[1.1] BDArmory v0.11.0.1 (+compatibility, fixes) - Apr 23

[MrWizerd]

Well that isn't hard you could do that with a simple creation of a cfg... heck I'll probably do it tomorrow if I think of it.

[Hellbrand]

Sweet. also everytime i see hodo's name i think hodor

[Avalon304]

I just had another awesome thought... it would be cool if the missiles (and perhaps bombs) supported the mesh and texture swap modules from Firespitter so you could have different missiles/bombs from only one part. Like the AIM-120 could be changed into the AIM-9, or the AGM-114 could be changed into the AGM-65 of the Mk. 82 could be changed into a JDAM or something... that would be cool.

[sumghai]

I just had another awesome thought... it would be cool if the missiles (and perhaps bombs) supported the mesh and texture swap modules from Firespitter so you could have different missiles/bombs from only one part. Like the AIM-120 could be changed into the AIM-9, or the AGM-114 could be changed into the AGM-65 of the Mk. 82 could be changed into a JDAM or something... that would be cool.

I personally am not too keen on this idea, as each munition has its own range, mass, warhead yield, rate of change of velocity, lead time etc - Firespitter may be able to swap meshes, textures and perhaps fuel content, but it won't be able to manipulate the BahaD MissileLauncher PartModule dynamically for each munition type.

[Avalon304]

I personally am not too keen on this idea, as each munition has its own range, mass, warhead yield, rate of change of velocity, lead time etc - Firespitter may be able to swap meshes, textures and perhaps fuel content, but it won't be able to manipulate the BahaD MissileLauncher PartModule dynamically for each munition type.

I think that getting into giving each specific weapon its own stats might be getting too involved for it.

[sumghai]

I think that getting into giving each specific weapon its own stats might be getting too involved for it.

The AIM-120 and AIM-9 may both be Air-to-Air Missiles, but they have notable differences - AIM-9s are generally more maneuverable but have much shorter range due to its smaller diameter.

Real-life specs aside, the difference in the physical dimensions would mean that the thrust transforms would be positioned differently, something Firespitter can't handle - essentially, you would either have the thrust coming out of well into the rear nozzle of the AIM-120, or a fair distance away from the back of the AIM-9.

[Avalon304]

The AIM-120 and AIM-9 may both be Air-to-Air Missiles, but they have notable differences - AIM-9s are generally more maneuverable but have much shorter range due to its smaller diameter.

Real-life specs aside, the difference in the physical dimensions would mean that the thrust transforms would be positioned differently, something Firespitter can't handle - essentially, you would either have the thrust coming out of well into the rear nozzle of the AIM-120, or a fair distance away from the back of the AIM-9.

Im aware that the missiles perform differently in real life... but for the purposes of inside KSP... they dont need to perform differently.

Also couldnt you just model it so the AIM-9 and AIM-120 had their visible nozzles placed at the same position? So that when the model changes it the fame effects still coming from the nozzle of the missile.

[sumghai]

Im aware that the missiles perform differently in real life... but for the purposes of inside KSP... they dont need to perform differently.

So let's assume that an AGM-114 Hellfire and a AIM-9 shared the same base stats - it doesn't make sense for an air-to-ground missile to be equally capable of suddenly intercepting aircraft, and it would be silly to consolidate models into one part to make a "generic" do-anything-you-want munition.

Also couldnt you just model it so the AIM-9 and AIM-120 had their visible nozzles placed at the same position? So that when the model changes it the fame effects still coming from the nozzle of the missile.

The pylon mounting for both missiles would be incorrect.

Having separate missile models as separate parts is overall a better choice.

[Avalon304]

So let's assume that an AGM-114 Hellfire and a AIM-9 shared the same base stats - it doesn't make sense for an air-to-ground missile to be equally capable of suddenly intercepting aircraft, and it would be silly to consolidate models into one part to make a "generic" do-anything-you-want munition.

The pylon mounting for both missiles would be incorrect.

Having separate missile models as separate parts is overall a better choice.

And yet the Hellfire we have right now is fully capable of targeting aircraft, and intercepting them quite well. Even Baha's last video showed that... he launched like 20 hellfires at a plane... We already have generic do-anything-you-want munitions right now...

And I dont agree adding more parts for the game to load is bad. It needlessly balloons the part catalog in the SPH.

[sumghai]

And yet the Hellfire we have right now is fully capable of targeting aircraft, and intercepting them quite well. Even Baha's last video showed that... he launched like 20 hellfires at a plane... We already have generic do-anything-you-want munitions right now...

That was merely for demonstration purposes, since KSP does not distinguish between ground and aerial targets.

Having separate parts for individual missiles, each with their own specifications, allows users to pick the right missile for the job. Otherwise, there would be no point in the MissileLauncher PartModule having subparameters to tweak range and turning speed, which the current implementation also has.

EDIT: I should also add that having separate missile parts would allow different, additional part modules to be added to each missile / bomb - e.g. a cluster bomb could have both the standard MissileLauncher PartModule and an additional ClusterMunition PartModule that deploys bomblets. Your idea of smushing everything into one generic ordnance means that a skinny anti-air missile can suddenly contain several coffee-can sized bomblets much bigger than the missile itself.

Edited July 30, 2014 by sumghai

[Avalon304]

EDIT: I should also add that having separate missile parts would allow different, additional part modules to be added to each missile / bomb - e.g. a cluster bomb could have both the standard MissileLauncher PartModule and an additional ClusterMunition PartModule that deploys bomblets. Your idea of smushing everything into one generic ordnance means that a skinny anti-air missile can suddenly contain several coffee-can sized bomblets much bigger than the missile itself.

Except Im not saying we making 1 missile that contains all of the missiles/bombs. Im saying make one that is A2A (AIM-9, AIM-120, AIM-54 etc.), one that is A2G (AGM-114, AGM-65 etc) and a bomb (that contains things like the Mk82, JDAMs, cluster bombs etc) Thats 3 separate parts. instead of 8.

[sumghai]

Except Im not saying we making 1 missile that contains all of the missiles/bombs. Im saying make one that is A2A (AIM-9, AIM-120, AIM-54 etc.), one that is A2G (AGM-114, AGM-65 etc) and a bomb (that contains things like the Mk82, JDAMs, cluster bombs etc) Thats 3 separate parts. instead of 8.

Even amongst the same type, there are notable differences between munitions, visually as well as performance.

The Air-to-air example I gave demonstrates significant range and maneuverability differences between the AIM-9 and the AIM-120 that cannot just be handwaved with "It's Kerbal!", while bombs would obviously have different payloads (e.g. a Mk82 obviously would not have submunitions, even if belonged to the same part as a true cluster bomb).

In response to your "saving space" argument:

- It is textures, not models or CFGs, that take up the most memory. Clever add-on authors can make separate parts share the same texture atlas and save memory

- Part list bloat can be easily resolved by using part catalog-style plugins

EDIT: And by not relying on the Firespitter mesh switching plugin or reinventing the wheel to duplicate the same functionality internally, it means one less potential point of add-on incompatibility.

Edited July 30, 2014 by sumghai

[Azimech]

Great mod, and that weapons manager is a wonderful idea!

[Kiwibear]

I encountered something kinda silly with the 20mm minigun

I shot something in orbit with it, and it's velocity changed drastically upon a part being destroyed which sent it on an escape trajectory from duna

was kinda hilarious but I'm pretty sure that's not supposed to happen lol

[Sufficient Anonymity]

Just spotted an error in the 30mm ammunition box description - it says it contains 20x102 rather than 30x173

[AntiMatter001]

BahamutoD: uhm are you thinking of making these tweakscale compatible? also does anyone have a quick guide on how to make a MM tweakscale.cfg for this?

i ask because i love this mod and thought the small turrets that look like blocks (forgot the name ) could be tweakscaled up and the firerate lengthed so it would be like some HW(HomeWorld) and HW2 dradnaughts/battle cruisers main guns.

thanks!

[Hodo]

BahamutoD: uhm are you thinking of making these tweakscale compatible? also does anyone have a quick guide on how to make a MM tweakscale.cfg for this?

i ask because i love this mod and thought the small turrets that look like blocks (forgot the name ) could be tweakscaled up and the firerate lengthed so it would be like some HW(HomeWorld) and HW2 dradnaughts/battle cruisers main guns.

thanks!

I can think of one problem with that off the top of my head.

Tweakscale just changes the size of the model and the mass, not really anything to do with the module that handles the damage done or ammo used. So if you made the 12.7mm MG a massive battleship sized turret, it would still be firing half inch sized rounds in KSPs mind.

So you would have made the largest BB gun in history.

[Hodo]

The AIM-120 and AIM-9 may both be Air-to-Air Missiles, but they have notable differences - AIM-9s are generally more maneuverable but have much shorter range due to its smaller diameter.

Real-life specs aside, the difference in the physical dimensions would mean that the thrust transforms would be positioned differently, something Firespitter can't handle - essentially, you would either have the thrust coming out of well into the rear nozzle of the AIM-120, or a fair distance away from the back of the AIM-9.

AIM-9 Sidewinder, has nothing in common with the AIM-120 outside the fact they are both Air to Air missiles. The AIM-9 is a WVR (Within Visual Range) missile, meaning it has to be in sight for it to lock on and hit the target. The Sidewinder is a IR "Heat" seeking missile, unlike the AMRAAM which is a SARH (Semi Active Radar Homing) missile. The AIM-9 is an expanding rod warhead which is basically a buzzsaw of a weapon with a pretty close proximity kill weapon. The AMRAAM is a fair bit more powerful then the Sidewinder and has a fairly larger kill radius.

The Sidewinder also is extremely nimble, but so is the AMRAAM, both are capable of over 9G turns. They both have the thrust in the same location, out the back. They aren't made in Russia or the UK where they are starting to mess with thrust vectoring WVR air to air missiles. Yes that new ASRAAM is just down right nasty.

It isn't that hard to model something like that in the current system, I have already messed around a bit and changed the module for the AIM-120, scaled it down to come REAL close to the AIM-9 size and tweaked its performance to match. But not happy with it, been messing with a few of the other weapon mods and seeing if I can convert them to use those models instead. But this is strictly for my own use, not for download.

[BahamutoD]

About the mesh swap discussion:

After playing with D12 Aerotech and all its mesh swappable parts, I agree that it would be quite convenient to just have one part that you can switch, but sumghai made good points on why it it would be difficult. I'd probably have to write my own swapping thing that would handle the thrust transforms and different missile specs. So, maybe in the distant future, but for now, deal with the bloated parts catalog.

Also, I wrote down the thing about the air-to-ground missiles being able to hit air targets as easily as the air-to-air ones. I have an idea for making those act properly.

About tweakscale:

As Hodo said, tweakscale won't change the gun stats. For your giant turret idea, you can change the rescaleFactor in the config, and try modifying the BahaTurret module to use the cannon weaponType. You can take a look at the Abrams cannon's config for an example.

Just spotted an error in the 30mm ammunition box description - it says it contains 20x102 rather than 30x173

Oops, you're right!

I encountered something kinda silly with the 20mm minigun

I shot something in orbit with it, and it's velocity changed drastically upon a part being destroyed which sent it on an escape trajectory from duna

was kinda hilarious but I'm pretty sure that's not supposed to happen lol

Do you mean the craft that was destroyed got shot out of Duna, or the craft with the 20mm gun?

Either way, I'd blame the kraken. Nothing in the gun or bullet code should cause that effect. I'll take a look anyways.

I also found another issue with missiles while playing around with helicopters. If you're sliding sideways and shoot them, they kind of veer towards the direction you're moving at first. Just a heads up; I'll fix it.

[Guest]

TBH, unless you want to do something like "tweakable bomb" (iron bombs are simple things), I'd stay clear of mesh switcher. Especially when it comes to wings. D12 wings are almost useless, especially to FAR users, due to their collider issues (no good radial attachment is possible) and aerodynamic model issues. D12 missiles are nice, but ultimately, there's no difference between warheads, fin sets and engines. And there should be. Texture switcher is nice, but mesh switcher needs to be used with care, and not abused like D12 does. I don't mind "part bloat", in fact, I'm more concerned about memory issues.

[BahamutoD]

I see. I didn't realize that about the aerodynamics not changing with the different fin types.

I still have a few things to figure out for memory reduction. At the moment, all the guns use the same texture for muzzle flash particles but they each have their own copy of the texture. They're tiny so its not a huge deal but I need to find out how to make them share a texture.

[EthanKerbman]

Any chance to see naval gun turrets ? I think a 5" (127mm) single turret (ala Arleigh Burke), a 8" (203mm) double turret and a 16" (406mm) triple turret (see Iowa battlecruiser) would cover a lot of ground, pleeeaaaaase.

[BahamutoD]

Naval turrets are on the todo list. (I really need to update that todo list on the op).

Hodo, if you come up with an AIM-9 config you're happy with and are willing to share it, I can make a sidewinder model and include it in the next update.

[Hodo]

Naval turrets are on the todo list. (I really need to update that todo list on the op).

Hodo, if you come up with an AIM-9 config you're happy with and are willing to share it, I can make a sidewinder model and include it in the next update.

All I have done is modified your AIM-120 config.

Reduced the mass of the missile to .09 which is about where it actually is. And reduced the thrust to 18kn and 2 on cruise.

And for now I am using the model from IDskillful as a test model. So far except for the smoke trails it works. May tweak a few other things, like its turn rate a bit.

EDIT-

This is what I have so far in game.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Edited July 30, 2014 by Hodo

[Spork of Doom]

Nice! More Firepower for "Debris Removal"

BTW Here is my goofy looking Tank. Anyone know of and mods that add a good main body chassis for a tank, besides LLL.