Official v6.20 Bugs Thread

[Mr.Bananza]

I'm playing with the 6. 21 version and this bug came up with commanders having a astronomical (pun intended) fighter bonus after being assigned to a fighter for about a year.

This fighter does not have a mothership and has efficient enough engines to only be useful in the inner planets of Sol (I designed them thus so I could have a cheap way to make the appearance of protection for my colonies) As such there are 10 fighters all in one task group that I have fly around survey/xenology groups (using the tutorial setup to have a ruin on mars).

Here are the stats of one of my Captains:
Fleet Initiative Bonus: 138
Survey bonus: 10%
Fighter Combat Bonus: 1010%   <- Holy crap!
Terraforming Bonus: 10%
Diplomacy Bonus: 15%
Promotion Score: 255225

There is another with a fighter bonus of 110% and that is the extent of the crazy bonuses. 
Not really an unplayable bug, but probably a bug none-the-less.

[clement]

The fighter combat bonus bug has been reported and already fixed for the next release.

[Nibelung44]

Hi,

I can confirm the bug on training units. If a unit is not dependant of an HQ (brigade), then it will never train up with a leader, whatever his rating.

If you attach a unit to a HQ, then is displayed in the grid the training value of the brigade leader, but not of the CO in command.

So clearly that's new and I guess that's a bug...

[Erik L]

Hi,

I can confirm the bug on training units. If a unit is not dependant of an HQ (brigade), then it will never train up with a leader, whatever his rating.

If you attach a unit to a HQ, then is displayed in the grid the training value of the brigade leader, but not of the CO in command.

So clearly that's new and I guess that's a bug...

I think this is as intended. Ground units only train up when they are attached to HQ units. And the HQ CO rating is what is used. As far as I recall, it's always worked this way.

[Nibelung44]

ok, lets say it's WAD then... That a colonel can't train his own battalion is weird for me though.


scrapping a ship: the ETA derives constantly, even if the actual work is done. i.e you start with an ETA of say July 1st, but then 5 days later it will show July 3rd, etc.

[sloanjh]

scrapping a ship: the ETA derives constantly, even if the actual work is done. i.e you start with an ETA of say July 1st, but then 5 days later it will show July 3rd, etc.

This is a known foible.  The work only happens during a 5-day industrial phase, but the ETA is calculated from the current moment.  So if there are 3 true days to go and the last cycle ended on June 28th, then on day 0 (June 28) it will show July 1, on day 1 July 2, ... day 4 it will show July 5 then on day 5 it will complete (with 2 days of left-over work applied to the next project).  There are subtle reasons (most of which I can't remember) why no matter what behavior Steve chooses here it will have something wrong with it.

John

[Tree]

So I ran into some bug trying to play a game without the real stars setting.
Whenever I create a system in SM mode, it's always 61 Cygni, always the same two stars, although planets and asteroids vary.  When I create a nebula, I get a bunch of errors, and get it again when I access the nebula.  The protostar has 61 Cygni A's mass and spectral class, and in system information window, 61 Cygni B isn't listed as part of the nebula, but it does appear on the system map, while its planets appear fine in system information.  Can't seem to avoid it, it does it without fail on all games I create.

This is the error I get first, several times on the nebulae stuff :
Error in cboSystems
Error 381 was generated by MSFlexGrid
Subscript out of range

And this one once after the other :
Error in cboSystems
Error 30009 was generated by MSFlexGrid
Invalid Row Value

I can create systems other than 61 Cygni when I use real stars, but obviously can't create nebulae there.

Also, if I set it so Sol is created at game generation, instead of 61 Cygni, I get a bunch of Proxima Centauri.  No errors on the nebulae though.

[Erik L]

So I ran into some bug trying to play a game without the real stars setting.
Whenever I create a system in SM mode, it's always 61 Cygni, always the same two stars, although planets and asteroids vary.  When I create a nebula, I get a bunch of errors, and get it again when I access the nebula.  The protostar has 61 Cygni A's mass and spectral class, and in system information window, 61 Cygni B isn't listed as part of the nebula, but it does appear on the system map, while its planets appear fine in system information.  Can't seem to avoid it, it does it without fail on all games I create.

This is the error I get first, several times on the nebulae stuff :
Error in cboSystems
Error 381 was generated by MSFlexGrid
Subscript out of range

And this one once after the other :
Error in cboSystems
Error 30009 was generated by MSFlexGrid
Invalid Row Value

I can create systems other than 61 Cygni when I use real stars, but obviously can't create nebulae there.

Also, if I set it so Sol is created at game generation, instead of 61 Cygni, I get a bunch of Proxima Centauri.  No errors on the nebulae though.

Did you have the SM Race selected when creating the systems?

[AbuDhabi]

(Own) missile launch interrupts regardless of minimum increments. This makes it incredibly, hellishly annoying to process battles as they require user input every $reload_interval, in my case, 20s in-game.

EDIT: Possibly it is Targeting, not Missile Launch. Either way, it's quite unplayable without being able to set a battle to complete overnight.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

(Own) missile launch interrupts regardless of minimum increments. This makes it incredibly, hellishly annoying to process battles as they require user input every $reload_interval, in my case, 20s in-game.

Put a number like 20 in "Min Inc" in top right of the system map, check the auto turns box, and select 30s.  This should run a minimum of 20 30s increments before the game will stop ticking time for interrupts.  Be warned, you can skip some important stuff this way, use it with care. 

Once you've fired all your missiles, it's a good idea to Clear Fleet targeting in the combat overview to stop the launchers from trying to fire. 

[alex_brunius]

It's not possible to launch buoys/mines/self-guided missiles from a ship without missile fire control (at least I haven't been able to find a way).

This seems flawed since no guidance or control of these types of munition is needed at all.

[tryrar]

I'm getting error 3035s followed by endless error 91s until I kill the program. I reload, and it's fine for a while, but then it happens again. What's up?

[Erik L]

I'm getting error 3035s followed by endless error 91s until I kill the program. I reload, and it's fine for a while, but then it happens again. What's up?

More details. Conventional start/TN? How far into the game? What's the error box say in total?

[Nibelung44]

Ships with 0 crew (example a civilian "fuel pod") crashes the game, it wants to update the morale...

[AbuDhabi]

Put a number like 20 in "Min Inc" in top right of the system map, check the auto turns box, and select 30s.  This should run a minimum of 20 30s increments before the game will stop ticking time for interrupts.  Be warned, you can skip some important stuff this way, use it with care. 

This is what I'm doing. I set minimum increments to 1, click 30s. The game returns me to command 15s or 20s later, when missiles are being launched. I set the increments to something else, I click a higher interval button - same story.