Why should i play Juno instead of KSP?

[KerbalOnDres]

I´m a KSP fan and i had this game for about a year now. And sometimes i look at it and ask, this game looks fun is should give it another chance. But everytime i try this game just feels so meh. It doesn´t have such a soul like KSP, with modded KSP you get most of Juno´s features, Juno´s UI feels just weird for me etc. I don´t mean this like an offense to this game, but what are some of Juno´s features that would make me want to play this instead of modded KSP?

[SJ]

I think you get a quick burst of attachment with EVAing a wobbly green goof from day 1 in KSP. Juno is more mechanical engineering focused with crew and EVA later like the mods for unmanned first play.

Getting used to the UI isn't hard once you're immersed in it for a few days. A matter of doing it and acclimatising.

Things that stood out to me:
The customizable parts definitely feel more like you're designing something yourself rather than clapping together legos.
The ship software you can put in is also quite easy and effective for being baked in.

Vehicles in general aren't wobbly. They can still bend and break with large forces, but are professionally built which is very nice.

The ground vehicle physics are definitely better. It does not feel like ice skating with thrusters, and the power draw of your motors sensibly drops when going sufficiently fast/downhill.

Aircraft feel pretty nice too. Electric motors (and pistons/hinges) being baked in to the base game does them good. It is notable that the motor spins all manner of things not just props, so I'm looking forward to playing with that on bigger things in space.
Batteries feel OP, but you're also going to be comparing a few kg slapped on the side to the option of an accidental full ton of battery being the main body of the craft.

Contracts I've seen so far (haven't got too far) are more interesting. Air/ground race course is cool. Taking pre-made cargo places. Explode away from town :D
Main downside is they are not informative... no being told the mass or dimensions of cargo beforehand, and tricky saving when there's loose cargo involved. (In KSP, you can just look at the map to see where you need to go before you accept, and you design the cargo yourself to fit the bill.)

Even more tweakable sliders and dynamic parts of parts than KSP2.
Unlock liquid fuel engine, you decide if it is more of a reliant or a 909, or the wheezing god of nozzle extensions. Quite a few techs are for extending the range of sliders on your existing parts. Add some ablator to everything, not just the heat shield.

The big things I long for are:
ISRU (which is in the future plans) Having a personal reason to develop your own outposts and keep interacting with them is really good.
KIS/KAS (dunno yet; there's EVA tethers and such so maybe it is already a thing or planned) It may be unrealistic, but major post-launch modifications are a ton of gamey fun for a mod. Minor modifications like adjusting your staging in flight or being able to load new probe software would be really useful. I might just not know how.

[toinkertoy]

Originally posted by briju200:

Juno´s UI feels just weird for me etc.

Seen so many players slam the game because of that! I've NEVER played KSP but I assume, despite being a similar type game with similar features, things are laid out differently so yeah it'll feel different then you're used too in KSP. Doesn't make it "BAD" just makes it a different game.

Main reason I went with this game over KSP was NO KERBELS. Just couldn't bring myself to play a game with those green aliens from Toy Story. It just seemed fake and cartoonish to me because of them! But apparently that's just me because almost everyone else who's played/plays this game has also played KSP.

The one area this game seems to excel at is the building. All parts are customizable in some way so you can create vehicle that look pretty much exactly how you want them too! Some KSP players have found this a bit daunting as they're not used too building vehicles in this manner, and it does take a bit of learning how all the settings work and effect performance, but once you got it you can make just about anything work!

But it sounds like you may have already chose your game and it's NOT Juno! And if that's what you enjoy well then go with it man!

[[BLK] Telu]

Juno go deeper than KSP. Example, you need to tweak your engine for atmosphere or vacuum to be able to get the max DeltaV from it.

The campaign is deep and you have ton of things to do in it.

You can build cars, plane, boats, submarines and all that stuff ...

But be aware :

The main issue you will get with this game is than the landscape feel really cheap. It can bother you.

Some physics are wonky. (People struggle with boat for example)


Also, you can replay the tutorial if you didn't understand something. It's hidden behind a button than we don't use often. I was struggling to find where the tutorial were hidden. I suggest to save the finished vessel of every tutorial when you finished the tutorial. It will help you.

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3108685334

[toinkertoy]

Originally posted by BLK Telu:

Some physics are wonky. (People struggle with boat for example)

I think that's because this game was never intended to have boats or race cars or even planes for that matter (that's what SimplePlanes was for) but, as should have been expected, some players took it upon themselves to take up the challenge! After all there is a lot of ocean out there! But I still find it very strange they ended up incorporating that into career games.

[[BLK] Telu]

I think it's great. They just need to fix the common issues with boats. It allow to explore the ocean of other planets (if there is planets with ocean)

[mreed2]

My two cents: You probably shouldn't.

Juno is marginally superior to un-modded KSP 1, but not by much. It is generally inferior to modded KSP 1 except in certain cases:

1. Juno is far superior in its modeling of boats.
   
2. Juno is significantly better in modeling rovers.
   
3. Juno is far, far, far superior to KSP when it comes to sharing craft files with others, whether your want to see what others have put together or share your creations with others.
   
4. Juno supports mobile, so if you want to play games on the go, it is the only option available.
   
5. Juno supports creating custom solar systems.
   
6. Juno has an integrated programming environment.
   
7. Juno offers far, far, far superior options for customizing the appearances of parts, which makes it far easier to create craft that look like they should.

On the flip side, modded KSP 1 is superior when it comes to:

1. Career mode unless you want to spend significant (hours) of time on rovers / planes / boats.
   
2. Tech tree progression -- due to the way in which KSP handles parts, KSP simply has far more parts to display in the tech tree, supporting more tech tree nodes, which means that the cost to unlock a new node can be lower.
   
3. Space career mode missions. This comes down to KSP not putting a "You must complete this mission within 1 year of accepting it" conditions on interplanetary missions (or missions in general).
   
4. Modding -- the Juno modding scene is a tiny fraction of the size of the KSP modding scene. You won't find life support, tech tree, scansat, etc. currently available in Juno.
   
5. ISRU -- Juno has zero support for refueling missions in progress.
   
6. Docking -- Docking in Juno persistently doesn't work as I expect. In particular, docking more than two crafts is highly likely to summon the Karkan, and docking craft at 90 degree angles is also problematic. The underlying issue appears to be with the autopilot -- it can only handle reaction control wheels that are mounted inline, and when that isn't the case...

In general Juno is at its best when you want to make planes / rovers / boats that "look good" while remaining functional. It also has a niche to fill if you want to automate spacecraft. Otherwise, it probably isn't worth the purchase prices, as low as it currently is.

[girgiy]

Because when you launch Juno, it does so in less than 30 seconds (versus 5 to 10 minutes KSP modded or not). And once inside the game any transfer from different screens takes less than 30 seconds. Juno runs smooth even on a potato computer. KSP still has bugs. I am talking ksp 1, I don't know how ksp 2 is fairing.

[SwiftOwl]

One tiny detail I like about J:NO's sandbox mode: if you reached a desire orbit around any body or land on another moon or planet with a probe or a Droo, you can "save your current location" and that newly "saved location" can be used to spawn/launch a new craft on that spot or orbit [a space station or larger space vehicle, a ground vehicle, aircraft, or a base, your choice of craft). Though, that kind of option doesn't exist in career mode.

[Yuri Bezmenov]

Kerbal Space Program's sequel has an EULA that literally doxxes you (look in INFORMATION COLLECTION & USAGE section).

That alone is sufficient reason for me.

[[BLK] Telu]

Yep, Red shell is still a thing even if they said than it is disable. People have a lot of network telemetry communication when KSP2 is running.

[叙土Sam]

I think,the JNO will be more freedom when you build a rocket.When you have a good idea,you can "draw"in JNO. The sandbox give this game more and more freedom and interesting.I wish my opine can help you ！Love from China.

[Taehl]

Originally posted by briju200:

what are some of Juno´s features that would make me want to play this instead of modded KSP?

Some of my favorite features:

- Parts are very customize-able, so you can make them the exact size and power you want

- Parts can be freely placed and rotated, letting you make just about anything you want

- Performance is WAY better. Let's be honest, KSP never been known for running well on weaker computers. JuNO is much better optimized, easily running on less capable machines (even mobile devices!), and generally loads much faster than KSP. (Or if you have great hardware, you can use the Parallax mod to make JuNO look amazing)

- Crafts are WAY more physically stable. Everything is nice and solidly welded together; parts won't be wobbling around even if you don't place any struts. KSP crafts, AFAIK, like to wiggle around like they were built in Garry's Mod.

- Color customization: You can paint any part of a craft any way you want, with optional control of material properties like how emissive or metallic it is. This includes the crew's space suits!

- Visual scripting (AKA "Vizzy") can automate anything, from simple stuff like "when less than 500 meters above the ground, deploy landing gear" up to fully automating your surface-to-orbit or docking procedures. Crafts can even send each other signals to coordinate with no intervention on your part. You can automate away just about anything you find tedious, and spend more time doing the things you enjoy.

- As others have mentioned: It never had spyware.

[Lisias]

Originally posted by Taehl:

- Visual scripting (AKA "Vizzy") can automate anything, from simple stuff like "when less than 500 meters above the ground, deploy landing gear" up to fully automating your surface-to-orbit or docking procedures. Crafts can even send each other signals to coordinate with no intervention on your part. You can automate away just about anything you find tedious, and spend more time doing the things you enjoy.

Vizzy is simply fantastic, one of the best features I ever see on a simulator.

But I wish they would, also, added a way to edit the script the old way, old school IDE style - I'm a developer, I'm way more comfortable writing text.

[mreed2]

I found it, finally.

There's a mod for that:

https://www.simplerockets.com/Mods/View/229226/VizzyBuilder

I just tried it, and there are a couple of things to note:

1. It is, as I expected, wants the code to be written C#. If you don't know how to program in C#, this probably wont be very helpful to you.
   
2. It is a stand-alone program, not a Visual Studio plug-in. The UI strongly resembles Visual Studio (as can be seen from the screenshots). When you download and extract the program, there will be a "VizzyBuilder.exe" which you need to execute.
   
3. It has no ability to edit or import existing Vizzy code.
   
4. It can open craft files (although it doesn't automatically open the correct directory -- %appdata%\..\locallow\Jundroo\simplerockets 2\userdata\craftdesigns\ is the one that you want). Doing this creates a "project" (not a Visual Studio project) associated with the craft file under whichever folder you extracted the program you downloaded to.
   
5. When you click on "Run" it generates the required XML file for the open program, assuming the program ends with the "Console.WriteLine(Vz.context.currentProgram.Serialize());" command.
   
6. It isn't at all clear whether it writes the XML directly back to the craft file, or if a manual copy and paste is required. The fact that it doesn't seem to provide a mechanism to attach code to a specific object in the craft file would seem to imply that manual copy and paste is required -- but there is a "Save as XML" option in the File menu...
   
7. The documentation is... Poor, lets say, and the syntax is cryptic at best. The examples only help a bit -- they are too trivial to actually provide much help. Expect to spend a lot of time learning the namespace and syntax to do things.

The fact that this project exists at all is amazing.

But...

I'm pretty sure that programming in it is going to be more difficult than Vizzy for almost any task. And that's not mentioning the fact that the learning curve will be much, much, much steeper than Vizzy itself.

Your mileage may vary, though.