Author Topic: Official v5.40 Bugs Thread  (Read 12067 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Peter Rhodan

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • P
  • Posts: 117
Re: Official v5.40 Bugs Thread
« Reply #60 on: March 14, 2011, 04:12:19 AM »
I am getting that same cut off window thing that I reported elsewhere and some others have reported here (incl attached screen shot jpg which is exactly my problem too)
I am running 64 bit 7 if that is any help
On the other hand - when I use resizenable now most windows retain their layout and I can fiddle and get access to all the buttons at the bottom except the ship design one....
my screen resolution is 1366 by 768 -
 

Offline Steve Walmsley (OP)

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20350 times
Re: Official v5.40 Bugs Thread
« Reply #61 on: March 14, 2011, 04:14:54 AM »
I am getting that same cut off window thing that I reported elsewhere and some others have reported here (incl attached screen shot jpg which is exactly my problem too)
I am running 64 bit 7 if that is any help
On the other hand - when I use resizenable now most windows retain their layout and I can fiddle and get access to all the buttons at the bottom except the ship design one....
my screen resolution is 1366 by 768 -

I think I have figured it out and I will be posting a patch later today. Please let me know if it fixes the problem.

Steve
 

Offline Steve Walmsley (OP)

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20350 times
Re: Official v5.40 Bugs Thread
« Reply #62 on: March 14, 2011, 04:16:26 AM »
The good news: The 5.4 problems many others were having seem to be the same as the 5.3 problems I and a few others had, and seem to be fixed.

The bad news:  I just created a new conventional start game, then tried to delete the existing game "The Space Race" (as I always do).  I got an "Error 3052 was generated by DAO.Recordset.  File sharing lock count exceeded.  Increase MaxLocksPerFile registry entry." in cmdDeleteGame.  I checked the registry, and the value (in Jet) was 9500, so I didn't think bumping it up a little would do any good.  I've never seen this error before - is it possible that this is due to a weird resource leak?

John

No idea what is causing it but I recreated it then fixed it by using the suggestion on this Microsoft help page:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/815281

Upping the MaxLocksPerFile in code to 15,000 sorted it out.

Steve
 

Offline Steve Walmsley (OP)

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20350 times
Re: Official v5.40 Bugs Thread
« Reply #63 on: March 14, 2011, 04:42:46 AM »
2)  Captain Glover is the commander of Missile Complex 011, but Missile Complex 011 doesn't know it has a commander!  In other words, I've hit the weird auto-assign bug again.

AHA!!!!  I found it!!!!!  I've got 3 missile bases which show up as "holes" in the potential assignments block (available) and all 3 of which have officers who think they command them.  And all 3 officers' previous assignment was as a staff officer.  So there's almost certianly something in the auto-assign code that is messing up the backpointer from the new assignment to the officer when the officer is given a command.

John

Well spotted!

Commanders have a command type, such as 1 for ships, 5 for ground units, or 6 for staff officers, etc. Staff officers also have a separate staff position ID. It appears that when an officer is auto-assigned to a non-staff command, his staff position ID is not being set to zero. There are If functions in the code, such as in the ShowCommands function which lists all current commands, that check StaffPositionID before checking CommandTypeID. Also, the CheckIfCommandAssigned function, that checks for existing commanders for ships, etc. listed as potential assignments on the F4 window, looks for an officer with the correct CommandID and CommandTypeID but also for a StaffPositionID set to zero for non-staff officer commands.

Steve
« Last Edit: March 14, 2011, 04:50:45 AM by Steve Walmsley »
 

Offline Steve Walmsley (OP)

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20350 times
Re: Official v5.40 Bugs Thread
« Reply #64 on: March 14, 2011, 04:50:18 AM »
1)  There seems to be something screwy with the order of events in the Officer history field (i.e. the date sorting doesn't seem to be working, assuming it's not a big text field).  Here's the history for Captain Charlie Glover, who was commisioned 4 years before the start date (i.e. he was an initial officer):

1st January 2100: Promoted to Lieutenant Commander
6th January 2103: Relieved from Intelligence Officer - Fleet Headquarters. Awaiting new orders on Earth
1st January 2100: Assigned to Intelligence - Fleet Headquarters
6th January 2103: Assigned to Missile Complex 011 (Crew Training 50)

This seems to be common through most of my officers.

It appears I never bothered with an order clause in the SQL that retrieves officer history :). It's amazing it wasn't a worse problem.

Steve
 

Offline Steve Walmsley (OP)

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20350 times
Re: Official v5.40 Bugs Thread
« Reply #65 on: March 14, 2011, 04:52:41 AM »
Just had some NPRs get into a fight and now I keep getting spammed by.

Error in ApplyInternalDamage
Error 6 was generated by Aurora
Overflow

Do you still have this problem and if so could you send me the database file? This is one of those bugs that is difficult to recreate manually.

Steve
 

Offline Steve Walmsley (OP)

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20350 times
Re: Official v5.40 Bugs Thread
« Reply #66 on: March 14, 2011, 05:01:30 AM »
The reason that I was trying to delete the old game was that I just ran into the same "can't find research projects that should be there" problem that someone else reported a while back.

I'm about 7 years into a conventional start game, and I realized I couldn't see projects like the next research or construction level anywhere (neither current, nor queued, nor available).  Finally, I started cancelling researchers' projects 1-by-1, and discovered that the missing projects reappeared as projects were deleted.

[long pause while poking around in DB]

Ok - I'm pretty sure I know what's going on.  I've got a researcher "Eve Richards" who's working on 12cm lasers.  When I cancel the project, Fuel Production 24,000 magically reappears.  Here's the interesting fact:  Eve Richards' project ID (which is the key for the ResearchProject table) is #669.  The TechSystemID (key in the TechSystem table) for Fuel Prod 24,000 is #669.  Hmmmm seems like a coincidence :-)  It looks like the query that displays the available research projects is somehow confusing the project ID with the TechSystemID.

Another well spotted! Here is the SQL for the available research list:

sSQL = "select * from TechSystem t, TechType tt where t.RuinOnly = False and t.TechSystemID NOT IN"
sSQL = sSQL & " (select TechID from RaceTech where RaceID = " & cboRace.ItemData(cboRace.ListIndex) & ")"
sSQL = sSQL & " and (Prerequisite1 = 0 or Prerequisite1 IN "
sSQL = sSQL & " (select TechID from RaceTech where RaceID = " & cboRace.ItemData(cboRace.ListIndex) & "))"
sSQL = sSQL & " and (Prerequisite2 = 0 or Prerequisite2 IN "
sSQL = sSQL & " (select TechID from RaceTech where RaceID = " & cboRace.ItemData(cboRace.ListIndex) & "))"
sSQL = sSQL & " and TechSystemID NOT IN "
sSQL = sSQL & " (select ProjectID from ResearchProject where RaceID = " & cboRace.ItemData(cboRace.ListIndex) & ")"
sSQL = sSQL & " and TechSystemID NOT IN "
sSQL = sSQL & " (select TechSystemID from ResearchQueue where PopulationID = " & ActivePopID & ")"
sSQL = sSQL & " and TechSystemID NOT IN "
sSQL = sSQL & " (select TechID from ResearchProject where PopulationID = " & ActivePopID & ")"
sSQL = sSQL & " and tt.TechTypeID = t.TechTypeID and tt.FieldID = " & cboCategory.ItemData(cboCategory.ListIndex)
sSQL = sSQL & " and (RaceID = 0 or RaceID = " & cboRace.ItemData(cboRace.ListIndex) & ") order by Name"

As you can see, the "select ProjectID from ResearchProject" should be "select TechID from ResearchProject" and the "select TechID from ResearchProject where PopulationID = " & ActivePopID & ")" line is not actually needed as it is now a subset of the corrected line. Also a preceding "ActiveRaceID = cboRace.ItemData(cboRace.ListIndex)" and a quick replace might be more readable :)

Steve
« Last Edit: March 14, 2011, 05:05:36 AM by Steve Walmsley »
 

Offline Steve Walmsley (OP)

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20350 times
Re: Official v5.40 Bugs Thread
« Reply #67 on: March 14, 2011, 05:08:18 AM »
Started a new game.    Tried to change the empire name after gamestart, from the F2 industry screen I realized i could type it in there. 

Then I loaded up my construction orders, and these errors are popping up.    The orders still go through.   

Error in cmdStartProduction_click
Error 381 was generated by Aurora
Invalid property array index

Changed name back, left window, opened it up again, and it was normal.

I've changed the F2 Race field from a dropdown combo to a dropdown list so you can't type in it. As soon as you started typing, the ID of the current race was lost which caused the subsequent errors. If you need to change the race name, open up the Race window from the main menu bar (Ctrl-F2)

Steve
 

Offline dooots

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • d
  • Posts: 129
Re: Official v5.40 Bugs Thread
« Reply #68 on: March 14, 2011, 07:49:23 AM »
Do you still have this problem and if so could you send me the database file? This is one of those bugs that is difficult to recreate manually.

Steve

Yep email sent.
 

Offline Gyrfalcon

  • Bug Moderators
  • Commander
  • ***
  • G
  • Posts: 331
  • Thanked: 199 times
Fighter Maintanence
« Reply #69 on: May 27, 2011, 02:57:53 AM »
In my current campaign, I went ahead and created a couple of squadrons of fighters before their carriers and ground bases were ready, only to find out that despite maintenance facilities for 14,000t carriers, no one had any idea how to maintain a fighter.  Attempting to assign the group to overhaul did no good either, as the fighters sat there for a year in overhaul mode with no effect.  It doesn't seem logical that fighters hanging out in planetary orbit are subjected to the maintenance clock where the destroyers sitting next to them are not.   
 

Offline Charlie Beeler

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1381
  • Thanked: 3 times
Re: Fighter Maintanence
« Reply #70 on: May 27, 2011, 08:01:11 AM »
In my current campaign, I went ahead and created a couple of squadrons of fighters before their carriers and ground bases were ready, only to find out that despite maintenance facilities for 14,000t carriers, no one had any idea how to maintain a fighter.  Attempting to assign the group to overhaul did no good either, as the fighters sat there for a year in overhaul mode with no effect.  It doesn't seem logical that fighters hanging out in planetary orbit are subjected to the maintenance clock where the destroyers sitting next to them are not.   

This is not a bug, it's working as intended.  Fighters used to be able to loiter around a planet with maintenance installations the same as all other military ships.  This was changed (v5.0?) too fighters only stop maintenance clocks only when in a hanger.
Amateurs study tactics, Professionals study logistics - paraphrase attributed to Gen Omar Bradley
 

Offline Brian Neumann

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1214
  • Thanked: 3 times
Re: Fighter Maintanence
« Reply #71 on: May 27, 2011, 10:13:30 AM »
In my current campaign, I went ahead and created a couple of squadrons of fighters before their carriers and ground bases were ready, only to find out that despite maintenance facilities for 14,000t carriers, no one had any idea how to maintain a fighter.  Attempting to assign the group to overhaul did no good either, as the fighters sat there for a year in overhaul mode with no effect.  It doesn't seem logical that fighters hanging out in planetary orbit are subjected to the maintenance clock where the destroyers sitting next to them are not.   
The difference is that a full sized ship has built in maintanence to work with.  A fighter needs someone elses facilities to be worked on.  After all it doesn't come with any major repair capabilities of its own, even if it does have a little maintenance to work with.  This was why the change was made.

Brian