Posted by: GrandNord
« on: Yesterday at 04:01:18 PM »Wow, thank you very much for this workaround. That definitely changes things. I'll try this for the next version of my long range torpedo.
Posted by: skoormit
« on: Yesterday at 11:21:48 AM »In regards to waypoint-fired missiles, the only way (that I'm aware of after extensive testing) to make them work is to calculate an intercept manually, place a waypoint there and fire the missiles at it, then use the currently broken Move Waypoint command to reposition the waypoint after the missiles approach whatever you want to hit close enough for their on-board sensors to detect it, but before they reach the waypoint itself. Doing so makes the missiles lose the waypoint as a target and target enemy ship contacts instead.
You can do this without resorting to moving waypoints.
You just need to add an engineless stage in the middle of your missile.
From back to front:
Stage 1: Just an engine and fuel and one (or more) of Stage 2, with a release range of zero.
Stage 2: No engine. Has an active sensor. Carries 1 or more of Stage 3, with a release range less than sensor range and less than the stage3 missile's fuel range. You want your release range to be well within both of those ranges (sensor and stage3 fuel) if you might be attacking ships that are running away.
Stage 3: Carries the warhead. Ideally moves fast, does lots of damage, etc. Does not need a sensor, but you might want one (see below).
Calculate and fire upon your intercept waypoint as usual.
When stage1 reaches the waypoint, it releases stage2.
Stage2 inherits the same waypoint as its target, and since it is already there and it has no engine, it immediately becomes a mine.
If you calculated your waypoint position accurately, the mine will immediately (in the same increment) detect the bad guys and release stage 3 upon them.
If your stage 3 does not have a sensor, then all of them released at the same time will target the same ship.
If stage 3 does have a sensor (and can detect the hostile ships), you may qualify for random targeting. Other conditions apply.
Posted by: Ghostly
« on: Yesterday at 09:11:34 AM »What I tried to do is put down a waypoint and then fire the missiles at the waypoint (I tried keeping or deleting the waypoint afterward but it didn't change the result).
What I think should have happened is that, when the enemy ship entered the sparation range (I can confirm it was both in sensor and separation range), the second stage should have separated and attacked the target ship but instead it just continued on toward the original waypoint (even when it was removed), then the second stage separated at 2mkm from the waypoint and attacked it. I tried with the enemy ship both in range and out of range of the séparation range and sensor from the waypoint.
In regards to waypoint-fired missiles, the only way (that I'm aware of after extensive testing) to make them work is to calculate an intercept manually, place a waypoint there and fire the missiles at it, then use the currently broken Move Waypoint command to reposition the waypoint after the missiles approach whatever you want to hit close enough for their on-board sensors to detect it, but before they reach the waypoint itself. Doing so makes the missiles lose the waypoint as a target and target enemy ship contacts instead. Also, missiles will acquire new targets with their sensors when their old ones are destroyed without the need for a Retargeting module. It looks like so:
https://imgur.com/gallery/aurora-4x-waypoint-fired-missiles-ejezAyC
https://imgur.com/gallery/aurora-4x-waypoint-fired-missiles-against-many-targets-3iE5LMK
I would also love to get clarification from Steve on this, as this tactic is fairly janky to execute and Waypoint movement is getting fixed in 2.6.0, which might make missile retargeting impossible. That would be a shame, but on the other hand, this is a very powerful tactic that the AI can neither use nor really retaliate against. But on the other hand, are such missiles all that different from missile fighters? I guess having the AI send scouts in the direction a missile (or a fighter) came from c could be a start.
At another point, when testing mines I had the following problem: an enemy ship came into sensor range but did not come into séparation range and from that point on the mine stage perpetually locked on the ship (even when putside sensor range or destroyed) and did not aquire any other target. So it became unusable.
If the enemy ship entered séparation range then the mines worked properly (even if the stack of mines all targeted the same ship).
What I think is happening is that the missile (or mine) is aquiring the first available target possible (the initial target waypoint or the first détecter enemy ship) and this target seems to be inherited by the second stage in the case of the missile. From this point on, they will keep the target and will never aquire another one and never wipe the old target, even if it is destroyed or removed.
Mines do indeed stay locked onto the first contact they encounter, even if it never comes within separation range. I'm pretty sure destroying the original target does clear their contact lock and allows them to seek new targets, deleting your race's contact for that ship in the DB should also work. Deleting the ship in the Intelligence window in-game, regrettably, does nothing, as the lost contact for the ship still exists. Also hoping for this to get fixed.
Posted by: GrandNord
« on: Yesterday at 07:55:11 AM »I did a quick check but I'm not sure if this has been mentionned or not for 2.5.1 yet. It's concerning two-stage missiles (both mines and two stage missiles with engines).
I've been trying stealth ships again to harass a nearby NPR and I've been confronted to a problem: my two-stage missiles don't work properly if I don't send them with an active sensor lock at the time of the launch.
The missiles I launched were a size 20 missile (total size) with a size 12 second stage. Launched at 50mkm, both stages with 3mkm range, résolution 100 active sensors and the second stage with 2.5mkm range and 2mkm séparation range.
What I tried to do is put down a waypoint and then fire the missiles at the waypoint (I tried keeping or deleting the waypoint afterward but it didn't change the result).
What I think should have happened is that, when the enemy ship entered the sparation range (I can confirm it was both in sensor and separation range), the second stage should have separated and attacked the target ship but instead it just continued on toward the original waypoint (even when it was removed), then the second stage separated at 2mkm from the waypoint and attacked it. I tried with the enemy ship both in range and out of range of the séparation range and sensor from the waypoint.
At another point, when testing mines I had the following problem: an enemy ship came into sensor range but did not come into séparation range and from that point on the mine stage perpetually locked on the ship (even when putside sensor range or destroyed) and did not aquire any other target. So it became unusable.
If the enemy ship entered séparation range then the mines worked properly (even if the stack of mines all targeted the same ship).
What I think is happening is that the missile (or mine) is aquiring the first available target possible (the initial target waypoint or the first détecter enemy ship) and this target seems to be inherited by the second stage in the case of the missile. From this point on, they will keep the target and will never aquire another one and never wipe the old target, even if it is destroyed or removed.
I couldn't do anything about the mine but for the missile my "fix" is to send a sensor probe to get active lock of the enemy ship before launching the missile.
I don't know if the same problem is présent for missiles with thermal sensors, I will try to test it.
I've been trying stealth ships again to harass a nearby NPR and I've been confronted to a problem: my two-stage missiles don't work properly if I don't send them with an active sensor lock at the time of the launch.
The missiles I launched were a size 20 missile (total size) with a size 12 second stage. Launched at 50mkm, both stages with 3mkm range, résolution 100 active sensors and the second stage with 2.5mkm range and 2mkm séparation range.
What I tried to do is put down a waypoint and then fire the missiles at the waypoint (I tried keeping or deleting the waypoint afterward but it didn't change the result).
What I think should have happened is that, when the enemy ship entered the sparation range (I can confirm it was both in sensor and separation range), the second stage should have separated and attacked the target ship but instead it just continued on toward the original waypoint (even when it was removed), then the second stage separated at 2mkm from the waypoint and attacked it. I tried with the enemy ship both in range and out of range of the séparation range and sensor from the waypoint.
At another point, when testing mines I had the following problem: an enemy ship came into sensor range but did not come into séparation range and from that point on the mine stage perpetually locked on the ship (even when putside sensor range or destroyed) and did not aquire any other target. So it became unusable.
If the enemy ship entered séparation range then the mines worked properly (even if the stack of mines all targeted the same ship).
What I think is happening is that the missile (or mine) is aquiring the first available target possible (the initial target waypoint or the first détecter enemy ship) and this target seems to be inherited by the second stage in the case of the missile. From this point on, they will keep the target and will never aquire another one and never wipe the old target, even if it is destroyed or removed.
I couldn't do anything about the mine but for the missile my "fix" is to send a sensor probe to get active lock of the enemy ship before launching the missile.
I don't know if the same problem is présent for missiles with thermal sensors, I will try to test it.
Posted by: nuclearslurpee
« on: June 20, 2025, 07:34:37 AM »Playing with the Limited Research Admin box unchecked.
The set up is OK, all scientists have research & research admin in multiples of 5, % for research and no. facilities for RA.
Promotion does increase research by 5%, but RA increase can be as low as +1 facility - is it possible that the code intended for limited box checked is also used, unintentionally, when the box is unchecked, for RA?
This is normal and happened even before limited admin was a thing.
Posted by: gingerbread
« on: June 20, 2025, 04:39:05 AM »Playing with the Limited Research Admin box unchecked.
The set up is OK, all scientists have research & research admin in multiples of 5, % for research and no. facilities for RA.
Promotion does increase research by 5%, but RA increase can be as low as +1 facility - is it possible that the code intended for limited box checked is also used, unintentionally, when the box is unchecked, for RA?
SJW: Working as intended. Under limited admin, increase is +1 or +2.
The set up is OK, all scientists have research & research admin in multiples of 5, % for research and no. facilities for RA.
Promotion does increase research by 5%, but RA increase can be as low as +1 facility - is it possible that the code intended for limited box checked is also used, unintentionally, when the box is unchecked, for RA?
SJW: Working as intended. Under limited admin, increase is +1 or +2.
Posted by: smoelf
« on: June 07, 2025, 10:13:58 AM »I recently had a successful espionage event, telling me that two human factions were allied, although they are most definitely set mutually to neutral. Is the espionage-event possibly set to register diplomatic rating instead of treaty level?
Pics attached.
Pics attached.
Posted by: Aloriel
« on: June 04, 2025, 01:14:39 PM »Just had an issue where neutrals were attacked by my minefield (probably starting the Earth-Minbari War).
The situation was this:
A Minbari Survey Ship jumped into Sol through a gate that I had mined (stats for mines below). 4 hours later, which was probably the minimum increment due to me hitting 5 days, my mines went off and hit the survey ship. The Minbari were marked as neutral, and continue to be marked as such.
Since they're marked neutral, I shouldn't be able to fire at them at all. Normal weapons can't be fired at them. Auto-targeting missiles apparently can target neutrals.
Mine outer body (some stats are slightly different due to upgraded tech):
Warhead (some stats are slightly different due to upgraded tech):
Also, I noticed that even though I zero out fuel on the buoy, it still adds 500 fuel to the device.
The situation was this:
A Minbari Survey Ship jumped into Sol through a gate that I had mined (stats for mines below). 4 hours later, which was probably the minimum increment due to me hitting 5 days, my mines went off and hit the survey ship. The Minbari were marked as neutral, and continue to be marked as such.
Since they're marked neutral, I shouldn't be able to fire at them at all. Normal weapons can't be fired at them. Auto-targeting missiles apparently can target neutrals.
Mine outer body (some stats are slightly different due to upgraded tech):
Code: [Select]
Missile Size: 16.64 MSP (41.600 Tons) Warhead: 0 Radiation Damage: 0
Speed: 0 km/s Fuel: 500 1st Stage Flight Time: 1 seconds 1st Stage Range: 0k km
2nd Stage Flight Time: 13 minutes 2nd Stage Range: 7.65m km
Active Sensor Strength: 0.8 EM Sensitivity Modifier: 8
Resolution: 100 Maximum Range vs 5000 ton object (or larger): 6,624,929 km
Cost Per Missile: 7.33 Development Cost: 428
Second Stage: Mk I Mine Warhead x1
Second Stage Separation Range: 4,000,000 km
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 0% 3k km/s 0% 5k km/s 0% 10k km/s 0%
Materials Required
Tritanium 1.5
Boronide 2.655
Uridium 1.3
Gallicite 1.875
Fuel: 500Warhead (some stats are slightly different due to upgraded tech):
Code: [Select]
Missile Size: 14.84 MSP (37.100 Tons) Warhead: 12 Radiation Damage: 12
Speed: 20,216 km/s Fuel: 500 Flight Time: 14 minutes Range: 16.57m km
Active Sensor Strength: 0.8 EM Sensitivity Modifier: 8
Resolution: 100 Maximum Range vs 5000 ton object (or larger): 6,624,929 km
Cost Per Missile: 11.78 Development Cost: 542
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 202.2% 3k km/s 67.4% 5k km/s 40.4% 10k km/s 20.2%
Materials Required
Tritanium 3
Boronide 4.23
Uridium 0.8
Gallicite 3.75
Fuel: 500Also, I noticed that even though I zero out fuel on the buoy, it still adds 500 fuel to the device.
Posted by: Louella
« on: May 30, 2025, 12:26:39 PM »In the course of the multifactional war, Earth got hit by missiles several times, and a lot of installations were destroyed, and several populations on Earth and in Sol changed hands, some several times. There were several battles between CMC garrisons as well. Some of the NPRs have been effectively defeated, with no remaining populated colonies, or ordnance.
Sounds like a fun game though!
Yeah ! It is the continuation of the "War of the Worlds" setup that I have been playing. It was all going rather well, until several Earth powers established large populations outside of Sol, and someone refused to recognise someone else's claim on a system. With a complex system of alliances between the different powers, it ended up with at least 3 different mutually-hostile factions at the height of the conflict, which lasted about 6 months, and pushed Earth to the edge of requiring infrastructure to cope with the radioactive fallout.
I'm not sure if e.g. the USA bombarding Brazil from space, putting radioactive dust into the atmosphere of Earth was the cause of France starting a war on the USA, or if there was also a dispute over sovereignty in Luhman 16, but it probably didn't help matters.
Posted by: skoormit
« on: May 28, 2025, 12:33:18 PM »Mass Driver not respecting reserve levels for mined minerals.
I have a CMC colony from which I am purchasing minerals.
I changed the mineral reserve levels on this colony to non-zero for three minerals.
Two of those minerals (DUR and MER) are being mined on the body.
The other mineral (BOR) is not.
I manually added 100t of BOR via SM-mode.
I expected the stockpile levels of DUR and MER to increase as time passes and mining progresses, until the stockpile levels reach the reserve levels, at which point excess amount would be sent away via the mass driver.
Instead, the stockpile levels of DUR and MER remain at zero, and the mined amount is apparently sent away with the outbound mass driver packets.
(The stockpile level of BOR remains at 100, as expected.)
Image attached.
I have a CMC colony from which I am purchasing minerals.
I changed the mineral reserve levels on this colony to non-zero for three minerals.
Two of those minerals (DUR and MER) are being mined on the body.
The other mineral (BOR) is not.
I manually added 100t of BOR via SM-mode.
I expected the stockpile levels of DUR and MER to increase as time passes and mining progresses, until the stockpile levels reach the reserve levels, at which point excess amount would be sent away via the mass driver.
Instead, the stockpile levels of DUR and MER remain at zero, and the mined amount is apparently sent away with the outbound mass driver packets.
(The stockpile level of BOR remains at 100, as expected.)
Image attached.
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: May 27, 2025, 04:17:51 PM »103 is AI checking fuel, 111 is AI checking for damage, 117 is AI ground force training.
They all run during every construction phase, and sometimes more often, so it must be a very rare bug.
What did you do with SM mode?
Well, the only things I can remember doing with SM mode before all this stuff started happening, was that I adjusted the orbits and environments of some planets in systems where I discovered a couple of new alien races, so that the planets would be suitable for them to colonise. Also used SM mode while designing a few ship classes that I transferred to some of the NPRs, to intervene in their wars.
In the course of the multifactional war, Earth got hit by missiles several times, and a lot of installations were destroyed, and several populations on Earth and in Sol changed hands, some several times. There were several battles between CMC garrisons as well. Some of the NPRs have been effectively defeated, with no remaining populated colonies, or ordnance.
It's probably the transferred ships. NPRs ships are created using the automated design code, which makes sure they are setup in a way the NPRs can handle. If you design a ship and transfer it, the AI will make an attempt to classify it and use it in that role, but it isn't guaranteed. It's best not to transfer ships to an AI race unless they are relatively simple.
Sounds like a fun game though!
Posted by: Louella
« on: May 27, 2025, 02:42:43 PM »103 is AI checking fuel, 111 is AI checking for damage, 117 is AI ground force training.
They all run during every construction phase, and sometimes more often, so it must be a very rare bug.
What did you do with SM mode?
Well, the only things I can remember doing with SM mode before all this stuff started happening, was that I adjusted the orbits and environments of some planets in systems where I discovered a couple of new alien races, so that the planets would be suitable for them to colonise. Also used SM mode while designing a few ship classes that I transferred to some of the NPRs, to intervene in their wars.
In the course of the multifactional war, Earth got hit by missiles several times, and a lot of installations were destroyed, and several populations on Earth and in Sol changed hands, some several times. There were several battles between CMC garrisons as well. Some of the NPRs have been effectively defeated, with no remaining populated colonies, or ordnance.
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: May 27, 2025, 02:47:25 AM »In my game, there was a multifactional war between different NPRs that all had the same homeworld (Earth), and I got a couple of error popups, and was wondering what they mean, and if anything I did with SM mode made things worse, so that I would know not to do those things again.
For a while, I got errors for functions #103 and #111, but these went away eventually. These popped up at seemingly random times, whenever I pressed the buttons to advance time. I couldn't figure out a pattern to what was happening.
Lately, I have an error for function #117, which seems to occur at the end of each construction cycle.
iirc, they all just say the same error message: "Object reference not set to an instance of an object".
103 is AI checking fuel, 111 is AI checking for damage, 117 is AI ground force training.
They all run during every construction phase, and sometimes more often, so it must be a very rare bug.
What did you do with SM mode?
Posted by: Louella
« on: May 26, 2025, 06:05:03 PM »In my game, there was a multifactional war between different NPRs that all had the same homeworld (Earth), and I got a couple of error popups, and was wondering what they mean, and if anything I did with SM mode made things worse, so that I would know not to do those things again.
For a while, I got errors for functions #103 and #111, but these went away eventually. These popped up at seemingly random times, whenever I pressed the buttons to advance time. I couldn't figure out a pattern to what was happening.
Lately, I have an error for function #117, which seems to occur at the end of each construction cycle.
iirc, they all just say the same error message: "Object reference not set to an instance of an object".
For a while, I got errors for functions #103 and #111, but these went away eventually. These popped up at seemingly random times, whenever I pressed the buttons to advance time. I couldn't figure out a pattern to what was happening.
Lately, I have an error for function #117, which seems to occur at the end of each construction cycle.
iirc, they all just say the same error message: "Object reference not set to an instance of an object".
Posted by: skoormit
« on: May 25, 2025, 08:11:57 AM »In FCT_MineralDeposit, there are two fields with data regarding the deposit's original values:
OriginalAcc
HalfOriginalAmount
It appears that these fields do not (always?) get updated based on the findings of ground surveys.
Here are the two records in my database that indicate such:
Both records have Amount more than 2x HalfOriginalAmount.
The second record also has Accessibility higher than OriginalAcc.
I know that the body of the first record had a geo survey that found additional duranium (with no increase in acc).
I don't recall doing a ground survey of the second one, but it would have happened a long enough time ago that I may have just forgotten.
OriginalAcc
HalfOriginalAmount
It appears that these fields do not (always?) get updated based on the findings of ground surveys.
Here are the two records in my database that indicate such:
Code: [Select]
GameID,MaterialID,SystemID,SystemBodyID,Amount,Accessibility,HalfOriginalAmount,OriginalAcc
119,1,14013,1270312,103680000.0,0.1,24502500.0,0.1
119,1,13991,1267757,14905800.0,1.0,230400.0,0.6
Both records have Amount more than 2x HalfOriginalAmount.
The second record also has Accessibility higher than OriginalAcc.
I know that the body of the first record had a geo survey that found additional duranium (with no increase in acc).
I don't recall doing a ground survey of the second one, but it would have happened a long enough time ago that I may have just forgotten.
