Author Topic: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread  (Read 107589 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20349 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #630 on: September 01, 2015, 08:38:04 AM »
Paul started his epic campaign ages ago, as I recall he's running in 6.10 .
I've said this before many times but I know 5 second increments are essential for working out parts of the simulation, but I just would live an option for them to not stop turn processing unless they're actually caused by my own sensors.
Edit: I think that is part of what amimai was suggesting. Basically keep running turn processing as normal but don't stop unless it's something that's relevant to the player.

You mean still have the short increments but the player wouldn't need to press the turn button?

That should be happening in most cases already. The game has separate interrupt code for the AI and the players so that events that stop the game if they happen to the player, won't stop the game if they happen to an AI player. I'll go through the EventType table and see if I can flag a few more as 'no interrupt'.

Also you can use the Minimum Increments options on the tactical map to force the game to keep processing increments no matter what happens.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20349 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #631 on: September 01, 2015, 08:40:08 AM »
Well the errors are from an already fixed morale bug, so you could open the database and modify the deployment time for all affected units, it shouldn't be too time consuming with only 40 units, just open in a text editor and search for whatever string precedes deployment time.

Or unlock the classes in the F5 window and edit it there. Just remember to select each ship in the Ship window so it updates the class-related data. What is error message connected with the morale bug btw?
 

Offline Paul M

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • P
  • Posts: 1432
  • Thanked: 50 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #632 on: September 01, 2015, 09:12:20 AM »
The morale bug error message is:

Quote
ErrorInCheckCrewMorale

Error 3421 created by DAO.field
Data Conversion Error

You replied to my error report with a link to another message where you said:
Quote
The problem is that I am using a long variable instead of a double to store the last launch time (which is stored for all ships even if they never enter a hangar). Because your game has been running for a long time, the number of seconds passed the game has exceeded the capacity of the database field. This is fixed for v6.20 but will continue to affect current games.

If anyone wants to fix this for a current game and has Access, you need to change the data type of the LastLaunchTime in the Ship table to Double (or currency).

The other error is that the docked small craft have a deployment time equal to the deployment time of their mothership rather than 0.  So when they launch they immediately suffer a morale failure.  So far this is "I don't care" issue as the pinnaces have no systems affected by morale.  When the armed pinnaces show up this will be a much more substantial problem.

I don't have Access so can't modify anything anyway....but I also don't know anything about the program at all, never used it in my life.
 

Offline amimai

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • a
  • Posts: 45
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #633 on: September 01, 2015, 09:40:10 AM »
yea that:
You mean still have the short increments but the player wouldn't need to press the turn button?
yes x 100

I'm not sure anyone cares that the AI they have not met ran 5000 5second increments in the space of 1 day on the other side of the galaxy while fighting another AI that you never met, its just not relevant to the player.
« Last Edit: September 01, 2015, 09:50:11 AM by amimai »
 

Offline MarcAFK

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 2005
  • Thanked: 134 times
  • ...it's so simple an idiot could have devised it..
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #634 on: September 01, 2015, 10:11:10 AM »
Yes, that's exactly what I think many people would want. Merely setting auto turns to get through NPR interrupts can be rather dangerous.
Edit:
You mean still have the short increments but the player wouldn't need to press the turn button?

That should be happening in most cases already. The game has separate interrupt code for the AI and the players so that events that stop the game if they happen to the player, won't stop the game if they happen to an AI player. I'll go through the EventType table and see if I can flag a few more as 'no interrupt'.


It's been a while since I've ran into AI related interrupts, so I can't really recall what was causing them, I would run some tests if my pc was working :(
« Last Edit: September 01, 2015, 10:22:45 AM by MarcAFK »
" Why is this godforsaken hellhole worth dying for? "
". . .  We know nothing about them, their language, their history or what they look like.  But we can assume this.  They stand for everything we don't stand for.  Also they told me you guys look like dorks. "
"Stop exploding, you cowards.  "
 

Offline xeryon

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 581
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #635 on: September 01, 2015, 10:16:24 AM »
Also you can use the Minimum Increments options on the tactical map to force the game to keep processing increments no matter what happens.

The problem with that toggle is that the turns blow right past a legitimate interrupt that affects the player.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20349 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #636 on: September 01, 2015, 11:05:54 AM »
yea that:yes x 100

I'm not sure anyone cares that the AI they have not met ran 5000 5second increments in the space of 1 day on the other side of the galaxy while fighting another AI that you never met, its just not relevant to the player.

Well, it probably is relevant to the player if two of his potential enemies are fighting and I personally would rather the battle played out as it affects future battles in which the player is involved and generates wrecks and potential tech information. Some players are happy to sacrifice some realism for faster play. That's why in v6.50 you can turn off NPR vs. NPR detection  (and even NPR generation of NPRs/Spoilers) and prevent any battles at all unless you are in the system.

Even if the NPRs (as they currently do) generate a lot of short increments without an interrupt, it doesn't make it any faster for the player if I display a lot of 5 second increments or one long increment (in fact the former is better because the latter would look like the program had frozen.

 

Offline iceball3

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 454
  • Thanked: 47 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #637 on: September 01, 2015, 11:17:04 AM »
The problem with that toggle is that the turns blow right past a legitimate interrupt that affects the player.
This is an easy one, actually. Just set on auto-turns and set minimum increment to 0. It will basically just increment turns until anything relevant to the player comes up in the event window. Since it will skip only event-less turns automatically, you don't have to worry about missing anything important as just about anything important will make the increments stop.
 

Offline amimai

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • a
  • Posts: 45
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #638 on: September 01, 2015, 11:28:08 AM »
but if you have auto-turns toggled and set to 0 it will halt the sim even if the most pointless interrupt causing event in the universe happens, and in mid game those events happen with startling regularity...

its especially bad if you have something like mineral shortage or another event that triggers every single turn occurring that happens in the middle of a 5 hour long AI v AI 5 second increment war (and the several thousand mouse clicks this involves)
« Last Edit: September 01, 2015, 11:32:07 AM by amimai »
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20349 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #639 on: September 01, 2015, 11:33:29 AM »
but if you have auto-turns toggled and set to 0 it will halt the sim even if the most pointless interrupt causing event in the universe happens, and in mid game those events happen with startling regularity...

its especially bad if you have something like mineral shortage or another event that procs every single turn occurring that happens in the middle of a 5 hour long AI v AI 5 second increment war

A mineral shortage for NPRs doesn't cause an interrupt. Only a mineral shortage for the player. Very few events actually cause an interrupt if they aren't player-related. The NPRs tend to cause shortened increment rather than interrupts. Check you aren't trying to build something without having the necessary mineral supplies. If so, pause or cancel that task and the interrupts will stop.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20349 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #640 on: September 01, 2015, 01:41:46 PM »
This is a repost of an update to the v6.50 changes thread - relevant to the discussion here

There has been some debate on the forums about NPR interrupts so I thought it was worth clarifying how they work and what has changed for v6.50

There are two ways in which a turn can be shortened. If the program believes something is about to happen, like a missile or ship entering detection range, it will shorten the turn at the start. The second is through an interrupt, which is caused by a notable event and ends the turn so that the player (or an NPR) can react to it. Some interrupts are player only, such a ship being constructed or a system being surveyed, and some are interrupts for both players and NPR, such as a ship being destroyed or missiles being launched.

Note that the NPR AI code for movement and combat takes place at the start of a turn, so if anything significant happens relating to an NPR, the NPR needs a new turn in order to evaluate the event and react to it. Once a player interrupt occurs, it ends automated turns so the player can react. However, the AI doesn't need a break to react - it just needs to start a new turn - so interrupts are flagged as Player Events or Non-Player Events. A Player event is either something directly affecting a player, or an NPR event that involves a player, such as the NPR detecting the player. For NPR events that do not involve players, Automated Turns are not switched off. This is how it works in 6.40 btw - not a change for v6.50.

It's also worth noting that Automatic Turns only work if you are using the Tactical Map - the time buttons on the Population Window or the Galactic Map don't use Automated Turns.

In v6.40 there are 264 different events in Aurora, 60 of which don't cause interrupts for players and 184 of which don't cause interrupts for NPRs. For v6.50 I revisited the event list to see if I can reduce the number of interrupts for NPRs and now there are only 27 events that will trigger NPRs interrupts. The list is shown below. These are all events that the AI will need to evaluate and potentially issue a change in orders.

In addition for v6.50, I am going to change Player Events to only events that directly involve the player, so an NPR detecting a player will no longer stop automated turns.

NPR Interrupt Events
Target Hit
Missile Launch
Ship Destroyed
Damage Taken
Ship Slowed
Alien Fleet
Alien Population
New Thermal Contact
Population Surrender
Hostile Transit Detected
Jump Point Detected
New Alien Race
Missile Intercepted
New Hostile Contact
Missile Contact
Shipyard Contact
New System Discovered
Active Sensor Detected
Population Detected
Shields Detected
Jump Point Found
Ramming Attempt
 

Offline MarcAFK

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 2005
  • Thanked: 134 times
  • ...it's so simple an idiot could have devised it..
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #641 on: September 01, 2015, 06:39:11 PM »
Great news, now when an NPR detects my exploration ship the only warning I get will be from it's destruction. As it should be :p
" Why is this godforsaken hellhole worth dying for? "
". . .  We know nothing about them, their language, their history or what they look like.  But we can assume this.  They stand for everything we don't stand for.  Also they told me you guys look like dorks. "
"Stop exploding, you cowards.  "
 

Offline iceball3

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 454
  • Thanked: 47 times
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #642 on: September 01, 2015, 07:21:31 PM »
Great news, now when an NPR detects my exploration ship the only warning I get will be from it's destruction. As it should be :p
If you put any sensors (size 1 and lower are commercial) on it or if it survives the first salvo/hit then a few seconds warning before it's ultimate destruction.
Alternatively, you might be the kind of person who puts CIWS on their ships, meaning that you may be able to escape the system with the ship barely intact... Maybe. Chances are a lot better when you use escorts.
 

Offline MarcAFK

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 2005
  • Thanked: 134 times
  • ...it's so simple an idiot could have devised it..
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #643 on: September 01, 2015, 07:46:14 PM »
Yeah, it's good to gather minimal intelligence like what speed the missile that took down the ship was travelling at, or the speed / energy weapons range of enemy beam combatants.
" Why is this godforsaken hellhole worth dying for? "
". . .  We know nothing about them, their language, their history or what they look like.  But we can assume this.  They stand for everything we don't stand for.  Also they told me you guys look like dorks. "
"Stop exploding, you cowards.  "
 

Offline amimai

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • a
  • Posts: 45
Re: Semi-Official 6.x Suggestion Thread
« Reply #644 on: September 02, 2015, 08:01:20 AM »
I found a logical inconsistency!

i use MIRV with warheads, but once the MIRV missiles releases its payload the primary carrier missile does not speed up accordingly with the lowered mass of the missile sans MIRV bomblets!

PLZ Fix
« Last Edit: September 02, 2015, 08:03:02 AM by amimai »