[1.8.x-1.10.x] SmokeScreen 2.8.14 - Extended FX plugin (18 April 2020)

[Speedster159]

Got an update to 2.6.12

What's new?

[nablabla]

Hi, I have kind of an idea for a particle shader.

On my system 8000 particles are slowing everything down. So I use 1000. I wonder why this is, my computer is kind of decent. Is it the creation/destruction rate of particles?

For me it seems that the exhaust looks rather slow. When compared to real footage where the exhaust is like a fast stream, while in ksp the exhaust looks more like cotton candy floating out of the nozzles.

So my thought process is, maybe if you increase the speed of the particles the rate in which they are created and destroyed must also be higher. So how can I prevent that? Two ideas: Using one particle for more 'iterations', so if it dies it reappears again. But this might look strange if the vessel moves and turns.

So my other idea is to change the particle shaders in a way that it looks faster without the particles actually flying faster: When sampling the texture color you could add an offset to the u-coordinate (or v-coordinate, along the velocity vector) relative to time. So a position in a particle which floats in y direction (which is also u in the texture) whould cycle through the texture multiple times such that the exhaust 'inside' the particles seems to flow faster than the particle.

What do you think?

Edited February 4, 2016 by nablabla

[sarbian]

11 hours ago, Speedster159 said:

Got an update to 2.6.12

What's new?

You can now open the UI with ALT P and I fixed a bug in the config editor. Nothing for end user.

2 hours ago, nablabla said:

Hi, I have kind of an idea for a particle shader.

On my system 8000 particles are slowing everything down. So I use 1000. I wonder why this is, my computer is kind of decent. Is it the creation/destruction rate of particles?

For me it seems that the exhaust looks rather slow. When compared to real footage where the exhaust is like a fast stream, while in ksp the exhaust looks more like cotton candy floating out of the nozzles.

So my thought process is, maybe if you increase the speed of the particles the rate in which they are created and destroyed must also be higher. So how can I prevent that? Two ideas: Using one particle for more 'iterations', so if it dies it reappears again. But this might look strange if the vessel moves and turns.

So my other idea is to change the particle shaders in a way that it looks faster without the particles actually flying faster: When sampling the texture color you could add an offset to the u-coordinate (or v-coordinate, along the velocity vector) relative to time. So a position in a particle which floats in y direction (which is also u in the texture) whould cycle through the texture multiple times such that the exhaust 'inside' the particles seems to flow faster than the particle.

What do you think?

I think that I won't do any change to SmokeScreen before KSP 1.1. Unity 5 will require me to rewrite pat of the code and if chance with get Unity 5.3 we will be able to use the far better shiruken particles system. A sliding texture trick would be nice but I d rather wait and see if we can use the other tricks that U5 will offer.

[sarbian]

2.6.13 Fix smoke running away from vehicle when Krakensbane activates by @ferram4

SmokeScreen-2.6.13.0.zip

[Alexoff]

Is it fixable to put flame effect on engine, if it is core part?

[sarbian]

You mean replace the effect on the stock parts ? Yes you can :

 

[JoseEduardo]

any news regarding the update?

[sarbian]

No. No news about the update. Asking about the update may actually slow the updating rate.

[Jimbodiah]

^^ gheghe

[sarbian]

Here is the release for 1.1 : https://ksp.sarbian.com/jenkins/job/SmokeScreen/54/

[adsii1970]

@sarbian: Thanks for the hard work you put into mods. It greatly improves my game play experience.

[sidfu]

thanks for the quick fix for the nre in map mode sabian

[sarbian]

Build for 1.1 SmokeScreen-2.6.15.0.zip

[adsii1970]

14 minutes ago, sarbian said:

Build for 1.1 SmokeScreen-2.6.15.0.zip

Please do not misunderstand my question as I am not meaning to be rude... but is this the same update listed in CKAN? (as well as your other posted updates). I think CKAN has made me lazy - and I do not mean to offend you with this question.

[Kruge631]

I'm trying to install this latest update for KSP 1.1, but my stupid Norton AV keeps removing the smokescreen dll (rendering it useless) claiming it represents a threat.  Obviously this is not the case, but turning off the NAV to install it is probably a workaround until the next time I run a security sweep.  Frustrating!  Any way around this?

[sarbian]

Yep,  uninstall the badly coded Antivirus. You could also try to move the game outside Program Files but with those stupid AV you never know 

[Blacks]

@sarbian is not just a badly coded Antivirus it is possible what he experience to be because community was report that file like a danger & if a file it get report from 10-100 symantec client (Insight + SONAR + Norton Community Watch), then symantec it have a implementation to treat that like a potential danger & to remove, what it can done by user is to tell antivirus to restore that file & remove from bad list trust that one ... BUT is recommend that thing to be use only by ppls who are very sure from were it take a file & what is going on ...

[sarbian]

10 hours ago, Blacks said:

@sarbian is not just a badly coded Antivirus it is possible what he experience to be because community was report that file like a danger & if a file it get report from 10-100 symantec client (Insight + SONAR + Norton Community Watch), then symantec it have a implementation to treat that like a potential danger & to remove, what it can done by user is to tell antivirus to restore that file & remove from bad list trust that one ... BUT is recommend that thing to be use only by ppls who are very sure from were it take a file & what is going on ...

I already explained it in detail in the MJ thread. Those AV heuristic are 100% BS. They work by giving a bad note to new exe/dll and improving their note as they are more and more used. And of course you can bypass that problem by signing your code, and symantec appends to delivers certs for that. This does not improve security because virus/malware can bypass those protection and so they only create problem for legit software. You can find comments by ex symantec engineer that tell the same thing...

[jpinard]

Sarbian - do you feel CKAN is reliable enough with your mods to fully rely on it for your work?  We found out CKAN really messed up Stock Visual Enhancements and now I don't know if it's just a one off and CKAN is usually perfect, or if I need to only manage mods myself.

[sarbian]

It works fine for me.

[gamerscircle]

The mod starts with 1000 , can someone recommend a setting that is fairly close to what we see during SpaceX launches.  [btw - I am a total rocket noob, love playing the game and learning a little bit each day.]

[Rhedd]

I've run into a bug that I strongly suspect isn't new, but I'm reporting it just in case.

When you use mach speed to control emissions, it works fine until the spacecraft leaves the atmosphere, at which time the emission suddenly restarts. (I assume mach has gone to -1 or something, and smokescreen doesn't know what to do with it?)

It causes me trouble with launch smoke effects, because I either have to control it with air pressure, which isn't sensitive enough at ground level, or mach speed, which means the stage must be jettisoned below 70km unless I want smoke in outer space.

Edited May 1, 2016 by Rhedd

[sarbian]

Mach is 0 in vacuum. So if you have a positive emission in your curve for 0 then yes, it will restart. I don't see what I can do about it since mach will lower as you get higher anyway.

[Rhedd]

On 5/1/2016 at 7:20 AM, sarbian said:

Mach is 0 in vacuum. So if you have a positive emission in your curve for 0 then yes, it will restart. I don't see what I can do about it since mach will lower as you get higher anyway.

I guess I'm silly not to have realized that starting the emission at mach0.0001 might solve the problem. I assume it would? Of course, then I guess I wouldn't get any pre-takeoff smoke, so that won't work either. Would mixing a mach curve with a density curve that cut everything off at 0.0 density work?

While we're on the subject, why is it that varying emission by density is so inaccurate compared to density readings something like MechJeb/RPM/Nanogauges gives you? If, for instance, I set up a curve to start at density 1.0 and end by density 0.999, it will fade out at around 1200meters, even though MechJeb reports the atmospheric density at that height to be around 0.8 atmos. It doesn't seem to matter at all how I set the fadeout density, it won't even start to pay attention until after about 11-1200m.

Just wondering why, and if there's a better tool to use to judge atmo density for Smokescreen effects.

Edited May 2, 2016 by Rhedd

[sarbian]

@Rhedd Look at how the game interpret your curve with my other mod. It may be that the curve it create get near 0 before you actually think it does.