Author Topic: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread  (Read 215254 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline db48x

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • d
  • Posts: 641
  • Thanked: 200 times
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #255 on: February 22, 2016, 11:17:22 AM »
Looks like cancelling a construction or shipyard task doesn't return any unused materials, even if no time has elapsed. For example, cancelling an 'Assemble PDC' job doesn't return the PDC components, and cancelling a refit of the wrong ship doesn't return the engines you had stockpiled.

Also, when starting refit jobs, it's possible to queue tasks even when there are no ships of the selected type in orbit. In my case the were in the system, and the class showed up in the refit ui, but they weren't actually in orbit of the same body as the shipyards. That was a lot of engines too.
 

Offline bean

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • b
  • Posts: 921
  • Thanked: 58 times
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #256 on: February 22, 2016, 12:34:09 PM »
I think that's one of the things which is just too hard to keep track of.  My solution would be to SM the engines back, and move on.
This is Excel-in-Space, not Wing Commander - Rastaman
 

Offline iceball3

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 454
  • Thanked: 47 times
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #257 on: February 22, 2016, 12:42:28 PM »
With the weird refitting of vehicles elsewhere issue, maybe there could be an added feature which basically creates and enforces an unmovable shipyard TG (rather than the current one which can be flown around at own pleasure), such that fighters, ships, and ships in refit are guaranteed to have a place that won't wander away from the shipyard during operations.
 

Offline TheDeadlyShoe

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1264
  • Thanked: 58 times
  • Dance Commander
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #258 on: February 22, 2016, 12:46:59 PM »
I believe that change has already been added for 7.2.
 

Offline TMaekler

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1112
  • Thanked: 298 times
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #259 on: February 22, 2016, 01:00:05 PM »
Not a bug directly but some off production numbers (I guess):
The different sizes of salvage modules do cost as following
(Corbomite / Boronide)
Size 500 - 55 / 50
Size 750 - 62,5 / 62,5
Size 1000 - 75 / 75
Size 1350 - 100 / 100
Size 1800 - 125 / 125
Size 2500 - 50 / 50

Why at Size 500 only 50 and not 55 Boronide?
Why at Size 2500 only 50 and not 190 (or something similar)?
 

Offline bsh

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • b
  • Posts: 50
  • Thanked: 1 times
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #260 on: February 22, 2016, 01:37:47 PM »
Quote from: SerBeardian link=topic=8144. msg87043#msg87043 date=1456149516
Found the problem. 

Bunch of NPR ships somehow had an order to transit a JP that didn't exist.   Each one was throwing mass errors. 
Designer and deleted the TGs and now it works. 

Working again, thanks a bunch! Hopefully not gonna encounter this again.
 

Offline chokuto

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • c
  • Posts: 23
  • Thanked: 8 times
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #261 on: February 24, 2016, 02:36:38 AM »
I have a problem with viewing a system.   I think it may have something to do with the size of the system.   The furthest object from the star is a planet 180t out. 


When I enter the system I get an error.   window header: "Error in CentreOnLocation", contents: "Error 6 was generated by Aurora.   Overflow.   Please report to .  .  .  ".   I got that twice and then another error.   window header: "Error in DisplaySystems", contents: "Error 6 was generated by Aurora.   Overflow.   Please report to .  .  .  "

On trying to zoom in I get an error.   The window header is Aurora and contents are "Run-time error '6': Overflow" when I click ok it crashes to desktop. 

On trying to zoom out I get an error.   window header: "Error in SaveLocation", contents: "Error 6 was generated by Aurora.   Overflow.   Please report to .  .  .  " three times and then the above DisplaySystems error. 

It didn't stop the game from progressing and I didn't notice the problem straight away I think

Here is a screenshot of the system and the planet really far out. 

hxxp: imgur.  com/WEfFAbr

I have taken a backup and deleted the system and will carry on

I'm using the portable Aurora. 


EDIT:

Well that was odd.   I delete the above system on a test game copy that had progressed about a month and it worked fine.   I then deleted it on the game I was going to continue and I seemingly instantly had a second Sol system.   Loaded up the backup and deleted the system again and it seems to not have done anything unexpected. 

In the game that spawned a second Sol system I had used SM to move the only task group in the above system to Earth before creating the backup.   I had turned on SM before deleting the Sol system.   In the game from the backup I didn't enter SM mode before deleting the system and it then popup a window to enter my SM password and it didn't stay in SM mode.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2016, 03:01:55 AM by chokuto »
 

Offline bean

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • b
  • Posts: 921
  • Thanked: 58 times
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #262 on: February 24, 2016, 01:10:31 PM »
The text in the Commander tab of the F5 window is wrong.  It states that higher numbers correspond to higher priority, while in fact, lower numbers appear to correspond to higher priority.
This is Excel-in-Space, not Wing Commander - Rastaman
 

Offline MasterInventor

  • Able Ordinary Rate
  • M
  • Posts: 4
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #263 on: February 24, 2016, 03:04:54 PM »


I get this error spammed every increment now (holding down Escape seems to get rid of the messages (eventually), if that helps anyone).  I think it may have something to do with all of the civilian ships (KHAAAAAAN!) and their orders bugging out.  There are somewhere in the neighborhood of FAR TOO MANY (at least 20-30) doing runs from Earth to Luna (colonists, infrastructure, and misc trade goods, if it matters, which I highly doubt), on 30 day increments (I only find out after that I should really be doing 5 day increments for them). 

If the image breaks, here is a transcript of the error message:

Error in ExecuteOrders

Error 5 was generated by Aurora
Invalid procedure call or argument
Please report to (link)

And here is a spaced out direct link to the image on Imgur:

http : / / imgur .  com / WWqT23u

I have yet to run into this problem in my newer game, but I have yet to invest so heavily into civilian shipping, either.

Unrelated note: I just joined to post this error report.  Is the verification always "What is the fourth planet?" and what will happen if I put in "(politician name removed)'s ego"?
 

Offline Erik L

  • Administrator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 5657
  • Thanked: 372 times
  • Forum Admin
  • Discord Username: icehawke
  • 2020 Supporter 2020 Supporter : Donate for 2020
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #264 on: February 24, 2016, 03:18:21 PM »
Unrelated note: I just joined to post this error report.  Is the verification always "What is the fourth planet?" and what will happen if I put in "(politician name removed)'s ego"?
Yes, and it will fail.
 

Offline jiduthie

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • j
  • Posts: 33
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #265 on: February 24, 2016, 06:39:16 PM »
The text in the Commander tab of the F5 window is wrong.  It states that higher numbers correspond to higher priority, while in fact, lower numbers appear to correspond to higher priority.

Wait really? I had always just assumed that the priority code was wonky. Just saw the other thread, disregard me.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2016, 06:40:49 PM by jiduthie »
 

Offline MasterInventor

  • Able Ordinary Rate
  • M
  • Posts: 4
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #266 on: February 24, 2016, 08:21:34 PM »
http : / / imgur .  com / IbKWNIf

Here's another error regarding civilian ships.  I get this a couple times whenever they design a new ship. 

Error in AutomatedDesign

Error 3201 was generated by DAO. Recordset
You cannot add or change a record because a related record is required in table 'TechSystem'.
Please report to (link).
 

Offline Rich.h

  • Captain
  • **********
  • R
  • Posts: 555
  • Thanked: 55 times
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #267 on: February 26, 2016, 09:48:58 AM »
Just had this game killing bug for what seems like no reason. I last played my current game and everything was fine and so on with no errors. Now a couple of weeks later when I try to start Aurora I get the following.

"Error in cboGame
Error 380 invalid property value"

This is followed by a constant

"Error 3201 was generated by DAO.Recordset
You cannot add or change a record because a related record is required in the table 'Game'"

For some reason all my backup saves from that day are also suffering this error and the only one working is from two days previous.
 

Offline db48x

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • d
  • Posts: 641
  • Thanked: 200 times
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #268 on: February 27, 2016, 04:49:04 PM »
Can civilian ships get decommissioned while they're transporting goods for a contract? I seem to be missing a few automines...
 

Offline Thineboot

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • T
  • Posts: 21
  • Thanked: 5 times
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #269 on: February 28, 2016, 04:20:26 PM »
Crew Quarters and Crew Quarters are the same and are not the same: while life support rating 1 has a cost of 0.2, size of 1, and uses 0.15 Mercassium (fighter x2, tiny x5, small x10, standard x50) two identical ships, one with mixed crew quarters, one with fighter quarters only end up with significantly different maintenance stats:
Code: [Select]
Stargate 3x Standard 3x Small 1x Fighter class Gravitational Survey Vessel    5 850 tons     55 Crew     258.4 BP      TCS 117  TH 400  EM 0
3418 km/s     Armour 1-28     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/1/0     Damage Control Rating 4     PPV 0
Maint Life 3.4 Years     MSP 110    AFR 68%    IFR 1%    1YR 15    5YR 218    Max Repair 100 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 36 months    Spare Berths 0   


Wilkins Drive Systems 200 EP 3.6 Commercial Internal Fusion Drive (2)    Power 200    Fuel Use 0.36%    Signature 200    Exp 2%
Fuel Capacity 10 000 Litres    Range 85.5 billion km   (289 days at full power)


Gravitational Survey Sensors (1)   1 Survey Points Per Hour


This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Code: [Select]
Stargate 91x Fighter class Gravitational Survey Vessel    5 850 tons     55 Crew     258.4 BP      TCS 117  TH 400  EM 0
3418 km/s     Armour 1-28     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/1/0     Damage Control Rating 4     PPV 0
Maint Life 4.6 Years     MSP 110    AFR 68%    IFR 1%    1YR 8    5YR 127    Max Repair 100 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 36 months    Spare Berths 0   


Wilkins Drive Systems 200 EP 3.6 Commercial Internal Fusion Drive (2)    Power 200    Fuel Use 0.36%    Signature 200    Exp 2%
Fuel Capacity 10 000 Litres    Range 85.5 billion km   (289 days at full power)


Gravitational Survey Sensors (1)   1 Survey Points Per Hour


This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
It's not about the design, just stopped when I saw the difference in 3rd line (Maintenance).
Note that Figther quarters are not used without keep excess quarters enabled. The mixed design ended up with a tiny instead of a figther. Removing the figther adds a tiny and an additional spare berth plus 0.6 BP plus 0.01 years of maintenance life.