SabertoothMosquito

To add to this (i knew there will be explanations, so i'm ok with that) - the raymarching shaders use host mesh to render their own "geometry" and mesh vertices aren't used at all (at least in traditional sense). And since math is involved, this shader is a bit more computationally expensive for GPU. That being said, ColdJ's suggestion to use other shader as a way making semi-transparent effect is not only ok i too recommend it since you'd need to make a mesh of desired shape and then apply that shader to it. This raymarching shader is using math to "draw" so using it to replicate some complex shape may not be the best idea.

Weeell it depends on your imagination (and some learning curve is involved too) Honestly, it does require some previous knowledge of shader coding. Readme on github has some references to sites where i learned some of the shader coding, but i can't remember ALL of the sites where i picked up little tidbits needed to make this work. There will certainly be more questions, i'll try to answer them all and help others along their development.

So the time has finally come - i managed to actually make something and give back to community. This is a release of raymarcher source code to be used as a generalized template for developing raymarching shader with quick-ish turnaround time. It has shadowcaster pass, it writes to depth map thus allowing raymarched SDF primitives intersect properly with normal mesh geometry in scene. Also uses unity's UNITY_BRDF_PBS() function in attempt to do proper reflections and specular coloring. I can't claim this is proper use of that, but i do hope that those struggling to make their own shader will benefit from this. Demo And here is the source on Github . Have fun and learning experience using this !

Requesting name change to SabertoothMosquito Thanks in advance !

That could be done with additional mod that would use the Conformal Decals mod to apply those burnmarks. Maybe something like that already exists, never tried it myself.

Ok that clears things up. I'll look into how its done, if that rabbit hole isn't too deep. As for shadow casting - i was hoping that with more lights / optimized lighting come also shadows with bigger shadow maps, can't really blame me for hoping

Deferred as in "deferred shader" ??? In KSP 1 ??? Also reading docs - question : are shadows any better than stock ? ie even 2x texture size (next larger) IMO should drastically improve shadow casting.

Will this work only with resource tanks within craft loading range, or will it be able to transfer resources to/from unloaded parts as well ? If considering unloaded parts/crafts, this will need to be addressed because if there are custom plugins capable of processing/generating resources in background, those plugins may assume that nobody is touching resources onboard unloaded parts/crafts. Do note that this may very well be one of the endgame mechanics for ultimate logistics / resource management. Sigh ...TLDR - original plugin thread does point to handling resources for unloaded parts/vessels XD.

meh its fine

Ohh this reminds me : IF you are using stock module to do tracking, what are its limitations ? Target distance itself may not an issue if for example using solar panel module for track since it is designed to track sun at great distances. What i see as larger issue is precision loss due to large numerical values for interstellar target coordinates (akin to floating origin errors - well known issue for planet modders). On its own it isn't much - you'll have a targeting error and thats it. BUT, problem may arise if tracking module (stock or custom) tries to perform changes close to floating point errors - visually it may produce jerky movement, constantly yanking the mesh. You could allow for greater errors still below perceptible levels and do some kind of smoothing/integrating over time for smooth movement. Deploy/retract may not be needed if done via some other animation module, but it'd be nice if your tracker could pay attention to deployed state and allow functions only if part is deployed [NB: deploy/retract animations may be looped]. Feature request (for general modder public) : playing animations on comm status. One for established and one for stop. Also please if this is implemented, do wait for comms on/off animations to complete prior to running anything else.

YES AND YES ! As for "most dreaded part: models and textures" - to me coding is most dreaded part Modeling ... not such a big issue. Does plugin have provisions for playing animations based on state of the laser comms ? Also it would be a good idea to post some kind of demonstration mesh in FBX or blender format so anyone trying to design parts can see object hierarchy, what goes where (especially transform hierarchy - i've seen people struggle to work out animations/tracking on new models for other mods). That's my two cents.

I'm just reporting a incompatibility for anyone else also stumbling on this issue. This isn't not a real bug report because i just rebooted my KSP1 playthrough after a long time and i'm not sure CC mod is up to date with KSP version. Alongside this mod, i installed also Allista's Configurable Containers v2.6.2.1 and main UI panel won't open. I found in log file a line with "Failed to add Resource [long integer number] to Simulation PartSet etc etc" It appears some resource is being removed while other parts/modules are trying to use it, and KSP isn't too happy about it.

Stolas : did your game work BEFORE adding this mod ?

YISSS!

It appears that ReflectionProbe.cullingMask is what i need to alter to get ships/parts and kerbals to be included in reflections/cubemap. so.,.. its solved.

I didn't want to pollute the forum with yet another thread so i'm posting here instead. Does anyone know how to setup RelfectionProbe to reflect dynamic objects in flight scene, not just statics (like buildings and terrain) ? Ref: https://docs.unity3d.com/Manual/class-ReflectionProbe.html Please @xEvilReeperx if you have time ...

If managed by mod, any bugs can be compensated for. So, completely separate tech trees can be a thing in KSP. Like geology, general phyiscs, structural engineering, fluid dynamics, biology, psychology, nanotech etc ... I'm hinting at the idea replacing current science system to prevent investing science in one branch to be used in another, keeping unrelated fields of study separate. One more thing : how are science points being kept separate by type, from generating by the science part to the last step when utilized in tech tree ?

So, this mod can separate science points into types that can be later expended on specific nodes in tech tree... Could tech tree nodes be separated completely from main tech tree, in their own root nodes ? Yes, it would make them unresearchable from default research root, but with some additional code those could be unlocked and allow further research as expected.

In my case for Science Relay, i had similar problem, but was able to kind of solve it. When i deployed a small science station around Mun i tried to send science data from a nearby satellite and it didn't work. So i turned on debug output and found that my station had 0 capacity to receive science (it has MPL lab module) and all science was sent back to original sources (the science parts that generated it). So i built a second module, launched it on SPH tarmac and tried to send science there and it worked. For unknown reason, my first station simply bugged out. I send an engineer to weld the science box part and it works now. Strange indeed. I did poke around in source, recompiled it with referencing KSP 1.11 assemblies and added some debug prints. Turns out finishTransfer() function in ScienceRelay.cs receives the vessel loaded argument as false, then it loops through all available science containers and ultimately fails, causing the "No valid science container for science" to show in debug log window. I can try to reproduce the bug, but this may be some edge case.

Hoping to reignite the discussion (even by going slightly OT again) , i've looked at Modular Flight Integrator which is written as VesselModule that manages part aerodynamics and heating model. Link: I assume it is designed only for crafts moving in air medium (ie low Reynolds number), but i'm not entirely sure if it can do other things, like modeling part behaviour in liquid medium (ie high Reynolds number). If MFI can't be used to model part motion in liquids, is it possible to write a separate VesselModule plugin that can override stock fluid mechanics in KSP and perform its own calculations ? In the above linked old post discussing the "Analysis of the buoyancy of parts and how to improve things" it has in OP mention of If this still holds true (and i assume this wasn't addressed by Squad since their first release), a separate plugin to tackle this would be welcome.

Thanks for the link, but beyond adding own modules to add ballast management and defining buoyancy for its own parts, it really does not address the issue en masse. There is still no clearly defined method to derive required parameters from part itself. The forum post i linked to does discuss about this, alas without definitive solution. Hence my post here. I'm hoping not to have hijacked (too much) of this thread to discuss this.

How is buoyancy affected by this ? Is it even considered as a sideffect of calculations ? I'm not mentioning it in objective headspace since i have waited long for someone to solve this problem. There was an effort to fix it, but it required adding extra module/field in part cfg and manually tweak the value of each part. You can see this method got nowhere. I did try for several times to build a combination of quadcopter and a bathysphere that was winched up and down on a KAS cable. It worked to some depth (below cable limit) until the kraken, after which cable physics stopped working. The bathysphere had a small module {} added to a cockpit part to artifically add/remove mass. It looked as if when buoyancy forces were excessively different among parts on bathysphere, hell broke loose (only a modified cockpit had its mass changed, rest of part were untouched).

To add my two cents, the visual damage can be done with code adapted from conformal decals mod . This way all impact can accumulate on surface and fit more or less nicely with surface. Oh and also this can add challenge to solar powered rovers on celestial bodies with dusty atmosphere (Opportunity rover survival challenge). As for impacts in interplanetary space, it can be expected to take craft cross-section area into probability calculation, but not all impact vectors point in direction of travel. There can always be impact from any direction and i don't know of any analysis / scientific paper describing distribution of matter in our solar system that can be used as starting point to make those calculations. I can only tell that the angle difference between impact vector and direction of travel does decrease as craft travels through space if its speed is approaching the average speed of particles defined for that particular volume of space. For example, in case of planetary rings, you can be fairly sure that particles travel in single plane and in same direction as it parent body rotation (i did say "fairly sure" since i'm not an astronomer). If you travel through them above their average speed, they will strike the craft "on the front".

Uh-oh ! I completely forgot about "beam propulsion" - it is direction-dependant ! You could imagine it as trying to raise orbit using only ion engine. You need to fire the engine at the single point in orbit to get what is needed. This one will be tricky. Imagine using sail-like propulsion to drive TOWARD source of beam, that is contradiction.

To add to above : also, if there is something wrong with code, all data will be in one place. It will be hard to match saved game state against custom data in separate file. Be aware of this. I had run into similar problem of saving state of my part and i analyzed the save and found the bug.