LLL - Lack Luster Labs - Development Thread

[JedTech]

Pretty much every KSP mod is a work-in-progress up until the time when modder looses interest/time.

[Lack]

'Cause it's still in active development. Most of the parts are unpolished, and some of them are straight-up placeholders. Basically, LLL is as much of a work in progress as KSP itself.

Well, I wouldn't quite say that. It's more that LLL needs a few very boring things doing, such as re-organising the file-structure. There are a few half finished models as well, I guess. For a mod I'm not actively developing, posting it in Releases just seems to be inviting trouble. Although, from the original road map, LLL was feature complete a year ago. I just kept adding more.

SXT is in active development. I think I'll need to decide what I want from it and add it into different stages/sets (like KSP-X was going to do), and then release it like that.

That and I dislike fuss; Addon Development is relatively quite and has a good group of people.

Edit:

Considering re-working the 5m parts (and then the 3.75m if I can find the damn .blend) with the ARM texture for the top and bottom of the tanks, this is closer to what I had originally envisioned when I made the parts.

I'm also re-balancing the engines a bit, from the re-done non-NASA parts and the graph posted by Stupid_Chris.

Edited April 2, 2014 by Lack

[MrWizerd]

If there is anything I can do to help, I don't mind putting time into the mod, although I know very little C# I can do stuff like organize file structures and consolidate the files so there is a standard of sorts, I noticed that there are modules in the Lite version of LLL that are not in the full version of LLL and I think maybe that is part of the file structure problems that you speak of. (i.e. radial NERVA and TurboJet) I learn quick, and don't mind the work, I am home all day anyways so. If you think of something you can farm out that someone like me can do please let me know.

Edited April 2, 2014 by MrWizerd

[Lack]

If there is anything I can do to help, I don't mind putting time into the mod, although I know very little C# I can do stuff like organize file structures and consolidate the files so there is a standard of sorts, I noticed that there are modules in the Lite version of LLL that are not in the full version of LLL and I think maybe that is part of the file structure problems that you speak of. (i.e. radial NERVA and TurboJet) I learn quick, and don't mind the work, I am home all day anyways so. If you think of something you can farm out that someone like me can do please let me know.

That would be great actually.

Yeah, the Lite version is mainly aimed for use with circular hulls (with a few other parts I couldn't bear to part with, like the greenhouse and the odd 2x1), so it's not quite 'LLL-full with less parts', more a re-working. Hence a differing set of parts. No need to worry about C#, the mod doesn't use any plugins or coding (my own coding knowledge is limited to python and excel, which I'm basically only learning to try and automate the boring part of my job. An odd type of lazy.)

Config files are fairly easy to understand really (Just open them up with Notepad++ or another plain text editor).

The problem with the file structure is there's a lot of this:

(Actually, that above folder is the main offender)

Often with multiple parts contained in each .cfg. It made sense while I was making it, but I doubt it makes even the damnest bit of sense to anyone else (especially judging by the number of people who have said exactly that). Well, I was dealing with moving from the old part loader to the (buggy and limited initial versions of the) new part-loader at the time, but it works pretty well now, so I think it could manage with a better ordered file structure.

The separate parts really need moving to their own cfgs and/or folder. But they're all held together by judicious use of the MODEL{}, so you need to be careful with that as there's a lot of cross-referenced parts. And not duplicating textures is obviously important for conserving RAM.

Here's an example of the MODEL{}

e.g.

MODEL
{
	model = LLL/Parts/FuelTank/LLL2x1/model
	texture = model001_NRM , LLL/Parts/Structural/LLL2x1Hull/HullNorm
}

The 'model =' telling it which .mu and 'texture = ' where to get the texture from. Problem is that 'texture =' isn't always perfect, it sometimes needs a place holder texture, I use a 1x1 file for that. There's also things like Scale and Position which you can use to muck around with it the x,y,z axis.

At the very least the config files need to be split up and then named by their actual in-game name.

If you can find a way to re-organise that folder in the pic (and the parts it contains) into something that makes sense, then you'll have done the hard bit and the rest should just be cleaning up. Just make sure that you get the 'www' (i.e. LLL/Parts/.../) part of the config right.

I'd look at B9 for an example of a better organised folder structure.

[dlrk]

Has anyone made an RSS resize?

[wasmic]

When rebalancing the engines, please make them not as horribly overpowered as the stock 3.75m parts. IMO, KW or NP-like balance would be best, but you can of course do as you want to.

[landeTLS]

I would for one love some tanks that go well with the new lfo combined tank engine

[Lack]

When rebalancing the engines, please make them not as horribly overpowered as the stock 3.75m parts. IMO, KW or NP-like balance would be best, but you can of course do as you want to.

Don't worry, as I said before, non-NASA engines and using this as a guide. The changes aren't drastic. The current balance on the NASA 3.75m upper stage annoys me especially, kind of breaks the whole 'Thrust/ISP/TWR - Choose two' idea. Biggest change is the LV-T80 (meant as a mid-way between the 30/45 and the skipper), since the stock LV-T30 got moved to almost exactly it's stats, I'm re-balancing it to being mid-way between the T80 and the Skipper, with the relevant changes to TWR and ISP. (480kN, 3t, 300asl-360vac ISP, currently).

@landeTLS,

I was thinking of that last night, seen a couple of photos of the existing 2.5m tanks on-top of it, doesn't look quite right.

Edited April 3, 2014 by Lack

[AntiMatter001]

Don't worry, as I said before, non-NASA engines and using this as a guide. The changes aren't drastic. The current balance on the NASA 3.75m upper stage annoys me especially, kind of breaks the whole 'Thrust/ISP/TWR - Choose two' idea. Biggest change is the LV-T80 (meant as a mid-way between the 30/45 and the skipper), since the stock LV-T30 got moved to almost exactly it's stats, I'm re-balancing it to being mid-way between the T80 and the Skipper, with the relevant changes to TWR and ISP. (480kN, 3t, 300asl-360vac ISP, currently).

@landeTLS,

I was thinking of that last night, seen a couple of photos of the existing 2.5m tanks on-top of it, doesn't look quite right.

whoops it seems i was the lone shout in the mountains that started the folder structure landslide. sorry about that i was just curious as to how it's stayed in development rather than release but since most of the parts have blank descriptions it seems right to have it in development.

also why is folder structure so important? it doesn't matter as long as it loads right?....Right...?

[landeTLS]

Don't worry, as I said before, non-NASA engines and using this as a guide. The changes aren't drastic. The current balance on the NASA 3.75m upper stage annoys me especially, kind of breaks the whole 'Thrust/ISP/TWR - Choose two' idea. Biggest change is the LV-T80 (meant as a mid-way between the 30/45 and the skipper), since the stock LV-T30 got moved to almost exactly it's stats, I'm re-balancing it to being mid-way between the T80 and the Skipper, with the relevant changes to TWR and ISP. (480kN, 3t, 300asl-360vac ISP, currently).

@landeTLS,

I was thinking of that last night, seen a couple of photos of the existing 2.5m tanks on-top of it, doesn't look quite right.

Cool. Perhaps you could just grab the texture and put it on a tank made the same length as the arm part without the engines. Or the length of the jumbo perhaps?

Btw im still coming to grips with the limitations of joints in ksp. How did you make your rcs boon work? I thought animations couldnt move attaced items without infernal robotics etc.

My thoughts on the nasa/arm engines is that some of them are ridiculously unbalanced especcially the Kr-2l

Edited April 3, 2014 by landeTLS

[Lack]

Cool. Perhaps you could just grab the texture and put it on a tank made the same length as the arm part without the engines. Or the length of the jumbo perhaps?

Btw im still coming to grips with the limitations of joints in ksp. How did you make your rcs boon work? I thought animations couldnt move attaced items without infernal robotics etc.

My thoughts on the nasa/arm engines is that some of them are ridiculously unbalanced especcially the Kr-2l

That's the plan.

New 2.5m X200-16 tank.

I didn't attach the part, just modelled the entire thing in Blender, nested the thrust transforms in Unity and rigged the whole arm to the animation.

Not sure if it's possible, there were some fancy new joint types that were introduced (or at least mentioned) a few updates back, but I've seen very few people using them and had trouble with the node based attach points when I tried.

Yeah, the ISPs on those things is especially ridiculous. I'm going to play around with their values on my own save, set up the LFBooster to be throttle locked like the SRBs but haven't tested that quite yet, give them at least some dis-advantage at least.

@AntiMatter,

It gets raised quite a lot, and I have a whole pile of PMs on the subject. As for why it's important, a lot of people like to remove parts from the pack that they don't want, or edit some. Kind of difficult if you can't find them in the first place.

Edited April 3, 2014 by Lack

[landeTLS]

O i must have been thinking of some rcs boon in other pack perhaps. On maybe i remembered wrong. The new Tank looks great tho. Longer version too? Ooo. Wait. I just tested an asparagus staged launcher with the arm parts and i found two things i missed. Bigger radial decoupler and bigger seperatrons (i basically just gave up and strapped some of the small 1.25m srbs on the sides after trying 10 sep motors on each side without luck:P) also a 3.75m nosecone would be nice(if you didnt add that already. Didnt check)

[Lack]

O i must have been thinking of some rcs boon in other pack perhaps. On maybe i remembered wrong. The new Tank looks great tho. Longer version too? Ooo. Wait. I just tested an asparagus staged launcher with the arm parts and i found two things i missed. Bigger radial decoupler and bigger seperatrons (i basically just gave up and strapped some of the small 1.25m srbs on the sides after trying 10 sep motors on each side without luck:P) also a 3.75m nosecone would be nice(if you didnt add that already. Didnt check)

Yep, going to have a X-16, 32 and 64 sized ones. It'll need to play around with the material settings a bit as well, the in-game ones don't appear to be straight KSP-Diffuse ones.

Edit: Think that might just be the lighting in the VAB.

Haven't tried radial decouplers before, could add it on a list of things to try. Bigger seperatrons would be good.

And in-case any-one missed it from the last update:

SKPTR series:

Edited April 3, 2014 by Lack

[AntiMatter001]

Yep, going to have a X-16, 32 and 64 sized ones. It'll need to play around with the material settings a bit as well, the in-game ones don't appear to be straight KSP-Diffuse ones.

Edit: Think that might just be the lighting in the VAB.

http://i.imgur.com/YLC6Vnn.png

Haven't tried radial decouplers before, could add it on a list of things to try. Bigger seperatrons would be good.

And in-case any-one missed it from the last update:

SKPTR series:

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

what does it do?

*0*.*0* -sparkling eyes-

[Lack]

what does it do?

*0*.*0* -sparkling eyes-

The SPKTR? Currently I'm not entirely sure. It's essentially just a kerbalised rip off of the Spektr module for Mir.

I may make a 'field lab' version. Like the regular science lab, but smaller and with a smaller bonus to the science gain. I currently just have it as a crew cabin.

Decided to rebalance the new NASA engines for myself, the LFB KR-1x2 is far more fun when you make it more like an SRB with the throttle locked.

Also, I find that with Rbray's clouds mod, I always end up starting my gravity turns a lot earlier. Just seems better.

Edit:

And the Kerbodyne KX-32 LFO Tank.

Kerbodyne KX-64 LFO Tank. Okay, yeah, it's just a longer kx-32.

Edited April 3, 2014 by Lack

[Kolago]

Any problems with LLL-Full pack and 0.23.5 ?

[MrWizerd]

That would be great actually.

~snip~

I was looking at the files last night, and realized that, and was seeing what you were talking about when I had gone looking for the radial NIRVA engine from the light pack that I did not have. Either way I have Geany on for cfg files, I will start editing the directories one at a time, do you have a place that we can colaborate on these? gethub? or something like? I can use my google drive for storage and share them if need be.

[BananaDealer]

Any problems with LLL-Full pack and 0.23.5 ?

Not really... Besides maybe some balancing issues when compared to the NASA parts. Everything works properly though...

[Sauron]

Lack, can you do a 2.5m to 3.75m half-spektr can and a 3.75m hitchiker? Also, rescales of your 2.5m cupola-styled tanks? Pleeeease

[736]

The airliner cockpit looks very... Airbus. how about a Boeing 737 style cockpit?

[AntiMatter001]

uhm lack... i just relised the only battery you have in this(not lll lite the full version without the old parts) pack is the surface mount one... i would like to request maybe one that fits the 2x1 hulls and tanks and 4x1. i'll try editing the .cfg for the SAS and ASAS for the 2x1 and 4x2 hulls and see if i get the results i'm looking for... idk about fair amounts though so i may put it to 10000 for the 4x2 and 5000 for the 2x1...

ugh i'm spending too much time on .cfg edits XD

also just random question: anyone else make a cup of tea first thing in the morning? i did it this morning without even thinking.

EDIT: done. pretty simple to do (just took RCS.cfg and edited it to hold electricity) also while i was poking about i saw this:

An RCS tank. What does it fire? Why Monopropellant. What's that you say? Well, it's whatever we please. Currently we use milk.

honestly i keep finding these things in .cfgs and not reading them in game XD

Edited April 4, 2014 by AntiMatter001

[wasmic]

Those SPKTR parts will, for me, not be used to make a SPEKTR-style thingy. I'll be making a TKS/VA style thingy instead!

[BananaDealer]

also just random question: anyone else make a cup of tea first thing in the morning? i did it this morning without even thinking.

Tea, Earl Grey. Hot.

Those SPKTR parts will, for me, not be used to make a SPEKTR-style thingy. I'll be making a TKS/VA style thingy instead!

You do know the Spektr is a variant of the TKS...

Edited April 4, 2014 by BananaDealer

[wasmic]

You do know the Spektr is a variant of the TKS...

Yes, I know. As were almost all the Mir modules and many of the ISS modules. TKS for the win!

EDIT: Please note that "many of the ISS modules" means at least one other module. I have no idea how many of the ISS modules were TKS-based.

[BananaDealer]

Yes, I know. As were almost all the Mir modules and many of the ISS modules. TKS for the win!

EDIT: Please note that "many of the ISS modules" means at least one other module. I have no idea how many of the ISS modules were TKS-based.

All of the Russian Orbital Segment's main modules come from variations of the old TKS design, now more widely known as the Functional Cargo Block. Except maybe the Zvezda, which still has common features...