Aurora 4x
Other Games => Quasar4x => Topic started by: Gram123 on October 20, 2019, 05:42:58 AM
-
In the main thread Kyle said that he was ready for bug reports, so i thought that it better be in a new thread not to mess up the main thread to too badly. As i'm sure we are quite a few who are looking forward to gets our hands on this, there may be quite a few bugs showing up.
I'll start with a few bugs. Please Kyle tell us what you need to correct them. You need comp specs, need to know if we are running win/linux, database file, or just screenshots?
-
Somewhy orbital path aint showing
https://i. imgur. com/UcxTljV. png
I pushed 5 days, apparently it jumped 5 years. . . .
https://imgur. com/nbWJ1Gp
(https://imgur. com/nbWJ1Gp)
I have no idea why i cant post images. . . . :( maybe i need more post before im allowed to post pictures
-
yeah, 1 more I think
-
Orbital paths are drawn with a shader for anti-aliasing and performance. About a week ago I changed Q4X to use an older shader library that more hardware supports. It fixed the problem for at least one user. Can you try re-downloading, and if that doesn't work, what version is your video driver?
Second screenshot: It only jumped 5 days. Aurora/Quasar shows Days:Hours:Minutes:Seconds in the event log.
I believe 10 posts are required for images to work. I'm fine with spaces in the url though.
Thanks for the feedback!
-
Second screenshot: It only jumped 5 days. Aurora/Quasar shows Days:Hours:Minutes:Seconds in the event log.
Silly me.
About the orbital path:
Im using the No media Quasar version updated to 6th of november version.
My video driver is a NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M and intels update agent tells me its running a updated driver.
Still see no orbital path
-
Class Design: I can add systems to a design but not remove anything from the design. Vers. 73
-
Seems to be somekind of problem with cycle order/repeat order.
Pressing the repeat order does nothing for me, cycle moves gives me the warning in the screenshot, seems like its not cycling moves at all. . .
Anyone else have this problem?
https://imgur. com/a/L1JIuoM
-
Seems to be somekind of problem with cycle order/repeat order.
Pressing the repeat order does nothing for me, cycle moves gives me the warning in the screenshot, seems like its not cycling moves at all. . .
Anyone else have this problem?
https://imgur. com/a/L1JIuoM
Both issues fixed!
-
Thanks so much for the last fix.
Here is another one:
This TUG doesn't seems to recognize its a tug. It moves just fine on its own, as soon as it's trying to tractor another ship its acts as if they were in taskgroup together and set max speed to the max speed of the slowest ship in this case 1, as its its trying to Tug a ship without engine.
https://imgur. com/eujr4h7
And a related bug:
When given a order to tug a ship, the release action doesn't become available.
https://imgur. com/8PCiiIf
-
Thanks so much for the last fix.
Here is another one:
This TUG doesn't seems to recognize its a tug. It moves just fine on its own, as soon as it's trying to tractor another ship its acts as if they were in taskgroup together and set max speed to the max speed of the slowest ship in this case 1, as its its trying to Tug a ship without engine.
https://imgur. com/eujr4h7
And a related bug:
When given a order to tug a ship, the release action doesn't become available.
https://imgur. com/8PCiiIf
Both fixed for the next version
-
Not sure why this happened
https://imgur. com/a/3BUpov0
I created a PDC, really simple just a msl lunch and standard nuke msl control. Apparently i created a new PDC taskgroup for every colony i have, and somehow placed the created PDC on another colony than it was created. . .
-
Not sure why this happened
https://imgur. com/a/3BUpov0
I created a PDC, really simple just a msl lunch and standard nuke msl control. Apparently i created a new PDC taskgroup for every colony i have, and somehow placed the created PDC on another colony than it was created. . .
This should hopefully be fixed now, in Version 84.
-
Thanks for the fixes. If you don't mind ill keep posting as i stumble by them in my playthrough. Btw. great job with the game so far - i'm really enjoying playing Quasar4x so far!
Here are a couple more. I think they are related:
Fuel Harvesters and Asteroid mining seems to be working on planets. I Believe this is not the intention at least not in Ax4
https://imgur. com/a/B7cBCnZ
Accessibility doesn't seems to drop with quantity. I Believe they do in Ax4
https://imgur. com/a/aADDFP8
-
Accessibility doesn't seems to drop with quantity. I Believe they do in Ax4
https://imgur.com/a/aADDFP8
In general, or only for Asteroid Miners on planets (where they're not supposed to be working in the first place)?
-
Not sure why this happened
https://imgur. com/a/3BUpov0
I created a PDC, really simple just a msl lunch and standard nuke msl control. Apparently i created a new PDC taskgroup for every colony i have, and somehow placed the created PDC on another colony than it was created. . .
This should hopefully be fixed now, in Version 84.
I thought of a situation where it could still mess up. Just pushed build 87. It should really be fixed now. Probably.
Thanks for the fixes. If you don't mind ill keep posting as i stumble by them in my playthrough. Btw. great job with the game so far - i'm really enjoying playing Quasar4x so far!
No problem, I appreciate the free QA testing :)
Here are a couple more. I think they are related:
Fuel Harvesters and Asteroid mining seems to be working on planets. I Believe this is not the intention at least not in Ax4
https://imgur. com/a/B7cBCnZ
Fixed
Accessibility doesn't seems to drop with quantity. I Believe they do in Ax4
https://imgur. com/a/aADDFP8
Fixed. I had simply forgotten to add code for accessibility decay
-
With your latest update, a bug/feature was discussed on Discord.
In standard aurora, (removed in C#), when a missile salvo could cross from outside your sensor range to your ship within 5 seconds tick, final fire PD would NOT open fire (I believe only CIWS would attempt to shoot them down).
Do you intend to save the same "functionality" or will you make these volleys being able to be shot at by PD?
IMO, that's a bug.
-
With your latest update, a bug/feature was discussed on Discord.
In standard aurora, (removed in C#), when a missile salvo could cross from outside your sensor range to your ship within 5 seconds tick, final fire PD would NOT open fire (I believe only CIWS would attempt to shoot them down).
Do you intend to save the same "functionality" or will you make these volleys being able to be shot at by PD?
IMO, that's a bug.
It's not a really a bug in VB6. It's a result of the sequence of play. The sequence of play during each increment is move - detect - launch, so sensors don't have an opportunity to detect missiles launched from very close range, so point defence cannot engage.
In C#, an extra missile-only detection phase has been added following missile launch so the sequence is now move - detect - launch - detect. This was a conscious decision to shift the balance a little from missiles to energy weapons.
-
I think Tankers are not load/unloading fuel as intended.
https://imgur. com/a/5dy21cJ
When you unload 90% fuel, from a not 100% full tanker it will actually unload 90% fuel. If you unload 90% fuel from a tanker with 50% fuel, now it unloads down to like 5%, however i think that it should unload down to 10%. I know that's not what the command really says, but i think this is how its intended to work.
Also the load/unload fuel to set level doesn't seems to work. It seems that is you set a order to unload to say 30% its creating a order to unload x 30. and then unload 30 times, instead of unloading to set level.
-
With your latest update, a bug/feature was discussed on Discord.
In standard aurora, (removed in C#), when a missile salvo could cross from outside your sensor range to your ship within 5 seconds tick, final fire PD would NOT open fire (I believe only CIWS would attempt to shoot them down).
Do you intend to save the same "functionality" or will you make these volleys being able to be shot at by PD?
IMO, that's a bug.
It's not a really a bug in VB6. It's a result of the sequence of play. The sequence of play during each increment is move - detect - launch, so sensors don't have an opportunity to detect missiles launched from very close range, so point defence cannot engage.
In C#, an extra missile-only detection phase has been added following missile launch so the sequence is now move - detect - launch - detect. This was a conscious decision to shift the balance a little from missiles to energy weapons.
Appreciate the input, I'll follow suit. Hopefully the performance hit won't be too bad.
-
I think Tankers are not load/unloading fuel as intended.
https://imgur. com/a/5dy21cJ
When you unload 90% fuel, from a not 100% full tanker it will actually unload 90% fuel. If you unload 90% fuel from a tanker with 50% fuel, now it unloads down to like 5%, however i think that it should unload down to 10%. I know that's not what the command really says, but i think this is how its intended to work.
Aurora unloads 50% -> 5%, not 50% -> 10%.
Also the load/unload fuel to set level doesn't seems to work. It seems that is you set a order to unload to say 30% its creating a order to unload x 30. and then unload 30 times, instead of unloading to set level.
Load/Unload to set level uses exact values not percentages. An unload of 30 times would show the order 30 times, not "x 30" on one order. Note that you are specifying the fuel level you want the pop to be at, not the ship.
-
https://imgur.com/a/WHIsu9O
This is odd i think.
In this screenshot is 3 ships that has been upgraded. In the new design there is room for an extra 500k fuel.
As you can see in the screenshot the Ships still only refuel to the level they used to have as a Agincourt 2 class (1.000.000 each). The fuel measurement correctly shows the ship is only fueled 66% however the cargo box in the lower right corner says 3.000.000 our of 3.000.000. This is not correct as the new class agincourt 3 can hold 1.500.000 each.
-
I dont have a screenshot for this one.
I think in aurora, there is a limit to how far surveyship will go with the automation survey order. (i think its max 10B ). But in Q4x i just had a GEO trying to go to another star in a binary 2000B away
-
https://imgur.com/a/REfzSXX
This ship continue to move even though it doesn't have any more fuel...
-
I dont have a screenshot for this one.
I think in aurora, there is a limit to how far survey ship will go with the automation survey order. (i think its max 10B ). But in Q4x i just had a GEO trying to go to another star in a binary 2000B away
While definitely a variance from A4x, perhaps we should consider this one a worthy update in need of an edit?
Ideally, the survey ship's own design would dictate the limit on how far away it will search. Anything within, say, 45% of the maximum fueled range, and within 45% of the deployment duration for travel time. Would keep the majority of its adventures from being inherently problematic, and let you design ultra long range survey ships and simply release them to do their thing with such distant locales.
-
I dont have a screenshot for this one.
I think in aurora, there is a limit to how far survey ship will go with the automation survey order. (i think its max 10B ). But in Q4x i just had a GEO trying to go to another star in a binary 2000B away
While definitely a variance from A4x, perhaps we should consider this one a worthy update in need of an edit?
Ideally, the survey ship's own design would dictate the limit on how far away it will search. Anything within, say, 45% of the maximum fueled range, and within 45% of the deployment duration for travel time. Would keep the majority of its adventures from being inherently problematic, and let you design ultra long range survey ships and simply release them to do their thing with such distant locales.
Yeah I didn't see any reason to limit the range.
-
I dont have a screenshot for this one.
I think in aurora, there is a limit to how far survey ship will go with the automation survey order. (i think its max 10B ). But in Q4x i just had a GEO trying to go to another star in a binary 2000B away
While definitely a variance from A4x, perhaps we should consider this one a worthy update in need of an edit?
Ideally, the survey ship's own design would dictate the limit on how far away it will search. Anything within, say, 45% of the maximum fueled range, and within 45% of the deployment duration for travel time. Would keep the majority of its adventures from being inherently problematic, and let you design ultra long range survey ships and simply release them to do their thing with such distant locales.
Yeah I didn't see any reason to limit the range.
Well it its kind of annoying when your ships just wandering out into the void of space until there is no more fuel...
-
I dont have a screenshot for this one.
I think in aurora, there is a limit to how far survey ship will go with the automation survey order. (i think its max 10B ). But in Q4x i just had a GEO trying to go to another star in a binary 2000B away
While definitely a variance from A4x, perhaps we should consider this one a worthy update in need of an edit?
Ideally, the survey ship's own design would dictate the limit on how far away it will search. Anything within, say, 45% of the maximum fueled range, and within 45% of the deployment duration for travel time. Would keep the majority of its adventures from being inherently problematic, and let you design ultra long range survey ships and simply release them to do their thing with such distant locales.
Yeah I didn't see any reason to limit the range.
Well it its kind of annoying when your ships just wandering out into the void of space until there is no more fuel...
A good point. Something similar was said in the main thread as well. I've put the 10B km limit in for the next update. I noticed that in A7.1, some orders are limited to 10B (survey nearest planet) but some are not (survey nearest body, survey next 5 bodies). For now, I put the limit in for all variations of the geo survey orders.
-
https://imgur.com/a/REfzSXX
This ship continue to move even though it doesn't have any more fuel...
Will be fixed in the next version.
-
https://imgur.com/a/WHIsu9O
This is odd i think.
In this screenshot is 3 ships that has been upgraded. In the new design there is room for an extra 500k fuel.
As you can see in the screenshot the Ships still only refuel to the level they used to have as a Agincourt 2 class (1.000.000 each). The fuel measurement correctly shows the ship is only fueled 66% however the cargo box in the lower right corner says 3.000.000 our of 3.000.000. This is not correct as the new class agincourt 3 can hold 1.500.000 each.
Will be fixed in the next version. After it's released you'll have to re-refit the ship to fix the fuel capacity.
-
With your latest update, a bug/feature was discussed on Discord.
In standard aurora, (removed in C#), when a missile salvo could cross from outside your sensor range to your ship within 5 seconds tick, final fire PD would NOT open fire (I believe only CIWS would attempt to shoot them down).
Do you intend to save the same "functionality" or will you make these volleys being able to be shot at by PD?
IMO, that's a bug.
It's not a really a bug in VB6. It's a result of the sequence of play. The sequence of play during each increment is move - detect - launch, so sensors don't have an opportunity to detect missiles launched from very close range, so point defence cannot engage.
In C#, an extra missile-only detection phase has been added following missile launch so the sequence is now move - detect - launch - detect. This was a conscious decision to shift the balance a little from missiles to energy weapons.
Appreciate the input, I'll follow suit. Hopefully the performance hit won't be too bad.
Will be fixed in the next version. I've changed mine to detect(missiles only) - move - detect - launch, so it will catch missiles manually launched with the "Msl Launch" buttons too.
Edit: will most likely be adding a game option to choose whether to enable/disable this, requiring SM password to change after game is started
-
I tried in 3 different computers your clone.
only can start it in one. starting original Aurora 4x have no problems.
what are the minimum specs?
-
Please try installing the Visual C++ 2019 redistributable (https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/2977003/the-latest-supported-visual-c-downloads) [microsoft.com]. Pick one of the vc_redist .exe files in the list. Let me know if it works.
(For some reason Itch auto-installs these up to 2017, but it doesn't support the 2019 version (https://itch.io/docs/itch/integrating/prereqs/vc.html). I have an issue open about it but no response. No idea why more devs on itch haven't complained about it.)
-
It Worked.
thx a lot friend!!
have a question: is any way to change game resolution? windows are oversized (playing in a 1366X768 Laptop)
-
have a question: is any way to change game resolution? windows are oversized (playing in a 1366X768 Laptop)
I'll see what I can do :)
-
Again, thx a lot friend.
-
After clicking the create game button, nothing happens. Latest Win 10 & vc_redist. Am I doing something wrong?
UPDATE
just delete the old save (at %APPDATA%\Roaming\Godot\app_userdata\Quasar4x\quasar4x. sqlite) and all fine now
-
have 2 problems:
creating a normal empire, in the solar system, when i press F3 (system map) game freezes.
creating an alien empire in any system, its imposible to find any system with planets. in the F9 Window no celestial bodies shown
-
have 2 problems:
creating a normal empire, in the solar system, when i press F3 (system map) game freezes.
creating an alien empire in any system, its imposible to find any system with planets. in the F9 Window no celestial bodies shown
I wasn't able to reproduce this on a fresh install. F3 opened and Create System worked normally for both known systems and random systems. Can you try deleting the save file and doing it again? (See above post for location)
Also make sure your video drivers are up to date.
-
It Worked :)
-
Downloaded V91 of Quasar, installed Redistributables and the game runs. However, I tried to generate a new game, but after all settings I clicked on "Generate Game" and Quarar CTDs. After relaunch, I do have basically an empty shell of a game in the DB.
-
Downloaded V91 of Quasar, installed Redistributables and the game runs. However, I tried to generate a new game, but after all settings I clicked on "Generate Game" and Quarar CTDs. After relaunch, I do have basically an empty shell of a game in the DB.
Can you delete the old save at %APPDATA%\Roaming\Godot\app_userdata\Quasar4x\quasar4x.sqlite and try again, and post screenshot of the new game settings before clicking Create Game please?
-
Its seems to me there is a bug on the "Re number" button on the "class design" Screen. It doesn't seems to do anything.
-
I'm having troubles with the sector civilian administrator. I can't assign a Governor of my only sector "earth sector". Anyone else have tried to build a sector command and not been able to assign governor ?
-
Im was very happy to find out that mass driver bombardment is working...
https://imgur.com/deMXFMG
Was not so happy that the way i found out was because there is no check that you don't remove the last mass driver from your own colony's.
In Aurora the game will warn you if you remove the last mass driver from a planet that has incoming mineral packages - i think we should have this in Q4x aswell :)
-
Here are a couple more. I think they are related:
Fuel Harvesters and Asteroid mining seems to be working on planets. I Believe this is not the intention at least not in Ax4
https://imgur. com/a/B7cBCnZ
Fixed
Accessibility doesn't seems to drop with quantity. I Believe they do in Ax4
https://imgur. com/a/aADDFP8
Fixed. I had simply forgotten to add code for accessibility decay
I think this has gone a bit to far, now it seems that asteroid mining doesn't work on comets, but i think they should?
-
Downloaded V91 of Quasar, installed Redistributables and the game runs. However, I tried to generate a new game, but after all settings I clicked on "Generate Game" and Quarar CTDs. After relaunch, I do have basically an empty shell of a game in the DB.
Can you delete the old save at %APPDATA%\Roaming\Godot\app_userdata\Quasar4x\quasar4x.sqlite and try again, and post screenshot of the new game settings before clicking Create Game please?
Here it is:
-
Downloaded V91 of Quasar, installed Redistributables and the game runs. However, I tried to generate a new game, but after all settings I clicked on "Generate Game" and Quarar CTDs. After relaunch, I do have basically an empty shell of a game in the DB.
Can you delete the old save at %APPDATA%\Roaming\Godot\app_userdata\Quasar4x\quasar4x.sqlite and try again, and post screenshot of the new game settings before clicking Create Game please?
Here it is:
Fixed for Version 92!
-
I'm having troubles with the sector civilian administrator. I can't assign a Governor of my only sector "earth sector". Anyone else have tried to build a sector command and not been able to assign governor ?
Im was very happy to find out that mass driver bombardment is working...
https://imgur.com/deMXFMG
Was not so happy that the way i found out was because there is no check that you don't remove the last mass driver from your own colony's.
In Aurora the game will warn you if you remove the last mass driver from a planet that has incoming mineral packages - i think we should have this in Q4x aswell :)
it seems that asteroid mining doesn't work on comets, but i think they should?
All fixed for Version 92
-
Its seems to me there is a bug on the "Re number" button on the "class design" Screen. It doesn't seems to do anything.
Can you post a screenshot of the Ships in Class prior to clicking the Renumber button?
-
Thanks, with Version 92 the game generation works. There is though a bug in it. I told it to create 6 research facilities and I got three... .
The Races Screen shows "null" for Empire Name. In the dropdown box I find the correct name, but can't select it. It stays on "null".
-
Thanks, with Version 92 the game generation works. There is though a bug in it. I told it to create 6 research facilities and I got three... .
The Races Screen shows "null" for Empire Name. In the dropdown box I find the correct name, but can't select it. It stays on "null".
If you change start type or government type it will overwrite what's in the research facilities box, but I also found and fixed a bug that showed population data from a previous game if you had one loaded then switched to a different one in the same session.
I wasn't able to reproduce the "null" empire name but I found and fixed a pretty severe bug on the Race Details window that affected almost all of the values displayed, not just the name.
Just pushed Version 93 containing these fixes plus a super important fix to the optional database backups that would have messed things up badly if anyone had it enabled.
-
Here are a couple. Using win64, version 92.
Not a bug, but there doesn't seem to be any way to tell what version you're using. Not in the about, not in a readme, etc. Please tell me if I am just not looking in the right place.
Clicking "reorder" in the Commanders menu crashes the game. I don't think I've ever clicked it in Aurora but I just couldn't resist this time.
I've never seen a naval officer with an Intelligence bonus. I started watching and after a while I caught an officer that the event log reported (on recruitment) as having an intelligence bonus but actually had an operations bonus instead. On that note when an officer in the Public Affairs position increased his Diplomacy bonus it was reported in the events as a "Public Affairs" bonus increase. . . I don't remember what it says in Aurora but it's confusing verbiage regardless, it might be worthwhile to unify diplomacy/public affairs under a single name.
The only maintenance failure I seem to get is the catastrophic one where the vessel explodes. I've started a couple games and in each game had one of a couple small grav surveyors with a 5+ year shelf life (according to the class design report) explode in the first year or two, without seeing any other failures of any kind.
The research screen has some issues. Cancelling a research doesn't reset the scientist back into the scientist window until the screen refreshes by selecting a different research category. Cancelling a research sometimes creates a duplicate research topic at a different level of completeness; both disappear once you select one of them for researching again. Manually changing the number of labs to be assigned sometimes results in 0 labs being assigned once you click "create".
-
Here are some updates to my previous post and some more problems. Win64 v94 now.
Update: somewhere in a decade of turns an officer working at Fleet Intelligence got an increase in Intelligence bonus, so it is possible for officers to have that bonus, but in that decade not a single newly recruited officer arrived with an intelligence bonus.
Update: after that same decade of watching my grav survey ships explode one by one from catastrophic failures I saw my first non-catastrophic failure (an engine) which was repaired from MSP as expected. Even so, I would say there is something wrong with the catastrophic failure frequency.
I see a lot of commanders (scientists and naval officers) get bonuses where instead of the increase being a multiple of 5%, like normal, it's multiple of 5% minus 1%. This leads to scientists who have a 34% bonus to biology, or a naval officer who has a 49% bonus to operations, etc. In Aurora, as far as I know, all bonus increases are either multiples of +5% (normal job) or they are a flat +1% (team member).
There seems to be a problem with the GRAV survey default order. Whenever the game announces that a system has been fully surveyed, if I go check on the system my surveyor will be redoing a survey point that had already been completed. Once it finishes that survey point again it will halt and announce that it can't find any valid survey targets, as expected. This also happens with multiple surveyors working in concert, they will each queue up as their final survey target the survey point that the other vessel is working on, so even after the system is fully surveyed they will run over to the other vessel's survey point and redo it before announcing their failure to find a valid target.
Something similar can happen with GEO surveying but I've only noticed it a few times, possibly because geo surveying a given target is typically very fast. The geo surveyor will queue up the final target twice in a row and survey it twice.
Industries don't stay shut down when turned off in the Civilians & Ind Status tab, the timer starts ticking as soon as you click "shut down" so 180 days later they are back to running again. I'm about to ship my fuel refineries to Venus so they stop using all my Sorium.
Renaming components in the "Design Tech" window doesn't work (or I can't get it to work). The prefix line is editable and works exactly as expected, but when I edit the pregenerated name (e. g. "150 EP Ion Drive" to "Test") my changes aren't reflected in the research topic name after I click "Create", the research topic name just uses the prefix line + pregenerated name.
Adding any hangar module to a vessel changes the displayed "maint life" to 10000. 00 years.
Vessels don't fail their "load [specific installation]" orders when there is none to be loaded. I noticed this after my cargo TG kept on repeating its orders to carry automated mines to Venus years after Earth had run out of automated mines, so the TG was just flying back and forth empty.
Officers don't automatically promote when using manual assignments, and can't be manually promoted.
Jump engine sizes above 100 wrap around to 1, such that selecting an engine size of 105 (the next after 100) creates a size 1 engine.
I don't know if this was a design decision or not but Quasar military/commercial jump engine rules are different from Aurora which goes against your stated goals for the project. In Aurora any vessel with commercial-rated thrusters can jump via a commercial-rated jump drive, regardless of the vessel's overall military/commercial classification, while any vessel of the appropriate size can jump via a military-rated jump drive. In Quasar military vessels can only jump via military-rated drives and commercial vessels can only jump via commercial-rated drives.
This also has in-game implications in that a person might consider using commercial jump drive and engines on a really large military vessel (a carrier or something) in order to avoid researching a really large military jump drive which comes with a huge research cost. Can't do that with the current Q4x mechanics.
-
In View Technology window, when you select Missile Launchers it is not possible to select researched technologies. So for example by default there is ICBM Silo and it is impossible to select to make it obsolete or rename it.
-
In View Technology window, when you select Missile Launchers it is not possible to select researched technologies. So for example by default there is ICBM Silo and it is impossible to select to make it obsolete or rename it.
Does this apply to ALL missile launchers, or only to the pre-designed ICBM Silos supplied at start of a new game (which are special and weird)?
-
It is same for all launchers. I have four other launchers researched and I can't select any of those. I don't have researched tech in all the categories but those that I use work properly.
-
Its seems to me there is a bug on the "Re number" button on the "class design" Screen. It doesn't seems to do anything.
Can you post a screenshot of the Ships in Class prior to clicking the Renumber button?
https://imgur.com/a/8NTsczR
-
https://imgur.com/a/oMAZpGu
Don't know if this is a mistake or i have just never seen it before. Here are two jump points set between the same systems. Denmark <-> KBH-0
-
https://imgur.com/a/dR7uvqW
There seems to be something with the system numbers. I'm playing a setup with max 500 systems, yet i have system numbers from 1 to at least 4408
-
https://imgur.com/a/oMAZpGu
Don't know if this is a mistake or i have just never seen it before. Here are two jump points set between the same systems. Denmark <-> KBH-0
It's been a known 'feature' of Aurora for years, so I assume it's deliberate.
-
https://imgur.com/a/dR7uvqW
There seems to be something with the system numbers. I'm playing a setup with max 500 systems, yet i have system numbers from 1 to at least 4408
Are you sure it's 500 and not 5000?
And are you sure it's never been 5000? Because (in Aurora) reducing the number of systems in the game won't remove or renumber any existing systems.
-
https://imgur.com/a/aE1u4ks
Don't know if this is a setup thing, but it doesn't seems to happen for me in Aurora. The Bottoms in the system screen exceed the windows size and the font doesn't scale well when zoomed
-
https://imgur.com/a/oMAZpGu
Don't know if this is a mistake or i have just never seen it before. Here are two jump points set between the same systems. Denmark <-> KBH-0
It's been a known 'feature' of Aurora for years, so I assume it's deliberate.
Maybe as a improvement then to Aurora it would be nice to name these different like kbh-1/2 or something, as it get quite difficult to set up orders when there are two jump point that are named the exact same thing.
-
https://imgur.com/a/dR7uvqW
There seems to be something with the system numbers. I'm playing a setup with max 500 systems, yet i have system numbers from 1 to at least 4408
Are you sure it's 500 and not 5000?
And are you sure it's never been 5000? Because (in Aurora) reducing the number of systems in the game won't remove or renumber any existing systems.
Well a was sure until you pointed it out and i checked the Game details where it said 1000, so maybe i intended to set it to 500 and it somehow defaulted to 1000, i'm pretty sure though that i din't set it to 5000 as that would be very stupid considering my laptops capabilities.
-
Its seems to me there is a bug on the "Re number" button on the "class design" Screen. It doesn't seems to do anything.
Can you post a screenshot of the Ships in Class prior to clicking the Renumber button?
https://imgur.com/a/8NTsczR
I accidentally designed the renumber function a bit differently than the tooltip says. Rather than wipe out the ship's name it preserves the ship name, only wiping out the 3 digit numbers at the end and adding new numbers. I'll let this simmer for a bit and see whether the different functionality feels better or worse. Might add an option to choose whether to redo class names the VB6 way when clicking renumber.
-
https://imgur.com/a/dR7uvqW
There seems to be something with the system numbers. I'm playing a setup with max 500 systems, yet i have system numbers from 1 to at least 4408
Are you sure it's 500 and not 5000?
And are you sure it's never been 5000? Because (in Aurora) reducing the number of systems in the game won't remove or renumber any existing systems.
Well a was sure until you pointed it out and i checked the Game details where it said 1000, so maybe i intended to set it to 500 and it somehow defaulted to 1000, i'm pretty sure though that i din't set it to 5000 as that would be very stupid considering my laptops capabilities.
It's true that the game won't remove or renumber any existing systems, but I did find and fix a bug where it was using the number of known systems as the maximum number in non-known-stars games instead of the other way around. So this is fixed for next version.
-
https://imgur.com/a/oMAZpGu
Don't know if this is a mistake or i have just never seen it before. Here are two jump points set between the same systems. Denmark <-> KBH-0
It's been a known 'feature' of Aurora for years, so I assume it's deliberate.
Maybe as a improvement then to Aurora it would be nice to name these different like kbh-1/2 or something, as it get quite difficult to set up orders when there are two jump point that are named the exact same thing.
If this happened in my game I think I'd just SM delete the second jump point, but you make a good point and I'll add it to my long list to make them easier to tell apart somehow
-
I tried to overhaul a ship at a planet that had a too small maintenance capacity. I got a warning that overhaul is not possible and directly next came a message that told me: "Stenton CV2 001 has suffered a catastrophic maintenance failure and exploded!" - Bit of a coincidence... or a bug? ::) I hope it has nothing to do with Marco Inaros...
Also: the "Hierarchy View" in the "System Information Screen" is not updated when one switches the star system.
-
Thanks for the reports kyonkundenwa and others, nearly every issue reported resulted in a bug getting fixed! Version 95 is up, with the following changes:
Here are a couple. Using win64, version 92.
Not a bug, but there doesn't seem to be any way to tell what version you're using. Not in the about, not in a readme, etc. Please tell me if I am just not looking in the right place.
Added this to Game Info window and About window.
Clicking "reorder" in the Commanders menu crashes the game. I don't think I've ever clicked it in Aurora but I just couldn't resist this time.
Fixed
I caught an officer that the event log reported (on recruitment) as having an intelligence bonus but actually had an operations bonus instead.
Fixed
On that note when an officer in the Public Affairs position increased his Diplomacy bonus it was reported in the events as a "Public Affairs" bonus increase. . . I don't remember what it says in Aurora but it's confusing verbiage regardless, it might be worthwhile to unify diplomacy/public affairs under a single name.
It copies Aurora's verbeage but I'm open to revisiting this later
The only maintenance failure I seem to get is the catastrophic one where the vessel explodes.
Fixed. This was a tricky bug to find, glad to have it squished.
I've started a couple games and in each game had one of a couple small grav surveyors with a 5+ year shelf life (according to the class design report) explode in the first year or two, without seeing any other failures of any kind.
This may or may not be fixed indirectly by a couple of my other fixes.
The research screen has some issues. Cancelling a research doesn't reset the scientist back into the scientist window until the screen refreshes by selecting a different research category. Cancelling a research sometimes creates a duplicate research topic at a different level of completeness; both disappear once you select one of them for researching again.
Fixed, by adding a more aggressive UI refresh (a function in the code called "refresh_others") after Cancel is clicked. I've added "refresh_others" to about a hundred or so other UI controls that needed it as well, but haven't explicitly tested every one. "refresh_others" is nearly the same as the Refresh All button with a couple optimizations, and it may not always refresh the F9 and Galactic Map windows since those are expensive to update. This should take care of a lot of potential issues where a Refresh All is needed to fix what is being displayed.
Manually changing the number of labs to be assigned sometimes results in 0 labs being assigned once you click "create".
Couldn't reproduce, but it might be fixed with the "refresh_others" fix above.
Here are some updates to my previous post and some more problems. Win64 v94 now.
Update: somewhere in a decade of turns an officer working at Fleet Intelligence got an increase in Intelligence bonus, so it is possible for officers to have that bonus, but in that decade not a single newly recruited officer arrived with an intelligence bonus.
Fixed by the above fix to recruitment
Update: after that same decade of watching my grav survey ships explode one by one from catastrophic failures I saw my first non-catastrophic failure (an engine) which was repaired from MSP as expected. Even so, I would say there is something wrong with the catastrophic failure frequency.
Yep, when spares were available it was working. Catastrophe frequency fixed as mentioned earlier.
I see a lot of commanders (scientists and naval officers) get bonuses where instead of the increase being a multiple of 5%, like normal, it's multiple of 5% minus 1%. This leads to scientists who have a 34% bonus to biology, or a naval officer who has a 49% bonus to operations, etc. In Aurora, as far as I know, all bonus increases are either multiples of +5% (normal job) or they are a flat +1% (team member).
Fixed. This is another nasty bug I'm glad to have squished. The code int(1.15 * 100) was resolving to 114. Not necessarily the engine's fault, it uses raw floating point number types because 3D engines prioritize speed over accuracy, and math with raw floating point numbers can get weird.
I replaced about 200 cases where I was converting floating point numbers to integers using the default 'int' with my own custom code called 'int_floor', in which int_floor(1.15 * 100) = 115, so that should eliminate some future bugs.
There seems to be a problem with the GRAV survey default order. Whenever the game announces that a system has been fully surveyed, if I go check on the system my surveyor will be redoing a survey point that had already been completed. Once it finishes that survey point again it will halt and announce that it can't find any valid survey targets, as expected. This also happens with multiple surveyors working in concert, they will each queue up as their final survey target the survey point that the other vessel is working on, so even after the system is fully surveyed they will run over to the other vessel's survey point and redo it before announcing their failure to find a valid target.
Fixed
Something similar can happen with GEO surveying but I've only noticed it a few times, possibly because geo surveying a given target is typically very fast. The geo surveyor will queue up the final target twice in a row and survey it twice.
Fixed
Industries don't stay shut down when turned off in the Civilians & Ind Status tab, the timer starts ticking as soon as you click "shut down" so 180 days later they are back to running again. I'm about to ship my fuel refineries to Venus so they stop using all my Sorium.
Fixed
Renaming components in the "Design Tech" window doesn't work (or I can't get it to work). The prefix line is editable and works exactly as expected, but when I edit the pregenerated name (e. g. "150 EP Ion Drive" to "Test") my changes aren't reflected in the research topic name after I click "Create", the research topic name just uses the prefix line + pregenerated name.
Fixed
Adding any hangar module to a vessel changes the displayed "maint life" to 10000. 00 years.
Couldn't reproduce. Maybe fixed by one of my other changes. If still happening can you give more details?
Vessels don't fail their "load [specific installation]" orders when there is none to be loaded. I noticed this after my cargo TG kept on repeating its orders to carry automated mines to Venus years after Earth had run out of automated mines, so the TG was just flying back and forth empty.
Fixed
Officers don't automatically promote when using manual assignments, and can't be manually promoted.
Fixed
Jump engine sizes above 100 wrap around to 1, such that selecting an engine size of 105 (the next after 100) creates a size 1 engine.
Fixed
I don't know if this was a design decision or not but Quasar military/commercial jump engine rules are different from Aurora which goes against your stated goals for the project. In Aurora any vessel with commercial-rated thrusters can jump via a commercial-rated jump drive, regardless of the vessel's overall military/commercial classification, while any vessel of the appropriate size can jump via a military-rated jump drive. In Quasar military vessels can only jump via military-rated drives and commercial vessels can only jump via commercial-rated drives.
This also has in-game implications in that a person might consider using commercial jump drive and engines on a really large military vessel (a carrier or something) in order to avoid researching a really large military jump drive which comes with a huge research cost. Can't do that with the current Q4x mechanics.
One correction, in Quasar, commercial ships should be able to jump via military drives. But yes, this is essentially a design decision because I coded this part how I understood the rules to be, without explicitly testing every possibility in Aurora. In this case I will accept the difference from Aurora because throwing a commercial engine on a carrier to get around long research times seems pretty gamey to me and I find it hard to believe this is an intended behavior.
In View Technology window, when you select Missile Launchers it is not possible to select researched technologies. So for example by default there is ICBM Silo and it is impossible to select to make it obsolete or rename it.
Fixed
https://imgur.com/a/dR7uvqW
There seems to be something with the system numbers. I'm playing a setup with max 500 systems, yet i have system numbers from 1 to at least 4408
Fixed
https://imgur.com/a/aE1u4ks
Don't know if this is a setup thing, but it doesn't seems to happen for me in Aurora. The Bottoms in the system screen exceed the windows size and the font doesn't scale well when zoomed
Window size fixed. I'm aware of the font scaling pixelation on F9 but it happens to not be a straightforward fix so it's pretty far down on my list. Aurora 7.1 font scaling on F9 looks better, but there are still some ultra-pixelly fonts at certain sizes.
Thanks again for all the reports.
-
the "Hierarchy View" in the "System Information Screen" is not updated when one switches the star system.
Fixed for version 96
-
These are still from v94, so you may have fixed some already.
Fighters landed in a mothership which is sent for overhaul will enter overhaul themselves, but will never complete their overhaul-you have to give the "abandon overhaul" order to move the vessel again. I don't remember how it works in Aurora but I suspect they shouldn't enter overhaul at all. I didn't test parasites of other sizes, just fighters.
This one's parasite related but I'm having a tough time with exactly what's going on. My 25000 ton mothership (8000 tons of hangar space) with 25000 ton rated jump drive can transit a jump point empty. It still can transit with up to 2x 500 ton fighters on board, but once I load a third fighter it fails at the jump point saying a vessel is too large for transit. It still fails if I launch the fighters.
My guess would be that the game is trying to jump the landed fighters through as though they were launched and just flying in the same TG, which is why a JD max squadron size of 3 lets 2x fighters (and the mothership) through but fails at 3x fighters.
Terraforming modules aren't affected by terraforming rate tech increases.
On the industry tab, changes to queue order aren't respected when selecting the next task. To reproduce, queue up a bunch of tasks at 50% industry. Shift the lowest in the queue up to the top. It will stay there until one of the in-progress tasks finishes, then the game will select whatever was originally next and the one you moved up will go back to last in the queue.
The maintenance facilities mineral use estimate in the Industry tab just displays 0s even though I have a bunch of military ships parked in orbit. Maintenance facilities seem to be using the minerals, they're just not reporting it in the estimate screen.
Orbital habitats don't seem to work quite right. The colony summary reports a -50% population growth per year, and political stability is decreasing due to overcrowding, but the population is exactly at the OH capacity and isn't changing. The population growth may be just a display issue but the stability event spam is annoying.
I can't get a newly-created TF staff to load onto a flag bridge which is in orbit.
Officer sorting ("sort by ability or location") doesn't work for civilian administrators and scientists.
To reproduce the hangar maint life issue, go to the class design tab, click "new", then add at least one of any hangar type to the new vessel. Maint life will display as 10000. 00. Adding certain other components (e. g. engine, survey sensor) will set the maint life to the expected value, while adding certain others (e. g. cargo hold, cryo transport) won't. A completed vessel will almost always wind up with a component that causes the correct value to display so I guess it's not really a big deal.
Expanding the system map beyond a certain width (such as on a widescreen monitor) extends the left-side toolbar, to the point that it will cover the scale bar in the top left.
-
If you wouldn't mind, could you check these on v95, a lot of things were impacted by it
Edit: well, some of these are still issues, will take a look
-
I thought I wouldn't check today, but then I did. v95.
Fighters still get stuck in overhaul.
I think I understand the parasite jump problem after SM-editing the carrier a few times. First, Standard Transit is following the same rules as Squadron Transit. In a Standard Transit any number of vessels can go through a JP regardless of the jump drive's squadron size rating, while the Squadron Transit uses the squadron size as a limitation. Second, Quasar is attempting to jump the landed parasites through as though they were just flying in the Task Group like any other vessel, rather than recognizing that they are inside the carrier and transit rules should not apply to them.
Terraforming modules still aren't affected by tech increases.
Maintenance facility minerals use still shows 0.
Orbital habitats are still acting oddly. The residents aren't being limited by the OH's capacity and instead are trying to grow like normal on the surface which results in the population going over the supported value. I don't remember exactly how this works in Aurora but I know that OH inhabitants going over their limit on an otherwise uninhabitable object didn't happen.
Vessels with Flag Bridges still don't show up in the Task Force - Move to Flagship dropdown. Overall it looks like Naval Organization may be unfinished, and I don't remember these mechanics very well, so I'm not going to say anything more about it.
Scientist/administrator sorting still doesn't work.
Hangar maint life thing still happens.
The map width "problem" hasn't changed.
Fixed in v95 - industry queue issue.
-
One correction, in Quasar, commercial ships should be able to jump via military drives. But yes, this is essentially a design decision because I coded this part how I understood the rules to be, without explicitly testing every possibility in Aurora. In this case I will accept the difference from Aurora because throwing a commercial engine on a carrier to get around long research times seems pretty gamey to me and I find it hard to believe this is an intended behavior.
Actually, that is Working As Intended: the technobabble is something about the more energetic military engines stressing/disrupting the jump so they can't ride with a commercial jump drive, whereas a military model has much higher tolerances and that's why it's so much harder to build, size being equal. (What's the alternative - a software lock that refuses to initiate the jump if it detects a vessel in the squadron is carrying a hangar/1.05HS passive sensor/whatever else, because it would violate the license tier you've payed for?)
-
As someone whose conventional-start empires normally research only a single, large civilian engine for our initial fleet (military and otherwise) for fuel efficiency & annoying research cost reasons (it's frequently cheaper to research an entire new engine power tier than a large military engine), I'd certainly rather see Quasar copy Aurora's behaviour in this matter.
- - - - -
While I agree that it's not intended behaviour to exploit quirks in Aurora's code, the idea that a military ship would utilize civilian engines for fuel efficiency, maintenance, or speed-of-construction reasons makes sense to me.
Also, I think it would be an annoying amount of micro-management if my fleet auxiliary tankers had to haul along civilian jump ships in order to move with the fleet.
-
Actually, that is Working As Intended: the technobabble is something about the more energetic military engines stressing/disrupting the jump so they can't ride with a commercial jump drive, whereas a military model has much higher tolerances and that's why it's so much harder to build, size being equal. (What's the alternative - a software lock that refuses to initiate the jump if it detects a vessel in the squadron is carrying a hangar/1.05HS passive sensor/whatever else, because it would violate the license tier you've payed for?)
Ok, that makes sense. I've made it like A4X, so that its based off engine class, not vessel class. I also removed the ship count restriction on non-squadron transits via jump drive. I was actually not aware that this restriction was for squadron transits only.
Fighters landed in a mothership which is sent for overhaul will enter overhaul themselves, but will never complete their overhaul-you have to give the "abandon overhaul" order to move the vessel again. I don't remember how it works in Aurora but I suspect they shouldn't enter overhaul at all. I didn't test parasites of other sizes, just fighters.
Fixed; Fighters landed in a mothership which is sent for overhaul will no longer overhaul themselves, matching A4X. Size is not factored into this particular rule.
the game is trying to jump the landed fighters through as though they were launched and just flying in the same TG
Fixed
Terraforming modules aren't affected by terraforming rate tech increases.
Fixed. This can be corrected in your game by researching one more tier of terraforming rate.
The maintenance facilities mineral use estimate in the Industry tab just displays 0s even though I have a bunch of military ships parked in orbit. Maintenance facilities seem to be using the minerals, they're just not reporting it in the estimate screen.
Not yet implemented, but it's on my short list.
Orbital habitats don't seem to work quite right. The colony summary reports a -50% population growth per year, and political stability is decreasing due to overcrowding, but the population is exactly at the OH capacity and isn't changing. The population growth may be just a display issue but the stability event spam is annoying.
Could not reproduce this with a quick test case. To save me time would you mind sending the save file where this is occuring to (https://i.imgur.com/hHtCCdL.png)?
I can't get a newly-created TF staff to load onto a flag bridge which is in orbit.
Mobile task forces are still on my list to do.
Officer sorting ("sort by ability or location") doesn't work for civilian administrators and scientists.
Fixed
To reproduce the hangar maint life issue, go to the class design tab, click "new", then add at least one of any hangar type to the new vessel. Maint life will display as 10000. 00. Adding certain other components (e. g. engine, survey sensor) will set the maint life to the expected value, while adding certain others (e. g. cargo hold, cryo transport) won't. A completed vessel will almost always wind up with a component that causes the correct value to display so I guess it's not really a big deal.
In A4X, the maint life would appear as 0 years for the same ship. A ship with just a hangar and engineering spaces can be expected to last over 10k years (assuming the math is right), quasar is just capping the calculation at 10k years
Expanding the system map beyond a certain width (such as on a widescreen monitor) extends the left-side toolbar, to the point that it will cover the scale bar in the top left.
Fixed
Overall it looks like Naval Organization may be unfinished, and I don't remember these mechanics very well, so I'm not going to say anything more about it.
It is feature complete so let me know if you find a bug. Note that I've intentionally made it behave a bit differently than A4X. I don't remember the details but I believe the main difference is that in Quasar ships can be put in more than one branch.
Version 96 has been pushed with the above fixes.
-
Version 96: "System Generation and Display" screen: creating a new system (from the database) leads to a new system without any bodies - wait, if you switch to the Hierarchy View there is shown a hierarchy, but looking at the "Sun" tab, there is nothing shown there... . This happens also when you don't use known star systems.
Additionally the delete button does nothing. It only leads to a warning when you try to delete the only created system as in: can't delete last system.
-
https://imgur.com/a/bdKLDvb
I'm getting Crash to Desktop, happen a few times now. I cant seem to make any sense of what is triggering it, it doesn't seems to be something I've done actively just that turn. I can restart the game and everything including most recent action is saved, and the game plays on without any apparent difference.
Here is a screen of the log just after it happened. Not sure where to find a save file that i could attach?
-
There is a issue with Tankers offloading fuel. I had a tanker offloading 90% of fuel, yet colony show 0 fuel. I have successfully offloaded to other colony's, not sure when its working and when its not.
---
In the "Event update" window, clicking on a event doesn't take you to the location of the event, even when "disable jump to event not ticked"
-
https://imgur.com/a/Py237gE
I know this has been reported before but there still seems to be a bug with survey vessels. In this screen i have three survey vessel one is reporting grav survey of the system is done, one is still surveying and one is heading for a survey point that is already surveyed.
I'm running version 96
-
Version 96: "System Generation and Display" screen: creating a new system (from the database) leads to a new system without any bodies - wait, if you switch to the Hierarchy View there is shown a hierarchy, but looking at the "Sun" tab, there is nothing shown there... . This happens also when you don't use known star systems.
Not every generated system will have bodies, it's the same in Aurora 7.1. When you're picking from the list of Known Systems, it is somewhat predictable, because system age and primary star type have a big impact on body generation (or lack thereof). I just generated some really nice looking Proxima Centauri and Alpha Centauri systems.
Additionally the delete button does nothing. It only leads to a warning when you try to delete the only created system as in: can't delete last system.
The 'Delete System' button hasn't been implemented yet, but I've moved it up on my to-do list.
https://imgur.com/a/bdKLDvb
I'm getting Crash to Desktop, happen a few times now. I cant seem to make any sense of what is triggering it, it doesn't seems to be something I've done actively just that turn. I can restart the game and everything including most recent action is saved, and the game plays on without any apparent difference.
Here is a screen of the log just after it happened. Not sure where to find a save file that i could attach?
On Windows, the save file is located at %APPDATA%\Roaming\Godot\app_userdata\Quasar4x\quasar4x.sqlite
If it's too big to attach here you can send it to (https://i.imgur.com/hHtCCdL.png)
There is a issue with Tankers offloading fuel. I had a tanker offloading 90% of fuel, yet colony show 0 fuel. I have successfully offloaded to other colony's, not sure when its working and when its not.
At this point I'd need a little more info to help pin this down, but I'll make a note of it.
In the "Event update" window, clicking on a event doesn't take you to the location of the event, even when "disable jump to event not ticked"
It works for some events though, right? Can you paste the exact text of the event, and verify that the thing referenced by the event still exists? Also not every event comes with jump-to-event information, same as Aurora 7.1, although I do hope to improve that where possible.
https://imgur.com/a/Py237gE
I know this has been reported before but there still seems to be a bug with survey vessels. In this screen i have three survey vessel one is reporting grav survey of the system is done, one is still surveying and one is heading for a survey point that is already surveyed.
I'm running version 96
Can you send a save file where this is happening?
-
Not every generated system will have bodies, it's the same in Aurora 7.1. When you're picking from the list of Known Systems, it is somewhat predictable, because system age and primary star type have a big impact on body generation (or lack thereof). I just generated some really nice looking Proxima Centauri and Alpha Centauri systems.
That is true. I however thought that "Hierarchy View" and "Sun"-Tab should fit, according to the planets that are "attached" to the sun... ;D
-
In the "Event update" window, clicking on a event doesn't take you to the location of the event, even when "disable jump to event not ticked"
It works for some events though, right? Can you paste the exact text of the event, and verify that the thing referenced by the event still exists? Also not every event comes with jump-to-event information, same as Aurora 7.1, although I do hope to improve that where possible.
I dont think its working for any events. I have testet the last 4 or 5 events in my task list they were:
- Unrest decresed in system x
Harvester fuel tanks over 90%full
Orders complete
Refueling could not complete
All locations still exists
-
There is a issue with Tankers offloading fuel. I had a tanker offloading 90% of fuel, yet colony show 0 fuel. I have successfully offloaded to other colony's, not sure when its working and when its not.
At this point I'd need a little more info to help pin this down, but I'll make a note of it.
Here is a save where i just offloaded fuel from the Fleet TK Delete to planet Kristina III. Planet still says 0 fuel. I think you can reproduce by OB creating a tanker of same class and offload 90% fuel to colony Kristina III
-
https://imgur.com/a/bdKLDvb
I'm getting Crash to Desktop, happen a few times now. I cant seem to make any sense of what is triggering it, it doesn't seems to be something I've done actively just that turn. I can restart the game and everything including most recent action is saved, and the game plays on without any apparent difference.
Here is a screen of the log just after it happened. Not sure where to find a save file that i could attach?
https://imgur.com/a/Py237gE
I know this has been reported before but there still seems to be a bug with survey vessels. In this screen i have three survey vessel one is reporting grav survey of the system is done, one is still surveying and one is heading for a survey point that is already surveyed.
I'm running version 96
Can you send a save file where this is happening?
I've played on from these two, will safe a file when i can reproduce.
-
I believe there used to be a +/- indication of the last change in wealth in the top of the window. As of right now my game shows just an empty ()
---
https://imgur.com/a/3qXMPcX
These two ships claims low fuel, but fleet window says 100% fuel. This is the first time I encounter this. The issue resolved when i sets speed to max speed instead of speed 1. There is some issue when you detach ships from another fleet that have max speed=1 they keep this speed instead of going to there max speed. (IE. there two ship were put into Earth SY taskgroup when created, this taskgroup also hold a newly created ship without engine therefor the SY tastgroup have movement of 0, when i create a new group they keep the speed at 0)
-
Here are some for v96.
Part of me wants to stop reporting so you won't have any distractions from the next feature additions, but I keep playing and noticing weird things.
System map sidebar "Minerals" tab -> "Show Mineral Concentrations" displays mineral concentrations on unsurveyed bodies.
Sidebar width issue not fixed, my monitor is "only" 1920x1080 and expanding the system map all the way across turns the sidebar into a pretty big obscuration (completely covers scale bar). Sidebar width could probably just be constrained to the default value as nothing is gained by letting it be wider.
LPs can display the wrong LP# in the "select destination" window which comes up when you click intra-system jump from another LP. For instance, if you have a 2-LP system, and you select LP1->Intra-system jump, in the resulting "select destination" window LP2 will be erroneously labeled as LP1.
Choosing to replace an commander by selecting "ok" on the "Do you wish to replace him/her" dialog resets the Commanders screen as though you closed and reopened it. As in, if you replace a ground forces commander, as soon as you click "ok" the Commanders screen will reset to Naval Officers, lowest rank selected, no officer selected. The commander does get replaced, but it's very annoying for mass-replacing.
Naval commanders don't get skill upgrades by performing their duty as they did in Aurora. For example, officers assigned to vessels conducting surveying or constructing jump gates would rapidly gain survey and factory production skill, respectively. Right now the only way to train an officer in a skill like survey or logistics is to assign them to the appropriate TF staff position. I've created a dozen otherwise useless TFs for this reason.
Cancelling research projects can still result in the project being duplicated in the research list. I haven't noticed any factors as to why sometimes they get duplicated and sometimes they don't.
"Projected Usage" in the industry tab can display negative values. My neutronium projected usage is at -39 right now. If this is somehow intended, I apologize.
Vessels in overhaul can still suffer maintenance failures.
The "fuel situation" window displays mx spares as the vessel's maximum value, not the actual remaining.
Homeworld geological survey always fails on the first construction interval. In Aurora the homeworld geological survey would proceed as any other with normal failure or success rates.
Deployment time <3 months is not a criteria for military vessel classification as in Aurora.
In the title bar of the Population and Production screen, the change in wealth since previous increment displays nothing "()" if the change was negative. This was also reported in the post above mine.
The default order "build closest jump gate", when finding that the closest jump gate is outside the system, halts and reports that all movement orders have been rescinded. . . but they don't get taken out of the orders list so the constructor starts acting on them on the next increment anyway. I've tried this several more times but can't recreate it.
In the naval organization tab if you add vessels to a branch under a different TF, then "Create Task Groups / Land Parasite" -> "Ship Only (Branch only etc)" on that ship or branch, the newly created TG should be part of the appropriate TF (evidenced in the top-left dropdown). All my TGs are still assigned to the starter TF, no matter how I create them or try to move them.
Three new ones post-edit:
Maximum speed in a nebula is as though the vessel has only one level of armor, regardless of how many levels it has. I refit a bunch of survey vessels with extra armor in order to fight through a high-level nebula but they still move at the same speed.
Clicking the "all projects" radio button in the research screen locks out adding/queueing research projects until Quasar is closed and restarted.
Minimum Jump Engine Size techs after the first one (size 15, the one you have to research to build jump drives) don't do anything. They're supposed to reduce the minimum engine size that allows squadron jumps.
-
There is a issue with Tankers offloading fuel. I had a tanker offloading 90% of fuel, yet colony show 0 fuel. I have successfully offloaded to other colony's, not sure when its working and when its not.
At this point I'd need a little more info to help pin this down, but I'll make a note of it.
Here is a save where i just offloaded fuel from the Fleet TK Delete to planet Kristina III. Planet still says 0 fuel. I think you can reproduce by OB creating a tanker of same class and offload 90% fuel to colony Kristina III
Tankers are built with only 10% of fuel in them. Immediately giving them "Unload 90%" order will not achieve anything, they must be filled up first.
-
https://imgur.com/a/bdKLDvb
I'm getting Crash to Desktop, happen a few times now. I cant seem to make any sense of what is triggering it, it doesn't seems to be something I've done actively just that turn. I can restart the game and everything including most recent action is saved, and the game plays on without any apparent difference.
Here is a screen of the log just after it happened. Not sure where to find a save file that i could attach?
https://imgur.com/a/Py237gE
I know this has been reported before but there still seems to be a bug with survey vessels. In this screen i have three survey vessel one is reporting grav survey of the system is done, one is still surveying and one is heading for a survey point that is already surveyed.
I'm running version 96
Can you send a save file where this is happening?
I've played on from these two, will safe a file when i can reproduce.
https://imgur.com/a/5l66JFW
So logs says Grav of Grenå is complete. Yet there are two unsurveyed, and Agricourt 002 and 006 seems to wanna survey the same point...
-
There doesn't seem to be any negative effects of being in negative wealth. I believe in Aurora there is some limitation on building new ships and constructions (?) when in negative wealth ?
In task group screen, when using "Show all pops" and creating orders into other systems, the route planner doesn't seems to use LP shortcuts when that would create a shorter line. I'm not sure how this works in aurora.
-
There doesn't seem to be any negative effects of being in negative wealth. I believe in Aurora there is some limitation on building new ships and constructions (?) when in negative wealth ?
Production (of everything) should slow down; the F2 window should show a negative wealth modifier next to the unrest modifier, lack of workers modifier, overpopulation modifier, etc.
-
Here is a save where i just offloaded fuel from the Fleet TK Delete to planet Kristina III. Planet still says 0 fuel. I think you can reproduce by OB creating a tanker of same class and offload 90% fuel to colony Kristina III
This is fixed. There was a bug in a line of SQL code left over from when I changed Fuel consumption to allow fractions internally.
I believe there used to be a +/- indication of the last change in wealth in the top of the window. As of right now my game shows just an empty ()
This is fixed, negative numbers weren't showing.
https://imgur.com/a/3qXMPcX
These two ships claims low fuel, but fleet window says 100% fuel. This is the first time I encounter this. The issue resolved when i sets speed to max speed instead of speed 1.
This should be an easy fix since it repeats itself each turn, I just need a save file so I can trace through when it is happening.
There is some issue when you detach ships from another fleet that have max speed=1 they keep this speed instead of going to there max speed. (IE. there two ship were put into Earth SY taskgroup when created, this taskgroup also hold a newly created ship without engine therefor the SY tastgroup have movement of 0, when i create a new group they keep the speed at 0)
Easy to fix, I just need to know precisely how the ships were detached. The Detach Ship button already updates the speed of the newly created fleet.
Here are some for v96.
Part of me wants to stop reporting so you won't have any distractions from the next feature additions, but I keep playing and noticing weird things.
Up to you :) Sooner or later these have to be fixed. The overall time spent on the project is probably reduced by me not having to spend time isolating the exact problem when I run into these issues.
System map sidebar "Minerals" tab -> "Show Mineral Concentrations" displays mineral concentrations on unsurveyed bodies.
Fixed
Sidebar width issue not fixed, my monitor is "only" 1920x1080 and expanding the system map all the way across turns the sidebar into a pretty big obscuration (completely covers scale bar). Sidebar width could probably just be constrained to the default value as nothing is gained by letting it be wider.
Fixed. I honestly have no idea how my previous fix got undone.
LPs can display the wrong LP# in the "select destination" window which comes up when you click intra-system jump from another LP. For instance, if you have a 2-LP system, and you select LP1->Intra-system jump, in the resulting "select destination" window LP2 will be erroneously labeled as LP1.
Fixed
Choosing to replace an commander by selecting "ok" on the "Do you wish to replace him/her" dialog resets the Commanders screen as though you closed and reopened it. As in, if you replace a ground forces commander, as soon as you click "ok" the Commanders screen will reset to Naval Officers, lowest rank selected, no officer selected. The commander does get replaced, but it's very annoying for mass-replacing.
Fixed. My goal is to eventually eliminate all of these cases where a refresh causes the currently selected item in a menu or list to get reset. Just a matter of weeding them out.
Naval commanders don't get skill upgrades by performing their duty as they did in Aurora. For example, officers assigned to vessels conducting surveying or constructing jump gates would rapidly gain survey and factory production skill, respectively. Right now the only way to train an officer in a skill like survey or logistics is to assign them to the appropriate TF staff position. I've created a dozen otherwise useless TFs for this reason.
Duty skillups aren't yet implemented. I've moved them up on my list.
Cancelling research projects can still result in the project being duplicated in the research list. I haven't noticed any factors as to why sometimes they get duplicated and sometimes they don't.
Fixed. Duplicates already existing in your game might stick around until the project is fully reseached.
"Projected Usage" in the industry tab can display negative values. My neutronium projected usage is at -39 right now. If this is somehow intended, I apologize.
Lots of possible places for a bug that would cause this, a save file would save me a lot of time finding the issue.
Vessels in overhaul can still suffer maintenance failures.
Fixed. Also stopped failures from occurring on ships not in overhaul but being tended by Maintenance Facilities. Also stopped failures from occurring when "No Overhauls" is enabled.
The "fuel situation" window displays mx spares as the vessel's maximum value, not the actual remaining.
Fixed
Homeworld geological survey always fails on the first construction interval. In Aurora the homeworld geological survey would proceed as any other with normal failure or success rates.
Ship geo survey worked fine, so I assumed you meant team geo survey. I just created a game in Aurora 7.1 with all the default settings, and the homeworld was already marked as surveyed by geo team so there doesn't appear to be any functional difference here.
Deployment time <3 months is not a criteria for military vessel classification as in Aurora.
Fixed
The default order "build closest jump gate", when finding that the closest jump gate is outside the system, halts and reports that all movement orders have been rescinded. . . but they don't get taken out of the orders list so the constructor starts acting on them on the next increment anyway. I've tried this several more times but can't recreate it.
I'll keep it in mind. Let me know if you're able to isolate this.
In the naval organization tab if you add vessels to a branch under a different TF, then "Create Task Groups / Land Parasite" -> "Ship Only (Branch only etc)" on that ship or branch, the newly created TG should be part of the appropriate TF (evidenced in the top-left dropdown). All my TGs are still assigned to the starter TF, no matter how I create them or try to move them.
Fixed
Maximum speed in a nebula is as though the vessel has only one level of armor, regardless of how many levels it has. I refit a bunch of survey vessels with extra armor in order to fight through a high-level nebula but they still move at the same speed.
Fixed
Clicking the "all projects" radio button in the research screen locks out adding/queueing research projects until Quasar is closed and restarted.
Wasn't able to reproduce. Can you send me a save file where this is reproducable?
Minimum Jump Engine Size techs after the first one (size 15, the one you have to research to build jump drives) don't do anything. They're supposed to reduce the minimum engine size that allows squadron jumps.
Fixed. Any existing Jump Engine designs and components with the wrong max squadron size will need to be recreated.
https://imgur.com/a/5l66JFW
So logs says Grav of Grenå is complete. Yet there are two unsurveyed, and Agricourt 002 and 006 seems to wanna survey the same point...
Fixed. There were duplicate entries in the "This race has completed the survey of this survey point" table. I fixed the code that was making the duplicate entries and hopefully made the rest of the code safely ignore duplicates. Existing systems in your game with partially completed grav surveys may act a bit weird but the surveys should be completable. Unsurveyed systems, new systems, and completed systems should be fine.
I fixed a bug that was sending multiple ships to survey the same geo or grav location, which should resolve some of the survey-related strangeness reported in the past. I have not tested the new survey code beyond making sure your game doesn't crash when I press "5 days", so there may or may not be further kinks to work out.
There doesn't seem to be any negative effects of being in negative wealth. I believe in Aurora there is some limitation on building new ships and constructions (?) when in negative wealth ?
Production (of everything) should slow down; the F2 window should show a negative wealth modifier next to the unrest modifier, lack of workers modifier, overpopulation modifier, etc.
Negative wealth impact hasn't been implemented yet. I've moved it up on my list.
Thanks for the reports. Build 97 has been pushed with these changes along with some new things I'll be mentioning in a progress update in a bit.
-
https://imgur.com/a/3qXMPcX
These two ships claims low fuel, but fleet window says 100% fuel. This is the first time I encounter this. The issue resolved when i sets speed to max speed instead of speed 1.
This should be an easy fix since it repeats itself each turn, I just need a save file so I can trace through when it is happening.
Sounds like the 'Task Force at speed 1' warning message is displaying the wrong text (i.e. low fuel).
-
"Projected Usage" in the industry tab can display negative values. My neutronium projected usage is at -39 right now. If this is somehow intended, I apologize.
Lots of possible places for a bug that would cause this, a save file would save me a lot of time finding the issue.
Next time I notice it I'll close and make a copy.
Homeworld geological survey always fails on the first construction interval. In Aurora the homeworld geological survey would proceed as any other with normal failure or success rates.
Ship geo survey worked fine, so I assumed you meant team geo survey. I just created a game in Aurora 7. 1 with all the default settings, and the homeworld was already marked as surveyed by geo team so there doesn't appear to be any functional difference here.
You're right of course. I really thought I used to do team geo surveys on Earth, maybe you could in one of the previous versions.
Clicking the "all projects" radio button in the research screen locks out adding/queueing research projects until Quasar is closed and restarted.
Wasn't able to reproduce. Can you send me a save file where this is reproducable?
This one may have been user error because I can't reproduce it now.
-
There is some issue when you detach ships from another fleet that have max speed=1 they keep this speed instead of going to there max speed. (IE. there two ship were put into Earth SY taskgroup when created, this taskgroup also hold a newly created ship without engine therefor the SY tastgroup have movement of 0, when i create a new group they keep the speed at 0)
Easy to fix, I just need to know precisely how the ships were detached. The Detach Ship button already updates the speed of the newly created fleet.
https://imgur.com/a/t7N3IXk
This task group was created via "Split taskgroup" in special orders & organisation
-
I don't know if this is a bug, or i'm just unlucky, but now i'm up to 22 system in my current game and have not found a single asteroid outside sol? This seems odd?
-
There is some issue when you detach ships from another fleet that have max speed=1 they keep this speed instead of going to there max speed. (IE. there two ship were put into Earth SY taskgroup when created, this taskgroup also hold a newly created ship without engine therefor the SY tastgroup have movement of 0, when i create a new group they keep the speed at 0)
Easy to fix, I just need to know precisely how the ships were detached. The Detach Ship button already updates the speed of the newly created fleet.
https://imgur.com/a/t7N3IXk
This task group was created via "Split taskgroup" in special orders & organisation
Fixed, also found and fixed a few other similar cases
I don't know if this is a bug, or i'm just unlucky, but now i'm up to 22 system in my current game and have not found a single asteroid outside sol? This seems odd?
... Oops. Comets weren't generating either. Fixed for new systems, sorry about that. You can do F9 > SM Redo Comets for a few random systems if you want. Unfortunately there's no good way to add asteroids to existing systems.
Build 98 has been pushed with these fixes.
Also included in this build:
- small chance for ship commanders to gain survey skill increase upon finding minerals, ruins, or anomalies.
- small chance for ship commanders to gain survey skill increase upon completing a grav survey on one survey location
- ship commanders gain production skill increase upon completing jump gate
- the chances and amounts gained of the above events are inversely affected by the number of eligible commanders in the fleet
- chance for ship commanders to gain a production skill increase upon salvaging a wreck
That should take care of the remaining duty skillup types that were left to do.
-
V97.
Max Engine Power techs don't provide the stated max power option, they provide the one just prior. For example, Max Engine Power 1. 5x only lets you select up to 1. 45x.
I can't get fighters to use fighter crew quarters. The smallest I can get a vessel to use is tiny crew quarters, even with no other components and a deployment time of 0. 1. That results in a quarters HS requirement of 0. 02, half of a fighter quarters and one fifth of a tiny quarters.
Orders which divide the fleet don't play well with carriers and landed parasites. If you "transit and divide", for example, with parasites landed on a carrier, the parasites won't be launched prior to dividing. They can go about their business (surveying in my example case) but don't use fuel nor run the mx clock, because they are still "landed", though they are stuck at the carrier's maximum speed.
Here's a weird one, probably related to what was previously reported about the speed=1/fuel warning. Setting vessel movement speed to a relatively low number, such as 100, and giving a "move to" order results in moving many billions of km away from the destination on the next time increment. The vessel will report that it "has insufficient fuel to complete orders of its fleet" and that it "has run out of fuel", though neither is true.
100 isn't always the magic number (such as on a fighter, where smaller numbers like 2 are required) but 100 works every time on my test vehicle (default new ship + a large fuel tank and a size-50 commercial engine). It probably has to do with maximum range vs set speed. Higher speeds result in greater distances warped. Predictable and repeatable enough to make it easily exploitable for exploring those hard-to-reach secondary/tertiary star systems.
Oh you posted an update. It's possible you fixed the dividing problem I just mentioned with the changes to splitting.
Comets weren't generating either.
I had found several comets, though they were all in systems that were otherwise empty except for the ~5 comets.
- the chances and amounts gained of the above events are inversely affected by the number of eligible commanders in the fleet
I assume by fleet you mean Task Group, such that a TG of 10 survey vessels which surveys 10 points produces on average the same number of skill upgrades as 10 TGs of 1 survey vessel each which survey those same 10 points?
-
V97.
Max Engine Power techs don't provide the stated max power option, they provide the one just prior. For example, Max Engine Power 1. 5x only lets you select up to 1. 45x.
Fixed
I can't get fighters to use fighter crew quarters. The smallest I can get a vessel to use is tiny crew quarters, even with no other components and a deployment time of 0. 1. That results in a quarters HS requirement of 0. 02, half of a fighter quarters and one fifth of a tiny quarters.
Fixed. Fighter crew quarters will now be available when total required crew is 2 or less, to match A4X 7.1.
Orders which divide the fleet don't play well with carriers and landed parasites. If you "transit and divide", for example, with parasites landed on a carrier, the parasites won't be launched prior to dividing. They can go about their business (surveying in my example case) but don't use fuel nor run the mx clock, because they are still "landed", though they are stuck at the carrier's maximum speed.
Fixed. 'Transit and Divide' and 'Divide Fleet into Single Ships' orders will not launch or detach landed parasites, to match A4X.
Here's a weird one, probably related to what was previously reported about the speed=1/fuel warning. Setting vessel movement speed to a relatively low number, such as 100, and giving a "move to" order results in moving many billions of km away from the destination on the next time increment. The vessel will report that it "has insufficient fuel to complete orders of its fleet" and that it "has run out of fuel", though neither is true.
100 isn't always the magic number (such as on a fighter, where smaller numbers like 2 are required) but 100 works every time on my test vehicle (default new ship + a large fuel tank and a size-50 commercial engine). It probably has to do with maximum range vs set speed. Higher speeds result in greater distances warped. Predictable and repeatable enough to make it easily exploitable for exploring those hard-to-reach secondary/tertiary star systems.
Fixed. Integers in the database were being pulled as 32 bit integers when they should have been pulled as 64 bit, even though both the database and the game assumes everything is 64 bit. This was causing nonsense negative numbers to show up in areas where they shouldn't, such as "how long can we travel before running out of fuel or reaching our destination". Of course there are a zillion ways to re-work the math so it doesn't rely on super large numbers, but that's besides the point. Squashing this nasty bug where integers are temporarily scrunched into 32 bits, in every single database interaction, is huge! Nice! (and fwiw my test case of a 6 LY move order at 5 m/s max speed didn't even come close to the 64 bit limit.)
Comets weren't generating either.
I had found several comets, though they were all in systems that were otherwise empty except for the ~5 comets.
Now that you mention it, turns out the bug had a bug, so that comets still had a chance of generating in low-abundance systems. Anyway, it's back to normal now.
- the chances and amounts gained of the above events are inversely affected by the number of eligible commanders in the fleet
I assume by fleet you mean Task Group, such that a TG of 10 survey vessels which surveys 10 points produces on average the same number of skill upgrades as 10 TGs of 1 survey vessel each which survey those same 10 points?
Yeah, I have a strong habit of saying Fleet to refer to task groups because the table they are stored in is called Fleet. For surveys and jump gates, the chance of the TG itself getting a skillup roll is constant regardless of how many eligible commanders are involved (the number of commanders of ships in the TG that participated in the work), but if there is more than one eligible commander then the chance of each commander getting a skill up is inversely proportional to the number of eligible commanders, and so is the amount of skill they gain.
Version 99 is up with these changes.
-
https://imgur.com/a/qLF53mk
I think this is a bug. I cant load Research lab component, even though they should be available ?
---
I think there is a bug when fueling from a tanker to another tanker. It seems to not take fuel that will take the tanker below 10%. I don't think Aurora behave this way.
-
Whenever a production cyclus run the system view is jumping to a "Random" system. I don't really think its random, but i cant make any sense to where its jumping.
It happens quite a lot, i have attached a safe, where it jumped from "sol" to "denmark".
Not that i write it i realize that this might be tight to the "center map" option in the fleet view. In this case i left the option on, closed the fleet window and the last fleet i selected was "Cargo 5 -mines Randers" This fleet is in "denmark" at the time so i think this may be why the system view jumped from Sol to Denmark.
This "center map option works different in Quasar, as the tick stays on, whereas in aurora every time you tick it you go to the fleet in mind. TBH i think its better the way it works in Quasar, but you might not wanna jump everytime you hit 5 days, just when you select a different fleet in fleet view.
Hope that make sense.
https://imgur.com/a/E36eIHU
Edit: When the Center map option is off i think it jump to the most resent event (in the event window) - If this is true then i think it is unwanted.
-
https://imgur.com/a/qLF53mk
I think this is a bug. I cant load Research lab component, even though they should be available ?
Can you send a save file for this?
I think there is a bug when fueling from a tanker to another tanker. It seems to not take fuel that will take the tanker below 10%. I don't think Aurora behave this way.
Need to verify how Aurora does it
Whenever a production cyclus run the system view is jumping to a "Random" system. I don't really think its random, but i cant make any sense to where its jumping.
Fixed for version 100. It was jumping to system on every fleet transit, when it was supposed to be just when a new system is discovered.
-
I think there is a bug when fueling from a tanker to another tanker. It seems to not take fuel that will take the tanker below 10%. I don't think Aurora behave this way.
Need to verify how Aurora does it
VB6 Aurora transfers 90% of the remaining fuel. So if you issue the order twice it transfers 99%.
-
V99.
LP numbering isn't entirely fixed. I have a vessel headed to LP4 for a jump to LP5, however the order in the TG window says LP3 jumping to LP4.
Sometimes orders assigned by the geosurvey default order will get deleted in the wrong order when you use the "remove" button, getting deleted top-to-bottom instead of bottom-to-top.
Replacing a commander resets your search parameters, annoying for mass-replacement.
When you click "add task" at the bottom of the shipyard window, the class list resets to the first class alphabetically, which is annoying for constructing [when multiple classes are available at one shipyard] or mass scrapping.
I just complained about the shipyard window resetting too often but there's also a proper bug from it not resetting enough. If you click a tooled shipyard which is set for construction, then click an un-tooled shipyard, the "new class" dropdown retains the class name from the tooled shipyard, which means you can use untooled shipyards to build any vessel for which another shipyard is tooled. I did this by accident at first and it took me a while to solve the mystery of why my untooled shipyard had no slipways available.
As previously reported, projected mineral usage can go negative. This is because projected cost for the decimal places of a project hits 0 when the item is x. 5% complete, and then continues down into the negatives until the integer decrements (or the project is complete). For example, if you build a shipyard (1200 each duranium and neutronium), projected usage of those two minerals will count down from 1200 at the start to 0 at 50% complete to (almost) -1200 in the cycle before it finishes.
A guy assigned to a geological team died, but the team rating didn't update and there was no team vacancy for me to fill in the Commanders->teams section, nor any way for me to assign someone to the team in the Teams & Academy tab (as far as I could tell). The four of them finished the task as normal, which was nice of them.
The Fast OB spacemaster function incorrectly multiplies "total cost" by the number of vessels you've indicated to determine cost to decrement. If you design a 500-point vessel, then go into Fast OB and order 5 at once, it will cost you 5x500x5=12500 points. I recognize that this doesn't matter at all.
I don't know if this is intended but in Quasar task-based skill increases go by 1% increments, while in Aurora task-based skill upgrades go by 5% increments (teams go by 1%).
Consequence: task-based skill upgrades are extremely slow; I've got commanders who have single-handedly geosurveyed a half-dozen systems each and the best anybody has done is +5%. It makes practical training kind of pointless when staff positions upgrade faster because they earn +5% at a time.
-
A guy assigned to a geological team died, but the team rating didn't update and there was no team vacancy for me to fill in the Commanders->teams section, nor any way for me to assign someone to the team in the Teams & Academy tab (as far as I could tell). The four of them finished the task as normal, which was nice of them.
A team of only four should still complete its task (at least, according to VB Aurora), but the rest of it is a bug.
I don't know if this is intended but in Quasar task-based skill increases go by 1% increments, while in Aurora task-based skill upgrades go by 5% increments (teams go by 1%).
Consequence: task-based skill upgrades are extremely slow; I've got commanders who have single-handedly geosurveyed a half-dozen systems each and the best anybody has done is +5%. It makes practical training kind of pointless when staff positions upgrade faster because they earn +5% at a time.
Team-based skill upgrades (survey, diplomacy, espionage, etc.) should award 5% divided among the team of five (i.e. 1% each). Single-officer upgrades (research, facotry production, etc.) 'divide' the same 5% among one person.
-
A team of only four should still complete its task (at least, according to VB Aurora)
Are you sure? I have never seen a 4-person team complete a task, they have always required assigning a fifth person to it.
-
A team of only four should still complete its task (at least, according to VB Aurora)
Are you sure? I have never seen a 4-person team complete a task, they have always required assigning a fifth person to it.
Very sure. I have many times overlooked a death (or two!) on a team and only noticed when the time came to send them on to something else.
Now, a team with a dead member or two is going to be much worse (dare I say, 20% worse) at doing it's job, so a mineral survey or xeno-archaeological team -- for example -- will take a much longer time to finish.
-
There is still some kind of problem with the Geo/grav survey orders.
Here is a save in which i have 5 vessels all wanting to survey the same survey point, even though there is a lot of unsurveyed. I used a superior formation and copied orders to subordinary formations, maybe this is were the bug lay?
Well in this case they all got a default order to survey nearest survey point from their superior formation. None of them choose the survey point closest to their position but i think indeed the survey point they all want to survey is the closest to the superior formation.
-
There is still some kind of problem with the Geo/grav survey orders.
Here is a save in which i have 5 vessels all wanting to survey the same survey point, even though there is a lot of unsurveyed. I used a superior formation and copied orders to subordinary formations, maybe this is were the bug lay?
Well in this case they all got a default order to survey nearest survey point from their superior formation. None of them choose the survey point closest to their position but i think indeed the survey point they all want to survey is the closest to the superior formation.
Sounds like the order to 'survey nearest' was set before the fleet split and they all inherited it.
-
There is still some kind of problem with the Geo/grav survey orders.
Here is a save in which i have 5 vessels all wanting to survey the same survey point, even though there is a lot of unsurveyed. I used a superior formation and copied orders to subordinary formations, maybe this is were the bug lay?
Well in this case they all got a default order to survey nearest survey point from their superior formation. None of them choose the survey point closest to their position but i think indeed the survey point they all want to survey is the closest to the superior formation.
Sounds like the order to 'survey nearest' was set before the fleet split and they all inherited it.
I'm pretty sure that is not the case, as the vessels very reordered after they had previously done the geo surveys.
-
Here is an interesting one.
This mass driver is very, very effective.
https://imgur.com/a/SsUnGAg
Should have a capacity of 10.000 per year yet it shipped a whooping 250.000 in a 5 day increment.
I have not previously had troubles with mass drivers. This happened just after i put on "Reserve Level" and only for the minerals that i had set reserve levels for. So i think that's were the bug are.
Btw the minerals shipped off never turned up on the target body
-
I think there are something with the system generation.
I run this setup with a 85% local generation and a spread of 8.
https://imgur.com/a/IvZ446S
Yet i have almost 30 system and not a single loop. This may or may not have something to do with the system numbers that I pointed out in a earlier post (i have system numbers up to 5000)
https://imgur.com/a/HcQ4CR4
-
I think there are something with the system generation.
I run this setup with a 85% local generation and a spread of 8.
https://imgur.com/a/IvZ446S
Yet i have almost 30 system and not a single loop. This may or may not have something to do with the system numbers that I pointed out in a earlier post (i have system numbers up to 5000)
https://imgur.com/a/HcQ4CR4
Real Stars ignores local generation chance & spread.
-
https://imgur.com/a/qLF53mk
I think this is a bug. I cant load Research lab component, even though they should be available ?
The code prevents loading research labs if they are all in use for research projects. I don't remember whether I did this to copy Aurora or just to keep things simple.
I think there is a bug when fueling from a tanker to another tanker. It seems to not take fuel that will take the tanker below 10%. I don't think Aurora behave this way.
I tried reproducing this. I made two TG's each with a tanker at 10% fuel, then refuelled target fleet from one tanker to the other. After the transfer the tankers were correctly at 1% and 19%. If you can list a precise series of steps to produce the issue let me know.
LP numbering isn't entirely fixed. I have a vessel headed to LP4 for a jump to LP5, however the order in the TG window says LP3 jumping to LP4.
The description of fleet moves is generated when the order is first issued and then never changes. It should be OK for new orders.
Sometimes orders assigned by the geosurvey default order will get deleted in the wrong order when you use the "remove" button, getting deleted top-to-bottom instead of bottom-to-top.
Fixed. This uncovered a nasty bug that could have caused all kind of weird issues with default orders. Orders such as "survey next 5 bodies" were issuing all 5 orders numbered internally as 1,1,1,1,1 rather than 1,2,3,4,5.
Replacing a commander resets your search parameters, annoying for mass-replacement.
This should be fixed now, but have not verified.
When you click "add task" at the bottom of the shipyard window, the class list resets to the first class alphabetically, which is annoying for constructing [when multiple classes are available at one shipyard] or mass scrapping.
Fixed. Also updated a few dozen other drop-down menus to preserve their previous selections when possible after UI actions are taken.
I will eventually do this for lists as well. (quite a few already do preserve selections).
I just complained about the shipyard window resetting too often but there's also a proper bug from it not resetting enough. If you click a tooled shipyard which is set for construction, then click an un-tooled shipyard, the "new class" dropdown retains the class name from the tooled shipyard, which means you can use untooled shipyards to build any vessel for which another shipyard is tooled. I did this by accident at first and it took me a while to solve the mystery of why my untooled shipyard had no slipways available.
Fixed
As previously reported, projected mineral usage can go negative. This is because projected cost for the decimal places of a project hits 0 when the item is x. 5% complete, and then continues down into the negatives until the integer decrements (or the project is complete). For example, if you build a shipyard (1200 each duranium and neutronium), projected usage of those two minerals will count down from 1200 at the start to 0 at 50% complete to (almost) -1200 in the cycle before it finishes.
Fixed
A guy assigned to a geological team died, but the team rating didn't update and there was no team vacancy for me to fill in the Commanders->teams section, nor any way for me to assign someone to the team in the Teams & Academy tab (as far as I could tell). The four of them finished the task as normal, which was nice of them.
Fixed, and implemented the unassignment and reassignment of single commanders to/from teams.
The Fast OB spacemaster function incorrectly multiplies "total cost" by the number of vessels you've indicated to determine cost to decrement. If you design a 500-point vessel, then go into Fast OB and order 5 at once, it will cost you 5x500x5=12500 points. I recognize that this doesn't matter at all.
Fixed
I don't know if this is intended but in Quasar task-based skill increases go by 1% increments, while in Aurora task-based skill upgrades go by 5% increments (teams go by 1%).
Consequence: task-based skill upgrades are extremely slow; I've got commanders who have single-handedly geosurveyed a half-dozen systems each and the best anybody has done is +5%. It makes practical training kind of pointless when staff positions upgrade faster because they earn +5% at a time.
I'm not seeing a bug here. As in Aurora, single-commander duty-based bonuses grant +1%, not +5%, and it's even less if more than one commander is affected. +5% survey bonus is indeed periodically granted to staff leaders and staff survey officers, so it does seem like making many task forces for the sole purpose of skill-ups would be technically faster, if not tedious, than sending a bunch of officers out to do actual surveys. But is this not the case in Aurora as well?
There is still some kind of problem with the Geo/grav survey orders.
Here is a save in which i have 5 vessels all wanting to survey the same survey point, even though there is a lot of unsurveyed. I used a superior formation and copied orders to subordinary formations, maybe this is were the bug lay?
Well in this case they all got a default order to survey nearest survey point from their superior formation. None of them choose the survey point closest to their position but i think indeed the survey point they all want to survey is the closest to the superior formation.
Sounds like the order to 'survey nearest' was set before the fleet split and they all inherited it.
I'm pretty sure that is not the case, as the vessels very reordered after they had previously done the geo surveys.
I'm unable to find a bug. These ships are surveying survey points, although their default orders say they should be performing Geo surveys, so these active orders did not get generated by their current default order. I would need to see a copy of the save file from before this happened so I could trace how it played out. If you don't mind about 2-3 seconds of additional delay between turns, you can enable backups in the Quasar4x Settings menu so the next time this happens you can send me the prior save that leads up to the issue.
Here is an interesting one.
This mass driver is very, very effective.
https://imgur.com/a/SsUnGAg
Should have a capacity of 10.000 per year yet it shipped a whooping 250.000 in a 5 day increment.
I have not previously had troubles with mass drivers. This happened just after i put on "Reserve Level" and only for the minerals that i had set reserve levels for. So i think that's were the bug are.
Btw the minerals shipped off never turned up on the target body
Yikes, goodbye minerals. You have my permission to SM add them back :) This bug is fixed.
I also fixed cargo loading orders to honor reserve settings, and a few other bizarre reserve-related bugs.
I think there are something with the system generation.
I run this setup with a 85% local generation and a spread of 8.
https://imgur.com/a/IvZ446S
Yet i have almost 30 system and not a single loop. This may or may not have something to do with the system numbers that I pointed out in a earlier post (i have system numbers up to 5000)
https://imgur.com/a/HcQ4CR4
Yep, unfortunately the bug that was allowing System Numbers ~10x higher than they should have been (fixed in a past update) would have reduced the odds of getting a loop. I did eyeball the code and verify that loops are possible. Although at 500 max systems / 85% local / ±8 spread, it is still easily possible to go 20-30 systems without seeing any loops. I'm unaware if Aurora goes out of its way to increase the odds of loops.
Version 100 is live with the above fixes, and also:
- Negative Wealth reduces the Economic Production Modifier (EPM). EPM is updated every production cycle based on ratio of racial debt to income, and logged if < 100%. Reduced EPM causes reduced rates of production, shipyard tasks, and research. It reduces ground unit maintenance costs, and gradually reduces ground readiness.
- Fixed image loading issues on linux related to case-sensitivity
- Fixed the message log for Alien Installation anomaly
- NPRClassType and minimum Rank Required assigned based on detected class type
-
I think there is a bug when fueling from a tanker to another tanker. It seems to not take fuel that will take the tanker below 10%. I don't think Aurora behave this way.
I tried reproducing this. I made two TG's each with a tanker at 10% fuel, then refuelled target fleet from one tanker to the other. After the transfer the tankers were correctly at 1% and 19%. If you can list a precise series of steps to produce the issue let me know.
I think Steve explained that this is indeed not a bug but how its suppose to work. If you have a tanker on 20% and another at say 50% and try to load the 50% from the 20% it will only take the 20% down to 10%, if you issue that same order again it will take it down to 1%. That is at least how i understood Steve's explanation, and that would also explain why your test with two at 10% would end up with 1% and 19%.
Here is an interesting one.
This mass driver is very, very effective.
https://imgur.com/a/SsUnGAg
Should have a capacity of 10.000 per year yet it shipped a whooping 250.000 in a 5 day increment.
I have not previously had troubles with mass drivers. This happened just after i put on "Reserve Level" and only for the minerals that i had set reserve levels for. So i think that's were the bug are.
Btw the minerals shipped off never turned up on the target body
Yikes, goodbye minerals. You have my permission to SM add them back :) This bug is fixed.
I also fixed cargo loading orders to honor reserve settings, and a few other bizarre reserve-related bugs.
Yea, i used the magic wand to get the minerals back.... :)
-
I think there are something with the system generation.
I run this setup with a 85% local generation and a spread of 8.
https://imgur.com/a/IvZ446S
Yet i have almost 30 system and not a single loop. This may or may not have something to do with the system numbers that I pointed out in a earlier post (i have system numbers up to 5000)
https://imgur.com/a/HcQ4CR4
Real Stars ignores local generation chance & spread.
It's not a real stars game
-
I think Steve explained that this is indeed not a bug but how its suppose to work. If you have a tanker on 20% and another at say 50% and try to load the 50% from the 20% it will only take the 20% down to 10%, if you issue that same order again it will take it down to 1%. That is at least how i understood Steve's explanation, and that would also explain why your test with two at 10% would end up with 1% and 19%.
Are you saying that a tanker that is 20% full, when given the order "Unload 90% fuel," is stopping at 10% full (and therefore only unloading 50% fuel) instead of stopping at 2% full (which would be the 90% fuel ordered)?
-
I think Steve explained that this is indeed not a bug but how its suppose to work. If you have a tanker on 20% and another at say 50% and try to load the 50% from the 20% it will only take the 20% down to 10%, if you issue that same order again it will take it down to 1%. That is at least how i understood Steve's explanation, and that would also explain why your test with two at 10% would end up with 1% and 19%.
Are you saying that a tanker that is 20% full, when given the order "Unload 90% fuel," is stopping at 10% full (and therefore only unloading 50% fuel) instead of stopping at 2% full (which would be the 90% fuel ordered)?
Unload 90% should unload 90% of remaining fuel. So if you start at 100% and issue the order twice, you will have 1% left.
-
https://imgur.com/a/drp6SsX
Hmm here is a case. I Accidentally absorbent my Earth Shipyard taskgroup into another task group, which in it self is a little annoying as all my shipyards loses their default taskgroup. Additional there is a bug that shipyards that are currently building to the taskgroup that does not exist anymore and at the same time are adding a slipway doesn't recognize that the task group they are trying to build into does not exist. The Shipyard task doesn't exist anymore but the slipways are still in use.
---
Additional the "delete Shipyard" Bottom in the Modify SY (spacemaster only) on the Manage shipyard screen doesn't do anything.
-
I think Steve explained that this is indeed not a bug but how its suppose to work. If you have a tanker on 20% and another at say 50% and try to load the 50% from the 20% it will only take the 20% down to 10%, if you issue that same order again it will take it down to 1%. That is at least how i understood Steve's explanation, and that would also explain why your test with two at 10% would end up with 1% and 19%.
Are you saying that a tanker that is 20% full, when given the order "Unload 90% fuel," is stopping at 10% full (and therefore only unloading 50% fuel) instead of stopping at 2% full (which would be the 90% fuel ordered)?
Unload 90% should unload 90% of remaining fuel. So if you start at 100% and issue the order twice, you will have 1% left.
Maybe i'm explaining myself pretty poorly here. I'm not a all talking about the command "Unload 90% fuel". I'm talking about the "Refuel from target fleet" Command.
If used between two tankers, that command does not take all the fuel from the tanker that is giving away the fuel.
So Tanker A has 30% fuel
Tanker B has 50% fuel
they both have a capacity of 10.000.000
Tanker B is given order to Refuel from target fleet (tanker A)
This will not take Tanker B to 80% And leave tanker A with 0 Fuel.
It will leave Tanker A with 3% = 300.000
And Tanker B with 77% = 7.700.000
I think this is because it will leave 10% of the original fuel in tanker A in this case 10% of 3.000.000 = 300.000
This may or may not be intentional.
-
I think Steve explained that this is indeed not a bug but how its suppose to work. If you have a tanker on 20% and another at say 50% and try to load the 50% from the 20% it will only take the 20% down to 10%, if you issue that same order again it will take it down to 1%. That is at least how i understood Steve's explanation, and that would also explain why your test with two at 10% would end up with 1% and 19%.
I think this is the statement you made that is confusing everybody else, and I think you misspoke. 10% of 20% is 2% (as you just said in your most recent post). In the post quoted above, you said "it will only take the 20% down to 10%". I think you meant to say "it will only take the 20% down to 10% of 20% which is 2%" or, more succinctly, "it will only take the 20% down to 2%". Is that correct, or did you really mean to say 10%? If you did, then I think it would help to explain why you think it would be 10% rather than 2%.
As far as I can tell from the thread, both Kyle (in Quasar) and Steve (in Aurora) have said that that (2%) is the way it is working now, so everything is WAI.
John
-
https://imgur.com/a/L3BaJIn
It seems there is still something wrong with the reserve function in the "mining & maintenance" window. In the screenshot above the reserve level for duranium is set to 25000 and stockpile is 29982. It should be sending off Duranium with the mass driver, but it doesn't. Unless it started counting in the "projected usage", i'm pretty sure Aurora don't but i think that would be an improvement.
-
https://imgur.com/a/drp6SsX
Hmm here is a case. I Accidentally absorbent my Earth Shipyard taskgroup into another task group, which in it self is a little annoying as all my shipyards loses their default taskgroup. Additional there is a bug that shipyards that are currently building to the taskgroup that does not exist anymore and at the same time are adding a slipway doesn't recognize that the task group they are trying to build into does not exist. The Shipyard task doesn't exist anymore but the slipways are still in use.
Fixed: Shipbuilding Tasks weren't showing in the UI if their fleet didn't exist
Fixed: Shipbuilding Tasks weren't completing if their fleet didn't exist
When a Shipbuilding Task completes it will now check to make sure the fleet is still in the same location as the Shipyard and belongs to the same race. If not, a new Shipyard TG will be created and all tasks and shipyards pointing to the problematic fleet will be re-pointed to the new TG. If a "Shipyard TG" fleet is found at the shipyard's location, that will be used instead of creating a new one.
Additional the "delete Shipyard" Bottom in the Modify SY (spacemaster only) on the Manage shipyard screen doesn't do anything.
Fixed
https://imgur.com/a/L3BaJIn
It seems there is still something wrong with the reserve function in the "mining & maintenance" window. In the screenshot above the reserve level for duranium is set to 25000 and stockpile is 29982. It should be sending off Duranium with the mass driver, but it doesn't. Unless it started counting in the "projected usage", i'm pretty sure Aurora don't but i think that would be an improvement.
This issue might be fixed now. Meaning, I saw *a* problem and fixed it, but did not have time to test beyond making sure it doesn't crash.
These fixes will appear in Version 101, which I am pushing along with a new Progress Update momentarily.
-
These are for v100.
The Jump Gate Construction default order doesn't check for other gate constructors, leading to multiple vessels potentially getting assigned to build the same gate. The ideal behavior would be to mimic the survey order such that gate constructors don't get assigned to construct a gate if another vessel is assigned (even if it hasn't started construction yet).
This is a repeat of a previous report, which I can reliably reproduce. The Jump Gate Construction default order behaves oddly when queuing out-of-system jobs. When a constructor (without a jump drive, haven't tested if this matters or not) in system A has no in-system jobs left, if it has good 2-way gate connections to system B (which still has some un-built gates) it will queue up a gate in B, interrupt and report that the job is out of the system and that all orders were rescinded, but not rescind the move orders nor the default order. I don't remember how this worked in Aurora.
I think the ideal behavior to maximize the utility of the default order would be as it is, but with the message changed to a simple report that it's going out-of-system. However, I can see the argument for the current report and rescinding the orders+deleting the default order as the current message implies should happen.
This is more of a feature request, but if you learn a tech from an archaeology site and it's currently being researched or in the queue it would be really nice if those would get cancelled instead of letting me waste RP on them if I miss the report in the event log.
While the game lets you recover (via archaeology) non-racial ship components (like Advanced Cargo Handling System) above your tech level, you can't use them until you research the associated technology (or if you can, I can't figure out how). High-tech racial components like jump drives and engines work fine (by deselecting "own tech only" as expected).
I just recovered a stack of "command modules" via archaeology, I don't think these exist in Aurora 7.1 and I can't use them in the class design. I want to say these were a fighter or FAC "bridge" from a really old version (2010 timeframe).
Archaeology sites can create ship components that shouldn't exist, presumably because the tech level is too low. JC0K jump drives (0 tons allowed), Null PB-1 reactors (0 power), 0 EP Null engines, etc. I've seen it on TL0 and TL1 archaeology sites thus far.
It's nice to see some asteroids again. However, I just generated a system which has a belt of huge asteroids, many 8-9000 diameter, which gives a lot of them enough gravity to be colonized with regular infrastructure or terraformed. Is the generation of planet-sized "asteroids" intentional?
Lagrange Points often get generated in nonsensical places. As an example, this secondary star has two super-jovians which I assume are the reason for these two LPs, but they're not on the super-jovian orbits as they should be. https://i.imgur.com/b93xDy9.png
As a logical feature extension but a deviation from Aurora, you might consider applying LP-generation rules to secondary/etc stars in addition to just super-jovians; there are a couple scenarios involving ultra-distant secondaries/etc where having LPs on the orbiting stars would be welcome.
Assigning a leader to "unassigned" resets your search parameters, which can be annoying if you're micromanaging commanders.
Planetary hydrosphere status doesn't update with temperature, nor is there the associated albedo change. It's possible that this just isn't implemented yet but I'm "reporting" it because the (non-spacemaster) system view window otherwise seems pretty complete.
-
The disband team in Teams & Academy screen doesn't seems to do anything. Edit: This seems to only be a problem if you have two teams in the same location
There are no notification when transferring into a unexplored jump point and it leads to an already know system.
-
The Jump Gate Construction default order doesn't check for other gate constructors, leading to multiple vessels potentially getting assigned to build the same gate. The ideal behavior would be to mimic the survey order such that gate constructors don't get assigned to construct a gate if another vessel is assigned (even if it hasn't started construction yet).
Fixed
This is a repeat of a previous report, which I can reliably reproduce. The Jump Gate Construction default order behaves oddly when queuing out-of-system jobs. When a constructor (without a jump drive, haven't tested if this matters or not) in system A has no in-system jobs left, if it has good 2-way gate connections to system B (which still has some un-built gates) it will queue up a gate in B, interrupt and report that the job is out of the system and that all orders were rescinded, but not rescind the move orders nor the default order. I don't remember how this worked in Aurora.
I think the ideal behavior to maximize the utility of the default order would be as it is, but with the message changed to a simple report that it's going out-of-system. However, I can see the argument for the current report and rescinding the orders+deleting the default order as the current message implies should happen.
I'll have to make a note of this and check how this works in Aurora later, unless someone can save me some time and send me an Aurora save with the testing scenario already prepared.
This is more of a feature request, but if you learn a tech from an archaeology site and it's currently being researched or in the queue it would be really nice if those would get cancelled instead of letting me waste RP on them if I miss the report in the event log.
Agreed, but saving this until later because testing this isn't trivial, and I'd kind of like to know precisely what Aurora does in this situation.
While the game lets you recover (via archaeology) non-racial ship components (like Advanced Cargo Handling System) above your tech level, you can't use them until you research the associated technology (or if you can, I can't figure out how). High-tech racial components like jump drives and engines work fine (by deselecting "own tech only" as expected).
Added to my list for after AI things. For now I guess consider this incomplete.
I just recovered a stack of "command modules" via archaeology, I don't think these exist in Aurora 7.1 and I can't use them in the class design. I want to say these were a fighter or FAC "bridge" from a really old version (2010 timeframe).
Removed from possible outcomes.
Archaeology sites can create ship components that shouldn't exist, presumably because the tech level is too low. JC0K jump drives (0 tons allowed), Null PB-1 reactors (0 power), 0 EP Null engines, etc. I've seen it on TL0 and TL1 archaeology sites thus far.
Fixed. Tech Level was sometimes being incorrectly generated as 0 or even negative numbers, it's not supposed to go below 1. This is going to mess up your game a bit, because existing ruin races in your game have bad tech levels, and nearby ruins tend to have the same race. Let me know if it's important to get your save fixed. Or you can just RP that the components are useless as the race never made it past steam tech :)
It's nice to see some asteroids again. However, I just generated a system which has a belt of huge asteroids, many 8-9000 diameter, which gives a lot of them enough gravity to be colonized with regular infrastructure or terraformed. Is the generation of planet-sized "asteroids" intentional?
Yikes, not at all. This is fixed. Also improved the display of very small mass numbers.
Lagrange Points often get generated in nonsensical places. As an example, this secondary star has two super-jovians which I assume are the reason for these two LPs, but they're not on the super-jovian orbits as they should be. https://i.imgur.com/b93xDy9.png
As a logical feature extension but a deviation from Aurora, you might consider applying LP-generation rules to secondary/etc stars in addition to just super-jovians; there are a couple scenarios involving ultra-distant secondaries/etc where having LPs on the orbiting stars would be welcome.
I'm unable to reproduce this. Even with giants orbiting secondary or tertiary stars, LPs appear in appropriate spots. If you want to send me a save file I may be able to deduce what criteria caused this to happen.
Assigning a leader to "unassigned" resets your search parameters, which can be annoying if you're micromanaging commanders.
Fixed.
Planetary hydrosphere status doesn't update with temperature, nor is there the associated albedo change. It's possible that this just isn't implemented yet but I'm "reporting" it because the (non-spacemaster) system view window otherwise seems pretty complete.
Yep, post-generation changes in system body characteristics beyond basic greenhouse effects is actually next on my list.
The disband team in Teams & Academy screen doesn't seems to do anything. Edit: This seems to only be a problem if you have two teams in the same location
Can't reproduce, even with multiple teams at a colony. It's possible you didn't have a team selected. Should be an easy fix if I can take a look at the file where this is happening.
There are no notification when transferring into a unexplored jump point and it leads to an already know system.
Need an example of what Aurora says when this happens
I've pushed Version 102 so I can get the fixes to race tech level and asteroid sizes out asap.
-
The disband team in Teams & Academy screen doesn't seems to do anything. Edit: This seems to only be a problem if you have two teams in the same location
Can't reproduce, even with multiple teams at a colony. It's possible you didn't have a team selected. Should be an easy fix if I can take a look at the file where this is happening.
Hmm I can reproduce. I reproduced in this save on Kristina-A-II. I have two team, cant disband James Roberts team. I noticed that it doesn't hold any members, maybe it releases the teammembers but don't remove the team? It seems it autosolve when one of the team completes the Planetary survey.
There are no notification when transferring into a unexplored jump point and it leads to an already know system.
Need an example of what Aurora says when this happens
Can't remember the exact thing Aurora say. Something like "Navigating the jump point leads to the excisting system of X."
-
You sure about the mineral generation on asteroids? I think there is unusual few minerals on the asteroids I find outside the Sol-system. I think they should have more frequent but less minerals than created for planets
-
You sure about the mineral generation on asteroids? I think there is unusual few minerals on the asteroids I find outside the Sol-system. I think they should have more frequent but less minerals than created for planets
Relatively sure. Steve was kind enough to give me very detailed information on mineral generation awhile ago. Density has the biggest impact on chance of finding minerals. 0.7 density is Mars density, getting much below that is going to be pretty sparse. I generated 4 systems and got 124 asteroids at 1.3 density each, 22 of which had minerals, which sounds about right iirc. Low diameter and low system abundance modifier (can only see this in database) can also reduce chance of minerals found to a lesser extent. Planets, especially those in the livable zone, will tend to have a higher chance of minerals than asteroids of the same density in the same system. If you've only seen a couple new systems since version 102, keep looking. Or try generating a dozen or so systems on a throwaway game to see if you find better results. I'm always open to reviewing detailed analyses comparing to Aurora 7 as well.
-
Version 104 is up with some improvements and fixes primarily related to unresearched ruin components.
This is more of a feature request, but if you learn a tech from an archaeology site and it's currently being researched or in the queue it would be really nice if those would get cancelled instead of letting me waste RP on them if I miss the report in the event log.
Agreed, but saving this until later because testing this isn't trivial, and I'd kind of like to know precisely what Aurora does in this situation.
I've reworked all research to route through a single function which, among the usual things, will clear out partially researched tech, currently researching tech, and queued research, across all pops, any time a new tech is learned via archaeology, normal research, SM, and so on. When currently researching tech is cleared, the scientist will of course start on the next project in their queue or you'll start getting inactive lab alerts. This takes care of housework an AI would otherwise have to do anyway. And it needed to be done for scrapping ships for tech and gaining tech from wrecks, which I plan to do in the next update or so.
While the game lets you recover (via archaeology) non-racial ship components (like Advanced Cargo Handling System) above your tech level, you can't use them until you research the associated technology (or if you can, I can't figure out how). High-tech racial components like jump drives and engines work fine (by deselecting "own tech only" as expected).
Fixed
The disband team in Teams & Academy screen doesn't seems to do anything. Edit: This seems to only be a problem if you have two teams in the same location
Can't reproduce, even with multiple teams at a colony. It's possible you didn't have a team selected. Should be an easy fix if I can take a look at the file where this is happening.
Hmm I can reproduce. I reproduced in this save on Kristina-A-II. I have two team, cant disband James Roberts team. I noticed that it doesn't hold any members, maybe it releases the teammembers but don't remove the team? It seems it autosolve when one of the team completes the Planetary survey.
Fixed
Also added:
- F2 > Disassemble Component
- prevent construction of and refit to ships with unresearched tech if you dont have enough components
-
There is something with naming of asteroids.
Here is a screenshot of two asteroids in a system renamed from Manchester to Strib, long time ago. Anyplace in the game the renaming has taken place, but in the orderscreen they still have their old name..
https://imgur.com/a/RqLEVRz
-
There is something with naming of asteroids.
Here is a screenshot of two asteroids in a system renamed from Manchester to Strib, long time ago. Anyplace in the game the renaming has taken place, but in the orderscreen they still have their old name..
https://imgur.com/a/RqLEVRz
Fixed for version 105+
-
Hello,
Account pending approval, but wanted to submit a potential bug for Quasar.
Win 10/64-bit.
This has occurred both in V103 and V105 according to the game.
- Created a new game, only changes being to the name of the empire and changing the empire theme to "Nations of Earth".
- Issue arises where a created research project (for ion engines) will not advance; the RP needed does not decrease and the estimated completion date extends out 5 days at each 5-day increment.
- Once this happens, the scientist that was assigned to it will not progress ANY research project assigned to them (created or normal).
- The issue might be related to attempting to queue a project along with the engine project.
- The issue is not resolved by cancelling the project, or deleting the racial tech and recreating it.
- With V105, I had deleted the previous version and fresh-unzipped the downloaded V105, starting fresh.
-
Would resize enable program used in aurora work?
-
Would resize enable program used in aurora work?
Tested and found that it only allows to increase window size, not reduce it.
-
I am setting up a game where a single small faction on earth is given some ships and tech by aliens. I wanted the initial ships to be relativelly hi tech but the earth faction to start low tech. So I created an alien empire with SM and tried to transfer the fleets to the Earth faction. Game crashed when I pressed the transfer bottton.
I plan to give the Earth faction boarding capacity for them to get the ships, so its not much problem for my game, but may be for other games where we may want to frequently transfer fleets.. I did a search for transfer and didn´t find the bug reported.
-
And that lead to another bug found. After giving the order to board a ship, my troops just disapeared and there were no boarding action messages.
-
Hello,
Account pending approval, but wanted to submit a potential bug for Quasar.
Win 10/64-bit.
This has occurred both in V103 and V105 according to the game.
- Created a new game, only changes being to the name of the empire and changing the empire theme to "Nations of Earth".
- Issue arises where a created research project (for ion engines) will not advance; the RP needed does not decrease and the estimated completion date extends out 5 days at each 5-day increment.
- Once this happens, the scientist that was assigned to it will not progress ANY research project assigned to them (created or normal).
- The issue might be related to attempting to queue a project along with the engine project.
- The issue is not resolved by cancelling the project, or deleting the racial tech and recreating it.
- With V105, I had deleted the previous version and fresh-unzipped the downloaded V105, starting fresh.
I couldn't reproduce this. Can you post the save file?
I am setting up a game where a single small faction on earth is given some ships and tech by aliens. I wanted the initial ships to be relativelly hi tech but the earth faction to start low tech. So I created an alien empire with SM and tried to transfer the fleets to the Earth faction. Game crashed when I pressed the transfer bottton.
I plan to give the Earth faction boarding capacity for them to get the ships, so its not much problem for my game, but may be for other games where we may want to frequently transfer fleets.. I did a search for transfer and didn´t find the bug reported.
And that lead to another bug found. After giving the order to board a ship, my troops just disapeared and there were no boarding action messages.
To save me some time setting all of this up in a test scenario, can you post a save file for these issues?
-
Sorry, I have changed a lot of the game since the bug. Ill be very busy the next few days, but Ill try to replicate the bug on the weekend if it still usefull.
-
So, not an issue I've been able to verify myself since I am away from my main pc but God of Exp on the discord would like to share.
According to him tech only research 1 at a time.