requimrar

Slightly? How much is 'slightly'? I don\'t want to overestimate here...

Bump. Here\'s a more detailed explanation of the problem: With the stock tank, when I stack 2 of them, the shadow is always parallel to the tank; not the ground. When it\'s not lit, the light simply fades away. However, with my tanks, the shadow is drawn at an angle; the light side is facing the sun, however it is offset by about 20 degrees. The biggest problem is that the shadows are drawn separately on 2 tanks; meaning the shadows don\'t form a line, which look really bad. Now for the second, and worst problem by far: MY PARTS EXPLODE ON THE LAUNCHPAD!!!11!!!!!!!111!!!1!11 Yea. All the parts, both tanks and my engine. I don\'t see why; I\'ve tried setting the crash resistance to 100000. I\'ve tried putting just a command pod above my parts. Nothing. They. Always. Explode. All my parts have a node_collider; all those node_colliders have a Mesh Collider component assigned to them inside Unity. I\'ve even tried assigned individual objects their own colliders. (I don\'t join them) Someone doesn\'t want me making parts for KSP. Also the inside of my engine nozzle is transparent; I think a recalculate normals will fix it. But the explosions. I have all 3 .blend files attached, as well as the unity scene.

Great. I just found a new problem: turns out I never actually launched the craft except from the runway. And it so happens that all 3 parts that I made spontaneously explode when the rocket loads. The tanks, and the engine. I don\'t see the problem; I have a node_collider, I assigned it a mesh collider component inside unity. WTS man.

I meant how it will help and what it will help.

How, and what does it help?

Thanks, done Anybody have a clue on the shadow problem? With my tanks, they are treated as separate vessels or something; i.e. they angle towards the sun, offset by around 20 degrees. However, the shadows are drawn as 2 'lines'; two separate shadows for the 2 tanks. With the stock tanks however, (i textured them white so i could see better), the shadows don\'t angle at all; they simply fade when not in view of the sun. WTS?

Thanks so much! As a sidenote, our virtual reality engineers are working on shadow problems; expect an update soon.

Hello! Our engineers have been hard at work designing and prototyping new parts for the upcoming spacecraft industry. As our top investors, you guys get a sneak peak of our latest advances in fuel storage and consumption technology. New: Our engineers have decided to switch from a series of motorised, rotating blades in a closed chamber to a fast cat with black spots. As such, the render may be different, but I can definitely make better textures thanks to the solid lines, although UV map adjustment is troublesome. Our newest model, a replacement for the LAE series of engines. Those engines will be removed from our catalog and remaining stock will be euthanised. The XFT-SR series will also share the same fate. The latest in curved-exhaust-cone technology, the GRS-44T allows for more efficient fuel consumption through the new bell shape. This model also features 4 hydraulic actuators which can gimbal the nozzle up to 0.93 degrees. This particular engine is designed to replace the LAE series of model, permanently. (Mostly because they sucked). Also, an early design decision allowed subsystems to be implemented that would enable the chaining of multiple engines through a single fuel pump, similar to those of our Russian friends. Specs: Height: 1.75m Diameter: 1.0m Our standard fuel tank; Here we have the XFT-S100, a simple fuel tank; slightly higher capacity than the rugged fuel tanks, (which I lost the specs and there will be no 2m version) due to the larger volume. It is bare, however also we offer double length, 2m double length and 2m quad length versions. As you may notice, there are sets of cross struts on the top (and bottom); this was because our engineers noticed that the tank liked to crumple and flatten like an aluminium can. (Shh, Don\'t tell anyone we just used a bigger version). So we added the cross struts. Specs: Height: 1.0m, 2.0m, 4.0m, 8.0m Diameter: 1.0m, 2.0m That\'s it for now! In case you\'re wondering... I do have a data sheet for the specs of each tank I make; this way I can have consistency etc etc. However... We lost the spec sheet for the rugged fuel tanks; scaling them doesn\'t work as expected. And I don\'t see the need for a 2m version... so I\'ll just leave it out there. Ok, enough bull. I\'m very pleased with the models, however I have a few problems: One: Shadows. Two: Textures. I have 'meh' textures right now, and I\'m having difficulty texturing the engine; I\'m a bland guy. I need someone for hire to help with the textures; I\'ll send the blender files along so you can reference the model. You will be listed as a co-producer of this part pack, as well as an employee of the engineering and design department of Aperture Research Inc. EDIT: Texturing has been made easier thanks to C3D, but I\'ll still appreciate people who come forward to help. Thanks, folks! Please give constructive criticism on my models and design style. Check out other products from Aperture Research Inc: OrionOS: https://github.com/requimrar/OrionOS, our in-house project.

[quote name='kellven'] Not sure what exactly engines we\'re talking about, but one of the 0.15 ones at least has a no-deathray option. By deriving a new engine class from it, adding a gui button to reverse thrust, and overriding the FixedUpdate block with a check for that button, and flipping the thrust vector 180 before passing it on to the base, you could get around the 0 thrust minimum 'feature'. [/quote] [code exhaustDamage = false There, problem solved.

Nobody? Really need help here.

Whoops. Sorry, rightclick -> new tab. Flickr is like that.

Help. (Again, I\'m sorry). Finally, I\'ve gotten the hang of texturing (albeit cumbersome, because blender insists on having retarded gradients on the UV map outlines). Now I\'ve finalised the model of my 1m tank and I\'m mostly fine with the texture. However... I\'m using Unity now, simply because I don\'t have to combine all the objects\' UV maps into one texture file; it makes my life easier. But back on topic: My shadows are slanted, instead of being parallel to the ground (in reference to the SH; in the VAB it is also slanted). Pictures: This is in Unity; I had to shift my view around because it appears that when looking head-on, I cannot see the shadow. But you can see that the problem lies with Unity. This is in the Spaceplane Hanger; Clearly the shadow is not in line with the stock tank. This is in the VAB. The same effect as above is also observed. It doesn\'t happen when I use the old DAE importer method. I can\'t trace the problem; I\'ve removed all the unnecessary objects from my scene. The Blender camera and lamp, and the Unity Main Camera and Light. What?

Damn, then I guess I\'m going to have to make a topic theb... thanks anyway.

I\'m going to try that, but just in case, this is my problem: As should be evident, the shadow on my tank is at an angle; the shadow on the stock tanks are horizontal. ??

Great. Another question: I noticed that my parts\' shadows are all wonky; it appears as though the light is coming from an angle, instead of from the top like they do with the stock parts (the fuel tank at least). I deleted the lamp and camera objects in blender, as well as in unity.

Ah. Great. I\'ll go try it, thanks. BTW, do you know if unity can import those svg files? or do i have to export to bitmap\' (which iirc also doesnt support partial transparency)?

I\'m not entirely sure for Sketchup, however I suggest importing into Unity; this way you can set any mesh as a collider simply by assigning it a mesh collider component. Also iirc someone said that Sketchup uses double sided meshes/polys and you should delete the ones on the inside.

I mean the lines in the UV map have gradients, and some pixels are translucent/transparent. Here: EDIT: You\'re going to have to zoom in to see what I\'m talking about. Zoom a lot...

I don\'t know the specifics, but do you notice some lag when you launch the craft? The game actually puts it slightly above the launchpad, so as to let the terrain load. I don\'t know if it gets put or dropped, but that could be the source of the G\'s; I\'ve seen my G meter fluctuate before launch on medium-large rockets.

EDIT; Solved.

Man at all the advanced stuff. I\'m just wondering, is it possible to force blender to generate the UVs with solid lines? The transparent, gradient-filled lines are pissing me off when I simply want to paintbucket it. Otherwise is there a workaround, in blender or otherwise, which will let me paintbucket in peace?

bump?

AFAIK, you can\'t do it via the legacy way. (DAE importing) However, if you use the new 0.15 Part Tools in Unity3D... Import your DAE (FBX, whatever) into Unity. Just don\'t join the separate objects in blender or whatever, then you can select them individually inside unity, and apply your textures separately. Then just press write. Although I\'ve been having problems with Unity doing inappropriate things to my textures...

For some reason, when reading about the exploding rocket, my mind pictures a large amount of lag......... But good writing style, please continue!

Thanks AdmiralStewart. Okay okay, one last, and probably most troubling, question; how in the world does the stupid texture work? It\'s always a dilemma here: DAE importing messes up in the VAB. Unity Parttools screws up the texture. I think the main cylinder body texture is being applied properly, however... those stupid caps. They\'re a triangle fan now, (anybody know how to make that the default in that blending thing?) however the texture.......... bah. The first image is the result, after I dragged the texture into the materials box in unity. I don\'t know how you would do it otherwise...? The second image is what it\'s supposed to look like: unmodified from blender; I moved things around to fit in the UV editor, then exported it. No changes after that. EDIT: I added a third image, it shows the UV map inside blender.