Morning Steve.
Right off the bat avast has blocked it from running.
Some minor bugs from 1.9.3 that I wasn't able to get in:
1) Prototyping causes a research complete message.
2) Without communications, you are still able to suggest/request/demand NPR leave.
3) With no contacts in any system, I am still getting spammed "Communications stalled" messages.
Pressing 'create swarm' button in the system generation and display while SM is active returns the following error: "#1420 Object reference not set to an instance of an object". It happened in my 1.9.3 game with non-real stars, it kept happening after being updated and I recreated it effortlessly with a fresh install of the game with real stars (I went into the default game, explored a new JP in SM mode, pressed 'create swarm' and presto! the error appeared).
In addition when a new system was being generated in my previous game I sometimes got that error as well. I didn't think too much about it as it seemed like nothing was wrong. I now think the game is not generating the swarm.
My decimal symbol is a period.
Edit: After I posted I dismissed the error window and just in case I pressed the "create swarm" button again. This time there were no error messages. After clicking it several times I sometimes got an error and sometimes I didn't so it may not be as easy to re-create as I thought.
The window affected: Crete Research Project
When designing engine prototype with "show next tech" checkbox checked. There is no next tech for bigger engines (Currently I have size 25 max, with checkbox it is still 25 instead of 40). I know power mod has problems with show next tech, but this should be a bug.
Conventional start
Random Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma? No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Easy to reproduce
Morning Steve.I am able to reproduce this. The event log needs to refresh to see it, but it does give a research complete event. It's possible Steve does want the event to fire, but maybe the text should be different.Right off the bat avast has blocked it from running.All good
1) Prototyping causes a research complete message.
~snip
Version 1. 9. 4 (patched from 1. 9. 3 but the displayed numbers did not change
There is something wrong about ppv calculation, potentially a problem with box launcher ppv calculation.
I have 4 designs:
1, Box launchers and gauss triple turret according to design window adding 88. 06 ppv, but when created only adds 24.
2, Box launchers only, should add 76 ppv, only adds 11 (same number of launchers as 1st design, only difference is the lack of turret) or 12 (I guess rounding error, as the colony window only displays whole numbers)
3, Ship with normal missile launchers, should add 12 ppv, adds 12 ppv when built.
4, Ship with launchers, should add 24ppv, adds 24 when built.
The turret itself is worth 12. 06 ppv according to the design window.
Decimal separator is . thousand separator is ,
Game lenght 52 years.
No function number, or error text
Conventional start
Version 1. 9. 4 (patched from 1. 9. 3 but the displayed numbers did not change, and tried building a new ship and got the same numbers)
Attached DB
Quote from: Carnagus link=topic=11231. msg130379#msg130379 date=1588525502Version 1. 9. 4 (patched from 1. 9. 3 but the displayed numbers did not change
Numbers definitely should change (did for me). Could you try to delete your exe and copy in the 1. 9. 4 one again?
Quote from: Carnagus link=topic=11231. msg130379#msg130379 date=1588525502There is something wrong about ppv calculation, potentially a problem with box launcher ppv calculation.
I have 4 designs:
1, Box launchers and gauss triple turret according to design window adding 88. 06 ppv, but when created only adds 24.
2, Box launchers only, should add 76 ppv, only adds 11 (same number of launchers as 1st design, only difference is the lack of turret) or 12 (I guess rounding error, as the colony window only displays whole numbers)
3, Ship with normal missile launchers, should add 12 ppv, adds 12 ppv when built.
4, Ship with launchers, should add 24ppv, adds 24 when built.
The turret itself is worth 12. 06 ppv according to the design window.
Decimal separator is . thousand separator is ,
Game lenght 52 years.
No function number, or error text
Conventional start
Version 1. 9. 4 (patched from 1. 9. 3 but the displayed numbers did not change, and tried building a new ship and got the same numbers)
Attached DB
Hello thank you for filing a report, I looked at your DB and looked through the designs, it seems to me everything is working fine you say the boxer launchers only add 11 but I see 76 in the window, here is an image of that attached below, can you please clarify further on what the bug directly is and what you mean. Thank you.
(https://i. imgur. com/7eDkCtk. png)
Also try to repeat this on a fresh install where 1. 9. 4 does show up correctly in misc
Damage Output 3 Rate of Fire 5 seconds Range Modifier 20 000
Max Range 60 000 km Laser Size 3 HS (150 tons) Laser HTK 1
Power Requirement 3 Recharge Rate 3
Cost 10.4 Crew 9
Development Cost 350 RPDamage Output 3 Rate of Fire 20 seconds Range Modifier 20 000
Max Range 60 000 km Laser Size 3 HS (150 tons) Laser HTK 1
Power Requirement 3 Recharge Rate 0.75
Cost 7.8 Crew 9
Development Cost 350 RP
1. (Repost of minor, persisting issue from 1.9.3) Real stars conventional 1.9 start, upgraded in three steps to 1.9.4. Do I put four comma-separated cats into my new dishwasher because it has a label on it that tells me urgently not to? Not while I'm sober, and probably not even otherwise. Although continental, it's set to handle dotted cats by default. Other questions n/a or answer follows.
Issue: Cancel button in Select Name still doesn't cancel properly and assigns previously selected or entered name from different object or window. Checked it only within System Generation & Display view this time; but before it also occurred in any other place where there's a Select Name button. Reproduce: In the system 'tryagain', manually rename body 'tryagain-A II' to 'buggard'. Then click Select Name for the System. Click Cancel. System is now named 'buggard'.
2. (Another repost of a still more minor issue/request) I had posted this minor bug report/feature completion request in the 1.8 thread shortly before update. I'm not sure if Steve did read it, but decided for one or other reason not to answer it. But I couldn't tell. As gamebraking bugs seem to become rare (workforce: 1, time: 3 weeks!), I dare to ask again.
Issue: The ship history VBAurora-style, or at least some of it, seems generated in the database, and there is a Ship Overview/History tab. Only, it's empty. Since the data and ui structure are already there, it would be nice to have displayed what is in, in addition to the excellent new shipwise stats on the main page – on the (surmised) condition that it takes only a fairly small coding effort. Or to know what the plans are for it.
3. (Thank you to the new 'bug moderators' for increasing efficiency by filtering cats and other non-bugs in advance)
It seems the tech "Reduced-size Laser 0.75 Size / 4x Recharge" does not change laser size:
with Standard Laser Size and Recharge Rate:Code: [Select]Damage Output 3 Rate of Fire 5 seconds Range Modifier 20 000
Max Range 60 000 km Laser Size 3 HS (150 tons) Laser HTK 1
Power Requirement 3 Recharge Rate 3
Cost 10.4 Crew 9
Development Cost 350 RP
with Reduced-size Laser 0.75 Size / 4x Recharge:Code: [Select]Damage Output 3 Rate of Fire 20 seconds Range Modifier 20 000
Max Range 60 000 km Laser Size 3 HS (150 tons) Laser HTK 1
Power Requirement 3 Recharge Rate 0.75
Cost 7.8 Crew 9
Development Cost 350 RP
It seems the tech "Reduced-size Laser 0.75 Size / 4x Recharge" does not change laser size:
with Standard Laser Size and Recharge Rate:Code: [Select]Damage Output 3 Rate of Fire 5 seconds Range Modifier 20 000
Max Range 60 000 km Laser Size 3 HS (150 tons) Laser HTK 1
Power Requirement 3 Recharge Rate 3
Cost 10.4 Crew 9
Development Cost 350 RP
with Reduced-size Laser 0.75 Size / 4x Recharge:Code: [Select]Damage Output 3 Rate of Fire 20 seconds Range Modifier 20 000
Max Range 60 000 km Laser Size 3 HS (150 tons) Laser HTK 1
Power Requirement 3 Recharge Rate 0.75
Cost 7.8 Crew 9
Development Cost 350 RP
Probably me being an idiot, but I can't seem to get my shipyard to refit a vessel. Didn't have a problem with refits in VB6, and I appreciate there's a 20% refit rule in C# version now but I haven't found any other posts regarding refit changes?
The function number: N/A
The complete error text: N/A
The window affected: Shipyards
What you were doing at the time: Attempting to refit a vessel
Things I've checked (not sure if all are required)
- Ship is Orbiting Earth (and shipyards are at Earth)
- Ship has just completed an overhaul
- Shipyard has slipways available
- Shipyard has been refitted to the new class
- Neither old nor new class are Prototype Class Designs
- Old and new class designs are within 20% size of one another (9999 tons for old, 9997 tons for new)
- New design is not obsolete
When I go into the Shipyard tab, I select the shipyard and have confirmed the Assigned class for said yard is the new design. I select "Refit" for Task Type, it auto selects the old design in "Refit From" and new design in "Class", but "Ship Name" dropdown is empty.
Apologies for the wordy description, not enough posts to be able to add images yet.
Conventional or TN start: Conventional
Random or Real Stars: Random
Is your decimal separator a comma? No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Uncertain
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: A little shy of 75 years but I've done very little in game so far. I have literally one ship, no other systems explored, and was mostly messing about with research. Not touched Spacemaster mode at all.
It seems the tech "Reduced-size Laser 0.75 Size / 4x Recharge" does not change laser size:
with Standard Laser Size and Recharge Rate:Code: [Select]Damage Output 3 Rate of Fire 5 seconds Range Modifier 20 000
Max Range 60 000 km Laser Size 3 HS (150 tons) Laser HTK 1
Power Requirement 3 Recharge Rate 3
Cost 10.4 Crew 9
Development Cost 350 RP
with Reduced-size Laser 0.75 Size / 4x Recharge:Code: [Select]Damage Output 3 Rate of Fire 20 seconds Range Modifier 20 000
Max Range 60 000 km Laser Size 3 HS (150 tons) Laser HTK 1
Power Requirement 3 Recharge Rate 0.75
Cost 7.8 Crew 9
Development Cost 350 RP
It also needs the cost to be at most up to 20% divergance so if you have a very expensive ship and a very cheap ship it may not work, can you attach the DB and or images of the designs so we can have a better idea of what you mean, other than that I want to say many tanks for actually following the guidelines it makes my job much much easier and eventually steves.
Quote from: SpaceMarine link=topic=11231. msg130397#msg130397 date=1588528931It also needs the cost to be at most up to 20% divergance so if you have a very expensive ship and a very cheap ship it may not work, can you attach the DB and or images of the designs so we can have a better idea of what you mean, other than that I want to say many tanks for actually following the guidelines it makes my job much much easier and eventually steves.
Ah, I guess the cost is the issue. I didn't think I'd changed that much between designs but perhaps I did more upgrading than I realised. Trying to work out which of these numbers you're referring to as cost. If it's Build points old class is 1280. 3 vs 1531. 4 - my rookie maths puts the 1280 design at a max upgrade of around 1536, so 1531 should be ok? For completions sake I've attached a zip containing the db plus screenshots of the two class designs.
Thanks!
error carried over from 1.9.3, didn't get a reply on the last post.
Context: first time I load a saved game (saved it every now and then while playing, closed the app one time, first time I reopen the game to play a saved game)
The function number: 1170, followed by a good number of 3056s and 3060s, followed by infinite (literally) 3056s
The complete error text:
at bootup, 1 window:
#1170: object cannot be converted from dbnull to other types
some time later, after booting up:
#3056: object reference not set to an instance of an object
#3060: object reference not set to an instance of an object
What you were doing at the time: loading the game
Conventional or TN start: TN
Random or Real Stars: Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma?: Period, thousands separator a comma
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? not sure
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: about 35 years
Installation: fresh install, 1.5.1 -> 1.9 -> 1.9.3, always deleting the files before extracting new ones
(updated to 1.9.4 and still have the same problem)
V 1.9.4, running the Federated Nations game carried over from V1.9.3 and earlier, no error text.
I'm confused by the event saying that one of my ships cannot carry out its refuel order as there is no suitable destination. Is the game trying to suggest that when I bring the ship back it won't be able to make it back to Sol?
Alternatively, maybe I'm misunderstanding the order. I'm unclear on the distinction between "Refuel at colony," and "refuel at colony Or."
DB attached.
Also I downloaded the DB and went forward time and I had no issues, it has qued up move commands to go refuel.
OKay,
I gave the refuel orders manually. Should have specified that.
Is it still WAI? I wasn't aware that particular order only worked in one system
Would someone help check on the effect of commanders and admin HQs on the rate of grav surveys? Here are my notes:
Testing using several gravitational survey ships, each mounting one ordinary grav sensor (base rate: 1/hour), and one geosurvey ship, mounting one ordinary geo sensor.
Survey (and general) commands appear to affect geo-surveys normally. The commander on a ship contributes 50% of their bonus. The effect of the science officer has not been tested by me. The effects of commanders and admin support take effect immediately. Survey commands do indeed get a 2x range bonus.
Grav surveys are weird. I could not get the rate at which they operate to change by any mix of commanders or admin HQs. The rate stuck at 1.45/hour, and attempts to reset things by cancelling commands, waiting for the next gravsurvey site, or even removing the admin command entirely all failed to change this in the slightest.
I first noticed this in previous version. Tested again now with fresh DB
Old bug post: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=11173.msg130296#msg130296
The function number: N/A
The complete error text: N/A
The window affected Naval Org. Ship overview on Supply ship
What you were doing at the time:
Added 20% Underway replenishment tech and spawned a supply ship and a tanker with SM. Both in same fleet. Set them going. Originally range for Supply ship was 98,4b km, which both fleet view and design agree upon. After 30 day of flying it was 94.35b km.
Tanker should have been able to refill the tank several times over during that 30 day period. As it has 50 000L transfer rate. Over 30 days it should be able to fill about 7m liters of fuel, assuming 20% effect due to tech mention earlier. Both ships have used about 20 000L during this time, so close to no refueling have been done.
Telling them to stop for an hour and Supply ship is refueled fine.
Tanker is set to "Refuel own fleet"
Conventional or TN start: TN
Random or Real Stars: Real
Is your decimal separator a comma? no
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? easy
Supply ship "resupply own fleet" setting reverting to "no auto resupply" after reload should also be shown in this DB. As the ship was set to resupply own fleet when DB was uploaded.
Original bug report: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=11173.msg130306#msg130306
Would someone help check on the effect of commanders and admin HQs on the rate of grav surveys? Here are my notes:
Testing using several gravitational survey ships, each mounting one ordinary grav sensor (base rate: 1/hour), and one geosurvey ship, mounting one ordinary geo sensor.
Survey (and general) commands appear to affect geo-surveys normally. The commander on a ship contributes 50% of their bonus. The effect of the science officer has not been tested by me. The effects of commanders and admin support take effect immediately. Survey commands do indeed get a 2x range bonus.
Grav surveys are weird. I could not get the rate at which they operate to change by any mix of commanders or admin HQs. The rate stuck at 1.45/hour, and attempts to reset things by cancelling commands, waiting for the next gravsurvey site, or even removing the admin command entirely all failed to change this in the slightest.
Aachen class Destroyer 36,000 tons 1,025 Crew 16,155.2 BP TCS 720 TH 14,400 EM 0
20000 km/s Armour 6-97 Shields 0-0 HTK 208 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 62 PPV 121.48
Maint Life 2.15 Years MSP 8,975 AFR 324% IFR 4.5% 1YR 2,594 5YR 38,903 Max Repair 3000 MSP
Magazine 865.6
Captain Control Rating 3 BRG ENG CIC
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months Morale Check Required
Aachen class Destroyer 36,000 tons 1,025 Crew 16,155.2 BP TCS 720 TH 14,400 EM 0
20000 km/s Armour 6-97 Shields 0-0 HTK 208 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 62 PPV 121.48
Maint Life 2.15 Years MSP 8,975 AFR 324% IFR 4.5% 1YR 2,594 5YR 38,903 Max Repair 3000 MSP
Magazine 865.6
Commodore Control Rating 3 BRG ENG CIC
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months Morale Check Required
Tested in 1.9.4, dot as decimal point as usual.
The requirement for secondary officers (chief engineers, CIC officer and such) seems to be very restrictive (limited to 1 rank).
This is the naval ranks I have (game default):
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/402321466839793664/706583404757647370/unknown.png)
This is the ship in question, before 'Senior C.O.' is checked:Code: [Select]Aachen class Destroyer 36,000 tons 1,025 Crew 16,155.2 BP TCS 720 TH 14,400 EM 0
20000 km/s Armour 6-97 Shields 0-0 HTK 208 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 62 PPV 121.48
Maint Life 2.15 Years MSP 8,975 AFR 324% IFR 4.5% 1YR 2,594 5YR 38,903 Max Repair 3000 MSP
Magazine 865.6
Captain Control Rating 3 BRG ENG CIC
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months Morale Check Required
A vice admiral is assigned to the ship as its commanding officer. Tested with rear admiral/captain as commanding officers too.
In this case, the ranks of officers allowed to take the tactical officer's role is only the lieutenant commanders:
(https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/402321466839793664/706578395294859335/unknown.png)
Nothing else between lieutenant commanders and captains work.
If 'Senior C.O.' on the ship design screen is checked, the min rank for the commanding officer changes to Commodore:Code: [Select]Aachen class Destroyer 36,000 tons 1,025 Crew 16,155.2 BP TCS 720 TH 14,400 EM 0
20000 km/s Armour 6-97 Shields 0-0 HTK 208 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 62 PPV 121.48
Maint Life 2.15 Years MSP 8,975 AFR 324% IFR 4.5% 1YR 2,594 5YR 38,903 Max Repair 3000 MSP
Magazine 865.6
Commodore Control Rating 3 BRG ENG CIC
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months Morale Check Required
In this case, only commanders are allowed in tactical officer's position. Nothing below (expected), nothing above.
(https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/402321466839793664/706585942957228132/unknown.png)
It seems so far only 1 exact rank can be assigned as secondary officers in both cases ('Senior C.O.' checked or not). Not sure if it is intended, or a bug.
Not sure if this is working as intended or not, but it appears that maintenance facilities that are still under construction will still contribute to the total maintenance capacity of a planet.
I'm attaching a database where such a thing is happening, on the planet Marie in the Curie system.
Not sure if this is working as intended or not, but it appears that maintenance facilities that are still under construction will still contribute to the total maintenance capacity of a planet.
I'm attaching a database where such a thing is happening, on the planet Marie in the Curie system.
It's WAI. You're not gaining capacity, you are losing some due to "unrest" Political stab is at 97.59%
With 8 facilities you should have 12800 with current tech, not 12 492
The function number: no error
The complete error text: no error
The window affected: Naval Organization and Shipyard Tasks (Economics)
What you were doing at the time: renaming ships
Conventional or TN start: TN
Random or Real Stars: Real
Is your decimal separator a comma?: period
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?: easy to reproduce
It is small issue with renaming ships. If I select Prefix for ship naming in Class Design - Miscellaneous, you get correctly named ship build by shipyards. But if you decide to later rename the ship in Naval Organization window with Select Name button, you get the new name but without the prefix. Same issue in Shipyard Tasks window, if you start construction and later decide to use Select Name button to rename the ship, you will get name without prefix.
So for example HMS Belfast will become just Belfast if renamed in this way.
Not sure if bug, oversight or WAI.
Fleet, that shipyards have to use for newbuilt ships, is always first fleet by alpha sorting order, instead of what you set manually.I'm a bit confused by what you are saying. Are you saying that if you select "fleet A" for the shipyard task that it doesn't actually place into that fleet? Or that the shipyard doesn't remember what fleet it was previously assigned?
The function number -
The complete error text -
The window affected Economics (Shipyards)
What you were doing at the time Building ships
Conventional or TN start TN
Random or Real Stars Real
Is your decimal separator a comma? No, period
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Easy to reproduce
Fleet, that shipyards have to use for newbuilt ships, is always first fleet by alpha sorting order, instead of what you set manually.I'm a bit confused by what you are saying. Are you saying that if you select "fleet A" for the shipyard task that it doesn't actually place into that fleet? Or that the shipyard doesn't remember what fleet it was previously assigned?
The function number -
The complete error text -
The window affected Economics (Shipyards)
What you were doing at the time Building ships
Conventional or TN start TN
Random or Real Stars Real
Is your decimal separator a comma? No, period
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Easy to reproduce
Fleet, that shipyards have to use for newbuilt ships, is always first fleet by alpha sorting order, instead of what you set manually.I'm a bit confused by what you are saying. Are you saying that if you select "fleet A" for the shipyard task that it doesn't actually place into that fleet? Or that the shipyard doesn't remember what fleet it was previously assigned?
The function number -
The complete error text -
The window affected Economics (Shipyards)
What you were doing at the time Building ships
Conventional or TN start TN
Random or Real Stars Real
Is your decimal separator a comma? No, period
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Easy to reproduce
I believe he means that when you select fleet for shipyard construction in Shipyards (Economics tab) it is not remembered when you close and open the window again. It always reset to alphabetically first fleet you have.
So you want to build one ship and assign it to flee B, you do it and it starts construction of ship that will be but in fleet B when done. Now when you close the window and open it again it switches to fleet A for new constructions because it is first alphabetically even when you previously told the shipyard that you want to place produced ships in fleet B.
Edit: I think in VB6 it remembered the shipyard you selected, but I am not completely sure.
1. Civilian colony ships do not respect max body population. Will cause overcrowding if you don't manually set to source or stable.As far as I'm aware this is WAI. They will respect your wishes if you go to the Economics-Civilian Economy tab and put the colony as Stable.
2. Orbital Habitats will likewise continue to grow even when max pop+hab capacity<pop, causing overcrowding.
3. Civilian fleets show up in instant build drop-down for ship classes.
The function number-N/A
The complete error text-N/A
The window affected-N/A
What you were doing at the time - Testing population and civilian trading mechanics. LG infrastructure is now traded, yay!
Conventional or TN start - TN
Random or Real Stars - Real
Is your decimal separator a comma? - 1,000.00
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Reproducible
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - less than 75
Was gonna say what Garfunkel said. I thought that might be the issue as it will just reset if you don't use default fleet.1. Civilian colony ships do not respect max body population. Will cause overcrowding if you don't manually set to source or stable.As far as I'm aware this is WAI. They will respect your wishes if you go to the Economics-Civilian Economy tab and put the colony as Stable.
2. Orbital Habitats will likewise continue to grow even when max pop+hab capacity<pop, causing overcrowding.
3. Civilian fleets show up in instant build drop-down for ship classes.
The function number-N/A
The complete error text-N/A
The window affected-N/A
What you were doing at the time - Testing population and civilian trading mechanics. LG infrastructure is now traded, yay!
Conventional or TN start - TN
Random or Real Stars - Real
Is your decimal separator a comma? - 1,000.00
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Reproducible
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - less than 75
I am seeing the admin and commander bonuses show up as expected in the rate at which bodies are surveyed. I am NOT seeing them show up in the rate at which grav survey points are surveyed.Would someone help check on the effect of commanders and admin HQs on the rate of grav surveys? Here are my notes:
Testing using several gravitational survey ships, each mounting one ordinary grav sensor (base rate: 1/hour), and one geosurvey ship, mounting one ordinary geo sensor.
Survey (and general) commands appear to affect geo-surveys normally. The commander on a ship contributes 50% of their bonus. The effect of the science officer has not been tested by me. The effects of commanders and admin support take effect immediately. Survey commands do indeed get a 2x range bonus.
Grav surveys are weird. I could not get the rate at which they operate to change by any mix of commanders or admin HQs. The rate stuck at 1.45/hour, and attempts to reset things by cancelling commands, waiting for the next gravsurvey site, or even removing the admin command entirely all failed to change this in the slightest.
Not quite following you here. Steve said that Admin command bonuses are not showing up on fleet view. I just check myself now and saw no difference in fleet view Survey points depending on admin command structure. Where are you seeing the grav/geo difference?
The function number: 1690
The complete error text:
1.9.4 Function #1690: Value to add was out of range.
Parameter name: value
The window affected: Main window
What you were doing at the time: Being bombed to death (i strongly suspect this is related to my political modifier being reduced as it started around then)
Conventional or TN start: Conventional
Random or Real Stars: Random
Is your decimal separator a comma?: No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?: It is happening every increment for me
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: 45 year campaign so far (year is 2060)
I am using custom portraits, so I stowed my whole game here:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/85l7jm7youh31hf/aurora_c%2523_1.94.zip/file
Additional note: This save was brought forward from 1.93
The function number: 1690
The complete error text:
1.9.4 Function #1690: Value to add was out of range.
Parameter name: value
The window affected: Main window
What you were doing at the time: Being bombed to death (i strongly suspect this is related to my political modifier being reduced as it started around then)
Conventional or TN start: Conventional
Random or Real Stars: Random
Is your decimal separator a comma?: No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?: It is happening every increment for me
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: 45 year campaign so far (year is 2060)
I am using custom portraits, so I stowed my whole game here:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/85l7jm7youh31hf/aurora_c%2523_1.94.zip/file
Additional note: This save was brought forward from 1.93
I downloaded your save to see what the hell was going on and I can't figure out what you're trying to go for here. Also, something is seriously wrong with Earth just looking at its colony summary.
Edit: I have screenshots embedded in my post, but the forums are adding a space after the . in the URL and they're not showing. Until I figure out how to fix this, here is the link to the imgur album. https://imgur. com/a/nR0CElt The screenshots are uploaded in order that I discuss them, and I'll reference them in text. If a mod can fix the img code for me through a message edit please go ahead and do so.
You have to press "default fleet" button to make it remember which fleet to use by default:
(https://i.imgur.com/8msqRqc.png)
I just tested and the button works as it should in 1.9.4
Reported in 1.9.3, still there in 1.9.4:
Some DSTS circles are displayed twice around a system like this:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1eyTh6bn5dYd55jOulg-I5SiwnKUAAtX6 (https://drive.google.com/open?id=1eyTh6bn5dYd55jOulg-I5SiwnKUAAtX6)
Here is the DB:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1ZGu9d3CmE4behsnqwmX7kQQk38RTsdHI (https://drive.google.com/open?id=1ZGu9d3CmE4behsnqwmX7kQQk38RTsdHI)
There are two bodies cery close to each other, Pandora & Daphne. But only one of them has DSTS (Daphne).
SM mode random ruins: when repeatedly hitting "random ruin" in an attempt to get a particular ruin type the Alien Installation type locks. The installation remains present even when selecting "random ruin" again to delete the ruin. And the installation does not appear to change. If you get say Ground 50% installation that is permanent even when you repeatedly re-roll the ruin. This is different than the behavior in 1.5.1 where the installation was also deleted upon deletion of the ruin.
Minor display bug: the ruin text does not update after deletion, you have to close and re-open the window to see that is deleted. The text will update with the new ruin type if you reroll the ruin again.
Version: 1.9.4
The function number: no error
The complete error text: N/A
The window affected: System Generation and display
What you were doing at the time: Repeatedly pressing "random ruin" in SM mode
Conventional or TN start: TN
Random or Real Stars: read
Is your decimal separator a comma? no
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? easy
1.9.4, started in 1.9.0, 21 years into the Campaign.
Possible civilian pathfinding bug, no error message.
Looking at the JP1 from Sol to Alpha Centauri, theres 3 civilian SLs doing a merry go round around the jumppoint.
Advancing time by below 3hrs shows the currently active Liner just sitting at the Jumppoint indefinitely doing nothing.
Advancing time by 3 hrs or more makes the ships continually exchange position on this or the far side of the JP.
Ships affected: SL Dong L4 002, SL Briseno L5 002, SL Winborn L4 011
All other FT/CS of all the shipping lines ships seem to work normally.
V. 1.9.4, checked Misc. tab to be sure
Function number:N/a
Error Text:N/a
Window Effected:Tricky to answer, but I guess the main screen
What you were doing:Surveying starting system
Start:Conventional, Spacemaster race, Spacemaster System
Stars:Random
Decimal Separator: "."
Easy, Intermittent, or one off: Easy to reproduce
Campaign Length: 21 years
I was surveying my starting system with auto-turns on and left to get a drink, when I came back I saw there had been an interrupt, so I checked what it was, it was research but under it there was a message under it saying my survey ship had insufficient crew quarters, so I checked the event logs and sure enough some turns back it had suffered a maintenance failure, but the game turns had not stopped. If that research hadn't of happened it seems I could've lost a ship just because I was thirsty
The game this happened in is named "Desert" species "Davonians" and the ship is the "Essex"
Reproduction steps: 1)Build military classed ship
2) Allow it to run out of supplies
3) Continue passing time with auto-turns on
4) Hope ship doesn't explode when you look away from it for a moment
Edit: I have screenshots embedded in my post, but the forums are adding a space after the .in the URL and they're not showing. Until I figure out how to fix this, here is the link to the imgur album. https://imgur.com/a/nR0CElt The screenshots are uploaded in order that I discuss them, and I'll reference them in text. If a mod can fix the img code for me through a message edit please go ahead and do so.
I have a series of catastrophic bugs in ground combat. I'll provide the requested information here, but a much more detailed walkthrough below:
The function numbers (all prefaced with 1.9.4) 2712, 1810, 327, 1821, 2868 (This last one is elusive, but the most verbose)
The complete error texts (For 2712, 1810, 327) The object reference not set to an instance of an object.(For 1821) Attempted to divide by zero (For 2868) "Index was out of range. Must be non-negative and less than the size of the collection. Parameter name: Index"
The window affected Global
What you were doing at the time Invading NPR Homeworld in NN 3819
Conventional or TN start TN
Random or Real Stars Real
Is your decimal separator a comma? Natively a period
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Easy to reproduce. See below
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well 45 years, started in 1. 9. 0, migrated to . 3 and now . 4.
Detailed Explanation
I saved the game immediately after this throwing the error. I had (I believe) one successful round of ground combat before the errors began, but the fallout can be seen from the get-go.
First, when loading the game, switch the view to NN 3819. The fun is around the first planet in the system.
You should see a ton of wrecks of the "Sheean" class around the first planet. If you turn off the wrecks so the lifepods are visible, the first indication that something is wrong appears
(https://i.imgur.com/ZVEPsvn.png) Screenshot 1
Despite there being a ton of wrecks of my fighters in orbit, I've only lost 2 fighters, but they seem to have exploded multiple times, leaving identical copies of wrecks and lifepods. I've only actually lost fighter 005 and 002. Looking at the naval organization screen proves this:
(https://i.imgur.com/aMIeup8.png) Screenshot 2
As you can see, the only ship numbers I'm missing are 2 and 5, and you can see that, for some reason, the game has created empty fleets for them - this seems to be due to the engine being hit, the speed dropping and ship detaching, prior to the game calculating that we've reached HTK and the fighter is dead. Below is a clip from the events window detailing the death of Sheean 012.
(https://i.imgur.com/JUyrIMr.png) Screenshot 3
Advancing time by 8 hours to the next ground combat phase will give the following errors in some random combination of times: 1810, 370. Also, Sheean 001 is usually the next to explode multiple times.
Additional advancements generally also include error 2712, in addition to 1810 and 370.
Also, generally within the first or second advancement of 8 hours, one of the events will be that we've conquered a population on Mars. This is unrelated to the Ground Combat bugs, but it is a bug that's been running for several in-game years: You can see the results on the Colony Summary window:
(https://i.imgur.com/nRatxE3.png) Screenshot 4
Several years ago the NPR tried to land troops on Mars and I defeated the fleet in orbit. Ever since that point, every 6 months or so the NPR creates a new colony on Mars and my lone garrison immediately conquers it. This is without the NPR having any fleet to speak of (I've been pruning them for a few years as I built an army). No error messages are shown, so I can't give any more details as to why this occurs.
Back to ground combat fun:
The elusive error that only shows up once or twice randomly (and which I had to reload the save many times to finally catch) is "Error 2686 Index was out of range. Must be non-negative and less than the size of the collection. Parameter name: Index. " I cannot consistently recreate this one, but advancing time enough will cause it to appear once or twice in the pile of error popups.
Ground Combat fun ends approximately 14 days after the start date of this save-file, just before the life pods expire. The game will throw error 1821 Attempted to divide by zero and all further ground combat breaks. When this happens, I stop getting any combat reports other than estimations of enemy composition, medal awards for destroyed tonnage (which I set up) and formation breakthroughs. The game still seems to think that I'm destroying significant amounts of enemies due to the medal awards at 5k, 10k and 25k tonnage destroyed, and the sensors in orbit detect tiny tiny changes to the ground force strength (generally 100t at a time). I will stop losing troops, however.
You can force the divide by zero error to happen sooner by moving supply elements from my reserve battalion (242nd Battalion HQ) into the top level of the 4 divisions (2 inf, 2 armored) so that the sub formations can resupply. When this happens, on the next 8h time advancement divide by zero occurs, and ground combat effectively breaks.
(https://i.imgur.com/w7ChV1i.png) Screenshot 5
The function number - (both prefaced with 1. 9. 4) 2608, 1838
The complete error text - A reference to an object was not set to an instance of an object (both functions)
The window affected - Ground Forces -> Unit Class Design tab
What you were doing at the time - Trying to design an STO, without any Active Grav Sensor Strength tech
Conventional or TN start - Conventional only
Random or Real Stars - Real Stars, but it shouldn't matter
Is your decimal separator a comma? - No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? - Easy
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - No length at all, can happen immediately
Steps to reproduce - Begin a new conventional start game, SM in a tech for a direct fire weapon (tested with particle beam and laser), try to design a ground STO unit, then when switching the component type for a static unit I get a regular popup that an STO requires sensor tech followed by the 2608 and 1838 error, and this happens 4 times in a row.
It seems that the error situation happens for every UI element that shows when selecting the STO component (like the panel, the PDW checkbox, the ECCM checkbox and the weapon itself).
I don't think this causes any other issues, it's quite situational and hardly game breaking.
Version 1.9.4 from 1.9.3
The function number - None
The complete error text - None
The window affected - Ground Forces -> Tactical map
What you were doing at the time - One day turns to process game.
Conventional or TN start - Conventional
Random or Real Stars - Random
Is your decimal separator a comma? - Yes
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? - Intermittent
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - 20 years both race and system is custom.
Steps to reproduce - Current Geo/Grav and ODB are set to overhaul when supply less than 20%
All vessels have msp greater than highest failure rate; and with AFR approx 15-17%.
When going for overhaul no vessel is being resupplied, planet has excess in maintenance facilities needed to overhaul with MSP available to resupply all vessels.
Currently each vessel is overhauling at various times, completing and going back into overhaul without restocking MSP. Removed condition with one geo survey and surveying with no MSP onboard.
It also appears that MSP is being taken but not appearing to be loaded onto said vessels.
Missile launchers with 0.4x size/20x reload rate have significantly less crew requirement than missile launchers with 0.3x size/100x reload rate.
The crew requirement of missile launchers increases with increasing size (This makes sense). Missile launchers with the above specifications seem to be an exception to this rule (this is very likely a bug)
The window affected: Components design
What you were doing at the time: Designing a missile launcher
Is your decimal separator a comma?: No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?: Trivial. Choose a larger missile size for greater effect.
The rest: N/A
The option to choose a random name from a specific theme for ship classes does not save and thus work as intended.
Version 1. 9. 4 from 1. 9. 3
The function number - N/A
The complete error text - N/A
The window affected - Class Design
What you were doing at the time - Trying to get my ship classes to use random names from a theme list.
Conventional or TN start - TN start
Random or Real Stars - Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma? - No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? - Easy
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - No length at all, can happen immediately
Steps to reproduce - Start a game, go to Class Design screen, go to miscellaneous tab, pick any theme and click the "select random name from theme" button and create a few new classes. Notice how they are alphabetical rather than random. Going back to the miscellaneous tab will show that neither the theme nor "select random name from theme" has not been saved.
PS. Is the bug with movement orders being lost on joining fleets already reported e. g. when using tugs?
Under some very specific circumstances, you can design a particle beam weapon with vastly reduced range, compared to what it should have.
The window affected: components design, view technology, class design
What you were doing at the time: see below
Is your decimal separator a comma?: No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?: Easy
The rest: N/A
Steps I used to reproduce (some might be redundant):
- new TN game
- Instant research some techs, in my case particle beam range 200000, Beam fire control range 48000, Beam FC Tracking 3000
- design a beam fire control, 24000 range, 12000 TS, I also designed some random gauss turret
- create a new ship class put Beam FC and Gauss turret on it
- create a particle beam prototype with strength 2, range 200000, add it to the ship
- see that the range of the particle beam is displayed as 24000 in ship design because of the fire control (this is intended afaik)
- Check the technology window and see that the particle beam has 24000 range there also (this is the bug)
- Design a beam fire control 192000 range, 3000TS add it to the ship -> Range of particle beam is still 24000, while it should be 192000
- particle beam now permanently has wrong range
DB Attached (game is called TESTGAME).
PS: Did you miss my previous bug report in this thread?
SM mode random ruins: when repeatedly hitting "random ruin" in an attempt to get a particular ruin type the Alien Installation type locks. The installation remains present even when selecting "random ruin" again to delete the ruin. And the installation does not appear to change. If you get say Ground 50% installation that is permanent even when you repeatedly re-roll the ruin. This is different than the behavior in 1.5.1 where the installation was also deleted upon deletion of the ruin.
Minor display bug: the ruin text does not update after deletion, you have to close and re-open the window to see that is deleted. The text will update with the new ruin type if you reroll the ruin again.
Version: 1.9.4
The function number: no error
The complete error text: N/A
The window affected: System Generation and display
What you were doing at the time: Repeatedly pressing "random ruin" in SM mode
Conventional or TN start: TN
Random or Real Stars: read
Is your decimal separator a comma? no
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? easy
Thank you for following the formatting, I have confirmed that you are not able to delete the ruins and also the bonus stays the same, though the installation does appear to change, either way this is a bug of somekind and will be logged in confirmed, thank you for the report.
Ok thanks, is there a way to make the game pick random names for classes rather than alphabetical ones?Quote from: Shodan13 link=topic=11231. msg130616#msg130616 date=1588591119The option to choose a random name from a specific theme for ship classes does not save and thus work as intended.
Version 1. 9. 4 from 1. 9. 3
The function number - N/A
The complete error text - N/A
The window affected - Class Design
What you were doing at the time - Trying to get my ship classes to use random names from a theme list.
Conventional or TN start - TN start
Random or Real Stars - Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma? - No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? - Easy
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - No length at all, can happen immediately
Steps to reproduce - Start a game, go to Class Design screen, go to miscellaneous tab, pick any theme and click the "select random name from theme" button and create a few new classes. Notice how they are alphabetical rather than random. Going back to the miscellaneous tab will show that neither the theme nor "select random name from theme" has not been saved.
PS. Is the bug with movement orders being lost on joining fleets already reported e. g. when using tugs?
The theme selection in the Misc. tab is for naming ships of that class, not for naming new classes. It works as intended. (If it didn't, I would be very upset, because I use that feature for all my ships)
Requested Data:
The function number - Not Applicable.
The complete error text - Not Applicable.
The window affected - Class Design.
What you were doing at the time - Design Ship Classes.
Conventional or TN start - Trans-Newtonian Start.
Random or Real Stars - Known Star Systems.
Is your decimal separator a comma? - Nope.
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? - The bug can be reproduced, but it is very specific.
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - Not Applicable, Jan. 1st, 2025
IMPORTANT STUFF - READ THIS FIRST:
--- This bug was produced both on 1.9.3 and in 1.9.4 with the save carried over. The DB attached has several copies of the Class Design used to trigger the bug, along with several screenshots of the bug. The copies of the design were made after triggering the bug. The steps to reproduce are long, so I will include them in an Off-Topic drop down to avoid taking up too much space. SM Mode was "On" the entire time for this bug, both in the 1.9.3 and 1.9.4 iterations. The bug in question involves Maintenance Storage Bay - Fighter taking up only 2 Tons instead of 3 Tons; I would chalk this up to a rounding thing, but C# rounds up in all instances as far as I known.
...
The armor calculation is actually done based on the exact class size (top right corner). The tonnage is just a round-up to integer of that. So the jump in tonnage is actually irrelevant of how the ship size is calculated.Requested Data:
The function number - Not Applicable.
The complete error text - Not Applicable.
The window affected - Class Design.
What you were doing at the time - Design Ship Classes.
Conventional or TN start - Trans-Newtonian Start.
Random or Real Stars - Known Star Systems.
Is your decimal separator a comma? - Nope.
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? - The bug can be reproduced, but it is very specific.
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - Not Applicable, Jan. 1st, 2025
IMPORTANT STUFF - READ THIS FIRST:
--- This bug was produced both on 1.9.3 and in 1.9.4 with the save carried over. The DB attached has several copies of the Class Design used to trigger the bug, along with several screenshots of the bug. The copies of the design were made after triggering the bug. The steps to reproduce are long, so I will include them in an Off-Topic drop down to avoid taking up too much space. SM Mode was "On" the entire time for this bug, both in the 1.9.3 and 1.9.4 iterations. The bug in question involves Maintenance Storage Bay - Fighter taking up only 2 Tons instead of 3 Tons; I would chalk this up to a rounding thing, but C# rounds up in all instances as far as I known.
...
This can be reproduced by just creating a new class and adding nothing but Fighter maintenance bays. Most of the time it will add 3 tons to the total, but every once in a while it will only go up 2 tons.
The reason this happens is the real size of the component is 2.5 tons (0.05 HS), but is rounded to show as 3 tons in the component window. Since rounding is done upwards and there is also a tiny bit of weight added for armour it will also add 3 tons most of the time. By increasing armour on the design I got it to vary between 3-4 tons in weight added for every component.
For such small components the rounding does misrepresent the size, but I would say this is technically not a bug. Maybe we should still suggest to Steve to show the decimal for <10 ton components?
This can be reproduced by just creating a new class and adding nothing but Fighter maintenance bays. Most of the time it will add 3 tons to the total, but every once in a while it will only go up 2 tons.The core problem is using units of 0.01 HS in some places but tons in others. I would suggest ditching HS entirely and just using tons everywhere.
The reason this happens is the real size of the component is 2.5 tons (0.05 HS), but is rounded to show as 3 tons in the component window. Since rounding is done upwards and there is also a tiny bit of weight added for armour it will also add 3 tons most of the time. By increasing armour on the design I got it to vary between 3-4 tons in weight added for every component.
For such small components the rounding does misrepresent the size, but I would say this is technically not a bug. Maybe we should still suggest to Steve to show the decimal for <10 ton components?
The core problem is using units of 0.01 HS in some places but tons in others. I would suggest ditching HS entirely and just using tons everywhere.
Ok thanks, is there a way to make the game pick random names for classes rather than alphabetical ones?
Thanks, that's what I've been doing.Quote from: Shodan13 link=topic=11231. msg130671#msg130671 date=1588600895Ok thanks, is there a way to make the game pick random names for classes rather than alphabetical ones?
Press Select Name, go to the theme you want, then close your eyes and start clicking until you get a name you're happy with.
(No, not yet)
Hatsuharu class Missile Boat 996 tons 22 Crew 143.3 BP TCS 20 TH 88 EM 0
4394 km/s Armour 1-8 Shields 0-0 HTK 8 Sensors 6/4/0/0 DCR 0 PPV 36
Maint Life 7.44 Years MSP 84 AFR 16% IFR 0.2% 1YR 3 5YR 40 Max Repair 43.75 MSP
Magazine 36
Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Morale Check Required
Xiao Aero Engines M-INPE-5-175 EP87.50 (1) Power 87.5 Fuel Use 401.06% Signature 87.5 Explosion 17%
Fuel Capacity 100 000 Litres Range 4.5 billion km (11 days at full power)
Yamamoto-Matsuki SSN-6-1 "Toge" Missile Launcher (6) Missile Size: 6 Hangar Reload 122 minutes MF Reload 20 hours
Hicks-Stevens FC45-R100-0.8 Missile Fire Control (1) Range 45.9m km Resolution 100
Yamamoto-Matsuki SSN-6-1 "Toge" Anti-Ship Missile (6) Speed: 14 933 km/s End: 50.3m Range: 45.1m km WH: 4 Size: 6 TH: 104/62/31
Hicks-Stevens AS-1B S128-2.5-R100-40M Sensor Array (1) GPS 3000 Range 40.6m km Resolution 100
Parker Electronics R-1 EM8-0.5 Warning Receiver (1) Sensitivity 4 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 15.8m km
Gadgil-Asani TH1.0-6 Thermal Sensor (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 19.4m km
Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Jump Point exploration is very clearly not creating the expected number of links to existing systems.
I made a non-known stars game with max systems = 1000, local chance = 95% and spread = 5.
I used SM to perform full grav surveys, then explored each new jump point with a fleet.
I continued until I had explored to a distance of 4 jumps from Sol.
The results:
41 systems explored.
Exactly two of those had links to existing systems.
Both of those links led back to the system that had originally led into that system.
Also of note:
After the naming theme runs out of names, the usage of the "System #X" template has problems.
The value of X is always either very close to 0, or very close to 1000, and in many cases the same X is used for multiple systems.
Of the 24 systems with this name template, there are only 15 distinct names. Here are the values of X:
0 0 0
1
2
3 3
4
5 5 5
6
7
987
990 990
994
996
997 997 997
998 998
1000
A cursory examination of the database indicates that these values of X match the system number for these systems.
From this data, I think that this is what is happening:
When a link to a local system is generated, the SystemNumber is correctly selected at random from within the specified local range.
If that SystemNumber matches an existing number, the code makes a new system with the same number instead of linking to the existing system.
The exception to this is when the SystemNumber matches a system that the current system already has a link to, in which case a new link is created, resulting in a double link between the systems.
DB is attached.
TN start
Random Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma? No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Easy
The function number: N/A
The complete error text: N/A
The window affected: Tactical
What you were doing at the time: Processing turns
Conventional or TN start: Conventional
Random or Real Stars: Real
Is your decimal separator a comma?: No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce?: No
Campaign length: 45 Years
I uploaded a 15 sec video:
I don't know if this is a bug or just some weird glitch, but
one of my civilian ships appears to be stuck on a jump-gate.
It keeps jumping between the 2 systems connected by the jump-gate.
This is the third time I am posting this issue, as it still is present in 1. 9. 4 for me. I also dont know how to use this forum so i was unable to see if I ever got a response on the previous threads as I'm not correctly notified by email and the posts get lost.
So:
I have encountered a bug with PPV calculations. It first started happening in 1. 6, but I thought i misunderstand the mechanics. After talking to people on discord, apparently it is a bug.
I have designed a ship which shows a PPV of 36. A fleet of 6 of them provides 32PPV total. No components are damaged, the ships are less than two months old. Removing one ship from the fleet results in a PPV of 27. The colony view also shows protection of 32, but clearly that doesn't correspond to 6*36. 12 ships result in PPV of 65.
My decimal separator is a ". "
Also, what do I need to do to be notified of replies to my posts (not the thread in general).Code: [Select]Hatsuharu class Missile Boat 996 tons 22 Crew 143.3 BP TCS 20 TH 88 EM 0
4394 km/s Armour 1-8 Shields 0-0 HTK 8 Sensors 6/4/0/0 DCR 0 PPV 36
Maint Life 7.44 Years MSP 84 AFR 16% IFR 0.2% 1YR 3 5YR 40 Max Repair 43.75 MSP
Magazine 36
Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Morale Check Required
Xiao Aero Engines M-INPE-5-175 EP87.50 (1) Power 87.5 Fuel Use 401.06% Signature 87.5 Explosion 17%
Fuel Capacity 100 000 Litres Range 4.5 billion km (11 days at full power)
Yamamoto-Matsuki SSN-6-1 "Toge" Missile Launcher (6) Missile Size: 6 Hangar Reload 122 minutes MF Reload 20 hours
Hicks-Stevens FC45-R100-0.8 Missile Fire Control (1) Range 45.9m km Resolution 100
Yamamoto-Matsuki SSN-6-1 "Toge" Anti-Ship Missile (6) Speed: 14 933 km/s End: 50.3m Range: 45.1m km WH: 4 Size: 6 TH: 104/62/31
Hicks-Stevens AS-1B S128-2.5-R100-40M Sensor Array (1) GPS 3000 Range 40.6m km Resolution 100
Parker Electronics R-1 EM8-0.5 Warning Receiver (1) Sensitivity 4 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 15.8m km
Gadgil-Asani TH1.0-6 Thermal Sensor (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 19.4m km
Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Version 1.9.4 from 1.9.3
The function number - None
The complete error text - None
The window affected - Ground Forces -> Tactical map
What you were doing at the time - One day turns to process game.
Conventional or TN start - Conventional
Random or Real Stars - Random
Is your decimal separator a comma? - Yes
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? - Intermittent
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - 20 years both race and system is custom.
Steps to reproduce - Current Geo/Grav and ODB are set to overhaul when supply less than 20%
All vessels have msp greater than highest failure rate; and with AFR approx 15-17%.
When going for overhaul no vessel is being resupplied, planet has excess in maintenance facilities needed to overhaul with MSP available to resupply all vessels.
Currently each vessel is overhauling at various times, completing and going back into overhaul without restocking MSP. Removed condition with one geo survey and surveying with no MSP onboard.
It also appears that MSP is being taken but not appearing to be loaded onto said vessels.
Thank you for the properly formatted bug report but it appears you are using a comma for your decimal separator, this can cause many issues so to help track down the bug please follow this guide http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=11139.msg129305 once you have followed it and you have changed your separator, please try to reproduce this bug and if you are able to then edit your post accordingly and I will look at it further.
A naval or ground forces officer must have a rank (with 1 being the lowest rank) at least equal to the number of military academies
When creating a prototype research project - a bogus "Research Completed" message is generated instantly without advancing time. To reproduce:
1. Go to create research window and use the "Prototype" button.
2. You should see a new "Research Completed" message.
I think the message is confusing, as you have not researched the prototype yet (not even turned into RP yet).
The function number: N/A
The complete error text: N/A
The window affected: Create Research Project
What you were doing at the time: Creating a prototype Research Project
Conventional or TN start: Conventional
Random or Real Stars: Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma: No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off: Easy to reproduce.
If this is a long campaign: ~40 years
version 1.9.4
The function number: N/A
The complete error text: N/A
The window affected: Class Design
What you were doing at the time: Designing a ship
Conventional or TN start: N/A
Random or Real Stars: N/A
Is your decimal separator a comma? Period.
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Trivial
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: N/A
Ships with commercial engines can no longer use military jump drives, but no warning is given if such a ship is equipped with such a drive. Edit: This also means that we can't build fuel efficient self-jumping jump tenders to support military engined ships.
The function number 1170 on Startup, 3060 when attempting to open a system with a terraformed planet. When not checking a terraformed system it still gives 3060 errors when opening the system body screen,
The complete error text Function #1170: Object cannot be cast from DBNull to other types | Function #3060: Object reference not set to an instance of an object | #3056 when switching to a system that is not terraformed, not checking the generation and display.
The window affected: Tactical map, System bodies map.
What you were doing at the time: Initially I was just starting up the game, when I got the Function 1170 error. And then when the game loads, it gives me #3060 errors, especially when I try to open the system bodies page for my terraformed star system, which then gives infinite #3060 errors, which forces me to shut down my game.
Conventional or TN start: TN start
Random or Real Stars: Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma?: No, it's a period. I checked and it didn't change to that.
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? So far it's only happened on this save, and every time I re-launch it happens. When starting a new save, and restarting my game, the launch error does not happen.
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well It is a 17 year campaign so far.
Spacemaster-adding an NPR to a body in the system view modifies the body's minerals even if the operation is cancelled.
Reproduction steps:
Enter spacemaster mode.
Open the system view.
Click a surveyed world with no minerals.
Click "Create Race".
Click "Cancel".
Observe the mineral window. The world will now have home world-level minerals.
This appears to work for all body types, including gas giants.
Those should be zeroes after decimal separator if you are using period so it is still 40 MSPWhile cosmetic it is still a glitch as fractional supplies aren't a thing. Maybe it should go in the typos thread?
Those should be zeroes after decimal separator if you are using period so it is still 40 MSPWhile cosmetic it is still a glitch as fractional supplies aren't a thing. Maybe it should go in the typos thread?
So current civ transports might transport in-correct numbers of facilities depending on the size of the transport the and facility in question.
For example when I asked for 1 spaceport to be moved to my colony I got 1.0125 or something like that.
The input for supply and demand do not allow fractions in (such as 0.125) and gives you a message telling you to put a whole number, meaning you have to manually use ships with cargo bays to correct the error.
Another common example I get is I demand 100 mines but end up with 102 mines on the colony (however you can fix this without your own cargo ships as 2 is a whole number).
As you can see from my post above I use periods not commas when it comes to fractions. This is on the latest 1.9.4 version but has been around since 1.0. Screen affected= civ economy. I've seen other people mention this too and I am sure one of you bug mods must have encountered this already. If you haven't the best way to get it to happen is to transport large facilities such as academies and spaceports using the civ economy. It's kinda random and depends on the last ship to transport and the size of it's holds. Always make sure you have some facilities on the first planet getting picked up from that is more than the supply you set (such as having 2 spaceports on Earth and supplying 1).
The "Keep Tactical in Background" checkbox is not saved.
In tactical (system) screen in the display tab.
Easy to reproduce:
1. Open game
2. Enable the "Keep Tactical in Background"
3. Save game
4. Close game
5. Reopen game
The "Keep Tactical in Background" in now disabled
At least some other buttons are saved ("events" and in contacts tab "civilians"), but have not done more major testing
Version 1.9.4
If it helps, VB Aurora had exactly the same problem and it was due to different sized freighters handling the same contract. If the freighter finishing the contract was larger than any of the others before it you can get a situation where it should only move a partial load but instead it moves a full load, going over the contracted amount.So current civ transports might transport in-correct numbers of facilities depending on the size of the transport the and facility in question.
For example when I asked for 1 spaceport to be moved to my colony I got 1.0125 or something like that.
The input for supply and demand do not allow fractions in (such as 0.125) and gives you a message telling you to put a whole number, meaning you have to manually use ships with cargo bays to correct the error.
Another common example I get is I demand 100 mines but end up with 102 mines on the colony (however you can fix this without your own cargo ships as 2 is a whole number).
As you can see from my post above I use periods not commas when it comes to fractions. This is on the latest 1.9.4 version but has been around since 1.0. Screen affected= civ economy. I've seen other people mention this too and I am sure one of you bug mods must have encountered this already. If you haven't the best way to get it to happen is to transport large facilities such as academies and spaceports using the civ economy. It's kinda random and depends on the last ship to transport and the size of it's holds. Always make sure you have some facilities on the first planet getting picked up from that is more than the supply you set (such as having 2 spaceports on Earth and supplying 1).
This one is known already. If you can spot any pattern or reliable way to trigger it please report the details as that could help Steve find it.
The function number: N/A
The complete error text: N/A
The window affected: Tactical
What you were doing at the time: Processing turns
Conventional or TN start: Conventional
Random or Real Stars: Real
Is your decimal separator a comma?: No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce?: No
Campaign length: 45 Years
I uploaded a 15 sec video:
I don't know if this is a bug or just some weird glitch, but
one of my civilian ships appears to be stuck on a jump-gate.
It keeps jumping between the 2 systems connected by the jump-gate.
Edit: I just deleted the ship and there was an other ship with the same problem, so it's 2 affected ships.
Academy Commandant assignment rank restrictions don't work as described in this Aurora C# post: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg104092#msg104092
I am able to assign the lowest level naval commander (Lieutenant Commander) to a colony with level 5 military academy. The rule states that this should be restricted to:QuoteA naval or ground forces officer must have a rank (with 1 being the lowest rank) at least equal to the number of military academies
Note that this restriction works correctly for Civilian Administrators and Scientists - issue is with Naval and Ground commanders only.
The function number: N/A
The complete error text: N/A
The window affected: Commanders
What you were doing at the time: Assigning Academy Commandant
Conventional or TN start: Conventional
Random or Real Stars: Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma: No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off: Easy to reproduce, build more than 1 academy and try to assign lowest ranking officer.
If this is a long campaign: ~40 years
When creating a prototype research project - a bogus "Research Completed" message is generated instantly without advancing time. To reproduce:
1. Go to create research window and use the "Prototype" button.
2. You should see a new "Research Completed" message.
I think the message is confusing, as you have not researched the prototype yet (not even turned into RP yet).
The function number: N/A
The complete error text: N/A
The window affected: Create Research Project
What you were doing at the time: Creating a prototype Research Project
Conventional or TN start: Conventional
Random or Real Stars: Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma: No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off: Easy to reproduce.
If this is a long campaign: ~40 years
The function number: N/A
The complete error text: N/A
The window affected: Main and event window
What you were doing at the time: 5 days increment
Conventional or TN start: TN
Random or Real Stars: Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma: No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off: one-off
If this is a long campaign: ~25 years
The event window (and on the main screen) shows that 40.0000 (instead of 40) MSP are required to repair an engine due to a failure.
The cost of the engine is 40 and the damage has been correctly repaired though, I do not know why it is showing this strange number 40.0000
I can say that just the increment before, the ship had exceeded the deployement time.
Are standing orders supposed to override manual ones? I told a ship to refuel from a tanker rather than a colony and I have to turn off the standing order to make that happen.
Two related bugs:
1) Standing orders to load/unload colonists do not respect population capacity limits for small bodies
2) Civilian colony ships do not respect population capacity limits for small bodies
To duplicate: create a colony on Phobos, which is a tiny moon with a population capacity of .05m. Deliver 50 LG infrastructure, which will give it a population supported by infrastructure value of .21m. Then set standing orders to load/unload colonists on your colony ship, or wait until a civilian colony ship gets around to delivering colonists. Either one will deliver colonists beyond the population capacity, triggering unrest due to overcrowding.
The function number N/A
The complete error text N/A
The window affected Economics/Events
What you were doing at the time: setting standing orders or waiting on Civilian
Conventional or TN start: TN
Random or Real Stars: real
Is your decimal separator a comma?: no
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Easy
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - A year or two into the campaign, after the first civilian shipping company launched a colony ship.
Researching PP still gives 25% bonus with a LG speciality researcher. See attached image.
1.9.4 dot conventional random about 10 years
As moves completes, an open window with movement orders does not update accordingly. Switching tabs and back makes it correct again, as does closing and reopening.
1.9.4 dot conventional random about 10 years
The function number: N/A
The complete error text: N/A
The window affected: Main and event window
What you were doing at the time: 5 days increment
Conventional or TN start: TN
Random or Real Stars: Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma: No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off: one-off
If this is a long campaign: ~25 years
The event window (and on the main screen) shows that 40.0000 (instead of 40) MSP are required to repair an engine due to a failure.
The cost of the engine is 40 and the damage has been correctly repaired though, I do not know why it is showing this strange number 40.0000
I can say that just the increment before, the ship had exceeded the deployement time.
This seems slightly inconsistent, but could very well depend on some OS setting. For me it shows like:
"Repairs have been carried out that required 7.605 maintenance supplies".
So fractional supplies are shown like this. I feel hesitant to move this into bugs right now as it seems like more of a small cosmetic thing, but let me know if you don't agree.
Got a game ending bug, just loaded the game and open economics window and this error throws up.
Probably related to comercial shipyards, since they are gone and trying to add them via SpaceMaster also throws the error.
The function number: #2196
The complete error text: 1. 9. 4 Function #2196 Referencia a objeto no establecida como instancia de objeto. (translation: Object reference not set as object instance)
The window affected: Economy window
What you were doing at the time: Load game
Conventional or TN start: Conventional
Random or Real Stars: Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma: ". "
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off: yes always. just open game, open economics window
If this is a long campaign: 40 years
The function number: N/A
The complete error text: N/A
The window affected: Create Project, missile design, turrets design
What you were doing at the time: NA
Conventional or TN start: NA
Random or Real Stars: NA
Is your decimal separator a comma: No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off: easy
If this is a long campaign: ~NA
There is no instant button when you still have starting RP point if you are not in SM mode. Also using that instant button does not remove the corresponding number of RP points.
As this button is present in the research tab when you have RP points remaining, the same should be true for these three windows as well
The function number: 1690
The complete error text:
1.9.4 Function #1690: Value to add was out of range.
Parameter name: value
The window affected: Main window
What you were doing at the time: Being bombed to death (i strongly suspect this is related to my political modifier being reduced as it started around then)
Conventional or TN start: Conventional
Random or Real Stars: Random
Is your decimal separator a comma?: No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?: It is happening every increment for me
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: 45 year campaign so far (year is 2060)
I am using custom portraits, so I stowed my whole game here:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/85l7jm7youh31hf/aurora_c%2523_1.94.zip/file
Additional note: This save was brought forward from 1.93
Colony ships do not respect maximum # of items on loading.
To duplicate: create a colony ship with 100,000 capacity. Issue a load order for 5 colonists. The colony ship will be filled to capacity.
The function number N/A
The complete error text N/A
The window affected Naval Organization
What you were doing at the time: loading colonists specifying # of items max
Conventional or TN start: TN
Random or Real Stars: real
Is your decimal separator a comma?: no
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Easy
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - First day of the campaign
Visual bug - renaming an alien race's Known Ship Class (with the "Rename Class" button in the "Intelligence and Foreign Relations" tab) will remove both the number and type of the ship until the window is refreshed by closing and reopening the window (example: '1x XX Ambler' changes to just 'Bob', instead of '1x XX Bob').
Separately, under Themes, there's two "Names Beginning with U" (the second of which is actually names that start with 'V'), and then "Names Beginning with V" is actually names starting with 'W'.
Various Ground Support Fighters Bugs and issues:
...
Two related bugs:
1) Standing orders to load/unload colonists do not respect population capacity limits for small bodies
2) Civilian colony ships do not respect population capacity limits for small bodies
To duplicate: create a colony on Phobos, which is a tiny moon with a population capacity of .05m. Deliver 50 LG infrastructure, which will give it a population supported by infrastructure value of .21m. Then set standing orders to load/unload colonists on your colony ship, or wait until a civilian colony ship gets around to delivering colonists. Either one will deliver colonists beyond the population capacity, triggering unrest due to overcrowding.
The function number N/A
The complete error text N/A
The window affected Economics/Events
What you were doing at the time: setting standing orders or waiting on Civilian
Conventional or TN start: TN
Random or Real Stars: real
Is your decimal separator a comma?: no
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Easy
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - A year or two into the campaign, after the first civilian shipping company launched a colony ship.
Thank you for the bug report, it appears theres a bit of a problem with the understanding of mechanics, it is possible to put more population on a planet then there is population "capacity" the capacity does not refer to the max people you can put on the planet but rather the amount it can support, if you want to tell civilians to stop overcrowding planets with very small population capacities you need to set it as "stable" so colonists do not arrive, when populations are that small it just needs 50% of its max population capacity filled to be able to use that option, alternatively you can make it a military restricted colony and move 50,000 people in Phobos case, this is less of a bug and more of a misunderstanding of mechanics and also a slight QOL oversight, it would be ideal if civilians stopped shipping when you were at population capacity but if its still set as "destination" they will keep coming, this may be added in a future patch but it is not exactly a bug outright, and when you yourself do it, thats completely normal the max capacity is again how much it can support reasonably not how many you can actually put there, theoretically you can put 10 million people on phobos but you are gonna have a lot of issues and massive unrest etc.
I hope that clears it up, and I do advise that you make a suggestion in the C# Suggestions for the "destination" designation of a colony to be disabled when you reach past or at population capacity max supported. Either way thank you for the report.
Two related bugs:
1) Standing orders to load/unload colonists do not respect population capacity limits for small bodies
2) Civilian colony ships do not respect population capacity limits for small bodies
To duplicate: create a colony on Phobos, which is a tiny moon with a population capacity of .05m. Deliver 50 LG infrastructure, which will give it a population supported by infrastructure value of .21m. Then set standing orders to load/unload colonists on your colony ship, or wait until a civilian colony ship gets around to delivering colonists. Either one will deliver colonists beyond the population capacity, triggering unrest due to overcrowding.
The function number N/A
The complete error text N/A
The window affected Economics/Events
What you were doing at the time: setting standing orders or waiting on Civilian
Conventional or TN start: TN
Random or Real Stars: real
Is your decimal separator a comma?: no
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Easy
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - A year or two into the campaign, after the first civilian shipping company launched a colony ship.
Thank you for the bug report, it appears theres a bit of a problem with the understanding of mechanics, it is possible to put more population on a planet then there is population "capacity" the capacity does not refer to the max people you can put on the planet but rather the amount it can support, if you want to tell civilians to stop overcrowding planets with very small population capacities you need to set it as "stable" so colonists do not arrive, when populations are that small it just needs 50% of its max population capacity filled to be able to use that option, alternatively you can make it a military restricted colony and move 50,000 people in Phobos case, this is less of a bug and more of a misunderstanding of mechanics and also a slight QOL oversight, it would be ideal if civilians stopped shipping when you were at population capacity but if its still set as "destination" they will keep coming, this may be added in a future patch but it is not exactly a bug outright, and when you yourself do it, thats completely normal the max capacity is again how much it can support reasonably not how many you can actually put there, theoretically you can put 10 million people on phobos but you are gonna have a lot of issues and massive unrest etc.
I hope that clears it up, and I do advise that you make a suggestion in the C# Suggestions for the "destination" designation of a colony to be disabled when you reach past or at population capacity max supported. Either way thank you for the report.
I respectfully disagree. Per http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg106715#msg106715
3) The available capacity of the system body on which the population is situated, taking into account other populations.
4) The available capacity of the infrastructure (normal or LG depending on the gravity), taking into account the current population size.
5) The lesser of 2) and 3) is used as the base capacity of the population to accept new colonists.
The available capacity of the infrastructure is being checked, but the available capacity of the system body is not. In this case the colony can have infrastructure with 0 population (so the stable button is not an option), and the first ship to deliver colonists will overcrowd it.
Additionally - the other bug which doesn't allow partial colonist loads means that you would either have to create tiny colony ship with very limited capacity to load it, or use SM mode to move the colonists.
Version 1.9.4.
The function number - None
The complete error text - None
The window affected - Economics - Shipyards
What you were doing at the time - refitting ships
Is your decimal separator a comma? - no
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? - easy to reproduce
A bit of annoying thing when refitting ships. Not sure if it is intended behavior. If you select Refit in Task Type (Economics - Shipyards), there is list in Refit From menu that includes obsolete classes that have no active ships in the game, so as you progress the game and make new classes, the list continues to grow.
Only solution I am aware is to delete non active designs from Class Design list and IMHO that is not always desirable solution.
I'm seeing the cycling 222, 224, 2339, 2608 errors (all Object reference not set to an instance of the object) on transiting an unexplored jump point (this looks to be linked to NPR generation, and goes back to at least 1.7.3). 1.9.4 installation, TN start on 1.9.3 or 1.9.4 (can't remember offhand), nothing particularly exotic going on. I did move the save from one computer to another, but I've had no other issues, and I deleted the database instead of pasting over.Do you have a DB where you can reproduce the errors? If yes, could you make a new post with it attached and also name which system(s) are causing the issue(s), please.
Real stars, less than a year into the campaign.
Oh, and one other thing. After I got through the errors (took quite a while), I noticed that the oxygen percentage on the probable planet was 31.69%, which puts it into the "dangerous atmosphere" region, IIRC. Not sure if that's related or not.
You can massively cheat on ground unit construction time by modifying a ground unit formation template after starting an order.I assume this goes under "cheating in solitaire" but it can be done by accident as well so I'm moving it for Steve to decide.
The window affected: Ground forces/formation templates
What you were doing at the time: see below
Is your decimal separator a comma?: No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?: Easy
The rest: N/AExpected behaviour: Since Formation templates unlike ships classes are not directly linked to the units, modifying a template should not affect units already in training. The game should remember the composition of the unit when it was initially ordered and create units based on that template at the end of the training period.
- Create a formation template (e.g. Battalion) with one unit, e.g. a light vehicle with some weapon
- Order a bunch of these battalions, which are very cheap and have a build time of only a few days.
- Add a few hundred expensive units to the battalion, increasing the build points massively
- The battalion is still completed after a few days, since it builds what the template is currently, not what was initially ordered.
Not really. It happened on transit into an unexplored jump point, which subsequently turned out to have a habitable planet and an NPR. I suspect that the error was somewhere in the code for generating that. I've since jumped into the system with no problems. If the database would be helpful, I can post it, but it's obviously not something I can reproduce on demand.I'm seeing the cycling 222, 224, 2339, 2608 errors (all Object reference not set to an instance of the object) on transiting an unexplored jump point (this looks to be linked to NPR generation, and goes back to at least 1.7.3). 1.9.4 installation, TN start on 1.9.3 or 1.9.4 (can't remember offhand), nothing particularly exotic going on. I did move the save from one computer to another, but I've had no other issues, and I deleted the database instead of pasting over.Do you have a DB where you can reproduce the errors? If yes, could you make a new post with it attached and also name which system(s) are causing the issue(s), please.
Real stars, less than a year into the campaign.
Oh, and one other thing. After I got through the errors (took quite a while), I noticed that the oxygen percentage on the probable planet was 31.69%, which puts it into the "dangerous atmosphere" region, IIRC. Not sure if that's related or not.
Not really. It happened on transit into an unexplored jump point, which subsequently turned out to have a habitable planet and an NPR. I suspect that the error was somewhere in the code for generating that. I've since jumped into the system with no problems. If the database would be helpful, I can post it, but it's obviously not something I can reproduce on demand.I'm seeing the cycling 222, 224, 2339, 2608 errors (all Object reference not set to an instance of the object) on transiting an unexplored jump point (this looks to be linked to NPR generation, and goes back to at least 1.7.3). 1.9.4 installation, TN start on 1.9.3 or 1.9.4 (can't remember offhand), nothing particularly exotic going on. I did move the save from one computer to another, but I've had no other issues, and I deleted the database instead of pasting over.Do you have a DB where you can reproduce the errors? If yes, could you make a new post with it attached and also name which system(s) are causing the issue(s), please.
Real stars, less than a year into the campaign.
Oh, and one other thing. After I got through the errors (took quite a while), I noticed that the oxygen percentage on the probable planet was 31.69%, which puts it into the "dangerous atmosphere" region, IIRC. Not sure if that's related or not.
I've attached the database. Not sure what I can do to reproduce it other than exploring a lot of systems, which I was already doing for other reasons.Not really. It happened on transit into an unexplored jump point, which subsequently turned out to have a habitable planet and an NPR. I suspect that the error was somewhere in the code for generating that. I've since jumped into the system with no problems. If the database would be helpful, I can post it, but it's obviously not something I can reproduce on demand.I'm seeing the cycling 222, 224, 2339, 2608 errors (all Object reference not set to an instance of the object) on transiting an unexplored jump point (this looks to be linked to NPR generation, and goes back to at least 1.7.3). 1.9.4 installation, TN start on 1.9.3 or 1.9.4 (can't remember offhand), nothing particularly exotic going on. I did move the save from one computer to another, but I've had no other issues, and I deleted the database instead of pasting over.Do you have a DB where you can reproduce the errors? If yes, could you make a new post with it attached and also name which system(s) are causing the issue(s), please.
Real stars, less than a year into the campaign.
Oh, and one other thing. After I got through the errors (took quite a while), I noticed that the oxygen percentage on the probable planet was 31.69%, which puts it into the "dangerous atmosphere" region, IIRC. Not sure if that's related or not.
The Database can be useful as steve can see if he can find any code around that, that may be the issue, but if not then I suggest either trying to reproduce it and if you cant then this is enough aka making steve aware so if it pops up again.
The function number - Not ApplicableThis probably isn't a bug. Even the system the sector HQ is in doesn't automatically assign to the sector. Make sure it's assigned in the sector window and see if that fixes it.
The complete error text - Not Applicable
The window affected - Economics Window, Summary Tab & Commanders Window
What you were doing at the time - Just playing as usual, nothing out of the ordinary.
Conventional or TN start - Conventional
Random or Real Stars - Random
Is your decimal separator a comma? - Nope.
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? - Should be super easy to reproduce.
This produced in v1.9.4 with a 1.9.3 save that was carried over.
--- I believe it is a display bug, but I cannot confirm at this time. I happened upon this bug during the course of normal play. Upon assigning an administrator to my Sector Command, specifically the Sol Sector, the Sector Governor in the Summary Tab of the Economics Window fails to display them as such. The Commanders Window confirms that they are, in fact, the commander of the Sector. To reproduce this bug, simply assign an administrator to a Sector Command, simplicity itself.
--- Upon a little bit of further testing, it seems this is not merely a display bug. The original administrator possessed no bonuses, but when I assigned another commander who did have bonuses, they failed to be applied along with the new administrator failing to be shown as the Sector Governor. This is despite the Commanders Window showing that them as being assigned to the Sol Sector.
IIRC, conditional orders need to clear the command list. Standing orders are what the ship is supposed to do when it has no other orders. In particular, if standing orders clear the list then you can't have both standing and conditional orders set because the conditional order will override the standing order when it fires instead of the other way around.Are standing orders supposed to override manual ones? I told a ship to refuel from a tanker rather than a colony and I have to turn off the standing order to make that happen.
I think this is WAI because manual orders could potentially leave a ship unable to perform the standing orders. I have a vague memory of Steve stating something like that but cannot find the post. If anyone can prove otherwise I'll report it as a bug.
IIRC, conditional orders need to clear the command list. Standing orders are what the ship is supposed to do when it has no other orders. In particular, if standing orders clear the list then you can't have both standing and conditional orders set because the conditional order will override the standing order when it fires instead of the other way around.Are standing orders supposed to override manual ones? I told a ship to refuel from a tanker rather than a colony and I have to turn off the standing order to make that happen.
I think this is WAI because manual orders could potentially leave a ship unable to perform the standing orders. I have a vague memory of Steve stating something like that but cannot find the post. If anyone can prove otherwise I'll report it as a bug.
Was gonna say what Garfunkel said. I thought that might be the issue as it will just reset if you don't use default fleet.1. Civilian colony ships do not respect max body population. Will cause overcrowding if you don't manually set to source or stable.As far as I'm aware this is WAI. They will respect your wishes if you go to the Economics-Civilian Economy tab and put the colony as Stable.
2. Orbital Habitats will likewise continue to grow even when max pop+hab capacity<pop, causing overcrowding.
3. Civilian fleets show up in instant build drop-down for ship classes.
The function number-N/A
The complete error text-N/A
The window affected-N/A
What you were doing at the time - Testing population and civilian trading mechanics. LG infrastructure is now traded, yay!
Conventional or TN start - TN
Random or Real Stars - Real
Is your decimal separator a comma? - 1,000.00
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Reproducible
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - less than 75
Sorry I wasn't clear. These are three separate issues.
1. Civilian shipping ignoring max body pop may be WAI, requiring you to manually turn off colonist transfer. Can catch people by surprise when overcrowding penalties start to accrue. Might cause confusion with the two separate sources of overcrowding (infra and max pop)
2. Separately from the above, natural population growth in a colony with orbital habitats will cause overcrowding.
3. Completely separate thing that I noticed when spawning in the Orbital Hab, Civilian fleets show up in instant build drop-down for ship classes.
In a new system I discovered some asteroids were generated inside the star.While technically a bug, that is awesome. If they are usable then count me as a vote for keeping that one. :)
When you post, please post as much information as possible, including:V.19.4
The function number N/A
The complete error text N/A
The window affected Ground Forces
What you were doing at the time Organizing Ground Forces
Conventional or TN start TN Start
Random or Real Stars Real
Is your decimal separator a comma? .
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? easy
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well 1.5 years
ground forces formations do not respect template rank, easy to repeat instant build a light artillery or mortar battalion and the template states LTC for C.O and the unit that is built requires a MAJ instead. see attached DB
Was gonna say what Garfunkel said. I thought that might be the issue as it will just reset if you don't use default fleet.1. Civilian colony ships do not respect max body population. Will cause overcrowding if you don't manually set to source or stable.As far as I'm aware this is WAI. They will respect your wishes if you go to the Economics-Civilian Economy tab and put the colony as Stable.
2. Orbital Habitats will likewise continue to grow even when max pop+hab capacity<pop, causing overcrowding.
3. Civilian fleets show up in instant build drop-down for ship classes.
The function number-N/A
The complete error text-N/A
The window affected-N/A
What you were doing at the time - Testing population and civilian trading mechanics. LG infrastructure is now traded, yay!
Conventional or TN start - TN
Random or Real Stars - Real
Is your decimal separator a comma? - 1,000.00
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Reproducible
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - less than 75
Sorry I wasn't clear. These are three separate issues.
1. Civilian shipping ignoring max body pop may be WAI, requiring you to manually turn off colonist transfer. Can catch people by surprise when overcrowding penalties start to accrue. Might cause confusion with the two separate sources of overcrowding (infra and max pop)
2. Separately from the above, natural population growth in a colony with orbital habitats will cause overcrowding.
3. Completely separate thing that I noticed when spawning in the Orbital Hab, Civilian fleets show up in instant build drop-down for ship classes.
While I have seen some talk about whether 1 is WAI, what about 2 and 3? The orbital habitat issue could easily cripple a colony on a small body with overcrowding with no means to deal with it short of spamming police or finding a way to sink the extra colonist growth. 3 is a minor issue but is presumably a bug.
After a forum search and having looked at the known issues i did not find anything related to this, so i'm posting as a new bug.You don't have to close and relaunch the game, just hit the refresh button
The function number - None
The complete error text - None
The window affected - System View (specifically the Mineral tab)
What you were doing at the time - Geo Survey of Sol
Conventional or TN start - TN
Random or Real Stars - Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma? - No. Decimal Separator is ". "
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? - Easy. See Below
If this is a long campaign - Less then 1 year
When surveying system bodies with minerals the Mineral Tab in the System View would not update with new entries.
There were event messages for new Body With Minerals discovered and the Mineral Overview screen would also be correct (you could search and the body would be there)
Saving and restarting would cause the Mineral Tab to now display correct info, but if you continued surveying the newly surveyed locations would not show up again.
In the following image you can see the event for minerals discovered on C/2017 K2, but the mineral tab does not show an entry for that system body
https://i. imgur. com/dwtcXH0. png
After a game reload and without advancing time the entry is now in the Mineral Tab
https://i. imgur. com/LAcpIeu. png
Advancing time again until a new mineral discovery shows minerals on Chernykh with an appropriate entry on the Mineral Report Window, but again there is no entry on the Mineral Tab of System View
https://i. imgur. com/u0wDL2U. png
You don't have to close and relaunch the game, just hit the refresh button
In a new system I discovered some asteroids were generated inside the star.While technically a bug, that is awesome. If they are usable then count me as a vote for keeping that one. :)
Version 1.9.4Would you be able to supply the DB?
Function Number 1531
Error Text: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
My last active geosurvey ship in the system was just unable to fill out it's standing orders of "geosurvey 5 bodies". There were still bodies in the system but they were too far away. I had two other geosurvey ships that just stopped because there were no other bodies close enough that weren't already claimed, but they did not trigger an error.
TN Start
Real Stars
period decimal separator
I'll post and ask about this as it does seem wrong.Was gonna say what Garfunkel said. I thought that might be the issue as it will just reset if you don't use default fleet.1. Civilian colony ships do not respect max body population. Will cause overcrowding if you don't manually set to source or stable.As far as I'm aware this is WAI. They will respect your wishes if you go to the Economics-Civilian Economy tab and put the colony as Stable.
2. Orbital Habitats will likewise continue to grow even when max pop+hab capacity<pop, causing overcrowding.
3. Civilian fleets show up in instant build drop-down for ship classes.
The function number-N/A
The complete error text-N/A
The window affected-N/A
What you were doing at the time - Testing population and civilian trading mechanics. LG infrastructure is now traded, yay!
Conventional or TN start - TN
Random or Real Stars - Real
Is your decimal separator a comma? - 1,000.00
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Reproducible
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - less than 75
Sorry I wasn't clear. These are three separate issues.
1. Civilian shipping ignoring max body pop may be WAI, requiring you to manually turn off colonist transfer. Can catch people by surprise when overcrowding penalties start to accrue. Might cause confusion with the two separate sources of overcrowding (infra and max pop)
2. Separately from the above, natural population growth in a colony with orbital habitats will cause overcrowding.
3. Completely separate thing that I noticed when spawning in the Orbital Hab, Civilian fleets show up in instant build drop-down for ship classes.
While I have seen some talk about whether 1 is WAI, what about 2 and 3? The orbital habitat issue could easily cripple a colony on a small body with overcrowding with no means to deal with it short of spamming police or finding a way to sink the extra colonist growth. 3 is a minor issue but is presumably a bug.
Just tested the effect of orbital habitats continuing to grow population when full and cause overcrowding on the surface. This will rapidly cripple any colony with a full orbital habitat over a small boy (i.e. Phobos) as the garrison strength required to prevent the resulting unrest from overcrowding grows with the square of surface pop/body capacity with no apparent upper limit. Since small bodies are otherwise attractive locations for orbital habitats, this seems like a nasty downside to orbital habitats. It seems that they should not overfill the surface.
In a new system I discovered some asteroids were generated inside the star.Did this cause any errors or are you asking if this is expected behavior?
The function number N/A
The complete error text N/A
The window affected N/A
What you were doing at the time Nothing, this is immediatly after new game generation
Conventional or TN start Both
Random or Real Stars Both
Is your decimal separator a comma? Dot
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Super Easy. :)
TLDR: Jupiter always has a LP, even if there is no second LP in the system.
As per the C# changes list (hxxp: aurora2. pentarch. org/index. php?topic=8495. msg109206#msg109206), Jupiter should only generate a LP if Minerva (Planet X option) is present and a Super Jovian.
In my current game I noticed Jupiter has a LP despite Minerva being a terrestial planet.
I tried generating more games with Minerva, but only got to 3 attempts in all of which Minerva was a Super Jovian with corrosponding LP.
On attempt 4 I forgot to check the Planet X option.
Jupiter had a LP regardless.
Further testing with different options (TN, Non-TN, Real Stars on/off) shows that Jupiter always spawns with an LP, even if there is no second LP in the system.
The function number N/A
The complete error text N/A
The window affected N/A
What you were doing at the time
Conventional or TN start :TN
Random or Real Stars : real start
Is your decimal separator a comma? comma
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? no idea but it should be
not exactly a bug - rather issue needing some attention (ver 1.94)
npr landed on my listining post planet
I reacted with fleet , destroyed enemy TF , thinned their land forces and parked over planet waiting for troop transport ( I wanted to test my units vs new enemy)
moment later my defensless tracking station is captured by enemy land forces and FLEET SURRENDERS to NPR !!!!!
no combat damage , was 5 days off my home base so morale should be maxed
System generation appears to be wonky. I've set up a new game with those settings:
New game
non-real stars
maximum number of stars set to 10
no NPRs
I've entered SM mode and begun exploring the jump points. I've got up to twenty three systems before the game crashed for some reason, despite the fact there were supposed to be only ten stars. In addition no connections between known star systems have been created.
Hi, a one salvager related bugs possibly and one suggestion. . v 1. 9. 4
The function number - none
The complete error text - none
The window affected - event window
What you were doing at the time - salvaging in a fleet, three salvager ships, medals setup to award as per the salvaging limits.
Conventional or TN start - TN start
Random or Real Stars - Real
Is your decimal separator a comma? - Y
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? easily reproduced
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - 2106 current year, not sure when it started.
Description - salvager ship commanders do not seem to recieve the salvaging medals when salvaging in a fleet, when seperated into individual units in fleets, the awards worked ok. The other item, not sure if it is WAI. . when the salvagers cargo hold is full it does not stop salvaging or provide a event, the event displays wreck salvaged, but no minerals or components are displayed. Could we get the salvager to stop or add in a secondary standing order, possibly conditional?
Can you please provide a DB and if not please try to reproduce the issue and ensure you have set the settings properly.
Can you please provide a DB and if not please try to reproduce the issue and ensure you have set the settings properly.
Games "bug test" and "bug test 2". Both of them were set to 10 systems of non-real stars before I begun exploring both have over 20 systems and neither of them has any loops. In bug test 2 there are two systems with 2 sets of jump points linking them, but that is a known bug that has been reported numerous times. I do think now however that when the game is trying to set up loops it just sets the connection back to one of the systems the star is already connecting to. Anyway there shouldn't be more than ten systems if I understand the setup correctly.
This bug was mentioned as an off-topic part of my massive ground combat bug report, but I figured I would repost an update, since it's affecting more and more planets now.
The function number N/A
The complete error text N/A
The window affected N/A
What you were doing at the time: normal gameplay
Conventional or TN start :TN
Random or Real Stars : real start
Is your decimal separator a comma? natively a period
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Ongoing.
Details:
Every 6 months, the NPR I discovered places colonies on multiple bodies I control and have occupied with ground forces. These bodies immediately are conquered, and start cluttering up my summary screen. I can manually delete them, but it's getting pretty frustrating as it's multiple deletions every 6 months, and if I ignore them I get unrest clutter in my events.
The next spawn of colonies should be ~June 16th, approximately a month from the save.
I tried to set a demand with threat leave order in diplomacy, hoping that it would signal to the NPR to stop trying to build colonies there, but it didn't work. I also attempted to SM in an alliance so I could see where they're left (since I captured the homeworld) to then eradicate them to stop getting these messages, but SM diplo points and NPRs is one-sided.
Database is attached. Same game as the ground forces error report.
These are 2 bugs both related to shipyards:
The function number: #2097
The complete error text: 1.9.4. Attempted to divide by zero
The window affected: Main Window, but also Economy/shipyards
What you were doing at the time: I have two classes (Defiant class and Defiant Mk2 class) that for some strange reason have a refit cost of 0. This is the cause of the bug. When I tried to refit a Defiant class to Defiant 2, it threw the above mentioned error and deleted the shipyard tasks list. Now my save is corrupted (I get an error every construction phase) and I need to go back to a backup. Lesson: Don't try stupid things without saving first.
Conventional or TN start: C
Random or Real Stars: Real
Is your decimal separator a comma?: No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?: unknown, I never had 2 classes with a refit cost of zero before. I have not tried to reproduce, but the class designs are in the DB.
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: 47 years
Additional Info: The only difference between Defiant and Defiant 2 are the 2 upgraded Gauss turrets, 1 upgraded Beam fire control and some fighter fuel storage to bring the tonnage in line. I noticed after the bug happened that they do have the exact same number of build points. This might be why they have a refit cost of zero. Even if the build points are exactly the same, the refit and retool cost should not be zero, as it still takes work to upgrade those components. Also, I'm not even sure why the build points are the same, as the new Fire control costs almost twice as much as the old one.
An additional weird bug: I have some other cruiser variants, namely the Intrepid Strike Cruiser and the Ajax Command Cruiser. A shipyard tooled for the Defiant can build the Ajax and the Intrepid as their build points were apparently similar. All these classes have 2 Gauss turrets and 1 beam fire control for the turrets. I designed a Ajax 2 and Intrepid 2 with the same exact upgrades as the Defiant class (only change gauss turrets, Beam FC, fighter fuel storage). Now, the shipyard tooled for the Defiant 2 class cannot build Intrepid 2 or Ajax 2 classes, but they can build Ajax 1 and Intrepid 1 classes , even though the components difference between Defiant 2 and Ajax 2 is smaller than between Defiant 2 and Ajax 1. This is very confusing, but might be related to the first bug.
DB is attached, game is Cosinusgame
- snip -
I am 99% sure this is WAI, could you please post the link fully as I cannot use it to find the post you describe, but I do distinctly remember reading Jupiter would always have a Lagrange point due to its mass, further information would be appreciated
The planet will be located at a distance between 125% and 225% of the orbit of the most distant dwarf planet. 10% of the time it will be a terrestrial body, 60% a gas giant and 30% a superjovian. Moons, Trojan asteroids and a Lagrange point may also be generated depending on the type of planet generated. If Planet X has a Lagrange point, a Lagrange point will also be generated for Jupiter. While very distant from the inner system, this could add an interesting variation to the Sol system.
- snip -
I am 99% sure this is WAI, could you please post the link fully as I cannot use it to find the post you describe, but I do distinctly remember reading Jupiter would always have a Lagrange point due to its mass, further information would be appreciated
That is the full link, just the anti-spam obfuscation at work. But since that was in fact my tenth post, I should be able to post proper links now. :)
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg109206#msg109206QuoteThe planet will be located at a distance between 125% and 225% of the orbit of the most distant dwarf planet. 10% of the time it will be a terrestrial body, 60% a gas giant and 30% a superjovian. Moons, Trojan asteroids and a Lagrange point may also be generated depending on the type of planet generated. If Planet X has a Lagrange point, a Lagrange point will also be generated for Jupiter. While very distant from the inner system, this could add an interesting variation to the Sol system.
Also, I haven't found any LP's so far in systems with only one Super-Jovian. They should only occur in systems with 2 or more Super-Jovians, but I can't make sure of that right now since I'm still stuck in Sol in my current game. About to leave though, so I can check soon™.
On a related note, a way to easier tell normal Gas Giants and Super-Jovians apart would be nice, they're all labeled "Planet - Gas Giant" in the System Display.
And btw, VB6 behaviour was like this as well: either there are at least two LP's, or none at all. http://aurorawiki.pentarch.org/index.php?title=Lagrange_Point
These are 2 bugs both related to shipyards:
The function number: #2097
The complete error text: 1.9.4. Attempted to divide by zero
The window affected: Main Window, but also Economy/shipyards
What you were doing at the time: I have two classes (Defiant class and Defiant Mk2 class) that for some strange reason have a refit cost of 0. This is the cause of the bug. When I tried to refit a Defiant class to Defiant 2, it threw the above mentioned error and deleted the shipyard tasks list. Now my save is corrupted (I get an error every construction phase) and I need to go back to a backup. Lesson: Don't try stupid things without saving first.
Conventional or TN start: C
Random or Real Stars: Real
Is your decimal separator a comma?: No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?: unknown, I never had 2 classes with a refit cost of zero before. I have not tried to reproduce, but the class designs are in the DB.
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: 47 years
Additional Info: The only difference between Defiant and Defiant 2 are the 2 upgraded Gauss turrets, 1 upgraded Beam fire control and some fighter fuel storage to bring the tonnage in line. I noticed after the bug happened that they do have the exact same number of build points. This might be why they have a refit cost of zero. Even if the build points are exactly the same, the refit and retool cost should not be zero, as it still takes work to upgrade those components. Also, I'm not even sure why the build points are the same, as the new Fire control costs almost twice as much as the old one.
An additional weird bug: I have some other cruiser variants, namely the Intrepid Strike Cruiser and the Ajax Command Cruiser. A shipyard tooled for the Defiant can build the Ajax and the Intrepid as their build points were apparently similar. All these classes have 2 Gauss turrets and 1 beam fire control for the turrets. I designed a Ajax 2 and Intrepid 2 with the same exact upgrades as the Defiant class (only change gauss turrets, Beam FC, fighter fuel storage). Now, the shipyard tooled for the Defiant 2 class cannot build Intrepid 2 or Ajax 2 classes, but they can build Ajax 1 and Intrepid 1 classes , even though the components difference between Defiant 2 and Ajax 2 is smaller than between Defiant 2 and Ajax 1. This is very confusing, but might be related to the first bug.
Probably it has already posted:
The function number: 569 & 2187
The complete error text: Object reference not set as object instance
The window affected: GU Training
What you were doing at the time: Press "Create Task" while no selecting any GU Template
Conventional or TN start: TN
Random or Real Stars: Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma: No
Is the bug easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off: easy
If this is a long campaign: ~30 years
Quote from: shanedday link=topic=11231. msg131133#msg131133 date=1588742709Hi, a one salvager related bugs possibly and one suggestion. . v 1. 9. 4
The function number - none
The complete error text - none
The window affected - event window
What you were doing at the time - salvaging in a fleet, three salvager ships, medals setup to award as per the salvaging limits.
Conventional or TN start - TN start
Random or Real Stars - Real
Is your decimal separator a comma? - Y
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? easily reproduced
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - 2106 current year, not sure when it started.
Description - salvager ship commanders do not seem to recieve the salvaging medals when salvaging in a fleet, when seperated into individual units in fleets, the awards worked ok. The other item, not sure if it is WAI. . when the salvagers cargo hold is full it does not stop salvaging or provide a event, the event displays wreck salvaged, but no minerals or components are displayed. Could we get the salvager to stop or add in a secondary standing order, possibly conditional?
If the Y = Yes your decimal separator is a comma then please head over here hxxp: aurora2. pentarch. org/index. php?topic=11139. 0 , having it set this way can cause a multitude of issues involving display bugs etc. Once you have done so please attempt to reproduce the bug and then edit your post accordingly