Official v5.42 Bugs Thread

[creodor]

That makes sense, except, is there a way or button to disable it if it's a toggle? Doesn't matter very much, I'm on a different game since that one was eaten by the 1 minute increment because an AI is in range but not shooting bug (I waited for around an hour for it to clear up).  I'm just curious.

[Beersatron]

Steve wrote the auto FC code for the AI which has simpler ship designs, he then enabled it for plYers to help with tedium but I think making it smarter is on his to-do list!

[jseah]

From this thread -> http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php/topic,3416.0.html

Essentially, when the difference between staying above water or sinking into debt depends on which timestep you use for auto-turns, there might be a problem. 

Could be due to the way I try to balance my economy to ±0 that the problem shows up.  It would be seriously weird to have to trade-off OOC convenience with in-game efficiency.  (I can imagine being tempted to run the game at 1 hour timesteps if you have enough spaceports on two moons in the same moon system that have a massive 1k CF civilian contract between them...
Which *might* just happen later in my game when I decide to split my construction base.  )
Mostly, it's just slightly irritating that stuff doesn't work the same way in 8 hour chunks and 24 hour chunks. 

[Shadow]

Well, it seems you're using a rather awkward construction cycle figure. Maybe that's somehow throwing off the standard calculations? Why are you using it in the first place? Calculating everything that's normally determined once every five days everyday instead is going to make your game a lot slower. Especially once you're a few decades into it.

[jseah]

It would happen anyway. 

If I click 5 days as a time step instead of 1 day, civilians would take 5 days to go from "move to Nilosia Trade Location" to "load trade goods Nilosia". 
In fact, if I click 5 days, right now, where the construction cycle time is 1 day, the civilians will take 5 days to do their thing.  Which does mean my lack of infrastructure on my homeworld disappears because my civilians transport ~3 times less infrastructure. 

My economy also dies. 


I also just like a 1 day construction cycle time.  I find it meshes very well with my transports and colony ships since I stick on enough cargo handling systems to finish load/unload in 1 day + 1 hour. (which drops to <1 day with space ports)
EDIT: also because I tend to use civilian contracts alot.  By third or fourth year, I usually move something like 10 facilities per day on average.  (not this particular game because I'm trying out a new strategy)

[sloanjh]

If I click 5 days as a time step instead of 1 day, civilians would take 5 days to go from "move to Nilosia Trade Location" to "load trade goods Nilosia". 
In fact, if I click 5 days, right now, where the construction cycle time is 1 day, the civilians will take 5 days to do their thing.  Which does mean my lack of infrastructure on my homeworld disappears because my civilians transport ~3 times less infrastructure.  *SNIP*

A small point: If you have a 1-day construction cycle set up and click for and achieve 5-day time advance, you will evaluate a single 5 day cycle.  The way that it works is that Aurora looks for the time since the last update; if that's greater than the cycle time then it will do a construction cycle for the total elapsed time since the last update, not the cycle time you've chosen.  So construction updates can't be "broken" by taking longer timesteps than the requested construction cycle.

John

PS - Everyone: it seems like we're getting some thread drift into discussions/questions in this "Official 4.2 Bugs" thread.  Please remember that this thread is the one that Steve uses as a database for the bugs he needs to fix - it's in our best interest to keep the signal to noise for actual bug posts high.  If you want to ask questions or discuss things (like I'm doing in this post ), please consider opening a new thread in The Academy or Aurora Chat.  Thanks!

[Shadow]

Both Colony Ship and Strike Cruiser classes share the same designation (CS). Would be nice to have a special window to edit existing class names and designations at least.

[tbro]

After trying to locate a vessel using the 'center map on fleet' check box in the Task Group window I got the following error msg 'Error in CenterOnLocation' 'Error 6 was generated by Aurora' 'Overflow' 'Please report to. . . '

Thereafter any time I moved the screen when in the Sol system or used the drop down menu to go to the Sol system on the System map window, I got the same error msg.  All other system maps work fine.  Using either the 'center on fleet' check box for fleets ourtside Sol or the system map drop down to go to systems other than sol is no problem.  I'm just shut out of Sol.  Restarts don't fix the problem.  Any ideas?

[Beersatron]

After trying to locate a vessel using the 'center map on fleet' check box in the Task Group window I got the following error msg 'Error in CenterOnLocation' 'Error 6 was generated by Aurora' 'Overflow' 'Please report to. . . '

Thereafter any time I moved the screen when in the Sol system or used the drop down menu to go to the Sol system on the System map window, I got the same error msg.  All other system maps work fine.  Using either the 'center on fleet' check box for fleets ourtside Sol or the system map drop down to go to systems other than sol is no problem.  I'm just shut out of Sol.  Restarts don't fix the problem.  Any ideas?

After you click OK on the error try and click on the zoom out or zoom in buttons (or even a reset zoom level button if there is one?).

[sloanjh]

When pressing on a leader in the leaders list on the very right of the leaders window:

Error in grdSorted_SelChange

Error 30009 was generated by MSFlexGrid
Invalid Row Value

Ok, I think I've isolated the exact condition.  It happens to the 1st of any rank, e.g. 1st Commander Charlie Hussain.  First click on anyone of a different rank, then click on the 1st guy and the error pops up.  All clicks are in the "Search by Ability or Location" panel.  I assume that the code that draws the "Seniority of Officers by Selected Rank" panel (left hand side) is what's triggering the bug.

John

[Ziusudra]

I don't get the error for the Commander, but for the other ranks that is when it happens.

[Brian Neumann]

On the reduced hight window for events (cntl F3) if you want to filter events, you loose all the buttons on the bottom.  I think the filter events screen is still set for full hight.

Brian

[sloanjh]

The Ordnance Management tab on the F6 (units) screen is broken when you've got multiple populations on the same planet.  I had ships in orbit of Earth trying to use the "Population" fast reload button (or even the slow reload dialogue).  Some of my ships were appear to have been using Earth as the population, while others were using Bizarro Earth (oops - I mean Lunie Earth).  I tried setting their location to "Capital", but that didn't fix it.

The real kicker was that the Population pulldown (for doing slow reload) doesn't give an option of choosing between Human Earth and Lunie Earth - this is the part that's definitely broken - I couldn't find a way for a ship which thought it was a Lunie Earth to talk to the Human Earth's stockpiles.  I worked around the issue, btw, using the ammo transfer window to move missiles between colonies through intermediary ships which were talking to different stockpiles.

John

[sloanjh]

There's something very strange going on in the design window for active sensors with sub-20 resolution - the "Range vs. 1000 ton object" entry is larger than the "Maximum Range vs. (50xResolution) ton object" entry.  All the numbers in the examples are use Active strength 21, EM sensitivity 11, and sensor size 1 for search sensors.  This does not match my recollection of the formula - the range is supposed to simply be multiplied by min(1,size/res)^2.

Example 1:  Res=20.  Max Range vs. 1000 ton = 10.33 MKm,   Range vs. 1000 ton = 10.33 MKm, Range vs. 250 ton = 645.625 KKm.  (this is correct)
Example 2:  Res=10.  Max Range vs.  500 ton =   7.3   MKm,   Range vs. 1000 ton = 29.2  MKm, Range vs. 250 ton =  1.825 MKm. (1st  and 3rd correct, 2nd 4x too big)
Example 3:  Res= 2.   Max Range vs.  100 ton =   3.26 MKm,   Range vs. 1000 ton = 326  MKm, Range vs. 250 ton = 20.375 MKm. (1st correct, 2nd 10^4x too big, 3rd 6.25 too big)
Example 4:  Res= 1.   Max Range vs.   50 ton =    2.31 MKm,   Range vs. size 6 Missile = 251.559 KKm, vs. size 8 = 369.6 KKm, vs. size 12 = 831.6 KKm.

So it looks like for ships it's incorrectly applying (size/res)^2 when the resolution is smaller than the size.  I hope/assume this is due to coding the formula up separately for this window (rather than referring to the actual code from the sensor routine).  For missiles (res 1) I have no clue what's going on.  According to the previous pattern, none of the missile sizes should be affected, since they're all smaller than 1 HS.  My recollection is that a missile size point is 1/20 a HS, so I would expect the range for size 6 to be (6/20)^2*2.31 MKm =  2.079 MKm.  Instead, it's (33/100)^2*2.31, i.e. 10% too big (I just checked - this is NOT due to sensitivity of 11).  Looking at the numbers some more, size 8 and size 12 look correct; it's just size 6 that is too big by a factor of (1.1)^2.  Weird

John

[tbro]

Thanks Beersatron.  That worked.  I've also found I seem to be able to avoid it happening in the first place by not minimizing the system map.  I was minimizing it to avoid the flashing when it updated.