[0.23] Squad Texture Reduction Pack - B9 and KW Packs also

[requimrar]

Just wanted to jump in here and help out my fellow Mac users.

STEP 7: Profit.

I don't know why you didn't bother to look 2/3 posts above your own, BEFORE posting.

As I mentioned, this technique will only work for as long as the filenames remain the same, and that's not guaranteed. And it will only work for the Squad pack, either that or you'd have to manually delete all the files.

If you would observer here, a much better example of script automation:

This should work on all UNIX systems supporting bash, and is practically maintenance free.

http://pastebin.com/UFi2Dtkt

Copy the paste into a file, any file (just replace the name below)

Then you'd copy that script file into the GameData/Gameplay folder that you downloaded

ie, put this script into the same folder as a 'Squad', 'B9_Aerospace' or 'KW_Rocketry' folder that you downloaded.

Run the script with the required arguments (below), indicating your KSP installation directory, and the name of the folder to replace. (Be it Squad or B9 or KW)

Usage:

chmod +x reduce.sh # (if that is what you named it)

./reduce.sh [Path to KSP directory, use quotes if contains spaces] [Name of Directory to Search, eg. Squad or B9_Aerospace; use quotes for safety]

Example:

./reduce.sh "~/KSP" "Squad"
./reduce.sh "~/Desktop/KSP" "B9_Aerospace"

I'm not trying to start a flame war, I'm just terribly upset that

1. This is essentially a repost of the same instructions on the first page, made by the mod author.

2. You didn't bother to read a COUPLE of posts above your own, on THE SAME PAGE, before posting your essentially duplicate material.

[JackStack]

Hi, thanks for your comments. I don't understand how giving people another answer to a common question is upsetting. Are you worried that people aren't going to credit you?

I'm sorry if you felt your post wasn't read or even ignored. I did read your post. I followed your post. I shared your post with a few of my friends who play KSP, and 100% of them needed help. What I did was write down what I told them, almost verbatim, and offered a different solution to the same problem. They agreed it was helpful. I wanted to share it with the rest of KSP. "Here's how I solved this problem."

I can edit my post to add a link to your solution too if that will help. Other than that, though, I'm not sure how offering a second way to solve a problem is deteriorative. (Don't we want to give people as many tools as possible to play this game? What if your post is too confusing? What if mine is too verbose? How can we anticipate future Mac player concerns and address them before they become a big problem?)

Thanks again.

[requimrar]

I honestly could give no damns about credit, this is to help all unix users. The thing is, random people coming along would most likely be confused by two different sets of instructions that are only a few posts apart.

Furthermore, (not meaning to put down your method or anything), but in the event the file names change, the OP's method (and by extension your own) is most likely not going to work fully (he did mention the unix script is maintained by someone else).

While offering a different solution is not destructive, it will cause confusion, especially for newer people. If someone else asks the question later on in the threads, by all means reproduce whatever solution anyone sees fit.

I don't want credit; goodwill doesn't need recognition, but it must be done effectively.

I suggest we both stop in order not to derail the thread any further.

[dlrk]

Can the this be used with .22?

[sidfu]

Can the this be used with .22?

somewhat but but i wouldnt till updated some parts have changed some

[Galane]

somewhat but but i wouldnt till updated some parts have changed some

Then no .22 for me until this is updated. Unless I want to run it vanilla style.

I need to get more RAM in my computer, 8 gigs or so, then upgrade it to 64bit Vista Ultimate from 32bit XP Pro. Already have a dual core Phenom II CPU in it. (Would be unlocked to quad core if the chipset was just one revision newer, but hey, the motherboard was free!)

[NathanKell]

Have you tried it? They optimized the loading/unloading code (check ksp.log for details)--sumghai was able to run MapSat v4 WITH a full complement of mods!

[Galane]

Mods I have installed, in the order installed.

SelectRoot http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/43208-0-21-1-Aug12-SelectRoot-Let-another-part-be-root-now-with-less-restrictions

MechJeb 2.0.9 http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/21mechjeb209/ (Have to fiddle with some things to get it to be always available in .22)

Stretchy Tanks http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/stretchytanks/

Procedural Fairings http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/procedural-fairings/

ReStock http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/0-21-restock-parts/

KSPX x0.2.3 http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/30472-0-21-x-KSPX-Kerbal-Stock-Part-eXpansion-mod-reposted-v0-2-3 (Only the large_shortMonoTank, large_tripleFuelTank, large_sasModule, mini_asas and mini_sas. Mini SAS is really Inline Reaction Wheel Micro.)

Kethane mod.

Omni docking ports, combining the Clampotron and Clampotron Jr. and one that combines all three sizes. (Find the UbioZur welding thread for the .cfg files to have them.)

Quantum struts (still haven't used them on a rocket).

With all that loaded, .21 would run for about 5 to 10 minutes before crashing, but while it was running it worked quite well. The Squad texture redux pack made it run very well, often for several hours before it'd crash, quite often I'd be done before it'd crash.

With all that loaded, .22 is an absolute slug. Even the spaceport external/menu view is slow. So I wait for the updated shrunken Squad texture pack and one for the latest Kethane mod .8 version.

My .21 setup with all these mods and an 11.3 meg save folder (with 71 rockets and one aircraft) is only 1.2 gig (1,289,839,706 bytes) with these reduced size stock textures.

Plain vanilla .22, fresh out of the ZIP, not even run yet, is starting out at 1.45 gig (1,564,505,219 bytes).

Plain vanilla .21 weighs in at 1.37 gig (1,479,244,660 bytes).

Shrinking these huge textures makes a very large difference. I could add more stuff and still be smaller than stock.

Edited October 18, 2013 by Galane

[Thrundar]

Any chance this could be uploaded to somewhere other than kerbal space port? Space port is being glitchy again for me and only getting partial file downloads.

[rpayne88]

Then no .22 for me until this is updated. Unless I want to run it vanilla style.

I need to get more RAM in my computer, 8 gigs or so, then upgrade it to 64bit Vista Ultimate from 32bit XP Pro. Already have a dual core Phenom II CPU in it. (Would be unlocked to quad core if the chipset was just one revision newer, but hey, the motherboard was free!)

It won't do anything unless you currently have less than 4GB installed. KSP is a 32-bit application, meaning it maxes out at 4GB of RAM. Since there is no 64-bit version available, the 64-bit OS would be useless. I've yet to play .22 (currently waiting for a few mods, see below) but .21 would repeatedly crash. I've currently have 8GB and 64-bit windows 7 premium. Take it from my experience, the performance upgrades will NOT help.

Mods I'm waiting for:

-Deadly Reentry

-Remote Tech

[NathanKell]

Actually, not quite true. 64 bit will help, because it means each 32-bit program will get to use _all_ of its 3.5GB, not just a portion of the OS's total 3.5GB, split among all programs.

Wait, since when does DRE have large textures? I didn't think RT did either...

Unless you mean updated for .22, and not texture-replaced?

[Galane]

I have 2 gig RAM. If you're running a 64bit OS with enough RAM to enable a single 32bit program to have a full 4 gig, then that should remove any issues KSP may have when it can't have 4 gigs.

Whether or not KSP properly requests the RAM, or any other glitches that make it crash, that's up to KSP.

[nismobg]

@Galene try something and thank me later , Go to Graphic Setting in game and get the Texture Quality :Half Res . Now try again and see how much RAM are you using.

[rpayne88]

[quote name= Wait' date=' since when does DRE have large textures? I didn't think RT did either...

Unless you mean updated for .22, and not texture-replaced?

DRE and RT don't. I'm waiting for their devs to update them for .22.

Edit: It always screws up the quotes for some reason.

Edited October 19, 2013 by rpayne88

[NathanKell]

Both work fine.

You just have to add tech lines to the parts.

[Imca]

Any way to request a Novapunch version? Next to B9, it is my largest user of ram.

[Mokmo]

Any way to request a Novapunch version? Next to B9, it is my largest user of ram.

Nova isn't that bad in terms of memory footprint, considering the number of parts...

It's probably a few pages back but it was mentioned that having a run at reducing textures on it would not yield any significant results.

Edited October 20, 2013 by Mokmo

[TomatoSoup]

I can't wait for a new set of reduction packs! The B9 one just isn't compatible anymore and Squad and KW aren't catching a few parts.

[Galane]

I can do the Squad one on .22 and still get most of the textures replaced?

[dlrk]

I also could definitely use an update here.

[Synthesis]

I have 2 gig RAM. If you're running a 64bit OS with enough RAM to enable a single 32bit program to have a full 4 gig, then that should remove any issues KSP may have when it can't have 4 gigs.

Whether or not KSP properly requests the RAM, or any other glitches that make it crash, that's up to KSP.

Well, I'm running Windows 7 64-bit, and I get crashes when memory pushes up to 4 GB like clockwork. I also happen to have 8 GB of RAM on my system. I think KSP crashes at that number no matter what, but it's just a theory.

[wasmic]

Well, I'm running Windows 7 64-bit, and I get crashes when memory pushes up to 4 GB like clockwork. I also happen to have 8 GB of RAM on my system. I think KSP crashes at that number no matter what, but it's just a theory.

You are correct. KSP is a 32 bit application, which means that it can utilize only up to 3.8 (IIRC) GB, no matter the RAM that you have available.

[Moon Goddess]

You are correct. KSP is a 32 bit application, which means that it can utilize only up to 3.8 (IIRC) GB, no matter the RAM that you have available.

What I found very interesting was my computer is kinda old, I only had 4GB of ram but 64 bit OS (planned for the future) KSP ran fine. I upgraded my computer to 8GB of RAM made no other changes to the computer or KSP. KSP now suddenly was crashing constantly. Looked and it was taking 3.8GB. Removed a few mods and the game began to run again.

So apparently Windows had to have ram for itself and other programs and was paging the game and due to the paging the game could handle more mods in some way.

[Mihara]

So apparently Windows had to have ram for itself and other programs and was paging the game and due to the paging the game could handle more mods in some way.

It might be that Unity's actually clearing out unused memory when forced to page, but not at other times, which would be the cause. We need a Unity guru to confirm or deny that, because if that is true, it could be possible to enforce that behaviour with a mod...

[Galane]

What'd be nice is if KSP did dynamic loading of parts and textures as the focus changed from location to location, vehicle to vehicle. I could do without the spinning parts in VAB and SPH to have more RAM for the game to work with, and for more mods.

Working with data larger than the available memory has a long history in computers. Overlays, paging, 'windows' as used by the old Lotus/Intel/Microsoft Expanded Memory System or LIM-EMS that used rapid paging in and out of single 64K chunks of up to megabytes of RAM. I had an 80286 with 12 megabytes, running Windows 3.1 in Standard Mode. Only 512K of that was on the mainboard. The rest was on 16bit ISA cards. These days I routinely work with single image files larger than that.

Look back at what CP/M software could do with a mere 64K RAM for the OS, the program running and the program's data. The original Word Star (written by one guy in a few months, in Z80 machine code!) was extremely well optimized so it could be used to work with document files larger than 64K, and do it all at decent speed from floppy disks.

Nearly 4 gigs of space to work with is positively gigantic, if managed well.