[1.12.1] JNSQ [0.10.0] [23 Sept 2021]

[4x4cheesecake]

14 minutes ago, curiousepic said:

Kopernicus 1.7.1 breaks planet packs that haven't been updated as well, including JNSQ.

I don't see any issue with JNSQ and the 1.7.1 version of kopernicus and I wouldn't expect any since the kopernicus upgrade 'just' breaks plugins (a .dll file) which depend on kopernicus but the config interface is supposed to be unaffected...and most planet packs use the config interface. One of the plugins which might be affected is "sigma dimensions" which is often used to rescale planets but JNSQ doesn't use it.

What happend to you when you tried JNSQ in 1.7.1 so you think it is broken?

[jefferyharrell]

10 hours ago, OhioBob said:

It is intended for players in seek of something that looks and feels more realistic than the stock game

There are dozens of us! Dozens!

No but seriously, I am that player. JNSQ has revitalized an interest in playing with KSP that had lain dormant for years. Thank you so, so much.

[curiousepic]

9 minutes ago, 4x4cheesecake said:

I don't see any issue with JNSQ and the 1.7.1 version of kopernicus and I wouldn't expect any since the kopernicus upgrade 'just' breaks plugins (a .dll file) which depend on kopernicus but the config interface is supposed to be unaffected...and most planet packs use the config interface. One of the plugins which might be affected is "sigma dimensions" which is often used to rescale planets but JNSQ doesn't use it.

What happend to you when you tried JNSQ in 1.7.1 so you think it is broken?

I see. After updating to Kop 1.7.1, the incompatibility message appeared on the loading screen which spooked me out of loading my save, at which point I checked the Kop thread which seemed to indicate JNSQ might break, and I did as I mentioned.

I struck out my prior message to reduce confusion.

Edited June 9, 2019 by curiousepic

[OhioBob]

10 hours ago, Iso-Polaris said:

I the goal is to " making something that resembles real life ". Then that would be nice to add ice geyser on icy moon or add molten lava on Eve. Realistic and Fun does not have to be mutually exclusive.

And good job on Nara. Does it resembles Sedna?

Ice geysers is a possibility (we actually did that already in GPP).  Eve isn't hot enough for molten rock, unless it's volcanic.  (I actually think the lava sea idea is starting to get old.)  And how much of JNSQ have you explored?  Maybe there is fun stuff out there to find that you just haven't found yet?  And don't forget, JNSQ is only at version 0.4.  It's not finished yet.

(edit)

Regarding Nara, its size and orbit is intended to resemble "Planet 9", though with a smaller semimajor axis so it does take so bloody long to get there.  Appearance-wise, you'd have to ask Galileo.  I don't know if he had any particular inspiration when creating it.
 

Edited June 9, 2019 by OhioBob

[OncaLupe]

Just now, curiousepic said:

I see. After updating to Kop 1.7.1, the incompatibility message appeared on the loading screen which spooked me out of loading my save, at which point I did as I mentioned.

Are you running KSP 1.7.0? If that's the case you do need to stick with Kop 1.7.0-x, as it's version locked to that specific KSP.

[curiousepic]

1 minute ago, OncaLupe said:

Are you running KSP 1.7.0? If that's the case you do need to stick with Kop 1.7.0-x, as it's version locked to that specific KSP.

Yes, as it was my understanding that JNSQ is not yet compatible with it...?

[OncaLupe]

1 minute ago, curiousepic said:

Yes, as it was my understanding that JNSQ is not yet compatible with it...?

JNSQ works fine in 1.7.1, I'm using it myself. It doesn't really care much about the KSP version, it's Kop that's the limiter. However the surface features are not yet implemented in JNSQ, that's coming soon from what I've heard.

[OhioBob]

6 minutes ago, OncaLupe said:

JNSQ works fine in 1.7.1, I'm using it myself.

Some of us has been experiencing severe performance issues with Kopernicus/JNSQ in version 1.7.1.  I don't recommend 1.7.1 until we can identify and fix the problem.  If you must use 1.7.1 and are experiencing performance issues, then I recommend you turn off terrain scatters in your game's graphic settings.

 

Edited June 9, 2019 by OhioBob

[Jognt]

10 hours ago, OhioBob said:

One of the primary goals of JNSQ was to be more scientifically accurate.  It is intended for players in seek of something that looks and feels more realistic than the stock game, but without scaling all the way up to RSS.  If the moons look like those in RSS, then we've come close to achieving our goal of making something that resembles real life.  While some of the "difficulty points" of stock have been removed, there are other things that have been made more difficult.  We don't want JNSQ to be a carbon copy of stock.  Been there, done that.

If what I've described doesn't float your boat, then JNSQ may not be the mod for you.

As long as you keep in mind that it's enjoyable, it's all good. Just don't go too far into the Realism hole. I spent a LOT of time in Elite: Dangerous for example, only to sigh and come to the conclusion "Yep.. Same as all the other planets I've found and landed on." (though the sights.. oh man, the SIGHTS!)

Oh, and don't go so far into Realism that you'd remove time warp. plz don't.

[curiousepic]

FYI, in trying a reinstall to get me out of my messy state, the JNSQ installer doesn't seem to let me select an install location, it just starts installing to the location I selected when I installed the first time (I'm just going to do a manual instead for now).

Edited June 9, 2019 by curiousepic

[jefferyharrell]

13 hours ago, Iso-Polaris said:

Have you tried SSTU, there's loads of historical parts too, but a bit more performance friendly

I'm not impressed by SSTU, personally. I recognize and admire the amount of work that's gone into it, but the aesthetics just don't fit into the game as I like to play it. The models are excellent but excessively detailed, and all that detail just turns into high-frequency noise on my screen (which KSP, bless it, is incapable of antialiasing). I also find the over-use of metallic shaders to be cloying. KSP wants a very careful balance between realistic and cartoonish. Too much in either direction and it all falls apart.

All that being said, I'm sure it's a fine mod. It's just not my cup of tea.

I'm very sorry that this has gone so wildly off-topic.

[StarStreak2109]

17 hours ago, Spike88 said:

How are you finding everything with BDB? I tried the Mercury-Redstone rocket and was only able to get to 85KM, but I don't know if this was my piloting or if the rocket needed to be buffed a little bit.

For Mercury-Redstone, you need to empty the upper tank to about 50% to have a proper TWR. I use MechJeb with a 65% ascent profile and easily get to about 90km apoapsis, which should be roughly in line with the prototype.

[Galileo]

15 hours ago, Iso-Polaris said:

 

With features from kopernicus, you can create interesting ground elements like lava seas and floating rocks, or at least making each planets and moons "distinctive and unique”

There are other mods that do that. JNSQ will not be one of them.

15 hours ago, Iso-Polaris said:

But there's a Nay, a lot of planets and moon from JNSQ look pretty much the same, just like those boring moons in RSS.

I’ll take that as a great compliment. 

JNSQ isn’t about taking advantage of everything Kopernicus has to offer. I’m well aware of what it can and can’t do, but it’s not for me. I wanted a realistic looking system, that also behaves like a real system and unfortunately, that means things are “boring” (RSS). 

If you want sci fi and other unique and diverse, possibly unrealistic things, then this pack is not meant for you.

Some people enjoy a challenge, and you can argue that RSS is probably one of the most popular mods. JNSQ wanted to give people the same experience, with a fresh aesthetic,  but without the use of part scaling mods. That’s it. Anything beyond that is beyond our scope. 

Ultimately, JNSQ is what it is, and it’s definitely not for everyone.

KSP (and any planet pack) is one of the only games I have played where you decide how much fun you have. I can’t control if you don’t like or don’t have fun with JNSQ. That’s not for me to do. If you don’t like, don’t use it, or play stock, or find another pack that suits your needs.  

Another thing for anyone that reads this, unlike GPP, we aren’t taking suggestions unless it’s something within reason, and fits within the scope of JNSQ, and we have the final say. This may not be popular with some, and that’s fine. We will never make everyone happy. That’s not our goal. Again, that’s what makes KSP and this modding community so great; you have options and they are all free (except DLC). 

So enjoy the mod for what it is, because that’s all it ever will be. 

3 hours ago, Jognt said:

“Yep.. Same as all the other planets I've found and landed on." 

KSP in a nutshell. No escaping that. Breaking Ground is a stepping stone in the right direction, but JNSQ will only have what Squad has provided. So even those will become boring and pointless at some point.

for some people, the realism and scientific aspects of it are the fun part (RSS users). 

That’s what we like and enjoy, so that’s what we did just in a smaller scale so that we could use stock parts.

Edited June 9, 2019 by Galileo

[Jognt]

9 minutes ago, Galileo said:

So enjoy the mod for what it is, because that’s all it ever will be. 

KSP in a nutshell. No escaping that. Breaking Ground is a stepping stone in the right direction, but JNSQ will only have what Squad has provided. So even those will become boring and pointless at some point.

for some people, the realism and scientific aspects of it are the fun part (RSS users). 

That’s what we like and enjoy, so that’s what we did just in a smaller scale so that we could use stock parts.

Note that I was referring to Elite: Dangerous with that "Yup, looks the same" remark.

With regards to "So enjoy the mod for what it is, because that’s all it ever will be." - That's how it should be. The best mods (and games!) are those that stick to the ideal/vision of the creators and don't try to cater to everyone's needs/desires.

[Galileo]

3 minutes ago, Jognt said:

Note that I was referring to Elite: Dangerous with that "Yup, looks the same" remark.

With regards to "So enjoy the mod for what it is, because that’s all it ever will be." - That's how it should be. The best mods (and games!) are those that stick to the ideal/vision of the creators and don't try to cater to everyone's needs/desires.

Oh I know. I just used it as a way to set an expectation for others

Edited June 9, 2019 by Galileo

[Zenteck]

I for one am chomping at the bit to get into JNSQ, I just don't wanna start without all the features of Breaking Ground. Hmm, might just dive in anyway, and try that hack when the the update's done.

It was a rescale mod that pulled me back into KSP before, that one was 6.4 scale, but it turned out a little overkill for me. This looks like the sweet spot.

[cantab]

On 6/8/2019 at 6:14 PM, OhioBob said:

We therefore increased their thrust and mass to compensate.  The LV-TX87 has had its thrust and mass increased 25% to 500 kN and 2.5 t, and the LV-T91 has been increased 20% to 150 kN and 1.2 t.

Can I suggest you also scale the cost? I remember from my last career the Bobcat is already a good value first stage engine, lots of thrust per dollar and they nicely cluster under larger fuel tanks for medium-sized launchers. This will only become even more prominent with a thrust increase.

[dxeh]

follwing this!

 

[Galileo]

5 hours ago, Zenteck said:

I for one am chomping at the bit to get into JNSQ, I just don't wanna start without all the features of Breaking Ground. Hmm, might just dive in anyway, and try that hack when the the update's done.

It was a rescale mod that pulled me back into KSP before, that one was 6.4 scale, but it turned out a little overkill for me. This looks like the sweet spot.

I would still wait a bit, while myself, the Kopernicus dev, and a few others work out what is causing a performance hit in the latest release.

Edited June 10, 2019 by Galileo

[Ratwerke_Actual]

Currently doing a 'casual' Hard Mode, No Revert/or Quicksave, Perma-death Career Mode.

Early chapters are suborbital science/tourist grinds for stacks of cash.

@JadeOfMaar , Am I correct in understanding this is your sunflare? It is beautiful.

 

[Jeb2]

Looks like a blast, gonna try it out when i can!

[OhioBob]

11 hours ago, cantab said:

Can I suggest you also scale the cost? I remember from my last career the Bobcat is already a good value first stage engine, lots of thrust per dollar and they nicely cluster under larger fuel tanks for medium-sized launchers. This will only become even more prominent with a thrust increase.

I agree.  I'm not sure why I didn't increase the cost the first time.  I've changed it so cost, mass and thrust all increase by the same factor.

[Iso-Polaris]

13 hours ago, Galileo said:

Another thing for anyone that reads this, unlike GPP, we aren’t taking suggestions unless it’s something within reason, and fits within the scope of JNSQ, and we have the final say.

So are there plans to add other star systems into JNSQ in the future updates, like GPP did. Because that would certainly put "realism" in a whole new level.

[theJesuit]

Has the Minmusic issue been resolved yet?  Another suggestion is that you simply increase the SOI of Kerbin.   The minmus could be even further out.

But then, I'm sure youve consider it.

Peace.

[Galileo]

3 hours ago, Iso-Polaris said:

So are there plans to add other star systems into JNSQ in the future updates, like GPP did. Because that would certainly put "realism" in a whole new level.

No, we will not be adding any other star systems. 

There are 30 bodies here and I can guarantee that 99% of users will never make it to half of them. We won’t waste our time developing another system for no reason.

Edited June 10, 2019 by Galileo