trying to use System Maps freezes the game, either from the drop down menu or the System Information tab.The system map uses OpenGL shaders to draw orbits. If it freezes or crashes, or you cant see the orbits, try updating your video drivers.
Screenshot five shows missile detection. Screenshot six shows when the anti-missiles were actually fired. Screenshot seven shows the event log showing the anti-missiles were fired at a range of a little over a million kilometers, far shorter than they should. Not sure if it's the problem with automated anti-missile firing or with the anti-missile fire control range, but it didn't work that way in the original Aurora.Fixed in version 139 which is now live. Thanks!
Thank you for your time.
Hey @Kyle,
I've been trying version 142 and I'm encountering an issue regarding "auto turns".
Even though no interrupt message are happening, it does not continue the turns.
Enabling "no interrupts" actually works, but I want to be interrupted if necessary.
Context: New conventional start game. (tried twice, happened in both games)
Any Idea?
EDIT: after letting it run for a year or so with "no interrupts" it started working without it.
But once in a while it stops without notice. So is an NPR doing something? (Only sol system)
SM view (events) does not show any messages/notices.
EDIT 2: Generated a game without starting NPR, issue is not happening.
If you could add any kind of feedback/notice that the interrupt wasn't caused by the player empire, would be great.
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/487747229445128192/872526808438964304/unknown.png)
Seems the tooltip in the Game Details window hasn't been updated, I think.
Oh, also, do anyone know if the SM start works presently? I've been trying to figure out how to get a custom start going and I'm probably missing a step, I'm not able to select the SM race from the economics window to do pre-empire creation terraforming. Can't seem to select the SM race from system maps window either.
Much appreciated! Maybe I can drop a ruins on what's left of earth for extra fluff-potential too hahaOh, also, do anyone know if the SM start works presently? I've been trying to figure out how to get a custom start going and I'm probably missing a step, I'm not able to select the SM race from the economics window to do pre-empire creation terraforming. Can't seem to select the SM race from system maps window either.
I see a couple bugs in this process, I'll add it to my list to fix. In the meantime, as a workaround you can start with the default Sol System Terran Federation, enable SM, use that to generate your custom system / race, set your new custom race to default, go to Race Details, and delete the original Terran Federation race.
Possibly abnormal gamestart behavior for a post-game-start new player empire: i started with an abnormally large naval shipyard, and no civilian shipyards.Yep, found a bug. This will be fixed in the next version. Meanwhile, you can use SM mode to change the type of the 84000 shipyard to commercial as intended.
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/487747229445128192/872928492134744186/unknown.png)
Expected behavior: vb6 starts typically have an even spread of commercial and military shipyards, with the commercial one up towards the 5 digit range.
V143
1. Don't know if it is a bug or WAI.
But when a CMC gets established and you purchase the minerals, no mass driver is present.
So you need to move one their yourself.
2. Started a new game, still having issues with autoturns being interrupted for "no reason". Attached my db.
Seems like you can end up with designs that can't be locked as a prototype, even though there are no components on it that could be prototyped.
Where are saves stored again? I can't seem to find them. Could be a good idea also to have the relational location of the save files declared in a readme to be distributed with the game in future updates, for anyone else needing to share their save files.Seems like you can end up with designs that can't be locked as a prototype, even though there are no components on it that could be prototyped.
Obviously a bug, and I've seen this reported before, but I can't reproduce myself or see what the problem could be. Can you post your save file where this is happening? And/or steps to reproduce
Been messing with it a bit, and it seems that having even a single class design declared as a prototype will lock you out of locking class designs entirely. Maybe.Seems like you can end up with designs that can't be locked as a prototype, even though there are no components on it that could be prototyped.
Obviously a bug, and I've seen this reported before, but I can't reproduce myself or see what the problem could be. Can you post your save file where this is happening? And/or steps to reproduce
Been messing with it a bit, and it seems that having even a single class design declared as a prototype will lock you out of locking class designs entirely. Maybe.Seems like you can end up with designs that can't be locked as a prototype, even though there are no components on it that could be prototyped.
Obviously a bug, and I've seen this reported before, but I can't reproduce myself or see what the problem could be. Can you post your save file where this is happening? And/or steps to reproduce
I then started a new save and the "prototype class designs cannot be locked" chased me over there too, even though i have exactly one design, that had no prototypes TO add to it. So the peril seems to be database-wide.
So how it's happening in my install: There is a prototype class (the Liminal) in one save (Campaign 1) in my entire game. When it has prototype components, I can't lock any class designs anywhere, even if I'm in another save game entirely. If I remove the prototype components from that class in that save, i'm suddenly able to lock designs everywhere again.
VB6 Parity bug: in VB6, a turret can be made with a tracking speed with 0%, and it will just use the racial base turret tracking speed instead at no gear expenditure. In Quasar, the desired tracking speed is capped down at 1 and will likely make the weapon unusual if it works like VB6 this way.
This is of particular concern of wanting to make hull-mounted beam weaponry with significant armor.
- I seem to have my "Queue" Option locked in the Research Window if I make a prototype component. Easy to test / re-produce, just start a new game, make a prototype, then try to queue up some Research. I have not ruled out that I may have inadvertently disabled them somehow, but I'd figured I'd shout out about it here anyway just in case it is a bug. :)
VB6 Parity bug: in VB6, you can make military designs that have no engineering spaces, with all the maintenance problems that comes with (particularly vital to designing short combat fighters). In Quasar presently, the "Freighters require at least one Engineering Spaces module" design error blocks you even if you're making a military design, or a fighter.
VB6 Parity bug: The cost of fire control (and maybe active sensors?) seems to deviate very hard from how VB6 does it. One very intense example is CIWS, where I have an identical system costing three times as much in quasar as it does in VB6, with all of that new cost being uridium.
Actual bona-fide bug: Missile warheads cost nothing when allocated in values less than 0.5 MSP. This makes small-warhead missiles extremely brokenly cheap to manufacture. There may be additional rounding-style errors somewhere in there too.
Ships in orbit cannot fire their energy weapons due to atmosphere as if they were PDCs. I'm not sure if this is about whether the ship firing or the target ship as I just created two fleets in orbit of Earth and tried to have them fire at each other.
Atmospheric retention is still wonky at least for the moons (didn't check the dwarf planets). There is no screenshot due to gravity/planet type and greenhouse factor being too far away from each other to fit on a screen.
Planets with too low gravity cannot retain atmosphere which is represented by having a greenhouse factor set permanently to 0 (at least in Quasar, don't know about Aurora). The way it works in Aurora the game checks for gravity, if ti's less than 0.1 it cannot have an atmosphere. Quasar however seems to check for body type, at least in the case of the moons. Those are some of the moons that have been generated in one of the systems:
Large moon, gravity 0.11, greenhouse factor=0
Small terrestrial moon, gravity 0.086, greenhouse factor=1
Small terrestrial moon, gravity 0.16, greenhouse factor=1
Large moon, gravity 0.15, greenhouse factor=0
Overall it seems that rather than checking for gravity, Quasar simply gives greenhouse factor=0 for any moon that isn't classified as small terrestrial or terrestrial irrespective of the actual gravity.
Thank you for your time.
There might be something funky with how VB6 determines greenhouse factor. I'm checking VB6 Sol right now and there's a significant collection of small moons that have a GH factor of 1, alongside the ones that have zero. For example, Adrastea.Planets with too low gravity cannot retain atmosphere which is represented by having a greenhouse factor set permanently to 0 (at least in Quasar, don't know about Aurora). The way it works in Aurora the game checks for gravity, if ti's less than 0.1 it cannot have an atmosphere. Quasar however seems to check for body type, at least in the case of the moons. Those are some of the moons that have been generated in one of the systems:
Large moon, gravity 0.11, greenhouse factor=0
Small terrestrial moon, gravity 0.086, greenhouse factor=1
Small terrestrial moon, gravity 0.16, greenhouse factor=1
Large moon, gravity 0.15, greenhouse factor=0
Overall it seems that rather than checking for gravity, Quasar simply gives greenhouse factor=0 for any moon that isn't classified as small terrestrial or terrestrial irrespective of the actual gravity.
Thank you for your time.
In order to make system generation as faithful to VB6 as possible I generated over 3700 systems in VB6 and compared the results to a similarly sized batch of systems generated by Q4X. I haven't seen any evidence that 0.1 gravity plays such a role. VB6 seems to check first and foremost what the body type is.
Below is the distribution of atmospheric pressure and greenhouse factor by body type in my sample from Aurora VB6. Note that this comes from a 1-to-1 export from mdb to sqlite so I can run queries on it. The Body Types are: 1 = Asteroid, 2 = Terrestrial Planet, 3 = Dwarf, 4 = Gas, 5 = Jovian, 7 = Small Moon, 8 = Moon, 9 = Large Moon, 10 = Small Terrestrial Moon, 11 = Terrestrial Moon, 14 = Comet. Also note that each row is showing statistics for all gravities, both above and below 0.1
Above is VB6. Here's the same query run against a batch of 3700 systems I generated in Quasar4x just now:
So I believe Q4X is correct in this area, as far as mirroring how A4X behaves anyway.
--
Thanks for the reports! I'll be doing some final testing then releasing the next version with the fixes this evening.
There might be something funky with how VB6 determines greenhouse factor. I'm checking VB6 Sol right now and there's a significant collection of small moons that have a GH factor of 1, alongside the ones that have zero. For example, Adrastea.Planets with too low gravity cannot retain atmosphere which is represented by having a greenhouse factor set permanently to 0 (at least in Quasar, don't know about Aurora). The way it works in Aurora the game checks for gravity, if ti's less than 0.1 it cannot have an atmosphere. Quasar however seems to check for body type, at least in the case of the moons. Those are some of the moons that have been generated in one of the systems:
Large moon, gravity 0.11, greenhouse factor=0
Small terrestrial moon, gravity 0.086, greenhouse factor=1
Small terrestrial moon, gravity 0.16, greenhouse factor=1
Large moon, gravity 0.15, greenhouse factor=0
Overall it seems that rather than checking for gravity, Quasar simply gives greenhouse factor=0 for any moon that isn't classified as small terrestrial or terrestrial irrespective of the actual gravity.
Thank you for your time.
In order to make system generation as faithful to VB6 as possible I generated over 3700 systems in VB6 and compared the results to a similarly sized batch of systems generated by Q4X. I haven't seen any evidence that 0.1 gravity plays such a role. VB6 seems to check first and foremost what the body type is.
Below is the distribution of atmospheric pressure and greenhouse factor by body type in my sample from Aurora VB6. Note that this comes from a 1-to-1 export from mdb to sqlite so I can run queries on it. The Body Types are: 1 = Asteroid, 2 = Terrestrial Planet, 3 = Dwarf, 4 = Gas, 5 = Jovian, 7 = Small Moon, 8 = Moon, 9 = Large Moon, 10 = Small Terrestrial Moon, 11 = Terrestrial Moon, 14 = Comet. Also note that each row is showing statistics for all gravities, both above and below 0.1
Above is VB6. Here's the same query run against a batch of 3700 systems I generated in Quasar4x just now:
So I believe Q4X is correct in this area, as far as mirroring how A4X behaves anyway.
--
Thanks for the reports! I'll be doing some final testing then releasing the next version with the fixes this evening.
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/111219652780195840/874597814007644221/unknown.png)
This could be Sol having some funky mechanics though.
Now that I actually check a freshly generated system, I'm almost certain it's sol having it's values a bit messed up.
So I believe Q4X is correct in this area, as far as mirroring how A4X behaves anyway.
Parity need not be completely perfect. At this point it's really just a question of whether atmospheres on small-bodies is a desired outcome and i get the impression that it wasn't, given the desire to put it as a mechanic in the first place. Much I want to turn all asteroids into tiny bubble planets hahaSo I believe Q4X is correct in this area, as far as mirroring how A4X behaves anyway.
I've done some additional digging and this is gonna be interesting.
Remember the game you converted for me some time back? I had a colony there on a moon and after conversion it had negative population growth and significant infrastructure deficit because in Aurora it had greenhouse factor but it did not have it in quasar. After additional digging I found out that you are correct about Q4x and AVB checking for body type to set up greenhouse factor however AVB had a bug - even though greenhouse factor was set to 0 as soon as you added any atmosphere it was immediately raised to 1.
So here is fun question - if Aurora VB had a bug do you preserve the bug for parity or do you fix it (it's currently fixed)?
Parity need not be completely perfect. At this point it's really just a question of whether atmospheres on small-bodies is a desired outcome and i get the impression that it wasn't, given the desire to put it as a mechanic in the first place. Much I want to turn all asteroids into tiny bubble planets haha
I can't create a new game in V147...
When clicking on "Create Game" nothing happens and no error message appears...
It just worked for me on version 149 with those exact settings. Can you try deleting %APPDATA%\Roaming\Godot\app_userdata\Quasar4x\quasar4x.sqlite and running the game again?Yes, deleting that file makes it work :)
When the "Event Updates" is in front and you want to advance time in the "Population and Production" window, the amount of time that is advanced is taken from the last action you took, but not the actual one. I misclicked on the "5 days" button but time was advanced "30 days" - as I had done before that. I then put the focus back to the "Events Update" and clicked on the "30 days" and got a 5 days advance... .
Add On: it looks like that that behavior happens all the time - also when the focus is on the "Population and Production" window.
I can't reproduce this. The Event Updates window scrolls to the bottom every UI update, but maybe it's scrolling wrong for you and it's showing the second-to-last increment at the bottom? You can verify the correct amount of time is incremented by watching the date change at the top of the Population windowYeah, I misread the log entries. They represent the LAST cycle. Sorry.
Possible bug: In the system map, Passive Sensor Ranges and Show Signature Detection Range don't update when you change the values, only when you toggle them off and back on again.
A VB6 parity thing, also, is that the Signature Detection Range option doesn't seem to apply to populations.
A VB6 parity thing, also, is that the Signature Detection Range option doesn't seem to apply to populations.
When transferring parts of Research Facilities I think VB6 Aurora didn't send you a warning of unused Research Labs (in this case parts of them). Maybe you can only send this warning if a complete RL is free, not a fraction?
I have transferred 1 Research Lab to Luna. Now both Earth and Luna are confused about free Research Labs and don't want to use the RLs correctly. I looked in the DB and the numbers of RLs are exact - 21.0 on Earth, 1.0 on Luna. Any idea what is going on here?
Here is the DB:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YoMjmy6tOY_CJK4bmNu4GVzG4NxvTVF4/view
Changing position of jump points in the System Generation and Display window appears to be working. However there is no change on the system map.
Something weird is going on with lagrange points. This isn't just the matter of representation on the map, the game really sees them there. Database attached just in case. Fresh install, new game, version 1.53, non-real stars, Linux.
V156: I can't refit a ship that has no orders in its task group. See picture and DB. Bug or am I missing something?
V157: I have queued a racial tech on one planet but it still shows as being researchable on other planets.
Also a loaded construction brigade does not change the number of loaded battalions in the fleet view.
"Add New Label" in System View doesn't seem to create new Labels.
Created a new engine with already researched tech and prototyped it. Cannot research it now because it is labeled as Future Prototype
It says 0/5 Battalions. Should it not say 5/5?Also a loaded construction brigade does not change the number of loaded battalions in the fleet view.I'm not seeing a bug in the screenshot. Remember that construction brigades are large.. they take up 5 battalions worth of space.
Nope, it's showing remaining capacity. Check VB6.It says 0/5 Battalions. Should it not say 5/5?Also a loaded construction brigade does not change the number of loaded battalions in the fleet view.I'm not seeing a bug in the screenshot. Remember that construction brigades are large.. they take up 5 battalions worth of space.
Interesting combination of messages:
(https://i.ibb.co/y0NZ8Mk/PDC.jpg) (https://ibb.co/Q9JT6qH)
I had shipped the exact number of prefabs needed to Luna. But that somehow still triggered the warning message - and then finished the construction nevertheless... .
Here is the DB:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1T38uRG6iwWrGgB98wdfSFMlGnIjt6Mfz/view?usp=sharing
I'm still using 1.56 but I haven't seen this addressed in patch notes.
I cannot take a screenshot for this as attempting to do so collapses the menu. Task Groups->History & Officers & Misc->Set task group position (SM Only). Systems in the drop dawn menu are in order of discovery not in the alphabetical order. I'm pretty sure it was different in Aurora. Even if it wasn't I'm using the option quite often so I would appreciate if it was in alphabetical order otherwise it will be almost impossible to use once the game gets large.
Edit: I think there is something wrong with gravity planet generation, at least for non-real stars. Here are the statistics for fourteen system (taken for terrestrial planets with temperature above -100C, moons are not included):
Gravity 4 or more - 3
Gravity 3 to 3.99 - 4
Gravity 2 to 2.99 - 18
Gravity 1 to 1.99 - 5
Gravity 0.3 to 1 - 3
I know this isn't a great sample size, but the planets with gravity between 2 and 2.99 outnumber all others combined which seems a little iffy to me.
Mars/Mercury type bodies are almost nonexistent except as moons.
Unfortunately no. I'll try to replicate and send you the before-DB.Interesting combination of messages:Do you have a backup from right before this occurred? You can enable auto-backups in the Quasar4x Settings window
(https://i.ibb.co/y0NZ8Mk/PDC.jpg) (https://ibb.co/Q9JT6qH)
I had shipped the exact number of prefabs needed to Luna. But that somehow still triggered the warning message - and then finished the construction nevertheless... .
Here is the DB:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1T38uRG6iwWrGgB98wdfSFMlGnIjt6Mfz/view?usp=sharing
I had four Reserve Units - and without being at war one was dissolved into some other unit. DB and lastDB are attached in the zip file.
(https://i.ibb.co/mbVH7Sv/Ground-Unit.jpg) (https://ibb.co/ydc8JVh)
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1T38uRG6iwWrGgB98wdfSFMlGnIjt6Mfz/view?usp=sharing
Oh, that is new... well... there a way you could add that information into a warning?
Here's a larger sample size. Looks like similar results to me, if anything planets are a little lighter in quasar.
Yeah, I meant, never recognised it in VB6 - though I don't recall being in a deficit there very often. Therefore new to me ;-)Oh, that is new... well... there a way you could add that information into a warning?It shouldn't be new. If VB6 does it differently I can change it.
Yeah, I meant, never recognised it in VB6 - though I don't recall being in a deficit there very often. Therefore new to me ;-)Oh, that is new... well... there a way you could add that information into a warning?It shouldn't be new. If VB6 does it differently I can change it.
I wouldn't change it per se. It might have a well based reason which is not obvious right now. We should take a look into the complete mechanics here. Ground Units usually don't cost training and maintenance when they are inside a PDC. Maybe that is a reason why Steve did this in the first place. Or we should ask him for the background of this mechanic. I guess it is still in C# also?!? Does he read here in this part of the forum?
Sector size isn't being calculated correctly in the assign system to sector window. My capital has size 10 radius 4 sector capital, but it is treated as radius 9.
Edit: wow, there is more going on than I realized. When I was previewing the post I noticed that the name for the capital doesn't match. The name should be Kleczanow. The name displayed in the name for the body for a different race (I have 2 races that can see the system). Database attached just in case.
Found and fixed a few other bugs while investigating these, take a look at the patch notes if you're interested
Found and fixed a few other bugs while investigating these, take a look at the patch notes if you're interested
That escalated quickly. Thank you for finding them.
Unfortunately there seem to be more problems related to interconnection. I'm currently playing 2 empires and their galactic maps are synced. If I change one map the other one is changed automatically making it impossible to create custom maps for different races.
Edit: I just noticed that moons are not being listed in the order of distance from the star. It can be seen on the same screenshot I provided for the colony cost bug. The first colony candidate moon has number 14 and is fifteen million kilometers from the parent body, the second candidate has number 19 and is only six hundred thousand kilometers from the gas giant.
V163: I have a planet with 5 Mines but they are inactive - though "Manned Mines" in the civilian tab is not blocked. What is blocked though are "Fuel Refineries", "Ordnance Factories", "Fighter Factories" and "Maintenance Facilities". Maybe there is a mixup in your code? Though there are "Mine Workers" in the Breakdown. Maybe it is just a glitch in the summary display?
Here we go. A little later in the game (6 mines there now). Planet Name: Snowden (Base)V163: I have a planet with 5 Mines but they are inactive - though "Manned Mines" in the civilian tab is not blocked. What is blocked though are "Fuel Refineries", "Ordnance Factories", "Fighter Factories" and "Maintenance Facilities". Maybe there is a mixup in your code? Though there are "Mine Workers" in the Breakdown. Maybe it is just a glitch in the summary display?
Can you send me your save file?
Here we go. A little later in the game (6 mines there now). Planet Name: Snowden (Base)V163: I have a planet with 5 Mines but they are inactive - though "Manned Mines" in the civilian tab is not blocked. What is blocked though are "Fuel Refineries", "Ordnance Factories", "Fighter Factories" and "Maintenance Facilities". Maybe there is a mixup in your code? Though there are "Mine Workers" in the Breakdown. Maybe it is just a glitch in the summary display?
Can you send me your save file?
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1T38uRG6iwWrGgB98wdfSFMlGnIjt6Mfz/view?usp=sharing
V165: If you set research facilities off in the civilian tab the game still asks you if your want to continue time progression because there are free research facilities.
V166: A civilian ship on refit done with refitting is set to overhaul?!? Any idea how that could have come about? DB attached - though I don't have a DB before that happened.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1T38uRG6iwWrGgB98wdfSFMlGnIjt6Mfz/view?usp=sharing
When removing a plotted move from a task force the time and distance calculation is not updated.
In "Individual Unit Details" under the Maintenance Tab is an infobox with "Range". That number is way larger than the design of the ship class when the ship has military engines.
The "Subsidise" button under "Shipping lines" seems to do nothing.
Nice progress :D
This one isn't a bug - just something that "bugs" me ;). The "Officer Update" includes several things - also if an officer retires. I pretty much don't care about any of the updates BUT the one when they "retire". Could you separate that one into a separate category so I could unhide that message and hide the rest? :)
Nice progress :D
This one isn't a bug - just something that "bugs" me ;). The "Officer Update" includes several things - also if an officer retires. I pretty much don't care about any of the updates BUT the one when they "retire". Could you separate that one into a separate category so I could unhide that message and hide the rest? :)
Thanks!
All retirement falls under Officer Health if I'm not mistaken. Try filtering out the new event type "Officer Health (Minor)" to help with this problem.
Yeah, I already filter out the minor ones. There are still a lot that fall under "Officer Health" which are not interesting to me. So as in C# have the retirement under "Retirement" - I would love to have that ;)Nice progress :D
This one isn't a bug - just something that "bugs" me ;). The "Officer Update" includes several things - also if an officer retires. I pretty much don't care about any of the updates BUT the one when they "retire". Could you separate that one into a separate category so I could unhide that message and hide the rest? :)
Thanks!
All retirement falls under Officer Health if I'm not mistaken. Try filtering out the new event type "Officer Health (Minor)" to help with this problem.
V168: Several name input fields exist, that don't show the already given name. I.e. would be a nice QoL if that name is already there to be edited.
a) General System Info:
- Rename Sys
- Rename Body (also in the "Population and Production" window) "Rename")
b) Population and Production:
- Ground Units: Rename
- GU Training Rename
- Manage Shipyards: Rename SY
Another QoL which is a leftover from VB6. If you want to add a team member to a team you have to do that via the "Commanders" windows - though having a button in the "Population and Production" windows in the Teams&Academy tab would be way easier because there you can see how many members are missing in a team. So instead of having to open a completely different window, could you add a button there "Assign selected commanders to the team"?
In the Galactic Map is a tab "System Info" where you can enter a text. But that text isn't saved when you press the Save button. Next time you click on a system the text is gone.
V168: Once an atmosphere has become breathable the game continues to send you that log message every 5-day turn. I thought it might end when the actual terraforming is finished, but it doesn't it keeps continuing. DB attached.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1T38uRG6iwWrGgB98wdfSFMlGnIjt6Mfz/view?usp=sharing
Did you change anything with the auto-progress dialogue in V169? I all of a sudden have 5 to 40sec stops in my progress - which I thought should be auto-progressed. I checked the dialogue, and the option to turn that off is off; i.e. the dialog should do its magic.
V169: Some messages in the log contain the abbreviation of the ship, others don't (like Overhaul complete), which only displays the ship name. Maybe you can unify this and always show abbreviation + ship name... .
Ah, I have a presence in that system ATM - so that is why ;)Did you change anything with the auto-progress dialogue in V169? I all of a sudden have 5 to 40sec stops in my progress - which I thought should be auto-progressed. I checked the dialogue, and the option to turn that off is off; i.e. the dialog should do its magic.
Nope, shouldn't be any changes in that area. The dialog only triggers in systems with no player presence (ie, either you haven't discovered the system yet or it says "No System Presence" in the F3 window), maybe that's the reason?
New bug: Get infinite crewmen by abandoning a ship multiple timesAnd this is how the clone army in Star Wars came about ;) - A glitch in the Matrix...
Steps to reproduce:
1. On the "Individual Unit Details" screen, damage control tab, click the big red "Abandon Ship" button
2. Observe escape pods with the correct number of survivors
3. Click the button again
4. Observe another set of escape pods also with a full compliment of survivors
5. repeat step 3 until you have all the crew you wnat in the escape pods
6. Use the ship which you "abandoned" to rescu the escape pods.
7. Unload survivors on a colony
The abandoning and rescuing can be done in the same 5 second turn, and if you were already orbiting the colony then the drop off only takes 5 seconds as well.
The galaxy map's right click menu leaks information about populations you have not found yet. My ships have been exploded by my neighbor's missiles, but I was not even 100% sure they were precursors until I saw this, and I had not found their colonies. See attached screenshots.
That menu is also showing what I assume is the Precursor's name for the system. Note that on my galaxy map and system display it is called Edmonton, but that menu shows it having a population on "Denise-A IV - Moon 4"
Found on version 167, I see I missed an update or two, will download the new version and see if it persists.
Edit: Confirmed on build 169
And a related detail which may or may not be a bug: Based on the wrecks I can see in that system I suspect those two precursor colonies are different factions and at war with each other.
Occasionally they get into really big fights that make a 30 day turn last more than 10 real time minutes. The current 30 day turn I am processing has been the slowest at almost 3 days with every tick being a 5 second tick, if this continues it will take over an hour for these 30 days to process.
V169: The Checkbox for "Inc All" in the ground units tab doesn't seem to do anything.
New bug: Get infinite crewmen by abandoning a ship multiple times
Steps to reproduce:
1. On the "Individual Unit Details" screen, damage control tab, click the big red "Abandon Ship" button
2. Observe escape pods with the correct number of survivors
3. Click the button again
4. Observe another set of escape pods also with a full compliment of survivors
5. repeat step 3 until you have all the crew you wnat in the escape pods
6. Use the ship which you "abandoned" to rescu the escape pods.
7. Unload survivors on a colony
The abandoning and rescuing can be done in the same 5 second turn, and if you were already orbiting the colony then the drop off only takes 5 seconds as well.
That's the one I meant. Sorry. And I wanted to transfer to another population - and that doesn't work. PDC, yes, Population, no.V169: The Checkbox for "Inc All" in the ground units tab doesn't seem to do anything.Do you mean 'Inc Sub' ? If so, I just tested it and it works for me. Maybe not enough room in the PDC for the HQ and all its subordinates?
Still works for me, transferring them back to the population. If you mean transferring troops to a population on another system body, you have to use a troop transport ship.That's the one I meant. Sorry. And I wanted to transfer to another population - and that doesn't work. PDC, yes, Population, no.V169: The Checkbox for "Inc All" in the ground units tab doesn't seem to do anything.Do you mean 'Inc Sub' ? If so, I just tested it and it works for me. Maybe not enough room in the PDC for the HQ and all its subordinates?
Well, technically right. But you can transfer one unit in this menu - so I thought it would make sense if all subunits would be auto transferred as well, if I turn that option on, instead of having to do it manually for each.Still works for me, transferring them back to the population. If you mean transferring troops to a population on another system body, you have to use a troop transport ship.That's the one I meant. Sorry. And I wanted to transfer to another population - and that doesn't work. PDC, yes, Population, no.V169: The Checkbox for "Inc All" in the ground units tab doesn't seem to do anything.Do you mean 'Inc Sub' ? If so, I just tested it and it works for me. Maybe not enough room in the PDC for the HQ and all its subordinates?
Martin Rees Mk.3 class Mineral Harvester 180 000 tons 1485 Crew 4723 BP TCS 3600 TH 2400 EM 0
660 km/s Armor 1-283 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 0
MSP 16 Max Repair 120 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months Spare Berths 2
Cargo 25000 Cargo Handling Multiplier 20
Asteroid Miner: 25 modules producing 350 tons per mineral per annum
Dodd Dynamics C300.0 EP Engine TR:75% (8) Power 300 Fuel Use 5.3% Signature 300 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 5 750 000 Liters Range 108.4 billion km (1882 days at full power)
This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposesI created an orbital mining ship like this:Code: [Select]Martin Rees Mk.3 class Mineral Harvester 180 000 tons 1485 Crew 4723 BP TCS 3600 TH 2400 EM 0
660 km/s Armor 1-283 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 0
MSP 16 Max Repair 120 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months Spare Berths 2
Cargo 25000 Cargo Handling Multiplier 20
Asteroid Miner: 25 modules producing 350 tons per mineral per annum
Dodd Dynamics C300.0 EP Engine TR:75% (8) Power 300 Fuel Use 5.3% Signature 300 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 5 750 000 Liters Range 108.4 billion km (1882 days at full power)
This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes
Moved it to a colony (not to the planet but the colony) where it is recognized as orbital mining modules; but no mining is happening. Am I missing something or is this a bug? Did the mining only work on asteroids? It is a moon with a diameter of 360km... .
(https://i.ibb.co/C6NSm73/Unbenannt-1.jpg) (https://ibb.co/dt1Hj2w)
Maybe it's an NPR empire? (It could also be star swarm, but that would be pretty obvious from the wrecks if you know anything about swarm) Feel free to post the DB if you want me to take a look.
Maybe it's an NPR empire? (It could also be star swarm, but that would be pretty obvious from the wrecks if you know anything about swarm) Feel free to post the DB if you want me to take a look.
I am almost a total newbie, I know nothing about Star Swarms. Peeking at the races table in the database, it is a Star Swarm. Thank you.
Version 170:
-- Currently designing a fightercraft and it has 4 crew, but six spare berths. Wanted to muck around with that to reduce it, maybe gain the 3 tons, but when I try to add Fighter Sized Crew Cabins it adds a Tiny one instead. I've got Keep Excess Q on, and in VB6 you could use that to manually add smaller ones that game simply rounded up over. With a 0.1 Deployment, it's not like I'm stocking much, lol.
V170: The Orbital Mines are now correctly shown only on asteroids and comets. But if you have two ships in one fleet it only shows the number of mines next to the planet of one ship. In the mineral tab however, everything seems ok - number of orbital mines and mineral mining.
Yeah, I already filter out the minor ones. There are still a lot that fall under "Officer Health" which are not interesting to me. So as in C# have the retirement under "Retirement" - I would love to have that ;)Nice progress :D
This one isn't a bug - just something that "bugs" me ;). The "Officer Update" includes several things - also if an officer retires. I pretty much don't care about any of the updates BUT the one when they "retire". Could you separate that one into a separate category so I could unhide that message and hide the rest? :)
All retirement falls under Officer Health if I'm not mistaken. Try filtering out the new event type "Officer Health (Minor)" to help with this problem.
Out of curiosity, are lay-off going to be counted as retirement? And are they preventable?
"_ has been deemed surplus to requirements and released from the service" as part of automatic commander assignment is what I am talking about.
V171: I've added two LPs to Kuiper75 system into the DB as you suggested to do (SysID, StarID, PlanetID + Distance). Rest was added by the game as you said. They do appear as LPs in the task force list but there are no dots in the system map drawn.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1T38uRG6iwWrGgB98wdfSFMlGnIjt6Mfz/view?usp=sharing
Added to Kuiper 75 A IV Moon 13 & Kuper 75 C IV Moon 18
1090-1486-131862 & 1090-1488-131911
Added to Kuiper 75 A IV Moon 13 & Kuper 75 C IV Moon 18
1090-1486-131862 & 1090-1488-131911
I see. I'll test functionality ;-)Added to Kuiper 75 A IV Moon 13 & Kuper 75 C IV Moon 18
1090-1486-131862 & 1090-1488-131911
I don't think they will work with moons, only with bodies orbiting a star.
Ergh. I think I've been losing a lot of minerals to this one >:(Just call it piracy ;D
Fixed for v172, available within the hour.
The in game description of the various laser frequency technologies describe the opposite of what those technologies do.
The tech names indicate that they increase frequency, which means they decrease wavelength. However the description claims they are increasing wavelength, and then goes on to describe the game mechanic. I am not complaining that the game mechanic fails to map to reality, I recognize that doing it the right way round would be confusing and/or hard to balance. But, saying UV has a higher wavelength than visible is sort of painful to me for some reason.
I just finished adding oxygen to the atmosphere of mars, and the message on completion says I just finished subtracting it. Minor visual bug I would say, but it did cause me a moment of panic.
Version 172
Related bug: I set the oxygen order on Mars and Io a long time ago, but a single terraforming module just arrived in orbit of each. In both cases, the oxygen job completed in the same 5 day tick as the terraforming fleet arriving. When I made the prior post, I had not realized Mars was in the batch just now getting their first terraformers.
Several other planets in this save have had terraforming orders for quite some time with no terraforming modules or installations present, so I am attaching a database backup from just after getting the Io message.
You could change the word "wavelength" into "frequency": Laser frequency technology. The higher a laser frequency, the less the laser loses power with range. Therefore, higher frequency lasers will cause more damage at a longer range than lower-frequency lasers of the same focal size.The in game description of the various laser frequency technologies describe the opposite of what those technologies do.
The tech names indicate that they increase frequency, which means they decrease wavelength. However the description claims they are increasing wavelength, and then goes on to describe the game mechanic. I am not complaining that the game mechanic fails to map to reality, I recognize that doing it the right way round would be confusing and/or hard to balance. But, saying UV has a higher wavelength than visible is sort of painful to me for some reason.
Noted. This comes from VB6, presumably written by Steve a really long time ago. Has Steve or anyone provided a better description for this, technobabbly or otherwise? If someone can link me to a post I can cobble together a new description from that.
V172: Don't know if this is a bug... take a look at the ship GEV Condor. The message in the log says that it can't find any new locations to perform its geo survey. There are still 5 targets left in that system and they are within 10bkm.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/14BXilNaAIy_KvZWkHFYTJjERXvH_9Xbu/view?usp=sharing
For both of these I would need to look at a backup of the db from before the message. But I'm willing to bet you didn't click the 'Save Atm', meaning the game thought your desired level was 0, which would indeed finish instantly if it was already 0.
You could change the word "wavelength" into "frequency": Laser frequency technology. The higher a laser frequency, the less the laser loses power with range. Therefore, higher frequency lasers will cause more damage at a longer range than lower-frequency lasers of the same focal size.I agree with this, still a tad technobably, but all the words map to their fundamental definitions that way.
For both of these I would need to look at a backup of the db from before the message. But I'm willing to bet you didn't click the 'Save Atm', meaning the game thought your desired level was 0, which would indeed finish instantly if it was already 0.
Summary: If the "Add Gas to Atmosphere" checkbox is checked and the target is below the current actual, then the completion is announced and the actual value is set to the target immediately. The reverse also works for raising the pressure in the atmosphere.
That was discovered while intending to just document what I know about my Mars and Io incident. That rambling discussion is as follows:
I don't know whether this is a bug or just me not understanding how beam weapons work.
I have 3 ships that each have 2 turrets and 2 fire controls, one turret is assigned to each fire control. The ROF of the turrets are 5 seconds and I have excess power generation. But most 5 second turns I get the message "... is preparing to fire but her weapons are not yet ready" for each of the three ships. I did not think to backup my database before the fight, but I exported the log to a text file to review.
It looks like they fire 1 to 3 times at 5 second intervals and then give that message 2 to 9 times at five second intervals. but it is probably best described as random with more failures to fire than successes.
The fight was lost either way, so not super annoyed, but if this is clearly a bug I can try to get a reproduction situation with the same ship class, I have three more under construction and I only killed one of the 137 ships in the swarm fleet.
Cadres do not get refunded if you cancel construction of a ground unit.
I cannot create a task to repair a ship. The "Add Task" button is enabled, but clicking it does nothing.
Shipyard has 10,000 ton capacity and one slipway (out of 4) is unused. the shipyard's current complex activity is adding another slipway.
The class of the ship that need repaired is:Off-Topic: show
Both of it's gravitational survey sensors are destroyed:Off-Topic: show
I am going to try working around this with damage control tasks, which may have been the more optimal approach in retrospect anyway.
Easiest way for me to investigate this is to just have a copy of the save file to try it out. I'll be repairing one of my own fleets soon though, so I may run into an issue myself.
Easiest way for me to investigate this is to just have a copy of the save file to try it out. I'll be repairing one of my own fleets soon though, so I may run into an issue myself.
The post you quoted has the save attached as well a screenshot to show which shipyard and ship.
New issue: A ship design with 0 spare berths became -1 after an overhaul and gave me a "crew morale falling" message. However that message only fired once per ship (at lest has not fired again after a couple 5 day ticks). Nor has morale dropped below 100% in 10 days.
Class design:Off-Topic: show
One of the affected ship designs:Off-Topic: show
Database is attached (I moved the affected ships to their own fleet before thinking to back up the save, they were the three with the least time deployed before the overhaul of "Battle Training Group", the rest of which is still overhauling)
This was on version 173.
"Ship Design Display" still shows -1 berths after upgrade to 174.
The "Available Colony Analysis" screen ("Potential Colonies" button) only shows bodies in my home system. I have inhabited colonies in 3 systems and I have surveyed planets with 2.0 habitability in 8 different systems, but that view only shows me systems in Sol. The database I uploaded in my previous post has this bug as well.
You can "prototype" a species doing so seems to instantly research it for free. Also, there is no way I can find to delete a species, rename a species, or mark a species as obsolete, I would expect to do the rename or obsolete from the Technology Report (View Technology button) but it does not list "species" or "new species" in its categories.
A "Human #2" I prototyped (thus hitting this bug) and could not figure out how to research, as well as a "Human #2" I actually did research are selectable on the "Environment & GMC" tab with the attached database.
Tested and still an issue on version 174
Oh, and I cannot find any reference to this, so I guess it is a bug in light of "all the features including AI are in place now" being part of the official description:
The "Auto Fire" button on the Combat Overview Window pops a "Not yet implemented" modal dialog. See attached.
V175: In the technology report I can't rename missiles. The dialog pops up but the changed name doesn't seem to be saved.
V175: Don't know what happened to this dialog screen... lots of options missing...
Multiple colonies on a body all get full bonuses from orbital mines, effectively duplicating them (see Neujmin in the attached database). The same is true for orbital transforming modules if both colonies have terraforming configured, you can even add multiple gasses at the same time this way (see Luna in the attached database).
V175: The "Modify Shipyard" dialog-overlay that can be activated by the "SM SY Mod" button doesn't disappear when you switch off the SpaceMaster mode.
Orbit compairson of "Pluto" appears to show the same distance as 10x Pluto
V175: In the technology report I can't rename missiles. The dialog pops up but the changed name doesn't seem to be saved.
V175: Don't know what happened to this dialog screen... lots of options missing...
He is probably going to need a database to debug that. I cannot reproduce. The attached screenshot is also V175.
Hi Kyle, first of all, thanks for Quasar 4X, it's great. And it also allows me to perfectly play Aurora VB6 on my 1366X768 monitor with the option you added: "Shrink to fit. . . " (I wish there was such an option in Aurora C #. . . ). The only problem I'm having with Quasar 4X is in the Class Design window, when I want to choose the different options in the "Hull" tab, I can only scroll down to a certain point, (just before the hulls called with the letter "T"). I realized this by wanting to create a Troop Transport ship and a Tug and could not select them. Is there any way to fix this? If so, I would really appreciate it.
Yes, still happening. DB attached.V175: Don't know what happened to this dialog screen... lots of options missing...I can't reproduce this. Is this still happening after a game restart? If so, do the galactic map graphics (circles etc) look ok?
Yes, still happening. DB attached.V175: Don't know what happened to this dialog screen... lots of options missing...I can't reproduce this. Is this still happening after a game restart? If so, do the galactic map graphics (circles etc) look ok?
https://drive.google.com/file/d/14BXilNaAIy_KvZWkHFYTJjERXvH_9Xbu/view?usp=sharing
* You cannot transport a spaceport?
* Also could you add something that will auto-assign new research labs? Something like in aurora c#?
I still can't reproduce this :( If you don't mind trying some things to figure out this bug, could you try creating a new game and see if it's the same in that game? Can you tell me exactly what UI elements you're clicking on and/or what keys you're pressing from the moment you run the program to reproduce this, using the file you uploaded?I started a game from scratch as well as starting that active game and in both cases, it works. So it must be something that happens because of gameplay. I'll try to narrow it down.
I still can't reproduce this :( If you don't mind trying some things to figure out this bug, could you try creating a new game and see if it's the same in that game? Can you tell me exactly what UI elements you're clicking on and/or what keys you're pressing from the moment you run the program to reproduce this, using the file you uploaded?I started a game from scratch as well as starting that active game and in both cases, it works. So it must be something that happens because of gameplay. I'll try to narrow it down.
V176: I can't move systems around in the galactic map. When I have moved a system and want to move the next, the former is reset to its former position.
Edit: Isn't reproduceable. Maybe the same source error as the other thing... strange, strange...
Looks like "Mineral text" is bugged and wont update after swapping system through the system map:
https://imgur.com/Uq910s1
Looks like "Mineral text" is bugged and wont update after swapping system through the system map:
https://imgur.com/Uq910s1
Fixed. I still had Mr. Maekler's file loaded while I was checking this out and fixed another bug where duplicate rows were being displayed in this tab as well :)
Pops that have orbital miners in orbit but not assigned to them display wrong in the populated systems list on the economics window in V177. Specifically, they get categorized under "Automated Mining Colonies" and show the number of miners in orbit as part of their name ("Neujmin - Human - TR+3: 100x Orb Mines").
Another duplicate seems to be present somewhere in system generation naming or in the systems view:
https://i.imgur.com/UkOQASo.png
For some unknowable reason I find that the game is not letting me interact with it. The system map window won't let me zoom or pan the view. Time also does not seem to progress when I hit the time control buttons. I thought it might be a problem with the save game, but I can't seem to pull up a new one, either, it simply does not progress to the next window when I hit 'create game'. Nor does it allow me to delete the game. I'm really rather quite boggled by it.
V176: It looks like that the number of free research labs is checked before parts of the labs are transported away by civilians. So even if already half of a lab is packed and in flight the research tab still says that it has one free unused lab and sends a warning.
Quote from: shepard1707 link=topic=12665. msg155878#msg155878 date=1633728037For some unknowable reason I find that the game is not letting me interact with it. The system map window won't let me zoom or pan the view. Time also does not seem to progress when I hit the time control buttons. I thought it might be a problem with the save game, but I can't seem to pull up a new one, either, it simply does not progress to the next window when I hit 'create game'. Nor does it allow me to delete the game. I'm really rather quite boggled by it.
It sounds like the game is unable to write to the save file. Can you please try deleting it then starting the game again? On windows it's located at %appdata%/Godot/app_userdata/Quasar4x/quasar4x. sqlite
Can you mouse over the names of those moons to see the full name? I bet those are moons 10-19 and 20-29 and just getting clipped.
Pops that have orbital miners in orbit but not assigned to them display wrong in the populated systems list on the economics window in V177. Specifically, they get categorized under "Automated Mining Colonies" and show the number of miners in orbit as part of their name ("Neujmin - Human - TR+3: 100x Orb Mines").
Is anyone else encountering issues with nothing happening when giving orders to repair ships to shipyards? ( No error, but also no ship repair task appearing ).
V176: Messages in cycled moves seem to get lost after saving a game. The fleet "zzz_FH Jupiter TK(c)" should just have sent a message to the log, but there is none. I know it worked previously, but I don't remember receiving that message after I restarted the game.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/14BXilNaAIy_KvZWkHFYTJjERXvH_9Xbu/view?usp=sharing
PS-QoL: if we could edit a message, that would be awesome ;D
Can you mouse over the names of those moons to see the full name? I bet those are moons 10-19 and 20-29 and just getting clipped.
You are of course correct, thanks. I now feel stupid ;D Or perhaps also a bit lazy in assuming all UIs should be using the standard "lorem ipsu..." nomenclature of 3 dots whenever the full name can't fit ::)
Unrelated I found something else that seemed odd. A NPR that spawned on a methane world with an atmosphere of 79% methane, 16% Nitrogen and 5% Ammonia seemed very weak, and apparently they suffered 2.0 colony cost on their homeworld leading to only 9 million surviving ( of the approximately 400 million starting pop based on my starting pop and 100% difficulty ).
Based on their tolerance and homeworld 79% of 0.182 pressure seems to match 0.144 Ideal Methane Content, so perhaps the Ammonia being the Dangerous Gas might be the culprit here.
https://i.imgur.com/MPWQS2w.png
V176: Cannot pin it 100%, but it looks like that some data gets lost when you transfer a research facility to another planet and the installation is half here and half sere, then leave the game and continue later. After continuation, the parts not underway are still in the civilian contracts view as supply and demand, but when you look with SM into the planet values, there are no partial numbers. Can't reproduce it every time, but someplace in that area something fishy is going on... .
It looks like Point Defense won't fire unless the sensors were able to detect the missiles in a previous time increment before they intercept their target.
Not sure if this was the case in VB6 Aurora, perhaps it was, but it's still quite annoying when it happens due to advancing time and getting your ships blown up despite having overwhelming PD firepower.
When I reversed course with the fleet and stepped 5 second increments they were able to spot the incoming missiles and kill them when their speed / distance combination were able to detect them in the previous 5 second increment.
It looks like Point Defense won't fire unless the sensors were able to detect the missiles in a previous time increment before they intercept their target.
Not sure if this was the case in VB6 Aurora, perhaps it was, but it's still quite annoying when it happens due to advancing time and getting your ships blown up despite having overwhelming PD firepower.
When I reversed course with the fleet and stepped 5 second increments they were able to spot the incoming missiles and kill them when their speed / distance combination were able to detect them in the previous 5 second increment.
I think this was in VB6 and was one of the bugs/features that C# fixed. I would say that this should probably be fixed in quasar as well.
V178: System Generation and Display - When you select "Minerals" so only bodies with minerals are shown, it doesn't matter what option you select for moons - they are never shown - even if they have minerals on them.
Send messages by a cycled fleet seem to reset the current speed back to maximum.
V178: When a fleet transits into another system AND is set to a slower than maximum fleet, the speed is reset to maximum.
V178: When a planet has no population and you gain research facilities by exploring a ruin, the warning message that there are unused research facilities keeps being given even if you have disabled research facilities in the civilian tab.
V178: Disassembling an alien tech gains you research points - but only on the planet you disassemble them on. I think that is a leftover from VB6 which handled that in the same way. Steve changed that for C# Aurora - I think it makes more sense if those values are globally available as in C#... .
V178: When you already have a move command in a fleet to jump between two LPs and you next want to move to a waypoint the automation adds another jump command between the LPs if the fleet is still on the far side of the LPs.
V178: In the "Individual Unit Display" there are some 000 missing in the fuel display of the population
V178: When plotting a course with tankers into another system, if that other system has Lagrange points the calculation routine does not add the LPs automatically. If you do the same when the ship is already in system, it works.
Based on what I can see using the "Unload Ordnance to Colony" Action on a Carrier fleet with both Carriers and Fighters loaded with missiles their ordnance seems to simply vanish into thin air.
This was tested on a colony both with and without Missiles in the stockpile and in both cases they never arrive at the colony. Missiles were in a missile series.
In one test using a combination of load/unload actions also managed to vaporize a stockpile of thousands of missiles from the colony itself ( despite there not even being room for that many missiles on the fleet ).
I normally use these actions to upgrade missiles to a new model for the whole TG, so them not working properly is a small inconvenience for Carrier Ops ::)
It looks like Point Defense won't fire unless the sensors were able to detect the missiles in a previous time increment before they intercept their target.
Not sure if this was the case in VB6 Aurora, perhaps it was...
but it's still quite annoying when it happens due to advancing time and getting your ships blown up despite having overwhelming PD firepower.
When I reversed course with the fleet and stepped 5 second increments they were able to spot the incoming missiles and kill them when their speed / distance combination were able to detect them in the previous 5 second increment.
I'm not certain that is the same issue as in the case with torpedoes the missiles are not possible to detect at all the previous increment ( as they weren't even launched which is 100% predictable ), and in my case detection depends on how close they randomly happen to end up in their movement the increment before impact ( within or outside of sensors detection range ) which feels like a pretty strange and unpredictable behavior.
- Seems like automatic Hangar reloads did reload the launchers, but did not transfer the actual ordnance from the Carrier Mothership to the Fighter. ( Edit: This one I might be remembering wrong though, was a few years since I played VB6 Aurora with Carriers and reloading with the button in TG UI does seem to work to transfer the missiles ).
- When launching a Fighter Squadron from F7 it's not converted into a separate fleet.
This sounds like a critical bug that needs to be fixed ASAP. Unfortunately, 98% of the time it takes to fix these types of bugs is spent setting up a scenario that reproduces the bug. The scenario is necessary to trace the code and find where the bug is occurring, and also to verify that the fix works and nothing new was broken afterwards. My time is limited these days so I don't have time to set this up right now... would you be willing to post your save file where you did your own testing or create a new save file I can work on? It'd be super appreciated.
Again, a save file so I can quickly reproduce these issues would be appreciated.
I think the game should give you a message log that shields are loading... if not, the function/button does not work.
Based on what I can see using the "Unload Ordnance to Colony" Action on a Carrier fleet with both Carriers and Fighters loaded with missiles their ordnance seems to simply vanish into thin air.
This was tested on a colony both with and without Missiles in the stockpile and in both cases they never arrive at the colony. Missiles were in a missile series.
In one test using a combination of load/unload actions also managed to vaporize a stockpile of thousands of missiles from the colony itself ( despite there not even being room for that many missiles on the fleet ).
I normally use these actions to upgrade missiles to a new model for the whole TG, so them not working properly is a small inconvenience for Carrier Ops ::)
- Seems like automatic Hangar reloads did reload the launchers, but did not transfer the actual ordnance from the Carrier Mothership to the Fighter. ( Edit: This one I might be remembering wrong though, was a few years since I played VB6 Aurora with Carriers and reloading with the button in TG UI does seem to work to transfer the missiles ).
- When launching a Fighter Squadron from F7 it's not converted into a separate fleet.
The conditional orders aren't really working very well. It seems the game is completely unable to auto-route my survey ships back to my home colony for overhauling. When they reach their condition (50% fuel) they get an order to overhaul, but it completely ignores the actual jump points, and tried to go directly to a colony, this causes an error message, so I go and give it an order to properly transit the jump points, but since the fleet is already at 50% fuel, it keeps adding new overhaul orders to the top of the list every sub-increment, freezing the game to 2 or so hour increments unless I remove their conditional orders and manually send them back, this entirely defeats the purpose of said orders.
I encountered some issues getting shields to work.
Equipped a few different ships with "Epsilon Shields" - "Regeneration Rate 3" and neither the button for Shields On in F12(TG window) nor the button to Raise Shields in F8(Battle Control window) resulted in any shield going active or working against incoming damage.
Edit: This might have already been partially fixed. Found this in change log from September 29:th "- Fixed: Ships window, Combat Settings tab: the Activate Sensors/Shields buttons weren't working"
I think the game should give you a message log that shields are loading... if not, the function/button does not work.
I was expecting both log entries and shield strength showing up on TG Screen but saw neither. Now that I try to reproduce it with a few different TGs I'm getting more mixed results than not working at all.
During some time increments shields do regain strength, and during others they don't. No damn clue what determines which behavior to expect but it feels like the game sometimes "forgets" it's supposed to be charging shields ( either right after pressing "Shields on" or even once during a time increment down the line when shields were partially charged ).
"Shields Off" Always seem to work in resetting shields strength back to 0 though.
List of PDC Component cargo and Fighters carried ( and possibly more types ) only display the name of the first type, and attribute the correct total to the first loaded:
The following bugs have been observed over several days of play. As none of those were crippling I just continued the campaign. As such I don't have specific save files nor have I dived deeper into them.
The current version is 179 but it has been updated from 170. I do not remember if 170 was a fresh install or an upgrade of an even earlier version. Playing on linux if that matters.
Damaged fuel tanks do not cause the loss of fuel. I have had a ship with four ultra large fuel tanks and one large for a total of 20 250 000 liters of fuel carried. After receiving damage the vessel lost four ultra large fuel tanks. However the individual units detail screen was still showing over twenty million liters of fuel on the ship. In Aurora if the maximum amount of fuel the ship could carry was smaller than the amount of fuel the ship carried, the additional fuel was lost. In this case the vessel should have had only 250 000 liters of fuel remaining.
Damaged ships have an incredibly high energy requirement. I believe it is a shield energy requirement bug once again. Repairing only internal systems did not help. Fully repairing the ship in a shipyard have brought energy requirements back to normal. I have confirmed that the shields were not recharging after a ship received damage, but I have not tried to fire energy weapons.
It would would appear destroyed fire controls can still launch missiles. One of my ships had only one anti-missile fire control remaining but two of his fire controls were firing.
A side defending against missiles does not receive updates on the number of missiles in a give salvo. Salvo is shown to have the initial number of missiles or is not shown if completely destroyed. Judging by the number of anti-missiles fired it is only a display bug and "under the hood" calculations are being done correctly.
Civilian mining operations do not come with a mass driver. They did in Aurora.
In Aurora if a tug order 'release tracktored ship" was used on a task group the released ship was automatically added to the task group. In Quasar it always results in the vessel becoming it's own, new task group.
Construction brigades do not work on uninhabited planets. Production rate is above zero but production is not progressing. Adding population (via orbital habitat for example) solves the problem. Production efficiency = 0% may be the problem.
The order "unload ordnance to colony" deletes the ordnance unless the vessel has the "collier" tag.
Launch date on the design screen shows the date a ship was added to its current task force, not the date the ship was actually launched.
Individual unit details – manual reloading from colliers (double click on missiles) isn’t working.
Abandoning ship causes the crew to leave the vessel but the vessel itself remains. Did not try to order it around, I simply used SM mode to cause additional damage and destroy it. I have a save if needed.
If you stop ship construction, the class design> ships in class window will still show the vessel as under construction.
Population is not growing in orbital habitats. I had two colonies with OHs exclusively (no ground population) and the population growth was shown as non-zero (well above five percent in both cases) but there was no population growth as time was progressing.
--- CMCs did indeed come with Mass Drivers in VB6.
--- CMCs did indeed come with Mass Drivers in VB6.
To be specific, if my memory serves, CMCs came with a single ground combat unit and a tracking station by default and then had mass driver spawned when buying minerals and despawned when minerals were being sold to civilian sector.
Kyle - thank you for your work. In regards to bugs you could not reproduce most of them are not important enough for me to try and hunt them. If I encounter them again I will make a dedicated save/additional notes. The exception are habitats. I will attach a save to this post which has a dedicated save made from fresh 1.80 install where three bugs related to orbital habitats are shown. First, after pressing the thirty day increment the population on Earth has grown but there was no growth on any of the orbital habitats.
Second orbital habitats on planets with too high gravity do not work, they are shown as unsuitable (Southampton I colony).
Third large clusters of habitats have all population going to manufacturing. In Aurora DB habitats had no population in environment but they had the rest spread between civilian sector and manufacturing sector (75% and 25% I believe, once the cap was reached of course). This is shown on Venus colony. Interestingly Mercury doesn't have that problem.
Also while I realize this isn't a suggestions topic, if you fix those bugs can you also add an option for orbital habitat colonies to not have population growth/infrastructure spawning on planets? It's very problematic when developing planets like Venus as it makes population go to the planet and have insane requirements for life support/infrastructure.
Combat Assignments Overview tab - if you have a fire control for energy weapons selected and you use "assign all" option for missiles you can assign missiles to energy weapons. I do not know what happens if you try to use them. I also have no idea how to unassign them. (the one gauss cannon that doesn't have a missile assigned is probably damaged as I used the assign all order on a damaged vessel)
Task Groups tab - when moving using "show all pops" option Lagrange points are auto included only for the system the task group is currently in. As an example in this screenshot I'm moving a task group from Kleczanow to Katowice and the route is incredibly long because Lagrange points in the Slask system (where Katowice is located) are not automatically included.
(http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=12665.0;attach=6922;image)
In this screenshot I'm doing the opposite, moving task group from Katowice to Kleczanow. Lagrange points in the Slask system are automatically included and the route has normal length.
(http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=12665.0;attach=6924;image)
Technology report tab - in the missiles sub tab there is 'missiles in service" column. In Aurora DB it showed all the missiles (storage, ships, PDCs). In quasar it seems to be counting only the missiles that are on the ships and PDCs.
Energy weapons set to final defensive fire do not intercept missiles targeting the planet said energy weapons are orbiting. In Aurora DB they did (to be specific final defensive fire protected everything in the same spot as the weapon, irrespective of whether or not it was part of the task group). (This is 1.79 bug, did not try it again in 1.80 version)
It is possible to put missile launchers designed for PDCs (twice the reload rate) on ships.
Combat Assignments Overview tab - the clear fleet button clears all orders for all fleets for all races in all systems instead of only the selected fleet (very annoying when playing two sides of a conflict).
Maybe you can insert that check for LPs when a fleet enters a system. To address the problem of possibly adding time to the move because of changing positions of LPs you could check the amount of time saved by adding the LPs. If it is less than 20% time save or less than 1bkm skip the adding.
Version 182
When my exploration ship refuels at Earth, all of my maintenance supplies vanish. Conversely when the ship resupplies, all my fuel reserves vanish.
Im not sure which one is the save but ill attach the sqlite file. please correct me if i am wrong and i will upload the right file. Thanks!
A6M Reisen (VB6 7.0) class Fighter 295 tons 3 Crew 58.4 BP TCS 5.89 TH 48 EM 0
8149 km/s Armour 1-3 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 2.25
Maint Life 0 Years MSP 0 AFR 58% IFR 0.8% 1YR 3 5YR 50 Max Repair 12 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.2 months Spare Berths 0
Magazine 15
Nakajima Sakae Fighter Engine (2) Power 24 Fuel Use 336.02% Signature 24 Exp 20%
Fuel Capacity 10,000 Litres Range 1.8 billion km (62 hours at full power)
TSH Dragon-5B Missile Launch System (3) Missile Size 5 Hangar Reload 37.5 minutes MF Reload 6.2 hours
Nagumo Engineering FC-40 Missile Fire Control (1) Range 38.0m km Resolution 120
ASM-4 Comet Anti-ship Missile (3) Speed: 28,800 km/s End: 30.6m Range: 52.9m km WH: 9 Size: 5 TH: 96/57/28
Nagumo Engineering AS-10 Active Sensor (1) GPS 1008 Range 10.1m km Resolution 120A6M Reisen (Quasar 183) class Fighter 295 tons 3 Crew 84 BP TCS 5.9 TH 48 EM 0
8000 km/s Armor 1-3 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 2.25
Maint Life 0 Years MSP 0 AFR 58% IFR 0.8% 1YR 5 5YR 74 Max Repair 24 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.2 months Spare Berths 5
Magazine 15
Nakajima Sakae Fighter Engine (2) Power 24 Fuel Use 336.02% Signature 24 Exp 20%
Fuel Capacity 10 000 Liters Range 1.8 billion km (2 days at full power)
TSH Dragon-5B Missile Launch System (3) Missile Size 5 Rate of Fire 2250
Nagumo Engineering FC-40 Missile Fire Control (1) Range 38.0m km Resolution 120
ASM-4 Comet Anti-ship Missile (3) Speed: 28 799 km/s End: 30.62m Range: 52.9m km WH: 9 Size: 5 TH: 96/58/29
Nagumo Engineering AS-10 Active Sensor (1) GPS 1008 Range 10.1m km Resolution 120I've been playing and collecting bugs over the past several months intending to put them in one big post (I'm lazy like that). I'll start with the newest ones and move over to older ones, as I only have notes on them (don't necessarily remember the situations/don't have saves) and they may be from older versions of the game, although I should note I haven't seen them in the patch notes.
In aurora if a jump ship was at a jump point it acted as a jump gate for all relevant ships (smaller tonnage, type). What I mean by that is that if, for example, there was a 10kT military jump ship at a jump point I could order any warship 10kT or smaller to perform standard jump without having to put the ship in the same group, as if a jump gate was on the jump point. This worked from both sides of the jump point. In quasar ships need to be in the same group to make a jump which adds a lot of micromanagement.
In Aurora DB ship size for the purposes of a jump point transit was rounded up to nearest 50, the same as the ship size in tonnes. In quasar the exact ship size is used. For example I had an exploration ship massing 6600T and a destroyer massing 6600T but I was not able to jump. Turns out that the exact ship size of the exploration ship is 131.6 while the exact size of the destroyer is 131.9, which prevents the jump. In Aurora that would not have mattered.
When creating a new race, the gravity deviation claims to be percentage based however it is absolute. For example creating a species on a planet with gravity of 0.6 and deviation of 70% should result in gravity tolerance of 0.18 to 1.02 however it results in gravity tolerance of -0.1 to 1.3.
Reduced thermal signature doesn’t work. According to the ship design window it is lowered, however while playing two sides, the other side was able to detect full thermal signature as if the tech wasn’t applied.
Not sure if this is a bug, but it appears the game first applies last ditch point defense and then applies potential misses by missiles. I can’t be sure since I haven’t played Aurora in several years but I think the point defenses were engaging only missiles that were going to hit, ignoring those that were going to miss.
Extended orbit doesn’t appear to be working. The vessel treats this as “move to x distance from the object” instead of following the object at a given distance.
It is possible to start the game without scientists.
Order delay works as intended in case of normal orders, however if “cycle moves” is toggled on, it will only work the first time. The next time the orders are cycled there will be no delay. Adds a lot of micromanagement for fuel harvesting operations.
The above bugs were all observed on the newest version over the past few days. The bugs below were observed over the past several months.
I was salvaging wrecks (very large wrecks of ships which had hundreds of shield generators/box launchers each) and I’ve never seen more than five components of a given type salvaged from a single wreck but I’ve seen a lot of exactly five components recovered. Is it a bug or is it working as intended?
Secondary explosions do not show in the summary/tactical map if armor wasn’t breached. Not sure if it’s supposed to work like this.
It is possible to use damaged components in combat. The exact mechanics are as follows. You need two ships of the same class, let's call them A and B. B gets damaged, some weapons are no longer operational. You set up weapons for ship A and use "copy assign". The ship B can now use destroyed weapons.
I've got ruins on venusian planets in non-real stars. I think it happened exactly once.
Political stability doesn't appear to affect mining. It's always extracting the maximum possible amount, even when political stability modifier is 0.
New PDCs are being put into individual, new task groups rather than existing ones. I think it may have to do with there being two populations on the planet (genetic engineering was being performed).
If a ship has automated orders to survey both bodies and jump points it will move from bodies to jump points without regard for lagrange points. This makes surveying distant binaries very annoying. For example let us say we have a distant binary with lagrange points. If I send the ship to the secondary component, after performing geological survey it will then move through normal space towards the jump point survey until it runs out of fuel.
It seems like surveying bodies means surveying bodies withing 10 bln km of the central star rather than the ship itself. I'm pretty sure it was 10 bln kilometers from the ship in Aurora.
That's all the bugs I have right now. Thank you very much for your work.
Bug Report: Quasar seems to use rounded-up class size to calculate speed, when it should be using exact class size. Build cost for engines seems to be determined incorrectly
Example: I can reproduce the following design from Steve's VB6 Rigellian Campaign reboot (http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=7673.msg77927#msg77927). I don't know what version of VB6 Aurora the Rigellian campaign was written under, but based on the date I believe it was a fairly early of patch 7.0, so fairly current to the "final form" of VB6 Aurora:Code: [Select]A6M Reisen (VB6 7.0) class Fighter 295 tons 3 Crew 58.4 BP TCS 5.89 TH 48 EM 0
8149 km/s Armour 1-3 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 2.25
Maint Life 0 Years MSP 0 AFR 58% IFR 0.8% 1YR 3 5YR 50 Max Repair 12 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.2 months Spare Berths 0
Magazine 15
Nakajima Sakae Fighter Engine (2) Power 24 Fuel Use 336.02% Signature 24 Exp 20%
Fuel Capacity 10,000 Litres Range 1.8 billion km (62 hours at full power)
TSH Dragon-5B Missile Launch System (3) Missile Size 5 Hangar Reload 37.5 minutes MF Reload 6.2 hours
Nagumo Engineering FC-40 Missile Fire Control (1) Range 38.0m km Resolution 120
ASM-4 Comet Anti-ship Missile (3) Speed: 28,800 km/s End: 30.6m Range: 52.9m km WH: 9 Size: 5 TH: 96/57/28
Nagumo Engineering AS-10 Active Sensor (1) GPS 1008 Range 10.1m km Resolution 120
Here is the design in the Quasar Class Design window. Aside from display rounding differences the design is identical - with the notable exceptions of the build cost, 84 BP in Quasar versus 58.4 in VB6, and the speed, 8000 km/s in Quasar versus 8149 km/s in VB6 7.0.Code: [Select]A6M Reisen (Quasar 183) class Fighter 295 tons 3 Crew 84 BP TCS 5.9 TH 48 EM 0
8000 km/s Armor 1-3 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 2.25
Maint Life 0 Years MSP 0 AFR 58% IFR 0.8% 1YR 5 5YR 74 Max Repair 24 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.2 months Spare Berths 5
Magazine 15
Nakajima Sakae Fighter Engine (2) Power 24 Fuel Use 336.02% Signature 24 Exp 20%
Fuel Capacity 10 000 Liters Range 1.8 billion km (2 days at full power)
TSH Dragon-5B Missile Launch System (3) Missile Size 5 Rate of Fire 2250
Nagumo Engineering FC-40 Missile Fire Control (1) Range 38.0m km Resolution 120
ASM-4 Comet Anti-ship Missile (3) Speed: 28 799 km/s End: 30.62m Range: 52.9m km WH: 9 Size: 5 TH: 96/58/29
Nagumo Engineering AS-10 Active Sensor (1) GPS 1008 Range 10.1m km Resolution 120
Usually the speed bug is not too noticeable as most ship designs aim for a round HS number, and the impact for large warships is almost unnoticeable. However, I have run into this bug when I design, e.g., a 250-ton scout fighter which is exactly size-5, and for some reason in the game code this is rounded up to size-6 for the speed calculation - a very noticeable 20% difference in speed between the Quasar class and the intended design! I have reproduced this bug using Steve's design to prove that this is an inconsistency between Quasar and VB6 which should be corrected.
The BP difference is attributable mostly to an engine cost bug which appears to be because the cost is multiplied by the EP modifier (2.0x) when this should only be the case when the EP modifier is lower than 1.0x - this is the case in C# and I cannot find any evidence that things were any different in VB6. This explains 24 BP of the 25.4 BP difference, I am unsure what factor accounts for the remaining difference.
I also note that there is some inconsistency in the display (Quasar appears to round more aggressively than VB6), a small inconsistency in the missile speed likely due to rounding, and that the box launcher is displayed with a rate of fire as if it was a larger, reloadable launcher type
Hi, if any of these are still bothering you can you please set up some example save files for me to look at.
In aurora if a jump ship was at a jump point it acted as a jump gate for all relevant ships (smaller tonnage, type). What I mean by that is that if, for example, there was a 10kT military jump ship at a jump point I could order any warship 10kT or smaller to perform standard jump without having to put the ship in the same group, as if a jump gate was on the jump point. This worked from both sides of the jump point. In quasar ships need to be in the same group to make a jump which adds a lot of micromanagement.
In Aurora DB ship size for the purposes of a jump point transit was rounded up to nearest 50, the same as the ship size in tonnes. In quasar the exact ship size is used. For example I had an exploration ship massing 6600T and a destroyer massing 6600T but I was not able to jump. Turns out that the exact ship size of the exploration ship is 131.6 while the exact size of the destroyer is 131.9, which prevents the jump. In Aurora that would not have mattered.
When creating a new race, the gravity deviation claims to be percentage based however it is absolute. For example creating a species on a planet with gravity of 0.6 and deviation of 70% should result in gravity tolerance of 0.18 to 1.02 however it results in gravity tolerance of -0.1 to 1.3.
Reduced thermal signature doesn’t work. According to the ship design window it is lowered, however while playing two sides, the other side was able to detect full thermal signature as if the tech wasn’t applied.
Not sure if this is a bug, but it appears the game first applies last ditch point defense and then applies potential misses by missiles. I can’t be sure since I haven’t played Aurora in several years but I think the point defenses were engaging only missiles that were going to hit, ignoring those that were going to miss.
Extended orbit doesn’t appear to be working. The vessel treats this as “move to x distance from the object” instead of following the object at a given distance.
It is possible to start the game without scientists.
Order delay works as intended in case of normal orders, however if “cycle moves” is toggled on, it will only work the first time. The next time the orders are cycled there will be no delay. Adds a lot of micromanagement for fuel harvesting operations.
I was salvaging wrecks (very large wrecks of ships which had hundreds of shield generators/box launchers each) and I’ve never seen more than five components of a given type salvaged from a single wreck but I’ve seen a lot of exactly five components recovered. Is it a bug or is it working as intended?
Secondary explosions do not show in the summary/tactical map if armor wasn’t breached. Not sure if it’s supposed to work like this.
It is possible to use damaged components in combat. The exact mechanics are as follows. You need two ships of the same class, let's call them A and B. B gets damaged, some weapons are no longer operational. You set up weapons for ship A and use "copy assign". The ship B can now use destroyed weapons.
I've got ruins on venusian planets in non-real stars. I think it happened exactly once.
Political stability doesn't appear to affect mining. It's always extracting the maximum possible amount, even when political stability modifier is 0.
New PDCs are being put into individual, new task groups rather than existing ones. I think it may have to do with there being two populations on the planet (genetic engineering was being performed).
If a ship has automated orders to survey both bodies and jump points it will move from bodies to jump points without regard for lagrange points. This makes surveying distant binaries very annoying. For example let us say we have a distant binary with lagrange points. If I send the ship to the secondary component, after performing geological survey it will then move through normal space towards the jump point survey until it runs out of fuel.
It seems like surveying bodies means surveying bodies withing 10 bln km of the central star rather than the ship itself. I'm pretty sure it was 10 bln kilometers from the ship in Aurora.
I had a ship that had exclusively size 1 magazines with 16 capacity and was armed either with anti-missiles or size 1 missiles with warhead strength 3. I would imagine such a magazine would have maximum explosion size of 48. The ship suffered magazine explosion strength 1200. I don't know how Aurora was calculating magazine damage, but even if something like that was possible there I would still be grateful if this could be corrected.