Author Topic: Bug Reports (Version 138 and up)  (Read 43959 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TMaekler

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1112
  • Thanked: 298 times
Re: Bug Reports (Version 138 and up)
« Reply #180 on: November 01, 2021, 03:54:01 AM »
I think the game should give you a message log that shields are loading... if not, the function/button does not work.
 

Offline alex_brunius

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1240
  • Thanked: 153 times
Re: Bug Reports (Version 138 and up)
« Reply #181 on: November 01, 2021, 05:36:38 AM »
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.
 

Offline alex_brunius

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1240
  • Thanked: 153 times
Re: Bug Reports (Version 138 and up)
« Reply #182 on: November 11, 2021, 03:11:07 PM »
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:

 

Offline Haji

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 442
  • Thanked: 53 times
Re: Bug Reports (Version 138 and up)
« Reply #183 on: November 21, 2021, 09:34:16 AM »
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.

Thank you for your time.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2021, 09:36:57 AM by Haji »
 

Offline Kyle (OP)

  • Moderator
  • Captain
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 472
  • Thanked: 973 times
  • Quasar4x dev
Re: Bug Reports (Version 138 and up)
« Reply #184 on: December 07, 2021, 11:07:42 PM »
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 ::)

Fixed


- 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 ).

Send me an Aurora VB6 save file with this scenario set up in SM mode if you want me to take a look at this.


- When launching a Fighter Squadron from F7 it's not converted into a separate fleet.

Fixed


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.

Fixed for Overhaul conditional orders.  Let me know if this happens with any other types.


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"

Yes, it sounds like the exact issue that was fixed on Sep 29


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.

In the Combat (F8) window, raising or lowering shields while a fleet was selected wasn't doing anything -- this is now fixed.  I have not been able to reproduce any strangeness in shield recharging.  It seems to be working correctly and reliably.


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:

Fixed


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.

It doesn't have to be your live save file.  It would save me just as much time if you set up a scenario that exhibits the bug reported using SM. 

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.

Fixed


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.

Fixed.  It was indeed the shields.


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.

I was not able to reproduce this, either with regular missile fire and anti-missile PD fire.


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.

Fixed


Civilian mining operations do not come with a mass driver. They did in Aurora.

I'm pretty sure they come with Sensors in Aurora, not Mass Drivers.


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.

Fixed


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.

Fixed


The order "unload ordnance to colony" deletes the ordnance unless the vessel has the "collier" tag.

Fixed


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.

Could not reproduce


Individual unit details – manual reloading from colliers (double click on missiles) isn’t working.

Fixed


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.

This is intentional to allow for more story possibilities.  Press Destroy Ship afterwards to replicate the original effect of Abandon Ship.


If you stop ship construction, the class design> ships in class window will still show the vessel as under construction.

Could not reproduce.  If by "Stop" you meant "Pause" then yes it will remain on the list.


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.

Could not reproduce this, OH population grew normally.  Note that, as far as the database is concerned there is no such thing as population "on" an orbital habitat, it still uses the same Population field that ground population does.  OH simply increases the capacity of ground population that requires no infrastructure to operate.  I'm not sure how non-zero growth was showing if there was no ground population.



Version 180 is available now containing the fixes noted above.

 
The following users thanked this post: Haji

Offline xenoscepter

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1154
  • Thanked: 317 times
Re: Bug Reports (Version 138 and up)
« Reply #185 on: December 07, 2021, 11:20:54 PM »
 --- CMCs did indeed come with Mass Drivers in VB6.
 

Offline Haji

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 442
  • Thanked: 53 times
Re: Bug Reports (Version 138 and up)
« Reply #186 on: December 08, 2021, 04:16:57 AM »
--- 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). This does not happen for habitats orbiting planets with too low gravity (Ceres 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. It may have to do with newly spawned planetary infrastructure, but that's just conjecture on my part.

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.

And now for the new bugs.

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.



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.



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).

Thank you for your time.

« Last Edit: December 08, 2021, 04:23:25 AM by Haji »
 
The following users thanked this post: Kyle

Offline Kyle (OP)

  • Moderator
  • Captain
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 472
  • Thanked: 973 times
  • Quasar4x dev
Re: Bug Reports (Version 138 and up)
« Reply #187 on: December 09, 2021, 09:25:41 PM »
--- 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.

This missing feature has been added.  I checked the wiki and verified in VB6 this is how it works:  Civ Mining Colonies have a built-in mass driver with infinite capacity for purchased civ minerals.  This mass driver will only ship minerals as they are mined.  Existing minerals in stockpiles need to be transported with traditional methods.


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.

Fixed


Second orbital habitats on planets with too high gravity do not work, they are shown as unsuitable (Southampton I colony).

Fixed


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.

The population distribution displayed in VB6 is actually bugged.  I set up your Venus scenario in VB6.  In VB6, Venus with 200m orbital capacity and 100m population shows about 56% of the population as serving in the service sector.  However, when you advance 5 days, all industrial activity proceeds as if 100% of the population were in the Industrial sector.  I verified this by adding 80 research labs and checking how much research was done in 5 day intervals.

So, for better or worse, Quasar uses the formula VB6 uses during the production cycle rather than the values VB6 displays in the UI.


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.

This would be a mechanics change, so for now I'm not going to change it.  The same problem exists for regular planets such as mars that eventually outgrow their infrastructure and continuously cause very tiny bursts of unrest as population cycles between growing and shrinking.  I view it as one more issue one has to deal with one way or another.  I will say that I want to eliminate tedium wherever possible.  Ideally, some day I come up with a way to automate hauling excess colonists off of planets to maintain a player-specified desired population level.


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)

Fixed. 

The next time you run the game, missiles will be unassigned from beam weapons in your game.


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.



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.



The problem is, it's very hard to predict where the Lagrange points will be once you reach Slask.  Jumping from point A to B might make the trip shorter if you were in Slask right now, but it could very well make the trip longer by the time your fleet arrives in Slask.  This is why the game only checks the current system for any possible LP shortcuts. 

I think if I were to tackle this problem, rather than try to predict where LP points will be in other systems, I would add a checkbox that says to insert an LP jump before any move where applicable.  Since that would be a performance hit I would need to decide how often that check is made.  Possibly during the construction cycle for all fleets.  BUT... I currently have no plans to work on this.


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.

Fixed


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)

Fixed.  Final PD Fire will now protect populations, shipyards, and ground units.


It is possible to put missile launchers designed for PDCs (twice the reload rate) on ships.

Fixed.  Existing components and designs will not be affected by this fix.


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).

Fixed

--

These fixes are available now in version 181.  Thanks for the bug reports and the helpful save file!


 

Offline drakonbane

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • d
  • Posts: 11
  • Thanked: 10 times
Re: Bug Reports (Version 138 and up)
« Reply #188 on: January 16, 2022, 04:43:51 PM »
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!
 

Offline TMaekler

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1112
  • Thanked: 298 times
Re: Bug Reports (Version 138 and up)
« Reply #189 on: January 17, 2022, 12:34:26 AM »
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.
 

Offline Kyle (OP)

  • Moderator
  • Captain
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 472
  • Thanked: 973 times
  • Quasar4x dev
Re: Bug Reports (Version 138 and up)
« Reply #190 on: January 19, 2022, 03:00:17 PM »
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.

Yep at some point I'll probably do that.


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!

Fixed in 183, available now
 

Offline Haji

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 442
  • Thanked: 53 times
Re: Bug Reports (Version 138 and up)
« Reply #191 on: May 27, 2022, 01:32:52 PM »
I'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.
 

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2960
  • Thanked: 2222 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: Bug Reports (Version 138 and up)
« Reply #192 on: June 02, 2022, 11:09:53 PM »
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. 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
 

Offline Kyle (OP)

  • Moderator
  • Captain
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 472
  • Thanked: 973 times
  • Quasar4x dev
Re: Bug Reports (Version 138 and up)
« Reply #193 on: July 17, 2022, 05:56:41 AM »
I'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.

Hi, if any of these are still bothering you can you please set up some example save files for me to look at.


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. 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

Thanks for the report!  Version 184 has been pushed which fixes the major issues noted above. After the fixes I was able to get an exact match on 8149 km/s, with a BP of 57, and the design summary now shows Hangar/MF reload times for box launchers instead of a rate of fire.

---

As a general update: I haven't been spending time on Q4X, so there won't be any new features.  I probably wont be working on it any more in the near future either, outside of bug fixes -- as long as they don't require too much work setting up test scenarios.  I got the itch to do some coding in Godot, hence the small patch update, but further coding will probably be in some other project.  I'm pretty happy with the state of Q4X though, it is fairly complete and stable.
 

Offline Haji

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 442
  • Thanked: 53 times
Re: Bug Reports (Version 138 and up)
« Reply #194 on: July 17, 2022, 06:10:59 AM »
Hi, if any of these are still bothering you can you please set up some example save files for me to look at.

I will, thank you. I can deal with most problems using SM mode but I'll check my lists later (I have found over a dozen new bugs). Right now I need a help with a crash. I have no idea what's been causing it as I have not had any errors, at some point the game just refuses to progress even if I use only 5 sec interval. Save file have been attached.

For clarity I did mess with the database file. I changed system abundance (but no new systems should be being generated), species tolerances (gravity, oxygen) and race modifiers (shipyard production, research speed). However I have not touched the database for several decades of game time.

Thank you for your time.