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

[Galileo]

29 minutes ago, theJesuit said:

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.

We did decide. We decided to leave Minmus exactly where we had it. Reason being is playability. We were going to move it into an orbit that sat inside of Mün, however, no matter where it’s placed Minmus,  Mün is always the first body to come up in contracts and there is no adjusting that. This disrupts early career and we wanted to avoid that. So, with that being the case, we decided to take some creative liberty and keep Minmus where it’s at, although it’s not in a realistic/stable orbit. 

Edited June 10, 2019 by Galileo

[Stone Blue]

2 hours ago, Galileo said:

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.

So, I am a totally inexperieced planet pack user... mostly due to potato computer...
THAT having been said, is/would JNSQ be compatable/useable with any interstellar packs? ... does it depend on if those packs not only add stuff *outside* the Kerbol, but if they change the "local" system? ... ie as long as they only add stuff *outside* the local system, might they be ok with JNSQ? vOv

Edited June 10, 2019 by Stone Blue

[Galileo]

19 minutes ago, Stone Blue said:

So, I am a totally inexperieced planet pack user... mostly due to potato computer...
THAT having been said, is/would JNSQ be compatable/useable with any interstellar packs? ... does it depend on if those packs not only add stuff *outside* the Kerbol, but if they change the "local" system? ... ie as long as they only add stuff *outside* the local system, might they be ok with JNSQ? vOv

Probably not due to JNSQs scale 

[OhioBob]

13 hours ago, theJesuit said:

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.

Yes, the situation has been resolved.  I posted a patch for those who want to implement the change now rather than wait for the next release:

With Principia installed and Minmus in its current orbit, Minmus is ripped from its orbit by the Sun's gravitation.  Moving it farther out will only make the situation worse.  And I don't think changing the SOI will have any effect on it because, as I understand it, Principia doesn't care about SOI, as it models gravitation in a more complex and realistic way.  I found that moving Minmus in (from about 181 Mm to 147 Mm) fixes the problem with the Sun wanting to pull it from its orbit, but now Mun's gravitation perturbs Minmus into a very chaotic orbit.  Eventually Minmus gets ejected out of the system.  The answer to stabilizing Minmus' orbit for Principia users is to move Minmus' orbit inside that of Mun.  But as Galileo explained, that makes to order of contracts feel a bit out of sequence.  So we've decided to move Minmus inside Mun only if Principia is installed.  For other players, Minmus stays outside Mun, though we are moving it to the smaller 147 Mm orbit.
 

Edited June 11, 2019 by OhioBob

[jmburbach]

What is the expected memory footprint with this mod? I am seeing 11-12 GB at the main menu... 

[Guest]

Have you tried making its orbit much more inclined, and locking it into some kind of resonance with the Mun? If it never actually came near the Mun, it could possibly be stable at 147Mm. Of course, that might come at a price of a near-polar orbit.

[OhioBob]

1 hour ago, Stone Blue said:

So, I am a totally inexperieced planet pack user... mostly due to potato computer...
THAT having been said, is/would JNSQ be compatable/useable with any interstellar packs? ... does it depend on if those packs not only add stuff *outside* the Kerbol, but if they change the "local" system? ... ie as long as they only add stuff *outside* the local system, might they be ok with JNSQ? vOv

Since JNSQ is natively 1/4 real scale, it will not work with any other planets packs unless they too are designed around the same scale.  And to my knowledge, none are (at least not yet).  So JNSQ is designed to be used by itself.

It is possible that other planet packs can be resized to fit JNSQ (or JNSQ resized to fit other planet packs) using Sigma Dimensions.  However, it cannot be done in the normal way using the global resize and rescale factors.  You would have to use planet specific changes to target only the celestial bodies that you want to resize.  This is outside the scope of what we plan to do with JNSQ, so will we provide no technical support for it.  Feel free to experiment, but you're on you own.

5 minutes ago, Dragon01 said:

Have you tried making its orbit much more inclined, and locking it into some kind of resonance with the Mun? If it never actually came near the Mun, it could possibly be stable at 147Mm. Of course, that might come at a price of a near-polar orbit.

I did not experiment with a high inclination orbit, but that is not something I would be interested in even if it worked.  Minmus' orbit can also be stabilized by making it retrograde, but that too is something I wasn't interested in.  High inclinations and retrograde orbits just seem too contrived to me.  My preferred method is the one that's we're using.

[Guest]

Minmus is notorious for its inclined orbit anyway. Maybe the necessary inclination won't even be that high, though probably more than 45 degrees. I'd say, it'd make for an interesting challenge. 

Alternatively, try a highly eccentric orbit, in resonance with the Mun. Also somewhat contrived, probably more so than high inclination, but a rendezvous with that could prove interesting, as well. TBH, I feel like it'd be better to have the system be consistent whether Principia is installed or not.

[OhioBob]

50 minutes ago, Dragon01 said:

Minmus is notorious for its inclined orbit anyway. Maybe the necessary inclination won't even be that high, though probably more than 45 degrees. I'd say, it'd make for an interesting challenge. 

Alternatively, try a highly eccentric orbit, in resonance with the Mun. Also somewhat contrived, probably more so than high inclination, but a rendezvous with that could prove interesting, as well. TBH, I feel like it'd be better to have the system be consistent whether Principia is installed or not.

You can always make your own config to overwrite whatever we do to set it up as you want it.

If I wanted to make the system realistic and same for everybody, I'd delete Minmus altogether. But I don't see that as an option.

I'm reasonable confident that Principia users are a small minority.  Making the system work for them is a courtesy.  I'm not going to do something that affects everybody else just so Principia works for a few.

 

Edited June 10, 2019 by OhioBob

[Jognt]

4 minutes ago, OhioBob said:

If I wanted to make the system realistic and same for everybody, I'd delete Minmus altogether. But I don't see that as an option.

It's too bad some jokes don't work in english.. ( "Min" means "Minus" in Dutch, so I giggled about "min minmus" or Minus MinusMus.. I need to go grab coffee don't I?)

Edited June 10, 2019 by Jognt

[sturmhauke]

2 hours ago, OhioBob said:

High inclinations and retrograde orbits just seem too contrived to me.

You are of course free to make your mod work as you see fit, but I don't understand this argument. Triton orbits Neptune in the retrograde direction, Pluto has a relatively high inclination of 17 degrees, and some exoplanets are known to have retrograde orbits as well. The universe is weird.

[Guest]

That was my thought, as well. There's nothing preventing a small body like Minmus being captured into a strange orbit. Granted, there are somewhat long odds of this happening to an inner planet that already has a moon so large it's nearly a binary, but it's a big universe. The Pluto-Charon systems has a bunch of extra moonlets, so this sort of thing can work and be stable.

Edited June 10, 2019 by Guest

[OhioBob]

22 minutes ago, sturmhauke said:

You are of course free to make your mod work as you see fit, but I don't understand this argument. Triton orbits Neptune in the retrograde direction, Pluto has a relatively high inclination of 17 degrees, and some exoplanets are known to have retrograde orbits as well. The universe is weird.

And we've included orbits like that elsewhere.  I don't want to do it with Minmus.

[JadeOfMaar]

15 hours ago, Ratwerke_Actual said:

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.

 

Yes, that's mine. An exclusive new Sunflare Of Maar: Esther. It will be usable without Scatterer and in place of the current Plain Jane yellow flare(s).

3 hours ago, jmburbach said:

What is the expected memory footprint with this mod? I am seeing 11-12 GB at the main menu... 

You are correct. That's what I get (the textures are nearly all 8K), and that's with a few mods on the side. But the performance is miraculously as good as, if not better than stock. I couldn't run visual mods anymore and I hated them. But fully loaded on JNSQ it all runs smoothly and made me return to enjoying having visual mods installed.

5 hours ago, Stone Blue said:

So, I am a totally inexperieced planet pack user... mostly due to potato computer...
THAT having been said, is/would JNSQ be compatable/useable with any interstellar packs? ... does it depend on if those packs not only add stuff *outside* the Kerbol, but if they change the "local" system? ... ie as long as they only add stuff *outside* the local system, might they be ok with JNSQ? vOv

I would say no, for the same reason @Galileo gave. JNSQ is not or should not be compatible with any stock scale planet mods. Not only does JNSQ have as many bodies as GPP, it has them all at 2.7x the normal size. Your favorite remote star system mod would look like TRAPPIST-1 (everything becomes uncomfortably small) and would be uncomfortably close to the JNSQ system.... or even inside it.

Edited June 10, 2019 by JadeOfMaar

[jefferyharrell]

1 hour ago, Dragon01 said:

There's nothing preventing a small body like Minmus being captured into a strange orbit.

I think there is, actually. I haven't crunched the numbers obviously, but my intuition tells me that if Minmus started in a significantly inclined orbit, the Mun would drag it toward the ecliptic over time. (Like geologic time, I mean.) It'd be interesting to see some numerical simulations that prove or disprove that, but that's my guess.

[cantab]

7 hours ago, OhioBob said:

Since JNSQ is natively 1/4 real scale, it will not work with any other planets packs unless they too are designed around the same scale.  And to my knowledge, none are (at least not yet).  So JNSQ is designed to be used by itself.

Why would it not work? True, mixing another planet pack with JNSQ will give you inconsistent planetary densities (and possibly art styles), but as long as the orbits are clear of each other is there any reason the install wouldn't load and run and be playable. Planetary SOIs shrinking leaving their moons outside maybe, I'm not sure what KSP makes of that.

[JadeOfMaar]

Just now, cantab said:

Why would it not work? True, mixing another planet pack with JNSQ will give you inconsistent planetary densities (and possibly art styles), but as long as the orbits are clear of each other is there any reason the install wouldn't load and run and be playable. Planetary SOIs shrinking leaving their moons outside maybe, I'm not sure what KSP makes of that.

3 hours ago, JadeOfMaar said:

Not only does JNSQ have as many bodies as GPP, it has them all at 2.7x the normal size. Your favorite remote star system mod would look like TRAPPIST-1 (everything becomes uncomfortably small) and would be uncomfortably close to the JNSQ system.... or even inside it.

That's the thing. There's no config to clear those orbits. And we're not making them. Planet packs that add far-off remote star systems (The World Beyond, Other Worlds Reboot) should be fine, but near ones (Extrasolar) or ones that extend the stock system (take your pick. There are many.) will easily conflict and overlap.

[Stone Blue]

2 minutes ago, JadeOfMaar said:

Planet packs that add far-off remote star systems (The World Beyond, Other Worlds Reboot) should be fine, but near ones (Extrasolar) or ones that extend the stock system (take your pick. There are many.) will easily conflict and overlap.

OK... I guess i didnt make that distinction clear in my post.... I *was* mainly asking about far-off remote star systems that dont modify/touch the "stock/home" system...

[OhioBob]

54 minutes ago, cantab said:

Why would it not work? True, mixing another planet pack with JNSQ will give you inconsistent planetary densities (and possibly art styles), but as long as the orbits are clear of each other is there any reason the install wouldn't load and run and be playable. Planetary SOIs shrinking leaving their moons outside maybe, I'm not sure what KSP makes of that.

Other planet packs will load.  That's not what I meant when I said they wouldn't work.  I just meant that the packs would be horribly mismatched.  If you don't mind mixing 1/4 scale and 1/10 scale together, then there's nothing stopping you.

[Guest]

Wouldn't some inner planets (or most of them, really. Stars are big) end up inside the sun? The jump from 1/10 to 1/4 is a big one.

Edited June 10, 2019 by Guest

[sturmhauke]

3 hours ago, jefferyharrell said:

I think there is, actually. I haven't crunched the numbers obviously, but my intuition tells me that if Minmus started in a significantly inclined orbit, the Mun would drag it toward the ecliptic over time. (Like geologic time, I mean.) It'd be interesting to see some numerical simulations that prove or disprove that, but that's my guess.

The orbit of Pluto is thought to be unstable over the course of millions of years. We just happen to exist during a time when it is relatively stable.

[OhioBob]

22 minutes ago, Dragon01 said:

Wouldn't some inner planets (or most of them, really. Stars are big) end up inside the sun? The jump from 1/10 to 1/4 is a big one.

Not unless the planet was really really close to the star.  Planet orbits are typically much large than the radii of stars.

[jmburbach]

4 hours ago, JadeOfMaar said:

8 hours ago, jmburbach said:

What is the expected memory footprint with this mod? I am seeing 11-12 GB at the main menu... 

You are correct. That's what I get (the textures are nearly all 8K), and that's with a few mods on the side. But the performance is miraculously as good as, if not better than stock. I couldn't run visual mods anymore and I hated them. But fully loaded on JNSQ it all runs smoothly and made me return to enjoying having visual mods installed.

 

But with "only" 16 GB of ram good performance doesn't last long before the kernel decides KSP is being greedy and needs to die. Guess I'll have to see if I can monkey with things a bit to reduce memory until I can download more ram... 

[OhioBob]

On ‎6‎/‎7‎/‎2019 at 7:28 PM, Iso-Polaris said:

Is it possible to set DSN Modifier to 4x if I already set Antenna Power to 4X

Sorry for the delay in responding.  It is our recommendation that both the antenna range and DSN modifiers be set to 4x.  Our previous posts mentioned only the antenna, but that's an oversight.  Setting only the antenna range modifier to 4x will double the combined antenna/DSN range.  That is only good enough to reach Jool.  Setting both the antenna range and DSN modifiers to 4x will quadruple the combined antenna/DSN range, which is what is needed to reach Eeloo and Hamek.

 

Edited June 11, 2019 by OhioBob

[Walker]

On 5/30/2019 at 7:58 PM, Galileo said:

Compatibility for mods that expect the stock planets with default topology, biomes, order or radii is not to be expected and will not be provided by us.

I'd like to make sure - this means dMagic Orbital Science is not compatibile with JNSQ, am I right?

Edited June 11, 2019 by Walker