Aurora 4x
C# Aurora => C# Bug Reports => Topic started by: Steve Walmsley on December 02, 2023, 01:01:13 PM
-
Please post potential bugs in this thread for v2.3.1
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 v2.3.1
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
-
Seems unimportant, but weird. In events I got a strange completion report:
Location N/A, "Research into Martohartono-Pamungkas Commercial Magneto-plasma Drive EP320.0 completed"
Non-location aside, that drive is a prototype using future tech. I not only haven't completed researching it, I haven't started and can't until my current project to develop Magneto-plasma Drive finishes.
-
Seems unimportant, but weird. In events I got a strange completion report:
Location N/A, "Research into Martohartono-Pamungkas Commercial Magneto-plasma Drive EP320.0 completed"
Non-location aside, that drive is a prototype using future tech. I not only haven't completed researching it, I haven't started and can't until my current project to develop Magneto-plasma Drive finishes.
Not a bug; prototypes are treated as research projects "under the hood", where the "hood" is made of see-through plastic instead of solid metal. ;)
-
Same prototype after I researched the one tech I should have needed, the "Research Proto" button does not become available and the prototype still shows (FP), which I expect means 'future prototype'.
I was able to replicate the prototype as a development project from scratch. Possibly the prototype thinks it needs some of the other future techs available under the 'show next tech' checkbox as well, even though it doesn't actually use them?
-
Another minimal bug/error, but maybe worth to correct it.
The function number: 3381
The complete error text: empty or invalid patch name
The window affected: Events window
What you were doing at the time: Click on import colour, then ok and when the windows prompt to select a csv file just click on cancel and the error appears.
Conventional or TN start: concentional
Random or Real Stars: Real
Is your decimal separator a comma? Comma
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? easy
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well Just started
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
Minor thing:
Conventional Troop Transport Bay can't be made obsolete component, unlike Cryogenic Transport.
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
I got the attached error message when a ship blew up due to maintenance failure while on a "training exercise" under a Training Command. It listed a component as being damaged due to enemy attack, but I could not see any enemies' on scanner and it happened at the same time as the other maintenance failure, so I'm assuming this is actually meant to be a result of that?
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
??? This popped up when I was saving. Can I close the game?
-
??? This popped up when I was saving. Can I close the game?
You will have an empty tech system table if you do, but unless you can diagnose and correct the problem while still running the game, you don't have any other option.
That is a very unusual error caused by two tech systems having the same unique identifier. Have you manually modified the database at all, or are you running any mods? That shouldn't happen in a normal situation because the code checks the existing IDs before assigning a new one.
BTW, if you close the game you can restore your previous save by deleting Aurora.db from the install directory and renaming AuroraDBSaveBackup.db to Aurora.db
-
I did not modify anything, and had only used deep blue theme
-
All the decoys and multi-stage missiles suffer this problem...
-
All the decoys and multi-stage missiles suffer this problem...
How do you know they are causing the problem?
BTW - what version are you using?
-
Okay, after a few trial-and-error attempts i have isolated it to be multi stage missiles
OR the class 25 decoy(made another attempt, eliminated)
(I'm on 2.3.1)
-
If you save the game after creating the terminal stage and before creating the actual multi-stage missile, nothing goes wrong. However, the bug seems to be triggered if you don't do so.
-
If you save the game after creating the terminal stage and before creating the actual multi-stage missile, nothing goes wrong. However, the bug seems to be triggered if you don't do so.
You will need to be more specific. I just created a multi-stage missile with decoys on the second stage, then saved the game with no problems. Can you do a step-by-step explanation including the missile designs?
I also tried a multi-stage missile with decoys on the first stage and decoys on the two second stages. Also saved with no problems.
Have you tried saving without the mod running?
-
Missile Size: 7.000 MSP (17.5000 Tons) Warhead: 0 Radiation Damage: 0
Speed: 37,143 km/s Fuel: 3,301 1st Stage Flight Time: 30 minutes 1st Stage Range: 67.47m km
2nd Stage Flight Time: 41 seconds 2nd Stage Range: 11,124k km
Active Sensor Strength: 6.75 EM Sensitivity Modifier: 75
Resolution: 100 Maximum Range vs 5000 ton object (or larger): 58,921,493 km
Cost Per Missile: 63.299900 Development Cost: 1257
Second Stage: Class 1 Terminal Stage x4
Second Stage Separation Range: 150,000 km
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 371.4% 3k km/s 123.8% 5k km/s 74.3% 10k km/s 37.1%
Materials Required
Tritanium 9.999900
Boronide 25.30
Uridium 6.75
Gallicite 21.25
Fuel: 3301
^This is the problematic MIRV
It seems that if the both stages are created without a save in between, the bug will trigger.
Missile Size: 1 MSP (2.5 Tons) Warhead: 10.000 Radiation Damage: 10.000
Speed: 270,000 km/s Fuel: 166 Flight Time: 41.2 seconds Range: 11,124,000 km
Cost Per Missile: 11.499975 Development Cost: 536
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 2,700% 3k km/s 900% 5k km/s 540% 10k km/s 270%
Materials Required
Tritanium 2.499975
Boronide 4.50
Gallicite 4.50
Fuel: 166
^This is the terminal stage, FYI
-
Missile Size: 7.000 MSP (17.5000 Tons) Warhead: 0 Radiation Damage: 0
Speed: 37,143 km/s Fuel: 3,301 1st Stage Flight Time: 30 minutes 1st Stage Range: 67.47m km
2nd Stage Flight Time: 41 seconds 2nd Stage Range: 11,124k km
Active Sensor Strength: 6.75 EM Sensitivity Modifier: 75
Resolution: 100 Maximum Range vs 5000 ton object (or larger): 58,921,493 km
Cost Per Missile: 63.299900 Development Cost: 1257
Second Stage: Class 1 Terminal Stage x4
Second Stage Separation Range: 150,000 km
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 371.4% 3k km/s 123.8% 5k km/s 74.3% 10k km/s 37.1%
Materials Required
Tritanium 9.999900
Boronide 25.30
Uridium 6.75
Gallicite 21.25
Fuel: 3301
^This is the problematic MIRV
It seems that if the both stages are created without a save in between, the bug will trigger.
Missile Size: 1 MSP (2.5 Tons) Warhead: 10.000 Radiation Damage: 10.000
Speed: 270,000 km/s Fuel: 166 Flight Time: 41.2 seconds Range: 11,124,000 km
Cost Per Missile: 11.499975 Development Cost: 536
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 2,700% 3k km/s 900% 5k km/s 540% 10k km/s 270%
Materials Required
Tritanium 2.499975
Boronide 4.50
Gallicite 4.50
Fuel: 166
^This is the terminal stage, FYI
I designed something similar but still can't recreate the problem. Given that many people design two-stage missiles and save the game, if this was a general problem I would have received a lot of bug reports by now.
It looks to be something specific to your install. It may be the save in-between is correcting some other underlying problems with tech IDs and it isn't connected to the missiles. It may also be related to the mod you are running.
If you have any earlier saves, it might be worth trying the same design. Also try running without the mod and see if that changes it. For now, I am giving up on this particular problem unless I get other similar reports from other players so I can narrow it down.
-
Potential bug with the "Create Habitable" feature.
Game version 3.3.1, entirely new game, all I've done is activate SM and click "Create Habitable".
In the 2.2 Patch Notes it was stated that when using Create Habitable the following rule applied toward the end of the process:
If the resulting temperature is between 250K and 310K (-23C and 37C), the planet qualifies as habitable and the dominant terrain is updated. If not, subsequent planets are checked. If no suitable planets are created, the system is discarded and regenerated until a suitable planet is created
Unless this is no longer the case, "habitable" systems are being created that fall outside this temperature bound. Attached is the screenshot of one such planet. There are no other planets in the system that might be considered the habitable one, so it's not the result of a failed conversion that was mentioned as a possibility in the feature description. As you can see, the temperature is currently 47.9 degrees, with the min/max due to eccentricity at 47.29 - 62.05 degrees.
SJW: The temperature range has since been updated to a range of -48C to +77C (which I've just changed again to +67C) to account for a wider range of NPRs. I've edited the original post.
-
This happened when selecting a DSP, and also when I do 5-Day increments after making the said DSP
-
And also related to the DSP is this display bug, fixed itself when some more colonies are created
-
Not sure if this is a bug or not, but in 2. 3. 1 CTRL+F2 doesn't appear to work. It's not that big an issue in the grand scheme of things but it makes playing with screen readers a little more tedious and far as I'm aware prevents you from viewing NPR"s and Spoilers via SM.
SJW: Working as Intended
-
Ctrl-F2 was for designer mode and should not have been left active. It is extremely easy for someone to accidentally corrupt their game if they modify NPRs or delete something. While I am sure the majority of people would take that advice and just use it to look, I don't want to be chasing phantom bugs reported by the minority.
-
There is something funky going on with assignment of ground unit formations when building from organizations. For the first 20 years of game play it has worked just fine, but I have noticed that with the recent formations I have constructed, after the top level division is built, then the new formations are not assigned in a hierarchy under the newly built division, but are instead placed under the first available division in the OOB for that colony. I have attached images of OOB before construction, the garrison division in the organization page, and how it looks after building the 14th garrison division and the 12th PDC-PD, which is placed under the 1st Assault Division.
I have tried to rebuild the organization a couple of times, both by replacing the various elements and by deleting the organization and starting over, but the end result is the same in all cases. Also if I contruct an assault division, then the new Armored Brigade is placed under the 1st Assault Division instead of the newly constructed 3rd Assault Division.
Since this occurred after a while, I am not sure what could be done to replicate it, so I am instead attaching my database file, if it helps with debugging.
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0. See this post: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13368.msg166993#msg166993
-
Load previous seems to not propagate retarget capability in missile design.
I designed (and built) a size 4 retargetting antiship missile, which displays the expected features in class design (*) and technology report. But if I open missile design and load previous, I get a size 3.5 design that doesn't have retargetting.
Additional note: If I set retargeting and then load previous again, it shows the correct design, including reverting other changes made. It looks like the load previous action is simply not setting the Retarget Capability status either way.
(*) The stat lines for missiles in ship descriptions don't seem to make any indication of retarget capability.
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
There is something funky going on with assignment of ground unit formations when building from organizations.
I've had this happen too and it didn't require 20 years. The organization was only 3 levels deep but my third division had its regiments built under the previous two. I had manually built one division HQ between using Organization to build the other two divisions since I had some regiments built manually before. Did you do something like that?
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0. See this post: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13368.msg166993#msg166993
-
There is something funky going on with assignment of ground unit formations when building from organizations.
I've had this happen too and it didn't require 20 years. The organization was only 3 levels deep but my third division had its regiments built under the previous two. I had manually built one division HQ between using Organization to build the other two divisions since I had some regiments built manually before. Did you do something like that?
I'm curious about the order of events here. Did you:
- Order the lone/"manual" division HQ to be built.
- Order the division organization to be built.
- "Manual" division HQ was completed and deployed.
- Division organization elements began to be built.
If so this could be an issue like: the "Build Organization" button checks existing formations to determine the IDs of formations that subordinates should be attached to, but doesn't account for units in the build queue?
-
Despite the new dedicated Missile Fire Control section in both tech view and research, Missile Fire Controls are still displayed under Active Sensors in the View Technology Window.
Personally speaking, I would still prefer the old ways: meaning designing the Missile Fire Control via Slider in the Active Sensor for practicality, which will also work better by keeping both Missile Fire Controls and Active Sensors as they are now.
Anyway, I guess this is a bug since I can see they have now been split.
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
I'm curious about the order of events here. Did you:
- Order the lone/"manual" division HQ to be built.
- Order the division organization to be built.
- "Manual" division HQ was completed and deployed.
- Division organization elements began to be built.
If so this could be an issue like: the "Build Organization" button checks existing formations to determine the IDs of formations that subordinates should be attached to, but doesn't account for units in the build queue?
I think it went like this:
- Build Organization for Division 1
- Realize that I had already built some regiments that needed a div HQ so manually build Division 2
- Build Organization for Division 3
And the regiments for Div 3 were put under Div 1 and 2, if I recall correctly, instead of under Div 3. But this was on 2.2.0. I'll see if I can reproduce it for 2.3.1.
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
I know Steve mentioned in the patch notes that messing around with the order of units in the queue could break the system, so I'm not surprised if it is fragile in some other way as well.
Now, someone hurry up and find a huge, game-breaking bug that needs to be patched immediately so I can get my hands on those sweet 2.4 jump drive changes. ;D
-
You can add unlimited Ordnance Transfer systems to your ship, while it supposed to return the message "Only a single component of this type can be added to a class design".
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
I think it went like this:
- Build Organization for Division 1
- Realize that I had already built some regiments that needed a div HQ so manually build Division 2
- Build Organization for Division 3
And the regiments for Div 3 were put under Div 1 and 2, if I recall correctly, instead of under Div 3. But this was on 2.2.0. I'll see if I can reproduce it for 2.3.1.
Interesting. I had something similar to this. My garrison division HQs were built too small at first, so I had to reorder a new set of division HQs separately to replace those I had built first and then updated the organization with the correct HQs size. I didn't notice it at first, but it is very possible that this is when the problem occurred.
-
Quite a major one: Genetic Centres don't seem to be restricted to the body they are on to where they place the population once it is created.
https://i.imgur.com/jsVxDZA.png
28th June Populations were as follows:
Terra - Mercurians ~2.1m
Mercury - Mercurians ~1.94m
https://i.imgur.com/iRCahbr.png
7th of august Populations were:
Terra - Mercurians ~2.12m
Mercury - Mercurians ~2.24m
~0.11 of a year, the growth rate of the mercury colony is 15% in that time!
Not a single ship travelled between these 2 planets in this time.
As you can see the Terra growth is about as expected, meanwhile the mercury colony is growing at a massive rate!
I assume the check for being on the same body is wonky somewhere, this is my 2nd time encountering this bug and other people have mentioned similar bugs.
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
I gave myself a ship at a higher tech level than I have right now (as an RP 'salvaged' vessel from the moon, which humanity cannot fully replicate yet), and now it is not correctly overhauling. The maintenance value does become green, but the deployment timer doesn't and both of them keep ticking upwards
There are a couple things that happened for the first time here:
1. I had a ship of a higher tech level than mine
2. I gave a ship to another race via the gift button
3. I owned a ship built by a deleted race
So I'm guessing one of these is the issue?
I also checked the economy window and there the maintained tonnage is the tonnage of my only other military ship, rather than the tonnage of this heavier ship.
Info:
window affected: economy & fleet organization
start: TN
real stars
decimal seperator is a comma
reproducability: have not tested this yet, since I just found this bug in the train to work
campaign length: happened on the first overhaul
This link has an album with two consecutive 5 day increments showing the timers going up: https://imgur.com/a/P8P4klD
-
I clicked on a 5 days increment and got the error below, when I closed the error window the I got a message that my jump construction ship had finished the stabilization of a Lagrange point on Uranus, so maybe it is connected to that.
The function number: 3673
The complete error text: Reference to an object not set to an object's instance
The window affected: Main map
What you were doing at the time: Click on 5 days increment
Conventional or TN start: Conventional
Random or Real Stars: Real
Is your decimal separator a comma? Comma
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? intermittent
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: 24 years
SJW: Fixed for v.2.4.0
-
There is something funky going on with assignment of ground unit formations when building from organizations. For the first 20 years of game play it has worked just fine, but I have noticed that with the recent formations I have constructed, after the top level division is built, then the new formations are not assigned in a hierarchy under the newly built division, but are instead placed under the first available division in the OOB for that colony. I have attached images of OOB before construction, the garrison division in the organization page, and how it looks after building the 14th garrison division and the 12th PDC-PD, which is placed under the 1st Assault Division.
I have tried to rebuild the organization a couple of times, both by replacing the various elements and by deleting the organization and starting over, but the end result is the same in all cases. Also if I contruct an assault division, then the new Armored Brigade is placed under the 1st Assault Division instead of the newly constructed 3rd Assault Division.
Since this occurred after a while, I am not sure what could be done to replicate it, so I am instead attaching my database file, if it helps with debugging.
Did you modify the build queue after it was created?
-
Did you modify the build queue after it was created?
Not in the described tests I ran. I did change the order at some point, which I think was at the same time that I had to reorder some new division HQ's described in my second post, but not since then.
-
Hello everyone.
(First time posting so I just want to say that I f**ing love to play Aurora ! :) )
I have two small "bugs" to report :
1- The "assign fleet" option in ship combat does not check if weapons are destroyed before assigning to fire control.
For instance if I have two ships (named A and B), from the same class using beams weapons.
If A beam are destroyed, I can go to ship B and use assign fleet to have A firing again.
This bug was present on older versions too (I plaid guilty I may have exploited this to cheese some fights ^^)
2- When building a ship, ordonnance is loaded in the ship whithout checking if said ship is able to load missiles.
For instance I had a class of ship with magazines, missiles launchers and 200missiles in the class ordonance template.
I copied this class and removed the magazines, and missiles launchers.
When building the new class, 200missiles are loaded (even if the new class no longer has magazines).
It is then impossible to unload the missiles at colony.
SJW: Added a 'Design Error' message if ordnance exceeds capacity. I didn't want to automatically remove ordnance as that would be annoying when trying different design options
-
When using the Ship Template system, I created a ship class which I imported to another race, but a few things were a bit off.
On the imported ship class, fractional capacitor railguns weren't the exact same as the template - instead of a 4.5 power capacitor, the new component had a 5 power capacitor, causing power generation to be slightly under target. Furthermore, the size of a jump drive changed when importing - a 75,000 ton military jump drive became an 86,250 ton jump drive, though this embiggening only affected jump drives that had greater than 50k distance ratings.
-
Power Plants and Railgun random company name are assigned to the wrong list generating Engines companies name.
SJW: WAI that Power and Engine have the same company names. Cannot reproduce railgun issue.
-
Dragging a ground unit organization onto a formation within its organization causes the game to go unresponsive, requiring you to force exit the game.
SJW: This creates an endless hierarchy, so the game goes into an endless loop. I've added code to prevent this and a popup to explain.
-
Got a state where four disabled fighters, none of which had an intact fire control or were anywhere near an enemy, were apparently forcing 'imminent action' 5 second turns. The only way I could find to end it was to abandon all four of the fighters in the Tarn Vedra system.
Attached DB prior to abandoning the fighters.
-
Got a state where four disabled fighters, none of which had an intact fire control or were anywhere near an enemy, were apparently forcing 'imminent action' 5 second turns. The only way I could find to end it was to abandon all four of the fighters in the Tarn Vedra system.
Attached DB prior to abandoning the fighters.
Did you try the 'cease fire all ships' button?
-
Got a state where four disabled fighters, none of which had an intact fire control or were anywhere near an enemy, were apparently forcing 'imminent action' 5 second turns. The only way I could find to end it was to abandon all four of the fighters in the Tarn Vedra system.
Attached DB prior to abandoning the fighters.
Did you try the 'cease fire all ships' button?
Probably not, I don't see a button with that label anywhere so I probably didn't find it at the time either.
-
Got a state where four disabled fighters, none of which had an intact fire control or were anywhere near an enemy, were apparently forcing 'imminent action' 5 second turns. The only way I could find to end it was to abandon all four of the fighters in the Tarn Vedra system.
Attached DB prior to abandoning the fighters.
Did you try the 'cease fire all ships' button?
Probably not, I don't see a button with that label anywhere so I probably didn't find it at the time either.
It's on the miscellaneous tab of the tactical map. Useful for shutting down all fire controls in general and also fixing any issues that arise through destroyed but somehow active fire controls (which I thought I had fixed).
-
This looks weird to me:
(https://i.imgur.com/FxwFZqa.png)
I have "use real names" ticked on and I have also pressed the button for the same thing with SM mode on. It's caused by the "Group Contacts" tick box. Without it, it looks fine:
(https://i.imgur.com/LU12fuq.png)
Not using "Group Contacts" will lead to an unreadable system view pretty soon as the factions get more and more ships in Earth orbit.
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
I am currently running a conventional start as a test campaign. Two NPRs have found each other and decided to express their distaste for one another by way of violence, with the usual accompaniment of increment adjustments and interrupts.
Occasionally, I am getting an error popup box "2.3.1 Function #755: Object reference not set to an instance of an object." on increments which are adjusted due to imminent action. The error does not crash or stop the game and I can continue with no apparent problems, but I don't know if this bug is affecting the NPRs in some way that will have long-term side effects.
I firmly believe that this is actually a very big problem requiring an immediate fix so we can have 2.4.0 with its saucy new jump drive mechanics. ;D
SJW: Fixed for v.2.4.0
-
I am still getting the same error as my last bug report, after completing the stabilization of a lagrange point, this time on Saturn:
The function number: 3673
The complete error text: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
The window affected: main map
What you were doing at the time: click on 5 days increment, error popup, closing error window and the only event was the stabilization of the lagrange point.
Conventional or TN start: conventional
Random or Real Stars: real
Is your decimal separator a comma? comma
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? dunno
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: 27
SJW: Fixed for v.2.4.0
-
I am currently running a conventional start as a test campaign. Two NPRs have found each other and decided to express their distaste for one another by way of violence, with the usual accompaniment of increment adjustments and interrupts.
Occasionally, I am getting an error popup box "2.3.1 Function #755: Object reference not set to an instance of an object." on increments which are adjusted due to imminent action. The error does not crash or stop the game and I can continue with no apparent problems, but I don't know if this bug is affecting the NPRs in some way that will have long-term side effects.
I firmly believe that this is actually a very big problem requiring an immediate fix so we can have 2.4.0 with its saucy new jump drive mechanics. ;D
Its a small function that relocates admin commands from a pop that has been conquered or lost its last naval headquarters has been eliminated. If no admin command can be found, the error pops up but there is no other effect. I've fixed it for v2.4.0.
-
I am still getting the same error as my last bug report, after completing the stabilization of a lagrange point, this time on Saturn:
The function number: 3673
The complete error text: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
The window affected: main map
What you were doing at the time: click on 5 days increment, error popup, closing error window and the only event was the stabilization of the lagrange point.
Conventional or TN start: conventional
Random or Real Stars: real
Is your decimal separator a comma? comma
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? dunno
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: 27
It's a only a display issue. It's in the code for creating ship histories and it was trying to find a jump point to report on rather than the Lagrange point.
-
Genome Sequence: Base Gravity 20% seems to increase gravity by 2.3 instead of 1.2.
SJW: Fixed for v.2.4.0
Another thing related to different species (and might be a more QOL thing than actual bug): The system window does not update Colony Cost when selecting a new species. If you create a colony with the new species, then the system window updates, but if you close the window again, you are back to the original species and need to create a colony in a random place with the new species to see the proper colony cost.
-
I am seeing commanders occasionally gain skills that are not part of their specialty. Examples so far include a naval commander gaining Xenoarcheology skill and a ground forces commander gaining Diplomacy skill. While I appreciate the initiative of my commanders to become well-rounded individuals I'm not sure these particular endeavors are the best use of their valuable professional development hours.
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
I have 2 stage missiles. Second stage has 2.2m km range. Separation is set to 1.5m km. Targeted hostile ship is going straight at firing ship. Second stage looses power just before hitting the target. Unfortunately I did not check the distance to target from point of separation. So I'm not sure if separation was too early, or missile somehow lost fuel half way.
Ok, I can confirm that separation took place at double the set distance.
I also noticed similar error. I made my ship follow the target at 40m km, but it's keeping, again double that distance, so 80m km.
-
Using "Copy + Upgrade" function to create updated ground unit models, which then are ported into the original template and deleting the "upgraded" template for the sake of retaining formation numbering, removes the original template from "Organizations" list.
SJW: Removing the old formation is working as intended
-
I have this save file that failed to load, my backups work. Not sure how much information you could get from this but hopefully some!
Many many error messages when i try to load it.
-
Weird formations appearing in the organisations tab that i assume shouldn't be there (with field positions)
https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/699273256531787836/1183000717393395742/image.png?ex=6586be46&is=65744946&hm=823c3fad0cd91d537ba9e2844a500ed4de3c21d472afe7fdc14269b171d6d676&=&format=webp&quality=lossless&width=1087&height=701
https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/699273256531787836/1183001055823413379/image.png?ex=6586be96&is=65744996&hm=020866bbae08ebe63792103ba226a5afc122eb90665a95c6086bafdf5c364d99&=&format=webp&quality=lossless
you can see in the first picture i have several "ASST Assault Squadron -77 (FA) in the list to assign to organisations, in the 2nd picture you can see i have no such formations named this meanwhile the proper ones don't appear in the list when they should do.
I will attach by DB so hopefully this will bring extra insight into the Organisations tab issues.
(i don't see this specific bug mentioned in here only other bugs about the organisations tab, my Organisations also refuse to sort themselves into the correct hierarchy after construction if you also want to test that out)
-
I have a fleet of alien ships that are firing at something (i assume by buoy) and they have done 1000+ damage with no signs of other enemies nearby.
Events screen:
https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/402321466839793664/1183033584957796382/image.png?ex=6586dce2&is=657467e2&hm=0a223a5bc272e613170ec851624bb19638bc2b9ad8b6ac1b35fbf042af75f0f7&=&format=webp&quality=lossless&width=1102&height=701
System View:
https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/402321466839793664/1183033612770222110/image.png?ex=6586dce8&is=657467e8&hm=bd6366620b65388c8b78a342796a992d6d08a498f9beb20428d4468a0cabd84d&=&format=webp&quality=lossless
They stopped firing after i deleted the buoy
(i couldn't find a way to find salvo ID on the system view so i had to guess based on age and the path of my mine layers, it would be nice to have a way to force that to appear on the system view for your own missiles again)
DB attached.
-
Possible bug (call this a bug check): The Limited Research Admin setting is supposed to limit scientist admin skill to 1 + (0.2 * RADM) where RADM is the 'normal' research admin skill when the Limited option is not checked. According to the database, the maximum RADM bonus is 50.0, which means the maximum scientist admin skill with the Limited option active should be 1 + (0.2 * 50) = 11.
I currently have a brilliant sensor scientist with the ability to administer 14 labs, despite the fact that I have Limited Research Admin active as in all my games. This is about 15 years into a conventional start. It seems like the check for maximum admin skill is not scaling the maximum value of the skill to account for the Limited option, which I don't think is WAI.
SJW: WAI. I decided not to add a maximum for Limited Research games.
-
I am sure I read this probably a long time ago, so it either escaped or reappeared.
Comets move in the direction of their tails instead of the opposite.
-
Possible bug (call this a bug check): The Limited Research Admin setting is supposed to limit scientist admin skill to 1 + (0.2 * RADM) where RADM is the 'normal' research admin skill when the Limited option is not checked. According to the database, the maximum RADM bonus is 50.0, which means the maximum scientist admin skill with the Limited option active should be 1 + (0.2 * 50) = 11.
I currently have a brilliant sensor scientist with the ability to administer 14 labs, despite the fact that I have Limited Research Admin active as in all my games. This is about 15 years into a conventional start. It seems like the check for maximum admin skill is not scaling the maximum value of the skill to account for the Limited option, which I don't think is WAI.
That is working as intended, as I didn't want to limit improvement for the LRA games.
-
I am sure I read this probably a long time ago, so it either escaped or reappeared.
Comets move in the direction of their tails instead of the opposite.
The tail isn't connected to movement any more. It just faces away from the primary. I am considering changing it back though, as while the new version is scientifically correct, the older version was a better visual aid.
-
Fixes
- Ground units now deleted correctly when parent colony is deleted.
Does not appear to work. Ground units at a deleted colony still show up in the Order of Battle when the Location checkbox is unchecked.
SJW: Cannot reproduce.
Re-reporting from previous bug thread as this happens to me in 2.3.1 as well.
Steps to reproduce:
1. Create a colony somewhere, like Venus since it is useless.
2. Instant-build a bunch of ground formations.
3. Delete the colony.
4. Ground formations still exist in the Ground Forces window if the Location checkbox is unchecked.
Closing and re-opening the Ground Forces window does not change this behavior.
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
The change logs for 2.2.0 state that all particle beams are now HS 6 (300 Tons). However looking at the DB I notice that particle beam 16 and onwards seem to have their old sizes still (HS 12 onwards). I'm assuming that's not intended. For what it's worth the same problem also exists for the advanced variants
Looks like it's already fixed for 2.4.0.
SJW: Yes, fixed for v2.4.0
-
Bug Report: Attacking a planet defended by the precursors. I destroyed the ships in orbit with missiles, went close and got shot by laser STOs, so I destroyed the laser STOs with volleys of missiles (12-13 fired at a time). I then sent a ship to go to the planet, and it just got shot by what are either railgun or gauss cannon STOs. However, the gauss cannons/railguns did not attack the missile volleys I had sent, which I assume should not be the case.
-
Disabling eccentric orbits does not seem to disable eccentricity for the Sol system. It works properly on newly generated systems though. This can be observed by watching the planets fail to align with their circular orbital paths drawn on the tactical view.
To reproduce just create a new game with eccentricity options disabled and observe through production increments.
-
I have a fleet of alien ships that are firing at something (i assume by buoy) and they have done 1000+ damage with no signs of other enemies nearby.
Events screen:
https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/402321466839793664/1183033584957796382/image.png?ex=6586dce2&is=657467e2&hm=0a223a5bc272e613170ec851624bb19638bc2b9ad8b6ac1b35fbf042af75f0f7&=&format=webp&quality=lossless&width=1102&height=701
System View:
https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/402321466839793664/1183033612770222110/image.png?ex=6586dce8&is=657467e8&hm=bd6366620b65388c8b78a342796a992d6d08a498f9beb20428d4468a0cabd84d&=&format=webp&quality=lossless
They stopped firing after i deleted the buoy
(i couldn't find a way to find salvo ID on the system view so i had to guess based on age and the path of my mine layers, it would be nice to have a way to force that to appear on the system view for your own missiles again)
DB attached.
It has happened again, attaching the DB again.
https://i.imgur.com/u9mNWPM.png
https://i.imgur.com/EF5SW1D.png
i still don't know of a way to find the salvo ID of a specific missile without just randomly guessing and deleting them from the salvos screen.
-
Fighter-sized crafts (shuttles etc) are still unable to land on a planet so to load/unload them you need a spaceport or the appropriate stations.
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
Moved 35 terraforming installation on Mars using civilian contracts, now I want move these installs. on another planet using the civilian contract, however this time I cannot add a "supply" order for the terraforming, instead the number I set ends in the "demand" for terraforming.
If instead, I remove the demand order from Mars, then I can add the supply order.
Bug? I remember there was something similar in previous version, maybe it is time to address it Steve?
SJW: Working as intended. You can't have supply and demand for the same installation at the same planet.
-
Moved 35 terraforming installation on Mars using civilian contracts, now I want move these installs. on another planet using the civilian contract, however this time I cannot add a "supply" order for the terraforming, instead the number I set ends in the "demand" for terraforming.
If instead, I remove the demand order from Mars, then I can add the supply order.
Bug? I remember there was something similar in previous version, maybe it is time to address it Steve?
Having a Demand order and Supply order for the same thing at the same location wouldn't make sense. Sounds like WAI to me.
-
Moved 35 terraforming installation on Mars using civilian contracts, now I want move these installs. on another planet using the civilian contract, however this time I cannot add a "supply" order for the terraforming, instead the number I set ends in the "demand" for terraforming.
If instead, I remove the demand order from Mars, then I can add the supply order.
Bug? I remember there was something similar in previous version, maybe it is time to address it Steve?
Having a Demand order and Supply order for the same thing at the same location wouldn't make sense. Sounds like WAI to me.
This happens, because now even when order is fulfilled it remains in either demand or supply active orders list. It just have a value of zero. Such order can remain until you restart the game. Let's say you ordered 1000 infrastructure to Luna. The order gets fulfilled, but remains on the list. Some time later you terraform Luna and you no longer need any infrastructure there. So you try to place a supply order with all that infrastructure, but game instead adds all of that to remaining active demand order. This was happening to me a lot before I realized what was going on.
-
Bug report from Reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/aurora/comments/18f7hvb/governor_bug/), but I have confirmed this as well:
When I close out of the game and then reload it, all the colonies with the governor radio button "No Assignment" selected get swapped to "Automated Assignment". The other buttons save their state however. Just a little frustrating when all my civilian mining operations start using up my best administrators.
Version 2.3.1, TN start, random stars, happens every time I restart the game.
I can also confirm this is a big annoyance with the CMCs.
EDIT: Source of error appears to be that the "AutoAssign" field in FCT_Population is treated as a boolean, but the no-assignment status is stored as the integer value '2', which converts to TRUE. Seems like the solution is to change the column datatype to Integer.
SJW: Yes, that was the problem. Fixed for v2.4.0
-
Maybe for non-English speaking people, "Demand order" and "Supply order" can have the same meaning.
"Demand order" can be read as "an order for a request, a demand, of goods", and "Supply order" as "an order to receive a supply": i.e. they can be the same thing.
If I remember well the mechanics, maybe could "Supply order" be better expressed as "Supply offer", or even better turn "supply" into "exportation"? So, it is clear that a site allows to supply that item.
And if the site serve as a deep space depot, it could have demand and supply active together: to receive goods from producing locations and distribute them to other places.
-
When designing Fire Controls and Active Sensors the option to improve the ECCM tech will generally speaking increase the Corbomite cost of the component. Unless it's a BFC in which case the increase is also reflected to the Uridium cost. This causes the resource cost of the BFC in question to be more than the BP cost of the component, which is unusual even outside the domain of active sensors/FCs.
This isn't WAI right?
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
Bug Report: I ordered an assault division (and its sub-units) to be built using the organization tab of the ground forces page. While it queued up the units properly, I just realized it did not add them to the organization properly. In the attached database save, you can see that the sub-units of 3rd division were instead attached in a weird way to 2nd division and sub-units within 2nd division (which had existed before I queued up 3rd division). To see how the divisions should look, just look at the organizations tab.
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0. See this post: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13368.msg166993#msg166993
Edit: 2nd Bug Report: The standing order: "Move to system requiring Geosurvey" doesn't work. The ships just go to the manticore-sol jump point and repeatedly go back and forth between the two systems. in the database I provided you can see the bug by setting any of the survey ships to have "Move to system requiring Geosurvey" as standing order
-
I got also hit with assignment of ground unit formations when building from organizations bug. I never modified the build queue. I currently have two colonies with GFCCs and both are affected. I am only 6 years in the game.
Only thing I did was constructing some ground formations from GU training window in Economics. But those formation were independent units without any hierarchy.
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
I got also hit with assignment of ground unit formations when building from organizations bug. I never modified the build queue. I currently have two colonies with GFCCs and both are affected. I am only 6 years in the game.
Only thing I did was constructing some ground formations from GU training window in Economics. But those formation were independent units without any hierarchy.
I have also had issues with building using org, currently I'm only doing 1 org formation at a time, e.g. a division with 4 regiments as the lowest unit. If I then do the Corps made of multiple Divisions, it doesn't create the org correctly. I usually end up with randomly one of the sub units having a bunch of the newly created formations under it
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0. See this post: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13368.msg166993#msg166993
-
It's an old bug sir, but it checks out.
When flying a Tug with a Shipyard through dangerous space the Tug was destroyed and deposited the shipyard in open space.
The Shipyard then became a part of a new race, an ally named the same as mine.
When opening the Naval Organization I get the error - 2. 3. 1 Function #358: The given key was no present in the dictionary.
I also get that error when I refresh Ship Combat on any ship in that system.
https://imgur. com/a/yhs2FzM
-
Moved 35 terraforming installation on Mars using civilian contracts, now I want move these installs. on another planet using the civilian contract, however this time I cannot add a "supply" order for the terraforming, instead the number I set ends in the "demand" for terraforming.
If instead, I remove the demand order from Mars, then I can add the supply order.
Bug? I remember there was something similar in previous version, maybe it is time to address it Steve?
Having a Demand order and Supply order for the same thing at the same location wouldn't make sense. Sounds like WAI to me.
This happens, because now even when order is fulfilled it remains in either demand or supply active orders list. It just have a value of zero. Such order can remain until you restart the game. Let's say you ordered 1000 infrastructure to Luna. The order gets fulfilled, but remains on the list. Some time later you terraform Luna and you no longer need any infrastructure there. So you try to place a supply order with all that infrastructure, but game instead adds all of that to remaining active demand order. This was happening to me a lot before I realized what was going on.
This is exactly what I was talking about, the problem is that It happens you place a supply order and this is not fulfilled because there's already a demand order for the same thing, but due to the amount of information and concentration Aurora requires, you might not notice that and you realize the mistake after years. To complicate further the things, the civilian orders is not updating in real time, at least in this case, so you won't notice the error until you have closed and open the screen again.
Steve said is WAI, but I do not thing it should work this way, maybe we can get a simple popup something like "order already existing in demand..." and vice versa, so we are prompted to delete one of the two orders.
-
Steve said is WAI, but I do not thing it should work this way, maybe we can get a simple popup something like "order already existing in demand..." and vice versa, so we are prompted to delete one of the two orders.
Supply and Demand are right next to each other on the same tab of the same window, so you can see existing demand/supply when you are creating a new request. A popup wouldn't add any information beyond what you can already see.
-
Power Plants and Railgun random company name are assigned to the wrong list generating Engines companies name.
WAI that engines and power plants have the same company name type. I confirmed in the DB that railguns are set to 'weapon' company names. Can you provide a company name example that is incorrect?
-
I think I figured out the link problems in 'Construct Organization'. I can't be certain this is the issue, but it fits the reported issues.
When an org is constructed, the task for the top level formation is given a ParentLinkID of 0 and a LinkID based on the parameter held at the game level (MaxLinkID) for the next available LinkID
Each formation on the next level is given ParentLinkID equal to the LinkID of the top level and its own new LinkID. This continues down through the hierarchy. These links are held in the queue and passed on to the actual formations when built, so that subsequently constructed formations will know their parents.
MaxLinkID was being set on game start to the maximum link in the queue +1 and then incremented when used. However, this didn't consider already built units so some LinkIDs were being duplicated. That would explain why it worked for a while, then stopped working correctly.
Now, I have changed it to a running MaxLinkID for each race, which is always tracked and never calculated. I hope that will solve the problem.
-
I made a SS before everything could crash, basically behind the overflow error window there's a ship with a search sensor, the thing is I could not see the sensor' range on the map (passives yes), then I scrolled in to zoom in and I got all these errors here.
EDIT: It does not crash, but I still get all these overflow errors and the active sensor is still not visible.
EDIT2: my bad, I had forgot to activate the sensor, still getting the overflow error, but I guess it happens when you are zooming too much.
I am 44years in the conventional campaign, real stars.
-
GU Training/Ground Formation Construction Capacity:
If the total allocation in active tasks is <100%, in this example case 70% + 29% = 99%,
it is possible to add another active task, up to 100% allocation (199% GFCC), while there should only be 1% of GFCC available.
Training tasks
(https://i.imgur.com/o563Akq.png)
Running few turns to confirm the build rate
(https://i.imgur.com/j2Qpu4m.png)
Another example: 4 x 33% tasks (132% GFCC)
(https://i.imgur.com/Qg2LJvB.png)
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
Bug Report: Starting a new game appears to delete all ship templates:
To reproduce: Have a game open. Create a ship template. Switching between different save games does not delete the template. However, creating a new game does delete the template.
If you want I can attach databases, but I was able to reproduce the bug immediately
-
Two stage missiles with more than one submunition only seem to release a single one instead of multiple if set up that way. My missiles which should be releasing a pair of Size 2.2 submunitions are only releasing 1. Have tried recreating the design etc in hopes of fixing it.
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
Copying a class after you have added ground units to it will "link" the original and copied classes ground forces. So if I make Ship A and add ground forces to it, copy it to Ship B, remove ground forces from Ship B, they are also removed from Ship A. Adding to either ship will add to the other.
This also happens if you add ground forces to Ship A, remove them, then copy the class over. Ship B will have the removed ground forces listed still.
Reproduced in two different games.
SJW: Just encountered this myself. Fixed for v2.4.0. For now, if you close and re-open they should be un-linked.
-
Ctrl-F2 was for designer mode and should not have been left active. It is extremely easy for someone to accidentally corrupt their game if they modify NPRs or delete something. While I am sure the majority of people would take that advice and just use it to look, I don't want to be chasing phantom bugs reported by the minority.
First, thank you for your amazing work and sharing this with us.
I am doing a game in 2.3.1 where i have had lot of "fun" inflicted upon me (you can read it in the "Spoiler" forum) where i had a system with a NPR + a spoiler 2 jump away from SOL discovered after 4 years ingame and soon after found other spoiler (Precursor) + another NPR + raiders roaming around. There are now 70+ wrecks around (10 of so of which are mine) and there seems to be no stopping to the enemy tonnage they can field.
I wish i had a "Designer mode" for after action after my playthrough since i am keeping saves at different stages to inspect what NPR had in term of fleets size and to a lesser extent design.
I understand the argument about the possibility to screw up the game, in the past this was password protected cant you have something like that again for those small minority of player that would like to inspect what happens under the hood?
You can go even further and have a variable in a save to say if the "Designer mode" was ever activated, if it was activated it is saved in the db and you will as a policy ignore every report/save that has the flag of having the designer mode ever activated.
Anyway this is a small thing only for your consideration ! look forward to play 2.4 !
-
I remember reading something in the past, shall we be able to discover 2 Jump points at the same Survey Location? It happened before to me and not sure if it was addressed as a bug or not.
(https://i.ibb.co/8gg5myw/Capture.png)
SJW: Jump points are working as intended. Theoretically, you could find more than two from the same survey location
On a personal note, I think it's great we are finding only minor changes/bugs as it certifies the amount of work from Steve, but also the whole community.
I am adding a Typo here as well even if I know we have a dedicated section.
Economic Window, Summary Section.
Parent Body Diameter should be just Body Diameter.
I never really looked into it (see previous note in regards) but it hit me when I was looking at a moon there rather than the classic System Window, so I thought it was referring to the Planet, which is not the case.
SJW: It was called 'Parent Body' as it is the body on which the population is located. I've changed to 'System Body' instead,
-
On commercial shipyard complex, while adding a slipway (38% completed) I retooled the shipyard with a new class and at the message if I wanted to stop the current task I pressed yes, the ship construction has started but the adding of the slipway is still progressing, it did not stop.
Conventional, real star, just started a new campaign.
I might have found the big bug that can unlock the 2.4 :P
SJW: If this was a new shipyard with no class assigned, that is working as intended
-
On commercial shipyard complex, while adding a slipway (38% completed) I retooled the shipyard with a new class and at the message if I wanted to stop the current task I pressed yes, the ship construction has started but the adding of the slipway is still progressing, it did not stop.
Conventional, real star, just started a new campaign.
I might have found the big bug that can unlock the 2.4 :P
Was that the first time the shipyard had been retooled, or was it already set to a class?
-
Ctrl-F2 was for designer mode and should not have been left active. It is extremely easy for someone to accidentally corrupt their game if they modify NPRs or delete something. While I am sure the majority of people would take that advice and just use it to look, I don't want to be chasing phantom bugs reported by the minority.
First, thank you for your amazing work and sharing this with us.
I am doing a game in 2.3.1 where i have had lot of "fun" inflicted upon me (you can read it in the "Spoiler" forum) where i had a system with a NPR + a spoiler 2 jump away from SOL discovered after 4 years ingame and soon after found other spoiler (Precursor) + another NPR + raiders roaming around. There are now 70+ wrecks around (10 of so of which are mine) and there seems to be no stopping to the enemy tonnage they can field.
I wish i had a "Designer mode" for after action after my playthrough since i am keeping saves at different stages to inspect what NPR had in term of fleets size and to a lesser extent design.
I understand the argument about the possibility to screw up the game, in the past this was password protected cant you have something like that again for those small minority of player that would like to inspect what happens under the hood?
You can go even further and have a variable in a save to say if the "Designer mode" was ever activated, if it was activated it is saved in the db and you will as a policy ignore every report/save that has the flag of having the designer mode ever activated.
Anyway this is a small thing only for your consideration ! look forward to play 2.4 !
1) Not a bug...
2) While I agree that Ctrl+F2 will be missed, at least in your case you have the option to go into these DBs for previous save points and change any NPR you want to inspect to a player race (table FCT_Race) before loading up that DB.
-
When creating ground force organisations, copying an organisation does not copy the assigned default field positions.
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
On commercial shipyard complex, while adding a slipway (38% completed) I retooled the shipyard with a new class and at the message if I wanted to stop the current task I pressed yes, the ship construction has started but the adding of the slipway is still progressing, it did not stop.
Conventional, real star, just started a new campaign.
I might have found the big bug that can unlock the 2.4 :P
Was that the first time the shipyard had been retooled, or was it already set to a class?
First time
-
First time
Its not really a bug then. The first time you retool a shipyard after building it, its free and is instant. And since it is instant it doesn't cancel whatever action the shipyard was doing, despite the warning prompt.
-
First time
Its not really a bug then. The first time you retool a shipyard after building it, its free and is instant. And since it is instant it doesn't cancel whatever action the shipyard was doing, despite the warning prompt.
Yeah, it sounds logic, let's hear from Steve if this is WAI.
SJW: Yes, working as intended
-
There seems to be an inconsistency in how commercial-engined ships can use military jump drive (following this post (http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=12523.msg158216#msg158216)).
In a fleet consisting of a 30.000 ton military ship with a military jump drive of 30.000 tons and a commercial ship of 20.000 tons, I get a 'Transit failure' message because the commercial-engined ships do not have a proper jump drive. However, if I split the fleet into two separate fleets, then the commercial ship is capable of using the military jump drive in the other fleet as a jump tender.
I would have expected that being in the same fleet or in separate fleets would not have made a difference.
-
First time
Its not really a bug then. The first time you retool a shipyard after building it, its free and is instant. And since it is instant it doesn't cancel whatever action the shipyard was doing, despite the warning prompt.
Yes, that's correct.
-
When you post, please post as much information as possible, including:
The function number: 2756
The complete error text: the collection has been modified, enumering operation could not been executed.
The window affected: main map
What you were doing at the time: 5 days increment, related to life support failure probably.
Conventional or TN start: conventional
Random or Real Stars: real
Is your decimal separator a comma? 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: beginning
-
In the "View Technology" screen, missile fire controls created by the player appear in the drop-down category of Active Sensors rather than where you'd imagine, Missile Fire Control.
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
It does not seem to be possible to load Decoys onto Colliers for transport and support. It just shows as 0 if you double-click the Decoy.
That is all.
-
Bug report: I was testing retargeting AMMs vs enemy missiles, and when the enemy volley hit my ship, the event log said my remaining AMMs self-destructed, but it didn't remove the AMM missile salvoes even though they have no missiles in them anymore
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
Bug report: Ground force replacement process doesn't seem to be working for me? I have 2 division formations, where I modified the division template to include 300 logistics trucks. However, despite having 3 formations marked "use as replacements" with logistics trucks on the planet, neither of the divisions have pulled logistics trucks into their formation to match their template, even though I have let like 20 days pass.
Its on earth in the attached database
Edit: apparently not a bug, my units weren't in a series
-
Bug report: Ground force replacement process doesn't seem to be working for me? I have 2 division formations, where I modified the division template to include 300 logistics trucks. However, despite having 3 formations marked "use as replacements" with logistics trucks on the planet, neither of the divisions have pulled logistics trucks into their formation to match their template, even though I have let like 20 days pass.
Its on earth in the attached database
Are the units that you are trying to replace part of a unit series? If not, replacement won't work and you'll need to create unit series and then add the units you want replacement for in those series.
-
Bug report: Ground force replacement process doesn't seem to be working for me? I have 2 division formations, where I modified the division template to include 300 logistics trucks. However, despite having 3 formations marked "use as replacements" with logistics trucks on the planet, neither of the divisions have pulled logistics trucks into their formation to match their template, even though I have let like 20 days pass.
Its on earth in the attached database
Are the units that you are trying to replace part of a unit series? If not, replacement won't work and you'll need to create unit series and then add the units you want replacement for in those series.
I guess that was the issue, since when I created updated templates using the copy+upgrade button, the replacement started working on the formation. I just assumed that I didn't need series if I wasn't changing what types of units were needed, just the number
-
I guess that was the issue, since when I created updated templates using the copy+upgrade button, the replacement started working on the formation. I just assumed that I didn't need series if I wasn't changing what types of units were needed, just the number
The replacement system is designed to work only through the Unit Series mechanic. It is a bit confusing when all you want at first is to reinforce with the same kind of unit, but it makes sense to have a single replacements mechanic and the Unit Series allows replacing with newer (or older, if desperate) units of the same type.
Personally I wish Steve would rewire Formations to be built from unit series rather than units, as this would make a lot of things work more smoothly IMO.
-
When researching Sensor Jammer 5, I was awarded Sensor Jammer 8 as well. I don't quite know how but I thought I'd mention it.
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
When researching Sensor Jammer 5, I was awarded Sensor Jammer 8 as well. I don't quite know how but I thought I'd mention it.
Cost on SJ-8 appears to be incorrectly set to 30k instead of 300k.
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
Personally I wish Steve would rewire Formations to be built from unit series rather than units, as this would make a lot of things work more smoothly IMO.
I think, but I am not a coding expert, that would be easier that once you create the unit a new series with that unit assigned is created. Isn't that what we all do anyway?
Or at least this is what I do: I create a unit, give it a name, then go to series, create a new series with exactly the same name, then slot it in.
I also think that now with the automated updates, shouldn't be impossible for the code to put the updated unit under the same series, but again no expert. ???
EDIT: I think your solution works, I am just trying to consider what could be easier/less coding extensive. We would like 2.4 to be out soonTM ;D
-
As a follow-up to my sensor jammer bug. I had to replay the game because I lost some from not saving.
The tech was awarded by "Information on Sensor Jammer 8 has been provided to us by "my alliance name"."
I had another bug where a tug dropped a shipyard and it made a new race with the same name as mine for the shipyard.
-
This might be better suited for the typo thread but the "German Destroyers" name theme seems to contain the names of German capital ships (E.g Sharnhorst, Bayern etc.) and not any actual destroyers.
SJW: Most of the naming themes are player-submitted and I don't normally check them. I have renamed this one to 'German Warships' as that seems a better description.
-
This might be better suited for the typo thread but the "German Destroyers" name theme seems to contain the names of German capital ships (E.g Sharnhorst, Bayern etc.) and not any actual destroyers.
Iz of destroyer; iz of destroy ze ship, yez? :P
-
"Load Previous" doesn't load the previous missile's "Multiple Warheads" value. I made a 4-warhead missile, researched it, and when I "load previous" the Multiple Warheads value stays at 1.
A very similar bug was reported in this thread regarding "Retarget Capability" and marked as fixed for 2.4.0.
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
Didn't see this mentioned. But I made a "collier" station and when I try to replace ordinance there with any fleet it locks the gameup. No error or anything.
-
Both commercial and military jump drives have their costs stuck to 10 (2.0 Duranium, 8 Sorium) until HS 7.7/77 for military and commercial respectively. Larger jump drives begin to see an increase in cost.
The 7.7 refers to the ACTUAL size of the jump engine design and not necessarily the size dropdown on the design window (aka if messing with the squadron size and radius gets you over the threshold the cost will start increasing).
SJW: Working as Intended. Jump Drives have a minimum cost of 10. This is changing in v2.4.0
-
Both commercial and military jump drives have their costs stuck to 10 (2.0 Duranium, 8 Sorium) until HS 7.7/77 for military and commercial respectively. Larger jump drives begin to see an increase in cost.
The 7.7 refers to the ACTUAL size of the jump engine design and not necessarily the size dropdown on the design window (aka if messing with the squadron size and radius gets you over the threshold the cost will start increasing).
This isn't a bug, jump drives have a minimum cost of 10 in pre-2.4 versions.
-
A couple decoy launcher related bugs:
When pressing "Assign all" in the ship combat menu, assigned decoys are duplicated in the list view. Closing and re-opening the naval organisation tab does not fix this, the duplicated entries can be manually cleared by dragging them into the unnasigned weapons tab. Conversely, when pressing "Assign all" on a ship with all decoy launchers unnassigned, other ships of the class with assigned decoy launchers will not unassign their decoy launchers like they should.
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
I'm not sure about this one but when using SM to instant research decoy launchers, if the ship design window is open, the component does not get properly researched, the research event log is generated but even after pressing "refresh tech" or just reopening the ship design menu the decoy launcher wont show up. SM researching with the ship design window closed seems to work though. HOWEVER, in all cases, the Technology Overview window never seems to show the decoy launchers in their aptly named "Decoy Launcher" category (they aren't marked obsolete).
-
In my current game, I do not see the Thermal Reduction technology anymore.
I am unaware of the exact time this was took place. Maybe it was there until I disassembled some alien technology. At least some of them gave me some progress in Defensive science. But of course I am absolutely not sure about this.
Unfortunate, I can't imagine how it is possible to figure out what was happening. I could provide the DB, but if it does not log changes I do not know if it is possible to find the root cause.
PS. My game is too old by now. I am going to roleplay that.
-
I'm posting this as a bug because I think this is an unintended side effect of the way decoys are designed.
Decoys can't be loaded into a magazine, when trying to add the decoys to a ships ordnance template, I just get 0 despite available space. This makes it impossible to transport decoys via magazine from one population to another, which is quite annoying if you have static defense bases that use countermeasures. I get that we shouldn't be able to reload decoy launchers through a ships magazine, but we should still be able to transport them to distant populations.
SJW: Decoys aren't 'missiles' in the traditional sense, so this is working as intended. I agree though that some form of transport for decoys is needed.
-
Hello,
For some reason the Ground Force Commanders promotions are not happening despite I have the units requiring an upper level. Wasn't this change introduced in 2.0?
-
Hello,
For some reason the Ground Force Commanders promotions are not happening despite I have the units requiring an upper level. Wasn't this change introduced in 2.0?
Promotions can only occur one level at a time, so make sure you have an intermediate level. Commanders will not promote from, e.g., Major to Field Marshal in one go (using typical rank names for this example). Almost every time someone says the auto-promote is not working this is the reason.
-
Superheavy Vehicle Armor tech (and Ultraheavy Vehicle Armor tech) does not require the Superheavy Vehicle unit type, even though you can't actually use it without that.
SJW: Fixed for v2.4.0
-
Fixes
- Ground units now deleted correctly when parent colony is deleted.
Does not appear to work. Ground units at a deleted colony still show up in the Order of Battle when the Location checkbox is unchecked.
SJW: Cannot reproduce.
Re-reporting from previous bug thread as this happens to me in 2.3.1 as well.
Steps to reproduce:
1. Create a colony somewhere, like Venus since it is useless.
2. Instant-build a bunch of ground formations.
3. Delete the colony.
4. Ground formations still exist in the Ground Forces window if the Location checkbox is unchecked.
Closing and re-opening the Ground Forces window does not change this behavior.
Fixed now. The reason I didn't reproduce this previously is that the bug only affects ground formations without commanders.
-
Fighter-sized crafts (shuttles etc) are still unable to land on a planet so to load/unload them you need a spaceport or the appropriate stations.
Rather than create exceptions for each type of load/unload function, I have assigned any vessel of 500 tons or less the equivalent of a cargo shuttle bay, as small craft effectively have that capability built in.
-
Thanks Steve, that's great! Also means I'm definitely abandoning my current campaign and shifting to 2.4.0! Woohoo, fighter-sized craft based campaign incoming!