Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Please read the rules before you post!


Topic Summary

Posted by: jRides
« on: March 09, 2011, 02:34:39 PM »

Aye, hopefully 5.4 will sort this, as it stands I get the errors but once ingame there is no problems - setting up a Conventional Empire game gives a fatal error, I needed task manager to get past the error pop ups and out of the game generation - but the game had been set up ok it seems and I could play it with no issues once I restarted Aurora.
Posted by: Smight
« on: March 09, 2011, 01:59:22 PM »

i have same problem with 5. 30 also I noticed that is says Version 5. 20 on Game details once you click past the initial errors.
Posted by: Shimmergloom
« on: February 25, 2011, 09:24:29 AM »

Thanks a lot, I will be eagerly awaiting that - having a lot of fun in my 5. 20 game anyway, atm :)
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: February 25, 2011, 04:10:10 AM »

So, I gave it another try: installed 4. 91 into c:\auroragame - runs normally. 
Copied 5. 30 . exe and . mdb over it - runs into the error mentioned above. 

Copied 5. 20 . exe and . mdb over it - runs flawlessly. 

I've attached the errors to this post.

Any clue? Mr.   Walmsley? Anyone? Thanks a whole lot, I am enjoying 5. 20 a lot already!


No Clue :). The error 91 is caused because of the first error. I have no idea though why the program can't find the database, especially as v5.20 is working fine. The only difference for v5.30 is that there is no example game, although that shouldn't cause that problem. I am going to release v5.40 in the next few days and I'll include an example game just in case.

Steve
Posted by: Shimmergloom
« on: February 25, 2011, 02:32:24 AM »

So, I gave it another try: installed 4. 91 into c:\auroragame - runs normally. 
Copied 5. 30 . exe and . mdb over it - runs into the error mentioned above. 

Copied 5. 20 . exe and . mdb over it - runs flawlessly. 

I've attached the errors to this post.

Any clue? Mr.   Walmsley? Anyone? Thanks a whole lot, I am enjoying 5. 20 a lot already!
Posted by: SakSak
« on: February 21, 2011, 06:36:16 PM »

Quote from: Steve Walmsley link=topic=3179. msg31358#msg31358 date=1298334635
Narrowband sensors were an idea that evolved into something else.  I think there is a Narrowband tech that I left in by mistake but it doesn't do anything.  Instead, the active sensor model was completely changed so that it is easier to detect smaller objects.  A sensor with a resolution of 100 will be identical in both the old and new sensor models.  In the new model, smaller resolutions have greater ranges than before with the greatest change at resolution 1.  Above resolution 100, sensor ranges are less than before.

This is the thread in which the original discussion took place.  It gets to about page 3 before I propose what was eventually implemented.

Steve

Ahh, thanks for clearing that up.

Also explains the indeterminate feeling I had of the sensor ability in component display being not quite what I seemed to remember it being.
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: February 21, 2011, 06:30:35 PM »

I've tried scanning threads, but couldn't find an answer.

Are the narrowband sensors functional in 5. 30? They are in 5. 20, but I remember Steve saying that the tech is functionally useless there.  Because I have a few ideas for a fleet support type area denial PD ship where those would fit extremely well without increasing the size of my sensor package too far.

Narrowband sensors were an idea that evolved into something else. I think there is a Narrowband tech that I left in by mistake but it doesn't do anything. Instead, the active sensor model was completely changed so that it is easier to detect smaller objects. A sensor with a resolution of 100 will be identical in both the old and new sensor models. In the new model, smaller resolutions have greater ranges than before with the greatest change at resolution 1. Above resolution 100, sensor ranges are less than before.

This is the thread in which the original discussion took place. It gets to about page 3 before I propose what was eventually implemented: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php/topic,2765.0.html

Steve
Posted by: SakSak
« on: February 21, 2011, 06:14:16 PM »

I've tried scanning threads, but couldn't find an answer.

Are the narrowband sensors functional in 5. 30? They are in 5. 20, but I remember Steve saying that the tech is functionally useless there.  Because I have a few ideas for a fleet support type area denial PD ship where those would fit extremely well without increasing the size of my sensor package too far.
Posted by: Shimmergloom
« on: February 21, 2011, 04:31:38 AM »

Quote from: Erik Luken link=topic=3179. msg31249#msg31249 date=1298146500
I'm on Win7, 64 bit and I've got Aurora running fine.  I upgraded my 5. 20 to 5. 30.  My install directory is D:\Games\Aurora.

Maybe try installing 5. 30 on top of 5. 20?

Just like sloanjh, I tried that too - both in the program files directory as well as in a seperate one that's just in my . . \games\folder.

No method for 5. 30 works for me so far - neither 4. 91 -> 5. 30, nor 4. 91 -> 5. 20 -> 5. 30.  And that's no matter where I install it (and believe me, that's not the first game I am installing that's a bit funky on the installation side).

Since some people have it running on Win7 w/o problems, apparantly, I am seonding sloanjh - I suspect something subtle changed somewhere.  Still, I ended up starting a new 5. 20 game instead of 5. 30 too - so any new ideas would be greatly appreciated! :(
Posted by: sloanjh
« on: February 19, 2011, 07:22:31 PM »

I'm on Win7, 64 bit and I've got Aurora running fine. I upgraded my 5.20 to 5.30. My install directory is D:\Games\Aurora.

Maybe try installing 5.30 on top of 5.20?

That's what I tried....

The fact that others seem to have it working on win7 is why I haven't screamed louder; whatever is going on it's probably subtle.  I ended up just starting a new 5.2 game.

John
Posted by: Erik L
« on: February 19, 2011, 02:15:00 PM »

I'm on Win7, 64 bit and I've got Aurora running fine. I upgraded my 5.20 to 5.30. My install directory is D:\Games\Aurora.

Maybe try installing 5.30 on top of 5.20?
Posted by: sloanjh
« on: February 19, 2011, 12:08:32 PM »

In fact I do use Windows 7 but I already knew I had to run it as admin.   

What I did was: download 4. 91 and install (worked), run as admin - works fine!
Download 5. 30 patch, extract with 7zip, overwrite .   exe and .   mdb - run as admin: run into the "stevefire. mdb not found" error.   

This was in both scenarios of installing it into .   .   \program files\aurora as well as any other kind of folder.   

So, then I thought to myself "give 5. 20 a chance"!

Uninstalled everything, installed 4. 91, downloaded 5. 20, extracted it, overwrote . exe and . mbd - run as admin et voilá: 5. 20 runs flawlessly.   

So, that leaves me with the error I described earlier: 5. 30 won't run, it still says it can't find the stevefire. mdb file.  Dismissing that error dumps me into an error cycle so I have to kill the process.   

5. 20 on the other hand works very well.   

This is almost certainly the same failure mode I'm seeing, including the win7 part.  I already had a 5.2 install working (in a "normal" directory, i.e. not program files, since I remembered someone saying something about win7 doing funky things when you try to replace the DB in program files).  When I did the usual thing that I've done a bazillion times (including on win7) of extracting the two files and stomping them in my working directory, it broke.  When I went back to 5.2 and stomped the same two files it went back to working.  So it appears that something has subtly changed with 5.3;  my suspicion is that it's something to do with 7zip.

John
Posted by: Shimmergloom
« on: February 18, 2011, 11:16:54 AM »

Quote from: Erik Luken link=topic=3179.   msg31227#msg31227 date=1298043920
Did you try to update after running 5. 2? Maybe there is some registry value needed.    Also under Vista/Win7 make sure you run as administrator on the program.   

In fact I do use Windows 7 but I already knew I had to run it as admin.   

What I did was: download 4. 91 and install (worked), run as admin - works fine!
Download 5. 30 patch, extract with 7zip, overwrite .   exe and .   mdb - run as admin: run into the "stevefire. mdb not found" error.   

This was in both scenarios of installing it into .   .   \program files\aurora as well as any other kind of folder.   

So, then I thought to myself "give 5. 20 a chance"!

Uninstalled everything, installed 4. 91, downloaded 5. 20, extracted it, overwrote . exe and . mbd - run as admin et voilá: 5. 20 runs flawlessly.   

So, that leaves me with the error I described earlier: 5. 30 won't run, it still says it can't find the stevefire. mdb file.  Dismissing that error dumps me into an error cycle so I have to kill the process.   

5. 20 on the other hand works very well.   
Posted by: Erik L
« on: February 18, 2011, 09:45:20 AM »

Except that it doesn't - once it complains about the "missing" stevefire.  mdp it loops into an error message.

5. 20 runs flawlessly.

Did you try to update after running 5.2? Maybe there is some registry value needed. Also under Vista/Win7 make sure you run as administrator on the program.
Posted by: Shimmergloom
« on: February 18, 2011, 09:33:40 AM »

Quote from: Erik Luken link=topic=3179.  msg31214#msg31214 date=1297994641
If you are talking that initial error, click okay and you can continue and the game works. 

Except that it doesn't - once it complains about the "missing" stevefire.  mdp it loops into an error message.

5. 20 runs flawlessly.