Galileo

[1.7.x] JNSQ [0.8.1] [28 Sept 2019]

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Galland1998 said:

So i'll ask a silly question... what does TweakChute actually do?  I couldn't find any documentation for it when I was searching yesterday.

Here you go :)

On 6/1/2019 at 6:05 PM, OhioBob said:

Since Sigma's plugin has come up, let me explain what it does.  It fixes what I think is a flaw in the way stock parachutes work.

Parachutes have two deployment modes:  (1) semi-deploy, which is a function of atmospheric pressure, and (2) full deploy, which is a function of height above terrain.  The problem, as I see it, is that parachutes will full deploy when they reach the height threshold regardless of whether or not they have reached the pressure threshold for semi-deployment.  I think this makes no sense; if the air is too thin for parachutes to semi-deploy, they shouldn't full deploy.

In stock KSP this really isn't an issue because there aren't any atmospheres that are so thin that the semi-deploy pressure hasn't been reached before the full deploy altitude has been reached.  (Maybe on some mountain tops on Duna, but I haven't investigated enough to confirm this)  But this "bug" puts a limitation on what planet makers can do with their atmospheres.  If a planet maker wants to give a planet an atmosphere, but one so thin that parachutes won't work, he can't.  Parachutes are going to full deploy when the height threshold is reached regardless on how thin the atmosphere is made.

Sigma's plugin fixes this.  Parachutes will not fully deploy unless the pressure for semi-deployment has also been reached.  Both conditions must be satisfied for full deployment.  In JNSQ, you won't have parachutes popping open 1000 meters above the ground on bodies with very thin atmospheres.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So a quick question (and anyone who is now playing 0.6 version can pipe in):  will I have to start a new game in order to see the 1.7.1 planetary features (like the rock/geyser anomolies?).


Cheers,
Gaultesian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the same rule than the stock game applies so yeah.

 

Another question, will the separate Final frontier ribbons folder work on the previous JNSQ version in 1.7?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an active 0.4 game. Can I just replace with the 0.6 build or will I break my save? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Quoniam Kerman said:

I think the same rule than the stock game applies so yeah.

 

Another question, will the separate Final frontier ribbons folder work on the previous JNSQ version in 1.7?

Yeah it will work. 

 

39 minutes ago, Tyko said:

I have an active 0.4 game. Can I just replace with the 0.6 build or will I break my save? 

It will probably break your save. Templates changed along with a few other things that can cause issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Galileo said:
2 hours ago, Tyko said:

I have an active 0.4 game. Can I just replace with the 0.6 build or will I break my save? 

It will probably break your save. Templates changed along with a few other things that can cause issues.

I backed up my save and gave it a try. It's early in the save and I've only thrown a few sats into orbit around Mun and Minmus. Everything seems to work okay so far except all of my sat's solar panels retracted oddly 

Would you expect the changes to cause unforeseen issues in the future or is it likely that anything that would break would have broken? 

Share this post


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

Everything seems to work okay so far except all of my sat's solar panels retracted oddly

That's probably because we disabled the Kopernicus solar panel module and reverted to stock.  The main purpose of Kopernicus solar panels is to handle multiple stars, and since JNSQ has only one star, we just though there'd be fewer problems going forward using the stock module.
 

24 minutes ago, Tyko said:

Would you expect the changes to cause unforeseen issues in the future or is it likely that anything that would break would have broken? 

If the issues are unforeseen, then how would we know about them?  We never plan that our mods are going to break saves or cause other problems.  But sometimes we make mistakes.  Or something out of our control forces us to make a change.  Or we find a better and more efficient way to do something that improves the game going forward, but breaks something in the present.  There's no way to predict what the future holds.

 

Edited by OhioBob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Loving how Minmus looks, i'm hoping to take some time on the weekend just to probe all of Mun and Minmus' biomes!

I have to say, i hate(d) the title of this mod. Doesn't do it the justice of how well crafted it is, in a way in my head. But trying to describe to my wife what made it good...

From the outside, or even from probably a great deal of the regular community for KSP, how do you explain wanting "a stockalike system but its not stockalike but its high quality but its not over the top for the sake of using every tool". Its KSP, if KSP Was made by better developers.

I did actually end up, out loud, saying to my wife "it just has elements that are hard to explain, i cant put them to words, it has this quality that ... i dont know what to call it" and realized begrudgingly what a well thought out name it is, after all

Edited by Lucius
blabbering on and on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

UPDATE 0.65 "Oh, chute"

is now available and fixes the issue with the chutes. 

 

Edited by Galileo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, OhioBob said:
2 hours ago, Tyko said:

Would you expect the changes to cause unforeseen issues in the future or is it likely that anything that would break would have broken? 

If the issues are unforeseen, then how would we know about them?  We never plan that our mods are going to break saves or cause other problems.  But sometimes we make mistakes.  Or something out of our control forces us to make a change.  Or we find a better and more efficient way to do something that improves the game going forward, but breaks something in the present.  There's no way to predict what the future holds.

Should have been more clear. I meant - "unforeseen by me, a common mortal but maybe something that's painfully obvious to those who have the powers to create solar systems"  :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After downloading 1.5 hours, it breaks on 89%, without possibility to continue.

Could you have a mirror? At least for a last version...

I have 100 Mb/s but it downloads from the github on 350 kB/s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FNAymAE.jpg

Oh, I like this mod. I do, I do.

I suppose the Kerbin textures could be a bit higher resolution, but I kind of like the jaggies. They've got a retro feel to them.

Incidentally, this is the 500-ton monstrosity that put most of that into orbit. I'm thinking of tweaking my ascent guidance program to hold on to the payload fairings a bit longer. They're not needed at that altitude, but it just feels wrong to ditch them before first-stage burnout.

2gQPDI8.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, jefferyharrell said:

Oh, I like this mod. I do, I do.

I suppose the Kerbin textures could be a bit higher resolution, but I kind of like the jaggies. They've got a retro feel to them.

Kerbin is 8k. The jaggies are from the map being compressed when exporting to dds. Not much I can do there as saving in a lossless format would kill your ram usage.

Share this post


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

Kerbin is 8k. The jaggies are from the map being compressed when exporting to dds. Not much I can do there as saving in a lossless format would kill your ram usage.

Please don't interpret what I said as some kind of back-handed, passive-aggressive way of complaining about the texture resolution. I meant what I said: I kind of like the look. Of course you could use higher-res or less-compressed textures, but it's about what's good for the game as a whole. I support that 100%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never thought KSP would be the game that would signal to me “16GB ram is not enough..*”

Are there RAM eating settings that I can drop/lower for JNSQ? They don’t have to be specific to JNSQ, if anyone knows a stock setting with a big impact, I’m all ears.

* to run JNSQ with Airplane Plus, a host of Near Future stuff, and SSPXr. Though I’ve already removed SSPXr IVAs. 

Share this post


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

I never thought KSP would be the game that would signal to me “16GB ram is not enough..*”

Are there RAM eating settings that I can drop/lower for JNSQ? They don’t have to be specific to JNSQ, if anyone knows a stock setting with a big impact, I’m all ears.

* to run JNSQ with Airplane Plus, a host of Near Future stuff, and SSPXr. Though I’ve already removed SSPXr IVAs. 

Have you tried using dx11 or OpenGL?

https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Startup_parameters

Edit: I just ran JNSQ with a full load of visual mods and restock and was under 4 gb with DX11

 

Edited by Galileo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, thanks for adding the additional CelestialBodies.pdf to the download. I was having to calculate the synchronous orbit altitudes myself, but my math kept coming out wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go again, not going to try your 1.7.1 version yet since the game just updated to 1.7.2 and obviously Kopernicus won't work yet.  Not to worry, I've still the 1.7 to play with.

As for saves, well I had only cram tested the DLC previous to your update, so my progress was very minor and quite wonky (lost Jebediah on a Mun landing attempt like an idiot, so I wasn't going to look froward playing on that save anymore.  I'll start anew when everyhting is in order.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Concerning this (and not considering Kopernicus' game patch incompatibility), do you have an idea of how savegame compatible coming JNSQ updates will be?:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The sunflare looks strange, it looks like some weird lighting effect around the flare. Already disabled Ghost, so theyre not ghost. How to get rid of it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Iso-Polaris said:

The sunflare looks strange, it looks like some weird lighting effect around the flare. Already disabled Ghost, so theyre not ghost. How to get rid of it

Not sure what you are talking about. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Galileo, Loving JNSQ a lot...if I was to offer any constructive criticism I think the new sun with the all the lens flare is a bit too JJ Abrams. 

I've googled a bunch of images of the sun from space, so I see what you're going for. That said, one of the things I love about JNSQ is the aim for a toned down (dare I say "realistic'?) look to the planets and I'm not sure the sun flare matches that toned down look.

Thanks for all the hard work.

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.