Aurora 4x

VB6 Aurora => Aurora Bugs => Topic started by: Steve Walmsley on October 24, 2013, 02:49:30 PM

Title: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on October 24, 2013, 02:49:30 PM
Please post confirmed bugs for v6.30 in this thread. However, please read the guidelines below on reporting bugs before posting. If you had a bug in v6.00+ and it still isn't fixed, please report it again in this thread.

Bug Reporting Guidelines (http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php/topic,1930.0.html)

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Nightstar on October 26, 2013, 02:35:39 PM
Any tech component design that has a '0' mineral cost in some category, e.g.
Code: [Select]
Active Sensor Strength: 16   Sensitivity Modifier: 80%
Sensor Size: 1 HS    Sensor HTK: 1
Resolution: 100    Maximum Range vs 5000 ton object (or larger): 12,800,000 km
Range vs 1000 ton object: 512,000 km
Range vs 250 ton object: 32,000 km
Chance of destruction by electronic damage: 100%
Cost: 16    Crew: 2
Materials Required: 0x Duranium  16x Uridium

Development Cost for Project: 160RP
Will get a non-zero cost for that mineral if you switch to a tech component that uses that mineral, e.g.
Code: [Select]
Max Ship Size: 6000 (300000 tons)     Max Squadron Size: 3     Max Jump Radius: 50
Jump Engine Size: 1000 HS    Efficiency: 6    Jump Engine HTK: 200
Cost: 62797    Crew: 2000
Materials Required: 12559.4x Duranium  50237.6x Sorium

Development Cost for Project: 627970RP
Resulting in this if you switch back to designing the first component:
Code: [Select]
Active Sensor Strength: 16   Sensitivity Modifier: 80%
Sensor Size: 1 HS    Sensor HTK: 1
Resolution: 100    Maximum Range vs 5000 ton object (or larger): 12,800,000 km
Range vs 1000 ton object: 512,000 km
Range vs 250 ton object: 32,000 km
Chance of destruction by electronic damage: 100%
Cost: 16    Crew: 2
Materials Required: 12559.4x Duranium  16x Uridium

Development Cost for Project: 160RP
This can result in wasted minerals if the player doesn't notice, depending on severity. Also happens with to ship engines, tritanium and missile engines, etc.

I remember a variant involving uridium and missiles with no sensors that emptied a stockpile. Maybe there's also one with tritanium and missiles with no warhead, but I'm less sure on how to reproduce the missile design bugs.

Closing aurora resets stuff to zero as a workaround, so I keep forgetting to report this.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Nightstar on October 26, 2013, 02:48:24 PM
Creating a factory build order for any sort of class (PDC, fighter, orbital habitat) does not lock the class design you are building. The class should be locked as if you gave the order to retool a shipyard to that class.
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php/topic,6508.0.html
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: vonduus on October 27, 2013, 10:52:00 AM
Officer history is clairvoyant.

The actual game date is 1st January 2025.

When I click on captain Alex Burns, his officer history says:

"1st January 2025: Promoted to Lieutenant Commander
13th November 2042: Promoted to Fiend"

Lieutenant Commander Elliot Daly:

"1st January 2025: Promoted to Lieutenant Commander
13th November 2042: Promoted to Demon"

Commodore Dylan Frost:

"1st January 2025: Promoted to Lieutenant Commander
13th November 2042: Promoted to Scientist"

Civilian Administrator Charles Barker:

"1st January 2025: Assigned to Governor of Earth
1st January 2025: Promoted to Civilian Administrator
13th November 2042: Promoted to Fiend"


I could go on, I have only found three or four officers that are not somehow already promoted in the future. So far this is only cosmetic (actually I find it quite amusing) but I am wondering if they will all become evil monsters and scientists when the game reaches 13th November 2042?

edit: I went through all my officers, and they are all of them, no exception, scheduled to be promoted on 13th November 2042.

The majority will be promoted to Fiend, a lot will be promoted to Demon, and a few will be either Civilian Administrator or Scientist.

I checked with version 6.21, nothing of the sort is happening there.

Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Prince of Space on October 27, 2013, 11:16:11 AM
Minor bug:

In the Population view, Luna is listed under Venus, not Earth.

Just to make sure I'm looking at the right thing, you don't mean on the task group window, do you? In a new game starting from Earth, Luna will appear there as if it were a satellite of Venus because Earth is populated and bumped to the top of the list for convenience sake. This was reported in the 6.00 bug thread. Is there another window you were looking at?

On another topic, the descriptions for the cryogenic combat drop modules (both sizes) have typos on them: "Until the drop, the unit is hled in cryogenic stasis and does not suffer moral penalties." "hled" should be "held" and "moral" should be "morale" unless that's how it's spelled in non-American dialects of English.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Prince of Space on October 27, 2013, 11:40:40 AM
No, I mean on the population window. So I guess this is already reported. Anyway, it really doesn't matter much, as I said: minor bug.

It might not be reported, actually. Maybe I'm just being dense, but do you mean the Population and Production window? I don't think that is intended to be organized according to any orbit-based hierarchy. I'd hate to dismiss what might be an actual bug, so any clarification would be appreciated.

Another bug: with reduced height windows enabled, in the Task Force window, the "Order Templates" box appears to gobble up most of the "Cargo, Ground Units, TG Information" box. Also, the 6.30 change log does not mention that the new GRAV and GEO buttons on the Task Force window's first tab won't appear with reduced height windows on. We might get some new players asking for help finding the buttons and would-be advice givers should be aware.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: vonduus on October 27, 2013, 12:22:34 PM
I am talking about the F12 screen. If you click on the "Moons" checkbox in the"System Location Display Options", Luna will appear under Venus. Sorry for confusing you by being imprecise.


Btw, can you confirm the other bug I reported? This is how to reproduce it:

Trash your Stevefire.mdb and copy a fresh one into your Aurora folder. Generate a new universe. Then open your Commander window (F4) and click on any officer. Watch how they all have two entries in their "Officer history", a new one from today (1st January 2025) and a future one (13th November 2042).

I tried to reproduce this bug in 6.21, but couldn't.

And now I just see it gets even weirder: My rear admiral has the following history:

1st January 2025: Promoted to Lieutenant Commander
13th November 2042: Promoted to Demon

So my rear admiral is really a Lieutenant Commander? Well, no he is not, in game he behaves exactly like a Rear Admiral.

As I understand it, the officer history is mainly a tool for writing AARs, so it probably has no real effect in the game. I guess I could just delete those entries. Anyway, it is weird. Perhaps it is a joke?
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Nibelung44 on October 27, 2013, 12:32:50 PM
Is the PDC don't refit properly bug fixed?
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Prince of Space on October 27, 2013, 12:39:02 PM
The F12 screen is the Task Group screen. It's not a bug, Steve addressed it in the 6.00 bug thread. Thanks for the clarification, though.

I can confirm the future demons bug. I started my game in 2250 and my officers get promoted to fiend or demon on 13th November 2267. Except for the one brigadier general who gets promoted to civilian administrator and one scientist who get repromoted to scientist on that date. All of this is on a new game without having advanced the time at all. All the leaders have an appropriate 1st January 2250 promotion listed as well.

I don't think it's supposed to be political satire, but who knows?

EDIT: I don't know if this is useful information or not, but even officers who joined the officer corps in 2268 are spawning with the 13th November 2267 promotion to fiend event in their history.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Prince of Space on October 27, 2013, 12:50:45 PM
I'm getting an error message: "Cryo and non-Cryo combat drop modules cannot both be present on the same ship"

This message pops up if I design a ship with mixed cryo and non-cryo drop pods (as I would expect) but also when mixing cryo company-sized pods and cryo battalion-sized pods, or when mixing non-cryo company-sized pods with non-cryo battalion-sized pods (which I wouldn't expect.) In 6.20 I could mix battalion and company sized drop pods without an error message. Is this intended to now be an error? The error message doesn't reflect that, if that was the intention.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Prince of Space on October 27, 2013, 02:43:03 PM
I apologize for dominating the conversation.

 However, I found another bug. I built a cryogenic drop ship and loaded it up with five mobile infantry battalions. I advanced time by 17 years and checked on the popsicles' morale. It was still at 100%, as advertised. Then I realized I had made a mistake in designing my ships. I had put non-cryo drop modules on it by mistake!

 I double checked by designing a new pair of drop ships, identical except one was cryo and the other was not. I loaded each up with a mobile infantry battalion, sent them off to uninhabited Mercury so I could use their maintenance clocks as a reference, and advanced time again. After 2.20 years I combat dropped the mobile infantry onto the surface of Mercury and they were both happy as clams. As of right now, apparently, there is no reason to spend the extra RP and tonnage on refrigeration for your infantry.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: zatomic on October 27, 2013, 05:05:25 PM
Quote from: vonduus link=topic=6501. msg66627#msg66627 date=1382894554
Btw, can you confirm the other bug I reported? This is how to reproduce it:

Trash your Stevefire. mdb and copy a fresh one into your Aurora folder.  Generate a new universe.  Then open your Commander window (F4) and click on any officer.  Watch how they all have two entries in their "Officer history", a new one from today (1st January 2025) and a future one (13th November 2042).

I tried to reproduce this bug in 6. 21, but couldn't. 

And now I just see it gets even weirder: My rear admiral has the following history:

1st January 2025: Promoted to Lieutenant Commander
13th November 2042: Promoted to Demon

So my rear admiral is really a Lieutenant Commander? Well, no he is not, in game he behaves exactly like a Rear Admiral.


I can confirm the promotions to Demon, Fiend, ect are present.  With regards to your rear admiral, that's been normal in previous versions as I recall.  I assume the game generates some number of new officers at game creation as the lowest rank (and gives them the promoted to Lt.  Commander message in their history), and then runs automatic promotions a few times so the highest rated become your starting higher ranked officers.  That process has never left log messages (though maybe it should).  Either way, your rear admiral is really a rear admiral.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Prince of Space on October 29, 2013, 01:41:08 PM
Minor bug: In the Ships (F6) window, under the Miscellaneous tab, the Tractor Link buttons both have mouseover tool tips that refer to the transfer of spares rather than to creating and breaking tractor links. likewise, the Transfer Ship to Alien Empire box on the same page has a Transfer button with a tooltip the says "Activate Transponder."
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: LizardSF on October 30, 2013, 04:33:01 PM
I can't create any ship classes at all. I keep getting MDB errors. Attached is a Screenshot.

I created a new game, turned SM on, spent my tech points, and then went to design a ship.

EDIT: I needed to hit the "New" button first. I've never had to do that before.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Erik L on October 30, 2013, 04:44:00 PM
EDIT: I needed to hit the "New" button first. I've never had to do that before.

That has pretty much always been the case. If you have not had to do so to create a class, then that is a bug :)
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: alex_brunius on November 01, 2013, 02:49:00 PM
Perhaps not a direct bug, but it would be nice if you could add a random anomaly to a body just like you can with ruins (in SM mode F9 System Generation and Display). There is even a empty space right next to the "Random Ruin" button!
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Aloriel on November 02, 2013, 10:01:01 PM
The promotion to Demon thing has additional oddities:

Code: [Select]
1st January 2050: Assigned to Fighter Ops - Fleet Headquarters
1st January 2050: Promoted to Lieutenant Commander
13th November 2067: Promoted to Civilian Administrator
Mind you, my in game date is merely 2054.

Another issue I am having is that I started with JUST 2 scientists. I do realize that it is random, but shouldn't there be a minimum number for scientists? I am really struggling to research things!
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Prince of Space on November 02, 2013, 10:06:35 PM
Seemingly without reason I received the following error message:

"Error in DesignLaser

Error 3021 was generated by DAO.Field
No current record.
Please report to http.//aurora 2.pentarch. org/ index. php/board,11.0.html"


I am just over 25 years into a game. I have generated an NPR via the Add NPR command, but that was over 10 years ago in game.

The error repeatedly comes up when closed. Frantic clicking has resulted in different error messages, including:

"Error in AutomatedDesign

Error 3201 was generated by DAO.Recordset
You cannot add or change a record because a related record is required in table 'TechSystem'.
Please report to..."

and:

"Error in AutomatedDesign

Error 11 was generated by Aurora
Division by zero
Please report to..."

The flood of errors eventually subsides, allowing me to return to play after several cycles of these latter two messages taking turns popping up. Prior to this error message two-step there may have been other messages mixed in with the initial burst of DAO.Field messages that I was spam-clicking to close out. I didn't notice the messages changed until I had hit the DAO.Recordset one.

EDIT: I restored from a backup I had, on the off chance that my database would have lasting errors in it. At roughly the same time in game I got the same cascade of errors, and this time I paid better attention. In addition to the DesignLaser message I got:

A bunch of DesignTurret errors
An Error in CreateTurret
"Error 3315 was generated by DAO.Recordset, Field 'TechSystem.Name' cannot be a zero-length string. Please report to..."
Another CreateTurret error referencing the 'ShipDesignComponents.name' but otherwise identical to the TechSystem.Name error
"Error in CreateTurret, Error 3201 was generated by DAO.Recordset, You cannot add or change a record because a related record is required in table 'TechSystem'. Please report to..."
More Error 11 Division by zero errors, each followed by AutomatedDesign 3201 errors, as before
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Nathan_ on November 02, 2013, 10:39:50 PM
Cancelling out of an instant research of a component system still puts that system in the research list. I've only tested this with microwaves, plasma Carronades, reactors, and ship engines, but in all these cases canceling instant doesn't properly disregard racial component tech creation.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: alex_brunius on November 03, 2013, 04:14:21 AM
Am I the only one that is still getting errors with missile bases for conventional starts? (Life support failures and errors making it impossible to advance time until they are deleted).
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Aloriel on November 03, 2013, 12:11:59 PM
Okay, this is a strange one...

I've been setting up fighter squadrons as per normal. However, among my fighters was listed:

(http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd86/aneiraelf/63bug_zps2c9a7ace.jpg)

Now, the Leif Ericsson isn't a fighter... not even close:
Code: [Select]
JCS Columbus class Construction Ship    92,900 tons     350 Crew     1826 BP      TCS 1858  TH 2880  EM 0
1550 km/s     Armour 1-182     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 1     PPV 0
MSP 12    Max Repair 27 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months    Spare Berths 0   
Jump Gate Construction Ship: 180 days

180 EP Commercial Ion Drive (16)    Power 180    Fuel Use 1.97%    Signature 180    Exp 3%
Fuel Capacity 750,000 Litres    Range 73.8 billion km   (550 days at full power)

This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes

It's also busy building a jump gate at the moment, so I can't determine whether it can actually dock at my PDC fighter base (Capacity: 5000 tons). I am assuming it will not allow it, but who knows?
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Captain Sloth on November 05, 2013, 10:16:59 AM
While playing a single player start, conventional, no - missile base, I noticed an oddity.  Sometimes, not always, I get the Event message: A civilian mining colony has been established on X.  The problem is while the comet is made a colony there are no mines on it, nor any mass driver.  Note that in one example, at the same interval, I got the expansion of an early existing civil mine elsewhere, and it worked fine.  In one game, several times the non-event Event occurred.  Has anyone else noticed this, or is it just me?  I used a  overwrite of 6. 30 beta over a clean install of 6. 21. 
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Bgreman on November 06, 2013, 10:45:44 AM
While playing a single player start, conventional, no - missile base, I noticed an oddity.  Sometimes, not always, I get the Event message: A civilian mining colony has been established on X.  The problem is while the comet is made a colony there are no mines on it, nor any mass driver.  Note that in one example, at the same interval, I got the expansion of an early existing civil mine elsewhere, and it worked fine.  In one game, several times the non-event Event occurred.  Has anyone else noticed this, or is it just me?  I used a  overwrite of 6. 30 beta over a clean install of 6. 21. 


The mines / mass driver only show up if you choose to buy minerals from the CMC.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on November 09, 2013, 05:59:15 AM
Fixed a bug where industrial projects from a different game are being displayed

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Anamori on November 09, 2013, 10:19:48 AM
 I found two bugs quasi-related to Ruins.   
 
First: There is possibility to get negative quantity of components and then you can disassemble them infinitely. 

 I ordered my little cargo taskforce to get some components from planet with ruins to my research hub.   They have too low cargo space to do that.   After auto-clean of order list they was ordered to move to research hub anyway and drop it.   One of components have quantity of 0(showed, but that was 0.  6) and when I ordered disassemble that goes negative still giving research boost.   

 -Attachment nr 1

 The scrap order worked for it, removing it from game and adding negative value of minerals&weath. 

 -Attachment nr 3


Second: Advanced Lasers focal size formula is wrong. 

 The tech 10cm focal of Advanced Lasers create 4cm component.   12cm give output of 5cm.   And 15cm -> 8cm.   I didn't yet research and check next ones.   But that should use that same formula anyway, right?
 
-Attachment nr 2

EDIT:
 20cm -> 12cm
 Additionaly there is no difference between 20cm(12cm) AL and normal 12cm laser. 
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on November 09, 2013, 10:22:32 AM
Am I the only one that is still getting errors with missile bases for conventional starts? (Life support failures and errors making it impossible to advance time until they are deleted).

Is this for v6.30, not v6.20?

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Garfunkel on November 09, 2013, 01:44:16 PM
Yes, missile bases for conventional start are still bugged. I did a clean re-install and no go.

Also, when a TG is unable to perform its default order, the game displays a null error in addition to the normal log message. The error does not disappear after you remove the default order from the TG until a construction cycle has passed, at which point it vanished.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: alex_brunius on November 09, 2013, 04:16:48 PM
Fuel consumption for missile engines seem to be off by one decimal in engine size.

In version 6.20:      1.0 MSP = x3.00 Fuel Consumption
In version 6.30:      0.1 MSP = x3.00 Fuel Consumption

Fairly sure this is not intended but a bug coming from adding one extra decimal.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on November 09, 2013, 05:51:38 PM
Fuel consumption for missile engines seem to be off by one decimal in engine size.

In version 6.20:      1.0 MSP = x3.00 Fuel Consumption
In version 6.30:      0.1 MSP = x3.00 Fuel Consumption

Fairly sure this is not intended but a bug coming from adding one extra decimal.

Fixed for v6.40. It's a display error and doesn't affect actual missile engine fuel consumption

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on November 09, 2013, 06:04:56 PM
Yes, missile bases for conventional start are still bugged. I did a clean re-install and no go.

Fixed for v6.40. The missiles bases had no crew quarters so I've sorted that out. Also fixed a code problem that was creating the CheckCrewMorale error

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on November 09, 2013, 06:06:34 PM
Cancelling out of an instant research of a component system still puts that system in the research list. I've only tested this with microwaves, plasma Carronades, reactors, and ship engines, but in all these cases canceling instant doesn't properly disregard racial component tech creation.

Fixed for v6.40

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on November 09, 2013, 06:21:06 PM
Any tech component design that has a '0' mineral cost in some category will get a non-zero cost for that mineral if you switch to a tech component that uses that mineral

This can result in wasted minerals if the player doesn't notice, depending on severity. Also happens with to ship engines, tritanium and missile engines, etc.

I remember a variant involving uridium and missiles with no sensors that emptied a stockpile. Maybe there's also one with tritanium and missiles with no warhead, but I'm less sure on how to reproduce the missile design bugs.

Closing aurora resets stuff to zero as a workaround, so I keep forgetting to report this.

Thanks for the detailed explanation. Been searching for this for a while and you led me straight to it. Turns out I was clearing an array that I thought contained the materials but it was outside the scope of the tech system creation code and there was an array with the same name within scope that wasn't being cleared. Aaargh!

Fixed for v6.40

I've also removed the display of 0x <mineral name> where the component no longer uses that mineral

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on November 09, 2013, 06:38:46 PM
I'm getting an error message: "Cryo and non-Cryo combat drop modules cannot both be present on the same ship"

This message pops up if I design a ship with mixed cryo and non-cryo drop pods (as I would expect) but also when mixing cryo company-sized pods and cryo battalion-sized pods, or when mixing non-cryo company-sized pods with non-cryo battalion-sized pods (which I wouldn't expect.) In 6.20 I could mix battalion and company sized drop pods without an error message. Is this intended to now be an error? The error message doesn't reflect that, if that was the intention.

No, it's a bug. Fixed for v6.40

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on November 09, 2013, 06:45:56 PM
Minor bug: In the Ships (F6) window, under the Miscellaneous tab, the Tractor Link buttons both have mouseover tool tips that refer to the transfer of spares rather than to creating and breaking tractor links. likewise, the Transfer Ship to Alien Empire box on the same page has a Transfer button with a tooltip the says "Activate Transponder."

Fixed (wish they were all this easy :))

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on November 09, 2013, 06:52:06 PM
Officer history is clairvoyant.

The actual game date is 1st January 2025.

When I click on captain Alex Burns, his officer history says:

"1st January 2025: Promoted to Lieutenant Commander
13th November 2042: Promoted to Fiend"

The commander history table isn't being cleared when a commander is deleted. If a commander has the same ID as a commander in a deleted game, both the current and deleted commanders history are being combined.

Fixed for v6.40

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: vonduus on November 11, 2013, 01:39:20 PM
Crash bug:

If you click the "use" button in the "Other templates" without specifying which template to use, the game throws an "invalid" error and crashes to desktop.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on November 11, 2013, 04:54:23 PM
Crash bug:

If you click the "use" button in the "Other templates" without specifying which template to use, the game throws an "invalid" error and crashes to desktop.

Fixed for v6.40

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on November 11, 2013, 04:59:38 PM
Creating a factory build order for any sort of class (PDC, fighter, orbital habitat) does not lock the class design you are building. The class should be locked as if you gave the order to retool a shipyard to that class.
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php/topic,6508.0.html

Fixed for v6.40

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: vonduus on November 11, 2013, 05:48:18 PM
Also relating to Order Templates, if you have orders in line and try to apply a template, the results are literally mixed:

Example: If a fleet has two orders (A-B), and I apply a template (C-D-E), the first order of the template invariably ends up as the second order in the final list (A-C-B-D-E).

Additionally, if automatic jump point planning also is involved somewhere along the line, the results are beyond description.



Off topic: Order Templates are a great addition to the game. All this feature needs apart from a little bug-fixing is an edit/delete button.

Thanks Steve, for a fantastic game, and I am happy to see that it has become significantly more polished since last time I played it. And I really love all the new views you have brought in from Newton Aurora.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Nathan_ on November 11, 2013, 06:12:00 PM
CIWS appear in the Beam fire control assignment list as a weapon that can be assigned to a beam fire control
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: vonduus on November 11, 2013, 10:53:49 PM
Negative time in Production Overview:

When scrapping ships, they show up on the Player Race Production Overview window with a negative completion time, like in my game on 6th of December 2059:

...Event Type: Shipbuilding, Description: Scrap, Completion Time: -0.21 years, Completion Date: 21st February 2060.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Garfunkel on November 12, 2013, 05:43:35 AM
Industry production orders appear from nothing. Possibly bleeding over from another game - though I had deleted the default campaign before starting my own. In any case, Luna, Titan and the comet Van Biesbroeck had orders for construction and missile building, that looked like they were in the middle of building them. For example, Luna had "construct 0.72 research labs". I deleted them with no ill-effects.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on November 12, 2013, 10:42:37 AM
CIWS appear in the Beam fire control assignment list as a weapon that can be assigned to a beam fire control

Fixed for v6.40

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on November 12, 2013, 10:43:17 AM
Industry production orders appear from nothing. Possibly bleeding over from another game - though I had deleted the default campaign before starting my own. In any case, Luna, Titan and the comet Van Biesbroeck had orders for construction and missile building, that looked like they were in the middle of building them. For example, Luna had "construct 0.72 research labs". I deleted them with no ill-effects.

Industry orders were not being deleted from old games. Fixed for v6.40

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on November 12, 2013, 10:53:07 AM
Negative time in Production Overview:

When scrapping ships, they show up on the Player Race Production Overview window with a negative completion time, like in my game on 6th of December 2059:

...Event Type: Shipbuilding, Description: Scrap, Completion Time: -0.21 years, Completion Date: 21st February 2060.

Fixed for v6.40

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on November 12, 2013, 11:12:37 AM
Also relating to Order Templates, if you have orders in line and try to apply a template, the results are literally mixed:

Example: If a fleet has two orders (A-B), and I apply a template (C-D-E), the first order of the template invariably ends up as the second order in the final list (A-C-B-D-E).

Additionally, if automatic jump point planning also is involved somewhere along the line, the results are beyond description.



Off topic: Order Templates are a great addition to the game. All this feature needs apart from a little bug-fixing is an edit/delete button.

Thanks Steve, for a fantastic game, and I am happy to see that it has become significantly more polished since last time I played it. And I really love all the new views you have brought in from Newton Aurora.

Fixed for v6.40. Looks like at the moment order templates only work correctly if there are no existing orders in the fleet's queue. I thought I was assigning the first order in the template to the TG's last order +1 but it turns out I was using TG's first order +1. Oops!

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on November 12, 2013, 11:36:41 AM
Is the PDC don't refit properly bug fixed?

It's been a while since I looked at this. What is the bug? Does the PDC not refit or does it refit incorrectly?

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Hawkeye on November 12, 2013, 10:48:16 PM
Refitting PDCs takes the correct time and minerals, but the PDCs don´t actually refit but stay the same as they were
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: vonduus on November 13, 2013, 07:13:42 AM
"Match Speeds" does not work in the Task Group window, Special Orders tab, Superior Formations field.

Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Bgreman on November 13, 2013, 01:19:55 PM
The estimated task group order completion times on the Task Force screen (CTRL+F4) are still 10x too small when comparing them to the (correct) values in the Task Groups screen (F12).
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: LizardSF on November 13, 2013, 02:22:08 PM
Not sure if this is explicitly a 6.3 bug, or just something I noticed for the first time in 6.3.

If I have a shipyard task set to "repair", and select a ship that doesn't need repair (or refit a ship to the same class it currently has), and advance the clock, I get an "overflow" error, sometimes repeating many times before it clears up.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Nathan_ on November 13, 2013, 10:11:36 PM
PDC hangars have some trouble repairing armor damage, which I think is because they can't carry msp. Maintenance storage bays are PDC elligible but do not contribute any MSP capacity to them.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: MarcAFK on November 13, 2013, 11:14:53 PM
Not exactly a bug, however I've noticed that with 'reduced height windows' turned on in the task group screen the order templates window covers the "cargo, Ground units, TG Information" window, however there is a gap in the interface that would allow both windows to co-exist, perhaps albiet slightly smaller in size.

Another one i have noticed, is that without 'reduced height windows' on the bottom of the "commanders" Window is completely cut off on a 1440x900 size monitor, yet every other window seems to work well on that size monitor.It seems that trimming 30 or so pixels off the "seniority of officers", "Potential assignments", "Officer history", and "search by ability" fields would allow that window to work on a 900 pixel high monitor without causing any significant reduction in readability.
I could be wrong but that might be the only window that isn't compatible with a 900 pixel monitor, so fixing it would help standardize the whole game to that resolution.
There's a few other ones actually that aren't right on that screen size, so I guess there would probably be alot of work to fix all of them, I've found that what works best is to leave reduced size windows on for my laptop monitor, then turn it off before opening any window that has better functionality when shoved over to my 1440x900 external monitor.
Time will tell if this setup is worth the additional screwing around.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Jorgen_CAB on November 14, 2013, 05:53:07 PM
The "Max Tracking Time Bonus" still does not seem to work, that is give any benefits.

I think I have reported this before.

I just tested a scenario where I fired 3x10 salvos (ten times in a row) of missiles at 12000km/s speed.

In the receiving end were five destroyers with 6x15cm lasers with a tracking speed of 4000km/s.

They managed to track and gain a bonus of 48% (according to the map).

Their basic to hit at 10000km was 96%, modified with regular tracking speed that is around 33% hit rate. In ten consecutive salvos they shot down more or less 33% of all the missiles every time, despite having a bonus of 48%.

I of course gave the target the technology to get up to 100% tracking bonus, but there was no increase in the hit rate of the missiles beyond regular tracking speed.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Vandermeer on November 15, 2013, 12:33:08 AM
I didn't find the bug in this thread yet, so I thought I might report it:
I got attacked by some superior Alien race in a size 7 missle bombardment on my homeworld Earth. I only had ICBM bases there and nothing else, as I evacuated all ships.    As soon as the missles hit the ground, I got a "Error 6 [somethingsomething] GroundBombardment". Not sure what is causing this, but it locked the game up again.  . . . I guess I will have to deploy Humanities secret superweapon, the SM-Laser.  8)

//Edit:
Well, it appears the Spacemaster tool is not powerful enough to deal with the situation.  I thought I could just delete the enemy ships, but there is no access to other races ships.  So I changed my missle bases to a quad-laser turret design I had, in order for them to at least shoot the missles down, but the tracking speed wasn't high enough (10k against 30k/s missles).  Then I thought I'd just instantly give me a better turret, as I had technology for faster tracking ones, but that didn't work either, because even though there is an "instant" button for normal tech projects, this button is inexplicably missing for turret designs, so I could just add it to the research list.  . . . Where I could not instantly research something, because, again, the SM power to do so was non existant.
What could I do now? My game is basically broken at this point.  The next 5 seconds intervall locks everything up.  After many hours of gameplay, this is extremly demoralising.
Also, I thought the SM mode was meant as some sort of debug tool, which is a logical thing to have in a game that is still in development and thus haunted by errors.  Yet the real powers of SM are very limited.  Most powerful without doubt the design change on the fly, but otherwise it offers very limited control over the game. (atleast when compared to the influence of actual debug tools)
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Gyrfalcon on November 15, 2013, 01:52:31 AM
It's not a debugging tool. It's a spacemaster/gamemaster tool, mostly usable for setting up scenarios to play out.

Actually deleting the enemy ships probably requires database access, which requires asking Steve privately for the password to get access to the database.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: vonduus on November 15, 2013, 07:22:35 AM
Some task groups, not all, spam multiple "completed orders" messages in the Event Update window. Other message types are also affected, for example "unable to"-type messages.

I have been unable to spot any connections between the affected task groups or what sets them apart from the unaffected ones. All new ships seems to behave them selves for a while, and then some of them gets over-informative.

In the following example the "Alhambra Victory" is an old (+5 years) one-ship freighter group, while the "Cargo 8" is five-ship freighter group from the same build; here both task groups deliver 21 "completed orders" messages. The Alhambra was never a member of a multi-ship group, except before she split from the shipyard she was built in, I checked the task group history.

The "Civil Service" is a five-ship group, only a few years old, and here they deliver only three identical messages. And "Hercules" is my old tug, as old as the universe itself, 38 years. Relatively well-behaved here, only four messages, but I have seen this particular one-ship fleet do a full page of identical messages.

The "Goblin" etc. are all brand new and well-behaved.

This phenomenon builds up over time, it seems, is all I can say.

Code: [Select]
29th May 2063 16:41:21,Sol,Civil Service has completed orders
29th May 2063 17:11:21,Sol,Civil Service has completed orders
29th May 2063 17:41:21,Sol,Civil Service has completed orders
29th May 2063 17:41:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro is unable to set up all five of its special survey orders as there are not enough acceptable destinations within ten billion kilometers
30th May 2063 17:41:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro is unable to set up all five of its special survey orders as there are not enough acceptable destinations within ten billion kilometers
1st June 2063 10:11:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro is unable to set up all five of its special survey orders as there are not enough acceptable destinations within ten billion kilometers
2nd June 2063 12:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 12:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 13:11:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 13:11:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 13:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 13:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 14:11:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 14:11:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 14:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 14:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 15:11:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 15:11:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 15:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 15:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 16:11:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 16:11:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 16:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 16:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 17:11:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 17:11:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 17:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 17:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 18:11:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 18:11:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 18:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 18:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 19:11:21,Kyrene,TG Atlas has completed orders
2nd June 2063 19:11:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 19:11:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 19:11:21,Kyrene,TG Atlas has carried out orders to detach any tractored ships
2nd June 2063 19:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 19:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 19:41:21,Kyrene,TG Atlas has completed orders
2nd June 2063 20:11:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 20:11:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 20:11:21,Kyrene,TG Atlas has completed orders
2nd June 2063 20:41:21,Kyrene,TG Atlas has completed orders
2nd June 2063 20:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 20:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 21:11:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 21:11:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 21:11:21,Kyrene,TG Atlas has completed orders
2nd June 2063 21:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 21:41:21,Kyrene,TG Atlas has completed orders
2nd June 2063 21:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 22:11:21,Kyrene,TG Atlas has completed orders
2nd June 2063 22:11:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 22:11:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 22:41:21,Kyrene,TG Atlas has completed orders
2nd June 2063 22:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 22:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
3rd June 2063 11:41:21,Sol,Cargo TG 1 has completed orders
4th June 2063 10:41:21,Kyrene,TG Hercules has completed orders
4th June 2063 10:41:21,Kyrene,TG Hercules has carried out orders to detach any tractored ships
4th June 2063 11:11:21,Kyrene,TG Hercules has completed orders
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Kyrene,TG Hercules has completed orders
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Unknown,Perry Transport and Trading has scrapped Perry Small F4 409 (Perry Small F4 class) due to its replacement by a newer vessel
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Sol,Perry Transport and Trading has launched a new Perry Small F5 class Freighter
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Unknown,The Morale of 67th Marine Battalion has increased to 109
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Sirius,The Katherine Noble Geology Team has completed its surface-based geological survey of Sirius-A Asteroid #67
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Sol,The crew of Ballista has completed shore leave and is fully rested
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Sol,The crew of Arbalest has completed shore leave and is fully rested
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Sol,The crew of Gandalf has completed shore leave and is fully rested
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Kyrene,The crew of Hercules has completed shore leave and is fully rested
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Sol,The crew of Arrow has completed shore leave and is fully rested
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Sol,The crew of Swale has completed shore leave and is fully rested
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Sol,The crew of Goblin has completed shore leave and is fully rested
5th June 2063 05:41:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 06:11:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 06:41:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 07:11:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 07:41:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 08:11:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 08:41:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 09:11:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 09:41:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 10:11:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 10:41:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 11:11:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 11:41:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: LizardSF on November 15, 2013, 02:21:36 PM
I have two ships locked in "Overhaul"... in deep space. I can't move them, can't cancel the Overhaul, can't do anything excehpt watch crew morale continue to drop, as they've been floating there immobile for far beyond their planned operation times.

I'm currently sending another TF there to try to absorb them and see if that will work.

Is there an SM thing I can do to "free" them from this? I am not sure of the sequence that got them there -- they shouldn't have been able to be overhauled if they weren't at Earth, but they're currently in the void somewhere between Mars and Jupiter. Poor guys.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Black on November 15, 2013, 02:27:36 PM
In SM you can change the location of Task Group in History/Officers/Misc there is Set Task Group Position (SM Only), select Sol and Earth and click Save button.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on November 17, 2013, 09:13:11 AM
Refitting PDCs takes the correct time and minerals, but the PDCs don´t actually refit but stay the same as they were

The section of code that completes the refit wasn't being accessed (I used the wrong number in a case statement). Should be fixed for v6.40.

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on November 17, 2013, 09:23:30 AM
Not sure if this is explicitly a 6.3 bug, or just something I noticed for the first time in 6.3.

If I have a shipyard task set to "repair", and select a ship that doesn't need repair (or refit a ship to the same class it currently has), and advance the clock, I get an "overflow" error, sometimes repeating many times before it clears up.

I've added checks so you can't repair an undamaged ship or refit a ship to its existing class.

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on November 17, 2013, 09:25:46 AM
Some task groups, not all, spam multiple "completed orders" messages in the Event Update window. Other message types are also affected, for example "unable to"-type messages.

I have been unable to spot any connections between the affected task groups or what sets them apart from the unaffected ones. All new ships seems to behave them selves for a while, and then some of them gets over-informative.

In the following example the "Alhambra Victory" is an old (+5 years) one-ship freighter group, while the "Cargo 8" is five-ship freighter group from the same build; here both task groups deliver 21 "completed orders" messages. The Alhambra was never a member of a multi-ship group, except before she split from the shipyard she was built in, I checked the task group history.

The "Civil Service" is a five-ship group, only a few years old, and here they deliver only three identical messages. And "Hercules" is my old tug, as old as the universe itself, 38 years. Relatively well-behaved here, only four messages, but I have seen this particular one-ship fleet do a full page of identical messages.

The "Goblin" etc. are all brand new and well-behaved.

This phenomenon builds up over time, it seems, is all I can say.

Code: [Select]
29th May 2063 16:41:21,Sol,Civil Service has completed orders
29th May 2063 17:11:21,Sol,Civil Service has completed orders
29th May 2063 17:41:21,Sol,Civil Service has completed orders
29th May 2063 17:41:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro is unable to set up all five of its special survey orders as there are not enough acceptable destinations within ten billion kilometers
30th May 2063 17:41:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro is unable to set up all five of its special survey orders as there are not enough acceptable destinations within ten billion kilometers
1st June 2063 10:11:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro is unable to set up all five of its special survey orders as there are not enough acceptable destinations within ten billion kilometers
2nd June 2063 12:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 12:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 13:11:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 13:11:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 13:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 13:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 14:11:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 14:11:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 14:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 14:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 15:11:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 15:11:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 15:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 15:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 16:11:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 16:11:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 16:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 16:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 17:11:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 17:11:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 17:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 17:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 18:11:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 18:11:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 18:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 18:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 19:11:21,Kyrene,TG Atlas has completed orders
2nd June 2063 19:11:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 19:11:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 19:11:21,Kyrene,TG Atlas has carried out orders to detach any tractored ships
2nd June 2063 19:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 19:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 19:41:21,Kyrene,TG Atlas has completed orders
2nd June 2063 20:11:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 20:11:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 20:11:21,Kyrene,TG Atlas has completed orders
2nd June 2063 20:41:21,Kyrene,TG Atlas has completed orders
2nd June 2063 20:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 20:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 21:11:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 21:11:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 21:11:21,Kyrene,TG Atlas has completed orders
2nd June 2063 21:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 21:41:21,Kyrene,TG Atlas has completed orders
2nd June 2063 21:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 22:11:21,Kyrene,TG Atlas has completed orders
2nd June 2063 22:11:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 22:11:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
2nd June 2063 22:41:21,Kyrene,TG Atlas has completed orders
2nd June 2063 22:41:21,Sol,Cargo 8 has completed orders
2nd June 2063 22:41:21,Sol,FT Alhambra Victory has completed orders
3rd June 2063 11:41:21,Sol,Cargo TG 1 has completed orders
4th June 2063 10:41:21,Kyrene,TG Hercules has completed orders
4th June 2063 10:41:21,Kyrene,TG Hercules has carried out orders to detach any tractored ships
4th June 2063 11:11:21,Kyrene,TG Hercules has completed orders
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Kyrene,TG Hercules has completed orders
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Unknown,Perry Transport and Trading has scrapped Perry Small F4 409 (Perry Small F4 class) due to its replacement by a newer vessel
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Sol,Perry Transport and Trading has launched a new Perry Small F5 class Freighter
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Unknown,The Morale of 67th Marine Battalion has increased to 109
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Sirius,The Katherine Noble Geology Team has completed its surface-based geological survey of Sirius-A Asteroid #67
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Sol,The crew of Ballista has completed shore leave and is fully rested
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Sol,The crew of Arbalest has completed shore leave and is fully rested
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Sol,The crew of Gandalf has completed shore leave and is fully rested
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Kyrene,The crew of Hercules has completed shore leave and is fully rested
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Sol,The crew of Arrow has completed shore leave and is fully rested
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Sol,The crew of Swale has completed shore leave and is fully rested
4th June 2063 11:41:21,Sol,The crew of Goblin has completed shore leave and is fully rested
5th June 2063 05:41:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 06:11:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 06:41:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 07:11:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 07:41:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 08:11:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 08:41:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 09:11:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 09:41:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 10:11:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 10:41:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 11:11:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders
5th June 2063 11:41:21,Gliese 526,GE Francisco Pizarro has completed orders

Check that they don't have the Cycle Moves check box checked. If it is, you will get this repeated message once per movement sub-pulse.

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on November 17, 2013, 09:55:16 AM
Fixed the bug that was preventing you changing the task force of a task group on the Task Group window

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on November 17, 2013, 10:03:56 AM
The estimated task group order completion times on the Task Force screen (CTRL+F4) are still 10x too small when comparing them to the (correct) values in the Task Groups screen (F12).

Fixed for v6.40

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: vonduus on November 17, 2013, 02:34:55 PM
Check that they don't have the Cycle Moves check box checked. If it is, you will get this repeated message once per movement sub-pulse.

Steve

They don't.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: alex_brunius on November 17, 2013, 03:14:05 PM
The "Add Sol System" button seems to add planets with different values compared to the normal pre-generated Sol system. For example Venus with atm pressure 100 instead of 25.

Bug? Perhaps this mechanic use old values that has not been updated?
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: ArchRylen on November 20, 2013, 10:40:25 AM
Aliens appear to have spawned on a world that could not support them.

Planet details:
Nitrogen 67%: 0.3055 atm
Oxygen 33%: 0.1505 atm
Total pressure 0.456
Surface temp - 27.88 C

Alien Ideals:
Temp: -27.9 C (+/- 24)
Grav 0.81 (+/-0.52)
Oxygen 0.151 (+/- 0.060)
Max pressure (1.32)

When set to the alien race, the Industry Summary screen showed a sharp negative growth rate (~40%) and a 2.0 colony cost. Problem went away when I SMed the world to have ~20% Oxygen by adding Nitrogen.

Problem also described here: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php/board,19.0.html
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: SteelChicken on November 22, 2013, 07:05:40 AM
Total Terraforming count doesn't update when two fleets join.

Lets say you send a ship or ships in a fleet to a planet to perform terraforming.
The Environmental tab/"terraformers in orbit" score calculates correctly when they arrive.

If you build more terraformer ships and then order them to join the existing fleet, the calculations do not update.  You have to move the fleet away from the planet and then back.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Narmio on November 22, 2013, 07:20:50 AM
Total Terraforming count doesn't update when two fleets join.

Lets say you send a ship or ships in a fleet to a planet to perform terraforming.
The Environmental tab/"terraformers in orbit" score calculates correctly when they arrive.

If you build more terraformer ships and then order them to join the existing fleet, the calculations do not update.  You have to move the fleet away from the planet and then back.
I can confirm this one's been around for quite a while - and I think it might happen to fuel harvesters and 'roid miners too. A quick 5s "Move to <target>" order (even though they're already there) on the main fleet fixes it, but you have to do it every time new ships are added to the fleet.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Hawkeye on November 22, 2013, 09:06:06 AM
I can confirm this one's been around for quite a while - and I think it might happen to fuel harvesters and 'roid miners too. A quick 5s "Move to <target>" order (even though they're already there) on the main fleet fixes it, but you have to do it every time new ships are added to the fleet.

An easier way is to _first_ issue an order of "move to---" followed by the "join TG" order. The move-to order makes Aurora recognize, the new miner/fuel harvester is there, the seconds puts it into the already employed TG.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: ArchRylen on November 23, 2013, 10:31:46 AM
Update: This is part of how terraforming works. Not a bug.

-----------
Problem: Attempt to terraform world via SM does not improve past a particular temperature.

Expected Behavior: Adding CO2, Safe Greenhouse, Methane, or other gasses in large quantity should raise the temperature.

Observed: As above, but temp stops increasing at -202.2 C regardless of how much gas is added. Seriously, over 900-9000 atm Safe Greenhouse and it doesn't budge 1/10th of a degree.

Same happens for a neighboring moon, at a different temperature.

--
I genned, deleted, and genned systems with SM as I set up one of my first custom games. (I plan on having a low-tech Trans Newtonian empire conquer several conventional start empires before heading out into the greater world.) One of these, a gas giant moon was listed as habitable in the System Info screen. I marked it as a SM colony and went to the environment screen to customize it, as I have others in the system. The other worlds could be adjusted, this one resists.

I do not have the worlds initial atmosphere. -- Grav 0.33, Orbital Distance 649k, diameter 6200. Its primary is a Super Jovian orbiting at 25.8b.

I just tested for a neighboring moon which stops improving at a different temperature. So, maybe, this is working as intended.

---
I will hold onto the save for a week or two, so I can provide it and further details.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: JacenHan on November 23, 2013, 11:36:35 AM
There is a hard limit on greenhouse gases, somewhere around 2 atmospheres, I think. After that, they don't have an effect.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: alex_brunius on November 23, 2013, 03:53:19 PM
There is a hard limit on greenhouse gases, somewhere around 2 atmospheres, I think. After that, they don't have an effect.
Indeed. The formulas are in plain text in the interface.

"Surface Temperature in Kelvin = Base Temperature in Kelvin x Greenhouse Factor x Albedo
Greenhouse Factor = 1 + (Atmospheric Pressure /10) + Greenhouse Pressure   (Maximum = 3.0)"

Since the maximum is 3.0 you can only raise the temperature to be 3 times what the base temperature is in Kelvin (for Albedo = 1.0).
This means if you want to terraform a body to 0 Celsius the body can be minimum -182 Celcius before you start for it to be possible.

Further information:
http://aurorawiki.pentarch.org/index.php?title=Terraforming
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: ArchRylen on November 23, 2013, 03:54:53 PM
There is a hard limit on greenhouse gases, somewhere around 2 atmospheres, I think. After that, they don't have an effect.
I poked around a bit. Hard limit is a greenhouse factor of 3, which is produced by Safe Greenhouse of 1.82 atm or other combinations of gas.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Xeluc on November 23, 2013, 04:07:35 PM
Not sure if this has been addressed but I noticed a ship that ran out of fuel still said it was moving at top speed, while it was dead in space.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: davidr on November 26, 2013, 04:36:00 AM
In the Create Research Project screen the "show sizes in tons " tick-mark for Engine projects still does not work. Engine sizes can only be displayed in HS units and not in tons.

DavidR
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: ExChairman on November 26, 2013, 11:42:49 PM
Not sure what this is, but I was in the process of starting to build an PDC an a settled planet. But there were already one building, none of my designs... Also it was stuck almost finished at 0.0106 for several months.... A bug, or?
I deleted it and are now starting one of my own designs
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: sloanjh on November 27, 2013, 08:14:33 AM
Not sure what this is, but I was in the process of starting to build an PDC an a settled planet. But there were already one building, none of my designs... Also it was stuck almost finished at 0.0106 for several months.... A bug, or?
I deleted it and are now starting one of my own designs

This sounds like a bug that someone noticed right after the 6.3 release and that Steve already fixed.  It should be near the start of the thread....

John
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: zatomic on November 27, 2013, 11:40:56 AM
This is basically a repeat from the v6. 20 Bugs thread.

When running under wine on MacOS, the program crashes when attempting to write log files (either manually from the Events window, or the automatic yearly output).  I would guess it's a Wine issue.  An option to disable the automatic log output would seem to be an easy sure-fire fix.

(In version 6. 20 it would do a flood of error messages that could be clicked through.  Now it just crashes.  Also interestingly, it seems to process the increment, and then crash.  When re-launched, the date has not been updated, but I've verified that planets have moved and research and production have advanced.  Usually the game proceeds normally but sometimes it keeps trying to write the log file and crashing.  Besides the crashes, this can result in 15 or 20 days of movement and production all happening in the same 5 days.  Another possible fix might be to just ensure the increment is completely processed and the current date updated before writing the log file so that upon re-launch it has the correct date and doesn't try to write the file again. )
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Garfunkel on November 28, 2013, 11:58:21 AM
This info might help with tracking down why terraforming/asteroid miner/fuel harvester TG's do not realize that additional modules have joined the group. It seems that this only happens when the ships in question have engines. If I use tugs to add further -bases to the existing TG, it's module count is immediately updated. I've tested this now with Terraforming Bases, Asteroid Mining Bases and Fuel Harvesting Bases - works with all.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: LizardSF on November 29, 2013, 04:11:15 PM
My game, one of the best I've had so far, is seemingly hung. I turned on "auto turn" to deal with an endless sequence of 5 second turns, probably due to aliens, and after a while, it just stopped. I forced it to quit, and restarted, and it simply hangs withot processing.

Here's what the event screen looks like:

Hopefully, there's something I can do to recover the game.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: ArchRylen on November 29, 2013, 07:07:24 PM
I found a ruin and recovered a bunch of T5 engines. I used those to go from T3->T5 engine tech in a single moment. Civilian shipping lines kept building T3 engine ships.

I researched my way to T4 power plants. No change.

While researching T5 power plants, a new shipping company started building T5 ships. The other companies continued to produce T3.

I researched T6 engines. Some companies are now building T6, others are still making new T3s.

Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: OzoneGrif on December 02, 2013, 10:32:35 AM
Everything is getting weird.   Mass transfers are never "removed" from space as they move, and it gives something like this attachment.   This happened after a few automatic 5s turns (I clicked 5 days) and it won't go away.   Restarting the game doesn't help.   It affects all mass transfers. 

I can provide the MDB if necessary.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Erik L on December 02, 2013, 10:41:09 AM
Everything is getting weird.   Mass transfers are never "removed" from space as they move, and it gives something like this attachment.   This happened after a few automatic 5s turns (I clicked 5 days) and it won't go away.   Restarting the game doesn't help.   It affects all mass transfers. 

I can provide the MDB if necessary.

Are you sure that is the same packet and not multiple packets?
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: OzoneGrif on December 02, 2013, 10:51:09 AM
If I set my Geosurvey task group to Default Orders :
1- Survey five next bodies
2- Refuel in Current System

I get the following error :
3021 was generated by DAO. Field
No record

And in the Event Updates :
GE Explorer 1 001 is unable to set up all five of its special survey orders as there are not enough acceptable destinations within ten billions km.
As per secondary orders, GE Explorer 1 001 has been assigned the following order:

(and there's nothing as secondary following order, hence the crash)

The task group is then corrupt, and has to be deleted because it will generate errors every turn, even if I remove the orders.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: OzoneGrif on December 02, 2013, 10:58:08 AM
Quote
Are you sure that is the same packet and not multiple packets?
Oh my bad, I understand the problem now (and it was me obviously ;) )

If I move forward by 30 days, it sends one packet of 289 tons.
If I move foward by 5 days, it sends many packets of 48 tons.

The fact it automatically made small turns generated a large number of packets everywhere and I was confused.
Thank you.  I posted another bug just above, that one is probably better :)
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Erik L on December 02, 2013, 11:02:17 AM
If I set my Geosurvey task group to Default Orders :
1- Survey five next bodies
2- Refuel in Current System

I get the following error :
3021 was generated by DAO. Field
No record

And in the Event Updates :
GE Explorer 1 001 is unable to set up all five of its special survey orders as there are not enough acceptable destinations within ten billions km.
As per secondary orders, GE Explorer 1 001 has been assigned the following order:

(and there's nothing as secondary following order, hence the crash)

The task group is then corrupt, and has to be deleted because it will generate errors every turn, even if I remove the orders.

Gonna go out on a limb here and say GE Explorer 1001 is not in your home system? ;)
You might want to change "Refuel in current system" to "Refuel at nearest colony/tanker in 4 jumps".

Not to say this isn't a bug.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: OzoneGrif on December 02, 2013, 11:12:32 AM
Smart try, it could have been, but I haven't explored other systems yet.  I'm still on Sol.

To add to this problem, when the bug happened, my ship refused to move whatever the orders.
I removed it from its task group and created a new one, and it fixed it.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Erik L on December 02, 2013, 11:32:40 AM
Smart try, it could have been, but I haven't explored other systems yet.  I'm still on Sol.

To add to this problem, when the bug happened, my ship refused to move whatever the orders.
I removed it from its task group and created a new one, and it fixed it.

I've never used the "Refuel in current system" order. Mainly because it has limited use. Most ships when needing refuelling will not be in a system with fuel.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: alex_brunius on December 02, 2013, 04:21:04 PM
"Message continued" will show the end of Program Errors in the Event log even if the start of the error is not shown ("Show Errors" check box in upper right not ticked in).
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Xeluc on December 04, 2013, 01:28:20 PM
This has probably been mentioned, but on Earth, there is a projected use of Sorium for the fuel refineries even though I have deactivated the industry. I'm not building anything that would need Sorium. Also the projected use correlates with what my refineries would produce.
EDIT: As far as I know this doesn't actually detract the Sorium from Earth.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: joeclark77 on December 04, 2013, 05:41:21 PM
Through espionage against an NPR, I discovered a new system that had connections to three systems I had already charted.  Two bugs emerged after this:

1. The new system is not accessible from the pull-down menu on the system map. This bug is easy to solve: quit Aurora and open it again, and the new system will be in the menu. (Edit: also just closing the system map and hitting F3 again fixes it.)

2. When opening the galaxy map, I get a series of errors:
2.a. At first no map is drawn and an error pops up saying "ERROR: WP Link not found in GetWarpPointData"
2.b. After I click OK, the "network" of orange and green connecting lines appears but the stars are not yet drawn. A second error pops up with the heading Error in DisplayWP: "Error 5 was generated by Aurora; Invalid procedure call or argument; Please report to...".
2.c. I click OK and the second error repeats itself once.
2.d. I click OK again and the map is drawn normally.
2.e. If I click or shift-click-drag on a star, or if I scroll the map using the arrow buttons, on mouse-up the stars disappear (leaving the links) and we go back to 2.b.  I click "OK" twice and the map is back to normal.

Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: joeclark77 on December 04, 2013, 07:26:55 PM
More on above bug:
The galaxy map does NOT display correctly after the errors, as far as I can tell.
The star map says the new system (call it "Q") has links to X, Y, and Z.
In systems X and Y, there are JPs now labeled as connecting to Q.  These were previously unexplored JPs.
In system Q, the other side of these JPs are visible.

However, there's a JP in system Q that goes to another system I'm familiar with (call it "P"), but it's not Z.
In Z, there's no JP leading to Q.
In P, there's no JP leading to Q.

There is one unexplored JP in each of Q and Z.  Ships are en route to check them out now.  I'll update again in a few minutes.
Edit 1: the unexplored JP in Z doesn't lead to Q, but to a new system.
Edit 2: transiting the JP from Q to P appears to work (my ship is in P), but does not reveal a JP in P.  I will re-survey to see if it is actually there.
Edit 3: the unexplored JP in Q doesn't lead to Z, but to a new system. oddly the system has a name already (same theme as Q, presumably named by the NPR)

In summary:
Star Q was discovered by espionage.
Galaxy map shows links from Q to X and Y, both of which are seen also on star maps, and work fine.
Galaxy map also shows a link between Q and Z, which is not visible on the star map in either system.
Star map in Q shows a JP to P.  This JP works, at least one-way, but is not shown on the galaxy map.
When opening or modifying the galaxy map, a bunch of annoying errors occur.

RESOLUTION:
Upon re-survey of star P, the other side of the jump connection to Q was discovered.  Now there's no more bug in the galaxy map.  The true link from Q to P is now shown, the false link from Q to Z is no longer shown, and the annoying error messages no longer pop up.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Cripes Amighty on December 05, 2013, 09:30:24 PM
I was playing a conventional start game and went to go a design my first laser with very minimal tech. 10cm, infrared wavelength, capacitor 2, and no research into spinal mounts. With only these settings, the output read:

Quote
Damage Output 10     Rate of Fire: 10 seconds     Range Modifier: 1
Max Range 100,000 km     Laser Size: 3 HS    Laser HTK: 1
Power Requirement: 3    Power Recharge per 5 Secs: 2
Cost: 3    Crew: 9
Materials Required: 0.6x Duranium  0.6x Boronide  1.8x Corundium

Development Cost for Project: 30RP

I thought that looked a little too powerful and checking back on the other versions, it was only giving out a damage output of 3. I haven't tested to see if it is actually causing 10 damage, in case it was just displaying higher numbers than it actually is.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: MarcAFK on December 05, 2013, 10:32:27 PM
That range doesn't look right either.

EDIT: This one might be a bug, I can't find anywhere listed the amount of starting research points remaining, as far as I can remember, I have never been able to find where this is displayed, shouldn't it be on the research screen?
Yeah sorry, ignore that, I made a mistake.

Edit, wait a minute, I see what is happening now, if I start a conventional game, starting research points aren't displayed at all, whereas they show up fine for a transnewtonian game.
This would actually be a bug. :p
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on December 06, 2013, 02:40:07 AM
That range doesn't look right either.

EDIT: This one might be a bug, I can't find anywhere listed the amount of starting research points remaining, as far as I can remember, I have never been able to find where this is displayed, shouldn't it be on the research screen?
Yeah sorry, ignore that, I made a mistake.

Edit, wait a minute, I see what is happening now, if I start a conventional game, starting research points aren't displayed at all, whereas they show up fine for a transnewtonian game.
This would actually be a bug. :p

There are no starting research points in a conventional game.

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: MarcAFK on December 09, 2013, 09:30:42 PM
Shields aren't working.
I've been running skirmishes between individual ships equipped with different weapons, and haven't seen a single damage absorbed by shields, from any type of weapon.
Version is 6.30, technology is Beta shields, regeneration 1.5, fuel consumption .8.
I'm certain I'm using the shields correctly as I have used them in the past. I used spacemaster to add them to the test ships, turned them on with the "raise shields" button, waitied untill they were fully charged, recieved messages on the events log to that effect, and the shields are showing on the system map to both test empires. Yet every weapon is failing to score a single hit to shielding, even high powered microwaves miss.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: joeclark77 on December 10, 2013, 12:03:25 AM
I used spacemaster to add them to the test ships
I suspect this is your problem.  I have used shields in my current game and they worked.  Have you gone into the ship detail window and looked at each of the ships in detail?  Typically when you re-design an existing ship via spacemaster mode, the changes don't actually "load" until you go and make the game pull up the ship's data directly.

Try building some ships with shields in their initial, locked design, and see if they work then.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: MarcAFK on December 10, 2013, 01:33:15 AM
I thought it might be this, but I had used shields in this way in other games. I'll do more checking.
Well you're right,Using FAST OB for the test ships fixed the problem.
I think I remember somewhere being told that with various systems you may need to lock the design after modifying them in SM mode to make them work correctly.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: ZimRathbone on December 10, 2013, 06:39:19 PM
I thought it might be this, but I had used shields in this way in other games. I'll do more checking.
Well you're right,Using FAST OB for the test ships fixed the problem.
I think I remember somewhere being told that with various systems you may need to lock the design after modifying them in SM mode to make them work correctly.

If you build a ships of a particular class, and then change the class design using SM abilities, then any new units built (either by regular method or Fast OB) will have the properties of the updated class, but any pre-existing units will have the properties of the old class.  This is because the ship records in the database (which holds all sort of data like current max speed, number of shields, crew requirements etc) are not updated when you change the associated class record. 

You can get the pre-exiting units to update to the new class design by viewing each one in the F6 (Individual Unit Details) window, which does refresh the ship record.  This can result in some rather strange effects if the unit in question has been damaged, as the damaged component record will remain even though there is now no associated ship component.

The class does not need to be locked for this to happen (although its good practice to do this after making changes) .
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: alex_brunius on December 14, 2013, 12:52:25 PM
Ground PDCs does not seem to update their ability for beam weapons to penetrate an atmosphere after the atmosphere pressure has changed.

Tested with a Ship and PDC firing at each-other, after a 5 day update from SM editing the atmosphere away the ship could fire but not the PDC that still got "cannot penetrate atmosphere with a pressure of 1.00" message.

Edit: I can also note that partial atmospheres does not seem to reduce beam damage as intended for weapons fired from range, only from weapons fired with 0km distance to target.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: alex_brunius on December 14, 2013, 01:17:33 PM
The Intel Update: "... is streaming atmosphere" is erroneously given when a ship takes shock damage (it has not had it's Armour pierced).

This also seem to cause a wrong Intel estimation of Armour Strength.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on December 14, 2013, 01:39:13 PM
The Intel Update: "... is streaming atmosphere" is erroneously given when a ship takes shock damage (it has not had it's Armour pierced).

This also seem to cause a wrong Intel estimation of Armour Strength.

Fixed for v6.40

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on December 14, 2013, 01:50:39 PM
This has probably been mentioned, but on Earth, there is a projected use of Sorium for the fuel refineries even though I have deactivated the industry. I'm not building anything that would need Sorium. Also the projected use correlates with what my refineries would produce.
EDIT: As far as I know this doesn't actually detract the Sorium from Earth.

Fixed for v6.40

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: alex_brunius on December 14, 2013, 07:03:30 PM
Boarding combat on a PDC continues after the battle is over throwing up error messages (Error 11, division by zero).

Possible causes:
The attacked PDC had room for 5 battalions but was only garrisoned with 2.
Right after combat ended I advanced time enough to trigger a 5 day update.
All of the crew being killed off before the garrisoned battalions.

Boarding combat on the above PDC tick each 5 seconds (or whatever time advance chosen) instead of the intended every 300 seconds.

Boarding combat against a ship seem to adhere to the 300 second clock, even if the combat right after breaching hull was allowed to tick twice before clock delay. After this it worked fine.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Bremen on December 14, 2013, 09:38:29 PM
I have been playing with the invaders option ticked, so I'll go ahead and spoil this for safety.

Sometimes, but not always, I have had a succession of the following error when fighting Invaders:

"Error in SetNPRMoveOrders

Error 6 was Generated by Aurora
Overflow
Please report to etc etc"

It seems to happen when invader ships have fired their missiles at me and are trying to hold open the range.


Edit: I can confirm the errors went away exactly when the last missile salvo hit.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: MLK on December 15, 2013, 05:28:52 AM
Got another spoiler bug here.

I just came across a stable wormhole and sent a 1kton gunboat out to keep watch while I assembled a fleet to deal with anything that comes through.
Two 48kton vessels have arrived and ignored the gunboat.  I retreated and sent the fleet in.

As the fleet started getting close I started getting this error at every time advance:

Error in GetMaxPotentialSensorRange

Error 6 was generated by Aurora
Overflow

They have not opened fire on anything.  I have some fighters at 10km firing lasers at them, no shields.  The rest of the fleet is largely big ships, 5kton to 25kton, with sensors and low ECM (several tiers below the invaders) and are not being targeted and getting really close.  They should be getting bombed by now, unless these are some freighters or something, but the error makes me think they can't get their sensors running.  Also they are moving towards the fleet instead of fleeing.  :P
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: SteelChicken on December 15, 2013, 03:42:39 PM
Did a search, didn't find it.

Combat Engineers dont reclaim ruined facilities like regular engineers do.  Shouldn't they?
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on December 15, 2013, 03:45:13 PM
Did a search, didn't find it.

Combat Engineers dont reclaim ruined facilities like regular engineers do.  Shouldn't they?

No, you need construction brigades for recovery. Combat engineers are for supporting attacks on PDCs.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: SteelChicken on December 15, 2013, 04:35:17 PM
No, you need construction brigades for recovery. Combat engineers are for supporting attacks on PDCs.

Thanks for the clarification.

Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: josephj on December 16, 2013, 02:05:11 PM
Anytime I try to advance time in my present game I get a window that says:

"Error in ExecuteOrders

Error 5 was generated by Aurora
Invalid procedure call or argument
Please report to. . . "

Depending on how much time I was trying to advance, I can click 'ok' enough times that the game will proceed, but the error never goes away entirely until I restart the game.  On restart and an advance of time, the error comes back. 

Anytime I can manage to move time forward, I get some event spam about private colony ships failing to load colonists at Earth, and unload colonists at Luna.  Luna has been having some problems with unrest due to too low protection, so maybe there's a relationship there?

Thanks for any help.

Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Erik L on December 16, 2013, 02:14:58 PM
Anytime I try to advance time in my present game I get a window that says:

"Error in ExecuteOrders

Error 5 was generated by Aurora
Invalid procedure call or argument
Please report to. . . "

Depending on how much time I was trying to advance, I can click 'ok' enough times that the game will proceed, but the error never goes away entirely until I restart the game.  On restart and an advance of time, the error comes back. 

Anytime I can manage to move time forward, I get some event spam about private colony ships failing to load colonists at Earth, and unload colonists at Luna.  Luna has been having some problems with unrest due to too low protection, so maybe there's a relationship there?

Thanks for any help.



How much infrastructure is on Luna?
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: josephj on December 16, 2013, 03:20:40 PM
Quote from: Erik Luken link=topic=6501. msg67835#msg67835 date=1387224898
How much infrastructure is on Luna?

3994.  16. 05 million population, 19. 97 million supported by infrastructure.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Erik L on December 16, 2013, 03:28:15 PM
Anytime I try to advance time in my present game I get a window that says:

"Error in ExecuteOrders

Error 5 was generated by Aurora
Invalid procedure call or argument
Please report to. . . "

Depending on how much time I was trying to advance, I can click 'ok' enough times that the game will proceed, but the error never goes away entirely until I restart the game.  On restart and an advance of time, the error comes back. 

Anytime I can manage to move time forward, I get some event spam about private colony ships failing to load colonists at Earth, and unload colonists at Luna.  Luna has been having some problems with unrest due to too low protection, so maybe there's a relationship there?

Thanks for any help.



I'm going to reply to this one again... The unrest issue is there is no military presence on Luna. Put a garrison or two there and that will/should go away. Or drop a PDC.

The event messages could be related to the source/destination being too close for the time increment you tried to perform.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: josephj on December 16, 2013, 03:57:04 PM
Quote from: Erik Luken link=topic=6501. msg67840#msg67840 date=1387229295
The event messages could be related to the source/destination being too close for the time increment you tried to perform.

I'm afraid I don't understand this.

I get the message no matter which time increment I choose, and I can't interact with the game except to move time forward unless I crash the program.  Even then I get only one shot to change anything until I have to crash it again.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: BobLordOfTheCows on December 17, 2013, 05:24:08 PM
I've encountered a few game-breaking bugs late-game (I'm in year 2140).  For what I've gathered, an issue with shipping lines erupt, causing an infinite loop of 3167, 3420, and 91 errors occur, preventing the game from advancing.  (Yes, it's infinite; I've held the enter key down for 10 min).  Additionally, the game crashes when I click compact database under miscellaneous. 

Unfortunately, this all happened while making a review of this game.  If someone can fix my save, which I have below, I'd be happy to continue making my review of this exceptional game.  I believe just deleting the shipping lines would work as temporary fix, if anyone is capable of doing that.  I've tried myself without success. 

hxxp: www. mediafire. com/download/cp55f02eokq5yvd/Stevefire. mdb

I've never played a game is as much potential as this.  Really impressive work, creator. 
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Vandermeer on December 23, 2013, 08:41:35 AM
Ok, I have long lived without much bugs, but now I encountered one that might be interesting. My construction just finished a large orbital habitat, and the following happens:

(http://abload.de/img/shock4fruy.jpg)

(http://abload.de/img/shockdualfin74qzn.jpg)

So whenever I click the ship list, the game locks up in this error message, and can only be closed and reopened. I don't think I can delete the habitat without the list either.(I have backup saves though, so my game is not at all broken.)

Two discoveries concerning the error: 1. Changing the Design in the design window to PDC (which makes it lose nearly all components, and shrink to near nonexistence), makes the error go away, hence I can go into the ship window again, and even delete the bugged construct. 2. Also, since this design is nearly identical to one I used in another game, with the only difference being total size, the error obviously must come from that the game cannot handle this part in some way.
Class comparisons - actual:
(http://abload.de/img/datakjrd7.jpg)
from other game:
(http://abload.de/img/datacompx6oh0.jpg)

My guess is henceforth that the sort-after-mass function, which is automatically on in the ship window when activated, cannot handle some things above a certain size, either through sheer numerical capacity, or maybe maybe because the rounding function does some bogus.(have occassional non critical error messages concerning rounding once in a while with bigger ships during design phase)

Here is the clean and slim save, in case needed: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3vZFhO9KKngNmhwYzFXaTJvNHM/edit?usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3vZFhO9KKngNmhwYzFXaTJvNHM/edit?usp=sharing)
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Narmio on December 23, 2013, 11:18:30 AM
I just noticed that "Targeting" events for point-blank beam PD intercepts use what I assume is the real name of incoming missile types, rather than just "Size 4 Missile" or whatever. e.g.:

Quote
CA Invincible - "Goalkeeper" BFC (40kkm/20kkmps/200t) targeting Kuan Ti Anti-ship Missile at 10000km using point blank fire: Base Chance to Hit: 112% (Base To Hit: 88% Modified by Crew Grade: 112%)
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Sloshmonger on December 29, 2013, 03:55:37 AM
When in the Mining/Maintenance section of the Population and Production screen, if you double click on the Total row and try to enter a number or hit cancel you get:

Error in grdMines_DblClick - "Error 3061 was generated by DAO.Database \ Too few parameters. Expected 1."
followed by
Error in grdMines_DblClick - "Error 91 was generated by Aurora \ Object variable or With block variable not set." x4

It may not be supposed to work, but it sure would be nice to use that Total to set a reserve level for every mineral at once, rather than having to click 11x times.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: ollobrains on December 29, 2013, 03:59:41 AM
When in the Mining/Maintenance section of the Population and Production screen, if you double click on the Total row and try to enter a number or hit cancel you get:

Error in grdMines_DblClick - "Error 3061 was generated by DAO.Database \ Too few parameters. Expected 1."
followed by
Error in grdMines_DblClick - "Error 91 was generated by Aurora \ Object variable or With block variable not set." x4

It may not be supposed to work, but it sure would be nice to use that Total to set a reserve level for every mineral at once, rather than having to click 11x times.

yeah ive been able to get this one to fire as well so ill confirm this one exists
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Spfnym on December 30, 2013, 08:49:20 AM
Update: I read that my spinal mounts cannot be used with turrets.  Well, that would explain my problem.

I had a game in which I couldn't build turrets for some reason.   The game started in 2025 and somewhere around 2080 I first researched a laser and then tried to research a turret for it.   I had a laser researched as I show in the beginning of this video: https://www.  youtube.  com/watch?v=MeK3OcayEPE
However, it still says "Please design at least one beam weapon before attempting to design a turret" when I click "Turret Design". 
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Thorgarth on January 01, 2014, 05:56:57 PM
Receiving the following message on the 5-day increments:

Error in PopulateGUTraining
Error 30009 was generated by MSFlexGrid
Invalid Row Value.

Started after I started construction of a Divisional HQ.

Simple work around was to delete that Divisional HQ and initiate construction on a new one.

25 years into the game.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Kof on January 04, 2014, 02:00:04 PM
I'm getting an error in 6.30 when I try to unload some components that I've salvaged from a alien race. This causes an infinte loop.

screenie attached.

Let me know if you want the DB too.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on January 04, 2014, 02:43:15 PM
I'm getting an error in 6.30 when I try to unload some components that I've salvaged from a alien race. This causes an infinte loop.

screenie attached.

Let me know if you want the DB too.

On the screenshot you don't have a component selected - that might be the cause of the error. Could you check it and let me know.

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Kof on January 04, 2014, 03:39:46 PM
Steve,

You are correct. So user error, but could be handled better.

BTW, great work on this game. Well done. IMO, you should try to make version 2, based on crowd funding, even it not for self enrichment (I know your feelings on hobby/work from previous posts).

You might be surprised on the support you'd get. There just aren't games out there like this.

I for one would contribute cash and time (I'm a developer/designer with 17 years experience) and I know DOTNET.

Thanks.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on January 04, 2014, 04:09:55 PM
You are correct. So user error, but could be handled better.

Yes, I agree. I've added a check here so it doesn't error.

Quote
BTW, great work on this game. Well done. IMO, you should try to make version 2, based on crowd funding, even it not for self enrichment (I know your feelings on hobby/work from previous posts).

You might be surprised on the support you'd get. There just aren't games out there like this.

I for one would contribute cash and time (I'm a developer/designer with 17 years experience) and I know DOTNET.

Thanks.

It's a question of time and motivation. These days I just don't have the time to spend on development that I used to. It would be a massive undertaking to recreate Aurora and in the end, a new version would just look prettier and have a better UI, neither of which I am bothered about (as you might guess :)). I would rather spend the available time adding new features to the existing version (and playing it). The best chance of a new version will be Newtonian Aurora when I finally get back to it.

Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Prince of Space on January 04, 2014, 11:15:00 PM
A minor bug:

I've been getting some weird move tails displayed on the System Map. I have a minelayer going around to each jump point to drop off engineless sensor buoys, and after each increment in which it executed the "Launch missiles at" order I get the light blue circle representing the buoy along with a roughly 6 billion km move tail from a seemingly empty spot in the system. It doesn't even line up with the direction that the minelayer approached from.

The tails disappear after the next increment but I could swear a similarly absurd move tail appeared earlier in the same game behind a large, slow spoiler ship that I had just picked up again on passive thermals. For a moment I was concerned, but the next increment showed it moving at the slow pace I am accustomed to for such craft. Thus, it appears to be a problem with misleading move tails being drawn on newly visible objects.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Vandermeer on January 06, 2014, 12:58:57 AM
Ok, this might be more a gap through development phases other than a bug, but I found two problems. Through ruins I recently discovered first plasma torpedoes tech, and later advanced lasers. The torpedoes I have seen before show up in the "view technology" window, even so there is no segment in the "design technology" menu that would let you develop one. So I guess they have been taken out in this version. However, the second, the advanced lasers, do in fact show up under lasers, yet seem unfunctional. I searched in the forum and discovered there definitely were working editions for this where the lasers improved accuracy or something(??), but when want to design a 10cm one, it gets displayed as 4cm (by autonaming) and has 0 damage, range and energy requirement. Researching the next level (12cm focal) gave me a considered 5cm laser which at least did 1 damage (with the corresponding range factor 1*frequenzy tech), so I guess there is some conversion factor going on. However it seems kind of unelegant to have the first one literally do nothing. Also, if it weren't for the forums, I wouldn't even know that there could be some advantage to them (in accuracy), since it is not mentioned anywhere what they do (not even the wiki). As it stands they just seem to be a normal laser in effect that is for some reason scaled down, and doesn't seem to do anything beyond that.


On another note, the description of the laser wavelength tech is reversed. When your technology advances, it increases the frequenzy of the laser into ultraviolet, gamma etc., which means the wavelength goes down. Yet the description writes something like "higher wavelength means more range", which is the wrong way around given the technological progress direction. However, in reality the description should be right as light with lower frequenzy (=higher wavelength as written) should get scattered far less.(it is alot like air resistance which also rises square to how much 'faster'/'powerful' you go) ...But if the description stays right, that would mean the whole techtree there is false, as all those higher frequenzy lasers are in fact the way that would make dispersion worse, hence reducing total range.
Maybe there was another explanation intended (like for example "high frenquenzy makes our lenses' focus bundling more effective"), but that is so far not in the tech description.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Coto on January 06, 2014, 04:41:21 AM
I got this message:

Error in RetireCommander
Error 3022 was generated by DAO. Recordset
The changes you requested to the table were not successful because they would create duplicate values in the index, primary key, or relationship.   Change the data in the field or fields that contain duplicate data, remove the index, or redefine the index to permit duplicate entries and try again.

I wasn't doing anything special when this message came up, but I checked the SM log and found this occuring at the same time (Wancandhu is an NPR):

7th January 2055 08:01:31,Wancandhu,Sol,Zena Belkin has joined your civilian administration.   GU Const Speed 10%  Administration Rating 5  Wealth Creation 15%  Mining 20%
7th January 2055 08:01:31,Wancandhu,Unknown,Scientist Zhenya Voronov has been killed in an accident.  Assignment prior to death: Research Project: Improved Gravitational Sensors
7th January 2055 08:01:31,SM Only,System 0,Error in RetireCommander
7th January 2055 08:01:31,The Federation,Unknown,Through training or experience, Civilian Administrator Adam Walters has increased his Population Growth Bonus to 10%
7th January 2055 08:01:31,Wancandhu,Unknown,Through experience as a project leader, Scientist Alexia Tereshchenko has increased his Research Bonus to 40%
7th January 2055 08:01:31,Wancandhu,Unknown,Through training or experience, Baron Oriel Vorontsov has increased his Fleet Movement Initiative Rating to 322

The error didn't spam me or anything, it just came up once.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: stonestriker on January 06, 2014, 11:50:32 AM
Opening up my saved game in my game about 50 years in and opening System Maps:
Sol system is completely blank and the following errors errors pops up, one after another

"Error in CentreOnLocation - Error 6 was generated by Aurora - Overflow" x 2
"Error in DisplaySystems  - Error 6 was generated by Aurora - Overflow"

If I try to scroll the map I get the last error again.  If I try to zoom i get

"Run-time error '6' - Overflow" and the game crashes

The tabs are still showing ships and colonies in the system, and I can advance time with no problem.

Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: ThunderRush on January 07, 2014, 01:57:35 PM
So I have the following problem - whenever I press any time increment, the game starts to work before it throws me bunch of 3201 Errors by the type of NPRPopPlanning.  I tested thhe following:


So it obviously must a problem with my system - I suppose at least.  I see a lot of people having problems with 3201 after time increments, but none of them seem to get the NPRPopPlanning.  Anything I should do/try?
Thanks in advance.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Gnooble on January 08, 2014, 10:32:45 AM
Found an odd bug with the Build Jump Gate default orders.   My construction ships are able to transit points that aren't gated and don't have commercial tenders/engines.   I discovered a new jump point and explored it with a military jump tender.   My construction ships headed for the point, started work on my side (as normal), but a second construction ship was able to transit the ungated point and start the other side.   The only jump engines were military engines too small to handle the gateships.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on January 08, 2014, 01:01:44 PM
Found an odd bug with the Build Jump Gate default orders.   My construction ships are able to transit points that aren't gated and don't have commercial tenders/engines.   I discovered a new jump point and explored it with a military jump tender.   My construction ships headed for the point, started work on my side (as normal), but a second construction ship was able to transit the ungated point and start the other side.   The only jump engines were military engines too small to handle the gateships.

Are you sure the jump point doesn't have an existing gate?

Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on January 08, 2014, 01:02:33 PM
Opening up my saved game in my game about 50 years in and opening System Maps:
Sol system is completely blank and the following errors errors pops up, one after another

"Error in CentreOnLocation - Error 6 was generated by Aurora - Overflow" x 2
"Error in DisplaySystems  - Error 6 was generated by Aurora - Overflow"

If I try to scroll the map I get the last error again.  If I try to zoom i get

"Run-time error '6' - Overflow" and the game crashes

The tabs are still showing ships and colonies in the system, and I can advance time with no problem.



Try the Min Zoom button on the system map (near the top left)
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: stonestriker on January 08, 2014, 01:16:08 PM
Quote from: Steve Walmsley link=topic=6501. msg68368#msg68368 date=1389207753
Try the Min Zoom button on the system map (near the top left)


Thanks a lot, did not think to try that button  :)

Game seems to be back to normal again.  And thanks for a great game!
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Gnooble on January 08, 2014, 02:29:59 PM
Quote from: Steve Walmsley link=topic=6501.     msg68367#msg68367 date=1389207704
Are you sure the jump point doesn't have an existing gate?

It doesn't - one of my other ships started building one. 

edit:  I ran a couple tests of my own - it works only with a military jump engine on the gateship itself that, if it were set as commercial instead, would allow transits for the gateship.     So basically I'm reporting a bug coming from what is probably an exploit already - putting military jump engines on commercial ships.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Vandermeer on January 09, 2014, 12:46:24 AM
@Gnooble: Doesn't putting any kind of military component on a former commercial ship change it into a military vessel instead? What does the design plan say?
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: AbuDhabi on January 09, 2014, 06:15:23 AM
The in-game atmosphere of Venus doesn't match the one listed on Wikipedia. It is currently 50 atm Nitrogen and 50 atm Carbon Dioxide. For some reason they are listed as 65% and 35% despite being the same pressure. Per the Wikipedia article, it should be 92 atm of 96.5% Nitrogen and 3.5% Carbon Dioxide. The numbers are superficially similar - possible a typo was involved somewhere.

The atmosphere of Mars is wrong too. Per Wikipedia: "The Martian atmosphere is 95% carbon dioxide, 3% nitrogen, 1.6% argon, and traces of other gases including oxygen totaling less than 0.4%." IIRC (I've since terraformed), it was something like 70% Nitrogen and 30% CO2.

Also: Carbon Dioxide begins to be toxic at levels beginning at 1% of the air, increasing in severity of symptoms until 8%, where it causes unconsciousness.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Prince of Space on January 09, 2014, 12:58:38 PM
I found an alien homesystem, complete with distant binary (and a third star closely orbiting the second in fact), but with no intra-system jump points to bridge the 3800 AU (6*10^11 km!) gap. Oh well. I turned on the hyper limit display just to see where it fell in the system. I left it on and launched active sensor missiles at the suspected home world, and zoomed in to the planet to monitor their progress. Then I started getting error messages, always the same one occurring in pairs:

Error in DisplayStars

Error 6 was generated by Aurora
Overflow
Please report to http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index. php/board,11.0.html

This occurs when zooming in beyond a certain degree, when advancing time while scrolled in that far, or when scrolling with the arrows next to the zoom buttons while scrolled in that far. The errors don't occur if I turn off the hyper limit display, so it isn't a problem right now, but if and when hyperdrive returns this might need some attention. I suspect that zooming in that far forces the hyper limit circles for stars B and C to be drawn so far outside the rendered part of the sysrem map that it causes the errors. But that's just a guess.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: AbuDhabi on January 09, 2014, 03:13:32 PM
Jump Points are sometimes generated with jump gates on them. I don't know if this is a bug or WAI. What I do know is a bug is that even if you select jump gates on all points, you get some missed. Fortunately, that's easily fixed with the Spacemaster mode.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Erik L on January 09, 2014, 03:15:02 PM
Jump Points are sometimes generated with jump gates on them. I don't know if this is a bug or WAI.

WAI. These are relics from previous civilizations.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Vandermeer on January 10, 2014, 02:54:37 PM
I got a by turn reoccuring error "PopulateFleetList" right after I built a planetary defense centre which only consisted of troop quarters an a couple CIWS. For some reason the new system where it was assembled didn't spawn the automatic PDC-fleet taskforce. I have no idea where this thing ended up, so I couldn't even put it in a fleet manualy.
To check if the pdc even was created I went into the ship list, where I found it (but every click in the list spawned error popups). Additionally I got a hard (/only solvable by task manager kill) error of this sort:
(http://abload.de/img/errorefbj2p.jpg)

...after I clicked on a commercial ship with nearly 40m tons size. It was fairly new and I never had a working ship of this size before, so I cannot say if this is an independent error, or it is somewhat related to the other problem. My intuition is that there is just too much armor on the thing, as I experienced notable delays every time I just clicked on the "one more layer armor" button during design, and this is somehow not managable anymore. ..But can be whatever.

Here is a copy of the stevefire.mdb to make checking possible: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3vZFhO9KKngNmhwYzFXaTJvNHM/edit?usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3vZFhO9KKngNmhwYzFXaTJvNHM/edit?usp=sharing)
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Vandermeer on January 10, 2014, 05:33:27 PM
Update: I came to test this a little and found that likely the long name of the system+body prevented the PDC Fleet to be automatically generated. When I made a custom task group and gave it the name it would normally have been given by default, I got an error of this calibre:
(http://abload.de/img/errorefinisezzl5.jpg)
..Which in short says "too much signs". So when the game tried to do this automatically, it failed and the task group was never created. Now there is a ship/pdc somewhere out there that is not assigned to any task group in the universe, ..basically in nirvana and beyond any selectionability(?). All I can do is delete, and manually assign shorter names to the planets there so this won't happen the next time. Calls for a check beforehand to prevent occurrencies like this. (by the way, the name got that long, because I add real planet names on top of the usual format [system name]-[position in system], which I like to do for organizational purposes. this time the system name alone was already huge on itself)

// The other thing with the big ship is therefore an independent problem. Too much armor for the memory it seems, but I will test that further tomorrow. (I wonder if that also was the issue with the 250 million tons orbital habitat I had a couple of days ago here... . There may be an upper limit on total armor boxes you can have)
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Vandermeer on January 11, 2014, 11:05:18 AM
Triple post, sorry, but as I said I looked into the armor cap theory today, and yes, I can pretty much confirm this. I rescaled the ship's armor that was making problems into an area where I wouldn't get the lockup errors when selecting the ship in the ship window. Since I haven't posted the picture of those, here they are:
(http://abload.de/img/error1ouo6h.jpg)
...this comes first, followed by an infinite chain of those:
(http://abload.de/img/error28ds7e.jpg)

After the scaledown I increased the armor gradually by one layer and checked each time if the error would spawn again.
Here is when that happened for this ship (36 layers were too much, 35 is A-O-K):
(http://abload.de/img/gagazetarmorupscy.jpg)

...But what is really causing the problem here? Could be column count, total size, armor strength or area.. - not clear. So since I wanted to check if it happened with my orbital habitat aswell, that also was the opportunity for a illuminating cross-check. I got the same error that I reported way above some days ago, so it is also confirmed that this happened due to maximum armor cap.
(http://abload.de/img/habitatarmor4csba.jpg)

This habitat was around 125 million tons, and the freighter ~37 million, so size didn't matter. If you look at the numbers it becomes clear that 'armor strength'(total count of boxes) is indeed this ominous limiting factor, and the point at which Aurora just can't handle the awesome anymore must lay between 345k and 355k armor boxes. Further testing closed that in to pretty much exactly 350k.
I don't know why, but it seems as if intentionally setup. I was expecting a power of 2 factor behind this somewhere(which often comes with natural memory limitation), but the next potency is pretty much equally away in both directions (2^18~262k and 2^19~524k). Addionally 350k is just too round of a number to be an incident.

Now, what does all that mean? Well, if armor is capped, and every ship has to have armor, that also concludes in that ship sizes are capped. I wanted to find out the two hard limits that are inclined by such a number:
- 1. The maximum ship size where you could technically still have maximum possible armor of 100 layers.
- 2. Of course maximum ship size with the 1 minimum layer of armor.

Here is what I got for the first (with maximum armor tech of course, otherwise resistance testing would be futile):
(http://abload.de/img/vanityzasjt.jpg)

..After this size (approx. 7.75 million tons) you would have to reduce the layer count to not excede the total box limit.

Aaand the ultimate maximum:
(http://abload.de/img/madnessrts2i.jpg)
...7.75 billion tons. It needs 10 minutes just to design because the program becomes so slow that you need to wait some seconds for every click to being processed. Although a ship of that size would not excede the maximum armor, it would possibly run into other errors like with the round function that works insinde the maintenance amount calculation. Isn't completly game breaking like the other though, but certaintly quite bothersome.


So, I don't know if this (or these) limitation(s) where intended, but if not, it is hereby reported by imperium intelligence for a steve to look after.
(http://abload.de/img/steve6ds46.jpg)
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Prince of Space on January 11, 2014, 11:55:05 AM
When I open the Galactic Map I get the following error twice in a row:

"Error in LoadRaceData

Error 76 was generated by Aurora
Path not found: 'Flags\'
Please report to..."

I should note that the NPR that generated at game start does not have a flag assigned to it, according to the Intelligence and Foreign Relations window. Also, I replaced the standard flags folder with the pack of different flags that's floating around on the forums somewhere. My first NPR in any Aurora game ever was represented by a picture of a pufferfish and a #### flag, which seemed... odd, so I've been using the other flags ever since.

I have encountered other NPRs and spoilers, in this 6.30 game and others, and they get assigned flags from the new folder just fine. If I don't assign a flag to my own race I have found that the same error has popped up before, but that was easy enough to fix. Here, I suspect I may have to conquer the offending empire to correct the problem.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Vandermeer on January 11, 2014, 04:29:43 PM
Another different problem I just stumbled across. In a very spacious system I have a far remote mining colony with mass drivers. The measurement shows a distance of 190 billion kilometers towards the nearest colony (which is the actual target of the mass drivers).
The problem:
(http://abload.de/img/nah7opol.jpg)
(http://abload.de/img/fernqofj0.jpg)

...The mineral packets are stacking up indefinitely, never actually reaching the target.
It could happen because of the sheer distance is not treatet well by Aurora anymore for some reason, but if the packets plot courses like everything else does, then it could also be because of the lagrange points, since the shortest route to that moon is through such a point. I don't think it is likely though, since there are other colonies where LPs would be an advantage and they are fine.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: MarcAFK on January 14, 2014, 12:46:03 AM
This one isn't really a bug, just a missing feature, I have noticed predesigned jump engines with a smaller size granularity than I'm able to design, for instance I have a 73 ton, and a 109 ton engine, but the drop down starts going up by 5 ton increments after 50 so I can design either a 70 ton or a 75 ton, but not a 73 ton, the same applies to the 109 ton where size starts going up by 10 ton increments, so i could make a 100 or 110 ton engine but not anywhere within that range.
Not really a problem since I usually like my ships to be round numbers when it comes to weight, but when I attempt to put new jump engines into my first predesigned ships I can never make an engine with the exact same capacity, but the new engines are smaller so theres really no problem, I suggest keeping the granularity as is and merely limiting the predesigned tech systems to the same rules as the players, though it's probably more work than merely changing the dropdown. Does anyone object to the jump engine size dropdown expanding to 1000 entries?
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: alex_brunius on January 14, 2014, 03:04:13 AM
Does anyone object to the jump engine size dropdown expanding to 1000 entries?

I posted a suggestion regarding engine sizes dropdown that could be applied to many size dropdowns.

The idea is to have varying degrees of size by roughly 10% everywhere instead of a set amount that is guaranteed to be big for the smallest engines and to small for the biggest ones.

So for 50 ton engines it makes sense to be able to make one that's 55 or 45 ton.
But for a 5000 ton engine it adds little value to be able to scale it to 5005 ton, 5500 ton however is a useful step.

The size increments could vary between 5-20% trying to hit even number like so:

10
12
14
...
50
55
60
...
500
550
600
...
And so on.

I'm not sure how technically hard this would be to make, but it would enable alot of detail to smaller craft without creating thousands of entries in the dropdown.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Ceebees on January 17, 2014, 03:24:55 PM
I've been playing 6.  3 on the portable package, and i seem to have found a couple hiccups.   A quick search didn't turn another instance of them up in this thread, but my apologies in advance if they're there and i just missed them. 

First, Advanced Spinal Lasers don't seem to tag themselves as Spinal mounts - specifically, i can put as many of them on my ships as i want.   The following design locked and built without issue for me:

Code: [Select]
Forrest-S class Nebula Cruiser    9 100 tons     219 Crew     1266.2 BP      TCS 182  TH 720  EM 0
3956 km/s     Armour 4-38     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 6     PPV 28
Maint Life 2.72 Years     MSP 522    AFR 110%    IFR 1.5%    1YR 101    5YR 1521    Max Repair 210 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 14 months    Spare Berths 0    

Westinghouse "Greyhound" S25pm080 Ion Drive (3)    Power 240    Fuel Use 30.05%    Signature 240    Exp 8%
Fuel Capacity 1 100 000 Litres    Range 72.4 billion km   (211 days at full power)

22cm C3 Advanced Spinal Ultraviolet Laser (4)   Range 256 000km     TS: 4000 km/s     Power 13-3     RM 4    ROF 25        13 13 13 13 10 8 7 6 5 5
Fire Control S04 128-4000 (1)    Max Range: 256 000 km   TS: 4000 km/s     96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61
P-4 Miniature Gas-Cooled Reactor (4)     Total Power Output 18    Armour 0    Exp 5%

Active Search Sensor MR15-R20 (1)     GPS 840     Range 15.0m km    Resolution 20
Active Search Sensor MR198-R140 (1)     GPS 29400     Range 198.8m km    Resolution 140

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes


Secondly, i had an issue where the game suddenly went to 15-second ticks for an extended period.   Figuring that an NPR had blundered into a Precursor (again), i left it running on auto-turns overnight, and returned the following morning to find that 90,000 seconds had passed at 15-s intervals. 

Annoyed and confused, i turned on SM mode and peeked at the combat log, only to find that an NPR meson ship had been firing at a hostile gatebuilder that was just outside of it's range for the last 24+ hours.  It seems to me like maybe they should scoot a little closer if the first 2-3000 volleys don't accomplish anything.  .  . 
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on January 18, 2014, 07:36:54 AM
First, Advanced Spinal Lasers don't seem to tag themselves as Spinal mounts - specifically, i can put as many of them on my ships as i want.   The following design locked and built without issue for me:

Not just Advanced. It seems I failed to add any restriction on the number of spinal weapons. Not sure what happened there but fixed for v6.40

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: DTF on January 18, 2014, 07:55:31 AM
Unsure on how 'recent' this bug is, haven't read all of the v6. x bug threads:

Fighters build from salvaged alien components do not use up the components from the stockpile. 
Quite profitable with invader components (if you can kill them, i. e.  let them ram themselves to death).

Also, Fighters refit either instantly or very quickly - due to the already mentioned bug of fighters, pds, etc.  not locking upon construction, I fitted a new engine onto a fighter design.  Next time I looked, all of the mentioned fighters had the upgrade.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on January 18, 2014, 07:57:38 AM
Just found and fixed a bug that caused non-jump capable NPR ships to try to make a squadron jump through a jump gate (which could potentially cause shortened increments).
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Nathan_ on January 18, 2014, 10:02:06 PM
Fuel Consumption in the Missile Engine Size category does not match what is printed in the design summary for new missile engines. size=0.5 reports a fuel consumption mod of 1x, but that doesn't actually happen until missile size = 5.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: alex_brunius on January 19, 2014, 04:53:40 AM
Fuel Consumption in the Missile Engine Size category does not match what is printed in the design summary for new missile engines. size=0.5 reports a fuel consumption mod of 1x, but that doesn't actually happen until missile size = 5.

Seems like this is already fixed in 6.40:

Fixed for v6.40. It's a display error and doesn't affect actual missile engine fuel consumption

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Vandermeer on January 20, 2014, 02:14:48 PM
It appears that you lose every fighter that you accidentally sent into overhaul. It gets stuck forever while the maintenance clock only continues to rise since the 'abandon overhaul' command does not work.(but 'begin overhaul' does; how cruel) You can land the craft in hangars which atleast rescues it from falling apart, but it doesn't really help - after relaunch, they are still stuck in overhaul.
I had this problem in the past without reporting, but this time I lose around 80 interceptors in one sweep. There is no other way than deleting them all one by one, or not?
Surely this is known already, so is there a fix maybe that I overlooked?
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Kurt on January 22, 2014, 06:57:53 PM
Steve - I have run into what has to be a bug in planet/system generation.  Or I have run into something I've never encountered before.  

One of my fleets was probing a system, as I've grown cautious after losing several survey ships in systems with planets with oxygen-nitrogen atmospheres.  The fleet was proceeding towards a habitable moon of a gas giant when it detected a population on the gas giant.  I double checked and the population was actually on the gas giant, not any of the moons, and it appeared to be composed of ground troops.  Thinking that maybe I had found something new that you've added, I sent in my geo-survey ship to survey the gas giant and began trying to establish contact with the aliens.  When the survey ship competed its survey it revealed that the gas giant had deposits of all eleven TN resources at good availability levels.  This should not be possible, unless things have changed a lot.  

At this point I thought that maybe Aurora was calling the planet a gas giant but that it really was a terrestrial planet in all but name, but that doesn't seem to be the case.  Aurora would not allow me to establish a colony on the gas giant, and informed me that it wasn't possible on a gas giant, just as it should have.  The gas giant has 10 moons, three of which are terrestrial, just as a gas giant might have but a terrestrial planet will not have.

The fact that Aurora allowed the NPR to establish a colony on the planet is interesting, given it would not allow me to do the same thing.  I think for now I am going to ignore the alien colony as if it doesn't exist, as it shouldn't exist.  

Kurt

Steve- I forgot to add that I'm using version 6.3.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: ArchRylen on January 22, 2014, 09:27:39 PM
Boarding troops don't seem to load properly.

I build some boarding fighters (company drop + engine), assign them to a group, and instruct to load from anywhere. All companies loaded are considered to be cargo of the first listed ship in the group. If that ship is destroyed, all companies are gone. If the fleet is split, all loaded units stay with that first ship. It does not seem to matter if I load within the fleet or from outside.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: MarcAFK on January 22, 2014, 11:27:30 PM
Steve - I have run into what has to be a bug in planet/system generation.  Or I have run into something I've never encountered before.  

One of my fleets was probing a system, as I've grown cautious after losing several survey ships in systems with planets with oxygen-nitrogen atmospheres.  The fleet was proceeding towards a habitable moon of a gas giant when it detected a population on the gas giant.  I double checked and the population was actually on the gas giant, not any of the moons, and it appeared to be composed of ground troops.  Thinking that maybe I had found something new that you've added, I sent in my geo-survey ship to survey the gas giant and began trying to establish contact with the aliens.  When the survey ship competed its survey it revealed that the gas giant had deposits of all eleven TN resources at good availability levels.  This should not be possible, unless things have changed a lot.  

At this point I thought that maybe Aurora was calling the planet a gas giant but that it really was a terrestrial planet in all but name, but that doesn't seem to be the case.  Aurora would not allow me to establish a colony on the gas giant, and informed me that it wasn't possible on a gas giant, just as it should have.  The gas giant has 10 moons, three of which are terrestrial, just as a gas giant might have but a terrestrial planet will not have.

The fact that Aurora allowed the NPR to establish a colony on the planet is interesting, given it would not allow me to do the same thing.  I think for now I am going to ignore the alien colony as if it doesn't exist, as it shouldn't exist.  

Kurt

Steve- I forgot to add that I'm using version 6.3.
You've found Goldblatt's world, while your system map shows it to be an ordinary gas giant, actually it's a torus of gas that's been ripped out of a normal gas giant by the intense gravity of the neutron star it orbits, the gas is just dense enough to support oxygen breathing creatures which can fly within it's limits, however there is no solid ground for a terrestial colony as you might wish to establish. However those moons you've found must be a bug as there's no single dense planet there for any moons to orbit.
Source: Science Fiction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Smoke_Ring_%28novel%29)
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Panopticon on January 23, 2014, 07:14:12 PM
Getting a "No ranks found, please set up ranks before creating commanders" message every 5 day increment.

I have done nothing unusual to ranks or commanders. It isn't breaking the game but it does pop up every turn.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Nathan_ on January 23, 2014, 08:33:39 PM
I've got some spoilers camped around my homeworld, they ran out of ammo, but haven't left and are tripping interrupts constantly even though they are unable to fire on anything either due to atmosphere or again not having ammo. 1 of which is a beamship and may be responsible, 2 others are amm ships.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Scraphound on January 23, 2014, 09:07:28 PM
Hi all.   New to the game and struggling with a number of errors.   

My latest is a 3021 error that pops up continuously and stops my game dead.   I reinstalled everything, careful to follow all steps in the installation and patch threads.   

If it matters, I recently built a couple geosurvey ships and automated them to scan nearest body.   I've been jumping by 30 day increments as well.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: ExChairman on January 24, 2014, 01:10:35 PM
What?!? I am not alone in the universe....After some 25 years into the game... Suddenly a hundred alien vessels appears on my sensors, all of them centered at Mars, were I have a colony of some 120 million humans... Cant find anything of there homeworld... After advancing time 5 seconds I still cant find any alien populations, anywhere i Sol system... A bug?
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: ExChairman on January 24, 2014, 01:19:13 PM
Had to restart the game, there is a new population on Mars....

Thermal: 221900
EM646830

But were did it come from....
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on January 24, 2014, 03:47:24 PM
Hi all.   New to the game and struggling with a number of errors.   

My latest is a 3021 error that pops up continuously and stops my game dead.   I reinstalled everything, careful to follow all steps in the installation and patch threads.   

If it matters, I recently built a couple geosurvey ships and automated them to scan nearest body.   I've been jumping by 30 day increments as well.

Is your decimal separator a comma?

Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on January 24, 2014, 03:49:22 PM
Steve - I have run into what has to be a bug in planet/system generation.  Or I have run into something I've never encountered before.  

One of my fleets was probing a system, as I've grown cautious after losing several survey ships in systems with planets with oxygen-nitrogen atmospheres.  The fleet was proceeding towards a habitable moon of a gas giant when it detected a population on the gas giant.  I double checked and the population was actually on the gas giant, not any of the moons, and it appeared to be composed of ground troops.  Thinking that maybe I had found something new that you've added, I sent in my geo-survey ship to survey the gas giant and began trying to establish contact with the aliens.  When the survey ship competed its survey it revealed that the gas giant had deposits of all eleven TN resources at good availability levels.  This should not be possible, unless things have changed a lot.  

At this point I thought that maybe Aurora was calling the planet a gas giant but that it really was a terrestrial planet in all but name, but that doesn't seem to be the case.  Aurora would not allow me to establish a colony on the gas giant, and informed me that it wasn't possible on a gas giant, just as it should have.  The gas giant has 10 moons, three of which are terrestrial, just as a gas giant might have but a terrestrial planet will not have.

The fact that Aurora allowed the NPR to establish a colony on the planet is interesting, given it would not allow me to do the same thing.  I think for now I am going to ignore the alien colony as if it doesn't exist, as it shouldn't exist.  

Kurt

Steve- I forgot to add that I'm using version 6.3.

Given that someone else just reported a large alien population appearing on Mars, I am starting to wonder if the game is somehow picking up a colony from another game. Could you email me the DB?

Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Scraphound on January 24, 2014, 04:18:52 PM
Quote from: Steve Walmsley link=topic=6501. msg69092#msg69092 date=1390600044
Is your decimal separator a comma?



Nope.   I'm in North America.   

Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Thorgarth on January 24, 2014, 08:03:14 PM
v6.3, after defeating a pre-TN world and then shipping the required maintenance, a squadron of FACs were stationed in the system.  I've placed them on training.  Yet, they are not suffering any maintenance issue nor is the maintenace clock running.

Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Kurt on January 25, 2014, 07:36:10 AM
Given that someone else just reported a large alien population appearing on Mars, I am starting to wonder if the game is somehow picking up a colony from another game. Could you email me the DB?


The DB is on its way, let me know if you don't get it.  I had to zip it to get it down in size. 

The system in question is Eta Cassiopeiae, and the planet with the alien colony on it is A-II. 
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: sloanjh on January 25, 2014, 09:37:41 AM
Given that someone else just reported a large alien population appearing on Mars, I am starting to wonder if the game is somehow picking up a colony from another game. Could you email me the DB?

Ooooh - parallel universe translation!!!  Wasn't there a Star Trek episode about that?

John
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Scraphound on January 25, 2014, 10:14:38 AM
A little more info on the bug I'm encountering.

Here's the full error message:

Quote
Error 3021 was generated by DAO. Field
No Current Record

If I dismiss the first error a second one immediately pops up over and over again, forcing me to end the process.   

Quote
Error 3420 was generated by DAO. Database
Object invali or no longer set.

It seems to happen only when I advance time by 5 days or more.   Not much happening in my game right now.   Conventional start.   I have two GeoSurvey ships on automated exploration detail.   

Any help would be greatly appreciated.   Aurora is just about everything I ever wanted in a game.   Can't wait to sink my teeth in. 
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Kurt on January 25, 2014, 11:53:26 AM
Ooooh - parallel universe translation!!!  Wasn't there a Star Trek episode about that?

John

Maybe Aurora is actually Steve's attempt to create a distributed AI, and these unexpected things we're seeing are bleeding over from the AI's database. 
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on January 25, 2014, 12:26:39 PM
The DB is on its way, let me know if you don't get it.  I had to zip it to get it down in size. 

The system in question is Eta Cassiopeiae, and the planet with the alien colony on it is A-II. 

I haven't received it yet. Did you send to the btinternet address or the gmail address?

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Tanj on January 25, 2014, 07:15:23 PM
I haven't received it yet. Did you send to the btinternet address or the gmail address?

Steve

This might be the same issue, or something else entirely, but on my current game both my Luna and Mars colonies suddenly started issuing their own build orders. Luna and Mars started trying to convert mines to automines (despite having no mines in the first place) and Mars also had a build order for a type of missile I've never designed... This is running 6.3
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Ceebees on January 26, 2014, 10:16:21 AM
Quote from: Tanj link=topic=6501. msg69121#msg69121 date=1390698923
This might be the same issue, or something else entirely, but on my current game both my Luna and Mars colonies suddenly started issuing their own build orders.  Luna and Mars started trying to convert mines to automines (despite having no mines in the first place) and Mars also had a build order for a type of missile I've never designed. . .  This is running 6. 3

I actually had this occur on a number of civilian mining complexes, also affecting the research panel.  From the names of the missiles being built and the scientists, i figured that they were somehow seeing NPR build orders.  Letting the projects complete didn't actually change anything in my empire, so i ignored and forgot about it.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Kurt on January 26, 2014, 05:08:06 PM
I haven't received it yet. Did you send to the btinternet address or the gmail address?

Steve

I sent it to the btinternet address. 
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Scraphound on January 26, 2014, 06:35:34 PM
So I scrapped my previous game after getting hit with error messages and started a new one.   Played like a dream all day yesterday.   No problem whatsoever.   Today I load my game and I'm getting a completely different set of bugs.   

When I click on research, industry, or really anything that shares the same menu I get the following:  Error 3001 was generated by DAO. Database.   Invalid argument.   Next I click okay and I get this error:  Error 91 was generated by Aurora.   Object variable or With block variable not set.   

I'd really, really like to play Aurora, but these bugs are making it impossible.   Is there anything I can do to avoid these bugs? Should I insteall version 6. 2 instead maybe? 

Any help would be appreciated.   Just stumbled across Aurora recently.   It's exactly the kind of game I've always wanted to play but never believed anyone would actually be crazy enough to make it.   
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on January 26, 2014, 07:37:48 PM
So I scrapped my previous game after getting hit with error messages and started a new one.   Played like a dream all day yesterday.   No problem whatsoever.   Today I load my game and I'm getting a completely different set of bugs.   

When I click on research, industry, or really anything that shares the same menu I get the following:  Error 3001 was generated by DAO. Database.   Invalid argument.   Next I click okay and I get this error:  Error 91 was generated by Aurora.   Object variable or With block variable not set.   

I'd really, really like to play Aurora, but these bugs are making it impossible.   Is there anything I can do to avoid these bugs? Should I insteall version 6. 2 instead maybe? 

Any help would be appreciated.   Just stumbled across Aurora recently.   It's exactly the kind of game I've always wanted to play but never believed anyone would actually be crazy enough to make it.   

Its difficult to know what the problem is. Aurora does have some bugs but is generally stable, nothing like the problems you are encountering. It's almost as if you have a corrupt installation or a mismatched database and executable. Something else is definitely going on because if these were common bugs everyone would be reporting them. I can only suggest removing and re-installing and make sure you follow every step in the install very carefully. Going to v6.2 is definitely an option.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: PaxMondo on January 26, 2014, 08:29:38 PM
31 years into a game it has halted with an : Error 3421.   I cannot clear it, and not sure exactly what is the trigger.

I can send a savegame if you wish.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Tanj on January 29, 2014, 06:09:13 AM
I've got some odd civilian traffic in my current game. All three civilian shipping lines are attempting to reach Luna, I presume with cargo from Earth, by routing all their traffic through 3 other solar systems... so they jump out to Barnards Star, then onto Luyten 726-8, then into Sirius and finally back into Sol to deliver their cargo. All together the four systems form a big circle, all jump-gated by an aggresive NPR which is currently slaughtering all the civilian traffic as it moves through Sirius  :-\
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: MarcAFK on January 29, 2014, 06:59:27 AM
.....
From Earth to Luna?
So instead of spending 12 minutes 48 seconds @ 500 km/s for the direct approach they're redirecting through 4 systems?
Sounds reasonable.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Tanj on January 29, 2014, 07:26:09 AM
.....
From Earth to Luna?
So instead of spending 12 minutes 48 seconds @ 500 km/s for the direct approach they're redirecting through 4 systems?
Sounds reasonable.

I figure it's some kind of corporate tax dodge  :P
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Ceebees on January 29, 2014, 02:25:10 PM
I ran into a curious event, not quite sure if it's a bug since i did do a bit of SM manipulation that led to it.


After another annoying stretch of 5-second shortened intervals, i turned on SM mode to discover that one NPR was laboriously attempting to conquer another by bombarding it's homeworld with a single gauss cannon, one point of damage at a time.  Wanting this to stop, preferably forever, i SM teleported my fleet into orbit and had them glass the planet in question.

At this point, things got a little strange; the NPR population on the ground surrendered to me due to the bombardment, but it's shipyards didn't and the attacking fleet continued to bombard a nonexistent population belonging to the defeated empire.  Firing a second salvo to obliterate the shipyards cleared the attacker's orders, but it also caused my fleet to surrender to itself and be turned over (to me) with 0% TF training.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Nathan_ on January 30, 2014, 01:14:07 PM
It looks like components are still being repaired from damage control after the ship itself was repaired, even though the display now shows the DCQ as clear post repair.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Cheet4h on January 30, 2014, 04:06:09 PM
I'm currently getting a stretch of forced 5 second intervals with an error 94 "Invalid use of Null".   This happened right after I dropped a thermal and EM sensor buoy at a jump point.   It may be that the error happened because I designed the buoy before I designed any missile engines, but it expected an engine in the buoy object?

What I did:
Designed a buoy with sensors and without engines
Flew a ship with these buoy to the nearest jump point
Used the button in the ship description to launch a missile. 
Gave the ship the order to turn to the next jump point
Checked the sensor ranges, no ranges turned up
Removed orders for the ship and gave it the order to "launch missiles at" jump point #1
Ship arrived, still no second sensor range. 
Gave order to fly to the next jump point, as soon as I incremented time the game reduced the intervals to 5-second intervals.   Throws "Error 94 - Invalid use of Null" everytime. 

edit: The error happens in "FireAllWeapons" and disappears when I delete the scout ship, so was definitely caused by it.  I think I pressed the "Open Fire" button in the ships screen, and now I see that I didn't assign the buoys to the launcher.  Maybe related to this?
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Raaaak on January 30, 2014, 05:08:31 PM
I'm getting errors related to a NPR fighting.

Background:
created a NPR in SpaceMaster mode, and got some error related to missile that I foolishly ignored.
16 years later this happens somewhere in the universe.

Alternating
"Error in CreateSalvo" and "Error in LoadSalvos"
Code: [Select]
Error 94 generated by Aurora
Invalid use of Null
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: SteelChicken on February 02, 2014, 10:41:08 AM
Saw an interesting situation where one race[Race A] allied with me (friendly military, open trade) opened fire on my ships...that had surrendered to me from *another* race[Race B] that I had won a war with years ago.  This other race was also at war with the race allied to me.  I guess they didn't know those were my ships, LOL.

If you want the db, let me know.

I defeat race A, their colony ships surrendered to me.  I kept them in orbit of my homeworld.
Race B, friends with me, but also at war with race A, blew away those ships that had surrendered to me years before.

Looking at Race B's event log, it shows my ships as still belonging to the old race.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on February 02, 2014, 12:43:25 PM
Saw an interesting situation where one race[Race A] allied with me (friendly military, open trade) opened fire on my ships...that had surrendered to me from *another* race[Race B] that I had won a war with years ago.  This other race was also at war with the race allied to me.  I guess they didn't know those were my ships, LOL.

If you want the db, let me know.

I defeat race A, their colony ships surrendered to me.  I kept them in orbit of my homeworld.
Race B, friends with me, but also at war with race A, blew away those ships that had surrendered to me years before.

Looking at Race B's event log, it shows my ships as still belonging to the old race.


I've found something in my current campaign that is similar. It is because when the ships change race, the contacts associated with them are not updated accordingly. So anyone who had a contact record before the ships changed hands will still see them as the original race. I'll fix it for v6.40

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Bgreman on February 04, 2014, 03:22:08 PM
I've found something in my current campaign that is similar. It is because when the ships change race, the contacts associated with them are not updated accordingly. So anyone who had a contact record before the ships changed hands will still see them as the original race. I'll fix it for v6.40

Steve

Nice to see this, that's another bugfix I'd die to have for my LP.  A related bug is that if a foreign ship undergoes refit, the contact is not updated to reflect the new class.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: SteelChicken on February 06, 2014, 10:42:17 AM
I've found something in my current campaign that is similar. It is because when the ships change race, the contacts associated with them are not updated accordingly. So anyone who had a contact record before the ships changed hands will still see them as the original race. I'll fix it for v6.40

Steve

Yay!!!!

A couple of more bugs.

1) Combat assignments overview.  If you set missile ships to a certain level of AMM defence, eg 1 anti missile per target, etc, you can copy that setting to other ships...this works correctly.  It does not work correctly for copying "none"...each ship has to be updated manually in this case.  No error message, just won't copy the "None" setting.

2) Recently conquered an enemy home-world.  I wanted to load some of their same-sized missiles into my ships, but when I go into ordnance management for my ships (click on a single ship, in a fleet, select population)...its pointing to the missiles stocks on my home-world, 3 jumps away.  My fleet is definitely orbiting the right planet :)

EDIT:  #2 went away all by itself...when I took ships out of the original fleet and created another fleet.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Erik L on February 06, 2014, 10:55:07 AM
I've found something in my current campaign that is similar. It is because when the ships change race, the contacts associated with them are not updated accordingly. So anyone who had a contact record before the ships changed hands will still see them as the original race. I'll fix it for v6.40

Steve

Actually, if Race A captured a ship of Race B, and then sent it into the system of Race C (who knew of both A and B), their first assumption should be that it is a ship of Race B rather than Race A.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 06, 2014, 02:40:13 PM
Actually, if Race A captured a ship of Race B, and then sent it into the system of Race C (who knew of both A and B), their first assumption should be that it is a ship of Race B rather than Race A.

Erik that would be true if Steve had a detailed fog-of-war/tactical intelligence model coded.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Erik L on February 06, 2014, 03:18:09 PM
Erik that would be true if Steve had a detailed fog-of-war/tactical intelligence model coded.

Maybe just wishful thinking on my part :)
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: MarcAFK on February 07, 2014, 07:39:34 AM
They should think it's Race B only if they aren't friendly with either race and therefore have no overriding intelligence. Obviously if they're allied to race A they would know the codes for A's civilian transponders or whatever and would know immediately that despite looking like B's ship it's actually claiming to be A's.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Antsan on February 07, 2014, 08:51:59 AM
This is basically a repeat from the v6. 20 Bugs thread.

When running under wine on MacOS, the program crashes when attempting to write log files (either manually from the Events window, or the automatic yearly output).  I would guess it's a Wine issue.  An option to disable the automatic log output would seem to be an easy sure-fire fix.

(In version 6. 20 it would do a flood of error messages that could be clicked through.  Now it just crashes.  Also interestingly, it seems to process the increment, and then crash.  When re-launched, the date has not been updated, but I've verified that planets have moved and research and production have advanced.  Usually the game proceeds normally but sometimes it keeps trying to write the log file and crashing.  Besides the crashes, this can result in 15 or 20 days of movement and production all happening in the same 5 days.  Another possible fix might be to just ensure the increment is completely processed and the current date updated before writing the log file so that upon re-launch it has the correct date and doesn't try to write the file again. )
I have the same problem. Also any research events are displayed once when they happen and a second time when the point where the game normally crashes is surpassed. Also strangely it didn't happen in the first year.
Disabling logs seems reasonable - I never use them, either way.

The time of crash seems to be moving 5 days forward per year. Seems like there somewhere is 365 days in a year lingering around.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Vermilingua on February 13, 2014, 01:44:00 AM
Hi all,
When incrementing more than a day (5 or 30 days), without fail, Aurora will return a division by zero error.  The full error is as follows:
Code: [Select]
Error in AddStatusPoints
Error 11 was generated by Aurora
Division by zero
This, needless to say, is really annoying.  It almost doubles the time it takes to increment, and disables auto incrementing.  I can't remember exactly when it started, but I think it was around the time I started my first colony (on Mars).
Anyway, if there's anything that can be done, or if there is a way to downgrade and keep the save, let me know.
Vermilingua
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Gru on February 15, 2014, 01:21:32 PM
When my Tanker is trying to unload fuel at my home planets (using conditional order "Fuel Tanks Full" then "Unload 90%  Fuel at Colony. . . ") I receive message "Error 5 generated by Aurora.  Invalid procedure call or argument. "

Is there a more acceptable way to do this, or is this just a bug?

Thanks.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on February 16, 2014, 06:36:34 AM
Hi all,
When incrementing more than a day (5 or 30 days), without fail, Aurora will return a division by zero error.  The full error is as follows:
Code: [Select]
Error in AddStatusPoints
Error 11 was generated by Aurora
Division by zero
This, needless to say, is really annoying.  It almost doubles the time it takes to increment, and disables auto incrementing.  I can't remember exactly when it started, but I think it was around the time I started my first colony (on Mars).
Anyway, if there's anything that can be done, or if there is a way to downgrade and keep the save, let me know.
Vermilingua

I've checked the code and it appears this could happen if a colony with zero population had unrest. I've corrected that for v6.4. Is that happening within your game?

Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Vermilingua on February 16, 2014, 05:32:09 PM
Quote from: Steve Walmsley link=topic=6501.  msg69874#msg69874 date=1392554194
I've checked the code and it appears this could happen if a colony with zero population had unrest.   I've corrected that for v6.  4.   Is that happening within your game?

At the moment, my only colony with unrest has a population of 28m, so that's unlikely.  I've had this problem from about when I put people on Mars, so I don't know where this is coming from.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: davidr on February 28, 2014, 01:52:51 AM
Steve,

Is there any way that the time taken for completion of TG orders as shown in the Task Force Organisation screen ( CTL +F4 ) can be made identical to the time for completion of TG orders as shown on the main Galactic map. At present there are major discrepancies (i.e. Time on the galactic map 35d 08h 22m but shown on the Organisation screen as 3d 12h 50m ( the galactic map shows the correct time involved ) - the distances however are identical.

DavidR
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Erik L on February 28, 2014, 08:18:19 AM
Steve,

Is there any way that the time taken for completion of TG orders as shown in the Task Force Organisation screen ( CTL +F4 ) can be made identical to the time for completion of TG orders as shown on the main Galactic map. At present there are major discrepancies (i.e. Time on the galactic map 35d 08h 22m but shown on the Organisation screen as 3d 12h 50m ( the galactic map shows the correct time involved ) - the distances however are identical.

DavidR

The time on the TG screen is time to complete the next order.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: davidr on February 28, 2014, 11:51:58 AM
Erik,

Apologies but I have just checked your answer re Time to complete next order and with the single order - Move to Earth I have a freighter on the galactic map showing a distance of 204.3m from Earth and Time to Earth of 1.14.36 at 1470 km/s . However on the TG list the same freighter has distance of 204.3m and an eta of 0.3.51.

DavidR

PS The Freighter arrived at the time shown on the galactic map but after a rest the next order , load an Auto Mine shows an identical time of 0.15.30 on both the TG screen and the galactic map. Anyone know why the transit order shows 2 different times yet  the load order shows identical times?
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Erik L on February 28, 2014, 12:49:46 PM
Erik,

Apologies but I have just checked your answer re Time to complete next order and with the single order - Move to Earth I have a freighter on the galactic map showing a distance of 204.3m from Earth and Time to Earth of 1.14.36 at 1470 km/s . However on the TG list the same freighter has distance of 204.3m and an eta of 0.3.51.

DavidR

PS The Freighter arrived at the time shown on the galactic map but after a rest the next order , load an Auto Mine shows an identical time of 0.15.30 on both the TG screen and the galactic map. Anyone know why the transit order shows 2 different times yet  the load order shows identical times?

I want to say the times on the map were added later. On the TG window there should be a button near the time that lets you toggle between "leg" and "total".
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: davidr on February 28, 2014, 02:59:32 PM
Erik,

Thank you for the info - funny but my TG ( called Task Force Organization CTL + F4 ) screen does not have the button for toggling and I am using v6.30. Do other users have this button?

DavidR

PS Erik - found the toggle button on the actual TG screen ( F12) but there are still discrepancies in times shown on this screen and the Task Force Organization ( CTL + F4 ) screen.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Bgreman on March 03, 2014, 11:15:25 AM
Steve,

Is there any way that the time taken for completion of TG orders as shown in the Task Force Organisation screen ( CTL +F4 ) can be made identical to the time for completion of TG orders as shown on the main Galactic map. At present there are major discrepancies (i.e. Time on the galactic map 35d 08h 22m but shown on the Organisation screen as 3d 12h 50m ( the galactic map shows the correct time involved ) - the distances however are identical.

DavidR

The estimated task group order completion times on the Task Force screen (CTRL+F4) are still 10x too small when comparing them to the (correct) values in the Task Groups screen (F12).

Fixed for v6.40

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Cripes Amighty on March 03, 2014, 12:43:37 PM
I was attempting to make a laser bomber using the spinal weapon mounts for a craft under 500 tons.

Quote
M B8NX Experiment class Fighter-bomber    485 tons     3 Crew     95 BP      TCS 9.7  TH 54  EM 0
7422 km/s     Armour 3-5     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 3
Maint Life 0 Years     MSP 0    AFR 97%    IFR 1.3%    1YR 19    5YR 284    Max Repair 45 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 months    Spare Berths 7   

72 EP Bomber ID0.7 (1)    Power 72    Fuel Use 185.18%    Signature 54    Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 10,000 Litres    Range 2.0 billion km   (3 days at full power)

22cm C0.15 Ultraviolet Laser (1)    Range 48,000km     TS: 7422 km/s     Power 13-0.15     RM 4    ROF 435        13 13 13 13 0 0 0 0 0 0
LBFC R24-S6 (1)    Max Range: 48,000 km   TS: 6000 km/s     79 58 38 17 0 0 0 0 0 0
GCFR-0.45 (2)     Total Power Output 0.9    Armour 0    Exp 5%

SSS AS16-EM8 Res 120 (1)     GPS 192     Range 1.4m km    Resolution 120

The problem is the laser won't recharge after discharging its initial shot. The original design had only one reactor kicking out 0.45 power since only 0.15 power was needed per 5 second increment. I thought that since the design screen wasn't showing any reactor power at all with only one power plant, I'd increase it to two so that it would show up as 1 reactor power (0.9 rounded up) being produced every 5 seconds. Even this wouldn't charge the weapon and I'm wondering if it's just rounding down the 0.15 at the end of each turn so that the power doesn't accumulate over time.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: gamemonger56 on March 03, 2014, 02:43:18 PM

alien race showed up  and is neutral and is now everywhere in my systems, friendship moving along nicely, but getting a constant Error 6 -Overflow- Error in GetMaxPotentionalSensorRange.

kinda annoying
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Anamori on March 07, 2014, 06:44:16 AM
 After over 3 in-game months of slowdowns without any explanation even in SM mode "turn" lenght finaly returned to normal (I used 1day forward in 5x repeat for last 116 "turns" ~42 in-game days unfortunately statistic about that lack major elements)

 Before it return to normal display in one certain system crashed.    Just after end of precursor ship salvage two errors occurs:
 "CentreOnLocation" & "DisplaySystems" as an Error 6, overflow.    After trying to focus view on that salvage taskforce, game crashed.   

 Now I can't notice anything (Screenshot) in that system from System map (finite errors repeats - without crash, everytime I select this system), but taskforce orders can acces information about it normaly (Like wrecks, taskforces and lifepods)

 50 years in game.   One NPR generated manualy, no chance to spawn & none at start. 

EDIT:

Quote from: Steve Walmsley link=topic=6501. msg70452#msg70452 date=1394225482
Try pressing the Min Zoom button



 Thanks :) Now everything works.
 I write it here to avoid unnecessary post.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Icecoon on March 07, 2014, 09:11:00 AM
I had: Error in Shipyard Attack
Error 5 was generated by Aurora
Invalid procedure call or argument

I had a lot of 5s and 10s turn adjustments recently, probably some NPRs are fighting and one is attacking a shipyard.  ???
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on March 07, 2014, 02:51:22 PM
After over 3 in-game months of slowdowns without any explanation even in SM mode "turn" lenght finaly returned to normal (I used 1day forward in 5x repeat for last 116 "turns" ~42 in-game days unfortunately statistic about that lack major elements)

 Before it return to normal display in one certain system crashed.   Just after end of precursor ship salvage two errors occurs:
 "CentreOnLocation" & "DisplaySystems" as an Error 6, overflow.   After trying to focus view on that salvage taskforce, game crashed. 

 Now I can't notice anything (Screenshot) in that system from System map (finite errors repeats - without crash, everytime I select this system), but taskforce orders can acces information about it normaly (Like wrecks, taskforces and lifepods)

 50 years in game.  One NPR generated manualy, no chance to spawn & none at start.

Try pressing the Min Zoom button

Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: alex_brunius on March 08, 2014, 05:04:40 AM
Not sure if its a bug or a suggestion.

But in the SM modification screen you can't change amount of Civilian mines or civilian mass drivers (possibly they were was added after the SM Mod screen).
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: alex_brunius on March 08, 2014, 06:44:02 PM
(Minor Bug) If you tow a shipyard that has ships in construction the ships will remain under construction at the initial body and be launched there.

Desired behavior: Construction paused while in tow and recommence once shipyards are detached again.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: ShadowLop on March 08, 2014, 07:46:00 PM
26 years in, random error

Error 3075 generated in DAO.database
Syntax error (missing operator) in query expression 'Name = 'Mikhel'son' and RaceID = 304'.
Please report...

Followed twice by:
Error in GetSystemThemeName
Error 3420 generated by DAO.Recordset
Object invalid or no longer set

Seems to have ocurred when I explored a new jump point.
Maybe an NPR spawned?

Found another NPR/spoiler infested system before too (second scout ship taken down by Mesons.) and had no problems there.

Few (Ingame) hours later, ran into some ships.

PS. I'm using a race pack.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on March 09, 2014, 08:37:40 AM
26 years in, random error

Error 3075 generated in DAO.database
Syntax error (missing operator) in query expression 'Name = 'Mikhel'son' and RaceID = 304'.
Please report...

Followed twice by:
Error in GetSystemThemeName
Error 3420 generated by DAO.Recordset
Object invalid or no longer set

Seems to have ocurred when I explored a new jump point.
Maybe an NPR spawned?

Found another NPR/spoiler infested system before too (second scout ship taken down by Mesons.) and had no problems there.

Few (Ingame) hours later, ran into some ships.

PS. I'm using a race pack.

Aurora can't handle theme names that contain apostrophes. I didn't realise there were any in the database. I'll take a look.

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: ShadowLop on March 10, 2014, 03:35:25 AM
Aurora can't handle theme names that contain apostrophes. I didn't realise there were any in the database. I'll take a look.

Steve

While you're at it, it seems it can't handle apostrophes in squadron names either.

Created a squadron ages ago and added 10 fighters. Now that I want to launch them, I'm looping the following errors:

Error in CheckFleetName
Error 3075 generated DAO.Database
Syntax error (missing operator) in query expression 'RaceID = 302 and FleetName = 'Squadron #2 - Screamin' Demons #23".
Please report...

Error in CheckFleetName
Error 91 generated by Aurora
Object variable or With block variable not set
Please report...
(this one appears twice)

This one required a process termination to get out of.
Loaded back up, removed the apostrophe, all good.



-----------

Adding here to not double-post:

Ran into another one. Had three colliers in my fleet with a bunch of missiles on board. Missile destroyers are a bit low.
Tell the fleet to rearm from own colliers.
Thew a bunch of errors (didn't get them and they don't show in the log).
Long story short: Destroyers didn't re-arm, colliers now have zero missiles.

Threw some more in there with SM and reloaded the destroyers. I'll try and replicate the bug, but I suspect that it is related to colliers attempting to reload themselves from other colliers of the same class, while having a default loadout of zero missiles.


----------------

Got another crasher:

Eror in UpdateGameLog
Error 3014 generated by DAO.Database
Cannot open any more tables.

Happened when I selected a branch that included a sub-branc, added the whole thing into stored branches, then attempted to add the whole thing into the copied sub-branch.

I think it's eternally looping, trying to generate an infinite number of branches...
Title: advanced laser bug
Post by: Brian Neumann on March 13, 2014, 07:57:20 AM
WARNING THIS IS A BUG REPORT ABOUT A SPOILER.

Steve a recent look at the advanced laser looks like something very wierd has happened with the damage progression.  The 10cm advanced laser now does 0 damage and on the info design screen says it is a 4cm laser.  On the high end the 80cm advanced laser is claiming to be a 210cm laser with the appropriately huge damage.

Here is the thread where this first came up.
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php/topic,6871.new.html#new


Brian
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: davidr on March 15, 2014, 03:24:40 AM
There seems to be an occasional bug relating to the drawdown of the maintenance clock and crew months shore leave clock as sometimes the values increase rather than decrease. This occurs with both military and civilian vessels ( for civilian only the shore leave crew months figure )

For instance a military Gravitational survey vessel on overhaul at Earth on 13/4/2071 had the values 1.03 and 9.66 , on 19/4//2071 the figures were 0.96 and 7.98 However on 21/4/2071 the figures were 0.97 and 8.07 ( an increase rather than a decrease ). On 25/4/2071 they were 0.89 and 6.16 but on 26/4/2071 they had crept up again to 0.90 and 6.19.

Has anyone else noticed this with the overhaul clocks even though eventually the drawdown reaches zero for both clocks.

There are plenty of maintenance supplies available so that is not an issue.

DavidR

PS I have also noticed that for commercial vessels , occasionally , vessels of the same class at a planet will all show the same amount of crew time remaining even though originally the times were different.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: SteelChicken on March 15, 2014, 03:52:28 PM
"Error in Execute Orders"

If you have a fleet with orders to move to another fleet, and lets say a certain nasty spoiler blows up the destination fleet, you will see this error continually as a popup...sometimes having to CTRL-ALT-DEL to exit.

Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: alex_brunius on March 16, 2014, 04:43:42 AM
The "Refresh Tech" button in F5 class design will not update "Selectable Missile Types" in the Ordnance / Fighter screen.

You have to tick in the "Show Obsolete" button to show new missile designs created after the ship was created which makes little sense.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: stamasd on March 16, 2014, 05:17:34 PM
I had: Error in Shipyard Attack
Error 5 was generated by Aurora
Invalid procedure call or argument

I had a lot of 5s and 10s turn adjustments recently, probably some NPRs are fighting and one is attacking a shipyard.  ???

Same here. Newly created game of 6.30, conventional start with no missile bases; about 2 years in the game I have endless 5- and 10-second turns, with an "error in shipyard attack - error 5 was generated by aurora" every 7 or 8 clicks.

(edit) link to savegame: http://speedy.sh/vFFsy/Stevefire-error5.7z
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: davidr on March 19, 2014, 03:29:06 AM
As with Prince of Space's post of November 3rd I am up to year 2073 in my game , have found 1 friendly NPR with whom I am trading and several systems with precursors in them. I pressed the 5 day turn button and received a swathe of pop-up error messages. Unfortunately I did not take a note of them so I reloaded a save game from 2 months previously and replayed.

At approximately the same point in time I again received pop-up errors as follows :-

1 Error in DesignLaser
   Error 3021
   No current record

2 Error in TurretDesign
   Error 3021
   No current record
  
3 Error in CreateTurret
   Error 3315
   Field "ShipDesignComponentsName" cannot be a zero string length

4 Error in CreateTurret
   Error 3021
   You cannot add or change a record because a related record is required in table "TechSystem"

5 Error in AutomatedDesign
   Error 11
   Division by zero

I had to use CTL + ALT + DEL to remove the pop-ups and the final message was

   Error in UpdateGameLog
   Error 3420
   Object invalid or no longer set.

I do not know yet how the above will affect my game or the NPR concerned if I can continue past the errors.

DavidR

ps  I ran the game and the next turn I received the same errors including :-

     Error in AutomatedDesign
     Error 3201
     You cannot add or change a record because a related record is required in table "TechSystem"

Do not yet know if this means the end of my dream of galactic supremacy.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Annuminas on March 20, 2014, 07:41:45 PM
I started a topic in the newbie area.  Basically, my menus wont expand in the production menu.  I cannot access any of the trees for colonies in other systems which are compacted with a "+" next to them.  hitting the plus does nothing.  Also, the menus will occasionally disappear into a block of grey.  I am running Windows 8 and I just learned this was a bug.  Is there any way around it? I cannot play the game.  :/
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on March 23, 2014, 10:22:12 AM
Finally tracked down an annoying bug that will sometimes result in one or more energy weapons not firing in final defensive mode. Fixed for v6.40

Steve
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Starmantle on March 23, 2014, 04:50:32 PM
Woot.

Go Steve!
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: davidr on March 26, 2014, 05:21:10 AM
Error in Shipyard Attack - Error 5


A survey ship of mine was just traversing a star with a known neutral ( so far ) NPR world when suddenly a battle commenced between the known and and an unknown NPR. There were many wrecks and lifepods appearing in the area and I am now being spammed by The message
 Error in Shipyard Attack
 Error 5
 Invalid procedure call or argument 

DavidR
 
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Thyrann on March 26, 2014, 10:34:05 AM
Hi Steve.

I have found few bugs.

1) Components found in ruins could be splitted to 0. x numbers (third of jump engine transported??? ok could be), but i have found T4 jump engine WAY too big (25000t freighter loaded only 0. 1 of the jump engine for 99kt capacity jump engine). 
2) Ruins components with . x number could be dismantled endlessly (free tech), selling negative numbers will cost you but still could not be possible at all.  This was mentioned before, just want to know.  Should be easy fix.
3) Accidentally changed design of Shippng line freighter to PDC - resulted in ton of mistakes that made game unplayable (either shut down shipping lines or about 2minutes of pressed escape every 5sec increment).  I know this more of a mistake between chair and keyboard, but still. . .

Nevertheless Aurora is a great game i love playing.  Keep up the awesome work.  I'd love to see newtonian version some day.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: SteelChicken on March 29, 2014, 06:36:30 PM
There is some kind of bug with assembling PDC's from components.

Not sure how it happened, but I shipped two PDC's worth of components to a colony, created a assemble order for 10, and it built 10.



Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: GenJeFT on April 03, 2014, 09:57:21 PM
I am getting two bugs.

Error 76 was generated by aurora.
Path not found
Please report to bla bla bla...

and

Error 424 was generated by Aurora.
Object required
Please report to bla bla bla...

I can get past them by spamming the enter key (I just hold it down and eventually it works past them).

I am (unfortunetly) running windows 8.1.

Note, it happens every December.

Edit.

I also noticed something else weird, it skips from December to March once the error happens.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: OJsDad on April 04, 2014, 11:20:51 AM
I'm pretty sure this is as designed, but wanted to make sure;

After surveying a JP in the Sol system, I pressed the F9, went to the Jump Point tab and clicked the Explore button.  The new system was binary.  The A component had a few planes/moons/asteroids.  The B component had nothing listed.  Is it possible in Aurora for a sun to have nothing orbiting.

Thanks
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: OJsDad on April 04, 2014, 11:35:13 AM
When pausing a construction project in the Industry tab of the Pop and Prod screen, and then add a new item to be built, the new items doesn't start until the paused item is demoted.  When demoting the paused item, its status changes to Queue-1, it requires a second demotion to get the new item to Queue 1. 

Shouldn't the productions points be skipped on a paused item and given to the first item in a Queue. 
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: xeryon on April 04, 2014, 11:57:06 AM
I'm pretty sure this is as designed, but wanted to make sure;

After surveying a JP in the Sol system, I pressed the F9, went to the Jump Point tab and clicked the Explore button.  The new system was binary.  The A component had a few planes/moons/asteroids.  The B component had nothing listed.  Is it possible in Aurora for a sun to have nothing orbiting.

Thanks

It is quite frequent for a star to have no orbiting bodies.  In my experience it happens more frequently that a given star has no planets as you add more stars to the system.  Binary -> Trinary -> Quadrinary.  Ive found a couple quad systems with not one planetary body in them among 4 stars.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: OJsDad on April 04, 2014, 01:05:58 PM
It is quite frequent for a star to have no orbiting bodies.  In my experience it happens more frequently that a given star has no planets as you add more stars to the system.  Binary -> Trinary -> Quadrinary.  Ive found a couple quad systems with not one planetary body in them among 4 stars.


That's what I figured.  I hadn't seen it before though. 
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: xeryon on April 04, 2014, 02:06:03 PM
If you are feeling really bummed about the lack of planetary bodies in a system there are ways to remove that system and generate something more bountiful in its place.  I won't clutter this thread with the details but there are other threads that explain the process.  It's fairly simple.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: GenJeFT on April 04, 2014, 03:52:30 PM
Anyone know why I am getting the Error 76 and Error 424?
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Beersatron on April 04, 2014, 05:03:51 PM
I am getting two bugs.

Error 76 was generated by aurora.
Path not found
Please report to bla bla bla...

and

Error 424 was generated by Aurora.
Object required
Please report to bla bla bla...

I can get past them by spamming the enter key (I just hold it down and eventually it works past them).

I am (unfortunetly) running windows 8.1.

Note, it happens every December.

Edit.

I also noticed something else weird, it skips from December to March once the error happens.

Do you have auto-assign for you officers turned on and set to 12 months? It's the only thing I can think of that would occur at the same time every year. Maybe one or more of your officers is assigned incorrectly.

As for skipping months, when you are holding down the enter key to get passed the errors your last focus was probably on the time increment. If you don't realize that the errors are over with then you could easily trigger more time increments, has happened to me quite a few times.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Bgreman on April 05, 2014, 12:48:06 AM
When pausing a construction project in the Industry tab of the Pop and Prod screen, and then add a new item to be built, the new items doesn't start until the paused item is demoted.  When demoting the paused item, its status changes to Queue-1, it requires a second demotion to get the new item to Queue 1. 

Shouldn't the productions points be skipped on a paused item and given to the first item in a Queue. 

This is works as designed.  Pausing construction saves you the CC consumed by that project, as well as the other costs (minerals, wealth, etc).  It is a separate system from the Queue system.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: GenJeFT on April 05, 2014, 08:37:13 AM
Do you have auto-assign for you officers turned on and set to 12 months? It's the only thing I can think of that would occur at the same time every year. Maybe one or more of your officers is assigned incorrectly.

As for skipping months, when you are holding down the enter key to get passed the errors your last focus was probably on the time increment. If you don't realize that the errors are over with then you could easily trigger more time increments, has happened to me quite a few times.

I do have officers auto assigned, I will try shutting that off and see if it makes a difference since I have more positions then officers.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Sharp on April 07, 2014, 09:58:23 AM
Hi, first time poster, hope this is right, and no links or images until I have a few posts I guess.

Using v6. 30 installed using AcidWeb's Installer

Got an odd bug where I have a Brigade HQ unit but I can't add more then 2 battalions to it.

http ://i1273. photobucket. com/albums/y411/H_Sharp2/AuroraTroopHQBug_zps77ed8c79. png

I can attach 4 battalions to other Brigade HQ but.  I'm using the same battalion unit type for both Brigade HQ's.  I trained both Bridage HQ's at the same time at same place and apart from their commanders they are identical, although I did swap their CO's just incase that makes a difference but still the same Brigade HQ which only allows 2 battalions will only allow 2 battalions regardless of CO.

It doesn't look like there are any ghost units attached to the Brigade as there is no gap if I rename the broken brigade hq to be 1st on the list.

----------------

Also got seperate issue of Aurora seeming to change my Opera browser theme when active and slightly different when closed down but computer not restarted.  When Aurora is active it looks like http: //i1273. photobucket. com/albums/y411/H_Sharp2/ThemeBug_zps9c6cca63. png so menu is blue instead of grey, if I close Aurora it goes brown/beige.  Doesn't seem to affect anything else except menus like that though so not a big problem and not really a big bug so I am not concerned with this one.

---------------

And finally getting some random computer freezing when I press some buttons, usually not same button but just seems purely random and not happening if I do anything specific (apart from mouse click) sometimes happens when advancing time, sometimes happens when just opening up another menu or just clicking on a ship design, however this could just be my computer as the HDD is quite old and im due to refit or scrap and upgrade the computer shortly anyway.  It does freeze my computer though so I need to restart it and one time it BSOD'ed me but normally it's just a deep freeze.

Operating System: Windows 7 Professional 64-bit (6. 1, Build 7601) Service Pack 1 (7601. win7sp1_gdr. 130828-1532)
Language: English (Regional Setting: English)
System Manufacturer: Gigabyte Technology Co. , Ltd.
System Model: X58A-UD3R
BIOS: Award Modular BIOS v6. 00PG
Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 950  @ 3. 07GHz (8 CPUs), ~3. 1GHz
Memory: 6144MB RAM
Available OS Memory: 6142MB RAM
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Sharp on April 07, 2014, 10:01:54 AM
Blargh and now I need to retract my first bug.  The problem with the HQ was that I sent two units that were attached to the HQ to another colony, so my bad, although suggestion would be that under Brigade and Divisional HQ it makes note of any units which are not at the same location as HQ or automatically detaches units from HQ when they are separated.

Sorry about that.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: xeryon on April 07, 2014, 11:19:54 AM
Aurora is extremely drive intensive.  If your hard drive is struggling (bad sectors, read errors, motor failing) it will cause a lot of the freezing you are noticing.  There is also a vast performance difference between SATA and PATA and 5400rpm, 7200rpm and SSD drives.  If you can afford it try a striped SSD setup.  Alternatively, my workplace (as a lot of offices) have old and small SSD's sitting around from upgrades that were free.  Aurora and Windows 7 are the only things installed and it's amazingly fast and smooth.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Steve Walmsley on April 07, 2014, 12:36:22 PM
Fixed a bug that would wipe out a research project if you downloaded tech data that should have completed the project instead.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: GenJeFT on April 07, 2014, 10:40:45 PM
Do you have auto-assign for you officers turned on and set to 12 months? It's the only thing I can think of that would occur at the same time every year. Maybe one or more of your officers is assigned incorrectly.

As for skipping months, when you are holding down the enter key to get passed the errors your last focus was probably on the time increment. If you don't realize that the errors are over with then you could easily trigger more time increments, has happened to me quite a few times.

Made no difference at all. Still got the error.

Edit*

I just tried making a new game and making sure that auto assign was off. First year went by without any problems, second year generated the error again. Seeing as it skips consistently from December till March I wonder if its a calender issue with Jan and Feb. I guess I gota re-download the game and try again.

Also I am in college and playing on my laptop. This game REALLY does not like working with laptop screens.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: NihilRex on April 07, 2014, 11:36:15 PM
Not sure if this has been mentioned.

Using the "msl launch" button on the ship screen gives an error about the ship suffering from transition delay, despite testing on ships that have been insystem for months.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: davidr on April 09, 2014, 10:34:57 AM
Just received the following error messages when trying to continue a v6.3 game and am now in a situation where I receive these messages each time when trying to open Aurora :-


Error in Form Load

Error 3358 was generated by DAO.db engine
Cannot open the Microsoft Jet Engine Workgroup information file.

then :-

Error in UpdateGameLog
Error 91 was generated by Aurora
Object variable or with block variable not set

Does anyone know what the first error represents or a workround as I do not want to completely re-install Aurora and start a new game if at all possible.

Davidr
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Erik L on April 09, 2014, 10:59:38 AM
Just received the following error messages when trying to continue a v6.3 game and am now in a situation where I receive these messages each time when trying to open Aurora :-


Error in Form Load

Error 3358 was generated by DAO.db engine
Cannot open the Microsoft Jet Engine Workgroup information file.

then :-

Error in UpdateGameLog
Error 91 was generated by Aurora
Object variable or with block variable not set

Does anyone know what the first error represents or a workround as I do not want to completely re-install Aurora and start a new game if at all possible.

Davidr

Search  your system for "System.mdw" Rename the file and relaunch Aurora.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: davidr on April 09, 2014, 12:17:31 PM
Erik,

I do not appear to have that file anywhere on my Win 7 laptop.

DavidR
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Erik L on April 09, 2014, 12:41:54 PM
Erik,

I do not appear to have that file anywhere on my Win 7 laptop.

DavidR

I just did a quick web search for the error text of the first error. That seemed to be the general consensus. Are there any *.mdw files? If so, try renaming those and see what happens. I bet with the first error cleared up, the second will go away too.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: davidr on April 10, 2014, 02:06:16 AM
Erik,

Thanks,

I use Kaspersky Anti-Virus programme on my computer.

I have just found out from the Kaspersky website  that there was a bug in a Kaspersky Anti-Virus update that was causing a 0 byte file to be created that was causing the problem. I have followed their instructions and the problem now seems cured as I can access my Aurora save game again.

DavidR
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: ddblackhawk on April 12, 2014, 04:29:41 PM
Just had a bug while I was opening the class design window, I'm running the All-in-one installer v6.30 beta wrapper 1.0 by AcidWeb if that makes any difference.
Anyway, I was designing a PDC and had just clicked the lock button, when I got the following 2 errors:
Quote
Getting Error in PopulateClassList
Error 94, Invalid use of Null
Quote
Error in PopulateClassList
Error 381, Invalid property array index
These repeat about 5 or 6 times and then go away, they also happen whenever I create a new class, delete a class, copy a class, and lock and unlock a class.

I am still setting up a game so I was in SM mode, and had already created several other ship classes and 1 PDC class.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Sharp on April 12, 2014, 06:19:12 PM
It's a bug that was posted before by someone else on v6. 20 (didn't see a reply to it though) but I still have it on 6. 3 in that for some civillian mining complexes the game seems to think it has like a 1000 -DSTS even though there is only 1, other CMC's have normal passive sensor ranges and other colonies where I have put tracking stations on seem to have normal sensor ranges but every few games there will be a huge passive sensor radius on a CMC colony even though it only says it has 1 tracking station.

I don't think it is just a display problem either as it seems to be able to detect alien ships but I can't confirm right now (without creating an SM NPR which I don't want to do right now) but I think it did in a previous game when aliens invaded Sol.

In my current game there is a CMC on Triton which can detect a 110 Thermal Signature at 6830 m km and another huge one on a CMC on Tethys, the Tethys one can cover all jump points regardless of Saturn's orbital position while my lvl 6 Tracking Station on Earth can't even reach the asteroid belt.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: davidr on April 13, 2014, 01:58:12 AM
Just updated a Turn and received the following pop-up error :-

Error in CheckAlienShip
Error 3077 was generated by DAo.RecordSet
Syntax error ( missing operator ) in expression.

Clicking through seems to have cleared error for now.

DavidR

Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: DennoD on April 13, 2014, 05:17:53 PM
Hello All, i'm a noob new player in the wonderfull Aurora's world (& french, so, i'm sorry for my über bad english), and i have one big, BIG problem.

When i launch a new game, i can't chose a gouvernor for my planet.  I try with portable version, normal version, with and without the wrapper, i switch my region to Amercian english (for the horrible french ","). . .  Aaaaaaand always the same problem.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: xeryon on April 13, 2014, 07:28:37 PM
Civilian Sorium harvesters do not follow the updated pathfinding that civilian cargo and colony ships use.  Cargo and colony ships seem to use LP points without any problems now but this poor harvester has 1737.18B k to go.  At it's current speed of 254 km/s it's going to take a while.  The excessive time to destination is also causing an "Error 6 was generated by Aurora Overflow" any time I do something that causes that ships time to destination to show on screen like 'Show Order time and Distance" toggle from the system map.

Poor guy is going to get SM nuked in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1...
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Sharp on April 14, 2014, 07:15:18 AM
Bit of a powerful bug.

Fighters can get upgraded on the fly.  Changing the design of the fighter in the ship design menu instantly changes all existing fighters, it also doesn't seem to care if the new design is not a fighter anymore, I can send a swarm of fighters and turn them from having 1-5 armour 475 tons into 150,000 ton behemoths with 40-253 armour and 20 meson cannons and 1000 engines.

My guess is the game needs to lock built and building fighter designs like it does for other ships and then be able to obsolete old fighter designs so they don't clog up the ship designs list.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Charlie Beeler on April 14, 2014, 11:27:13 AM
Bit of a powerful bug.

Fighters can get upgraded on the fly.  Changing the design of the fighter in the ship design menu instantly changes all existing fighters, it also doesn't seem to care if the new design is not a fighter anymore, I can send a swarm of fighters and turn them from having 1-5 armour 475 tons into 150,000 ton behemoths with 40-253 armour and 20 meson cannons and 1000 engines.

My guess is the game needs to lock built and building fighter designs like it does for other ships and then be able to obsolete old fighter designs so they don't clog up the ship designs list.

You're supposed to lock all designs prior to building(fighter/ship/pdc).  Steve added to lock control to the design screen for this purpose.  If I recall correctly, the reason Steve has not added a check to constuction is that in SM mode the lock can be turned off.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Sharp on April 14, 2014, 11:42:38 AM
All ship designs are auto-locked once a shipyard is retooling for it and locked while it is tooled for a design.  Fighters though aren't built in shipyards so they don't get locked.  I can understand the SM mode to unlock existing designs on shipyards for when people forget to add that one component to their design.  The optional lock design option is so you don't make accidental changes if you are just browsing your design.  This bug exists for fighters and PDC's and any ships which don't have design on shipyard.

What needs to be changed though is locking designs if there are ships existing with that design, the same bug occurs if you retool a shipyard from one design to another but still have ships on the old design, any changes to that design will affect any ships in existence.

Current
If shipyard has design as assigned class or shipyard is retooling to design then lock design

Proposal
If shipyard has design as assigned class or shipyard is retooling to design or population industry building design then lock design
If ship has design then lock design


Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Charlie Beeler on April 14, 2014, 04:11:59 PM
Please start a post over in Academy.  While technically there is a "bug" related to the locking of class designs, this really falls more under "under documented functions".  What you're experiencing with the shipyards is a well known condition within Aurora.  PDC's and fighters lag way behind ships for class/refit/upgrade. 

What you've described about retooling shipyards appears to be an issue with how to redesign existing classes and retooling the shipyards.

All ship designs are auto-locked once a shipyard is retooling for it and locked while it is tooled for a design.  Fighters though aren't built in shipyards so they don't get locked.  I can understand the SM mode to unlock existing designs on shipyards for when people forget to add that one component to their design.  The optional lock design option is so you don't make accidental changes if you are just browsing your design.  This bug exists for fighters and PDC's and any ships which don't have design on shipyard.

What needs to be changed though is locking designs if there are ships existing with that design, the same bug occurs if you retool a shipyard from one design to another but still have ships on the old design, any changes to that design will affect any ships in existence.

Current
If shipyard has design as assigned class or shipyard is retooling to design then lock design

Proposal
If shipyard has design as assigned class or shipyard is retooling to design or population industry building design then lock design
If ship has design then lock design



Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: sloanjh on April 14, 2014, 09:20:38 PM
All ship designs are auto-locked once a shipyard is retooling for it and locked while it is tooled for a design.  Fighters though aren't built in shipyards so they don't get locked.  I can understand the SM mode to unlock existing designs on shipyards for when people forget to add that one component to their design.  The optional lock design option is so you don't make accidental changes if you are just browsing your design.  This bug exists for fighters and PDC's and any ships which don't have design on shipyard.

What needs to be changed though is locking designs if there are ships existing with that design, the same bug occurs if you retool a shipyard from one design to another but still have ships on the old design, any changes to that design will affect any ships in existence.

Current
If shipyard has design as assigned class or shipyard is retooling to design then lock design

Proposal
If shipyard has design as assigned class or shipyard is retooling to design or population industry building design then lock design
If ship has design then lock design

My recollection is that this bug has been seen before - maybe a year or two ago?  A repeat report is a good thing though - I don't remember if Steve said he fixed it or not....

John
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: ExChairman on April 20, 2014, 10:02:09 PM
I got an error in CheckCrewMorale Error 3021 was generated by DAO.Field I get this 6 times and then error 3020 was generated by DO.Recordset
under it it says, Update or CancelUpdate without AddNew or Edit

The underlined words have been translated from swedish...

Cant play my game  :'(


Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: ExChairman on April 20, 2014, 10:14:18 PM
Offcourse it seems that I found the problem... One of my fighters were almost destroyed, infact there were nothing working on that ship, it should have been destroyed... By SM repairing it it seems that the eroor has gone away...
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: SteelChicken on May 14, 2015, 07:00:03 AM
While you're at it, it seems it can't handle apostrophes in squadron names either.

Created a squadron ages ago and added 10 fighters. Now that I want to launch them, I'm looping the following errors:

Error in CheckFleetName
Error 3075 generated DAO.Database
Syntax error (missing operator) in query expression 'RaceID = 302 and FleetName = 'Squadron #2 - Screamin' Demons #23".
Please report...


This squadron name still exists and is causing the looping error.
Title: Re: Official v6.30 Bugs thread
Post by: Ostia on May 15, 2015, 12:03:07 PM
This squadron name still exists and is causing the looping error.

I think your problem is that you used a ' in the squadron name. Aurora hates those.