Official v6.10 Bugs Thread

[Jumpp]

The problem is that I am using a long variable instead of a double to store the last launch time (which is stored for all ships even if they never enter a hangar). Because your game has been running for a long time, the number of seconds passed the game has exceeded the capacity of the database field. This is fixed for v6.20 but will continue to affect current games.

If anyone wants to fix this for a current game and has Access, you need to change the data type of the LastLaunchTime in the Ship table to Double (or currency).

Steve

I downloaded an Eval copy of Access to try this.  It looks like the database is password-protected.  Is this password known to the player community?  Am I overlooking something obvious?

[Erik L]

I downloaded an Eval copy of Access to try this.  It looks like the database is password-protected.  Is this password known to the player community?  Am I overlooking something obvious?

You have to ask Steve nicely for the db password. And don't pass it around.

Plus if you modify the database and encounter errors, make sure you can reproduce them with an unaltered db

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

Refits can't be done on PDCs yet, the general consensus is to use SM to accomplish that.

Mines don't seem to be separating their payload on thermal detection, I'll try building an active detection mine and see if that works.

Update: Active sensor controlled releases don't appear to work either.

Update 2: Regular mirvs do work.

I think I have tracked this one down. Buoys no longer require endurance in v6.1. Unfortunately their trigger code was being bypassed because old code was checking their endurance (which they didn't have) but then new code was leaving them in place anyway.

Steve

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

I just got this bug again, so I can give a clearer report about exactly how it went down:

The site of the action is Altair-A IV.  There's a division HQ, four brigade HQs, eight mobile infantry battalions, four battalions of some kind of infantry that I don't recall, four construction brigades, and maybe 3 replacement battalions.

The first set of robot guardians was a few weeks ago, a single battalion, and was destroyed in a couple rounds of combat.  Things were peaceful for a time.  On 25 August 2095 we turn up another set of guardians composed of two assault battalions.  Here's their appearance and the first round of combat:

Thanks for the detail. When ground combat takes place, it generates collateral damage. This is resolved as planetary bombardment after all ground combat is resolved. If your population is small, I think it surrendered to the bombardment caused by the collateral damage. In such a case, all defending ground units are removed. What I can't understand is why you seem to be getting messages from both sides.

I'll change the code so you can't surrender to collateral damage and it is stated as such, rather than planetary bombardment. Then I need to look at this in more detail.

Steve

[Jumpp]

Thanks for the detail. When ground combat takes place, it generates collateral damage. This is resolved as planetary bombardment after all ground combat is resolved. If your population is small, I think it surrendered to the bombardment caused by the collateral damage. In such a case, all defending ground units are removed. What I can't understand is why you seem to be getting messages from both sides.

I'll change the code so you can't surrender to collateral damage and it is stated as such, rather than planetary bombardment. Then I need to look at this in more detail.

Steve

That makes sense.  The very first colonists had arrived not long before this round of combat.  The population would have been very tiny.  In the future, I'll take care to not start digging until the population is big enough to soak a stray round or two.

[bean]

Minor bug:
When on the Ordnance/Fighters tab of the Ship Design window, the ranges listed for the fighters in the Select Fighters Type box are not the actual ranges of the craft in question.  The ranges shown appear to be in hundreds of thousands of km, while it's listed as billions of km.

[Paul M]

This isn't a game breaker but what I am getting is that during turn advance a message window pops up and says "No Ranks Found, please set up ranks before creating officers" (or something to that effect).  I click ok and the turn proceeds.  I assume it is related to an NPR but even in SM mode I can't see how to fix the issue.  Any suggestions?

Edited in the correct error message

[puylanitar]

First of all, I apologize for my english.

I don't know if this is a bug but, when I'm at the class design view, I don't see anything else than the ship's name and the size in Ktons of the class in the summary window.

For example I should see

Code: [Select]

Fletcher class Geological Survey Vessel    3 500 tons     50 Crew     338.8 BP      TCS 70  TH 240  EM 0
3428 km/s     Armour 1-20     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/2     Damage Control Rating 1     PPV 0
MSP 61    Max Repair 100 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months    Spare Berths 2   

Commercial Massive Ion Drive (1)    Power 240    Fuel Use 3.54%    Signature 240    Exp 4%
Fuel Capacity 100 000 Litres    Range 145.3 billion km   (490 days at full power)

Geological Survey Sensors (2)   2 Survey Points Per Hour

This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes

But I only see

Code: [Select]

Fletcher class Geological Survey Vessel    3
That didn't happen in previous versions and it's very annoying since I don't have a general vision of what I am doing.
And yes, this is my first message, yet I have been playing Aurora for several weeks now.

[Paul Tankersley]

Probably not worth reporting now 6. 2. 1 is out, but finally my game got into a seemingly endless loop.  I was in a 5 second combat turn phase, probably 20 or so turns into this (NPR combat) when it just stopped progressing.  Waited about 45 minutes and not a 5 second advance.  Closed out the game with task manager and tried again.  Same result.  Repeated this a couple of more times and canned the game.  Starting on the newest version now. . .

[Bandus]

First off, let me state that this bug (I believe it is a bug at this point) relates to the issues initially encountered and outlined in this thread: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php/topic,5737.0.html

On further investigation I believe that it is the star system itself that is bugged as opposed to a specific ship or missile design. Essentially, the star system GJ 1289 in my game appears to be confused about the position of planetary bodies and possibly the secondary star as well. The system is a binary star system which appears at first glance to simply be large, with the secondary star and accompanying bodies being very far away from the primary star system. I have attached screenshots for context. The first screenshot shows a zoomed in view of the primary star and the jump points leading into the system while the second screenshot shows a zoomed out view which shows the secondary star as well. Note the small blue circle around "GJ-1289-A (G4-V)" in the second shot. That blue circle is an orbital comparison range marker set to 10x Pluto.  So, again, this system appears to be massive in size.

Screenshot 1


Screenshot 2


So the issues I have encountered in this system beyond the thread listed above is that any ship that is set to go to planetary bodies around the secondary star initially show a small distance to travel as well as a relatively short ETE. However, as I advance time the distance as well as the ETE grows as opposed to shrinks. Three more screenshots to illustrate this. Note that between each screenshot time was advanced by exactly 1 day. Also note that the destination is a wreck that is in orbit of one of the planets which itself is orbiting the secondary star in this system.

Screenshot 3


Screenshot 4


Screenshot 5


Beyond ships inability to actually go to these planets, as well as the issues with launching long range probes towards the planetary bodies, things seem more or less normal in the system. I have colonies on planets around the primary star and am able to travel between them with no problems. It may also be important to note that I am 95% certain that there is, at the least, a NPR colony on one or more of the planetary bodies around the secondary star. I think it may actually be a homeworld but I have been unable to confirm it.

I'm not sure what other information I can provide since there isn't an overt error message or anything but if more details are required I'll be happy to provide what I can, just let me know. Additionally, I am interested in ways to "bandage" this problem if possible as I am not quite ready to start a new game yet. If there is anything I can do to that effect I'd appreciate it.

[peskyninja]

My current game is now stuck in an error loop:
"Error in UseFuel"
Error 5 was generated by Aurora
Invalid procedure call or argument

Got 60 of those errors on 5 day increments, only one on 5-sec increments.

The only "weird" action I've done was to seize those civi harvesters (Yarr!) and turned them into scrap metal in high earth orbit for future salvaging.

+1 on this.  It started to happen after I tried towing a orbital habitat.



EDIT: I've discovered the problem, aparently my tug crew (Named hercules btw) decided they are too badass to follow the laws of trans-newtonian physics and tried creating another field of physics;  the trans-trans-newtonian one. They tried towing the 1/2 KK tons habitat without actually being near it, from venus. (The habitat was on mars.)

[Jenkins]

I have a problem.  For any version of Aurora, or pre-installed versions, I got an error message whenever I try to advance past 5 days.  The error message goes like this: Errors in LoadFleets: Error 3159 was generated by DAO database Not a valid bookmark Please report to etc, etc, then when I exit out of that I get this: Error 91 generated in Aurora Object variable or block variable not set Please report to etc, etc.  Message my profile you have any help!

[Paul M]

Posting this here as it is the official 6.10 bug list and this is from v6.10...

When I attempt to launch fighters from the fighter mangement panel I get the following error (in version 6.1)

Upon Clicking the Launch button:
Error in cmdLaunch_click
Error 3163 was generated by DAO.field
"The field is too small to accept the amount of data you attempted to add."

I then click OK to remove the error message and get the following error message window

Error in cmdLaunch_click
Error 94 was generated by Aurora
"Invalid use of null."

When I click ok to remove this error window then the first shows up again, and when I click on that the second shows up.  I have to use Cntr-alt-del to open up the manager and manual terminate the fighter management panel.

When I then look in the TG list of the TG control panel I find the TG "Guardian Early Warning Pinnance-Big Ears" is present with the fighters I just attempted to launch.  Only this is the wrong squadron name...it is the first squadron name in my list of squadron names but it is not the squardon I attempted to launch.

Subsiquently when I got back to the fighter management panel I find the correct squadron is in space and can recover it.

This is completely reproducable, and is independent of which squadron I attempt to launch first.  That one will mess up, but after ending the fighter management pannel and reopening it things function normally.

[sloanjh]

When I then look in the TG list of the TG control panel I find the TG "Guardian Early Warning Pinnance-Big Ears" is present with the fighters I just attempted to launch.  Only this is the wrong squadron name...it is the first squadron name in my list of squadron names but it is not the squardon I attempted to launch.

Have you tried changing this (and any similarly long name in the squadron name list) to something shorter to see if there error goes away?

John

[Paul M]

I think the problem isn't the name...as that isn't an issue later...the problem seems to be it is putting the fighters from Fort Dublin Early Warning Pinnaces into "Guardian Early Warning Pinnance -- Big Ears" for no obvious reason.

If in the fighter management screen I set the mothership to Fort Dublin, and click on the Fort Dublin Squadron in the list and then click Launch.  I get the error.  When I kill the fighter management screen with the task manager and look in my TG listing I find the fighters are in the "Guardian Early Warning Pinnance -- Big Ears" TG.  If I open the Fighter Management Screen I find the Fort Dublin Squadron is in Sol and I can manipulate them.  Including recovery or actually at this point launch other squadrons without this error showing up.

I can get around this problem depending on how I launch the parasites.  If I use the fighter management screen it is pretty much guarenteed to show up...but if I use the TG display I can avoid it.

The Guardian Early Warning Pinnance Squadron is the first squadron in my list of squadrons in my Figher Management screen.  If this is relevant or not is not clear.

I will try changing the name of Fort Dublin's squadron to somethig shorter though and see if the problem goes away...I'm just dubious about the problem being the length of the name.