[Released] Free IVA Alpha v0.2.1 [1.12.x] (2022-11-24)

[TeeGee]

No and Yes. The model maker has to create two sets of window shaders, one transparent and one opaque and then configure to use RPM in the part config file.

You can of course just have ONE window shader (say the stock one) and then just change the config file, but then it looks like there is no window/glass at all, but it doesn't always work.

A more realistic and working window needs a window shader to be generated with low opacity.

Like I also said, having lots of internalmodels being rendered as well as external part models... does hit on performance. Which is probably why it is not stock.

As per RPM it was noticed also that the more internal props you have configured the more performance hit there is as well.

Its about time someone did this with the stock pods. I've been waiting for see through windows since I got this game 2 years ago.

[JPLRepo]

Its about time someone did this with the stock pods. I've been waiting for see through windows since I got this game 2 years ago.

Sorry I don't think people are understanding this. no you can't just change stock parts to be transparent, or other mods parts to be transparent.

It depends on how the model has been created. In order for RPM transparent pods to work (not sure about this mod) the windows must be separate pieces of the actual model.

Then you can define transparent shaders to the windows.

Let's take an example stock part: the copula. this model was created by squad with the windows and the body of the part all as one piece.

Therefore you cannot make it transparent using RPM transparent pods. The model would have to be changed/re-created.

Like I said, what you can do is contact the mod authors and ask them to look at making their parts transparent (where the part has an internal).

But I doubt Squad will change the stock parts.

[ThatGuyWithALongUsername]

my apologies if this has been pointed out before but I think the Structural Fuselage would/should also be on that list.

also the large probe core and maybe a few of the mk3 fuel tanks? all though I cant tell if they are doors on there or door shaped panels...

also maybe the TVR parts?.

and another thing...

could it be possible to allow radial attachment of IVAable parts on to an external door hatch? then allow the crew to pass through where the hatch was?

And the MK3 parts. They have hatches on them too.

[skykooler]

Sorry I don't think people are understanding this. no you can't just change stock parts to be transparent, or other mods parts to be transparent.

It depends on how the model has been created. In order for RPM transparent pods to work (not sure about this mod) the windows must be separate pieces of the actual model.

Then you can define transparent shaders to the windows.

Let's take an example stock part: the copula. this model was created by squad with the windows and the body of the part all as one piece.

Therefore you cannot make it transparent using RPM transparent pods. The model would have to be changed/re-created.

Like I said, what you can do is contact the mod authors and ask them to look at making their parts transparent (where the part has an internal).

But I doubt Squad will change the stock parts.

Couldn't you cut window holes the same way this mod is cutting hatch holes?

[BarryDennen12]

Cool image, how did you get that? Is there a mod that makes the windows or the crew pods and cockpits transparent?

Photoshop sorry. I just had the pod oriented the same way and took two shots haha. I have no idea if anyone will ever think of a way to make the IVA render through just the windows so that this sort of effect is possible, but I'll like slip them $5 under the desk if they can make it happen.

[ZodiaK]

I reeeeeeeeealy want to high five you right now, Pizza.

[ThatGuyWithALongUsername]

Photoshop sorry. I just had the pod oriented the same way and took two shots haha. I have no idea if anyone will ever think of a way to make the IVA render through just the windows so that this sort of effect is possible, but I'll like slip them $5 under the desk if they can make it happen.

Yes, it is possible. RPM has a feature that lets you make transparent pods. I was planning to have this in my IVA enhancement mod, but that has kinda been abandoned.

[Joshwoo70]

looks cool...i wonder if you can bring kerbcam to 1.0. With rhis mod i think it would be cool!

[cameronh]

the rockomax brand adapter should have an iva to as it is commonly used to make stations look better

[pizzaoverhead]

Hi, there! The mod seems fantastic so far! Any chance of a "lite" version that just gives free-moving IVAs for movie and graphic novel makers?

The version available for download does just that. The GUI can be hidden by right-clicking on it or pressing F2. A simpler version more geared towards video making could be made in future.

That would make the structural fuselage so much more useful.

Are you going to add an option to remove the seats out of modules? This is so you could go into the cupola (for example) and not have your view blocked by a seat.

Custom IVA furnishing is a bigger task for a separate project, but I'd like to do it if I have the time. You can hide any IVA component in the current preview by using the mesh renderer controls to make it invisible, including the seats and whole control console.

Mk3 fuselage tanks also have hatches in the sides, so I assume this means axial crew tunnel in stock.

I'm not sure what you're referring to. Could you post a screenshot?

Ok, i currently have a member of my team working on a config to make the ssp compatible with this mod.

Glad to hear it! I look forward to seeing the results!

If you're restricting where you can place docking ports based on where there are visual hatches, should you add nodes in those places, or do you suppose checking for a docking port close to where one should be is enough?

The system currently looks for the part attachment nodes, but this could be replaced with something more flexible in future depending on what ideas people have.

That definitely sounds like something I'd like. I'm going to be taking over the maintenance of kerbal Foundries soon (I think lo-fi got burnt out on KSP development, he's actually throwing the proverbial towel out the window) which is where DustFX finally came to rest. Still, collision sound effects have been my greatest adversary (at least, when not struggling with the crud that's involved in making custom GUI windows. That was a nightmare.) We squashed some of the most persistent nullrefs when we stripped out the collision sound effects from my adaptation of CollisionFX.

Thinking about a random sound effect selector for a moment, I imagine the randomization part would be pretty simple to set up. We already have random number generators with definable ranges, so I would think setting up an enumerator for all the sound clips you have, and then have a random number drawn with a minimum of 1 and a maximum of the enumeration's length, you could then take that output and match it to the index in the enumeration and bingo, all ready to emit the sound effect. For configurable sound effects, you can simply set up a few config fields. One for the sound clip path, and a second for a comma-delimited list of clip file names (using two fields reduces the need to have the entire path for very clip) which is then parsed out at startup and enumerated with a prefix of the path for the clips. Alternatively you could simply require all sound clips to be in a specific folder and simply reference them by name. A third alternative is available, though I'm unsure how to make it happen, but I know there are mods that can reference images by name on the global level, without requiring a path to be declared. You might be able to adapt that for sound clips.

But there I go again, derailing the thread. Get back on topic you crazy people...

GUIs are indeed tedious. Random sound effects are no technical difficulty to set up, they just take time, mainly in the configuration file management. We should continue the discussion on the CollisionFX thread.

This mod makes me wish Squad had gone with transparent windows from the start.

http://i.imgur.com/C2jGg8R.jpg

It would probably only make a difference if you're using the cupola, but I've always found the flat blue windows to be an annoyance.

Very pretty! Yeah, the blue glass has always looked out of place to me. As rbray89 mentioned, a mod could be written to apply this shader effect to the stock capsules using a texture, similar to how the reflection shader is applied in WindowShine.

RasterPRopMonitor mod already does transparent pods/parts and IVAs. And before RPM, a mod called sfr command pods did it, which was abandoned and Mihara rebuilt it in RPM. Beware it is heavy on performance which is probably why it's not stock. I just finished updating the RPM module so you will be able to turn transparent pods on and off per part in the editor or in flight. MOARdV should be putting out a new version of RPM this weekend with this feature.

Having multiple IVAs visible in flight can be pretty performance intensive. I have an idea for an LOD method for this: hiding the majority of the props in an IVA when it goes beyond a certain distance from the camera. I have yet to test it and see how it affects performance however.

I wonder whether it would be possible to have the IVA render the internal model, but not the IVA props? They're generally not at an angle that you could see them from outside the vessel anyway.

Exactly this. It's possible. You can try it out with the current preview by disabling each mesh renderer using the GUI.

my apologies if this has been pointed out before but I think the Structural Fuselage would/should also be on that list.

also the large probe core and maybe a few of the mk3 fuel tanks? all though I cant tell if they are doors on there or door shaped panels...

also maybe the TVR parts?.

The current plan for the structural fuselage is to either make it tweakable between a strong fuselage or a heavy crew transfer tunnel, or better yet, make a second version of it specifically for use in IVA design. With windows! The RC-L01 appears to be full of equipment, similar to the MK2 Drone Core. Ditto for the fuel tanks. I think it's more interesting that way. You have more design considerations to make: Where should your unpressurised equipment sections go? At this point I can't say whether that is too restrictive. It'll take playtesting to see at which challenge level the most fun gamplay lies, and the mod isn't sufficiently complete for that yet.

With regards to the TVR parts, due to their sharp angles, I don't think it would be physically possible to fit a suited kerbal through them. The added physics brings its own real-world restrictions. I don't think we should be making do with reusing old parts in ways that aren't quite fit for purpose. Traversible IVA design is a new gameplay element that'll need new parts made for it. We want space stations looking their very best, inside and out! For example, the structural fuselage is often used in ring assemblies, awkwardly clipped angled together. A little wedge-shaped connector would both look better and give you a traversible IVA. I'm looking forward to seeing what players and modders come up with.

and another thing...

could it be possible to allow radial attachment of IVAable parts on to an external door hatch? then allow the crew to pass through where the hatch was?

That's an interesting one! You could make an airbridge setup For transfer to craft that don't have crew-capable docking ports. I've added it to my notes for future.

the rockomax brand adapter should have an iva to as it is commonly used to make stations look better

I'd forgotten about that one, thanks! It's big enough for IVAing through, and its an important part for using the 6-way HubMax Multi-Point Connector with 2.5m parts, so it or something similar will be needed. For such a simple shape however, I think a new part built specifically for IVA would be better. It could be made shorter, and have a window in it, similar to Mir's Core Module:

Stations don't normally have much visibility along their axis. This would give you a nice view of the 1.25m parts you're connected to.

EDIT: Looks like Nertea has this covered:

Edited September 23, 2015 by pizzaoverhead

[nikokespprfan]

Mk3 fuselage tanks also have hatches in the sides, so I assume this means axial crew tunnel in stock.

I'm not sure what you're referring to. Could you post a screenshot?

If you look at the kerbal wiki, and take a close look at one of the following parts, you will clearly see an IVA hatch on the side of them:

Mk3 Rocket Fuel Fuselage Short

Mk3 Rocket Fuel Fuselage

Mk3 Rocket Fuel Fuselage Long

Mk3 to 3.75m Adapter

Mk3 Liquid Fuel Fuselage Short

Mk3 Liquid Fuel Fuselage

Mk3 Liquid Fuel Fuselage Long

Mk3 Monopropellant Tank

For some parts I suspect them also having those hatches, but you cannot see them from this angle:

Mk3 to Mk2 Adapter

Mk3 to 2.5m Adapter

Mk3 to 2.5m Adapter Slanted

[HafCoJoe]

Random question for you Pizza... Are you planning on modeling door props and hallways yourself or do you think you'll ask another modder to help out? I know Roverdude does modelling streams occasionally.

I'll try and make a moc-up image of what I'm guessing a hallway would look like when I get home. I'm guessing it would basically be a cylindrical tube detailed like the Mk2/Mk3 internals (with maybe a ladder running along it). Maybe even something that you can just stretch or shrink depending on the length of the part.

P.S. Don't quote me on any of this! XD

EDIT: Alrighty! I got bored and ended up creating a mock-up IVA for concept as a "filler" inside stock IVA-less parts. I hope this sparks some imagination:

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[qm3ster]

Will it be possible to add a default filler to non-stock parts?

[Enceos]

The filler is done via INTERNALS{} and "offset=" config nodes, one will have to adjust the offset and rotation of the IVA individually for each part, because not all parts have a uniform rotation of the model itself.

[pizzaoverhead]

This week: Colliders!

After a lot of reading, experimentation and spontaneously exploding vessels, the player can now collide with manually placed colliders attached to the vessel. The collider is made visible here in white, acting as a simple model of a control panel.

Box colliders are used as a simple way of designating the collideable areas. They can be scaled and positioned to fit internal components or to make the interior walls as a compound collider without being too CPU-intensive. The colliders are affixed to the part itself via a fixed joint.

A sphere collider is used for the player to rotate freely in microgravity. This will likely be replaced with a capsule collider in future: Mind where you're flailing your legs!

Next will come allowing these internal part colliders to be specified in the part's configuration file, and improving their behaviour.

If you look at the kerbal wiki, and take a close look at one of the following parts, you will clearly see an IVA hatch on the side of them:

Mk3 Rocket Fuel Fuselage Short

Mk3 Rocket Fuel Fuselage

Mk3 Rocket Fuel Fuselage Long

Mk3 to 3.75m Adapter

Mk3 Liquid Fuel Fuselage Short

Mk3 Liquid Fuel Fuselage

Mk3 Liquid Fuel Fuselage Long

Mk3 Monopropellant Tank

For some parts I suspect them also having those hatches, but you cannot see them from this angle:

Mk3 to Mk2 Adapter

Mk3 to 2.5m Adapter

Mk3 to 2.5m Adapter Slanted

These appear to be part of the bulkhead rather than a hatch, as there's no window present. Either way, there's no way to travel through a fuel tank without removing the majority of its capacity for the tunnel. It's the wrong tool for the job. You'll have to design around it.

Random question for you Pizza... Are you planning on modeling door props and hallways yourself or do you think you'll ask another modder to help out? I know Roverdude does modelling streams occasionally.

I'll try and make a moc-up image of what I'm guessing a hallway would look like when I get home. I'm guessing it would basically be a cylindrical tube detailed like the Mk2/Mk3 internals (with maybe a ladder running along it). Maybe even something that you can just stretch or shrink depending on the length of the part.

P.S. Don't quote me on any of this! XD

EDIT: Alrighty! I got bored and ended up creating a mock-up IVA for concept as a "filler" inside stock IVA-less parts. I hope this sparks some imagination:

http://i.imgur.com/ljpdk37.png

http://imgur.com/a/RkgNd

Very nice! That'd cover a lot of situations. My plan is to attempt it myself, but I have zero experience modelling, so I may have to get help, depending on how it goes. I'd like to make more detailed and interactive hatches while maintaining the style of the stock ones, and perhaps adding animations for them and their components. We'll have to see just how bad I am at modelling

Will it be possible to add a default filler to non-stock parts?

Yes, via configuration file at the very least. You'll need to tweak the values manually to fit the part, as Enceos mentioned.

Edited September 30, 2015 by pizzaoverhead

[HafCoJoe]

This week: Colliders!

http://i.imgur.com/Xk4dT15.png

OH BOY!!! This is wonderful! I hope it isn't too repetitive.

Very nice! That'd cover a lot of situations. My plan is to attempt it myself, but I have zero experience modelling, so I may have to get help, depending on how it goes. I'd like to make more detailed and interactive hatches while maintaining the style of the stock ones, and perhaps adding animations for them and their components. We'll have to see just how bad I am at modelling

Thank you! I sadly have no clue how to model either. I could help you out with textures possibly but that's as far as I have knowledge. Coding is magic to me... "Technology that is far enough advanced is indistinguishable from magic". Still have no clue how you guys do it . Best of luck!

Edited September 30, 2015 by Avera9eJoe

[Pac0master]

This looks really Awesome!

I wish it can be added in the game.

[Captain Dax]

Awesome mod! Can't wait to see the final result and the crew floating around

Here's a small suggestion: throwing around some semotic standard icons around IVA hatches would be nice!

https://wharferj.wordpress.com/2012/05/25/ron-cobbs-alien-semiotic-standards/

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/symbols.php

[monstah]

Random question for you Pizza... Are you planning on modeling door props and hallways yourself or do you think you'll ask another modder to help out? I know Roverdude does modelling streams occasionally.

Very nice! That'd cover a lot of situations. My plan is to attempt it myself, but I have zero experience modelling, so I may have to get help, depending on how it goes. I'd like to make more detailed and interactive hatches while maintaining the style of the stock ones, and perhaps adding animations for them and their components. We'll have to see just how bad I am at modelling .

Hey there!

I could try and help a bit. I have ~some~ experience modelling, which by my calculations is NaN % better than zero experience I'll probably have to install some tools, I've seen there's a blender plug-in for KSP parts but never looked into it. I'll let you know if I get things working out

- - - Updated - - -

Eh, that was supposed to be a PM, so as not to raise too much hope on the community. My bad.

Anyway, yeah. Some help offered.

[GorillaZilla]

The colliders are affixed to the part itself via a fixed joint.

Does this mean the player inside the ship bumping into things will have a small but measureable affect on the entire ship?

What mass will the player object have?

How is the player being propelled about, say if they propell off a wall and bump into a console, will the push off the wall be transferred into the ship, then undone when they hit the console?

What if only one thing is taken into account? like the pushing off the wall simply being a force applied to the player, but then the collision with a wall or console adding an impulse to the ship......

Could that mess about with the trajectory of a ship that is on a verry sensitive trajectory where the tinyiest impulse might put you deeper into the atmosphere than you want, ect....

No need to answer any of those questions, just some things for you to think about :-)

[Ralathon]

Does this mean the player inside the ship bumping into things will have a small but measureable affect on the entire ship?

What mass will the player object have?

How is the player being propelled about, say if they propell off a wall and bump into a console, will the push off the wall be transferred into the ship, then undone when they hit the console?

What if only one thing is taken into account? like the pushing off the wall simply being a force applied to the player, but then the collision with a wall or console adding an impulse to the ship......

Could that mess about with the trajectory of a ship that is on a verry sensitive trajectory where the tinyiest impulse might put you deeper into the atmosphere than you want, ect....

No need to answer any of those questions, just some things for you to think about :-)

That would be silly to simulate. The spaceship is a closed system, it can't generate a net force that alters the orbit. Best you can do is shift the spaceship around the center of mass, which won't do a damn thing to the orbit.

[GorillaZilla]

That is correct in real life, but this is a game engine. If the colliders are attached to the ship's parts as described they could in theory transmit forces into the part when the player hits the parts, if the player camera has mass, and is generating forces to push off that are not transmitted into the ship, but then acts on the internal colliders, and through the joints the actual ingame parts themselves.

Unless you are saying the IVA, player, the colliders, and the ship's parts the colliders are attached to are all in a separate enviroment completely isolated from the physics of the ship's in universe parts?

[pizzaoverhead]

Weekend development! More colliders. The PPD-10 Hitchhiker Storage Container has become the first part to have its IVA fully enclosed in colliders.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Awesome mod! Can't wait to see the final result and the crew floating around

Here's a small suggestion: throwing around some semotic standard icons around IVA hatches would be nice!

https://wharferj.wordpress.com/2012/05/25/ron-cobbs-alien-semiotic-standards/

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/symbols.php

That's pretty cool! Interesting read! I'll see what I can do.

Hey there!

I could try and help a bit. I have ~some~ experience modelling, which by my calculations is NaN % better than zero experience I'll probably have to install some tools, I've seen there's a blender plug-in for KSP parts but never looked into it. I'll let you know if I get things working out

- - - Updated - - -

Eh, that was supposed to be a PM, so as not to raise too much hope on the community. My bad.

Anyway, yeah. Some help offered.

Thanks!

Does this mean the player inside the ship bumping into things will have a small but measureable affect on the entire ship?

What mass will the player object have?

How is the player being propelled about, say if they propell off a wall and bump into a console, will the push off the wall be transferred into the ship, then undone when they hit the console?

What if only one thing is taken into account? like the pushing off the wall simply being a force applied to the player, but then the collision with a wall or console adding an impulse to the ship......

Could that mess about with the trajectory of a ship that is on a verry sensitive trajectory where the tinyiest impulse might put you deeper into the atmosphere than you want, ect....

No need to answer any of those questions, just some things for you to think about :-)

That's the intention! Any movement would have to be transmitted to the ship to bounce you off it, which would be cancelled out when you bump into the far side of it, just like in real life. If you don't take the starting force into account, you get something similar to the ladder drive: A method of pushing the craft around while attached to/inside it. I have no idea what the mass of a kerbal is, but it would be helpful to know. If anyone knows, send me a message.

That would be silly to simulate. The spaceship is a closed system, it can't generate a net force that alters the orbit. Best you can do is shift the spaceship around the center of mass, which won't do a damn thing to the orbit.

From the time you bounce off one wall until the time you hit another, you're a separate system. If you jump forwards inside a small boat, it'll move the boat backwards. Similarly, if your box cart is sitting at the top of a hill, you can throw yourself around in your seat to push it over the edge. Not exactly the same in space, but you get the idea.

That is correct in real life, but this is a game engine. If the colliders are attached to the ship's parts as described they could in theory transmit forces into the part when the player hits the parts, if the player camera has mass, and is generating forces to push off that are not transmitted into the ship, but then acts on the internal colliders, and through the joints the actual ingame parts themselves.

Unless you are saying the IVA, player, the colliders, and the ship's parts the colliders are attached to are all in a separate enviroment completely isolated from the physics of the ship's in universe parts?

After encountering difficulties with the joint method, I've now switched to the simpler isolated physics method. The part is held in place using RigidbodyConstraints.FreezeAll, preventing the collider from being moved.

[Drew Kerman]

I have no idea what the mass of a kerbal is, but it would be helpful to know.

Well there is the wiki entry for kerbals but also consider the Kerbal Mass mod

Great work so far on this

[skykooler]

Kerbals weigh 93.75 kilograms.