Thomas P.

[1.7.3-1 + Backports] Kopernicus & KittopiaTech

Recommended Posts

47 minutes ago, Starwaster said:

@Jognt but you can't have JNSQ without Kopernicus... you can't do stock + JNSQ only. No Kopernicus means no JNSQ

Yup, that's why I figured it'd be a no-go.
I decided to at the very least go for a completely clean KSP install with just JNSQ + Dependencies. No custom CFGs, launch params or anything else that can interfere.

Just got done with sending another craft to the Mun (why oh why did I use that 1 modded girder in my other save..) so I was able to at the very least confirm that I can reliably reproduce it. Tomorrow I'll do some comparing with JNSQ_Default and perhaps even some even more in depth stock vs stock+Kopernicus and/or Stock+Kopernicus vs Stock+Kopernicus+ReScale.

Though my plan was to just do nothing at all and listen to the rain after a rough week.. We'll see which plan wins out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello all, I'm trying to get OPM to work with KSP 1.6.1 with Kopernicus, OPM etc installed via CKAN. However on startup, a message appears saying that 'Kopernicus was not able to load the planet pack due to an exception in the loading process' or something. I have Sigma dimensions installed (via CKAN) and scaled everything up to 5x. Does anyone know how to fix this? All the versions are correct and I do have other mods installed. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Did you update sigma dimensions? I had to update it.

 

Any word on how to add surface features to bodies created with Kopernicus?

Edited by KerikBalm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, edwin.robert said:

Hello all, I'm trying to get OPM to work with KSP 1.6.1 with Kopernicus, OPM etc installed via CKAN. However on startup, a message appears saying that 'Kopernicus was not able to load the planet pack due to an exception in the loading process' or something. I have Sigma dimensions installed (via CKAN) and scaled everything up to 5x. Does anyone know how to fix this? All the versions are correct and I do have other mods installed. Thanks!

SD is not on ckan, you should install the mod manually and choose the correct version for that ksp version, I don't remember which one it was, maybe looking at the changelog you can see when I updated to 1.6.1

Maybe @HebaruSan can be of help

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maxQuadLengthsPerFrame = 0.03

17 hours ago, SkyRex94 said:

There seems to be some Bug in Kopernicus maybe:
I boiled it down to being a Kopernicus issue and it's an issue once you start changing a planets radius:
Then the ocean surface collider disappears. There is no more part interaction. No explosions, no swimming pieces nothing. Everything just goes straight through and for the ground. (The water has still resistance though, seems to be only the collider and buoyancy)

Tested with just a Line in Kerbin Properties setting a different radius.

LOG:

...

Nevermind...
I found a solution.

When rescaling any body with an ocean you HAVE to add the
"Ocean
{
}"
thing in your cfg, in my case I just put a maxQuadLengthsPerFrame = 0.03 in there for Kerbin, Eve n Laythe.
This seems to force Kopernicus to actually recalculate the Oceans and gives the ocean back it's top layer collider as well as it's buoyancy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Sigma88 said:

SD is not on ckan, you should install the mod manually and choose the correct version for that ksp version, I don't remember which one it was, maybe looking at the changelog you can see when I updated to 1.6.1

Maybe @HebaruSan can be of help

I made sure all mods were updated to my current version of KSP  but that message still appears. I eventually removed OPM and everything related but the message kept on showing. I then removed Kopernicus entirely and loaded it up and it was gone. I'm going to put it back again and see what happens. I have no other planet pack mods installed other than OPM which I removed but the message was still showing. I do have Distant Object enhancer, just to let everyone know.

Edited by edwin.robert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, edwin.robert said:

I made sure all mods were updated to my current version of KSP  but that message still appears. I eventually removed OPM and everything related but the message kept on showing. I then removed Kopernicus entirely and loaded it up and it was gone. I'm going to put it back again and see what happens. I have no other planet pack mods installed other than OPM which I removed but the message was still showing. I do have Distant Object enhancer, just to let everyone know.

What version of Kopernicus are you using?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Galileo said:

What version of Kopernicus are you using?

KSP 1.6.1

Kopernicus 1.6.1.9

Sigma dimensions 0.10.4

OPM (removed) 2:2.2.5

I've had to restart KSP 20 times today and each time it takes half an hour to load.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, edwin.robert said:

KSP 1.6.1

Kopernicus 1.6.1.9

Sigma dimensions 0.10.4

OPM (removed) 2:2.2.5

I've had to restart KSP 20 times today and each time it takes half an hour to load.

Can you post your logs here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, edwin.robert said:

KSP 1.6.1

Kopernicus 1.6.1.9

Sigma dimensions 0.10.4

OPM (removed) 2:2.2.5

I've had to restart KSP 20 times today and each time it takes half an hour to load.

SD 0.10.4 is for KSP/Kopernicus 1.7.1

for 1.6.1 try SD v0.10.2

 

that version was for KSP 1.6.0 however the next version of SD is for KSP 1.7.1 so either 0.10.2 works or I never released anything for 1.6.1

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Sigma88 said:

SD 0.10.4 is for KSP/Kopernicus 1.7.1

for 1.6.1 try SD v0.10.2

 

that version was for KSP 1.6.0 however the next version of SD is for KSP 1.7.1 so either 0.10.2 works or I never released anything for 1.6.1

 

I can't find SS 0.10.2, i see 0.10.3 and 0.10.1.... I looked on Github and can't find it. Is it alright with the .2 or .3?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Well, I managed to find the base mods needed to show the horrific FPS problem: Stock + Kopernicus (+Dependencies) is all that you need.
Below is a video that shows the same craft and performance in Stock followed by the same craft and performance after installing Kopernicus.

Output log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/sazezeanpntwvj6/Stock_Recorded_OutputLog.txt?dl=0

The video: (time stamps to specific moments in the video description on YouTube. Full video uploaded to offer insight into how I did what)

 

Edit: Considering this thread isn't filled to the brim with people complaining I'm assuming there might be an external factor at play which means some people don't experience any problems. If you are experiencing this massive drop in FPS, consider going without Kopernicus or setting RoCSeed = -1 in your persistent.sfs to disable surface features completely until this is resolved.
Either that or everyone that is seeing this FPS drop isn't aware that installing Kopernicus caused it.

Edited by Jognt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My game is crashing quite often lately, so I went through the logfile. It is getting spammed with the same error message, and I found no repy to this post:

On 4/16/2018 at 1:25 AM, Quoniam Kerman said:

Hello guys, I usually never go to the archives in the R&D building of the space center... I took a look there tonight and I got a infinte spam on nullreferences exception. I went to search into the log file and it said this:

"[EXC 01:16:27.413] NullReferenceException
    Kopernicus.RnDFixer.LateUpdate ()"

So this is why I'm here, Kopernicus thinks there is something missing in the R&D building scientific archives.

I'm using OPM mod as well as SVE, EVE,  Scatterer and JX2 antennae.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, infinite_monkey said:

My game is crashing quite often lately, so I went through the logfile. It is getting spammed with the same error message, and I found no repy to this post:

To make sure that that is the last error that makes KSP crash, press alt+f12 and tick the box for “flush log to disk”. 

That’ll make sure the last few entries don’t get lost if KSP crashes before it adds to the log. Which in the case of crashes is the most valuable info  

it’ll probably cause a lot more disk IO though so I recommend unticking that box when you’ve acquired a fresh log. 

Edit: I don’t know the inner workings of Kopernicus and don’t know the details around that specific log message, this advice is purely to get ‘moar info’. 

Edited by Jognt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/20/2019 at 5:16 PM, Galileo said:

Can you post your logs here?

Here are my logs

output_log.txt: https://www.dropbox.com/s/gzi9oa6ddulfedr/output_log.txt?dl=0

KSP.log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/um3aqt0ee4rowwe/KSP.log?dl=0

I made sure I removed the one and only planet pack I installed but that Kopernicus error message still shows up all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Jognt said:

Well, I managed to find the base mods needed to show the horrific FPS problem: Stock + Kopernicus (+Dependencies) is all that you need.
Below is a video that shows the same craft and performance in Stock followed by the same craft and performance after installing Kopernicus.

Output log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/sazezeanpntwvj6/Stock_Recorded_OutputLog.txt?dl=0

Simple link because I can't figure out how to embed it in a way that doesn't make it huge: https://youtu.be/znriOxMEExA

Now excuse me while I go make some chicken soup and crawl back under my blanket.

Edit: Considering this thread isn't filled to the brim with people complaining I'm assuming there's an external factor at play which means some people don't experience any problems. If you are experiencing this massive drop in FPS, consider going without Kopernicus or setting RoCSeed = -1 in your persistent.sfs to disable surface features completely until this is resolved.

Yep, your problem is the exact same as mine.

Could it be something to do with hardware, i.e. chipset or GPU? I'm running an Nvidia GPU and Intel i7 if that helps.

Edited by Diddly Feelerino

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
51 minutes ago, Diddly Feelerino said:

Yep, your problem is the exact same as mine.

Could it be something to do with hardware, i.e. chipset or GPU? I'm running an Nvidia GPU and Intel i7 if that helps.

i5 4670k, GTX980, 16GB ram, 512GB 850pro SSD, XonarDX audio.

Honestly I'm guessing most people are running nvidia/intel at the moment. Only the newer builds from the past year or two will have a chance of not running that. (AMD wasn't really a good buy before then)
I doubt it's hardware related. If anything it'd be software.

Though if I'm being honest I'm actually curious whether anyone can confirm this problem does not affect them.
The whole, are people not getting the problem? Or are they not noticing the problem? Similar to how I just dialed down settings like scatter to get decent framerate before I saw others mention the problem here.

@Starwaster for example has a different problem alltogether I think as (s)he is seeing insanely high amounts of features. Whether or not (s)he is also experiencing this 200/350m problem: I don't know.

With regards to ROC numbers, I noted them down while I was testing for both Stock and JNSQ and both default and high quality presets.
For some strange reason, reducing the quality setting will increase the amount of ROCs for both stock and JNSQ. (Though it does reduce quads)

  Quads Features
Stock_Default 116 508
Stock_High 208 253
JNSQ_Default 56 246
JNSQ_High ~110 43

Note that Stock was tested on an actual stock install, so that was with Stock Mun vs JNSQ Mun and different landing sites. For the JNSQ_High quad amount I forgot to reload so it showed 0 instead of the proper number. There were 112 quads loaded during landing, so I assume it was ~10% less had I loaded in already landed.

@Galileo - I was wondering what your thoughts are on the inverse relation of terrain quality and feature amount, and the framerate crash/recovery at the 200/350m mark while ROCs are enabled and Kopernicus is installed.

Edited by Jognt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Jognt Re: very high number of features: When I first reported that I was  on a Rescale 10x. The more the planet is scaled up, the more features, all other considerations being equal. Regarding the issue about performance changing with distance from another vessel, it's just a case of another vessel in proximity to the Kerbal decreasing performance. It's not directly linked to ROCs but when you have multiple things going on in the player's vicinity then performance decreases tend to compound each other. But there's no direct interaction or correlation between the number of vessels and ROCs in the area. They just don't interact that way. (I spoke with one of the devs on that subject after you mentioned it). Now, I do notice a graphical framerate drop when a vessel loads in (or increase when it unloads) but for me it's marginal and doesn't impact performance at all

As far as feature quantity; I was under the impression that it was computed per quad loaded in but if there are fewer of them when there are more quads then maybe that's not the case.

And my gender, since you seem confused, is male.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Starwaster said:

@Jognt Regarding the issue about performance changing with distance from another vessel, it's just a case of another vessel in proximity to the Kerbal decreasing performance.

I know they're not supposed to interact that way, but check that video.. When Kopernicus is installed: They do. (you can even see me writing to the Console "What the o_O" after FPS tanks. The last line before that is that it unpacked the lander)

The video I linked literally shows the same install, location, craft, and save both with and without Kopernicus, with MASSIVE differences in framerate.
It's a <10 minute video with exact time stamps to the most important bits in the video description.

Run it on stock -> It's fine.
Run it on stock + Kopernicus -> it's horrible.

 

15 minutes ago, Starwaster said:

And my gender, since you seem confused, is male.

Cheers. Just wasn't sure.

Edited by Jognt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what exactly happens when vessels unpack? What scripts fire etc? Anything that could clash with Kopernicus (that is known)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Diddly Feelerino said:

So what exactly happens when vessels unpack? What scripts fire etc? Anything that could clash with Kopernicus (that is known)?

I have no clue. Considering the responses I'm guessing nothing should clash in the first place.

At this point I don't think I can test 'deeper' considering the video showing the problem is introduced when Kopernicus is installed.

Edited by Jognt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, Diddly Feelerino said:

So what exactly happens when vessels unpack? What scripts fire etc? Anything that could clash with Kopernicus (that is known)?

Pack() or Unpack() are called for every part on the vessel (which does things like update colliders, joints and rigidbodies and other physics related things) Also, an event is fired OnPartUnpack which is received by any code in the game which is listening for that event. Uhm... quick search of Kopernicus code says it does listen for that event.... but I don't see it doing anything unusual or lag inducing. It replaces the stock buoyancy component with its own version. Something which would occur very quickly. Even if it did cause lag it would be transient and not long lived at all. If there were an error in that process you would see it in the log.

Other than that I don't see Kopernicus interacting with parts during an unpack.

 

Edit: Oh, and PartModules are all initialized during an unpack. 

Edited by Starwaster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, Starwaster said:

Pack() or Unpack() are called for every part on the vessel (which does things like update colliders, joints and rigidbodies and other physics related things) Also, an event is fired OnPartUnpack which is received by any code in the game which is listening for that event. Uhm... quick search of Kopernicus code says it does listen for that event.... but I don't see it doing anything unusual or lag inducing. It replaces the stock buoyancy component with its own version. Something which would occur very quickly. Even if it did cause lag it would be transient and not long lived at all. If there were an error in that process you would see it in the log.

Other than that I don't see Kopernicus interacting with parts during an unpack.

 

Edit: Oh, and PartModules are all initialized during an unpack. 

Partmodules  and buoyancy you say? I’ll see if I can dig deeper in that regard. 

There is a slight drop in FPS on unpack regardless of whether or not Kopernicus is there. It’s this massive constant FPS drop that occurs only with Kopernicus. 

In what file does Kopernicus listen to unpack?

Edited by Jognt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the new ROCs are physical (i.e. can be interacted with, physically), whereas the scatter objects are merely cosmetic, could the sudden deluge of physical objects and colliders be causing the lag? Especially as a craft gets closer to the surface...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.