Tyren Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Uhm i dont know exactly where it was, my first guess are the firespitter float parts...they have a water effects toggle. Does that help? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lo-fi Posted June 12, 2015 Author Share Posted June 12, 2015 Errr. You can check if its colliding with the collider that gets created? The relevant stuff is in VesselTools Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaalidas Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 (edited) Uhm i dont know exactly where it was, my first guess are the firespitter float parts...they have a water effects toggle. Does that help?My question was specific to the KF source. The next release of the KF package will include dust effect emitters for the wheels and repulsors, which also means I'll need some way of detecting water repulsion so that the "dust" can be made liquid-ish.... ish...- - - Updated - - -Errr. You can check if its colliding with the collider that gets created? The relevant stuff is in VesselToolsYeah, I was just having some trouble figuring out when it's all active or not. Would you be opposed to me adding an "isActive" boolean that I can call up in the repulsor dustFX module? I don't see any easier ways to do it.EDIT: On second thought... I can't even see where, anywhere in your code, you're checking if the collider is even necessary. Are those things always running the water colliders when active, and not just when over water? That would sure put small monkey wrench into my proverbial fan. Edited June 13, 2015 by Gaalidas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lo-fi Posted June 13, 2015 Author Share Posted June 13, 2015 I think it's running all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaalidas Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 Alright then, back to the drawing board. I've also been digging a bit into cameras for the idea of sampling the texture color under the collider. Not much luck there, unfortunately. There's lots of stuff about the cameras themselves, but no one really uses a camera without making it visible to the user, and there's even less information about the possibility of sampling the colors from a camera. Besides all that, we'd need a way to gather the average color of the texture we're looking at and emit that, otherwise we'd get dust that's changing color constantly due to the textures not being solid colors. I also got a chance to finally test out the emitter variables using GUI sliders, and discovered that I can control the apparent thickness of the particle with the "energy" parameter instead of relying on an alpha level, but it looks like the "emission" parameter really doesn't do much. I found that moving it to zero, of course, turned off the effect, but anything above zero had the same appearance. There doesn't appear to be any sort of scale parameter that I can find... yet... so there's not much chance of being able to make the effect bigger for things like the mole tracks, but that should be easily worked around now that we can emit from all of the colliders in a multi-collider set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lo-fi Posted June 13, 2015 Author Share Posted June 13, 2015 Hmmm, odd you can't scale. Try changing the scale of the GO that's created? Careful emitting from all colliders, could lead to performance issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyren Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 Hmm can you handle the dust via smokescreen plugin? Then you should be able to scale appearance, dissipation, fading and spread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lo-fi Posted June 13, 2015 Author Share Posted June 13, 2015 Possibly, but I try to avoid dependencies like the plague. I'll have a rummage around the methods we're using; there must be a way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaalidas Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 (edited) Hmmm, odd you can't scale. Try changing the scale of the GO that's created? Careful emitting from all colliders, could lead to performance issues.Hey, you're the one who made it happen, so don't blame me if your computer starts begging for death. Anyway, I have enough performance issues for a whole army, and I've still managed to get away with rovers sporting over 20 wheels or wheel-colliders on each side without performance becoming a huge issue. Compared with a smkoescreen-style emission, in which I can get a near-crash when emitting a single effect, well... the possibility of this creating a huge problem is pretty small.With that said... I have no idea what a "GO" is nor how I would ever scale it. I'm sure it's possible and all, I just haven't found that magic little code snippet.I'd actually like to find out if there are other, possibly more appropriate, effects that I could use. Right now it's just using a light smoke effect. Would sure be nice if I could preview effects like that without loading them into the game. I'm really missing the super-easy NIF model format that's used in Bethesda games. It sure made effect modding easy.EDIT: I discovered the min/maxSize properties of the particle emitter. Going to do some testing tomorrow and see what kind of effect they have. I'm also experimenting with a "grow" parameter in the color animation part. supposedly is handles a grow rate over the lifetime of the color animation, which is set up by the array of colors which, in DustFX, is the same for all the frames we populate it with. Without a clear idea of how much they will grow/shrink (I'm experimenting with entering a negative number, hoping it will shrink over time), it'll take some experimentation. Knowing what KSP sets for the default values of these parameters when not set would sure be nice. Edited June 14, 2015 by Gaalidas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damerell Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 From the department of hopelessly vague bug reports, this rover:http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~damerell/games/ksp/mkii-rear.pngThis looked like a plausible design until I got it off the runway and onto a rough surface. Then, intermittently, the middle or rear track is yanked backwards with some force, causing the whole rover body to distort.Two KF medium tracks, one on the fore and aft panels, do something similar. One KF medium track in the middle with wheels fore and aft also does it. I haven't built a satisfactory rover with a KF medium track mounted behind any other part. Any ideas? Anything else I can do to test it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Aqua* Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 I believe it's the game which causes this behavior. The ground is made of several "patches". When driving over a "seam" between patches the collision calculation can mess up leading to flips or even ripping the wheels off your rover. It's a bug in KSP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lo-fi Posted June 14, 2015 Author Share Posted June 14, 2015 I'll get back to you, I've noticed some odd things with the medium tracks that I've not managed to narrow down. Anything in the logs? Sounds like it manages to get stuck in the ground, which is odd because there shouldn't be any anywhere near to get stuck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyren Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 I have driven them quite a lot and never had any issues...weird.- - - Updated - - -Except for some crashes due to memory, that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lo-fi Posted June 14, 2015 Author Share Posted June 14, 2015 I believe it's the game which causes this behavior. The ground is made of several "patches". When driving over a "seam" between patches the collision calculation can mess up leading to flips or even ripping the wheels off your rover. It's a bug in KSP.Yes, that is annoying. I believe the collider for the ground is sort of created dynamically, and its this that causes that behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damerell Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 I'll get back to you, I've noticed some odd things with the medium tracks that I've not managed to narrow down. Anything in the logs? Sounds like it manages to get stuck in the ground, which is odd because there shouldn't be any anywhere near to get stuck.I'm glad I experimented some more before I read your reply (best not to lead the witness); after a bit of fiddling, I'd concluded it was always the medium track that caused the problem. Two long track pairs? Works fine. A half-track with wheels+ long track? Fine. A half-track with tiny tracks and long tracks? Fine. Invertible tracks? Fine, pity they run so slow. But anything I've tried with medium tracks is prone to this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lo-fi Posted June 14, 2015 Author Share Posted June 14, 2015 Wait a minute. Are you using the latest version? Some of the older revisions had issues like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaalidas Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 I remember a rover I built long ago that had that problem with the medium wheels, and I was experiencing something similar recently with the medium wheels when transitioning from the runway to the planet surface. I'm not convinced it's KF that's doing it though.Sometimes, when running in less than high-quality planet details, the interaction between the ground and the wheels can become distorted and even "sticky" which has led to an entire rover being ripped to tiny pieces. That was a sad day, but what was left of the rover still made it back to KSC somewhat intact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyren Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 The height map is slightly.off with medium to low planetary details. The biomes miss somewhat like a smooth rendering at their edges, but still i couldnt reconstruct that issue. Weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lo-fi Posted June 14, 2015 Author Share Posted June 14, 2015 Yep, there are certainly some weird things that go on..By the way, everything is going to be all over the place in dev for the time being. I'm trying out some new features! Rovers will be faster or slower to accelerate than usual because the wheels now react to vessel mass correctly - what Riocrokite was talking about. I'm not sure if the methods are quite bullet proof enough yet, but the effects shouldn't be devastating. Also added some bits in for electronicfox and Zodius that will be useful for their stuff. More to look into on DustFXNew tracks are coming along nicely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smjjames Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Oof, when release? XD lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lo-fi Posted June 14, 2015 Author Share Posted June 14, 2015 Working as fast as I can As usual, I've bitten off quite a lot, so LOTS of testing/checking/panicking to do beforehand. electronicfox and Zodius are waiting on the plugin to be ready, but all the parts need an update to operate properly before I can do that. So much to do, but I hate releasing stuff unless I know there's a fighting chance it's pretty well (major) bug free.- - - Updated - - -Also, I think I broke the biome colour stuff in DustFX. Sad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smjjames Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 (edited) No hurry on my part though Edit: Also, I noticed this odd bug where the screw drive will actually still be able to propel you when in water, despite a torque and RPM of 0.(Ignore the fact that the boat is partially capsized and the probe core is upside down) Edited June 14, 2015 by smjjames Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lo-fi Posted June 14, 2015 Author Share Posted June 14, 2015 Hahaha! That'll teach me to knock up modules for something silly without proper testing. I'll add that to the fix list... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyren Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 if i can be of any help, i am pretty skilled at panicking Anyway, just work it over step by step, thats some massive to do list youve got here...^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lo-fi Posted June 14, 2015 Author Share Posted June 14, 2015 (edited) Ah, excellent! It just so happens we have an opportunity...Just a little teaser:Ignore the temporary textures.EDIT: also ignore the rollcage being too big. Blame the silly default scale factor. Edited June 14, 2015 by lo-fi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts