Official v5.42 Bugs Thread

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

Right now I'm fighting some orbital habitats I think, and when ever I hit them, and apperantly causing internal damage I an an Error in ApplyInternalDamage
Error 6
Overflow

Here is the file if you want to take a look:

hxxp: www. filedropper. com/stevefire

Is it one of the huge 25m ton habitats you are fighting?

Steve

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

I think I'm on 5.20 but I'm sure you can still do this in later versions.  You can use a negative number of research labs for your research job, and it increases the number of available labs by the negative number - so if I start a job with -20 labs, I now have an extra 20 labs.  The time to completion is marked as N/A, and I didn't check to see what happened when time advanced.  I was doing it as an experiment.

Fixed for v5.50

Steve

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

Someone pointed out in The Academy that Maintenance Storage Bays cost no minerals, even though their build cost is 15.  I noticed that Command Modules cost 3 minerals, even though their build cost is 2.5.  My understanding is that build cost == mineral cost on a 1-for-1 basis, hence this bug report.

John

PS - Have you thought about writing a little DB validation tool that would run over the DB and make self-consistency checks on things like this?  That would be the way to catch all of these....

Minerals fixed. Yes, some type of validation tool would be a good idea.

Steve

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

I have a simple one Steve
Gleise 542

Should be Gliese 542

Fixed, along with the other fourteen systems with the same spelling mistake

Steve

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

Error 381

Built ship with 2x size8 missile launchers and a missile fire control FC15-R100
Stocked magazine with size8 missiles
Individual ship settings > combat settings, select missile fire control FC15-R100 then select both size8 launchers, click "assign" generates error 381 twice, every single time.

Just to make sure, check you are pressing the assign button below the weapon list and not the assign button below the target list.

Steve

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

I have read in a couple of places on this forum that the Low Tech Infantry and Armour units were supposed to be pre-TN and the other units were supposed to be post TN; however, even on a conventional start, I can build every unit type before I even research Trans-Newtonian Technology.

Shouldn't most of the ground units have a Trans-Newtonian Technology prerequisite?

Yes, they probably should. It's just something I haven't added yet. I'll get back to you on this one.

EDIT: Ground units now need to be researched in v5.50. See the v5.50 Changes post for more details

Steve

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

The bug he might be referring to is the big jump from 30 to 40.   I've never seen a 10% jump, only a 5% jump.

You can have a 10% jump

Steve

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

So, I'm now getting one I haven't seen before.  From the short interrupts I assume it's two NPRs fighting. I got these in a big bunch, several dozen errors, I just held Enter until they stopped popping up.  Then several intervals later (about 60s) I'm getting them again.

Error in ApplyShapedDamage
Error 6 was generated by Aurora
Overflow.

I think this may be related to Invaders and I think I have fixed it. We'll find out in v5.50

Steve

[sloanjh]

Fixed, along with the other fourteen systems with the same spelling mistake

Steve

I think I forgot to log: "Cincinatti should be Cincinnati".  And when I tried to fix the name on my system with a rename, the next system I explored picked up the old, incorrect name (since it was unused ).

John

[Father Tim]

I think I forgot to log: "Cincinatti should be Cincinnati".  And when I tried to fix the name on my system with a rename, the next system I explored picked up the old, incorrect name (since it was unused ).

John

This is actually one of my biggest pet peeves:  If you rename a theme-named system (to fix a spelling mistake, or simply because you don't like the name), then the next auto-named system gets the 'rejected' name.  So if there's a name you really don't like, you have to abandon your theme entirely to avoid it.  I'd much prefer if Aurora kept track of names I've rejected in this way, or even just picked names at random from the theme instead of sequentially.

[jRides]

As father Tim says, with the rejected name thing - there are a few Names (ship names) that should be two lines but the linebreak is missing so there are ships with names like:

"AkagiAldara", "AtlasAurora", "BalbaoBayta", "BeagleBelak", "GalorGalaxy", "HawkingHera" and "HoodHoratio" in the Trek Ships theme. Luckily with shipnames you can choose the name as you build. Strangley though, I have a weird bug with the Hood; (it was the HoodHoratio but i renamed it after it was built), every line of text that mentions that ship adds a linebreak after its name. Odd but hardly gamebreaking.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

As father Tim says, with the rejected name thing - there are a few Names (ship names) that should be two lines but the linebreak is missing so there are ships with names like:

"AkagiAldara", "AtlasAurora", "BalbaoBayta", "BeagleBelak", "GalorGalaxy", "HawkingHera" and "HoodHoratio" in the Trek Ships theme. Luckily with shipnames you can choose the name as you build. Strangley though, I have a weird bug with the Hood; (it was the HoodHoratio but i renamed it after it was built), every line of text that mentions that ship adds a linebreak after its name. Odd but hardly gamebreaking.

Fixed all of the above

Steve

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

I think I forgot to log: "Cincinatti should be Cincinnati".  And when I tried to fix the name on my system with a rename, the next system I explored picked up the old, incorrect name (since it was unused ).

John

Fixed for v5.50

Steve

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

Finally found the bug that causes an alien race to view your freighters as intruding on their space, even when a trade treaty is in effect. The problem was that the treaty status was being checked the wrong way around. Instead of checking if the alien race had granted a trade treaty, the program was checking if you had granted the alien race a trade treaty. The bug won't happen in the case of reciprocal treaties. Only if the alien race has granted a trade treaty and you haven't.

Fixed for v5.50

Steve

[sloanjh]

Finally found the bug that causes an alien race to view your freighters as intruding on their space, even when a trade treaty is in effect. The problem was that the treaty status was being checked the wrong way around. Instead of checking if the alien race had granted a trade treaty, the program was checking if you had granted the alien race a trade treaty. The bug won't happen in the case of reciprocal treaties. Only if the alien race has granted a trade treaty and you haven't.

Fixed for v5.50

Steve

YEAH!!!!  So does that mean there's an easy workaround - SM your relation with them up to 100 and grant them trade access?
(And remember how many points you added so they can be subtracted later when the relationship is strong enough.)

John