RSI Diff Bot; head commit 60ea293 merging into 8a06dde
This PR makes changes to 1 or more RSIs. Here is a summary of all changes:

Resources/Textures/Structures/Power/Generation/solar_panel.rsi

State	Old	New	Status
solar_assembly			Modified
solar_tracker			Modified
broken			Removed
normal			Removed
static			Removed
solar_assembly_tracker_circuit			Added
solar_assembly_tracker_circuit_uncabled			Added
solar_assembly_uncabled			Added
solar_panel_glass			Added
solar_panel_glass_broken			Added
solar_panel_glass_uncabled			Added
solar_panel_plasma			Added
solar_panel_plasma_broken			Added
solar_panel_plasma_uncabled			Added
solar_panel_uranium			Added
solar_panel_uranium_broken			Added
solar_panel_uranium_uncabled			Added
solar_tracker_broken			Added
solar_tracker_broken_uncabled			Added
solar_tracker_uncabled			Added

are you in the ss14 discord

The sprites themselves don't look that great.

Newer sprites are in, updated images above.

I love everything about this, the sprites looks cool and looks like it adds nuance to an otherwise boring power source.

Makes solars an actual thing you can work on, instead of just that errand you send the assistants to do.

I love this, like a lot. Upgradable solars sounds amazing. Make them into the power house they should be over the course of a round, with the help of salv or cargo.

This pull request has conflicts, please resolve those before we can evaluate the pull request.

are you working on it?

are you working on it?

Merge conflict resolved.

I merged #31425 in the meantime until the maintainer discussion for this PR is finished. You might want to check if you need to re-add that construction recipe to the building menu (please merge master for this). We still need to do some testing on how much power is produced for upgraded panels on different stations, but the concept has been approved so far.

This pull request has conflicts, please resolve those before we can evaluate the pull request.

Resolved the conflicts. I decided to remove the construction entries I added for the panels and tracker as well. Do let me know if there's any questions around this within the discussion, I'd be more than glad to answer anything.

Hey, sorry for the wait, we are currently quite backlogged with reviews.
I gave it an in-game test and the power supply values seem to be good on the first look. But we can adjust the exact numbers later if necessary. A few minor things I noticed need a small cleanup first though:

The solar panel sprites point in the wrong direction compared to before, could you rotate them by 180 degrees? This is important because for the power calculation a raytracer checks if there is anything blocking the area in front of the panel - if they point towards the station they don't produce power.

When you replace a normal solar panel with a plasma one it does not register the contruction to be complete and wants you to undo the steps:

Not sure if this is a problem with construction graphs in general though.

Otherwise this is should be good to merge and the maintainers think it is a great addition to engineering gameplay.

Awesome! I'll be taking a look at these two issues.

Rotation should be fixed now.

I do believe that the issue is within how construction graphs are handled as a whole, I'm not seeing anything that is different between the basic glass version and the other versions, any tips on how to debug construction graphs would be handy but it reads correct to me compared to the solarpaneluranium and solarpanelplasma nodes within the graph itself.

Tested in-game and should be good to merge.
Since the new maintainer policy is now in effect a second maintainer has to give approval and merge this, but that should be quick since this was already approved conceptually in the internal discussion.
Thank you for your contribution.

Sorry for being late to the party, can you tweak the sprite so that the silhouette is closer to the original and the panel itself being less like. overdetailed cause the pixels are very kinda chaotic and messy. Square is better than diamond! (looks better in an array)

Can you provide a quick mock up of what you're thinking? We've been through some iteration within the sprite channel months ago with a few reworks and were under the impression that the sprites were approved as is.

Can you provide a quick mock up of what you're thinking? We've been through some iteration within the sprite channel months ago with a few reworks and were under the impression that the sprites were approved as is.

Yeah so sorry for that, I was kind of looking at goon and /vg/ sprites for the general shape (even if the style itself is not what we're going for)

Can you provide a quick mock up of what you're thinking? We've been through some iteration within the sprite channel months ago with a few reworks and were under the impression that the sprites were approved as is.

Yeah so sorry for that, I was kind of looking at goon and /vg/ sprites for the general shape (even if the style itself is not what we're going for)

These look very similar to the sprites as they are in this PR, except the sprites within the PR are tilted a bit more to showcase the panel itself. The goon panel looks to almost have the same profile as well with maybe two pixels less in tilt.

To be clear your asking for us to rework the entire sprite to remove a row or two of pixels to decrease the effect of the panels being tilted?

These look very similar to the sprites as they are in this PR, except the sprites within the PR are tilted a bit more to showcase the panel itself. The goon panel looks to almost have the same profile as well with maybe two pixels less in tilt.

To be clear your asking for us to rework the entire sprite to remove a row or two of pixels to decrease the effect of the panels being tilted?

It's basically just making the blue bit on your pr less thick and less tilted yeah
and then theres the matter of making the shading simpler

I feel like we've been pulled in both directions here via the conversation that was done months ago in sprite-dungeon. We had to completely alter the dithering and shading done to all the sprites. Why wasn't this brought up months ago or even a month ago while the PR was in maintainer discussion?

I feel like we've been pulled in both directions here via the conversation that was done months ago in sprite-dungeon. We had to completely alter the dithering and shading done to all the sprites. Why wasn't this brought up months ago or even a month ago while the PR was in maintainer discussion?

It was definitely brought up in maintainer discussion but there was just so little discussion that no one refuted my claim, or reviewed it... Please understand that there are at least a hundred PRs under discussion and it's pretty easy to lose track of one or two.

I feel like we've been pulled in both directions here via the conversation that was done months ago in sprite-dungeon. We had to completely alter the dithering and shading done to all the sprites. Why wasn't this brought up months ago or even a month ago while the PR was in maintainer discussion?

It was definitely brought up in maintainer discussion but there was just so little discussion that no one refuted my claim, or reviewed it... Please understand that there are at least a hundred PRs under discussion and it's pretty easy to lose track of one or two.

Sure, but in this case at the last moment, is it worth killing the entire PR for this change that can be done by another contributor in the future? The license is permissive on the sprites as intended so others can make the change they see fit to match the vision you propose.

I very much support getting something that's 95% there and an improvement over something into main and then coming back around to it to fix as it's own item instead of dragging this PR out for months which has already burned us out as we've had limited to no communication after we've been through a round or two of re-spriting.

Resolved the conflicts. I decided to remove the construction entries I added for the panels and tracker as well. Do let me know if there's any questions around this within the discussion, I'd be more than glad to answer anything.

I even a month ago raised the point that we were open to hearing feedback or questions, Being a part of the maintainer discussion for the PR someone has opened even as an observer could help solve these issues.

Sure, but in this case at the last moment, is it worth killing the entire PR for this change that can be done by another contributor in the future? The license is permissive on the sprites as intended so others can make the change they see fit to match the vision you propose.

It's your decision in the end but as soon as you address the changes I'll merge it.

@CaasGit How's this going? Have you made any progress on the re-spriting?

i'd be willing to help with sprite work i can understand how frustrating it is