[1.0.x] [V1.9f] Kerbal Foundries wheels, anti-grav repulsors and tracks

[lo-fi]

There seems to be a tendency to make textures "look stock". Which tends to mean flat and largely featureless with some panel lines and lots of weathering. It hardly needs to be crisp! I'm not saying mine are anything , but the moment you put anything with contrast it really shows it up..

The textures look just as terrible opened in paint - KSP isn't a factor here. I tried the conversion tool, Gimp plugin and something else I can't remember. Each the same result: "Ugh. What the actual....."

[Gaalidas]

Well, I just did a reversion on github and I think we're back to normal... except I committed my altered normal maps for a few of those track surfaces. Still might be better if you went over them, since mine are based purely on the textures and not what the model is supposed to feature. The rover body textures remain in an unaltered state.

Also, everything loaded in MS Paint looks like kerbal poo. It's the nature of MS Paint. I could be biased of course... and I probably am... cause to be honest I don't open anything in paint anymore. I guess I'm just enjoying bashing MS Paint for no reason.

What I like in my textures are darker features. All this white just annoys me to no end.

Edited July 27, 2015 by Gaalidas

[lo-fi]

True enough, but gimp did them no favours either...

Which models need UV jiggery? Don't forget that whenever I write a part out it will over write whatever you've adjusted. Much easier to fix this end!

Edited July 27, 2015 by lo-fi

[Gaalidas]

UV I know nothing about, but if you compare the track surface textures to their corresponding normal maps, you'll notice that some of them have normal maps that look more like the mole track surface textures, when in fact their surface texture is much different. For example: the texture labeled "model002" and its corresponding normal map would be "model003_NRM" I'd assume. In the github right now I have an altered normal map texture that fits really well but, in the default set of textures which you likely have on your machine still, "model003_NRM" is a normal map of a completely different surface texture.

I basically just used Gimp with the normal mapping plugin to take "model002" and run it with a Prewitt 5x5 filter, scale 1.0, everything else defaulted. For others I used a Prewitt 3x3 when the 5x5 got a bit too weird. One time when I was messing with the normals for other parts as well, I even went as low as a simple 4-sample with a scale of 4.0.

I've had a lot of success with doing normals this way for games like Bethesda's Elderscrolls series games, but the other normal map formats are pretty foreign to me. For instance, the STALKER series of games used an 8 bit unsigned normal map format, while a number of KSP parts use something that more resembles a height-normal map.

One of these days I must figure out what all is done to make these parts, especially if I want to look into splitting up the rover body into several pieces in the attempt to make a modular expandable rover body.

Edited July 27, 2015 by Gaalidas

[lo-fi]

Oh, I see! Some of the materials have the wrong normal maps selected, that's all then. Easily fixed.

[Gaalidas]

the first rover body texture was 80meg @ 4096

Holy expletives... I totally didn't notice it was that big back then.

So yeah, you'll probably want to double check all of those assignments then, because there are other cases of mismatched normals in there too.

Is it intentional that the APU has a normal map, but the normal map appears to be completely flat? Just curious. If it is completely flat, at the very least that texture could be reduced to 25% of its current size without running into darkening artifacts (sometimes hits you when you resize flat textures under a certain set of dimensions, usually below 24x24).

if that old texture was 80meg @ 4096, I kinda wonder how anyone can run entire solar system replacement mods using textures that are 8192 range. That must really bog down the system a lot. hell, I remember downloading a mod once for Skyrim that included the lowest resolution textures all boosted to at least 4096, with the others scaled accordingly, when the default lowest resolution was something along the lines of 256x128 for gold coins and such, ranging to 2048 range textures for character skins. Insane stuff.

Edited July 27, 2015 by Gaalidas

[lo-fi]

Yeah, my bad. I was experimenting and left the wrong version on! Makes you wonder, yes...

Spanner made the APU, so I hadn't noticed that. I expect that's just a place holder for a normal map he didn't get around to creating, so might as well squish it.

[Gaalidas]

Ah, I thought that was all you. Didn't you mention an alternative model for that thing a long while back? I'm not even going to try and search back over the 344 pages of posts.

[AccidentalDisassembly]

Something to think about for the textures - I don't *think* KSP has any particular problem with textures that aren't powers of 2 on a side, so some textures that don't really need to be 1024 could be 768x768 instead: 25% reduction in linear resolution for 50% reduction in RAM.

[SmashBrown]

Regarding looks, some of the parts have a "shine" to them, to me it looks a bit off compared to the rest of my parts. Any chance you might give them a bit more of a matte finish to make them fit in with squads textures? Still like the parts though, don't mean to seem ungrateful.

[Gaalidas]

Something to think about for the textures - I don't *think* KSP has any particular problem with textures that aren't powers of 2 on a side, so some textures that don't really need to be 1024 could be 768x768 instead: 25% reduction in linear resolution for 50% reduction in RAM.

Good point. There are some limitations I believe, such as textures with one side's length being a primary or something, where it may have issues. I've done 25% reductions before on textures I wanted to reduce for performance on my machine, but wanted to keep the higher details that kept getting aliased in the smaller size.

- - - Updated - - -

Regarding looks, some of the parts have a "shine" to them, to me it looks a bit off compared to the rest of my parts. Any chance you might give them a bit more of a matte finish to make them fit in with squads textures? Still like the parts though, don't mean to seem ungrateful.

You ungrateful shine-hater you! No no... I agree. There is a point where too much shine is worse than no shine at all. I've removed entire hull type mods just because one part had a strange super-shine on half of a part due to a badly formatted normal map or something. It's really distracting.

[lo-fi]

Yeah, I never finished the alternate APU. Maybe I ought to pick that back up...

Shiny parts do need fixing by generating spec maps.

I'll look into the between size textures. I might be able to squeeze some stuff for the rollcages in some of the empty space of the rover body texture (they don't need much), so you get a decent amount of parts for a large-ish texture. The trouble is with the rover body, there's lots of part to cover, so you do actually need the pixels. There's not much of the rollcages, so they can fit in the gaps!!

[Shaggygoblin]

I think you mean to use "guiActive = true" so that it shows up in the flight scene, right?

Yes, "...= True" is what I meant. Damn, I even reread that several times before submitting...lol

Max speed defined by the float curve for motorTorque. First value is speed, second is torque for that speed.

So, in short: Yes, the top speed can be increased by fudging the keys associated with torquecurve? So Key=0,100,0 Key=50,10,0 Key=100,0,0 'might' give me a bit more speed, say? Default values give me ~36m/s after half the L3 Runway. I'm shooting for 100m/s max. any more would be silly/uncontrollable. I'm making the assumption that the steering curve is similar in function as to the steering amount/angle allowed at a given speed/velocity (low speed = tight turn, high speed = shallow turn), or is it just how much force is applied to slow a wheel in order to pull/yaw turn (inside turns slower than outside wheels)?

This is the vehicle of interest, pics for clicks...lol!

Javascript is disabled. View full album

- - - Updated - - -

RE:RE:RE: Looks, from a player perspective...

I like shiny(read pretty, High-Res, 4K) but likely, KF will not be the only mods to exist if KF is present. Granted there's pruners, but assume that several mods/parts packs exist... I would rather have playability(read no memory crashes) than 4K on everything...

On DDS, there shouldn't be that much of a degradation on convert, at least I've never encountered that much when using Win DDS Converter to manually DDS mods when I was still on .90.

On the Poll: I voted 'Something Different.'

Reason: While everyone likes more/new things, maint/improve existing can be even more... I vote quality(improvements to existing) over quantity... just my two Lincolns.

Edited July 28, 2015 by Shaggygoblin

[Gaalidas]

Quality over quantity is how I like to do everything. For instance, I'm in two choirs at my college and while I don't have a strong voice, I try to keep the output from my voice as high quality as possible. It's worked well so far as long as I avoid doing solos.

What those huge wheels need is less acceleration I think. It's way too easy to flip those due to their high acceleration and extremely free-moving suspension.

[lo-fi]

There two problems in KSP:

Wheel colliders, by default, don't take any notice of the mass they're moving. Ever notice how a heavy rover accelerates at the same rate as a light one? Yup.

The control method is digital. What happens with a powerful truck when you mash full throttle with instant torque available? See why dragsters need wheelie bars?

That vessel is waaaaaay too light for big wheels at default torque. You've made the equivalent of a monster truck. Which is, to be fair, what they're mostly for. The next version includes some smoothing of control inputs. It also passes the correct weight of the vessel to the wheel colliders, which means there's a little bit more finesse to setting up the torque values. You ought to be happy with the forthcoming release: Not many new parts; lots of changes under the hood!

[Shaggygoblin]

Well, I do R/C Cars, and can apply a bit of suspension tuning theory to the KF Wheels using the Spring/Damper/Height adjustments to better utilize the high torque. Sometimes getting that tweaked just right is fun/exciting in and of itself. Personally, I want to get to max speed quick to make the trip from Sci-Point A to Sci-Point Z as short (time) as possible...lol. I can't fly/land. As in, I can build a great flying platform and I can fly it as well as any other, but I can not land them sans kill throttle, deploy gear, deploy chutes, hope I don't land on too steep of grade...lmao! I just can't control my controlled crash/stall. Oddly, I CAN land R/C Planes and 'copters.

I was going for the Monster Truck look with the large wheels, and correctly tuned, the suspension compliments the excessive torque.

All the extra bits aside, this thing handles a dream at any speed. You have to manually mind the front rear torque, just as in a real monster truck(yes, this can be/is done IRL, I did it using a central suspension/torque controller in my Stryker, with advance controllers derived from tech used to manipulate geometries of monster truck suspension/torque).

Edited July 28, 2015 by Shaggygoblin
spelling/grammar

[Gaalidas]

Yeah, half of that flew right in one ear and out the other. Oh well.

[*Aqua*]

Holy "§$/%! lo-fi, did you just commit changes to 52 files all at once!? No wonder you named that commit "Balls..."

[Gaalidas]

There two problems in KSP:

Wheel colliders, by default, don't take any notice of the mass they're moving. Ever notice how a heavy rover accelerates at the same rate as a light one? Yup.

The control method is digital. What happens with a powerful truck when you mash full throttle with instant torque available? See why dragsters need wheelie bars?

That vessel is waaaaaay too light for big wheels at default torque. You've made the equivalent of a monster truck. Which is, to be fair, what they're mostly for. The next version includes some smoothing of control inputs. It also passes the correct weight of the vessel to the wheel colliders, which means there's a little bit more finesse to setting up the torque values. You ought to be happy with the forthcoming release: Not many new parts; lots of changes under the hood!

And those babies will toss up a monster truck load of dust into the air when going at full speed over rough terrain. At least, that's my goal.

- - - Updated - - -

Holy "§$/%! lo-fi, did you just commit changes to 52 files all at once!? No wonder you named that commit "Balls..."

HAH! That's awesome.

[lo-fi]

I've got to admit, I did have fun making monster truck type stuff when I first made those wheels. Long suspension travel was something of a revelation, as was a sensible grip level. Grab a vid if you can!

EDIT: Haha! Yeah, was a bit of a fustercluck sorting textures after the DDS/revert debacle. Just sorting a few other bits...

[Shaggygoblin]

And those babies will toss up a monster truck load of dust into the air when going at full speed over rough terrain. At least, that's my goal.

I want your test files for that collider dust/gravel/sand... I was drooling when I was reading about it several posts back. I promise I won't come back here complaining 'it don't work' or 'this/that/other looks weird/acts funky'. The kick-up from the wheels would top it! OHHH! and variable wheelspin on mass / wheel wxh / torque...ZOMG! The possibilities.... Surely, you've all thought of that and is on some back-back-back-burner somewhere...

Edited July 28, 2015 by Shaggygoblin

[smjjames]

Release soon maybe?

[lo-fi]

Looking at the bug tracker, it's just a few config bits remaining to sort out. So yes!

[Shaggygoblin]

Awww... what would the world be without bugs IRL... we need them, really. What's a few digi-bugs between users... come on...let us have 'em. Doesn't mean you can't still work on it! lol I'll even sign a waiver/NDA if need be!

[Gaalidas]

By signing this agreement (the "agreement") you are hereby acknowledging that you (the "user") are fully aware that the use of this product (the "product") may or may not cause one or more of the following: insanity, dementia, schizophrenia, gigantic eyeball, funny balls, keyboard imprints on the face, slow death, agony, and/or a runny nose. All warranties (of which there are none) are made void if product (the "product") is removed from the package, of which there is none.

Signed ________________.

Enjoy your buggy product.