described occurs when the parts are moved (not complete copes with new parts) from an old location with the copy changed up a bit. 

As to your other problem, I can't reproduce it locally as of last night, and unfortunately can't look at the log file at work. I'll do it when  I have a chance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you add a dark and a gray/orange decoupler skin? Right now they stick out badly when used between gray/orange or black parts of tanks. Similarly for shrouds, if that's possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2019 at 9:20 AM, Nertea said:

mods that depend on the stock assets

I don't quote understand what that means: Say, i have a mod like "MechJeb for All" or "DE_IVAExtension" with all its dependencies. Do they "depend on the stock assets" in the sense of the OP, or is adding functionality by ModuleManager generally okay? What would not be Okay?

Or more generally: Is there a comprehensive list of Mods that will require whitelisting "legacy" stock parts when using ReStock?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, LupinoArts said:

I don't quote understand what that means: Say, i have a mod like "MechJeb for All" or "DE_IVAExtension" with all its dependencies. Do they "depend on the stock assets" in the sense of the OP, or is adding functionality by ModuleManager generally okay? What would not be Okay?

Or more generally: Is there a comprehensive list of Mods that will require whitelisting "legacy" stock parts when using ReStock?

Most mods will whitelist something if they need it. 

‘Stock assets’ are things like models. Lets say a mod copied the Terrier engine, that copy will now look like the ReStock model unless you whitelist the old model and point your copy there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Jognt said:

Most mods will whitelist something if they need it. 

‘Stock assets’ are things like models. Lets say a mod copied the Terrier engine, that copy will now look like the ReStock model unless you whitelist the old model and point your copy there. 

Akchuly...because the way restock stops stock assets loading so your game doesn't explode your ram, the mod using stock assets fails, because it tries to load stock assets that have been disabled.

So the choices are, reenable the asset even though the stock part has been patched not to use it, or patch the mod part to use restock assets iff they're there.

The default suggested fix is remove the assets from the "don't load this stuff" list. For my one affected mod I went the other way because I figure anyone playing with restock would prefer the restock look.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
53 minutes ago, TiktaalikDreaming said:

Akchuly...because the way restock stops stock assets loading so your game doesn't explode your ram, the mod using stock assets fails, because it tries to load stock assets that have been disabled.

So the choices are, reenable the asset even though the stock part has been patched not to use it, or patch the mod part to use restock assets iff they're there.

The default suggested fix is remove the assets from the "don't load this stuff" list. For my one affected mod I went the other way because I figure anyone playing with restock would prefer the restock look.

Ah yes. If the copy was done before ReStock initialized it’s parts, it’ll fail because the copy contains the old info. 

What I mainly meant is that an end-user shouldn’t need to worry about whitelisting stuff for another mod, because if the mod needs it, the author will (probably?) do the whitelisting :) 

As always, anything I say will have terms and conditions attached that may or may not be stated in the post itself :D 

Edited by Jognt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, WarriorSabe said:

Can you add a dark and a gray/orange decoupler skin? Right now they stick out badly when used between gray/orange or black parts of tanks. Similarly for shrouds, if that's possible.

Maybe in 2021. Though I agree conceptually, this adds a nonzero amount of memory use and a fair amount of work to our plates.

5 hours ago, LupinoArts said:

I don't quote understand what that means: Say, i have a mod like "MechJeb for All" or "DE_IVAExtension" with all its dependencies. Do they "depend on the stock assets" in the sense of the OP, or is adding functionality by ModuleManager generally okay? What would not be Okay?

Or more generally: Is there a comprehensive list of Mods that will require whitelisting "legacy" stock parts when using ReStock?

In order to clarify, there are some mods that create brand new parts, either by cloning existing stock models (eg, an infinite power ion engine as a different part) or by using elements of stock models  (say, making a new model and using an old texture). If your mod is not one of these (eg, adding things to existing parts), then you are fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More great work Nertea, thanks for your efforts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, crowsnose said:

I've already been here a while ago and done what I could, just seeing if I can get any extra help. Nodes for swivel engine are extremely far for some reason, idk why.

https://imgur.com/a/dxqZHOk

Output log below. 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/hf7mg40vvchrrmn/output_log.txt?dl=0

Make sure the version of MissingHistory you have installed is updated (remove the mod completely before reapplying). I'm seeing MissingHistory applying its configs to the Swivel & Reliant (the newer versions shouldn't if Restock is present)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Eridan said:

Make sure the version of MissingHistory you have installed is updated (remove the mod completely before reapplying). I'm seeing MissingHistory applying its configs to the Swivel & Reliant (the newer versions shouldn't if Restock is present)

Thanks a ton, it worked :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could we get the additional sizes, and possibly additional textures from Fuel Tanks Plus and possibly Space-Y expanded?

Specifically, the thin fuel tanks, medium length (3/4 stock max) and extended length (1.5 stock length)

From Space-Y expanded, the 7.5m and 10m parts would be nice.   Engines, aren't necessarily needed, but might be nice to pull over.

Finally, adding reworks for the 1.8m parts might be nice for users with the DLC installed.   (Engine reworks probably aren't needed, those 1.8m engines are perfect as is.)

Also, having a series of texture and model reworks more inspired by the 1.7 KSP quality passs updates might be nice. to add to the todo list as well.  (I REALLY like the new Ant and Spider from the reworks.)

Finally, adding more color textures on EVERYTHING.  The following are available in the current atlas set if indexes are created: Black, Dark, White White/Black Light, Black/White Dark,  Bright Metal, Dark Metal, Flat Metal. Kosmonaut Green. Kosmonaut Green/Orange, Insulation Orange, Insulation Beige, Space Station Fabric.

If Interstellar Meshswitch permits it you could use a separate "style" and "color" switch on some of the parts, such as engines, RCS and science parts.

An improved variety of textures/styles could also be created by switching out the parallax maps and/or normal maps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Wow, you don't ask much, do you? That description is a shockingly large amount of work.

I can confirm that exactly one of those is happening, but I will not say what it is. The rest are very much 'never'.

 

Edited by Nertea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nertea said:

I can confirm that exactly one of those is happening, but I will not say what it is.

Is it adding <counts on fingers> 15 textures per part?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Peers at the list*

Yup, I know which one it is. Of course, it's not exactly hard to figure out if you know where to look... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Streetwind said:

Yup, I know which one it is. Of course, it's not exactly hard to figure out if you know where to look... ;)

If only there was a website that showed ReStock's progress...

Edited by EchoLima

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.