Jump to content

[1.1] RLA Stockalike 13.4 [25 Apr]


Recommended Posts

Ah, mea culpa. I got a bit over zealous deleting parts that I don't use. If I'd bothered to read the MODEL routing in the tiny radial tank cfg I would have seen that it's texture was in a separate folder. Thanks!

Edited by Boomerang
Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad I could help. The MODEL{} system is great for saving memory for the overall pack, but not so great for allowing people to customise things to only have what they want. I probably should've written a more comprehensive changelog so this could've been avoided entirely. Ah well, have a solar panel preview to make up for it;

LeOEzoD.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, that looks great! I don't know if you've looked at the BoxSat mod at all, but it's got a 1x3 panel with a rather different texture but a similar folding mechanism. Looks like it's the tiny sort of size that you excel at.

And honestly, if I'd taken the time to actually read what was in the cfg and perhaps been a bit less eager to help spot minor problems, it wouldn't have been a thing, don't worry about a changelog.

As someone who's not a modder by any means but who occasionally tinkers with editing .png/.tga textures to change the look of parts, or occasionally create similar-looking parts with different functions, is there any fairly straight forward means of converting .mbm files to an image file? If answering that would require pages of explanation, don't worry about it, I've already probably kept you from working on something :P

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey, that looks great! I don't know if you've looked at the BoxSat mod at all, but it's got a 1x3 panel with a rather different texture but a similar folding mechanism. Looks like it's the tiny sort of size that you excel at.

One of the panels on that part up there is larger than the 2x3 stock panels, each of the BoxSat panels are smaller. I might fiddle with the texture some more to make it look more interesting, the Venus Express panels it's vaguely kind-of based on have a gold strip down the center, that might help break up that big repeated texture space somewhat and draw the eye away from the big flat metal part on the inside. That said, it's not exactly a hero part like the engines usually are so it doesn't need to look super detailed.

As someone who's not a modder by any means but who occasionally tinkers with editing .png/.tga textures to change the look of parts, or occasionally create similar-looking parts with different functions, is there any fairly straight forward means of converting .mbm files to an image file? If answering that would require pages of explanation, don't worry about it, I've already probably kept you from working on something :P

Look up mbm2png on Google, it used to be on Spaceport but since that went down the other hosting options for it are somewhat dubious. Beware that PNGs can lack mipmapping so that can have a negative effect on the appearance of any textures you edit. And don't worry about keeping me from something, brain needs a rest from figuring out all this new stuff I've had to learn to make the solar panels. Animation was totally alien to me before this part, so that's why it's taken so long to get made! As well as that I went through about five different designs before settling on this one because of the relative ease of the shape.

Link to post
Share on other sites
One of the panels on that part up there is larger than the 2x3 stock panels, each of the BoxSat panels are smaller. I might fiddle with the texture some more to make it look more interesting, the Venus Express panels it's vaguely kind-of based on have a gold strip down the center, that might help break up that big repeated texture space somewhat and draw the eye away from the big flat metal part on the inside. That said, it's not exactly a hero part like the engines usually are so it doesn't need to look super detailed.

This is entirely my own personal opinion, and I'm not a graphic designer or anything, but I liked the fairly simple look of what you've done so far.

I'm a fan of that repeated texture because it fits well with stock, and like you alluded to, we don't generally look to panels for particular details. I also like seeing more of the structure of the panel. All of the 1x6 and 2x3 panels end up looking fairly magical in how they unfold due to a lack of visible support and hinges.

Look up mbm2png on Google, it used to be on Spaceport but since that went down the other hosting options for it are somewhat dubious. Beware that PNGs can lack mipmapping so that can have a negative effect on the appearance of any textures you edit. And don't worry about keeping me from something, brain needs a rest from figuring out all this new stuff I've had to learn to make the solar panels. Animation was totally alien to me before this part, so that's why it's taken so long to get made! As well as that I went through about five different designs before settling on this one because of the relative ease of the shape.

Eh, I had a nose around for mbm2png and while it seems to still be floating about in the aether, I'm running OSX and no one got around to writing a version for that. I suppose if I'm terribly desperate to do some photoshopping of textures I could set up a dual boot. Emphasis on terribly :P

Thanks for the info though. I usually have my hands full just creating new MODEL routes and such for when I make copy-cat parts for my own use, I can't imagine teaching myself modeling and all that, let alone then animating those parts. Makes me even more grateful for folks like you!

Link to post
Share on other sites

What are peoples thoughts on science storage parts? I know there's a few hanging about in other mods, but with some planned parts in the next update I might add one myself. The command seat is a bit useless in career without that storage capability that full command pods provide, but I'm concerned about people just adding the storage option to pods to be able to double up on science reports. Is this a real potential issue or am I overthinking it because you could just do this with two pods if you really wanted to anyway?

Since those other parts aren't in a previewable state yet, here's a quick mockup of what the new panels would look like in symmetry:

XCiMjj4.jpg

Each of those squares in the grid is a meter.

This is entirely my own personal opinion, and I'm not a graphic designer or anything, but I liked the fairly simple look of what you've done so far.

I'm a fan of that repeated texture because it fits well with stock, and like you alluded to, we don't generally look to panels for particular details. I also like seeing more of the structure of the panel. All of the 1x6 and 2x3 panels end up looking fairly magical in how they unfold due to a lack of visible support and hinges.

The small stock ones do have hinges, but they do tend to end up folding up inside each other.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of using monopropellant engine instead of LFO engine?

The MP engines are generally lower TWR than their LFO counterparts, which admittedly doesn't make that much sense. The seemingly very high ISP on them shouldn't be compared directly to LFO engine ISP since well, they don't use LFO! Broadly speaking you should end up with roughly the same dV in a vacuum with using a comparable sized engine and tank combination, but the MP combination will almost always be lower mass. In atmosphere the LFO will always win out. The exception to these "rules" is the aerospike since that has no gimbal, lower vacuum ISP and higher atmospheric ISP. I'll be going over all of these stats and may end up changing them completely in the next update, mainly thinking about lowering the mass of the engines and decreasing the ISP to try and get the overall vehicle capability to be roughly the same. Right now you can get away with a smaller launch vehicle for MP vessels due to the overall lower mass.

TL;DR: Lower TWR, roughly the same dV capability in vacuum, worse in atmosphere, lower mass, and I might change all that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i7FO4nl.png

A little rover based on a medium sized rover frame in the next Stockalike update, 1.25m x 2m in size. There will also be a 2.5m x 4m version for even bigger vehicles. These are the reason I asked about science storage containers, since sticking a pod on these looks a bit ugly.

Truly can't wait for the probe cores and panel. Keep up the great work!

Those panels will be in the next Stockalike update that'll be coming fairly soon if all goes to plan, but the probe cores will be in a separate pack once I've modelled a few more parts to flesh it out a little.

The little 5 thrust MP engine is awesome for satellites. Cuts down on size of the ship quite a bit.

That's the entire point behind the smaller parts, not everything needs to be built huge. You can squeeze quite a capable little vessel inside the cargobays without having to resort to the strangely balanced stock parts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

lukzc9D.png

The large construction frame, testing it out around KSC on a rover. The attachment nodes for this and the smaller one are different to the structural panels, they're at the "front" and "back" along the shorter lengths of the rectangle, rather than being on the top and bottom. The two parts also appear lengthwise in the editors, which is especially helpful in the SPH.

I miss the LV-T5 alternative model :/

The alternative models pack is still available under the Previous Versions header in the OP. Check the spoiler link for downloads.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as rover bodies go, I've always noticed that the wheel attachments were taller and heftier than any structural components we had to attach them to, so if you're thinking about doing any more rover bodies my $.02 would be something that isn't flat. Love the current rover frame btw, and lengthwise SPH alignment sounds wonderful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

in wip(for ksp 0.23) state it had 3 modules:

Stockalike 0.9.4

Power Generation 0.1.1

Electric Engines 0.6.1

Are all of those now part of one merged Stockalike pack?

but you removed SRGs (rtgs with higher e/s production) :\

Edited by gendalf
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if you guys check the screenshots thread, so I'll crosspost it here;

MVJ7KQR.png

Took me a little while to figure out how to get the darn things to face the right way when tracking the sun, but I got there in the end. In other news, I've been going through the particle effects and updating the older ones and adding new ones. The current stock SRB effect looks a little insane on the two Boostertrons! I've tweaked the monopropellant particles for the small and medium engines, removing one texture (smoke particle 2.mbm). and bumping up the emission rates. Also fiddled with the Cutter FX (linearmain.mbm), renamed it and stuck it on the Spinnaker as well. It fits quite nicely and totally puts the 48-7S to shame;

J46Stax.jpg

As far as rover bodies go, I've always noticed that the wheel attachments were taller and heftier than any structural components we had to attach them to, so if you're thinking about doing any more rover bodies my $.02 would be something that isn't flat. Love the current rover frame btw, and lengthwise SPH alignment sounds wonderful.

As you can see in the screenshot above the large frame is nice and chunky, and the small one is just a hairs width thinner than the attachment part on the smallest rover wheels as well. Both look better than just using awkward square flat panels for making rovers. The lengthwise attachment is great for building stuff, but it does make easy placement of balanced skycranes a tad harder. There's a bug with attachment nodes and MODEL{} (since the two frames share a texture) that prevents me from putting nodes in the middle that face up and down (in the SPH).

The new rover bodies look great!

Thanks! They play pretty great too, the shape makes rovers look much nicer.

in wip(for ksp 0.23) state it had 3 modules:

Stockalike 0.9.4

Power Generation 0.1.1

Electric Engines 0.6.1

Are all of those now part of one merged Stockalike pack?

but you removed SRGs (rtgs with higher e/s production) :\

You got it exactly right, Power Generation and Electric Engines got merged down into Stockalike. I cut the 1.25m electric engines since they didn't add much in terms of gameplay, and the SRGs got cut because they were kinda boring. If you still want to use them the OP still has download links for the last WIP version of each pack, and the SRGs should be absolutely fine to use, except for their cost.

Edited by hoojiwana
Link to post
Share on other sites

Also fiddled with the Cutter FX (linearmain.mbm), renamed it and stuck it on the Spinnaker as well. It fits quite nicely and totally puts the 48-7S to shame;

http://i.imgur.com/J46Stax.jpg

OMG yes, I had been using hotrockets just for your engines because the stock effects just didn't do them justice, this is perfect.

Both look better than just using awkward square flat panels for making rovers.

Amen to that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stockalike 12 is out!

The big change is a reduction of Monopropellant engine ISP, as well as the addition of new parts. You will need to delete older versions before installing due to folder and file deletions or renames. Check the OP for a full changelog and download links, and let me know what you think.

OMG yes, I had been using hotrockets just for your engines because the stock effects just didn't do them justice, this is perfect.

3IyNOc6.jpg

Edited by hoojiwana
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've liked these little parts for a long time - it's great fun to try and see how much I can accomplish with small rockets. But they're better looking than all my other rockets now too! Nice work on the engines.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Stockalike 12 is out!

The big change is a reduction of Monopropellant engine ISP, as well as the addition of new parts. You will need to delete older versions before installing due to folder and file deletions or renames. Check the OP for a full changelog and download links, and let me know what you think.

http://i.imgur.com/3IyNOc6.jpg

Uh oh, do the renamed parts mean that this is a craft-breaking update?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the changelog on the OP, it looks like it is only partical names that have changed, not part names. Sooo, I think that makes it ok?

Make a copy of your persistance file before loading the game after updating RLA, if your crafts gets nuked then yes it is save breaking :). Then you can either downgrade back to RLA 11 to use with your copy of persistance, or you can continue a new game and new names.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I've liked these little parts for a long time - it's great fun to try and see how much I can accomplish with small rockets. But they're better looking than all my other rockets now too! Nice work on the engines.

Thanks! Engines are always great fun to make, which is probably where there are so many of them in part packs!

Uh oh, do the renamed parts mean that this is a craft-breaking update?
Looking at the changelog on the OP, it looks like it is only partical names that have changed, not part names. Sooo, I think that makes it ok?

Make a copy of your persistance file before loading the game after updating RLA, if your crafts gets nuked then yes it is save breaking :). Then you can either downgrade back to RLA 11 to use with your copy of persistance, or you can continue a new game and new names.

I didn't make any part name changes for this update, just the one folder name change and the particle texture changes, so your craft should be safe. I deliberately made the changelog as verbose as possible this time around which is why it seems so long compared to say, the v10 update. As Shania_L said though, if you're unsure you should backup your persistence files just in case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just started to play 0.25 and am glad that this mod has updated! These are up near the top on my "Most commonly used parts" list and I'd hate to play without them. One of the best things in this pack are the 45 degree RCS nozzles. I don't understand why they aren't in the base game to begin with. Keep up the great work!

Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...