R-T-B

Heh, that bugfix did not change any sunflare code... but hey, if it works, I won't question it... glad you got it working!

Why do I suddenly want a new solar system?

Are you using KSP 1.9? If so, do you have a 1.9 compatible scatterer? Only unofficial versions exist at the moment, but they mostly work well. I can advise you to try mine here: You may want to grab the eve build with bugfixes for 1.9 while you are there.

It's probably because Principia has some C++ and assembly stuff that Norton views as "can't possibly be good / dark magic." Of course, Principia's harmless and awesome to boot. But yeah, dat topic.

Man, that screenshot is surreal. Nice to see it working that well!

I got off on the wrong foot when I first came here, so perhaps part of that is out of an abundance of caution... heh. But no, really, if I fork your work it's because I love it and want to help. Complete respect for these guys and nothing but. @Harvey W. Please try the EVE build I am presently uploading, it may fix your issue.

Please continue discussion on my mods in this thread: Reason is this is supposed to be for official scatterer. I would say though that though that might work, you are much better off just fixing the AVP values manually. If you just install a fresh scatterer, it should do that automatically given the way AVP is structured, actually.

Hello @Harvey W. I may have found the place the EVE bug happens. I need some more data though. Some pretty simple questions, basically: 1.) When you start seeing the clouds dissapear, do they ever vanish completely as you rise in altitude, or are they always somewhat present? Do they "pop" back in at some point? If so, is it around 160,000-180,000m? If so, I'm thinking I know what's happening. I will start on a fix as soon as you confirm.

Understood. Do understand: I would only have been building for the 1.9 Frobenius patched target (and I possess a lot of *nix and WIndows horsepower, so the build target is not an issue), and as described in my thread, I tag all my versions at the logger with a prefix. But as far as what I can offer you, it is limited honestly as I am not as good a C++ dev as I am at higher level languages (I can read and write it but my time with it is low). I appreciate your consideration and of course will honor your wishes. No offense taken and appreciate your thoughts. I am very happy to hear Principia is already on it. You guys are awesome.

In my country it was 2am! My work never sleeps though (and by "work" I mean my job which presently is sending me remote work). Don't worry, I got sleep in the end. I always do at some point. One of my idol's is SpidewebSoftware's Jeff Vogel, which I will now quote: "Do not brag about not getting enough sleep. It's stupid. You need sleep to live." Good to know. Principia is presently on 1.8, but I have updated it (they have in master branch too) and it can now build on 1.9. I'd be happy to post test binaries if they grant permission. Your log is fine then, I will investigate this today and see if I can't give the EVE dev a bugfix for it, as well as fix it in my builds. Only 3 right now, but I do plan to take on more. How many I take on longterm remains to be seen, but right now accepting ideas.

Interesting. I think that's enough, provided you are only using eve and not Scatterer. Is this the case? If so, it's a bug but I am unsure what's causing it right off hand, and will have to look in the morning (really late here). If you are using Scatterer, it could still be a bug, but there is no log data for it, which would be odd. If you are using both, please provide that actual log from your game directory (KSP.log file). Otherwise I think I have enough data.

Huh. I thought I fixed that one. Latest release I assume? Can I get a log file after a flight that was affected, please? KSP..log in your install folder.

I'm good at saving fuel and actually a really good pilot, but lazy. I don't bother to do that complex manauver even though I know it should. That orbit will take 30 DAYS? Let's just intercept it faster/sooner at the cost of more fuel. At the end of the day, I installed a budget mod to sustain myself, and I know exactly why: I just fly around like a space cowboy in ludicrously overengineered fueltank laden monstrosities. Because I don't like to think about energy... in a game about rocket science. I could probably accomplish what I do with half or even quarter the fuel, but I don't really care and my designs show it. It only bothers me when the part count crosses 400 and my FPS dies.

lol, I hear that in Kerbal-voice thanks to your avatar. You have that log file? I probably won't finish finding let alone fixing the bug tonight, but I will work on it tomorrow for certain.

Hello, you are experiencing what bug? Is it the missing clouds and water bug as above? Please reply here, I made a thread for my builds to reduce clutter on the OP authors:

Hello Principia devs, I find you to be some of the most highly qualified coders on this site, so I am unsure if this will honestly be of much use, but as I mentioned I've been using 1.9 with Principia for some time and it's been working fine, apparently. Would you be open to me making a binary build available and forwarding bug reports to you as well as making a proper pull request for basic support as well as any bugs we may find along the way? If you are, I'd be willing to help you out. You can read more about my adoption program for updating plugins here: In short: I just fix bugs, I do not add features. And I report back. It's to help you, not harm you. In that spirit, I will not do this without your permission and will not be upset if you decline. I already have a fairly decently good release of Frobenius in my personal use case, but as you and I know, testing matters. I'd love to get some eyes and ears on it for you, but I need your permission and will not proceed without it since you are quite obviously active members of this community. What's your thoughts on the matter? No pressure, and infinite respect! @eggrobin, @pleroy

Please direct all further discussion on my unofficial builds to here if at all possible: It will be closely monitored, where I'll check here less often (it's for blackrack's official builds, technically.)

just a heads up that blackrack has official versions out, as such I am basically closing up shop here. Please see here: https://github.com/LGhassen/Scatterer/releasesways You can always fetch my builds at the old links but really, blackracks should be better. He knows shaders like nobodies business and that's where the rest of the bugs were. I may pick up other projects that interest me later but for now my work here is done.

Yeah, there goes me hoping it was going to be as easy as it not detecting OpenGL on windows or something. Sadly that works perfect... heh. We'll figure this out. Just FYI, I am about to open a new thread for all my unoffical builds in add-on releases, so I don't spam blackrack anymore when he goes official. We should probably move there soon. I will post a link.

Yep. Another quick fix is just to drop from "Ultra" shader quality to something lower, but there are drawbacks to that of course.

Hello all, this is a bit of a PSA: If using my latest scatterer that is 1.9 ready, you should be advised that most visual packs (probably this one too) do not have the Spec R G B vailues set correctly for Kerbin with regards to the new "Ultra" setting in 1.9. Kerbin's new Atlas-based ultra shader interprets these values differently, and as such, in 1.9, the values are approximate 5x as potent. You will need to divide them by 5 to make them look "correct." You can find these values in [KSP Install Dir]\Gamedata\scatterer\config\Planets\Kerbin\atmo.cfg The new scatterer will not autoadjust these values (as we'd lose precision by doing so, technically, and if you lowered your settings from ultra, it'd all be wrong), whether official or in my preview builds. You will probably want to make a "1.9 ultra shader" version of your texture packs to compensate for this strange behavior of the new Atlas shader. The only world currently incorperating this Shader is Kerbin in KSP 1.9+. Thanks.

It's even worse, I was looking at stuff from September 2019. This is a big log file, but I'll find what I need, thanks. EDIT: Or not. It appears this log ends abrubtly in early Feb 2020. It's a detailed log, which I like, but for some reason it's not complete. Can I just get the KSP.log file from your game directory? That always logs after every game and should be more than enough. Quick question too: Are you forcing any graphics modes? Like OpenGL, or something? It's ok if you are, that is technically supported by me, but I need to know to isolate the bug.

As am I! The log is indicating Unity 2017, which was abandoned as of KSP 1.8. That means you are aparently running 1.7... or so your gamelog says. Maybe it's an old entry. Let me take a second look. EDIT: Doh! Your logfile starts in September 2019. I made a rookie mistake, I have to scroll.. lol. Standby while I look into this.

Hello all, If using my latest scatterer that is 1.9 ready, you should be advised that this pack does not have the Spec R G B vailues set correctly for Kerbin. Kerbin's new Atlas-based ultra shader interprets these values differently, and as such, in 1.9, the values are approximate 5x as potent. You will need to divide them by 5 to make them look "correct." You can find these values in [KSP Install Dir]\Gamedata\scatterer\config\Planets\Kerbin\atmo.cfg The new scatterer will not autoadjust these values (as we'd lose precision by doing so, technically, and if you lowered your settings from ultra, it'd all be wrong), whether official or in my preview builds. You will probably want to make a "1.9 ultra shader" version of your texture packs to compensate for this strange behavior of the new Atlas shader. The only world currently incorperating this Shader is Kerbin in KSP 1.9+. Thanks.

I was using Spectra recently and it was working fine (or at least, seemed to be). Wonder what's different on your config? hmmm... Weird is all I can say. Must be a GPU-driver based difference. EDIT: Oh! Spectra and Astronomers both don't presently account for the new 1.9 "Ultra" Kerbin shader. I used to work around this, but I don't in recent builds because it's not technically the correct way to interpret the data. To fix, You need to lower the Spec R,G,B values in the Kerbin Atmo.conf file by about a factor of 5 (divide the number by 5 and round, basically). That seems to be what the Ultra shader needs. It's weird I know, but I can't implement that in code because it only applies to Kerbin (or well, I could technically but I feel this is more the visual pack authors duty). I will advise them of this so they can make a proper config. Spectra is a close second to Astronomers in my "favorite visual pack" list afterall. EDIT: Authors advised: