ACSoft

Yes, the final test was just RealPlume-stock, as I have said.

I made the traditional "mods conflict" test (removing one by one all other mods), but no luck ! I even tried to remove "Squad" and "SquadExpansion", which, I suppose, come from the two official DLC I own too, but the game didn't started anymore. So I renounced, because for this, I suppose I would have to reinstall the game without these 2 DLC's. Here you can see a small video which demonstrate how ugly it is and also the plumes making this totally unreal arabesque rotation just after the booster separation: So, back to my special version with all solid booster plumes config files removed, to obtain stock plumes instead. If anybody has more idea, I would be glad to test again ! Thanks in forward.

Funny, because before reading your last answer, I tried 2000, which didn't really improved, so I tried 10000 with the following result: Massive hit on frame-rate, which dropped down to 33 FPS and generated anomalies. First, I simply didn't had the smoke rendering, only the flams, which were, I admit, much better and these ridiculous amazingly unrealistic slag flow.Then, after maybe 1 second, came the smoke in a ridiculous very strewn rendering in an "Indian smoke message" mode !!! Simply HOR-RI-BLE, believe me ! LOL ! Also something I didn't mentioned until now, which always happen (in all tests and configs): When the booster are ejected, the plumes remain attached to the booster and therefore, you can see these plumes making a gracious circular arabesque, according to the booster rotation, before they disappear ! This is horrible too ! Sorry to say that, but for me, these solid rocket plume flames are just a catastrophe right now ! Almost speaking of the RT-10 "Hammer", but also the Ariane 5, I tested yesterday seemed bad, and probably most of all other's. OK, my PC is probably not the most powerful one, but 16GB RAM with an Intel 7700 PCU and a 1080 GTX GPU, should be able to run this. I don't know how you obtained the plumes you showed to me on the pictures in your first answer, but I really doubt this is feasible with this mod on an actual KSP 1.10 installation, on a PC like mine. Hope this feedback may help to improve in the future and me, for now, in the meantime, I will remove all these flames, to obtain vanilla version instead. Cheers Zorg !

Me again ! LOL ! I didn't succeed with Ctrl-P, but in revenge, I founded a configuration file inside the mode which contain: SmokeScreen { maximumActiveParticles = 1000 atmDensityMult = 1 globalCollideDisable = False globalPhysicalDisable = False } What setup would you recommend ? Unfortunately, there are no explanations on these parameters inside the mod zip. By chance, do-you have something ? Or shall-I contact Sarbian for this ? Thanks in forward.

Zorg, Thanks for the trail to particle tuning ! Just for your information, I have tested again without 60 FPS lock and I have 67 FPS, with all graphic setup to max. So, to my humble point of view, it surprise me very much to get these graphic rendering results on a vanilla installation. Anyway, thanks to your precious help, I have now everything I need to investigate, study & optimize that. Again, thanks for your help !

Zorg, thanks for your quick answer, I appreciate ! Just tested again now with a FPS display and my frame rate remained locked at 60 FPS during this phase (for an unknown reason, take screenshot of KSP do not take GeForce Experience FPS display). Speaking of global particle limit, I didn't even knew such a parameter exist and therefore, it should be set to default installation value. So, apparently, this has to be changed and therefore you would be advised to inform the user on which value he must "try" to increase it, to insure the expected rendering. I suppose this parameter is somewhere inside the KSP setup ? I will try to found it now and try to tweak ! EDIT: I didn't found any "global particle limit" ?!? Where is this setup, please ?

What a great mod I have just discovered ! Congratulations and thanks to all persons involved in this project ! Actually, all the solid rocket booster plumes seems to me not very realistic, to not say ugly: This is to the point I wonder if this is not a bug or maybe, a compatibility problem with the new 1.10 version ? When testing some other rockets with solid buster, all seem to have the same kind of problems. Flams burn like a "campfire", slags are completely unrealistic. Smoke is maybe the best, if the factor is increased a lot, to avoid the "steam locomotive smoke" effect. This is sad, because the plumes of liquid fuel engines are great ! I really love the transition from hyper-sonic nodes at see level to more and more expanded flames when climbing to high atmosphere and beyond. Editing the concerned (hammer booster) setup file from: plumeScale = 0.6 flareScale = 0.8 smokeScale = 0.3 slagScale = 0.6 To: plumeScale = 0.8 flareScale = 0.8 smokeScale = 0.8 slagScale = 0.2 I was able to improve a bit, but far from being perfect. Now, I am asking myself: Shall-I rework all solid booster setup file ? Apparently this might be a tremendous work ? Is there a way to disable all solid rocket plumes of this addon and just let those of the original game, which are also not perfect, but far better looking, even if not very realistic sometimes. I would really appreciate any help from any experienced Kerbinauts. personally, I come from the world of Orbiter freeware, but completely new to KSP. I am even the author of a well known addon for it: AMSO (Apollo Mission Simulator for Orbiter). I say this not to brag, but just so that the reader can situate my skills in working on addons any help on this matter would be greatly appreciated ! Thanks in forward !

Does this mean that City lights are imcompatible with version 1.10 of KSP ? If it should work, can-you please indicate what shall I do manually to activate them ? If not, are-you going to include them late on ? Thanks in forward PS: I am completely new to KSP and I really like your "Spectra" mod. Great work, congratulations and warm thanks !