Galileo

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

Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, Jognt said:

JNSQ is bundled with Rational Realistic Resources (mod) that is basically a remake of the entire resource system.

Apparently, it's Realistic Rational Resources ;) ("realistic" was the name up to version 0.8)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, infinite_monkey said:

Apparently, it's Realistic Rational Resources ;) ("realistic" was the name up to version 0.8)

Oh right, I got my R's mixed up. Thank god I don't do Metric/Imperial conversions at NASA :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Jognt said:

JNSQ is bundled with Rational Realistic Resources (mod) that is basically a remake of the entire resource system. I've read a few pages back that the bundled version is several commits behind the 'standalone' version though, so maybe updating RR from it's own repo will fix it?

Ah!  That appears to have solved the problem.

  • With current RR (0.8.5) as shipping in JNSQ... the bug happens.
  • With the latest release (0.8.6) of RR from its git repo... the bug happens.
  • Just cloning the RR repo itself to get every commit including recent days... bug goes away!  :)

 

So, all cleared up for me, though it required cloning a git repo, which means any user who's not a techie might not know how to do that.  Hopefully the next release of JNSQ will have an updated RR in it.

Share this post


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

Ah!  That appears to have solved the problem.

  • With current RR (0.8.5) as shipping in JNSQ... the bug happens.
  • With the latest release (0.8.6) of RR from its git repo... the bug happens.
  • Just cloning the RR repo itself to get every commit including recent days... bug goes away!  :)

 

So, all cleared up for me, though it required cloning a git repo, which means any user who's not a techie might not know how to do that.  Hopefully the next release of JNSQ will have an updated RR in it.

... /me postpones reinstalling RR

Thanks for the feedback :)

Pinging @JadeOfMaar for relevance.

Edited by Jognt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, who do I complain to about JNSQ?

It runs buttery smooth at the "full" 60fps (my display's limit) at full detail settings and with all supported & recommended mods. Granted, I've not put in audio muffler (a sometimes lag inducer) or any KK stuff and no extra part mods, etc, but usually scatterer and eve shave off a handful or so FPS right out of the gate. The settings look gorgeous, so I don't think I'm just "running on low."

My generic +OPM install is hovering around 37-45fps, but I may be cranking too many settings at once there. I'll see what might be replicated as far as scatterer config or main game settings (which will actually be the same as JNSQ, since I'm using gamedata switcher) but I'm curious to see how JNSQ holds up once I start installing more mods. :)

It's looking very fun so far. I can't wait to explore it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Beetlecat said:

So, who do I complain to about JNSQ?

It runs buttery smooth at the "full" 60fps (my display's limit) at full detail settings and with all supported & recommended mods. Granted, I've not put in audio muffler (a sometimes lag inducer) or any KK stuff and no extra part mods, etc, but usually scatterer and eve shave off a handful or so FPS right out of the gate. The settings look gorgeous, so I don't think I'm just "running on low."

My generic +OPM install is hovering around 37-45fps, but I may be cranking too many settings at once there. I'll see what might be replicated as far as scatterer config or main game settings (which will actually be the same as JNSQ, since I'm using gamedata switcher) but I'm curious to see how JNSQ holds up once I start installing more mods. :)

It's looking very fun so far. I can't wait to explore it.

The performance will be even better once Kopernicus updates with its new fixes ;) 

Share this post


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

So, who do I complain to about JNSQ?

It runs buttery smooth at the "full" 60fps (my display's limit) at full detail settings and with all supported & recommended mods. Granted, I've not put in audio muffler (a sometimes lag inducer) or any KK stuff and no extra part mods, etc, but usually scatterer and eve shave off a handful or so FPS right out of the gate. The settings look gorgeous, so I don't think I'm just "running on low."

My generic +OPM install is hovering around 37-45fps, but I may be cranking too many settings at once there. I'll see what might be replicated as far as scatterer config or main game settings (which will actually be the same as JNSQ, since I'm using gamedata switcher) but I'm curious to see how JNSQ holds up once I start installing more mods. :)

It's looking very fun so far. I can't wait to explore it.

Try the latest patch I posted in the Kopernicus thread. I’ve tested it on my JNSQ install and confirmed no gas giants are targeted by it so it should alleviate *that* problem for the time being. 

Since your CPU is a lot beefier than mine there’s a good chance it’s not influenced as much while still causing slowdown. 

Edit: you can also check GPU/CPU usage to see if you’re bottlenecking somewhere, but that’s off topic for here I think :) 

Edited by Jognt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jognt said:

Try the latest patch I posted in the Kopernicus thread. I’ve tested it on my JNSQ install and confirmed no gas giants are targeted by it so it should alleviate *that* problem for the time being. 

Since your CPU is a lot beefier than mine there’s a good chance it’s not influenced as much while still causing slowdown. 

I still have yet to run those particular lag/stutter tests -- I'll plop a craft onto the Mun to see if I can replicate that behavior with current JNSQ vs. patched(ocean fix) behavior and what it does with my better performance in JNSQ in general.

I'm also keen to see if I can duplicate some of those fixes/settings back in "vanilla" world.

Share this post


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

I still have yet to run those particular lag/stutter tests -- I'll plop a craft onto the Mun to see if I can replicate that behavior with current JNSQ vs. patched(ocean fix) behavior and what it does with my better performance in JNSQ in general.

I'm also keen to see if I can duplicate some of those fixes/settings back in "vanilla" world.

Considering the part of the code that causes it I don’t think it’s possible to not be affected. (When using Kopernicus 1.7.3-1 on 1.7.3)

Whether or not you notice it depends on the system and parts in the scene, but the patch should improve performance in those instances for everyone. 

So you don’t really need to test anymore now that it’s been confirmed to be within Kopernicus itself :) (but you’re free to compare if you want)

Edited by Jognt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a bizarre problem.

I'm running JNSQ on KSP 1.7.0.  It's not the latest version of JNSQ because Minmus moved, and the planet numbers changed, and other save game breaking stuff.  So, not quite the latest and greatest.

I'm deep into a career game, flying a Mun lander up from the surface to the station in a 50 km orbit.  It gets there, but I've got a lot less propellent less than expected.

Next time I go down to the Mun's surface, the Kerbal's jetpack doesn't work.  Or, rather, it's working, but it doesn't have enough thrust to get off the surface.  And the Kerbal can't jump very high, either.  The Mun appears to have 1G surface gravity.

Things that were in orbit are still in orbit.  Orbital velocities are what you would expect for the Mun in JNSQ.

The gravity changed very recently.  Everything has been fine up until now.  Anyone have any idea what could have caused this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have any mods that add items or resources to Kerbals. For example any life support mod, or KIS/KAS? They can make the Kerbals heavier which will produce the results you describe, especially if they have a bug and give the Kerbal excessive resources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, cantab said:

Do you have any mods that add items or resources to Kerbals. For example any life support mod, or KIS/KAS? They can make the Kerbals heavier which will produce the results you describe, especially if they have a bug and give the Kerbal excessive resources.

That's possible.  I've also noticed it's related to the saved game, not the installation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never mind.  User error.  I had enough stuff in the Kerbal's inventory to keep him solidly on the ground. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm... I've run into a problem.  (I'm guessing it's Rational Resources doing this?)

Have my miner / refiner on Minmus, and I just discovered that... stock options are missing.  It still has LFO as an option... but there's no option for "just LF" or "just oxidizer", nor is there an option for monopropellant.

This is a problem, since I'm relying on this to resupply not only LFO-powered ships, but also LV-N ships running on LF only.  Really need the options for liquid fuel and oxidizer independent of each other, plus a monoprop option.

(It also adds a whole bunch of other options for things like "liquid ammonia" and so on and so forth, which I have no use for because I'm just playing with stock resource types.)

Is it by design that LF, O, and monoprop are no longer there?

[EDIT] ...Oh, my bad, apparently it is.  Found the relevant configs, just deleted them and the ISRU is back to normal.

Kinda curious about the design choice, though-- is it intentional that KSC should be the only place that can supply monopropellant?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Snark Hmm? I go out of my way to provide separate options for LF and OX. However, there never was, and there shouldn't be a config that changes any of Squad's tanks apart from clones of the bread tanks and the Ore tanks. You must mean the Convert-O-Tron options. I do remove those, actually. Create a folder in GameData and name it RationalResourcesEasy to stop that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Snark It is by design that the Ore-consuming converter options are nearly gone. Ore is omnipotent, and I am among those seasoned players who are fairly unhappy about that.

It's not my intent that the KSC is the only place you can get MonoPropellant. It's typically related to Hydrazine which is composed of Nitrogen and Hydrogen. Every atmosphere has Nitrogen in them (also Minmus' surface has it) and you can get Hydrogen from Hydrates or Water which can be drilled up everywhere so you'd be surprised.

LiquidFuel, not MonoPropellant (as a propellant) is technically what is shoved out the door by Rational Resources because it's a very Carbon-heavy resource and is hard to come by in the depths of the solar system, and it's inferior to Hydrogen (for Hydrolox) and Methane with regards to availability for mining, and performance in an engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JadeOfMaar said:

It's not my intent that the KSC is the only place you can get MonoPropellant. It's typically related to Hydrazine which is composed of Nitrogen and Hydrogen. Every atmosphere has Nitrogen in them (also Minmus' surface has it) and you can get Hydrogen from Hydrates or Water which can be drilled up everywhere so you'd be surprised.

Fair 'nuff.  Perhaps I should have read the fine print on the label for RR, more.  I wasn't looking to change the core dynamics of the game or add complex chemical pathways with umpteen different resources-- I've played with mods like that before (did an MKS career), and though it was impressive and I'm sure lots of people like it, it's really not for me, mainly because it turned KSP into a logistics game and I want it to be a rocket-ship game.

(Out of curiosity... how does one make monopropellant, then?  "related to hydrazine" doesn't help me in gameplay terms.  Is there some other converter part that makes it?  Because the Convert-O-Tron can't, and that's the only part in the game that I know of that has any ability to convert one resource to another.)

I'd just been assuming that RR was doing things like adjusting what stuff is in which locations so that it's harder to find a good ore patch, that sort of thing-- I could be totally on board with that, because ore that's simply harder to get to provides a challenge (which I like)... but more importantly, the challenge is about building and flying spacecraft, i.e. it's a rocket-building thing, which is why I'm interested in it.

If the goal of RR is to make a more complex and interconnected set of many different resource types such that it's not possible to fill a space program's basic needs (LF, O, monoprop) without getting several different types of resources from different places and them minding them through a complex set of reactions... nothing wrong with that, of course.  :)

It's just that it wasn't at all what I was expecting, because the blurb about RR in the OP of this thread doesn't say anything at all about that:

On 5/30/2019 at 10:58 AM, Galileo said:

JNSQ introduces and bundles a new utility mod that depends on the Community Resource Pack and makes Ore even more scarce and challenging than GPP does. This mod is appropriately called Rational Resources, whose purpose is to purge the random resource configurations generated by CRP, grant increased compatibility between planet packs and mods that use certain resources, and encourage the use of mods that use advanced resources.

^ The above didn't give me a hint that it's totally rejiggering the resource system.  Here are the things that it actually says about it, and how I interpreted them:

  • ...makes Ore even more scarce and challenging...  "Oh, okay. It means that ore will be harder to find, maybe on fewer bodies or in harder-to-get-to locations."
  • ...purge the random resource configurations...  "Ah, I see.  'Random configurations', that's another reference to the distribution of ore.  Clearly it's simply about changing ore distribution to something more 'realistic'."
  • ...grant increased compatibility between planet packs and mods that use certain resources, and encourage the use of mods that use advanced resources... "Sure, that makes sense.  It's saying that if you're one of those people who likes a fancy resources setup with umpteen different resources and a complex logistics chain, then they've got that aspect of compatibility covered.  Good for them.  Of course, I'm not one of those people and I'm not running any of those mods that do the umpteen-resources thing, so this won't affect me."

Perhaps worth maybe rewording the blurb a bit, just so it's clearer to folks what they're getting?  e.g. something that says "RR completely replaces the resources system, and will require mining multiple resources and a custom logistics chain to make needed supplies, rather than just Ore for everything."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Snark Ahhh. Thanks for spotting that huge discrepancy. I've seen another instance of someone being unhappy about the convert-o-tron dealings. For the next update I'll not remove those options then, and make a fitting blurb adjustment. I've been thinking of adding or sifting a few things into Extras and not having them active by default anymore.

No, there's no other converter that makes MonoPropellant from Ore. But for now the stock converter options are restored by creating GameData/RationalResourcesEasy/ for the "easy mode." That feature has been available from the start.

As is setup, MonoPropellant can be made from Ammonia (see "MonoPropellant B" converter) or can be made from Nitrogen and Hydrogen (see "MonoPropellant A" converter). Nitrogen is in every solid world's atmosphere, and Hydrogen is in Hydrates or Water which are available everywhere. The audience I targeted is indeed at least somewhat on the "logistics" side of the game.

Thanks for the feedback. It is golden. :) I must confess I've grown out of touch (again?) with the concept of simply playing KSP. Messing with mods is nearly all I do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JadeOfMaar said:

No, there's no other converter that makes MonoPropellant from Ore. But for now the stock converter options are restored by creating GameData/RationalResourcesEasy/ for the "easy mode." That feature has been available from the start.

Thanks, I'll give that a whirl!

Perhaps worth including a "readme" file in the root folder of RationalResources that explains this fact?  "Here's what RR does, here's what the implications are for gameplay compared with stock, and here's what you can do to customize".

1 hour ago, JadeOfMaar said:

As is setup, MonoPropellant can be made from Ammonia (see "MonoPropellant B" converter) or can be made from Nitrogen and Hydrogen (see "MonoPropellant A" converter). Nitrogen is in every solid world's atmosphere, and Hydrogen is in Hydrates or Water which are available everywhere. The audience I targeted is indeed at least somewhat on the "logistics" side of the game.

Not sure what this "MonoPropellant A" and "MonoPropellant B" converter is that you're talking about?

There's no converter like that on the ISRU-- just LqdAmmonia, Kerolox, Hydrolox, Methalox, CO2 Splitter, and Hydrates Splitter.

Unless you're talking about some other part?  If so, where's it located?  I sure don't see any other resource-converter parts in the "Utility" category, other than the stock big and little Convert-O-Trons.

 

[EDIT]  Okay, I just now tried running after creating a "RationalResourcesEasy" folder in GameData... doesn't appear to do anything, I'm still not seeing ISRU acting like it usually does.  As far as I can tell, having RationalResourcesEasy present doesn't actually do anything at all, at least not on my installation.  I'll just go back to manually deleting the files that tweak the Convert-O-Tron.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JadeOfMaar said:

LiquidFuel, not MonoPropellant (as a propellant) is technically what is shoved out the door by Rational Resources because it's a very Carbon-heavy resource and is hard to come by in the depths of the solar system, and it's inferior to Hydrogen (for Hydrolox) and Methane with regards to availability for mining, and performance in an engine.

Wait... does this mean that I'm only going to find Ore in the inner solar system?  i.e. it's completely deliberately excluded from the outer solar system?  (So far I've only gotten to Mun and Minmus in this career, Duna comes next.)

I've got this whole plot line mapped out in my head, involving exploring the outer solar system and mining for resources to fuel that... but I'm only willing to play with stock Ore, and if that plan is doomed from the get-go I need to rethink my career plans.  I'd hate to spend dozens of hours setting up an extensive resource-scanning probe program to map out "where's the ore" and then discover there's nothing at all...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Snark said:

Wait... does this mean that I'm only going to find Ore in the inner solar system?  i.e. it's completely deliberately excluded from the outer solar system?  (So far I've only gotten to Mun and Minmus in this career, Duna comes next.)

I've got this whole plot line mapped out in my head, involving exploring the outer solar system and mining for resources to fuel that... but I'm only willing to play with stock Ore, and if that plan is doomed from the get-go I need to rethink my career plans.  I'd hate to spend dozens of hours setting up an extensive resource-scanning probe program to map out "where's the ore" and then discover there's nothing at all...

 

If -like me- you were looking for bigger planets for bigger rockets while still keeping fuelmanagement simple like stock, you can remove RR. JNSQ works fine and Ore is returned. No fancy rethinking of how it’s distributed sadly though.

(Reading your comments is like skipping back to when I found out the exact same thing :D)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Snark said:

Wait... does this mean that I'm only going to find Ore in the inner solar system?  i.e. it's completely deliberately excluded from the outer solar system?  (So far I've only gotten to Mun and Minmus in this career, Duna comes next.)

Absolutely not the case. :D It would be stupid to make Ore completely not appear. It will still be present on every planet, just not in every biome on each. I respected at least that much. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/21/2019 at 11:44 PM, Galileo said:

Consider it done. Thank you for your time and effort!! It’s much appreciated and I know of a few streamers that will be happy to hear the PBC is supported now. 

Edit: I think the spacedock link you posted to download your mod is not working, unfortunately. 

Hey so just a heads up I've now updated the JNSQ PBC Rebalance to use Module Manager patches instead of full replacement configs. It's much cleaner now and more compatible than ever. (Just thought I'd mention it, I'm assuming based on @JadeOfMaar's post in my thread that you guys were waiting for me to change that to put it up in the OP.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@JadeOfMaar, I have to say that I completely understand where @Snark is coming from.  When Rational Resources was first added to JNSQ, I thought all it was going to do was to distribute resources in a semi-realistic way, where the abundance of certain resources depends on the type of celestial body (rock vs. ice, etc.).  But it seems it has grown into much more.  To be honest, I don't even understand what RR is anymore.  But since I don't use any resource mods anyway, I just play without RR.  I agree that the explanation at the beginning of the thread can use an update.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...So, I happened to find a monolith on Kerbin (not the one by KSC).  It doesn't seem to be "active", though (e.g. no tech granted, etc.)  I'm guessing it's just there for window dressing?

A suggestion:  Since it looks as though this is a non-random monolith that's deliberately placed in a specific location (and I'm guessing there may be others?) ... perhaps add a new biome to the Kerbin map, "Kerbin Monoliths"?  It would be a very tiny biome, just a very small radius around each of the fixed monoliths (excluding the one at KSC).

I think this would be nifty for a few reasons:

  • Should be pretty simple to implement
  • Provides the player with a little "reward" for finding the monolith ("hey, found a new biome, cool!").  Bragging rights, a few extra gatherable science points.
  • You could probably have some fun with the science result descriptions.  :)
  • Doesn't unbalance the game-- since it's on Kerbin, the science values are pretty small, so it's only just a few extra science points.

Seems like a lot of player appeal for a fairly modest investment of time.

In a similar vein:  I happened to notice that there's a humongous mountain not far from Woomerang-- it doesn't look like all that much until you get close, then you realize it's well over 10 km high.  However, it appears to just be "Kerbin Mountains", in terms of biome.  It's a particularly hard place to land:  high enough altitude to make landing a plane tricky, plus it's a fairly small target.  Since finding the mountain is a minor geography achievement, and landing atop it takes some effort and skill... how about another micro-biome, as described above?  "Kerbin Peaks", or something like that.  Would be tiny, would only apply to the very top of the highest mountains.  Same rationale as the monolith one above.

(I notice that the "micro-biomes" around stock KSC, like "Runway" and so forth, only apply when one is landed-- being in the air over them still counts as "Shores" or whatever.  If that's something that's simple to do with config, might be a good touch for the suggested micro-biomes above.  i.e. simply flying (or orbiting, for that matter) over a super-high peak or a monolith wouldn't count, one has to land there.)

Thoughts?

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.