snkiz

Your barking up the wrong tree my friend. This is a space plane mod. NESD's cockpit mod is another thread, and as you've pointed out, and been shown. There are many options for what you ask in mods with better context for the parts.

Well as I understand it, the idea is to recognise that professionals use platforms like YouTube, tiktok, twitch etc.. And they should be adherent to the same rules they have imposed on traditional media, and they are imposing on things like apple music and Netflix. The problem of course, is that it's poorly worded and has few defining points. This makes it way over reaching. I don't think it will pass as is. I don't think social media companies will put up with it. They tried Something similar in Australia recently. Australia ended up walking it back.

The overly dramatic lens flares and general haziness. LIke I said like petroleum jelly smeared on the camera lens. All the edges look hazy. Witch is not my experience with actual HDR equipment, quite the opposite. To me with HDR the edges are to crisp, colours are unnatural in a uncanny valley kind of way. So what's worrisome to me is that 'HDR' images look worse then normal ones if you don't have HDR. This isn't the place to debate it, I was just curious if the effect was intentional.

Well that's worrisome. A lot screencaps from new games look smeared like this. I've seen HDR panels before, I don't like them, made everything look super fake. I haven't been new game shopping in a while. I hope regular graphics aren't neglected over this. My monitor isn't super cheap it's a Benq 1440 VA panel. Has 10 bit colour.

So I'm reading through the entire thread. This is the first time I've noticed a screenshot like that and HDR mentioned together, and the KSP2 shots look like that to. So maybe I'm slow to catch up. Is HDR supposed to look like nvidia's petroleum jelly filter (DLSS)? Or is that just because my monitor isn't HDR and those shots are?

I didn't even bother with RP Plumes, so what does that tell you? If I read things right they just work for srb's using stock plumes. WF doesn't handle dirty srb plumes well yet. RP was made with older tools and is really good for what it is. All I'll say about performance is WF scales better then RP, Nerta has the numbers to back that up. More complex plumes may in fact run worse. But being that complex isn't even possible with RP, so no one does it.

It's your picnic, IMO they are the same nozzles are they not? Not uncommon for component companies to do stand alone parts to demo their products. That my 2 cents.

Also on the topic of updates. Being familiar with both and knowing how similar they really are, I agree with LinuxGuruGamer

Yup that's what I did to make those. just the mods I was messing with and the squad folder. (well The MH to folder when I remembered that's where the white panels are) Speaking of, since your pushing an update soon. I don't use them, but I can have a look at your KeR-7 engines if you like. Save you some low level effort.

This might explain why ksp runs like... well you know after a few hours for me to. I've had out memory related blue screens while playing to. Could have been HW related(I had an ssd die recently) or KSP slowly filling all of it. yikes. I test ships a fair bit as well. Not as much as you I'd imagine bug testing your mods.

This is what's killing you. I keep kebal on an NVME. I only have a 1600x and a oc'd 580. But 32gb memory and fast storage make all the difference. I play Cities skylines. I have enough mods on that to boot stuff out of ram( it loads to 26gb) still not that bad with background being pushed to swap(pagefile). The system while a little slower, is still responsive. Most of my page file still lives on an ssd because I don't want to wear out my OS drive to fast. But I feel your pain, Nerta's Near Future stuff is a rabbit hole. All their stuff is a rabbit hole lol.

How many do you have? I'm loading over 10,000 patches RN and I'm only hitting 15gb on the game.

I am aware of the potato status of your rig. Nerta says it runs better then the stock effects, you should consider trying it out. I would honored for you to link them. I slightly was worried I might have offended you with my tweaks. I think my logic is sound. the only thing really op about it, is it's compat and surface attachable. But that's why they are awesome. Almost forgot the engine config will work on stock. Using the newer moduleEngineFx. I don't know if that was clear.

I think you may need to change the engineID to basicEngine. And I don't think you don't have enough controllers for that plume. Do you have SWFE? If nothing else it serves as a pretty complete set of examples. And if you are modding an engine that has waterfall already then you edit the @ModuleWaterfallFX {stuff here} module not create one.

I keep them in a patches folder but you can put them in the mod dir. The template file needs to be in a folder named 'Templates' in the same dir.

Shoot, I would have found that, I swear. ty

The thing that you are looking for is Re-entry Particle Effect (Renewed). It's been a while since I read up on it. But if I remember, it uses an existing unity particle effect that isn't that resource intensive and you can customize.

I sorted my plume issues out. See this post In the APUS thread, and this one in the NESD's Warehouse thread (InternalRCS). They now have support for WaterfallReStock, and StockWaterfallEffects. In The process of that I needed an LF RCS jet. I took the hydrazine-rcs plume, reassigned its control to RCS and recoloured it to look like a methane Hot Gas Thruster. While I as at it I noticed The Vernier didn't have a plume in WFRS. I applied the just reassigned(not recoloured.) hydrazine plume to it. @Nertea I don't know if you had plans for those two plumes, but your welcome to mine. Is there a way to reassign control of a plume without creating a new template? Picture and files below. The plumes on the right are the ones I adapted from the included hydrazine-rcs plume. Files;

@NESD InternalRCS is a seriously underrated mod. I thought it could use some love, so I gave it support for WaterfallRestock and StockWaterfallEffects. I configured it so you can have WFRS and SWFE with no conflicts (from my patches. ) Your wellcome to ship the patch if you think they're good enough. ReStock plumes; On the right Stock engines. On the Left InternalRCS and APUS. (Yes I did this for APUS Too.) StockWaterfallEffects; And it all fits in the tiny patch and accompanying template. The patch is designed to live in a dedicated patch folder (Eg: MyPatches/waterfall/Templates[folder] {files,...}), but it can go into the mod's patch folder. The template needs to be in a 'Templates' folder in the same dir as the patch. InternalRCS-WF~SWFE.cfg Template, waterfall-methalox-rcs-jet-1.cfg

May 5/2021 8pm est. New version! More effecient config, added Rstock support for RCS, New template file. Same offer @NESD Yours if you want it. This is my favorite medium size shuttle mod. Seems to work ok to me. I made a couple patches to update the plumes. In this one The BBQ-150 has a new moduleEnginesFX plume, it mostly looks like an RS plume IMO. I took the liberty of buffing SL ISP a bit, and added a small alternator. If you have waterfall installed, I converted to CH4. See file for details. To install: either create a patches folder for them. Like mine 'GameData/Mypatches/waterfall/Templates{patch files} or in the mod dir with the same structure. I don't remember how deep you can nest a file structure before MM says no. But I've done it. If you have a patch folder already in a mod just use it instead of making a waterfall dir. If not it's ok to make one. and this one I Adapted and tweaked the rcs plumes from StockWaterfallEffects and Restock. And now there's a template to go with it. It needs to live in a folder called 'Templates' in the same dir as the patch. be that in the mod dir or a dedicated patch folder. PS. These are not in a zip because then I would have to licence them. I don't agree with that. I'm configuring API's here, I haven't created anything. The intention was to offer them to NESD for inclusion the next time he gets back to the forums. Til then, they are here, free for taking.

Ty I just figured out what I did a couple hours ago. Not exactly clear if you don't know the transformName is an anchor point built into the model. I'm not what you'd call a modding expert. Thanks for pointing me to the real plume config though. I tried for a while to find a working example, the hard way. By looking through mods. Then failed at making one from scratch. I was tired what can I say.

The Canadians are invading.

So I had the idea that i'd like to add waterfall support to my current favourite small shuttle mod A.P.U.S. The main engine is basically a half size vector, using a pretty simple ModuleEngines config. After poking around stock-waterwall effects and reading the wiki I came to the conclusion that I needed ModuleEnginesFX to work with waterfall. Naturally I borrowed the necessary bits from the vector and came up with a working waterfall config in pretty short order. A tribute to how well laid out waterfall is, I'm no modding expert. Then I had the idea that it's only a couple more steps to come up with a patch to update the og plume to the new stock FX for those not using waterfall, while I'm at it, add a real plume one to. Famous last words. Here's the kink, the new hotness is methane right? The vectors stats never made sense as RS25's not even on the kerbal scale, hence neither does a half size 'RS15' But they are really not far a sensible kerbal scale raptor in my opinion. (Sort of Given the early game engines inspired by RP1 are buffeed in to what would be Kscaled CH4 ISP ranges) So I tried very hard to come up with a methane real plume and couldn't get it to work, whatever not using realplume anyway. But in the process of of cleaning that up I broke the stock config I had working, I can't figure out what I broke. I know it's not strictly speaking waterfall support, but if I could get a hint about these errors I'd be grateful. [ERR 10:13:49.830] [ModuleSrfFX]: No IThrustProvider module found at index 0! [ERR 10:13:50.046] PrefabParticleFX: Cannot find transform of name 'smokePoint' [ERR 10:13:50.047] ParticleModelFX: Cannot find transform of name 'thrustPoint' [ERR 10:13:50.047] PrefabParticleFX: Cannot find transform of name 'thrustTransformYup' The engine works config tweaks, sound, flameout. Just no stock plume. I had it once. This is the config I'm patching. This is my stock patch. I've tied KS25 and basicEngine and nothing for the engine ID. E150 is it's animate id, it was a shot in the dark. no change. For completeness this is my functioning waterfall config.

Oh wow, I made this for my JNSQ game. you can use it your skunkworks program. Source: Chris Hafields twitter

Not for a while I'm just revisiting the issue. last I looked any version of kerbalism seemed like still to many hoops for my taste. I've always liked the semi cartoonish feel of snacks. It fits the mo of the game more. Get the point across while being light hearted and not to serious. And bonus, it uses the stock supply chain in its basic form. The problem in the past was it was to simple and just seemed arbitrary. From what I'm reading, now it's pretty flexible. So I could potentially reconfigure it to not rely on ore but a more realistic resource or two. I Don't like how the hitchhiker is the catch all processing station (for a number of mods without models) , but it's easy enough to mod it in to what I want to use it in.