Aurora 4x
C# Aurora => C# Bug Reports => Topic started by: Steve Walmsley on January 25, 2024, 09:03:58 AM
-
Please post potential bugs in this thread for v2.5.1
First, please check the Known Issues post before posting so see if the problem has already been identified or is working as intended.
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=10637.0
'Me too' posts for unresolved bugs are fine as it shows they are affecting more than one person. Any extra information you can provide in 'me too' posts is very welcome.
Please do not post bugs from previous versions unless you confirm they are still present in v2.5.1
When you post, please post as much information as possible, including:
The function number
The complete error text
The window affected
What you were doing at the time
Conventional or TN start
Random or Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma?
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well
-
The "Centre on selected body" option does not work in the mineral window when you have the wide view option selected.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
I designed and researched my first anti ship missile, but then the missile isn't appearing anywhere (except the research tab in completed projects) as if I never researched it.
I am running a 23 years conventional start campaign with 2.5.1 applied to 2.5.0.
Real star
Steps:
Designed an ASM in the dedicated window
Completed the research
Missile is not appearing in the ordnance production view, technology window or missile window, only in the research tab under completed projects.
-
I have an asteroid that generated with exactly 1 ton of Neutronium, and absolutely nothing else. That's weird, but not a bug.
The bug is that on the System Generation and Display screen - and only that screen, as far as I can tell - the minerals are listed as "Neutronium 01 1.00" - it correctly shows as 1 ton in the Minerals screen and the Mining tab.
This is a 2.5.0 game that's been upgraded 2.5.1, and I unfortunately don't remember if this system generated under 2.5.0 or 2.5.1.
-
I have an asteroid that generated with exactly 1 ton of Neutronium, and absolutely nothing else. That's weird, but not a bug.
The bug is that on the System Generation and Display screen - and only that screen, as far as I can tell - the minerals are listed as "Neutronium 01 1.00" - it correctly shows as 1 ton in the Minerals screen and the Mining tab.
This is a 2.5.0 game that's been upgraded 2.5.1, and I unfortunately don't remember if this system generated under 2.5.0 or 2.5.1.
What is the bug? It is showing you that the asteroid has 1 ton of neutronium at 1.00 accessibility, that seems correct to me...
-
What is the bug? It is showing you that the asteroid has 1 ton of neutronium at 1.00 accessibility, that seems correct to me...
It's showing that the asteroid has "01" tons of minerals on it. It's just a minor display bug - everywhere else displays "1".
Edit: Something else which is probably not a bug, just a strange generation - I've got an asteroid that's large enough that it can be colonized with regular infrastructure and hold an atmosphere. I would have thought that anything that large would classify as a dwarf planet or similar.
SJW: WAI. Asteroids can very occasionally be above 0.1G.
-
What is the bug? It is showing you that the asteroid has 1 ton of neutronium at 1.00 accessibility, that seems correct to me...
It's showing that the asteroid has "01" tons of minerals on it. It's just a minor display bug - everywhere else displays "1".
I'm pretty sure it's not a bug, that field is just configured to display at least two digits for some reason.
Edit: Something else which is probably not a bug, just a strange generation - I've got an asteroid that's large enough that it can be colonized with regular infrastructure and hold an atmosphere. I would have thought that anything that large would classify as a dwarf planet or similar.
It happens every so often. I think Steve used one of these as a fleet base in his pre-release WH40K Crusade AAR. Apparently, the classification has more to do with shape than size (although you expect the two to be generally correlated there seems to be a grey zone).
-
After destruction of enemy ship, you can land your fighters with "active" fire control (no target).
If fighters are in carrier hangar, you won't get a message of 5s incements.
But when you scrap the carrier it will pop up and bring your game almost to a stop :)
SJW: WAI. Fighters in hangars cannot fire so they aren't checked,
-
I have run into a similar issue as this one reported in 2. 2. 1
My current game seems to be stuck with an endless loop of:
Function #1954: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #1943
Function #478
I managed to save the db, advancing time in two 5 day increments should replicate the issue. Unfortunately it seems as if the save has been rendered unplayable.
Started on v2. 5. 0 - upgraded to v. 2. 5. 1 this morning. I did manage to get a save, any advancement will identify it. It looks like I go through the #1953 - > #1943 - > #478 cycle 27 times per increment.
DB attached in case it's helpful.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6. Caused by an Alien Race without a class naming theme. DB was helpful, thanks.
-
The function number : 2929
The complete error text : Reference to an object not set to on an object's instance
The window affected : main window
What you were doing at the time : Ordered a tug to tractor a shipyard from Earth to Mars, pressed 1day increment and got the error.
Conventional or TN start : Conventional
Random or Real Stars real
Is your decimal separator a comma?
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well 26y
EDIT: I figured out what causes the error, the shipyard was busy constructing 3 ships when I started to tug it (and in fact the error appears 3 times in a row) but the funny thing is that the ships are still under construction and the % of completition is advancing, I guess it shouldn't work like that and if you move a Shipyard while busy, the ships construction should be deleted or at least stopped and continue when the yard arrives at destination, am I right?
SJW: Changed the move order so you can only tractor inactive shipyards.
-
The function number - none
The complete error text - none
The window affected - main window
What you were doing at the time - see below
Conventional or TN start - Conventional
Random or Real Stars - real
Is your decimal separator a comma? - no
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? - reproducible in attached db
If this is a long campaign - 49 yrs, this was a 2. 5. 0 game I upgraded to 2. 5. 1
Problems:
In attached DB, after placing a few WPs of any type,
1) Using the "Move waypoint" button prevents me from subsequently being able to create any new WPs in any system of any type. I only can move the last wp that was moved.
2) If I try to place a new WP of the same type that I last moved in a 2nd system, I can't, but the last wp moved gets moved in the Lalande system to the same location.
Replications steps:
1 Load "Game3" and place a few WPs in one corner of Lalande, ie:
normal waypoint #1
a named wp
a POI
normal waypoint #2
2 Move normal wp 1 to another location
3 Try to create a new normal wp - result: it instead moves normal wp 1 to the location you try to create the new WP in.
4 Move the named wp to another location
5 Repeat #3 and get the same result, except the named wp gets moved instead (the last wp that was moved).
6 Go to another system and try to create a new named wp in the opposite corner of the system - result: in this 2nd system, nothing seems to happen, but if you go back to Lalande, the existing named wp is now moved to that same opposite corner of Lalande. The same result happens if I try to add a new normal wp in the 2nd system.
7 If I create a new TN or Conv game in the same DB, nothing happens when I try to create new wps of any type.
--I haven't tried saving after these rep steps as I'm afriad there is corruption that will get worse.
Workaround: Don't use the Move wp button at all, and I seem to be able to create wps as expected.
If it helps, this is my best recollection of how I ended up in this situation:
1 Added a wp in Lalande
2 Tried testing the new "Move waypoint" option - I moved that existing wp elsewhere then back to where I had it.
3 After this, I recall adding a wp in another system (System B), then going back to Lalande and noticing the WP there had moved to what appeared to be the same . . perhaps astrographic. . location as the wp added in the other system. Tested this more, and it seemed that whenever I created a new WP in either Lalande or System B, it moved it to a similar location in the other system too.
4 At this point, I could no longer create new WPs in Lalande - when I attempted to do that, it simply moved the first WP.
5 I deleted the WP in Lalande to try to clear the issue, and then noticed I could no longer create any new waypoints of any type in any system. ie. Click "Normal waypoint" > click on map > nothing happens.
6 Restarting the game allowed me to be able to create new WPs again, but I still encounter the issues in the problem statement and replication steps.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
Hi,
Having similar problems with waypoints, if you use move, it eventually makes waypoints impossible to place.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
A parasite craft can be dragged into a different task group than it's parent carrier, without launching.
The parent carrier's task group, and the TG which the parasite was newly dragged into, can then move off in different directions. The parasite is still classed as docked.
I accidentally now have two FAC tenders at Earth, whose docked parasites are part of a TG flying around the distant colonies. . . .
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
(https://i.imgur.com/fvfIL3r.png)
If Minerva (Planet X) is in Sol and gets Trojan asteroids, they pop up in the list among the closest asteroids to the sun, instead of being near the end of the list as they should be. Or at least after Minerva itself. It's not a big deal but it's a little annoying when surveying near-Earth asteroids by hand.
-
I have a very interesting bug report. Unfortunately, I can't provide a save and it's not easily reproducible, but I think I have collected enough evidence to help track down the issue.
TLDR: Some NPR missiles with thermal sensors teleported about 2 million kilometers and detonated in a single 5 second increment. I believe this happened because my fleet was moving away at the time, the missiles reached my original position, reacquired me with their onboard sensors, and then detonated immediately, attacking my ships as though they were still in the original position. This was accompanied by a generic "Key not found in dictionary" error, but I'm not sure if it was the NPR missiles or my AMMs that triggered that.
Long Version:
The NPR missile in question is the "Kukri Anti-Ship Missile" a size 9 missile with WH12, speed of 55,000 km/s, max range of 104 mkm and, most importantly, a 0.25 MSP thermal sensor.
The situation is that I chased one of my local NPR's fleets to a stabilized jump point. They jumped out and my fleet parked 35 million kilometers off to wait for reinforcements. What follows is an abridged version of the Game Log when the NPR fleet briefly returned.
1894113097 "Missile Battle Fleet - Jump 002 cannot conduct a transit as there are one or more ships suffering from jump shock" Xcor: 719826778 Ycor: -449797692
1894113097 "Contact re-established with Hostile Ship contact: [AAÓ] XX Dmitriy Pozharskiy 001 19,999 tons 0 km/s" Xcor: 684865572 Ycor: -448150254
1894113256 "CS-07 Valour 007 has launched 13x Kukri Anti-Ship Missile from Size 9 Missile Launcher (30.0% Reduction) targeted on XX Dmitriy Pozharskiy 002. Range 35,000,000 km Estimated Chance to Hit 123%"
Here the NPR fleet jumped back through the stabilized jump point. You can see my original X-coordinate attached to the contact established message.
1894113276 "5x Kukri Anti-Ship Missile cannot locate its target. it will continue to the last known target location and use onboard sensors to search for a new target"
I didn't have a lot of AMM launchers, so I ordered my fleet to move almost directly away at its top speed of 9000 km/s. Quite a bit of time passes as missiles come in.
1894113821 "Updated Hostile Salvo contact: [AQ] Size 9 Missile x3 (Salvo ID3454) Thermal 25 55,000 km/s" Xcor: 688786222 Ycor: -448335003
1894113891 "CA-12 UNS Gawain has launched 4x SIM2-1C "Peregrine" 90kms from Size 2.0 Missile Launcher targeted on Salvo ID 3440. Range 1,736,791 km Estimated Chance to Hit 35%" Xcor: 683253554 Ycor: -448566936
At this point, you can see that the range to the missile is 1.7 million kilometers. You can also see that my fleet has moved a bit more than 1.5 million kilometers on the X-axis from where it was originally detected by the NPR ships.
1894113893 "CA-12 UNS Gawain attacked Salvo ID 3446 with Quad R30-50 Autocannon Turret Mk II. Range 10,000 km Chance to Hit 34% Shots 5 Missiles Destroyed 0" Xcor: 683236127.579917 -448571441.205602
Here you see just 2 seconds later the same ship attacks with a Gauss Canon at 10kkm. In that time my ship moved 17,427 km on the X-axis, roughly consistent with the speed of 9000 km/s. The missiles though appear to have moved over 1.7 million kilometers in these two seconds.
1894113893 "8x Kukri Anti-Ship Missile from CS-07 Valour 007 attacked XX Dmitriy Pozharskiy 002. Chance to Hit 100% Damage per Hit 12 Armour Hits 4 Penetrating Hits 4 New Target Speed 9,000 km/s" Xcor: -2101822936.46163 YCor: 806814233.320147
1894113894 "4x SIM2-1C "Peregrine" 90kms has no target and no onboard sensors and will therefore self-destruct" Xcor: 683417124 Ycor: -448491803
Here we see the missile detonation message, which has some pretty weird coordinates. I'm not sure if that is relevant, but from a quick skim of the log it looks like missile detonation messages usually have more accurate coordinates. You can also see that my AMMs self-destructed one second later, having never attacked, because the missiles jumped past them.
My hypothesis is that the missiles attacked my fleet when they reached my original position, instead of my new position.
I hope this information helps you figure out what happened because this seems like a pretty dangerous bug if NPRs are making more missiles with onboard sensors now.
-
Sorry for the double post, but I've been experimenting some more after work and I *can* reliably reproduce the issue from the attached save. I tried it at least 10 times. Here are the steps:
1. Load up the attached save.
2. Go to the 113 Aquarii System. In the upper right corner of this system, you'll find the fleet "Cruiser Squadron 1 (Achilles)" parked about 70 million kilometers from an Unexplored jump point. They are sitting on the "Wreck of Unicorn-E R59 class" which makes this really easy to demonstrate.
3. Pass 1 Hour. The NPR should reappear. Wait about two minutes and they jump out again.
4. Give the fleet a move order to Waypoint #3. They're in "United Combat Command" -> 1st Fleet -> Expeditionary Forces Command -> Cruiser Squadron 1.
5. In about 20 minutes the missiles will show up on thermals. They appear about 10 million kilometers from the fleet so you can watch them come in for awhile.
6. Pass some more time and you will see the missiles tracking unerringly towards the "Wreck of Unicorn-E R59" rather than the fleet which has now moved.
7. The instant the missiles reach the Wreck, one of my ships 2 million kilometers away explodes.
The NPRs really like this trick as they have repeated it multiple times now. They've killed more of my ships with this bug than they did in the entire assault on their home system. ;D
EDIT: If anyone else runs into this, the trick is to accelerate TOWARDS the incoming missiles. They will go right past towards your original location (I think this is expected behavior, but a bit weird) and you have twice as much time to shoot AMMs at them. A bit cheesy perhaps, but there isn't much else you can do.
-
On 21st June 2156, the vessel FAC-55 Electro-Intercept 027 exploded due to maintenance failures.
On 17th August 2156, a damage report appeared for FAC-55.
This is similar to a 2. 1. 1 bug I reported.
https://aurora2. pentarch. org/index. php?topic=13078. msg163401#msg163401
I think sometimes, when a ship exploded due to maintenance failures, then the next-ish time that a ship experiences a maintenance failure, the event printed on-screen points to the previous explodey ship.
-
If the player captures NPR civilian shipping carrying trade goods, there's no way to unload or delete them.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6. Trade goods will be deleted if a ship is captured or otherwise transferred to another race.
-
If you tow a ship that is towing another ship, the 1st towed ship will stay in tow but it's mass will be ignored.
Example:
Ship A : 100,000
Ship B : 25,000 Tug EP 5000
Ship C : 25,000 Tug EP 5000
If Ship B tows ship A, the speed will be (5000EP/2500HS) = 2,000km/s
If Ship C now tows ship B, the speed will be (5000EP/1000HS) = 5,000km/s, but Ship A will still move with ship B and C.
In attached DB file.
SJW: The bug is allowing the tractor chain in the first place. Should be fixed for v2.6.
-
If you create a fighter base and land fighters on it as a squadron, then tow that fighter base to another location the fighters will be towed along as intended but will be permanently assigned to the original fleet the FB was towed from, though the game doesn't indicate this being the case in any way, the original fleet will continue to exist in the original location but will show as empty. If this original, supposedly empty fleet is deleted, then the fighters that are now in a different fleet 2 systems away will disappear from the game.
-
I believe that has been stated to be working as intended.
I am prepared to be corrected
(exploit minimax : Make the "middle ship" JUST a tractor beam {and associated crew and such} )
-
I have met a problem while I was selecting a commander for a ship.
In the attached image, you can see, in the list on the right, the name I selected: "R7 Qunitus Otacilius Hybrida".
While, in the list on the left, it is still highlighted the previous name I selected: i.e., the selection on the left didn't update at the new selected name.
The same happens also for other names.
DB also attached.
I installed 2.5.0, and updated the .exe to 2.5.1.
This game started using the 2.5.1.
I am now 26 years in the game.
No mods or DB editing, apart importing some names lists (that I am not using in this game).
EDIT: Closing and reopening the game seems having solved the issue.
Now, I can find "R7 Qunitus Otacilius Hybrida" in the list on the left of the Commanders window.
-
I believe that has been stated to be working as intended.
I am prepared to be corrected
(exploit minimax : Make the "middle ship" JUST a tractor beam {and associated crew and such} )
Intended? Interesting. I figured it was a bug since it means I can move a 2,500,000t station for free. Was it left in as a purposeful exploit?
-
No, that is a bug. It existed in VB6 and seems to have made a comeback in C# now.
If you create a fighter base and land fighters on it as a squadron, then tow that fighter base to another location the fighters will be towed along as intended but will be permanently assigned to the original fleet the FB was towed from, though the game doesn't indicate this being the case in any way, the original fleet will continue to exist in the original location but will show as empty. If this original, supposedly empty fleet is deleted, then the fighters that are now in a different fleet 2 systems away will disappear from the game.
Can you provide Steve with your DB where this happens? Might help him to fix it.
SJW: This problem was fixed in v2.5.1, so need to make sure it is the same version.
-
Several times now I've had my commercial shipping completely empty colonies of their populations, and then have a huge string of colony ships still continue going to those bodies and then failing to collect colonists because none are available.
This was with colonies which had more than enough infrastructure to support the population, and jobs demand for the people to fill, so I'm not sure why it's happening and it doesn't seem like intended behavior.
I can't cause it to be repeated on demand, but it has happened I think three times in my campaign now. To reverse it I have to use one of my manually controlled colony ships to drop off some colonists, then the AI start repopulating the planet
SJW: Not a bug. Change the colony to 'Stable' on the Civilian tab of the Economics window and the civilians will stop loading colonists there.
-
I've run into two issues while attempting to figure out assault on an NPR homeworld. I'll split the post so they're not combined.
Issue #1: CIWS are not removing missiles despite scoring kills. I ran two tests against an NPR homeworld, one with a gauss turret vessel and the other with a CIWS vessel; I've attached annotated screenshots for both tests.
- No function number
- No error text
- No specific window
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 72 years into the campaign
- Campaign started on v2. 5. 1
With the gauss turret vessel, the expected occurs: the NPR fires missiles against the vessel and the gauss turrets engage, scoring kills and removing missiles. Extra kills are instead counted as overkill (as a result, kill count never exceeds missile count) while the armour takes the remainder of the hits (in this case, 2x strength-1 impacts per leaked size-2 missile).
However, with the CIWS vessel, when the NPR fires on the vessel and the CIWS engage, a large number of kills (vastly exceeding the number of missiles) and exactly zero overkill are both recorded but no missiles are removed. This results in every inbound missile scoring hits on the armour as if the CIWS had not fired at all despite Events showing weapons fire and kills.
SJW: This problem was fixed in v2.5.1, so please confirm you are on that version.
-
New species that you research do not seem to retain modifiers like population density or growth rate from the base species, instead reverting to 1.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
Issue #2: NPR size-2 AMMs are no engaging as AMMs and are only engaging as ASMs.
- No function number
- No error text
- No specific window
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 72 years into the campaign
- Campaign started on v2. 5. 1
While attempting to assault an NPR homeworld, I ran into the expected: 103x ~15,000t Gargoyle-class size-2 "AMM" platforms and 42x ~15,000t Asp-class platforms (I believe they're size-9 ASM and simply out of ammo from my prior engagement with them). I've seen the same NPR's ~13,000t Ballista-class size-2 AMM escorts use these same launchers and missiles as proper AMMs so my expectation is that the Gargoyles are meant to fill the same AMM role.
However, the unexpected: the Gargoyles will engage everything from 58t fighters to 20,000t cruisers with their size-2 "AMMs" but will not engage missiles. I succeeding in hitting their planet with ~500 of ~650 size-6 ASMs (~150 were caught by STO-PD from the planet) without a single one of the ~5,000 size-2 "AMM" launchers in orbit opening fire. I've also hit both platform types with both size-1 and size-6 ASMs and the size-2 "AMM" launchers still will not fire. On the other hand, moving a 20kt cruiser into range (just below 3mkm) and ~2,000 size-2 missiles instantly launch in an ASM role.
I assume this isn't intended behavior so I'll report it as a bug but it's nonetheless possible that this is WAI and ripe for abuse if the size-2 "AMMs" won't engage incoming missiles.
-
Not a bug exactly, but has anyone else had an issue downloading the 2.5.1 patch? Everytime I click on the link it tries to open a new tab and then doesn't start the download.
-
Not a bug exactly, but has anyone else had an issue downloading the 2.5.1 patch? Everytime I click on the link it tries to open a new tab and then doesn't start the download.
The same, just right click on the link and save link as name... it works
-
Not a bug exactly, but has anyone else had an issue downloading the 2.5.1 patch? Everytime I click on the link it tries to open a new tab and then doesn't start the download.
The same, just right click on the link and save link as name... it works
That worked - thanks.
-
Orbiting habitats using ark modules do not increase in population as per hxxp: aurora2. pentarch. org/index. php?topic=12523. msg159464#msg159464
Steps to replicate:
1. Create an orbital habitat - I used 5 modules for a total habitat space of 1 million per station
2. Load less than maximum colonists - I loaded 10k per habitat
3. Pass time in-game; I let a year pass before checking in on them
Result: no growth inside the habitats.
-
Deleting population created by genetic modification did not delete the population, and it re-appeared on passing turns. (intended, perhaps?)
Steps to replicate:
1. Set up a regular colony, give it gene centers (I used Mercury)
2. Create a new race (I used the default name, human 2. 0, and temperature range +-12. 5 option after researching)
3. Let the labs run for a while, then stop them
4. Delete the resulting colony/population
5. Pass a turn of any time length (I passed 5 days)
Result: Colony re-appears
(Moving them to Venus did in fact end that colony, it disappeared after all colonists were removed. So if this is intended that colonies don't just 'vanish' if there are still people there, then ignore this bug report)
-
On repairing a fighter, the grade points were reduced from 281 to -202. This causes a "2. 5. 1 Function #2823: Value was either too large or to small for a Decimal. " Error when ending the turn, or viewing the fighter in the fleet organization window.
Save: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/uoghzrcdaoe4917kd68lw/AuroraDB.db?rlkey=jxcaknl32a8h7lji8jqkrzhw6&dl=0
TN start
Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma? NO
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Very easy to reproduce. Load save, and advance ~30 days (get to feb 26th to be precise), and the fighter will repair. advance one more time and you will get the error message.
Campaign is about 32 years in.
Fixed the link - Garfunkel
-
Deleting population created by genetic modification did not delete the population, and it re-appeared on passing turns. (intended, perhaps?)
Steps to replicate:
1. Set up a regular colony, give it gene centers (I used Mercury)
2. Create a new race (I used the default name, human 2. 0, and temperature range +-12. 5 option after researching)
3. Let the labs run for a while, then stop them
4. Delete the resulting colony/population
5. Pass a turn of any time length (I passed 5 days)
Result: Colony re-appears
(Moving them to Venus did in fact end that colony, it disappeared after all colonists were removed. So if this is intended that colonies don't just 'vanish' if there are still people there, then ignore this bug report)
Does deleting the gene centers after deleting the altered colony keep them from reappearing? Maybe whats happening is the gene centers aren't actually stopping production of modified population?
-
If you create a fighter base and land fighters on it as a squadron, then tow that fighter base to another location the fighters will be towed along as intended but will be permanently assigned to the original fleet the FB was towed from, though the game doesn't indicate this being the case in any way, the original fleet will continue to exist in the original location but will show as empty. If this original, supposedly empty fleet is deleted, then the fighters that are now in a different fleet 2 systems away will disappear from the game.
Ran into an issue that may be similar to this (fighter assignments), but ran into an issue where fighters that are dragged to a new fleet from their strikegroup are moving with the new fleet, but are still considered landed, I assume on the original carrier.
I have a patrol cruiser that carries Breaching Pods for boarding and arresting pirates. I had an NPR target in system, so I launched one pod from the strike group by selecting it and hitting "Detach," and then dragging a second Breaching Pod from the strike group list to the new detached fleet. This resulted in the fleet showing the Detached Breaching pod, and then the dragged Breaching Pod still showed as being assigned to the Patrol Cruiser:
(https://i.imgur.com/VTS6NT7.png)
When the fleet with two Breaching Pods reached the NPR target, the result of the "Attempt Boarding All Formations" resulted in only the Detached Boarding Pod attempting boarding. Similarly, manually ordering the formation from each Breaching Pod resulted in only the detached Breaching Pod attempting boarding. On the flip side, the NPR target shot and destroyed the detached Breaching Pod, but otherwise ignored the Breaching Pod that thought it was still landed. After the NPR destroyed the detached Breaching Pod, the fleet containing the remaining Breaching Pod that was dragged was stuck at 1 km/s movement speed despite the remaining Breaching Pod being undamaged. Trying to manually set speed failed to change anything; however, if I "Detached" the landed Breaching Pod it now no longer showed as landed and could move at full speed again.
DB is attached, the issue is easily reproducible as I did it twice for another NPR target that was also detected. So long as I detach everything first it works fine, but dragging a landed ship from a strike group seems to have it stay in the "landed" state even as it moves with the new fleet.
SJW: Yes, same issue. Fixed for v2.6.
-
Does deleting the gene centers after deleting the altered colony keep them from reappearing? Maybe whats happening is the gene centers aren't actually stopping production of modified population?
It does not. The population still re-appears if deleted. But if you move all the pops elsewhere, the colony can be deleted.
-
Fuel harvesters cannot unload fuel.
Steps to replicate:
1. Design ship with at least 1 sorium harvester module, engines, and a fuel transfer method (either a hub or refueling system, both were tested)
2. Set 'Transfer Fuel to Colony' move order
3. Pass any length of time
Result: the move order is 'completed', the log shows "Orders Complete"; however, no fuel is transferred.
Note: fuel tankers that do not have sorium harvester modules, are able to transfer fuel as expected.
2nd Note: yes, I did checkmark the 'tanker' box. Yes, I also doublechecked to make sure it was done.
("fuel transfer test" game in attached file)
-
I received an error today for the first time ever:
2. 5. 1 Function #2927: Attempted to divide by zero.
Info dump:
- Function #2927
- Error text: Attempted to divide by zero
- Triggers from the Economics window when selecting one specific colony
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 75 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2. 5. 1
I receive and must clear this error four times over whenever I select a specific Listening Post colony in the Economics window. Once I have the colony selected, changing the tab (Shipyards, Research, Environment, etc. ) does not trigger the error again. However, all tabs will generate the error if I select the tab before selecting the colony so it seems to be at a colony level rather than at a tab level.
-
I received an error today for the first time ever:
2. 5. 1 Function #2927: Attempted to divide by zero.
I ran into this one too; to add context, it happened when I accidentally tried to set a ground unit construction task, on a world with no available labor. The GU construction wasn't queued, and there is no visible sign in any of the colony screens or GU management screens that the task exists, but the divide by zero error happens every time I open that colony's summary.
I imagine any situation where a task gets set that doesn't get immediately rejected and has nobody to do it or nothing to do it with might cause the same problem. Shipyards, cargo transfers, etc. Mine eventually stopped warning on it's own, too, so it seems the 0 got to divide by itself after all.
-
I imagine any situation where a task gets set that doesn't get immediately rejected and has nobody to do it or nothing to do it with might cause the same problem. Shipyards, cargo transfers, etc.
Believe it or not, I just stumbled into something like this with shipyards on the same colony as well. Different function number so I'll drop it here as well; this one seems to be more specific to trying to do shipyard modifications with zero population.
Error pop-up says:
2. 5. 1 Function#2188: Attempted to divide by zero.
Info dump:
- Function #2188
- Error text: Attempted to divide by zero
- Triggers when selecting some shipyard modifications from the drop-down menu in the Economics window / Shipyards tab
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 75 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2. 5. 1
+500t, 1000, 2000, 5000, 10000, and Add Slipway options trigger the error pop-up. No Activity, Retool, And Continual Capacity Upgrade do not trigger the error pop-up. Just for giggles I tried to set one of the modifications that generates the error as the shipyard's activity: of course it didn't work, but it did delete all shipyards at that colony!
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
'Redo minerals' on a comet doesn't appear to produce the same mineral generation routine as comets generated on system creation.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
I've run into a particularly large comet that has a mathematically correct LG Time (y) but cannot be stabilised. My understanding of LG stabilisation is that comets cannot be stabilised by definition; I believe C# added moons to the initial planet-only VB6 stabilisation. While I'm not sure which direction this bug pulls in, it stands to reason that either comets shouldn't be able to display a stabilisation time at all or comets should be able to be stabilised if they're going to continue displaying a stabilisation time. Whichever the case may be, something benefits from a minor correction.
Info dump
- No function number
- No error text
- System Generation and Display window; row values and column headers show 0. 86 Gravity, 19,612 Diameter, 2. 03 Mass, 0. 56 Density, and 3. 51 LG Time (y) for the comet in question
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 76 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2. 5. 1
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
I have run into a similar issue as this one reported in 2. 2. 1
My current game seems to be stuck with an endless loop of:
Function #1954: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #1943
Function #478
I managed to save the db, advancing time in two 5 day increments should replicate the issue. Unfortunately it seems as if the save has been rendered unplayable.
Started on v2. 5. 0 - upgraded to v. 2. 5. 1 this morning. I did manage to get a save, any advancement will identify it. It looks like I go through the #1953 - > #1943 - > #478 cycle 27 times per increment.
DB attached in case it's helpful.
This bug seems to be caused by alien races without a class naming theme. If you suffer this bug in v2.5.1, then try setting a theme.
-
If you create a fighter base and land fighters on it as a squadron, then tow that fighter base to another location the fighters will be towed along as intended but will be permanently assigned to the original fleet the FB was towed from, though the game doesn't indicate this being the case in any way, the original fleet will continue to exist in the original location but will show as empty. If this original, supposedly empty fleet is deleted, then the fighters that are now in a different fleet 2 systems away will disappear from the game.
Please can you confirm you are on v2.5.1.
-
I've run into two issues while attempting to figure out assault on an NPR homeworld. I'll split the post so they're not combined.
Issue #1: CIWS are not removing missiles despite scoring kills. I ran two tests against an NPR homeworld, one with a gauss turret vessel and the other with a CIWS vessel; I've attached annotated screenshots for both tests.
- No function number
- No error text
- No specific window
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 72 years into the campaign
- Campaign started on v2. 5. 1
With the gauss turret vessel, the expected occurs: the NPR fires missiles against the vessel and the gauss turrets engage, scoring kills and removing missiles. Extra kills are instead counted as overkill (as a result, kill count never exceeds missile count) while the armour takes the remainder of the hits (in this case, 2x strength-1 impacts per leaked size-2 missile).
However, with the CIWS vessel, when the NPR fires on the vessel and the CIWS engage, a large number of kills (vastly exceeding the number of missiles) and exactly zero overkill are both recorded but no missiles are removed. This results in every inbound missile scoring hits on the armour as if the CIWS had not fired at all despite Events showing weapons fire and kills.
Can you confirm you are on v2.5.1, as this bug was fixed for that version?
-
The "Centre on selected body" option does not work in the mineral window when you have the wide view option selected.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
Hi Steve, also the create colony button on the mineral window does not work if you have the wide view windows selected.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
<snip>
Issue #1: CIWS are not removing missiles despite scoring kills. I ran two tests against an NPR homeworld, one with a gauss turret vessel and the other with a CIWS vessel; I've attached annotated screenshots for both tests.
<snip>
Can you confirm you are on v2. 5. 1, as this bug was fixed for that version?
I am indeed running v2. 5. 1; the campaign was started with and has been running the v2. 5. 1 exe exclusively (patched from v2. 5. 0). I did make a copy of the DB before carrying on with my campaign that I've just dug up to verify (I also grabbed a fresh copy of the v2. 5. 1 exe just in case); the CIWS are still presenting the issue unfortunately.
Screenshot info:
- 93 inbound salvos with a total of 458 S2 missiles (90 of 5xS2, 2 of 2xS2, 1 of 4xS2)
- 2x 1dmg warhead each for 916 total impacts and damage
- 105 "kills" from 100x CIWS-250 but all 916 warheads impact the armour nonetheless
-
I've hit an error while saving that I suspect is connected to a ship class design not having a valid hull classification.
Info dump:
- Error text reads "2. 5. 1 Function #1465: Object reference not set to an instance of an object. "
- The error popped up from the main window during saving as an interrupt; the game went back to saving after I cleared the error
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 77 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2. 5. 1
Roughly speaking I:
- Created a new class of ship in the Class Design window and added the modules as I needed
- Clicked on the drop-down menu to choose a hull classification for the ship
- Started typing "haul" intending to select my "Hauler HL" classification
- Hit enter while "Hauler HL" appeared to be selected instead of clicking on the selection
The ship class promptly disappeared from the left-hand Hull/Class tree; I was unable to dig it out again with either a newly-created "Haul HL" classification or "Haul" classification with an empty abbreviation (the second did not create a new hull classification anyway). After saving, exiting, and starting the game up again I found that both the vanished class as well as all other classes I had created after that point had not been saved at all; they do not even exist in the database. If I were to presume, I'd think that saving hit an error with the vanished (invalid?) class and halted saving ship designs at that point before carrying on with the rest of the save.
SJW: Having a ship with no valid Hull ID would cause that error and result in no classes being saved. I've added a check to the save code that will substitute cruiser if the hull type is null.
-
I have run into a similar issue as this one reported in 2. 2. 1
My current game seems to be stuck with an endless loop of:
Function #1954: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #1943
Function #478
I managed to save the db, advancing time in two 5 day increments should replicate the issue. Unfortunately it seems as if the save has been rendered unplayable.
Started on v2. 5. 0 - upgraded to v. 2. 5. 1 this morning. I did manage to get a save, any advancement will identify it. It looks like I go through the #1953 - > #1943 - > #478 cycle 27 times per increment.
DB attached in case it's helpful.
This bug seems to be caused by alien races without a class naming theme. If you suffer this bug in v2.5.1, then try setting a theme.
Oooo, so that's what was causing me so much grief in my "war of the worlds" game. Some ships entering the sensor range of the Martians would throw this error.
So, if I looked at the database and put in class naming themes where they're missing, then that might solve the problem ?
-
I have run into a similar issue as this one reported in 2. 2. 1
My current game seems to be stuck with an endless loop of:
Function #1954: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #1943
Function #478
I managed to save the db, advancing time in two 5 day increments should replicate the issue. Unfortunately it seems as if the save has been rendered unplayable.
Started on v2. 5. 0 - upgraded to v. 2. 5. 1 this morning. I did manage to get a save, any advancement will identify it. It looks like I go through the #1953 - > #1943 - > #478 cycle 27 times per increment.
DB attached in case it's helpful.
This bug seems to be caused by alien races without a class naming theme. If you suffer this bug in v2.5.1, then try setting a theme.
Oooo, so that's what was causing me so much grief in my "war of the worlds" game. Some ships entering the sensor range of the Martians would throw this error.
So, if I looked at the database and put in class naming themes where they're missing, then that might solve the problem ?
You can just go on the Diplomacy window and select one - no need to touch the DB. The weird thing about this bug is that it shouldn't be possible for a race not to have a naming theme, unless its been deleted from the DB for some reason.
-
I have run into a similar issue as this one reported in 2. 2. 1
My current game seems to be stuck with an endless loop of:
Function #1954: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #1943
Function #478
I managed to save the db, advancing time in two 5 day increments should replicate the issue. Unfortunately it seems as if the save has been rendered unplayable.
Started on v2. 5. 0 - upgraded to v. 2. 5. 1 this morning. I did manage to get a save, any advancement will identify it. It looks like I go through the #1953 - > #1943 - > #478 cycle 27 times per increment.
DB attached in case it's helpful.
This bug seems to be caused by alien races without a class naming theme. If you suffer this bug in v2.5.1, then try setting a theme.
Oooo, so that's what was causing me so much grief in my "war of the worlds" game. Some ships entering the sensor range of the Martians would throw this error.
So, if I looked at the database and put in class naming themes where they're missing, then that might solve the problem ?
You can just go on the Diplomacy window and select one - no need to touch the DB. The weird thing about this bug is that it shouldn't be possible for a race not to have a naming theme, unless its been deleted from the DB for some reason.
Could it arise from a DB version migration from a previous version where new naming themes were added? I ask because when I upgraded from 2.4 to 2.5 I only copied over the naming themes that I cared about, which weren't all of them.
-
Could it arise from a DB version migration from a previous version where new naming themes were added? I ask because when I upgraded from 2.4 to 2.5 I only copied over the naming themes that I cared about, which weren't all of them.
Yes, if it was the same game. The AI also uses naming themes, so it could be using one you didn't transfer.
-
This bug seems to be caused by alien races without a class naming theme. If you suffer this bug in v2.5.1, then try setting a theme.
Oooo, so that's what was causing me so much grief in my "war of the worlds" game. Some ships entering the sensor range of the Martians would throw this error.
So, if I looked at the database and put in class naming themes where they're missing, then that might solve the problem ?
You can just go on the Diplomacy window and select one - no need to touch the DB. The weird thing about this bug is that it shouldn't be possible for a race not to have a naming theme, unless its been deleted from the DB for some reason.
fortunately I still have the zips from when I was encountering the problem.
My problem was that in my war of the worlds game (multiple races on Earth), one of the Earth races (not the one I had control over) had for some reason not assigned a class naming theme to the Martians.
Looking at the database in FCT_AlienClass, there was a number of completely blank names for the Martian ships, and in FCT_AlienRace, the ClassNameID was set to 0 for the Martians by the NPR Earth race in question.
I changed the entry for FCT_AlienRace from 0 to 1, and that solved the problem completely.
the attached zip was when I was encountering the problem. For some reason, race 607 (Spanish empire) had assigned classnameID 0 to the Martians, and this threw errors. Changing the 0 to 1 in FCT_AlienRace seems like it solves the problem.
So it seems like sometimes an NPR will assign classnameID 0 to another alien race, and this causes a problem.
-
If you create a fighter base and land fighters on it as a squadron, then tow that fighter base to another location the fighters will be towed along as intended but will be permanently assigned to the original fleet the FB was towed from, though the game doesn't indicate this being the case in any way, the original fleet will continue to exist in the original location but will show as empty. If this original, supposedly empty fleet is deleted, then the fighters that are now in a different fleet 2 systems away will disappear from the game.
I have also run into this issue multiple times. The first time by towing the carrier and having the parasites revert to the previous fleet. The second by moving the carrier to a different fleet, deleting the now empty fleet and all the parasites, which were in the new fleet, being deleted as well.
Edit: Having dealt with the issue quite a bit, it seems to be a problem with the "Release" order not proper assigning parasites and transported ground units to the new fleet.
-
I got errors saving my 2.5.1 game and now get errors loading the saved game.
When Saving:
2.5.1 Function#3230 constraint failed
UNIQUE constraint failed: FCT_TechSystem.TechSystemID
followed by:
2.5.1 Function#1500 constraint failed
UNIQUE constraint failed:
FCT_ShipDesignComponents.SDComponentID
Game finished saving after that.
When I try to load I get 4 errors:
2.5.1 Function #1349: An item with the same key has already been added.
Then:
Tech system does not exists for D50-1 Ship Decoy so it cannot be loaded
Then:
Tech system does not exists for D80-1 Ship Decoy so it cannot be loaded
Then:
Tech system does not exists for D99-1 Ship Decoy so it cannot be loaded
The game was a TN start with real stars and I'm about 82 years into the game.
I HAVE been able to reproduce this.
Background and Description: I had not used decoys up to this point and decided I need to. I had previously researched a size 20 launcher and had queued a size 50 launcher project for research but no actual decoy missiles. After I loaded my save last time, I quickly created projects for size 80 and 99 launchers, plus decoy missiles for size 20, 50, 80 and 99. I played for a hour or two and when I saved, I got the errors above. I reloaded the game and got the above load errors. Those names (DF50-1, D80-1 and D99-01) correspond to the decoy missiles I queued up for research. None of them had been researched at the time of the save.
To reproduce the long way (this mirrors the sequence of what I actually did before initially getting the error except without playing a couple of hours before saving), what I did was:
- Load my previous save
- Click the create research project button
- Set the company name
- Select Decoy Launcher
- Select Size 80 from the dropdown
- Click Create at the bottom
- Change size to size 99
- Click Create at the bottom
- Open the missile project window
- Check the "Decoy Missile" checkbox
- Change the decoy strength to 50
- Change the name to D50-1
- Click Create at the bottom
- Change the decoy strength to 80
- Change the name to D80-1
- Click Create at the bottom
- Change the decoy strength to 99
- Change the name to D99-1
- Click Create at the bottom
- Open research window
- Select a researcher (Komatsu Tadako in my save)
- Change the research category dropdown to "Missiles / Kinetic Weapons"
- Use "Add to Queue" to add each of the research projects above to the researcher's queue
- Save the game
I have also been able to reproduce just by doing the following:
- Load my previous save
- Open the missile designer window
- Check the "Decoy Missile" checkbox
- Change the decoy strength to 50
- Change the name to D50-1
- Click Create at the bottom
- Change the decoy strength to 80
- Change the name to D80-1
- Click Create at the bottom
- Save the game
I suspect the issue is related to my trying to create multiple decoy missile projects from the window at the same time. If I follow the same steps above except close the missile designer window and reopen it before creating the second missile, I don't get the error.
I've attached two saves. The one with the 2131 date is the previous save I used to reproduce. The one with the 2132 date is the one after the save where it throws errors on load.
-
In the naval org. view if you select a ship with beam weapons (laser for example), in the ship design display tab you have the possibility to play with the target speed and range bands as in the class design window.
If you change the target speed to something else two issues occur:
1) the chance to hit along the fire control does not update.
2) the window itself freeze or something like that and if you switch to another ship you get the following error: 934 Uncorrect input string format
Same error whenever you select another ship, the only solution is to close the entire window and reopen it.
The version is 2.5.1 of course, conventional, real star.
-
Guys, I reiterate this weird thing, It seems strange to me that none is facing this issue. Whenever I research a missile, it is not appearing for production until I reload the game.
Anyone?
-
A function 2407 error when designing an autocannon fighter pod.
Steps to replicate:
1. New game/no missiles designed yet(? not sure if really a trigger, but)
2. Have some form of fighter pod researched
3. Create a fighter pod using the missile design dialog; I made both 8 HS and 20 HS variations, tried all three types of fighter pod, all gave the same error
4. Hit 'create'
Result: triggers 2407 error; however, the research task is created and selectable. Doesn't seem game-breaking.
-
I am currently passing judgement on the atmosphere of Venus because my terraformers lack any other work. I have discovered that the current colony cost is higher than the highest cost out of the individual potential costs; this should not be so, as current colony cost is nothing more than the maximum among the individual costs, eccentricity aside. This appears to be rooted in the current temperature being higher than the maximum (perihelion) temperature. I've attached a screenshot displaying this discrepancy. Colony cost reduction tech is currently 20%.
Just in case it is relevant, my work reverse-engineering the base temperature equation found an oddity with Sol, where Venus resides; while all other systems appear to use a constant of exactly 255 in the temperature equation, Sol appears to use a constant somewhere between ~255. 13 and 255. 3406815, resulting in ever-so-slightly warmer bodies. Perhaps the maximum eccentricity-based temperatures are using the global constant while the current temperature is using the Sol-specific value. It's also possible my calculations for Sol were wrong (or that 255 is not actually a constant) so I'll leave my equation here as well:
Base_Temp_K = ~255 * Luminosity_Sols^(1/4) / Distance_AU^(1/2)
Info dump:
- No function number or error text
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 79 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2. 5. 1
-
While hunting the remains of one of my main NPR's FAC fleets I have discovered that they are still capable of running away despite being out of fuel, out of MSP, and years beyond their intended 10-day deployment. Clearly they don't obey maintenance or deploy rules (I imagine this is granted to them so that they stand a chance at all), but my understanding is that they should not be able to receive orders other than "search for fuel while empty" as indicated in the C# changes list. I cannot find any indication of roll-back in the changes list so I assume that change still stands and that this is unintended behavior; https://aurora2. pentarch. org/index. php?topic=8495. msg110348#msg110348 is the latest that I can find on the subject.
Info dump:
- No function number or error text
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 79 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2. 5. 1
-
The "run away" part of the NPR code tends to supersede the "find fuel" part, admittedly for obvious reasons as it would be rather silly for the NPR to barrel its FACs into the teeth of your fleet just because this is a direct path towards fuel. You can also see this sometimes with the NPR logic around jump points, as it is one reason that NPRs jump back and forth endlessly due to the circular logic of (1) "I am in System A and I need fuel, I must jump into System B!" and (2) "I am in System B and it has a high danger rating, I must escape by jumping into System A!".
-
The "run away" part of the NPR code tends to supersede the "find fuel" part, admittedly for obvious reasons as it would be rather silly for the NPR to barrel its FACs into the teeth of your fleet just because this is a direct path towards fuel.
But if they're out of fuel they shouldn't have access to the "run away" part of their code at all, at least as it's explained in the changes list: "unable to do anything except search for refuelling options." Heading home for fuel, even if it risks going directly through an enemy fleet, would still be preferred to sitting motionless for all of eternity and is how their logic would guide them if I'm reading the changes list correctly but this was a full 360 degree scatter and definitely not a refuel order.
You can also see this sometimes with the NPR logic around jump points, as it is one reason that NPRs jump back and forth endlessly due to the circular logic of (1) "I am in System A and I need fuel, I must jump into System B!" and (2) "I am in System B and it has a high danger rating, I must escape by jumping into System A!".
One of my cloaked, passive-only survey ships spent part of the evening watching a swarm medium hive mindlessly do this and those don't even have fuel tanks so I agree that there's more than just refueling logic in play there. However, given the way it's written in the changes list I'm not sure this would apply to 100% empty NPR fuel tanks.
-
The "run away" part of the NPR code tends to supersede the "find fuel" part, admittedly for obvious reasons as it would be rather silly for the NPR to barrel its FACs into the teeth of your fleet just because this is a direct path towards fuel.
But if they're out of fuel they shouldn't have access to the "run away" part of their code at all, at least as it's explained in the changes list: "unable to do anything except search for refuelling options." Heading home for fuel, even if it risks going directly through an enemy fleet, would still be preferred to sitting motionless for all of eternity and is how their logic would guide them if I'm reading the changes list correctly but this was a full 360 degree scatter and definitely not a refuel order.
Rather than spend weeks writing AI code than uses extra processing power to assess every decision differently based on fuel state (something humans do easily, but AI does not because of the complexity of factors involved), most of which would be completely invisible to the player anyway, the AI ignores fuel until it runs out, then heads to refuel. If it is forced to run, that takes precedence. Otherwise the AI would be back to assessing fuel state constantly in case it needs to run. There is no penalty for empty tanks for the same reason.
-
By mistake I tried to tow a ship that was in Overhaul. Result is the towed ship is now stuck in a random point in orbit, can't move and Deployment and maintenance timers are going up. Also it would be nice to have a clear indicator to differentiate if a ship is actually towed or just in the same fleet.
-
By mistake I tried to tow a ship that was in Overhaul. Result is the towed ship is now stuck in a random point in orbit, can't move and Deployment and maintenance timers are going up. Also it would be nice to have a clear indicator to differentiate if a ship is actually towed or just in the same fleet.
Take the ship out of overhaul - then tow it.
-
I lost track of a spoiler fleet thoroughly enough to resort to finding it in the DB. It turns out the fleet has been fleeing directly away for more than five years despite not being aware of any enemies and being fully alone in the system for approximately two of those years. I've been aware of it for awhile but wanted to see if it ever corrected its behavior; nothing has updated and there are no far-flung system bodies for it to be heading to. I've also spotted 15 single-FAC fleets from an NPR that have been fleeing for months despite being the only fleets in the system after I jump in on top of them and promptly jumped back out. Presumably a fleet that flees should periodically check to see if it still has any hostile contacts so that it doesn't render itself functionally self-destructed due to extreme range.
I've attached a screenshot of some of the DB values to showcase just how far a couple of the hostile fleets (in red) have fled from their origination location where my own fleets (in green) are now stationed. I had to add thousands separators to make some of the values readable.
Info dump:
- No function number or error text
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 80 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2.5.1
-
The Standing Order: Build Jumpgate at Nearest Jump Point still overrides the Exclude Alien Controlled tick box. Stabilization Ships will enter flagged systems.
I thought this one was fixed already, but apparently not.
-
Sorting ships of a class by fuel within the Class Design window does not sort ships by fuel amount; it appears to update nothing. I suspect it is attempting to sort by maximum fuel capacity instead of current fuel in tanks, resulting in no change of vessel order regardless of current order as all vessels of a given class have identical capacity by definition unless damaged. The attached screenshot has a blue border around the Fuel button (as it has most recently been clicked) but retains the prior System Name sort anyway.
All other sorts appear to be working as intended, as least as tested by alternating with a System Name sort to provide a pseudo-randomized vessel order before each test.
Info dump
- No function number or error text
- Class Design window, Ships in Class tab
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 80 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2.5.1
-
In the Commanders window, after some assignments, in the dropdown at the left high corner of the window, I selected again the "Player Race" to update the names of the available officers.
The names (in the lists on the left and on the right of the window) updated.
But, even if the four dropdowns of the abilities all turned into "Crew Training", I think the shown numbers are related to the previous selection of the abilities.
I don't know if this is WIA (and I don't remember if it was already noted): I feel it as misleading.
Thanks!!
-
Plasma Carronade tech appears to contain as least one bug with the RP cost of the final research level (it costs 12m RP instead of what I imagine was intended as 1200k RP) and I'll drop it here in bugs because it changes gameplay rather than just readability. There are two other potential errors worth mentioning just in case they require correction but at least one of them may be better suited in the typos thread.
The final five tech levels and costs for v2.5.1 are as follows:
"50cm" at 125,000 RP
"60cm" at 250,000 RP
"70cm" at 300,000 RP
"80cm" at 600,000 RP
"100 cm" at 12,000,000 RP
I presume 12,000,000 RP for the final level is an error from an intended cost of 1,200,000 RP.
For what it's worth, the step up from 60cm to 70cm only increases in cost from 250k to 300k; I would have guessed that this step would have gone from 250k to 500k, leading to costs of 1m for 80cm and 2m for 100cm, but the lower costs may be by design. Additionally, the final tech level is named "100 cm" with a space rather than "100cm" without a space to keep with convention.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6.0
-
I would like to confirm the bug report about CWIS not hitting properly. Save game attached.
I quadruple checked I was on 2. 5. 1 EXE file was created on jan 25. the day the 2. 5. 1 update was posted.
The function number -none
The complete error text -none
The window affected -event log?
What you were doing at the time - getting my ass kicked by NPRs
Conventional or TN start -TN
Random or Real Stars - Real
Is your decimal separator a comma? no.
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Other guy in the thread had it too.
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer ~60 years so far.
-
Ran into an error with the "Autoroute by System" option within the Naval Organization window that appears to be repeatable as many times as I try it. It does not appear to break anything else further.
Steps to reproduce:
- Select the "Autoroute by System" option with a fleet selected and double-click any destination to add the route to the fleet's orders
- With the route to the destination still set as the fleet's orders, select "Autoroute by System" again
- "Remove All" orders from the fleet; this resets the available order selection to "System Locations" but leaves "Autoroute by System" selected
- Double-click any jump-point option with "Autoroute by System" still selected to attempt to add a standard transit order to the fleet's order list; this throws the error
Info dump:
- 2.5.1 Function #3210: Unable to cast object of type 'hg' to type 'jh'.
- Naval Organization window
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 80 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2.5.1
-
Ran into an error with the "Autoroute by System" option within the Naval Organization window that appears to be repeatable as many times as I try it. It does not appear to break anything else further.
Steps to reproduce:
- Select the "Autoroute by System" option with a fleet selected and double-click any destination to add the route to the fleet's orders
- With the route to the destination still set as the fleet's orders, select "Autoroute by System" again
- "Remove All" orders from the fleet; this resets the available order selection to "System Locations" but leaves "Autoroute by System" selected
- Double-click any jump-point option with "Autoroute by System" still selected to attempt to add a standard transit order to the fleet's order list; this throws the error
Info dump:
- 2.5.1 Function #3210: Unable to cast object of type 'hg' to type 'jh'.
- Naval Organization window
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 80 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2.5.1
I think this happens because the Orders pane doesn't correctly update the fleet location for order-giving purposes when orders are removed. You see something similar happen in other cases when orders are removed but the game still thinks the fleet is or will be in that system. Fix is usually to refresh that window somehow to force an update, so I'd imagine that the bug fix is simply to force that update after removing orders.
-
Not a major issue, but the tonnage displayed by wrecks doesn't seem to use the same rounding logic that the ship design screen uses.
You can see it on my post here: https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=11100.msg168848#msg168848 (https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=11100.msg168848#msg168848), where a number of my ships are listed as #,999 tons.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6.0
-
Hit another error though I have truly no idea where this one came from or how to reproduce it. With Automated Turns set to On, I fired an 8 hour increment; a 3h30m increment passed then the error popped up. Only needed to clear it once before Automated Turns resumed on its own without needing another increment selection.
Info dump:
- "2.5.1 Function #558: Object reference not set to an instance of an object."
- Possibly attached to the main game window; selecting any other window moves it to the background, but selecting the main window puts it in front. The error does not have its own taskbar icon.
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 81 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2.5.1
-
I have somehow lost the ability in my empire to research Electronic Counter-countermeasures. I have the tech "Electronic Warfare" researched but no additional research options for ECCM. I only noticed this after I got some salvage data from a NPR and could not find the tech in my research list.
I think this may have occurred because I took over a NPR ship or had one surrender to me when it had jammer tech before I researched electronic warfare. I don't actually remember researching "electronic warfare" actually.
I did go into SM mode and remove the tech and try and add it back via instant but it does not resolve the problem.
Attached is the db.
- Conventional Start
- Real Stars
- US Decimial
- 58 years into the campaign
- Started on 2.5.0
I had ECCM being researched on another planet and this is why I couldn't find the option on earth. So this is just user error. :P
-
I had something odd happening, 2 of my transports could not fulfill any of their order on Earth (loading infrastructure), they were on repeat, so I cancelled all orders.
48 days later, I find them at the same spot in space, except Earth has moved, so they are 232 millions km from it. They de-orbited more or less. Feature or bug?
-
I had something odd happening, 2 of my transports could not fulfill any of their order on Earth (loading infrastructure), they were on repeat, so I cancelled all orders.
48 days later, I find them at the same spot in space, except Earth has moved, so they are 232 millions km from it. They de-orbited more or less. Feature or bug?
I am sure not your case, but maybe you had a previous "minimum distance" option set for a different ship and now your cargo had load infrastructure but because there was the minimal distance still set they were not in Eath orbit? Sometimes it happens to me, because I tend to keep the ship window open.
-
Hi,
I've just had a bug that I think hasn't been reported yet.
I just had a cargo fleet drop off some components (found in ruins) at my home world. I disassembled the three engines one by one. I then clicked to disassemble one of the two terraforming modules. The number of terraforming modules in the GU/Stockpile page dropped to 0 but the component was still listed in green. I clicked on it and clicked to disassemble and it gave me the research points and the number of components changed to -1, another disassemble and it changed to -2.
There is clearly a something wrong happening here as I could get infinite research points this way!
OS is Windows 10
A4X version 2.5.1
Decimal separator is a ,
Only mod in use is DeepBlueTheme which I believe is allowed.
Thanks,
Andy
-
Decimal separator is a ,
Decimal separator needs to be a '.' (period), you have it as ',' (comma).
I admit, this doesn't sound like the most likely cause of such a bug, but the decimal separator issue causes a lot of weird things to happen believe it or not.
-
I had something odd happening, 2 of my transports could not fulfill any of their order on Earth (loading infrastructure), they were on repeat, so I cancelled all orders.
48 days later, I find them at the same spot in space, except Earth has moved, so they are 232 millions km from it. They de-orbited more or less. Feature or bug?
I am sure not your case, but maybe you had a previous "minimum distance" option set for a different ship and now your cargo had load infrastructure but because there was the minimal distance still set they were not in Eath orbit? Sometimes it happens to me, because I tend to keep the ship window open.
This was one of my test runs, so I had a single fleet, and no follow to another fleet. But it's ok, it's not a feature apparently, so I must have done something.
-
Decimal separator is a ,
Decimal separator needs to be a '.' (period), you have it as ',' (comma).
I admit, this doesn't sound like the most likely cause of such a bug, but the decimal separator issue causes a lot of weird things to happen believe it or not.
My mistake, the decimal separator is a . while the thousands separator is the ,
Thanks,
Andy
-
I'm pretty sure there are bugs with applying colors in the message log. For example a color change not taken into account, or one which seems to be changed in the message log, but is still using the old scheme when shown in the tactical window.
So if these are not known issues, I can set a save aside.
-
The tactical window will only update to the new colors when it refreshes - just scrolling the screen should do it.
-
I restarted for 30 mn my game this morning. I guess it qualifies as "refreshing the tactical window"? ;D
See the pinky color msg, for an event just generated after my session start.
(https://i.imgur.com/xYQB9Iu.jpeg)
-
Error popup, often several times at once, occurs every few 5-day increments. It was originally #2661, now #2662.
2. 5. 1 Function #2662: Could not load file or assembly 'System. Data. Entity. Design, Version=4. 0. 0. 0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089' or one of its dependencies.
Started happening after, I *think*, making several ground forces with "Construct Org".
No mods, running 2. 5. 1 in aurora4x-docker.
-
There is some GUI bug where the Control UIDs for the buttons in the GUI are being renumbered, making it impossible to click them reliably via Autohotkey.
For example, the Control for 5-day turns is "WindowsForms10.BUTTON.app.0.141b42a_r8_ad178" when the game loads, however at some point, and by some means I have not narrowed down the control changes to "WindowsForms10.BUTTON.app.0.141b42a_r8_ad1109". Every Control then has 31 added to it.
This didn't happen in previous versions and honestly, I'm confused as to why it is happening.
-
I had something odd happening, 2 of my transports could not fulfill any of their order on Earth (loading infrastructure), they were on repeat, so I cancelled all orders.
48 days later, I find them at the same spot in space, except Earth has moved, so they are 232 millions km from it. They de-orbited more or less. Feature or bug?
I am sure not your case, but maybe you had a previous "minimum distance" option set for a different ship and now your cargo had load infrastructure but because there was the minimal distance still set they were not in Eath orbit? Sometimes it happens to me, because I tend to keep the ship window open.
More likely, they didn't register as in orbit when the "could not load" error was reported, so they stayed still in space. Next time, cancel the order, then order them back to the planet you want them to orbit.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/p4iLkzH.jpeg)
When you rename a civilian company, in many cases (but not all) renaming is only partially working. (It's more than one year after having renamed the company in this screenshot)
-
Minor Bug
If a fleet is transferred to another race it cannot wind back its maintenance clock at a colony of the new species. Until there has been a save and reload of the database.
-
So how can that be. My Production event persists being in pink & yellow on the tactical screen, whereas it is set since one week (real life, 12+ sessions so not in memory) to be pink & black.
(https://i.imgur.com/wz4EJJx.jpeg)
-
I now understand the issue. It's simple actually! The events when displayed on the tactical screen never use the defined Text Colour, only the default one.
-
If that's the case, it's a problem with the theme you're using, as I can assure you that text colors work fine on default settings.
-
Ah crap. Sorry for the bother then, my fault.
-
I have created another game where I added 4 NPR on Earth, one is Greater China, short name CHI.
Pass 2 mn, the contact name is GRE, not CHI. The same issue presents itself for the 3 other races. Looking at the DB, the short handle is CHI, not GRE.
If I go to the Intelligence window, replace GRE with CHI in the Abbrev field, and then (mandatory or nothing changes) click on Rename Race then OK (not changing the actual race name), then the next contact update will correctly show CHI.
-
I have created another game where I added 4 NPR on Earth, one is Greater China, short name CHI.
Pass 2 mn, the contact name is GRE, not CHI. The same issue presents itself for the 3 other races. Looking at the DB, the short handle is CHI, not GRE.
If I go to the Intelligence window, replace GRE with CHI in the Abbrev field, and then (mandatory or nothing changes) click on Rename Race then OK (not changing the actual race name), then the next contact update will correctly show CHI.
The short name you give a race, which can be of any length, is not related to the 3 letter abbreviation used by the Intelligence window.
-
I find this confusing, as the intelligence window reports the correct long name, race portrait, and flag. So, why would the handle be different from the short name? Unless, in your mind, the short name is not the handle but something to use somewhere else. But then, where?
-
I find this confusing, as the intelligence window reports the correct long name, race portrait, and flag. So, why would the handle be different from the short name? Unless, in your mind, the short name is not the handle but something to use somewhere else. But then, where?
The Race Short Name is used for places where the Race Title would be too long, such as colonies on the System View.
The three letter capaitalised abbreviation on the intelligence window is a reporting code and is used for contacts. This is initially set to the first three letters of the intelligence reporting name. This reporting name is always the <system name> aliens until comms are established, after which it will change to match the long name. Also, you can change the reporting name and the abbreviation to anything, regardless of the alien's actual name. So if you discover the aliens in Wolf 359, they will be named the Wolf 359 aliens and their reporting code will be WOL. In your case, I am guessing the two races started on the same planet so comms were already established.
So the reporting name and the three letter abbreviation are completely independent of the true name of the aliens, with the only crossover being the reporting name updated once comms are established.
For example, in my own current game, my race short name is Imperium, which would be too long for contact information.
-
Got it, thanks for the thorough explanation. And I can change it to what I like, so it's all good.
-
Buglet or misunderstood feature:
If I set the speed of my fleet to 350 km/s (nominal speed 1066), then it seems to work; as in, if I bring the dialog box up again, it shows 350, but the next move impulse shows it's still moving at 1066 km/s.
Also, another one, but it might just be it's for non-fighters only. I have a fighter tender with 3 fighters, if I ask to split all 'ships' at arrival, it does nothing. I guess here 'ships' are 1000+ tons objects?
-
Buglet or misunderstood feature:
If I set the speed of my fleet to 350 km/s (nominal speed 1066), then it seems to work; as in, if I bring the dialog box up again, it shows 350, but the next move impulse shows it's still moving at 1066 km/s.
Also, another one, but it might just be it's for non-fighters only. I have a fighter tender with 3 fighters, if I ask to split all 'ships' at arrival, it does nothing. I guess here 'ships' are 1000+ tons objects?
Did you uncheck 'use maximum speed'?
Split fleet doesn't affect anything in a hangar.
-
I did not! I now see the checkbox. I would have unchecked it automatically for the player in the case he enters a speed manually...
-
Just minding my own business playing, and suddenly if I advance time beyond 12 hours after this save (attached), I get what seems like an endless set of errors, in order as below. It does end, if you close enough of them, but then happens again everytime you advance time without end.
When you post, please post as much information as possible, including:
2. 5. 1 Function #1954: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
2. 5. 1 Function #1943: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
2. 5. 1 Function #478: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
it then repeats 1954 and continues on in the same order. This occurs with no windows other than the main window open when advancing time.
TN start
Random or Real Stars - not sure, default setting?
Is your decimal separator a comma? Yes
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Never seen this before
it's only a few years in, not a long campaign
Game is now unplayable. In the attached it's "Terran Empire 2"
-
This same string of Function numbers came up earlier in this same thread: Here (https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13464.msg168710;topicseen#msg168710).
According to Steve, it's being caused by "alien races without a class naming theme. If you suffer this bug in v2.5.1, then try setting a theme."
-
Stabilizing an LP point on a planet with an elliptical orbit appears to place the LP where it would go if the orbit was circular (or I'm assuming that's what it's doing - it's certainly not placing them on the orbital line.)
-
Stabilizing an LP point on a planet with an elliptical orbit appears to place the LP where it would go if the orbit was circular (or I'm assuming that's what it's doing - it's certainly not placing them on the orbital line.)
Have you advanced game time since the LP was completed?
Prior to eccentricity being added, there was a bug in the displayed position of the LP upon completion, but the position updated correctly after time was advanced (possibly not until the next construction cycle).
Perhaps this is just a different presentation of the same bug.
-
Looks like you're correct - I went back to the system in question and the LP is now on the planet's track.
I'm not sure when, exactly, it updated - but I know that it wasn't instantly, because I saw my stabilization ship make its way to the LP after it created it.
-
EDIT: Ignore this one. It was already fixed in the 2.5.1 patch.
Summary: Dormant construct bonus apparently being applied to local research.
I did a non-Sol start by making a new system with the "Create Habitable" button, and making a race on the generated homeworld with the "Create Race" button.
The HW has a dormant construct. I have not yet developed the technology to investigate it.
However, the Research tab seems to be including a 40% bonus for Ground Combat research projects.
-
Loading multiples of the same ship design component on a freighter only uses the space of one component.
I loaded eight Boat Bay components (size 5.25HS = 262.5t ea.) onto a freighter with 5000 cargo capacity.
After loading, reported remaining capacity is 4737, which indicates that only a single Boat Bay is being subtracted from total capacity.
-
Training a XENO unit does not initiate Dormant Construct survey on the same body.
My HW (non-Sol start) has an Ancient Construct, which was dormant at game start.
After some years, I finally constructed a XENO ground unit.
I left the unit on the HW and waited for it to survey the construct.
And I waited.
And waited.
And waited.
After 9+ years of no results, I loaded the unit on a transport, and immediately unloaded the unit back to the surface.
Five months later, the construct was reported as surveyed.
So, it seems like the code only starts calculating construct survey chances after a XENO unit is unloaded onto the body.
Training a unit locally does not seem to trigger it.
-
Fire Control Jammer 3 seems to have the wrong cost of 60 , the other level 3 jammers have a cost of 30 and all the level 12,4 jammer costs are identical, fire control jammer 4 costs 40
-
I designed and researched an infantry unit, then obsoleded it because it wasn't what I wanted. It is now appearing under the power and propulsion research tab as researcheable race-designed engine ???
-
I designed and researched an infantry unit, then obsoleded it because it wasn't what I wanted. It is now appearing under the power and propulsion research tab as researcheable race-designed engine ???
There used to be a similar bug that could happen if you had two Create Research Project windows at the same time when you designed a component to research.
Regardless, you should be able to just delete the tech from the Research screen.
-
In the Medal Management window, the Medal Conditions tab does not correctly reflect the medals of the current race in cases of multiple player races. In other words, in a game with multiple player races, if I set medal conditions for Player Race 1, then switch to Player Race 2, the medals shown in the Medal Conditions tab will show medals from Player Race 1 (regardless of whether Player Race 2 has set a medal for that condition).
-
"Show Next Tech" checkbox does not affect the Engine Power dropdown.
On the Create Research Project window, with Engines selected as the type, there are five further dropdowns:
Engine Tech
Engine Power
Fuel Consumption
Thermal Reduction
Engine Size
My current tech is:
Nuclear Pulse
40%-200%
0.8LEPH
50% Thermal
60HS max
When I tick the Show Next Tech checkbox, the dropdown lists repopulate with the options that will become available when I complete the next associated tech.
Except for Engine Power, which still only has the options from 40% to 200%.
-
Tractored ships with engines will use fuel as if they were moving under their own power under certain conditions. I believe the bug shows up if the tractored ship has moved on its own without being tractored since the last time the game was opened. I was able to reproduce the issue in a fresh game using the following steps:
- Make two tugs and two other ships with engines, e.g. fuel harvesters
- Order Harvester 1 to move to Luna, leave the other one at Earth
- Order Tug 1 to tractor Harvester 1 and Tug 2 to tractor Harvester 2
- Order both tugs to move to Neptune. Harvester 1 will use fuel while being tugged; Harvester 2 will not.
- Save, close, and reopen the game, and neither one will use fuel
I confirmed I'm using version 2.5.1.
-
I have discovered a bug, I think. I went through the bug posts for 2.51 and couldn't find anything like it, but who knows?
To start I am using a fresh install of 2.51. No mods or anything unusual.
I started a single-player race campaign with limited starting tech featuring a humanity that had been conquered and oppressed by aliens for quite a while, before they mysteriously left just as the human resistance was close to defeating their human proxy troops. The humans get their act together and begin exploring the solar system, looking for the aliens, and expanding and building a fleet in case they find them. I pushed this campaign about twelve years down the road, from 2400 to 2412, before stopping because I was considering starting a different campaign with multiple player races.
I created the second game in the same database and played around with it for a bit, but never got much beyond the start phase, mostly due to a crippling Fallout 4 addiction, as my son helped me mod the base game and add a lot of new content.
Either before I created the second campaign or just after I noticed Steve's campaign that comes with the database and I deleted it.
After the Fallout 4 addition abated a bit I felt the need to get back to Aurora, so I opened up the game and decided to go back to my single-race game, as it was farther along and better developed. However, the dates are now screwed up. As noted above, the campaign started at 2400, and went out to March of 2412 before I quit. My log document verifies this. When I opened up the campaign, the dates in the Events window are in August 2068. I checked the image I had made of the starting conditions and that verifies that the campaign started on the year 2400 as well.
I don't know where this date came from. The other campaign I created, with multiple player races, started in the year 1, so it doesn't seem to be cross contamination from that.
I don't know how this happened, and the campaign is essentially unusable because the dates don't match my log document (potential campaign write-up).
Kurt
-
Hello, I was using a somewhat old version of Aurora 4x, and having a fine game, until I decided to create another Race during my playthrough. I started getting errors every time I tried to change the time, so I had to uninstall and reinstall the game, with the latest patch.
Unfortunately, every time I open up the game, every time I uninstall and reinstall it, I get the error messages: "2. 5. 1 Function #141: Column "Eldar" does not belong to table Record Set", and then
"2. 5. 1 Function #139: Object Reference not set to an instance of an object"
Im allowed to open the game, but every time I click something that second error pops up, including to when I try starting a new game, which gives two errors
"2. 5. 1 Function #1709: Object Reference, etc"
and
"2. 5. 1 Function #1697: Object Reference not set to an instance of an object"
No matter how many times I uninstall, and reinstall, ive been getting the same errors ever since I created that new race in that old save (which is now gone). I am confused and would like to ask for help on this.
Thank you
-
Hello, I was using a somewhat old version of Aurora 4x, and having a fine game, until I decided to create another Race during my playthrough. I started getting errors every time I tried to change the time, so I had to uninstall and reinstall the game, with the latest patch.
Unfortunately, every time I open up the game, every time I uninstall and reinstall it, I get the error messages: "2. 5. 1 Function #141: Column "Eldar" does not belong to table Record Set", and then
"2. 5. 1 Function #139: Object Reference not set to an instance of an object"
Im allowed to open the game, but every time I click something that second error pops up, including to when I try starting a new game, which gives two errors
"2. 5. 1 Function #1709: Object Reference, etc"
and
"2. 5. 1 Function #1697: Object Reference not set to an instance of an object"
No matter how many times I uninstall, and reinstall, ive been getting the same errors ever since I created that new race in that old save (which is now gone). I am confused and would like to ask for help on this.
Thank you
This sounds like a mismatch between the executable version and the database version, which is probably due to a bad install. I recommend trying a fresh install in a different location, following the installation instructions very, very closely.
For reference, that means to install the full 1.13 distribution (http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=10635.0), then the 2.5.0 distribution (http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13418.0), then the 2.5.1 distribution (http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13462.0) in that order, following the instructions in each linked thread.
-
On a new session (luckily for me, as I reverted to the previous save) I fiddled with old security formations on Mars, by showing all elements, and grouping 4 formations into a single one. The end result somehow was that I had the remaining formation with a 25k HQ leading another 25k HQ, which seems not very legit to me. But oh well ... Then it went worse.
I closed the window and reopened it, and Mars was only showing the header, and nothing else, although clicking on Mars showed all elements there, but without any formation.
I did not save as it was feeling very buggy. So my question is probably, do people encounter these organizational bugs in land units or not? This was the first time I did some reorg, and bam a bug, so I guess it's not ultra-rare?
-
I believe it's a bug, however it makes a lot of sense as a (probably unintended) feature:
When disassembling conventional cryogenic transport modules, you get research points for the cryogenic transport tech, even before researching Trans-newtonian technology (And can get the full tech! ;D )
Also i checked and it doesn't work for:
- Conventional Active Sensors - Strength 2 (Or their missile fire control variants)
- Conventional Geological Survey Sensors - Strength 0. 2
- Troop Transport Bay - Conventional
- Cargo shuttles (Non-TN)
-
In the System Body Modification window off the System Generation and Display window, player cannot adjust Radiation level. Attempting to change the number to something other than zero does not work. Closing and re-opening the window does not change things. Dust Level can be changed in this manner without issues. It is also not just a visibility issue, as changing radiation to 50,000 and then running time until the next construction cycle shows that nothing happens to the colony on that body: environment tab shows 0 radiation and population growth is not affected.
-
Not a bug, but an odd rounding IMO. :-\
See the cost of the jump drive in the image.
-
You can select a commercial fleet as the target of your new fighter production. It seems a 'dangerous' and totally un-necessary option to me.
-
You can select a commercial fleet as the target of your new fighter production. It seems a 'dangerous' and totally un-necessary option to me.
Commercial carriers are a thing, for hauling replacement fighters to the frontlines. Or do you mean a civilian fleet?
-
Sorry, civilian ...
-
Did anyone ever encounter a bug with species Population Density and Growth/Research rate/factory modifiers ? For some reason when i loaded the save my Humans suddenly had 100.00 both density and growth.
Various tested runs ( both TN and conv civs ) also show that game suddenly adds two zeroes to those parameters.
See attached pic - ignore the grav/temp deviations, i was trying to see if it will change too but it doesnt apparently..
EDIT : seems to happen right from the start with all four parameters - density/growth/research rate/factory production modifiers at the race creation screen - i set them all to 5.00 and in game its suddenly 500.00, i leave them at default and in game they are 100.00.
2.5.1
Absolute clear install, not even so much as a additional picture or medal.
-
See attached pic
I see in the attached pic that your decimal separator looks suspiciously like a comma instead of a dot.
Known issues, the very first one: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=10637.0
-
See attached pic
I see in the attached pic that your decimal separator looks suspiciously like a comma instead of a dot.
Known issues, the very first one: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=10637.0
How the hell did game run fine by now? Weird. Guess ill try to change it and see if its fixed now.
EDIT: well ill be damned it actually was , and i never noticed.. Somehow it changed from dot at some point O.o
Thx.