Aurora 4x
C# Aurora => C# Bug Reports => Topic started by: Steve Walmsley on January 25, 2024, 09:03:58 AM
-
Please post potential bugs in this thread for v2.5.1
First, please check the Known Issues post before posting so see if the problem has already been identified or is working as intended.
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=10637.0
'Me too' posts for unresolved bugs are fine as it shows they are affecting more than one person. Any extra information you can provide in 'me too' posts is very welcome.
Please do not post bugs from previous versions unless you confirm they are still present in v2.5.1
When you post, please post as much information as possible, including:
The function number
The complete error text
The window affected
What you were doing at the time
Conventional or TN start
Random or Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma?
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well
-
The "Centre on selected body" option does not work in the mineral window when you have the wide view option selected.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
I designed and researched my first anti ship missile, but then the missile isn't appearing anywhere (except the research tab in completed projects) as if I never researched it.
I am running a 23 years conventional start campaign with 2.5.1 applied to 2.5.0.
Real star
Steps:
Designed an ASM in the dedicated window
Completed the research
Missile is not appearing in the ordnance production view, technology window or missile window, only in the research tab under completed projects.
-
I have an asteroid that generated with exactly 1 ton of Neutronium, and absolutely nothing else. That's weird, but not a bug.
The bug is that on the System Generation and Display screen - and only that screen, as far as I can tell - the minerals are listed as "Neutronium 01 1.00" - it correctly shows as 1 ton in the Minerals screen and the Mining tab.
This is a 2.5.0 game that's been upgraded 2.5.1, and I unfortunately don't remember if this system generated under 2.5.0 or 2.5.1.
-
I have an asteroid that generated with exactly 1 ton of Neutronium, and absolutely nothing else. That's weird, but not a bug.
The bug is that on the System Generation and Display screen - and only that screen, as far as I can tell - the minerals are listed as "Neutronium 01 1.00" - it correctly shows as 1 ton in the Minerals screen and the Mining tab.
This is a 2.5.0 game that's been upgraded 2.5.1, and I unfortunately don't remember if this system generated under 2.5.0 or 2.5.1.
What is the bug? It is showing you that the asteroid has 1 ton of neutronium at 1.00 accessibility, that seems correct to me...
-
What is the bug? It is showing you that the asteroid has 1 ton of neutronium at 1.00 accessibility, that seems correct to me...
It's showing that the asteroid has "01" tons of minerals on it. It's just a minor display bug - everywhere else displays "1".
Edit: Something else which is probably not a bug, just a strange generation - I've got an asteroid that's large enough that it can be colonized with regular infrastructure and hold an atmosphere. I would have thought that anything that large would classify as a dwarf planet or similar.
SJW: WAI. Asteroids can very occasionally be above 0.1G.
-
What is the bug? It is showing you that the asteroid has 1 ton of neutronium at 1.00 accessibility, that seems correct to me...
It's showing that the asteroid has "01" tons of minerals on it. It's just a minor display bug - everywhere else displays "1".
I'm pretty sure it's not a bug, that field is just configured to display at least two digits for some reason.
Edit: Something else which is probably not a bug, just a strange generation - I've got an asteroid that's large enough that it can be colonized with regular infrastructure and hold an atmosphere. I would have thought that anything that large would classify as a dwarf planet or similar.
It happens every so often. I think Steve used one of these as a fleet base in his pre-release WH40K Crusade AAR. Apparently, the classification has more to do with shape than size (although you expect the two to be generally correlated there seems to be a grey zone).
-
After destruction of enemy ship, you can land your fighters with "active" fire control (no target).
If fighters are in carrier hangar, you won't get a message of 5s incements.
But when you scrap the carrier it will pop up and bring your game almost to a stop :)
SJW: WAI. Fighters in hangars cannot fire so they aren't checked,
-
I have run into a similar issue as this one reported in 2. 2. 1
My current game seems to be stuck with an endless loop of:
Function #1954: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #1943
Function #478
I managed to save the db, advancing time in two 5 day increments should replicate the issue. Unfortunately it seems as if the save has been rendered unplayable.
Started on v2. 5. 0 - upgraded to v. 2. 5. 1 this morning. I did manage to get a save, any advancement will identify it. It looks like I go through the #1953 - > #1943 - > #478 cycle 27 times per increment.
DB attached in case it's helpful.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6. Caused by an Alien Race without a class naming theme. DB was helpful, thanks.
-
The function number : 2929
The complete error text : Reference to an object not set to on an object's instance
The window affected : main window
What you were doing at the time : Ordered a tug to tractor a shipyard from Earth to Mars, pressed 1day increment and got the error.
Conventional or TN start : Conventional
Random or Real Stars real
Is your decimal separator a comma?
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well 26y
EDIT: I figured out what causes the error, the shipyard was busy constructing 3 ships when I started to tug it (and in fact the error appears 3 times in a row) but the funny thing is that the ships are still under construction and the % of completition is advancing, I guess it shouldn't work like that and if you move a Shipyard while busy, the ships construction should be deleted or at least stopped and continue when the yard arrives at destination, am I right?
SJW: Changed the move order so you can only tractor inactive shipyards.
-
The function number - none
The complete error text - none
The window affected - main window
What you were doing at the time - see below
Conventional or TN start - Conventional
Random or Real Stars - real
Is your decimal separator a comma? - no
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? - reproducible in attached db
If this is a long campaign - 49 yrs, this was a 2. 5. 0 game I upgraded to 2. 5. 1
Problems:
In attached DB, after placing a few WPs of any type,
1) Using the "Move waypoint" button prevents me from subsequently being able to create any new WPs in any system of any type. I only can move the last wp that was moved.
2) If I try to place a new WP of the same type that I last moved in a 2nd system, I can't, but the last wp moved gets moved in the Lalande system to the same location.
Replications steps:
1 Load "Game3" and place a few WPs in one corner of Lalande, ie:
normal waypoint #1
a named wp
a POI
normal waypoint #2
2 Move normal wp 1 to another location
3 Try to create a new normal wp - result: it instead moves normal wp 1 to the location you try to create the new WP in.
4 Move the named wp to another location
5 Repeat #3 and get the same result, except the named wp gets moved instead (the last wp that was moved).
6 Go to another system and try to create a new named wp in the opposite corner of the system - result: in this 2nd system, nothing seems to happen, but if you go back to Lalande, the existing named wp is now moved to that same opposite corner of Lalande. The same result happens if I try to add a new normal wp in the 2nd system.
7 If I create a new TN or Conv game in the same DB, nothing happens when I try to create new wps of any type.
--I haven't tried saving after these rep steps as I'm afriad there is corruption that will get worse.
Workaround: Don't use the Move wp button at all, and I seem to be able to create wps as expected.
If it helps, this is my best recollection of how I ended up in this situation:
1 Added a wp in Lalande
2 Tried testing the new "Move waypoint" option - I moved that existing wp elsewhere then back to where I had it.
3 After this, I recall adding a wp in another system (System B), then going back to Lalande and noticing the WP there had moved to what appeared to be the same . . perhaps astrographic. . location as the wp added in the other system. Tested this more, and it seemed that whenever I created a new WP in either Lalande or System B, it moved it to a similar location in the other system too.
4 At this point, I could no longer create new WPs in Lalande - when I attempted to do that, it simply moved the first WP.
5 I deleted the WP in Lalande to try to clear the issue, and then noticed I could no longer create any new waypoints of any type in any system. ie. Click "Normal waypoint" > click on map > nothing happens.
6 Restarting the game allowed me to be able to create new WPs again, but I still encounter the issues in the problem statement and replication steps.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
Hi,
Having similar problems with waypoints, if you use move, it eventually makes waypoints impossible to place.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
A parasite craft can be dragged into a different task group than it's parent carrier, without launching.
The parent carrier's task group, and the TG which the parasite was newly dragged into, can then move off in different directions. The parasite is still classed as docked.
I accidentally now have two FAC tenders at Earth, whose docked parasites are part of a TG flying around the distant colonies. . . .
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
(https://i.imgur.com/fvfIL3r.png)
If Minerva (Planet X) is in Sol and gets Trojan asteroids, they pop up in the list among the closest asteroids to the sun, instead of being near the end of the list as they should be. Or at least after Minerva itself. It's not a big deal but it's a little annoying when surveying near-Earth asteroids by hand.
-
I have a very interesting bug report. Unfortunately, I can't provide a save and it's not easily reproducible, but I think I have collected enough evidence to help track down the issue.
TLDR: Some NPR missiles with thermal sensors teleported about 2 million kilometers and detonated in a single 5 second increment. I believe this happened because my fleet was moving away at the time, the missiles reached my original position, reacquired me with their onboard sensors, and then detonated immediately, attacking my ships as though they were still in the original position. This was accompanied by a generic "Key not found in dictionary" error, but I'm not sure if it was the NPR missiles or my AMMs that triggered that.
Long Version:
The NPR missile in question is the "Kukri Anti-Ship Missile" a size 9 missile with WH12, speed of 55,000 km/s, max range of 104 mkm and, most importantly, a 0.25 MSP thermal sensor.
The situation is that I chased one of my local NPR's fleets to a stabilized jump point. They jumped out and my fleet parked 35 million kilometers off to wait for reinforcements. What follows is an abridged version of the Game Log when the NPR fleet briefly returned.
1894113097 "Missile Battle Fleet - Jump 002 cannot conduct a transit as there are one or more ships suffering from jump shock" Xcor: 719826778 Ycor: -449797692
1894113097 "Contact re-established with Hostile Ship contact: [AAÓ] XX Dmitriy Pozharskiy 001 19,999 tons 0 km/s" Xcor: 684865572 Ycor: -448150254
1894113256 "CS-07 Valour 007 has launched 13x Kukri Anti-Ship Missile from Size 9 Missile Launcher (30.0% Reduction) targeted on XX Dmitriy Pozharskiy 002. Range 35,000,000 km Estimated Chance to Hit 123%"
Here the NPR fleet jumped back through the stabilized jump point. You can see my original X-coordinate attached to the contact established message.
1894113276 "5x Kukri Anti-Ship Missile cannot locate its target. it will continue to the last known target location and use onboard sensors to search for a new target"
I didn't have a lot of AMM launchers, so I ordered my fleet to move almost directly away at its top speed of 9000 km/s. Quite a bit of time passes as missiles come in.
1894113821 "Updated Hostile Salvo contact: [AQ] Size 9 Missile x3 (Salvo ID3454) Thermal 25 55,000 km/s" Xcor: 688786222 Ycor: -448335003
1894113891 "CA-12 UNS Gawain has launched 4x SIM2-1C "Peregrine" 90kms from Size 2.0 Missile Launcher targeted on Salvo ID 3440. Range 1,736,791 km Estimated Chance to Hit 35%" Xcor: 683253554 Ycor: -448566936
At this point, you can see that the range to the missile is 1.7 million kilometers. You can also see that my fleet has moved a bit more than 1.5 million kilometers on the X-axis from where it was originally detected by the NPR ships.
1894113893 "CA-12 UNS Gawain attacked Salvo ID 3446 with Quad R30-50 Autocannon Turret Mk II. Range 10,000 km Chance to Hit 34% Shots 5 Missiles Destroyed 0" Xcor: 683236127.579917 -448571441.205602
Here you see just 2 seconds later the same ship attacks with a Gauss Canon at 10kkm. In that time my ship moved 17,427 km on the X-axis, roughly consistent with the speed of 9000 km/s. The missiles though appear to have moved over 1.7 million kilometers in these two seconds.
1894113893 "8x Kukri Anti-Ship Missile from CS-07 Valour 007 attacked XX Dmitriy Pozharskiy 002. Chance to Hit 100% Damage per Hit 12 Armour Hits 4 Penetrating Hits 4 New Target Speed 9,000 km/s" Xcor: -2101822936.46163 YCor: 806814233.320147
1894113894 "4x SIM2-1C "Peregrine" 90kms has no target and no onboard sensors and will therefore self-destruct" Xcor: 683417124 Ycor: -448491803
Here we see the missile detonation message, which has some pretty weird coordinates. I'm not sure if that is relevant, but from a quick skim of the log it looks like missile detonation messages usually have more accurate coordinates. You can also see that my AMMs self-destructed one second later, having never attacked, because the missiles jumped past them.
My hypothesis is that the missiles attacked my fleet when they reached my original position, instead of my new position.
I hope this information helps you figure out what happened because this seems like a pretty dangerous bug if NPRs are making more missiles with onboard sensors now.
-
Sorry for the double post, but I've been experimenting some more after work and I *can* reliably reproduce the issue from the attached save. I tried it at least 10 times. Here are the steps:
1. Load up the attached save.
2. Go to the 113 Aquarii System. In the upper right corner of this system, you'll find the fleet "Cruiser Squadron 1 (Achilles)" parked about 70 million kilometers from an Unexplored jump point. They are sitting on the "Wreck of Unicorn-E R59 class" which makes this really easy to demonstrate.
3. Pass 1 Hour. The NPR should reappear. Wait about two minutes and they jump out again.
4. Give the fleet a move order to Waypoint #3. They're in "United Combat Command" -> 1st Fleet -> Expeditionary Forces Command -> Cruiser Squadron 1.
5. In about 20 minutes the missiles will show up on thermals. They appear about 10 million kilometers from the fleet so you can watch them come in for awhile.
6. Pass some more time and you will see the missiles tracking unerringly towards the "Wreck of Unicorn-E R59" rather than the fleet which has now moved.
7. The instant the missiles reach the Wreck, one of my ships 2 million kilometers away explodes.
The NPRs really like this trick as they have repeated it multiple times now. They've killed more of my ships with this bug than they did in the entire assault on their home system. ;D
EDIT: If anyone else runs into this, the trick is to accelerate TOWARDS the incoming missiles. They will go right past towards your original location (I think this is expected behavior, but a bit weird) and you have twice as much time to shoot AMMs at them. A bit cheesy perhaps, but there isn't much else you can do.
-
On 21st June 2156, the vessel FAC-55 Electro-Intercept 027 exploded due to maintenance failures.
On 17th August 2156, a damage report appeared for FAC-55.
This is similar to a 2. 1. 1 bug I reported.
https://aurora2. pentarch. org/index. php?topic=13078. msg163401#msg163401
I think sometimes, when a ship exploded due to maintenance failures, then the next-ish time that a ship experiences a maintenance failure, the event printed on-screen points to the previous explodey ship.
-
If the player captures NPR civilian shipping carrying trade goods, there's no way to unload or delete them.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6. Trade goods will be deleted if a ship is captured or otherwise transferred to another race.
-
If you tow a ship that is towing another ship, the 1st towed ship will stay in tow but it's mass will be ignored.
Example:
Ship A : 100,000
Ship B : 25,000 Tug EP 5000
Ship C : 25,000 Tug EP 5000
If Ship B tows ship A, the speed will be (5000EP/2500HS) = 2,000km/s
If Ship C now tows ship B, the speed will be (5000EP/1000HS) = 5,000km/s, but Ship A will still move with ship B and C.
In attached DB file.
SJW: The bug is allowing the tractor chain in the first place. Should be fixed for v2.6.
-
If you create a fighter base and land fighters on it as a squadron, then tow that fighter base to another location the fighters will be towed along as intended but will be permanently assigned to the original fleet the FB was towed from, though the game doesn't indicate this being the case in any way, the original fleet will continue to exist in the original location but will show as empty. If this original, supposedly empty fleet is deleted, then the fighters that are now in a different fleet 2 systems away will disappear from the game.
-
I believe that has been stated to be working as intended.
I am prepared to be corrected
(exploit minimax : Make the "middle ship" JUST a tractor beam {and associated crew and such} )
-
I have met a problem while I was selecting a commander for a ship.
In the attached image, you can see, in the list on the right, the name I selected: "R7 Qunitus Otacilius Hybrida".
While, in the list on the left, it is still highlighted the previous name I selected: i.e., the selection on the left didn't update at the new selected name.
The same happens also for other names.
DB also attached.
I installed 2.5.0, and updated the .exe to 2.5.1.
This game started using the 2.5.1.
I am now 26 years in the game.
No mods or DB editing, apart importing some names lists (that I am not using in this game).
EDIT: Closing and reopening the game seems having solved the issue.
Now, I can find "R7 Qunitus Otacilius Hybrida" in the list on the left of the Commanders window.
-
I believe that has been stated to be working as intended.
I am prepared to be corrected
(exploit minimax : Make the "middle ship" JUST a tractor beam {and associated crew and such} )
Intended? Interesting. I figured it was a bug since it means I can move a 2,500,000t station for free. Was it left in as a purposeful exploit?
-
No, that is a bug. It existed in VB6 and seems to have made a comeback in C# now.
If you create a fighter base and land fighters on it as a squadron, then tow that fighter base to another location the fighters will be towed along as intended but will be permanently assigned to the original fleet the FB was towed from, though the game doesn't indicate this being the case in any way, the original fleet will continue to exist in the original location but will show as empty. If this original, supposedly empty fleet is deleted, then the fighters that are now in a different fleet 2 systems away will disappear from the game.
Can you provide Steve with your DB where this happens? Might help him to fix it.
SJW: This problem was fixed in v2.5.1, so need to make sure it is the same version.
-
Several times now I've had my commercial shipping completely empty colonies of their populations, and then have a huge string of colony ships still continue going to those bodies and then failing to collect colonists because none are available.
This was with colonies which had more than enough infrastructure to support the population, and jobs demand for the people to fill, so I'm not sure why it's happening and it doesn't seem like intended behavior.
I can't cause it to be repeated on demand, but it has happened I think three times in my campaign now. To reverse it I have to use one of my manually controlled colony ships to drop off some colonists, then the AI start repopulating the planet
SJW: Not a bug. Change the colony to 'Stable' on the Civilian tab of the Economics window and the civilians will stop loading colonists there.
-
I've run into two issues while attempting to figure out assault on an NPR homeworld. I'll split the post so they're not combined.
Issue #1: CIWS are not removing missiles despite scoring kills. I ran two tests against an NPR homeworld, one with a gauss turret vessel and the other with a CIWS vessel; I've attached annotated screenshots for both tests.
- No function number
- No error text
- No specific window
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 72 years into the campaign
- Campaign started on v2. 5. 1
With the gauss turret vessel, the expected occurs: the NPR fires missiles against the vessel and the gauss turrets engage, scoring kills and removing missiles. Extra kills are instead counted as overkill (as a result, kill count never exceeds missile count) while the armour takes the remainder of the hits (in this case, 2x strength-1 impacts per leaked size-2 missile).
However, with the CIWS vessel, when the NPR fires on the vessel and the CIWS engage, a large number of kills (vastly exceeding the number of missiles) and exactly zero overkill are both recorded but no missiles are removed. This results in every inbound missile scoring hits on the armour as if the CIWS had not fired at all despite Events showing weapons fire and kills.
SJW: This problem was fixed in v2.5.1, so please confirm you are on that version.
-
New species that you research do not seem to retain modifiers like population density or growth rate from the base species, instead reverting to 1.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
Issue #2: NPR size-2 AMMs are no engaging as AMMs and are only engaging as ASMs.
- No function number
- No error text
- No specific window
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 72 years into the campaign
- Campaign started on v2. 5. 1
While attempting to assault an NPR homeworld, I ran into the expected: 103x ~15,000t Gargoyle-class size-2 "AMM" platforms and 42x ~15,000t Asp-class platforms (I believe they're size-9 ASM and simply out of ammo from my prior engagement with them). I've seen the same NPR's ~13,000t Ballista-class size-2 AMM escorts use these same launchers and missiles as proper AMMs so my expectation is that the Gargoyles are meant to fill the same AMM role.
However, the unexpected: the Gargoyles will engage everything from 58t fighters to 20,000t cruisers with their size-2 "AMMs" but will not engage missiles. I succeeding in hitting their planet with ~500 of ~650 size-6 ASMs (~150 were caught by STO-PD from the planet) without a single one of the ~5,000 size-2 "AMM" launchers in orbit opening fire. I've also hit both platform types with both size-1 and size-6 ASMs and the size-2 "AMM" launchers still will not fire. On the other hand, moving a 20kt cruiser into range (just below 3mkm) and ~2,000 size-2 missiles instantly launch in an ASM role.
I assume this isn't intended behavior so I'll report it as a bug but it's nonetheless possible that this is WAI and ripe for abuse if the size-2 "AMMs" won't engage incoming missiles.
-
Not a bug exactly, but has anyone else had an issue downloading the 2.5.1 patch? Everytime I click on the link it tries to open a new tab and then doesn't start the download.
-
Not a bug exactly, but has anyone else had an issue downloading the 2.5.1 patch? Everytime I click on the link it tries to open a new tab and then doesn't start the download.
The same, just right click on the link and save link as name... it works
-
Not a bug exactly, but has anyone else had an issue downloading the 2.5.1 patch? Everytime I click on the link it tries to open a new tab and then doesn't start the download.
The same, just right click on the link and save link as name... it works
That worked - thanks.
-
Orbiting habitats using ark modules do not increase in population as per hxxp: aurora2. pentarch. org/index. php?topic=12523. msg159464#msg159464
Steps to replicate:
1. Create an orbital habitat - I used 5 modules for a total habitat space of 1 million per station
2. Load less than maximum colonists - I loaded 10k per habitat
3. Pass time in-game; I let a year pass before checking in on them
Result: no growth inside the habitats.
-
Deleting population created by genetic modification did not delete the population, and it re-appeared on passing turns. (intended, perhaps?)
Steps to replicate:
1. Set up a regular colony, give it gene centers (I used Mercury)
2. Create a new race (I used the default name, human 2. 0, and temperature range +-12. 5 option after researching)
3. Let the labs run for a while, then stop them
4. Delete the resulting colony/population
5. Pass a turn of any time length (I passed 5 days)
Result: Colony re-appears
(Moving them to Venus did in fact end that colony, it disappeared after all colonists were removed. So if this is intended that colonies don't just 'vanish' if there are still people there, then ignore this bug report)
-
On repairing a fighter, the grade points were reduced from 281 to -202. This causes a "2. 5. 1 Function #2823: Value was either too large or to small for a Decimal. " Error when ending the turn, or viewing the fighter in the fleet organization window.
Save: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/uoghzrcdaoe4917kd68lw/AuroraDB.db?rlkey=jxcaknl32a8h7lji8jqkrzhw6&dl=0
TN start
Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma? NO
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Very easy to reproduce. Load save, and advance ~30 days (get to feb 26th to be precise), and the fighter will repair. advance one more time and you will get the error message.
Campaign is about 32 years in.
Fixed the link - Garfunkel
-
Deleting population created by genetic modification did not delete the population, and it re-appeared on passing turns. (intended, perhaps?)
Steps to replicate:
1. Set up a regular colony, give it gene centers (I used Mercury)
2. Create a new race (I used the default name, human 2. 0, and temperature range +-12. 5 option after researching)
3. Let the labs run for a while, then stop them
4. Delete the resulting colony/population
5. Pass a turn of any time length (I passed 5 days)
Result: Colony re-appears
(Moving them to Venus did in fact end that colony, it disappeared after all colonists were removed. So if this is intended that colonies don't just 'vanish' if there are still people there, then ignore this bug report)
Does deleting the gene centers after deleting the altered colony keep them from reappearing? Maybe whats happening is the gene centers aren't actually stopping production of modified population?
-
If you create a fighter base and land fighters on it as a squadron, then tow that fighter base to another location the fighters will be towed along as intended but will be permanently assigned to the original fleet the FB was towed from, though the game doesn't indicate this being the case in any way, the original fleet will continue to exist in the original location but will show as empty. If this original, supposedly empty fleet is deleted, then the fighters that are now in a different fleet 2 systems away will disappear from the game.
Ran into an issue that may be similar to this (fighter assignments), but ran into an issue where fighters that are dragged to a new fleet from their strikegroup are moving with the new fleet, but are still considered landed, I assume on the original carrier.
I have a patrol cruiser that carries Breaching Pods for boarding and arresting pirates. I had an NPR target in system, so I launched one pod from the strike group by selecting it and hitting "Detach," and then dragging a second Breaching Pod from the strike group list to the new detached fleet. This resulted in the fleet showing the Detached Breaching pod, and then the dragged Breaching Pod still showed as being assigned to the Patrol Cruiser:
(https://i.imgur.com/VTS6NT7.png)
When the fleet with two Breaching Pods reached the NPR target, the result of the "Attempt Boarding All Formations" resulted in only the Detached Boarding Pod attempting boarding. Similarly, manually ordering the formation from each Breaching Pod resulted in only the detached Breaching Pod attempting boarding. On the flip side, the NPR target shot and destroyed the detached Breaching Pod, but otherwise ignored the Breaching Pod that thought it was still landed. After the NPR destroyed the detached Breaching Pod, the fleet containing the remaining Breaching Pod that was dragged was stuck at 1 km/s movement speed despite the remaining Breaching Pod being undamaged. Trying to manually set speed failed to change anything; however, if I "Detached" the landed Breaching Pod it now no longer showed as landed and could move at full speed again.
DB is attached, the issue is easily reproducible as I did it twice for another NPR target that was also detected. So long as I detach everything first it works fine, but dragging a landed ship from a strike group seems to have it stay in the "landed" state even as it moves with the new fleet.
SJW: Yes, same issue. Fixed for v2.6.
-
Does deleting the gene centers after deleting the altered colony keep them from reappearing? Maybe whats happening is the gene centers aren't actually stopping production of modified population?
It does not. The population still re-appears if deleted. But if you move all the pops elsewhere, the colony can be deleted.
-
Fuel harvesters cannot unload fuel.
Steps to replicate:
1. Design ship with at least 1 sorium harvester module, engines, and a fuel transfer method (either a hub or refueling system, both were tested)
2. Set 'Transfer Fuel to Colony' move order
3. Pass any length of time
Result: the move order is 'completed', the log shows "Orders Complete"; however, no fuel is transferred.
Note: fuel tankers that do not have sorium harvester modules, are able to transfer fuel as expected.
2nd Note: yes, I did checkmark the 'tanker' box. Yes, I also doublechecked to make sure it was done.
("fuel transfer test" game in attached file)
-
I received an error today for the first time ever:
2. 5. 1 Function #2927: Attempted to divide by zero.
Info dump:
- Function #2927
- Error text: Attempted to divide by zero
- Triggers from the Economics window when selecting one specific colony
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 75 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2. 5. 1
I receive and must clear this error four times over whenever I select a specific Listening Post colony in the Economics window. Once I have the colony selected, changing the tab (Shipyards, Research, Environment, etc. ) does not trigger the error again. However, all tabs will generate the error if I select the tab before selecting the colony so it seems to be at a colony level rather than at a tab level.
-
I received an error today for the first time ever:
2. 5. 1 Function #2927: Attempted to divide by zero.
I ran into this one too; to add context, it happened when I accidentally tried to set a ground unit construction task, on a world with no available labor. The GU construction wasn't queued, and there is no visible sign in any of the colony screens or GU management screens that the task exists, but the divide by zero error happens every time I open that colony's summary.
I imagine any situation where a task gets set that doesn't get immediately rejected and has nobody to do it or nothing to do it with might cause the same problem. Shipyards, cargo transfers, etc. Mine eventually stopped warning on it's own, too, so it seems the 0 got to divide by itself after all.
-
I imagine any situation where a task gets set that doesn't get immediately rejected and has nobody to do it or nothing to do it with might cause the same problem. Shipyards, cargo transfers, etc.
Believe it or not, I just stumbled into something like this with shipyards on the same colony as well. Different function number so I'll drop it here as well; this one seems to be more specific to trying to do shipyard modifications with zero population.
Error pop-up says:
2. 5. 1 Function#2188: Attempted to divide by zero.
Info dump:
- Function #2188
- Error text: Attempted to divide by zero
- Triggers when selecting some shipyard modifications from the drop-down menu in the Economics window / Shipyards tab
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 75 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2. 5. 1
+500t, 1000, 2000, 5000, 10000, and Add Slipway options trigger the error pop-up. No Activity, Retool, And Continual Capacity Upgrade do not trigger the error pop-up. Just for giggles I tried to set one of the modifications that generates the error as the shipyard's activity: of course it didn't work, but it did delete all shipyards at that colony!
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
'Redo minerals' on a comet doesn't appear to produce the same mineral generation routine as comets generated on system creation.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
I've run into a particularly large comet that has a mathematically correct LG Time (y) but cannot be stabilised. My understanding of LG stabilisation is that comets cannot be stabilised by definition; I believe C# added moons to the initial planet-only VB6 stabilisation. While I'm not sure which direction this bug pulls in, it stands to reason that either comets shouldn't be able to display a stabilisation time at all or comets should be able to be stabilised if they're going to continue displaying a stabilisation time. Whichever the case may be, something benefits from a minor correction.
Info dump
- No function number
- No error text
- System Generation and Display window; row values and column headers show 0. 86 Gravity, 19,612 Diameter, 2. 03 Mass, 0. 56 Density, and 3. 51 LG Time (y) for the comet in question
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 76 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2. 5. 1
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
I have run into a similar issue as this one reported in 2. 2. 1
My current game seems to be stuck with an endless loop of:
Function #1954: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #1943
Function #478
I managed to save the db, advancing time in two 5 day increments should replicate the issue. Unfortunately it seems as if the save has been rendered unplayable.
Started on v2. 5. 0 - upgraded to v. 2. 5. 1 this morning. I did manage to get a save, any advancement will identify it. It looks like I go through the #1953 - > #1943 - > #478 cycle 27 times per increment.
DB attached in case it's helpful.
This bug seems to be caused by alien races without a class naming theme. If you suffer this bug in v2.5.1, then try setting a theme.
-
If you create a fighter base and land fighters on it as a squadron, then tow that fighter base to another location the fighters will be towed along as intended but will be permanently assigned to the original fleet the FB was towed from, though the game doesn't indicate this being the case in any way, the original fleet will continue to exist in the original location but will show as empty. If this original, supposedly empty fleet is deleted, then the fighters that are now in a different fleet 2 systems away will disappear from the game.
Please can you confirm you are on v2.5.1.
-
I've run into two issues while attempting to figure out assault on an NPR homeworld. I'll split the post so they're not combined.
Issue #1: CIWS are not removing missiles despite scoring kills. I ran two tests against an NPR homeworld, one with a gauss turret vessel and the other with a CIWS vessel; I've attached annotated screenshots for both tests.
- No function number
- No error text
- No specific window
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 72 years into the campaign
- Campaign started on v2. 5. 1
With the gauss turret vessel, the expected occurs: the NPR fires missiles against the vessel and the gauss turrets engage, scoring kills and removing missiles. Extra kills are instead counted as overkill (as a result, kill count never exceeds missile count) while the armour takes the remainder of the hits (in this case, 2x strength-1 impacts per leaked size-2 missile).
However, with the CIWS vessel, when the NPR fires on the vessel and the CIWS engage, a large number of kills (vastly exceeding the number of missiles) and exactly zero overkill are both recorded but no missiles are removed. This results in every inbound missile scoring hits on the armour as if the CIWS had not fired at all despite Events showing weapons fire and kills.
Can you confirm you are on v2.5.1, as this bug was fixed for that version?
-
The "Centre on selected body" option does not work in the mineral window when you have the wide view option selected.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
Hi Steve, also the create colony button on the mineral window does not work if you have the wide view windows selected.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
<snip>
Issue #1: CIWS are not removing missiles despite scoring kills. I ran two tests against an NPR homeworld, one with a gauss turret vessel and the other with a CIWS vessel; I've attached annotated screenshots for both tests.
<snip>
Can you confirm you are on v2. 5. 1, as this bug was fixed for that version?
I am indeed running v2. 5. 1; the campaign was started with and has been running the v2. 5. 1 exe exclusively (patched from v2. 5. 0). I did make a copy of the DB before carrying on with my campaign that I've just dug up to verify (I also grabbed a fresh copy of the v2. 5. 1 exe just in case); the CIWS are still presenting the issue unfortunately.
Screenshot info:
- 93 inbound salvos with a total of 458 S2 missiles (90 of 5xS2, 2 of 2xS2, 1 of 4xS2)
- 2x 1dmg warhead each for 916 total impacts and damage
- 105 "kills" from 100x CIWS-250 but all 916 warheads impact the armour nonetheless
-
I've hit an error while saving that I suspect is connected to a ship class design not having a valid hull classification.
Info dump:
- Error text reads "2. 5. 1 Function #1465: Object reference not set to an instance of an object. "
- The error popped up from the main window during saving as an interrupt; the game went back to saving after I cleared the error
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 77 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2. 5. 1
Roughly speaking I:
- Created a new class of ship in the Class Design window and added the modules as I needed
- Clicked on the drop-down menu to choose a hull classification for the ship
- Started typing "haul" intending to select my "Hauler HL" classification
- Hit enter while "Hauler HL" appeared to be selected instead of clicking on the selection
The ship class promptly disappeared from the left-hand Hull/Class tree; I was unable to dig it out again with either a newly-created "Haul HL" classification or "Haul" classification with an empty abbreviation (the second did not create a new hull classification anyway). After saving, exiting, and starting the game up again I found that both the vanished class as well as all other classes I had created after that point had not been saved at all; they do not even exist in the database. If I were to presume, I'd think that saving hit an error with the vanished (invalid?) class and halted saving ship designs at that point before carrying on with the rest of the save.
SJW: Having a ship with no valid Hull ID would cause that error and result in no classes being saved. I've added a check to the save code that will substitute cruiser if the hull type is null.
-
I have run into a similar issue as this one reported in 2. 2. 1
My current game seems to be stuck with an endless loop of:
Function #1954: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #1943
Function #478
I managed to save the db, advancing time in two 5 day increments should replicate the issue. Unfortunately it seems as if the save has been rendered unplayable.
Started on v2. 5. 0 - upgraded to v. 2. 5. 1 this morning. I did manage to get a save, any advancement will identify it. It looks like I go through the #1953 - > #1943 - > #478 cycle 27 times per increment.
DB attached in case it's helpful.
This bug seems to be caused by alien races without a class naming theme. If you suffer this bug in v2.5.1, then try setting a theme.
Oooo, so that's what was causing me so much grief in my "war of the worlds" game. Some ships entering the sensor range of the Martians would throw this error.
So, if I looked at the database and put in class naming themes where they're missing, then that might solve the problem ?
-
I have run into a similar issue as this one reported in 2. 2. 1
My current game seems to be stuck with an endless loop of:
Function #1954: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #1943
Function #478
I managed to save the db, advancing time in two 5 day increments should replicate the issue. Unfortunately it seems as if the save has been rendered unplayable.
Started on v2. 5. 0 - upgraded to v. 2. 5. 1 this morning. I did manage to get a save, any advancement will identify it. It looks like I go through the #1953 - > #1943 - > #478 cycle 27 times per increment.
DB attached in case it's helpful.
This bug seems to be caused by alien races without a class naming theme. If you suffer this bug in v2.5.1, then try setting a theme.
Oooo, so that's what was causing me so much grief in my "war of the worlds" game. Some ships entering the sensor range of the Martians would throw this error.
So, if I looked at the database and put in class naming themes where they're missing, then that might solve the problem ?
You can just go on the Diplomacy window and select one - no need to touch the DB. The weird thing about this bug is that it shouldn't be possible for a race not to have a naming theme, unless its been deleted from the DB for some reason.
-
I have run into a similar issue as this one reported in 2. 2. 1
My current game seems to be stuck with an endless loop of:
Function #1954: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #1943
Function #478
I managed to save the db, advancing time in two 5 day increments should replicate the issue. Unfortunately it seems as if the save has been rendered unplayable.
Started on v2. 5. 0 - upgraded to v. 2. 5. 1 this morning. I did manage to get a save, any advancement will identify it. It looks like I go through the #1953 - > #1943 - > #478 cycle 27 times per increment.
DB attached in case it's helpful.
This bug seems to be caused by alien races without a class naming theme. If you suffer this bug in v2.5.1, then try setting a theme.
Oooo, so that's what was causing me so much grief in my "war of the worlds" game. Some ships entering the sensor range of the Martians would throw this error.
So, if I looked at the database and put in class naming themes where they're missing, then that might solve the problem ?
You can just go on the Diplomacy window and select one - no need to touch the DB. The weird thing about this bug is that it shouldn't be possible for a race not to have a naming theme, unless its been deleted from the DB for some reason.
Could it arise from a DB version migration from a previous version where new naming themes were added? I ask because when I upgraded from 2.4 to 2.5 I only copied over the naming themes that I cared about, which weren't all of them.
-
Could it arise from a DB version migration from a previous version where new naming themes were added? I ask because when I upgraded from 2.4 to 2.5 I only copied over the naming themes that I cared about, which weren't all of them.
Yes, if it was the same game. The AI also uses naming themes, so it could be using one you didn't transfer.
-
This bug seems to be caused by alien races without a class naming theme. If you suffer this bug in v2.5.1, then try setting a theme.
Oooo, so that's what was causing me so much grief in my "war of the worlds" game. Some ships entering the sensor range of the Martians would throw this error.
So, if I looked at the database and put in class naming themes where they're missing, then that might solve the problem ?
You can just go on the Diplomacy window and select one - no need to touch the DB. The weird thing about this bug is that it shouldn't be possible for a race not to have a naming theme, unless its been deleted from the DB for some reason.
fortunately I still have the zips from when I was encountering the problem.
My problem was that in my war of the worlds game (multiple races on Earth), one of the Earth races (not the one I had control over) had for some reason not assigned a class naming theme to the Martians.
Looking at the database in FCT_AlienClass, there was a number of completely blank names for the Martian ships, and in FCT_AlienRace, the ClassNameID was set to 0 for the Martians by the NPR Earth race in question.
I changed the entry for FCT_AlienRace from 0 to 1, and that solved the problem completely.
the attached zip was when I was encountering the problem. For some reason, race 607 (Spanish empire) had assigned classnameID 0 to the Martians, and this threw errors. Changing the 0 to 1 in FCT_AlienRace seems like it solves the problem.
So it seems like sometimes an NPR will assign classnameID 0 to another alien race, and this causes a problem.
-
If you create a fighter base and land fighters on it as a squadron, then tow that fighter base to another location the fighters will be towed along as intended but will be permanently assigned to the original fleet the FB was towed from, though the game doesn't indicate this being the case in any way, the original fleet will continue to exist in the original location but will show as empty. If this original, supposedly empty fleet is deleted, then the fighters that are now in a different fleet 2 systems away will disappear from the game.
I have also run into this issue multiple times. The first time by towing the carrier and having the parasites revert to the previous fleet. The second by moving the carrier to a different fleet, deleting the now empty fleet and all the parasites, which were in the new fleet, being deleted as well.
Edit: Having dealt with the issue quite a bit, it seems to be a problem with the "Release" order not proper assigning parasites and transported ground units to the new fleet.
-
I got errors saving my 2.5.1 game and now get errors loading the saved game.
When Saving:
2.5.1 Function#3230 constraint failed
UNIQUE constraint failed: FCT_TechSystem.TechSystemID
followed by:
2.5.1 Function#1500 constraint failed
UNIQUE constraint failed:
FCT_ShipDesignComponents.SDComponentID
Game finished saving after that.
When I try to load I get 4 errors:
2.5.1 Function #1349: An item with the same key has already been added.
Then:
Tech system does not exists for D50-1 Ship Decoy so it cannot be loaded
Then:
Tech system does not exists for D80-1 Ship Decoy so it cannot be loaded
Then:
Tech system does not exists for D99-1 Ship Decoy so it cannot be loaded
The game was a TN start with real stars and I'm about 82 years into the game.
I HAVE been able to reproduce this.
Background and Description: I had not used decoys up to this point and decided I need to. I had previously researched a size 20 launcher and had queued a size 50 launcher project for research but no actual decoy missiles. After I loaded my save last time, I quickly created projects for size 80 and 99 launchers, plus decoy missiles for size 20, 50, 80 and 99. I played for a hour or two and when I saved, I got the errors above. I reloaded the game and got the above load errors. Those names (DF50-1, D80-1 and D99-01) correspond to the decoy missiles I queued up for research. None of them had been researched at the time of the save.
To reproduce the long way (this mirrors the sequence of what I actually did before initially getting the error except without playing a couple of hours before saving), what I did was:
- Load my previous save
- Click the create research project button
- Set the company name
- Select Decoy Launcher
- Select Size 80 from the dropdown
- Click Create at the bottom
- Change size to size 99
- Click Create at the bottom
- Open the missile project window
- Check the "Decoy Missile" checkbox
- Change the decoy strength to 50
- Change the name to D50-1
- Click Create at the bottom
- Change the decoy strength to 80
- Change the name to D80-1
- Click Create at the bottom
- Change the decoy strength to 99
- Change the name to D99-1
- Click Create at the bottom
- Open research window
- Select a researcher (Komatsu Tadako in my save)
- Change the research category dropdown to "Missiles / Kinetic Weapons"
- Use "Add to Queue" to add each of the research projects above to the researcher's queue
- Save the game
I have also been able to reproduce just by doing the following:
- Load my previous save
- Open the missile designer window
- Check the "Decoy Missile" checkbox
- Change the decoy strength to 50
- Change the name to D50-1
- Click Create at the bottom
- Change the decoy strength to 80
- Change the name to D80-1
- Click Create at the bottom
- Save the game
I suspect the issue is related to my trying to create multiple decoy missile projects from the window at the same time. If I follow the same steps above except close the missile designer window and reopen it before creating the second missile, I don't get the error.
I've attached two saves. The one with the 2131 date is the previous save I used to reproduce. The one with the 2132 date is the one after the save where it throws errors on load.
-
In the naval org. view if you select a ship with beam weapons (laser for example), in the ship design display tab you have the possibility to play with the target speed and range bands as in the class design window.
If you change the target speed to something else two issues occur:
1) the chance to hit along the fire control does not update.
2) the window itself freeze or something like that and if you switch to another ship you get the following error: 934 Uncorrect input string format
Same error whenever you select another ship, the only solution is to close the entire window and reopen it.
The version is 2.5.1 of course, conventional, real star.
-
Guys, I reiterate this weird thing, It seems strange to me that none is facing this issue. Whenever I research a missile, it is not appearing for production until I reload the game.
Anyone?
-
A function 2407 error when designing an autocannon fighter pod.
Steps to replicate:
1. New game/no missiles designed yet(? not sure if really a trigger, but)
2. Have some form of fighter pod researched
3. Create a fighter pod using the missile design dialog; I made both 8 HS and 20 HS variations, tried all three types of fighter pod, all gave the same error
4. Hit 'create'
Result: triggers 2407 error; however, the research task is created and selectable. Doesn't seem game-breaking.
-
I am currently passing judgement on the atmosphere of Venus because my terraformers lack any other work. I have discovered that the current colony cost is higher than the highest cost out of the individual potential costs; this should not be so, as current colony cost is nothing more than the maximum among the individual costs, eccentricity aside. This appears to be rooted in the current temperature being higher than the maximum (perihelion) temperature. I've attached a screenshot displaying this discrepancy. Colony cost reduction tech is currently 20%.
Just in case it is relevant, my work reverse-engineering the base temperature equation found an oddity with Sol, where Venus resides; while all other systems appear to use a constant of exactly 255 in the temperature equation, Sol appears to use a constant somewhere between ~255. 13 and 255. 3406815, resulting in ever-so-slightly warmer bodies. Perhaps the maximum eccentricity-based temperatures are using the global constant while the current temperature is using the Sol-specific value. It's also possible my calculations for Sol were wrong (or that 255 is not actually a constant) so I'll leave my equation here as well:
Base_Temp_K = ~255 * Luminosity_Sols^(1/4) / Distance_AU^(1/2)
Info dump:
- No function number or error text
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 79 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2. 5. 1
-
While hunting the remains of one of my main NPR's FAC fleets I have discovered that they are still capable of running away despite being out of fuel, out of MSP, and years beyond their intended 10-day deployment. Clearly they don't obey maintenance or deploy rules (I imagine this is granted to them so that they stand a chance at all), but my understanding is that they should not be able to receive orders other than "search for fuel while empty" as indicated in the C# changes list. I cannot find any indication of roll-back in the changes list so I assume that change still stands and that this is unintended behavior; https://aurora2. pentarch. org/index. php?topic=8495. msg110348#msg110348 is the latest that I can find on the subject.
Info dump:
- No function number or error text
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 79 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2. 5. 1
-
The "run away" part of the NPR code tends to supersede the "find fuel" part, admittedly for obvious reasons as it would be rather silly for the NPR to barrel its FACs into the teeth of your fleet just because this is a direct path towards fuel. You can also see this sometimes with the NPR logic around jump points, as it is one reason that NPRs jump back and forth endlessly due to the circular logic of (1) "I am in System A and I need fuel, I must jump into System B!" and (2) "I am in System B and it has a high danger rating, I must escape by jumping into System A!".
-
The "run away" part of the NPR code tends to supersede the "find fuel" part, admittedly for obvious reasons as it would be rather silly for the NPR to barrel its FACs into the teeth of your fleet just because this is a direct path towards fuel.
But if they're out of fuel they shouldn't have access to the "run away" part of their code at all, at least as it's explained in the changes list: "unable to do anything except search for refuelling options." Heading home for fuel, even if it risks going directly through an enemy fleet, would still be preferred to sitting motionless for all of eternity and is how their logic would guide them if I'm reading the changes list correctly but this was a full 360 degree scatter and definitely not a refuel order.
You can also see this sometimes with the NPR logic around jump points, as it is one reason that NPRs jump back and forth endlessly due to the circular logic of (1) "I am in System A and I need fuel, I must jump into System B!" and (2) "I am in System B and it has a high danger rating, I must escape by jumping into System A!".
One of my cloaked, passive-only survey ships spent part of the evening watching a swarm medium hive mindlessly do this and those don't even have fuel tanks so I agree that there's more than just refueling logic in play there. However, given the way it's written in the changes list I'm not sure this would apply to 100% empty NPR fuel tanks.
-
The "run away" part of the NPR code tends to supersede the "find fuel" part, admittedly for obvious reasons as it would be rather silly for the NPR to barrel its FACs into the teeth of your fleet just because this is a direct path towards fuel.
But if they're out of fuel they shouldn't have access to the "run away" part of their code at all, at least as it's explained in the changes list: "unable to do anything except search for refuelling options." Heading home for fuel, even if it risks going directly through an enemy fleet, would still be preferred to sitting motionless for all of eternity and is how their logic would guide them if I'm reading the changes list correctly but this was a full 360 degree scatter and definitely not a refuel order.
Rather than spend weeks writing AI code than uses extra processing power to assess every decision differently based on fuel state (something humans do easily, but AI does not because of the complexity of factors involved), most of which would be completely invisible to the player anyway, the AI ignores fuel until it runs out, then heads to refuel. If it is forced to run, that takes precedence. Otherwise the AI would be back to assessing fuel state constantly in case it needs to run. There is no penalty for empty tanks for the same reason.
-
By mistake I tried to tow a ship that was in Overhaul. Result is the towed ship is now stuck in a random point in orbit, can't move and Deployment and maintenance timers are going up. Also it would be nice to have a clear indicator to differentiate if a ship is actually towed or just in the same fleet.
-
By mistake I tried to tow a ship that was in Overhaul. Result is the towed ship is now stuck in a random point in orbit, can't move and Deployment and maintenance timers are going up. Also it would be nice to have a clear indicator to differentiate if a ship is actually towed or just in the same fleet.
Take the ship out of overhaul - then tow it.
-
I lost track of a spoiler fleet thoroughly enough to resort to finding it in the DB. It turns out the fleet has been fleeing directly away for more than five years despite not being aware of any enemies and being fully alone in the system for approximately two of those years. I've been aware of it for awhile but wanted to see if it ever corrected its behavior; nothing has updated and there are no far-flung system bodies for it to be heading to. I've also spotted 15 single-FAC fleets from an NPR that have been fleeing for months despite being the only fleets in the system after I jump in on top of them and promptly jumped back out. Presumably a fleet that flees should periodically check to see if it still has any hostile contacts so that it doesn't render itself functionally self-destructed due to extreme range.
I've attached a screenshot of some of the DB values to showcase just how far a couple of the hostile fleets (in red) have fled from their origination location where my own fleets (in green) are now stationed. I had to add thousands separators to make some of the values readable.
Info dump:
- No function number or error text
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 80 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2.5.1
-
The Standing Order: Build Jumpgate at Nearest Jump Point still overrides the Exclude Alien Controlled tick box. Stabilization Ships will enter flagged systems.
I thought this one was fixed already, but apparently not.
-
Sorting ships of a class by fuel within the Class Design window does not sort ships by fuel amount; it appears to update nothing. I suspect it is attempting to sort by maximum fuel capacity instead of current fuel in tanks, resulting in no change of vessel order regardless of current order as all vessels of a given class have identical capacity by definition unless damaged. The attached screenshot has a blue border around the Fuel button (as it has most recently been clicked) but retains the prior System Name sort anyway.
All other sorts appear to be working as intended, as least as tested by alternating with a System Name sort to provide a pseudo-randomized vessel order before each test.
Info dump
- No function number or error text
- Class Design window, Ships in Class tab
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 80 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2.5.1
-
In the Commanders window, after some assignments, in the dropdown at the left high corner of the window, I selected again the "Player Race" to update the names of the available officers.
The names (in the lists on the left and on the right of the window) updated.
But, even if the four dropdowns of the abilities all turned into "Crew Training", I think the shown numbers are related to the previous selection of the abilities.
I don't know if this is WIA (and I don't remember if it was already noted): I feel it as misleading.
Thanks!!
-
Plasma Carronade tech appears to contain as least one bug with the RP cost of the final research level (it costs 12m RP instead of what I imagine was intended as 1200k RP) and I'll drop it here in bugs because it changes gameplay rather than just readability. There are two other potential errors worth mentioning just in case they require correction but at least one of them may be better suited in the typos thread.
The final five tech levels and costs for v2.5.1 are as follows:
"50cm" at 125,000 RP
"60cm" at 250,000 RP
"70cm" at 300,000 RP
"80cm" at 600,000 RP
"100 cm" at 12,000,000 RP
I presume 12,000,000 RP for the final level is an error from an intended cost of 1,200,000 RP.
For what it's worth, the step up from 60cm to 70cm only increases in cost from 250k to 300k; I would have guessed that this step would have gone from 250k to 500k, leading to costs of 1m for 80cm and 2m for 100cm, but the lower costs may be by design. Additionally, the final tech level is named "100 cm" with a space rather than "100cm" without a space to keep with convention.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6.0
-
I would like to confirm the bug report about CWIS not hitting properly. Save game attached.
I quadruple checked I was on 2. 5. 1 EXE file was created on jan 25. the day the 2. 5. 1 update was posted.
The function number -none
The complete error text -none
The window affected -event log?
What you were doing at the time - getting my ass kicked by NPRs
Conventional or TN start -TN
Random or Real Stars - Real
Is your decimal separator a comma? no.
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Other guy in the thread had it too.
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer ~60 years so far.
-
Ran into an error with the "Autoroute by System" option within the Naval Organization window that appears to be repeatable as many times as I try it. It does not appear to break anything else further.
Steps to reproduce:
- Select the "Autoroute by System" option with a fleet selected and double-click any destination to add the route to the fleet's orders
- With the route to the destination still set as the fleet's orders, select "Autoroute by System" again
- "Remove All" orders from the fleet; this resets the available order selection to "System Locations" but leaves "Autoroute by System" selected
- Double-click any jump-point option with "Autoroute by System" still selected to attempt to add a standard transit order to the fleet's order list; this throws the error
Info dump:
- 2.5.1 Function #3210: Unable to cast object of type 'hg' to type 'jh'.
- Naval Organization window
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 80 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2.5.1
-
Ran into an error with the "Autoroute by System" option within the Naval Organization window that appears to be repeatable as many times as I try it. It does not appear to break anything else further.
Steps to reproduce:
- Select the "Autoroute by System" option with a fleet selected and double-click any destination to add the route to the fleet's orders
- With the route to the destination still set as the fleet's orders, select "Autoroute by System" again
- "Remove All" orders from the fleet; this resets the available order selection to "System Locations" but leaves "Autoroute by System" selected
- Double-click any jump-point option with "Autoroute by System" still selected to attempt to add a standard transit order to the fleet's order list; this throws the error
Info dump:
- 2.5.1 Function #3210: Unable to cast object of type 'hg' to type 'jh'.
- Naval Organization window
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 80 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2.5.1
I think this happens because the Orders pane doesn't correctly update the fleet location for order-giving purposes when orders are removed. You see something similar happen in other cases when orders are removed but the game still thinks the fleet is or will be in that system. Fix is usually to refresh that window somehow to force an update, so I'd imagine that the bug fix is simply to force that update after removing orders.
-
Not a major issue, but the tonnage displayed by wrecks doesn't seem to use the same rounding logic that the ship design screen uses.
You can see it on my post here: https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=11100.msg168848#msg168848 (https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=11100.msg168848#msg168848), where a number of my ships are listed as #,999 tons.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6.0
-
Hit another error though I have truly no idea where this one came from or how to reproduce it. With Automated Turns set to On, I fired an 8 hour increment; a 3h30m increment passed then the error popped up. Only needed to clear it once before Automated Turns resumed on its own without needing another increment selection.
Info dump:
- "2.5.1 Function #558: Object reference not set to an instance of an object."
- Possibly attached to the main game window; selecting any other window moves it to the background, but selecting the main window puts it in front. The error does not have its own taskbar icon.
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 81 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2.5.1
-
I have somehow lost the ability in my empire to research Electronic Counter-countermeasures. I have the tech "Electronic Warfare" researched but no additional research options for ECCM. I only noticed this after I got some salvage data from a NPR and could not find the tech in my research list.
I think this may have occurred because I took over a NPR ship or had one surrender to me when it had jammer tech before I researched electronic warfare. I don't actually remember researching "electronic warfare" actually.
I did go into SM mode and remove the tech and try and add it back via instant but it does not resolve the problem.
Attached is the db.
- Conventional Start
- Real Stars
- US Decimial
- 58 years into the campaign
- Started on 2.5.0
I had ECCM being researched on another planet and this is why I couldn't find the option on earth. So this is just user error. :P
-
I had something odd happening, 2 of my transports could not fulfill any of their order on Earth (loading infrastructure), they were on repeat, so I cancelled all orders.
48 days later, I find them at the same spot in space, except Earth has moved, so they are 232 millions km from it. They de-orbited more or less. Feature or bug?
-
I had something odd happening, 2 of my transports could not fulfill any of their order on Earth (loading infrastructure), they were on repeat, so I cancelled all orders.
48 days later, I find them at the same spot in space, except Earth has moved, so they are 232 millions km from it. They de-orbited more or less. Feature or bug?
I am sure not your case, but maybe you had a previous "minimum distance" option set for a different ship and now your cargo had load infrastructure but because there was the minimal distance still set they were not in Eath orbit? Sometimes it happens to me, because I tend to keep the ship window open.
-
Hi,
I've just had a bug that I think hasn't been reported yet.
I just had a cargo fleet drop off some components (found in ruins) at my home world. I disassembled the three engines one by one. I then clicked to disassemble one of the two terraforming modules. The number of terraforming modules in the GU/Stockpile page dropped to 0 but the component was still listed in green. I clicked on it and clicked to disassemble and it gave me the research points and the number of components changed to -1, another disassemble and it changed to -2.
There is clearly a something wrong happening here as I could get infinite research points this way!
OS is Windows 10
A4X version 2.5.1
Decimal separator is a ,
Only mod in use is DeepBlueTheme which I believe is allowed.
Thanks,
Andy
-
Decimal separator is a ,
Decimal separator needs to be a '.' (period), you have it as ',' (comma).
I admit, this doesn't sound like the most likely cause of such a bug, but the decimal separator issue causes a lot of weird things to happen believe it or not.
-
I had something odd happening, 2 of my transports could not fulfill any of their order on Earth (loading infrastructure), they were on repeat, so I cancelled all orders.
48 days later, I find them at the same spot in space, except Earth has moved, so they are 232 millions km from it. They de-orbited more or less. Feature or bug?
I am sure not your case, but maybe you had a previous "minimum distance" option set for a different ship and now your cargo had load infrastructure but because there was the minimal distance still set they were not in Eath orbit? Sometimes it happens to me, because I tend to keep the ship window open.
This was one of my test runs, so I had a single fleet, and no follow to another fleet. But it's ok, it's not a feature apparently, so I must have done something.
-
Decimal separator is a ,
Decimal separator needs to be a '.' (period), you have it as ',' (comma).
I admit, this doesn't sound like the most likely cause of such a bug, but the decimal separator issue causes a lot of weird things to happen believe it or not.
My mistake, the decimal separator is a . while the thousands separator is the ,
Thanks,
Andy
-
I'm pretty sure there are bugs with applying colors in the message log. For example a color change not taken into account, or one which seems to be changed in the message log, but is still using the old scheme when shown in the tactical window.
So if these are not known issues, I can set a save aside.
-
The tactical window will only update to the new colors when it refreshes - just scrolling the screen should do it.
-
I restarted for 30 mn my game this morning. I guess it qualifies as "refreshing the tactical window"? ;D
See the pinky color msg, for an event just generated after my session start.
(https://i.imgur.com/xYQB9Iu.jpeg)
-
Error popup, often several times at once, occurs every few 5-day increments. It was originally #2661, now #2662.
2. 5. 1 Function #2662: Could not load file or assembly 'System. Data. Entity. Design, Version=4. 0. 0. 0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089' or one of its dependencies.
Started happening after, I *think*, making several ground forces with "Construct Org".
No mods, running 2. 5. 1 in aurora4x-docker.
-
There is some GUI bug where the Control UIDs for the buttons in the GUI are being renumbered, making it impossible to click them reliably via Autohotkey.
For example, the Control for 5-day turns is "WindowsForms10.BUTTON.app.0.141b42a_r8_ad178" when the game loads, however at some point, and by some means I have not narrowed down the control changes to "WindowsForms10.BUTTON.app.0.141b42a_r8_ad1109". Every Control then has 31 added to it.
This didn't happen in previous versions and honestly, I'm confused as to why it is happening.
-
I had something odd happening, 2 of my transports could not fulfill any of their order on Earth (loading infrastructure), they were on repeat, so I cancelled all orders.
48 days later, I find them at the same spot in space, except Earth has moved, so they are 232 millions km from it. They de-orbited more or less. Feature or bug?
I am sure not your case, but maybe you had a previous "minimum distance" option set for a different ship and now your cargo had load infrastructure but because there was the minimal distance still set they were not in Eath orbit? Sometimes it happens to me, because I tend to keep the ship window open.
More likely, they didn't register as in orbit when the "could not load" error was reported, so they stayed still in space. Next time, cancel the order, then order them back to the planet you want them to orbit.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/p4iLkzH.jpeg)
When you rename a civilian company, in many cases (but not all) renaming is only partially working. (It's more than one year after having renamed the company in this screenshot)
-
Minor Bug
If a fleet is transferred to another race it cannot wind back its maintenance clock at a colony of the new species. Until there has been a save and reload of the database.
-
So how can that be. My Production event persists being in pink & yellow on the tactical screen, whereas it is set since one week (real life, 12+ sessions so not in memory) to be pink & black.
(https://i.imgur.com/wz4EJJx.jpeg)
-
I now understand the issue. It's simple actually! The events when displayed on the tactical screen never use the defined Text Colour, only the default one.
-
If that's the case, it's a problem with the theme you're using, as I can assure you that text colors work fine on default settings.
-
Ah crap. Sorry for the bother then, my fault.
-
I have created another game where I added 4 NPR on Earth, one is Greater China, short name CHI.
Pass 2 mn, the contact name is GRE, not CHI. The same issue presents itself for the 3 other races. Looking at the DB, the short handle is CHI, not GRE.
If I go to the Intelligence window, replace GRE with CHI in the Abbrev field, and then (mandatory or nothing changes) click on Rename Race then OK (not changing the actual race name), then the next contact update will correctly show CHI.
-
I have created another game where I added 4 NPR on Earth, one is Greater China, short name CHI.
Pass 2 mn, the contact name is GRE, not CHI. The same issue presents itself for the 3 other races. Looking at the DB, the short handle is CHI, not GRE.
If I go to the Intelligence window, replace GRE with CHI in the Abbrev field, and then (mandatory or nothing changes) click on Rename Race then OK (not changing the actual race name), then the next contact update will correctly show CHI.
The short name you give a race, which can be of any length, is not related to the 3 letter abbreviation used by the Intelligence window.
-
I find this confusing, as the intelligence window reports the correct long name, race portrait, and flag. So, why would the handle be different from the short name? Unless, in your mind, the short name is not the handle but something to use somewhere else. But then, where?
-
I find this confusing, as the intelligence window reports the correct long name, race portrait, and flag. So, why would the handle be different from the short name? Unless, in your mind, the short name is not the handle but something to use somewhere else. But then, where?
The Race Short Name is used for places where the Race Title would be too long, such as colonies on the System View.
The three letter capaitalised abbreviation on the intelligence window is a reporting code and is used for contacts. This is initially set to the first three letters of the intelligence reporting name. This reporting name is always the <system name> aliens until comms are established, after which it will change to match the long name. Also, you can change the reporting name and the abbreviation to anything, regardless of the alien's actual name. So if you discover the aliens in Wolf 359, they will be named the Wolf 359 aliens and their reporting code will be WOL. In your case, I am guessing the two races started on the same planet so comms were already established.
So the reporting name and the three letter abbreviation are completely independent of the true name of the aliens, with the only crossover being the reporting name updated once comms are established.
For example, in my own current game, my race short name is Imperium, which would be too long for contact information.
-
Got it, thanks for the thorough explanation. And I can change it to what I like, so it's all good.
-
Buglet or misunderstood feature:
If I set the speed of my fleet to 350 km/s (nominal speed 1066), then it seems to work; as in, if I bring the dialog box up again, it shows 350, but the next move impulse shows it's still moving at 1066 km/s.
Also, another one, but it might just be it's for non-fighters only. I have a fighter tender with 3 fighters, if I ask to split all 'ships' at arrival, it does nothing. I guess here 'ships' are 1000+ tons objects?
-
Buglet or misunderstood feature:
If I set the speed of my fleet to 350 km/s (nominal speed 1066), then it seems to work; as in, if I bring the dialog box up again, it shows 350, but the next move impulse shows it's still moving at 1066 km/s.
Also, another one, but it might just be it's for non-fighters only. I have a fighter tender with 3 fighters, if I ask to split all 'ships' at arrival, it does nothing. I guess here 'ships' are 1000+ tons objects?
Did you uncheck 'use maximum speed'?
Split fleet doesn't affect anything in a hangar.
-
I did not! I now see the checkbox. I would have unchecked it automatically for the player in the case he enters a speed manually...
-
Just minding my own business playing, and suddenly if I advance time beyond 12 hours after this save (attached), I get what seems like an endless set of errors, in order as below. It does end, if you close enough of them, but then happens again everytime you advance time without end.
When you post, please post as much information as possible, including:
2. 5. 1 Function #1954: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
2. 5. 1 Function #1943: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
2. 5. 1 Function #478: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
it then repeats 1954 and continues on in the same order. This occurs with no windows other than the main window open when advancing time.
TN start
Random or Real Stars - not sure, default setting?
Is your decimal separator a comma? Yes
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Never seen this before
it's only a few years in, not a long campaign
Game is now unplayable. In the attached it's "Terran Empire 2"
-
This same string of Function numbers came up earlier in this same thread: Here (https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13464.msg168710;topicseen#msg168710).
According to Steve, it's being caused by "alien races without a class naming theme. If you suffer this bug in v2.5.1, then try setting a theme."
-
Stabilizing an LP point on a planet with an elliptical orbit appears to place the LP where it would go if the orbit was circular (or I'm assuming that's what it's doing - it's certainly not placing them on the orbital line.)
-
Stabilizing an LP point on a planet with an elliptical orbit appears to place the LP where it would go if the orbit was circular (or I'm assuming that's what it's doing - it's certainly not placing them on the orbital line.)
Have you advanced game time since the LP was completed?
Prior to eccentricity being added, there was a bug in the displayed position of the LP upon completion, but the position updated correctly after time was advanced (possibly not until the next construction cycle).
Perhaps this is just a different presentation of the same bug.
-
Looks like you're correct - I went back to the system in question and the LP is now on the planet's track.
I'm not sure when, exactly, it updated - but I know that it wasn't instantly, because I saw my stabilization ship make its way to the LP after it created it.
-
EDIT: Ignore this one. It was already fixed in the 2.5.1 patch.
Summary: Dormant construct bonus apparently being applied to local research.
I did a non-Sol start by making a new system with the "Create Habitable" button, and making a race on the generated homeworld with the "Create Race" button.
The HW has a dormant construct. I have not yet developed the technology to investigate it.
However, the Research tab seems to be including a 40% bonus for Ground Combat research projects.
-
Loading multiples of the same ship design component on a freighter only uses the space of one component.
I loaded eight Boat Bay components (size 5.25HS = 262.5t ea.) onto a freighter with 5000 cargo capacity.
After loading, reported remaining capacity is 4737, which indicates that only a single Boat Bay is being subtracted from total capacity.
-
Training a XENO unit does not initiate Dormant Construct survey on the same body.
My HW (non-Sol start) has an Ancient Construct, which was dormant at game start.
After some years, I finally constructed a XENO ground unit.
I left the unit on the HW and waited for it to survey the construct.
And I waited.
And waited.
And waited.
After 9+ years of no results, I loaded the unit on a transport, and immediately unloaded the unit back to the surface.
Five months later, the construct was reported as surveyed.
So, it seems like the code only starts calculating construct survey chances after a XENO unit is unloaded onto the body.
Training a unit locally does not seem to trigger it.
-
Fire Control Jammer 3 seems to have the wrong cost of 60 , the other level 3 jammers have a cost of 30 and all the level 12,4 jammer costs are identical, fire control jammer 4 costs 40
-
I designed and researched an infantry unit, then obsoleded it because it wasn't what I wanted. It is now appearing under the power and propulsion research tab as researcheable race-designed engine ???
-
I designed and researched an infantry unit, then obsoleded it because it wasn't what I wanted. It is now appearing under the power and propulsion research tab as researcheable race-designed engine ???
There used to be a similar bug that could happen if you had two Create Research Project windows at the same time when you designed a component to research.
Regardless, you should be able to just delete the tech from the Research screen.
-
In the Medal Management window, the Medal Conditions tab does not correctly reflect the medals of the current race in cases of multiple player races. In other words, in a game with multiple player races, if I set medal conditions for Player Race 1, then switch to Player Race 2, the medals shown in the Medal Conditions tab will show medals from Player Race 1 (regardless of whether Player Race 2 has set a medal for that condition).
-
"Show Next Tech" checkbox does not affect the Engine Power dropdown.
On the Create Research Project window, with Engines selected as the type, there are five further dropdowns:
Engine Tech
Engine Power
Fuel Consumption
Thermal Reduction
Engine Size
My current tech is:
Nuclear Pulse
40%-200%
0.8LEPH
50% Thermal
60HS max
When I tick the Show Next Tech checkbox, the dropdown lists repopulate with the options that will become available when I complete the next associated tech.
Except for Engine Power, which still only has the options from 40% to 200%.
-
Tractored ships with engines will use fuel as if they were moving under their own power under certain conditions. I believe the bug shows up if the tractored ship has moved on its own without being tractored since the last time the game was opened. I was able to reproduce the issue in a fresh game using the following steps:
- Make two tugs and two other ships with engines, e.g. fuel harvesters
- Order Harvester 1 to move to Luna, leave the other one at Earth
- Order Tug 1 to tractor Harvester 1 and Tug 2 to tractor Harvester 2
- Order both tugs to move to Neptune. Harvester 1 will use fuel while being tugged; Harvester 2 will not.
- Save, close, and reopen the game, and neither one will use fuel
I confirmed I'm using version 2.5.1.
-
I have discovered a bug, I think. I went through the bug posts for 2.51 and couldn't find anything like it, but who knows?
To start I am using a fresh install of 2.51. No mods or anything unusual.
I started a single-player race campaign with limited starting tech featuring a humanity that had been conquered and oppressed by aliens for quite a while, before they mysteriously left just as the human resistance was close to defeating their human proxy troops. The humans get their act together and begin exploring the solar system, looking for the aliens, and expanding and building a fleet in case they find them. I pushed this campaign about twelve years down the road, from 2400 to 2412, before stopping because I was considering starting a different campaign with multiple player races.
I created the second game in the same database and played around with it for a bit, but never got much beyond the start phase, mostly due to a crippling Fallout 4 addiction, as my son helped me mod the base game and add a lot of new content.
Either before I created the second campaign or just after I noticed Steve's campaign that comes with the database and I deleted it.
After the Fallout 4 addition abated a bit I felt the need to get back to Aurora, so I opened up the game and decided to go back to my single-race game, as it was farther along and better developed. However, the dates are now screwed up. As noted above, the campaign started at 2400, and went out to March of 2412 before I quit. My log document verifies this. When I opened up the campaign, the dates in the Events window are in August 2068. I checked the image I had made of the starting conditions and that verifies that the campaign started on the year 2400 as well.
I don't know where this date came from. The other campaign I created, with multiple player races, started in the year 1, so it doesn't seem to be cross contamination from that.
I don't know how this happened, and the campaign is essentially unusable because the dates don't match my log document (potential campaign write-up).
Kurt
-
Hello, I was using a somewhat old version of Aurora 4x, and having a fine game, until I decided to create another Race during my playthrough. I started getting errors every time I tried to change the time, so I had to uninstall and reinstall the game, with the latest patch.
Unfortunately, every time I open up the game, every time I uninstall and reinstall it, I get the error messages: "2. 5. 1 Function #141: Column "Eldar" does not belong to table Record Set", and then
"2. 5. 1 Function #139: Object Reference not set to an instance of an object"
Im allowed to open the game, but every time I click something that second error pops up, including to when I try starting a new game, which gives two errors
"2. 5. 1 Function #1709: Object Reference, etc"
and
"2. 5. 1 Function #1697: Object Reference not set to an instance of an object"
No matter how many times I uninstall, and reinstall, ive been getting the same errors ever since I created that new race in that old save (which is now gone). I am confused and would like to ask for help on this.
Thank you
-
Hello, I was using a somewhat old version of Aurora 4x, and having a fine game, until I decided to create another Race during my playthrough. I started getting errors every time I tried to change the time, so I had to uninstall and reinstall the game, with the latest patch.
Unfortunately, every time I open up the game, every time I uninstall and reinstall it, I get the error messages: "2. 5. 1 Function #141: Column "Eldar" does not belong to table Record Set", and then
"2. 5. 1 Function #139: Object Reference not set to an instance of an object"
Im allowed to open the game, but every time I click something that second error pops up, including to when I try starting a new game, which gives two errors
"2. 5. 1 Function #1709: Object Reference, etc"
and
"2. 5. 1 Function #1697: Object Reference not set to an instance of an object"
No matter how many times I uninstall, and reinstall, ive been getting the same errors ever since I created that new race in that old save (which is now gone). I am confused and would like to ask for help on this.
Thank you
This sounds like a mismatch between the executable version and the database version, which is probably due to a bad install. I recommend trying a fresh install in a different location, following the installation instructions very, very closely.
For reference, that means to install the full 1.13 distribution (http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=10635.0), then the 2.5.0 distribution (http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13418.0), then the 2.5.1 distribution (http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13462.0) in that order, following the instructions in each linked thread.
-
On a new session (luckily for me, as I reverted to the previous save) I fiddled with old security formations on Mars, by showing all elements, and grouping 4 formations into a single one. The end result somehow was that I had the remaining formation with a 25k HQ leading another 25k HQ, which seems not very legit to me. But oh well ... Then it went worse.
I closed the window and reopened it, and Mars was only showing the header, and nothing else, although clicking on Mars showed all elements there, but without any formation.
I did not save as it was feeling very buggy. So my question is probably, do people encounter these organizational bugs in land units or not? This was the first time I did some reorg, and bam a bug, so I guess it's not ultra-rare?
-
I believe it's a bug, however it makes a lot of sense as a (probably unintended) feature:
When disassembling conventional cryogenic transport modules, you get research points for the cryogenic transport tech, even before researching Trans-newtonian technology (And can get the full tech! ;D )
Also i checked and it doesn't work for:
- Conventional Active Sensors - Strength 2 (Or their missile fire control variants)
- Conventional Geological Survey Sensors - Strength 0. 2
- Troop Transport Bay - Conventional
- Cargo shuttles (Non-TN)
-
In the System Body Modification window off the System Generation and Display window, player cannot adjust Radiation level. Attempting to change the number to something other than zero does not work. Closing and re-opening the window does not change things. Dust Level can be changed in this manner without issues. It is also not just a visibility issue, as changing radiation to 50,000 and then running time until the next construction cycle shows that nothing happens to the colony on that body: environment tab shows 0 radiation and population growth is not affected.
-
Not a bug, but an odd rounding IMO. :-\
See the cost of the jump drive in the image.
-
You can select a commercial fleet as the target of your new fighter production. It seems a 'dangerous' and totally un-necessary option to me.
-
You can select a commercial fleet as the target of your new fighter production. It seems a 'dangerous' and totally un-necessary option to me.
Commercial carriers are a thing, for hauling replacement fighters to the frontlines. Or do you mean a civilian fleet?
-
Sorry, civilian ...
-
Did anyone ever encounter a bug with species Population Density and Growth/Research rate/factory modifiers ? For some reason when i loaded the save my Humans suddenly had 100.00 both density and growth.
Various tested runs ( both TN and conv civs ) also show that game suddenly adds two zeroes to those parameters.
See attached pic - ignore the grav/temp deviations, i was trying to see if it will change too but it doesnt apparently..
EDIT : seems to happen right from the start with all four parameters - density/growth/research rate/factory production modifiers at the race creation screen - i set them all to 5.00 and in game its suddenly 500.00, i leave them at default and in game they are 100.00.
2.5.1
Absolute clear install, not even so much as a additional picture or medal.
-
See attached pic
I see in the attached pic that your decimal separator looks suspiciously like a comma instead of a dot.
Known issues, the very first one: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=10637.0
-
See attached pic
I see in the attached pic that your decimal separator looks suspiciously like a comma instead of a dot.
Known issues, the very first one: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=10637.0
How the hell did game run fine by now? Weird. Guess ill try to change it and see if its fixed now.
EDIT: well ill be damned it actually was , and i never noticed.. Somehow it changed from dot at some point O.o
Thx.
-
Some CMCs Missing from Populations List on Commanders Window
In my game I have 18 CMCs.
In the Commanders window, with Civilian Administrators selected in the bottom-right pane (and anyone in the list clicked on) and Populations selected in the bottom-center pane, the list of available assignments is missing three CMCs.
I suspect (but am not certain) that the missing three are all on bodies which I had previously placed my own colony on (and later removed).
DB is attached.
The missing CMCs are:
Huang Mining Corporation (ZZZPrime III)
Terblanche Minerals Group (Abacus V - Moon 12)
McNay Resources (Baal-A III)
-
Some CMCs Missing from Populations List on Commanders Window
You have them set to "No Assignment" in the Governor tab.
-
When you jump to a Jump Point and then immediately queue a return jump followed by a move to another location, the following sequence occurs:
A message indicates that jump shock prevents further jumping.
Subsequently, no further actions take place.
This persists even after five days and several game segments. Under the current mechanics, while it is correct that the ship cannot jump back immediately due to jump shock, the subsequent orders are not cancelled.
Logic suggests that either the jump shock should cancel all subsequent orders and halt turn processing, or the game should attempt another jump at the next sub-pulse.
-
When you jump to a Jump Point and then immediately queue a return jump followed by a move to another location, the following sequence occurs:
A message indicates that jump shock prevents further jumping.
Subsequently, no further actions take place.
This persists even after five days and several game segments. Under the current mechanics, while it is correct that the ship cannot jump back immediately due to jump shock, the subsequent orders are not cancelled.
Logic suggests that either the jump shock should cancel all subsequent orders and halt turn processing, or the game should attempt another jump at the next sub-pulse.
This one probably needs a DB. I use this sequence of orders very frequently and after the first interrupt(s) the jump shock ends and the ship transits as normal, so it's probably not easy to reproduce at all.
-
Some CMCs Missing from Populations List on Commanders Window
You have them set to "No Assignment" in the Governor tab.
Oy. Don't know how I overlooked that.
Many thanks!
-
A quirk or a bug?
I somehow managed to load then lose 0.2 auto-mines somewhere, perhaps I dumped them in the wrong place.
So Earth now has 8.8 auto-mines.
I tell myself, ok no worries, I'll adjust my ongoing order and add +0.2 to "complete back" my current amount.
I did nothing, even when the order was finished. I ended up with 8.8 AM on Earth.
Then I issued a new order, to specifically order 0.2 AM only.
Guess what, no change, the order was finished and I was still with 8.8 AM on Earth.
-
A quirk or a bug?
I somehow managed to load then lose 0.2 auto-mines somewhere, perhaps I dumped them in the wrong place.
So Earth now has 8.8 auto-mines.
I tell myself, ok no worries, I'll adjust my ongoing order and add +0.2 to "complete back" my current amount.
I did nothing, even when the order was finished. I ended up with 8.8 AM on Earth.
Then I issued a new order, to specifically order 0.2 AM only.
Guess what, no change, the order was finished and I was still with 8.8 AM on Earth.
Check your civ ships and see if the final 0.2 is actually on the way.
I have noticed that sometimes the order "finishes" according to the order list, even though some freighters are still en route.
-
I can check, but it was more than one year ago and the longest travel time is 4 months. And still, it would not explain the 'freeze' on current AM count when producing an extra 0.2
-
I can check, but it was more than one year ago and the longest travel time is 4 months. And still, it would not explain the 'freeze' on current AM count when producing an extra 0.2
Attach your DB if you like. I'll send my SQL Raiders to find the missing 0.2 automines.
-
SQL Raiders
Instead of railguns and slave ships, they just use queries to place your population in their home system while you shake your fist impotently. Truly Steve's most diabolical creation yet.
-
Aurora 2.5.1 "vanilla" or not (I usually play with Deep Blue mod), conventional start
Easily reproducible:
- Economics window
- Civilian/Flags tab
- Select the central title row "Installation Type Demanded - Amount - Assigned"
- Press "Edit Demand" button[/li][/list]
a message will be generated: "2.5.1 Function #608: Object reference not set to an instance of an object"
same behaviour if it is selected the empty row below title row
click on OK button: message close and nothing seem wrong but...
.... but after few in game-day I recieved 10 (!) Research Lab without apparently reason (se Event log in attach)
I dont' know if this two things are linked or not, I would tend not to believe it, but it is a quite strange coincidence...
And for me those 10 Reserch Lab are a real mistery...
-J-
-
When toggling the Lifepods checkbox on in the Naval Organization view, an error pops up and must be cleared in triplicate. I suspect it is attached to a couple of maybe-broken 0-crew lifepods in the same system as the fleet is trying to view (the two lifepods do not show up on the list of contacts, left-hand column, despite Lifepods being checked on). I generated these two lifepods unintentionally when I deleted a test (SM) fleet that contained one carrier and two hangared parasites; while the carrier was deleted, both parasites left a lifepod and a wreck instead of being properly removed.
Edit: the error no longer generates after those two lifepods expired. My money's still on something wrong with those two in particular.
Info dump:
- "2.5.1 Function #773: Object reference not set to an instance of an object."
- Generates from the Naval Organization window in triplicate when checking Lifepods on
- Possibly connected to a pair of empty life pods; see above description and below attached screenshot
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 83 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2.5.1
-
Just had a Stablization Ship fly through to a system with a different flag controlled race with the exclude alian controlled flag ticked on the ship.
This had happned before in this game, but I thought I had made a mistake. Seems this bug is still turning up somehow.
Doesn't help they let Swarm out of the system.
-
Just had a Stablization Ship fly through to a system with a different flag controlled race with the exclude alian controlled flag ticked on the ship.
This had happned before in this game, but I thought I had made a mistake. Seems this bug is still turning up somehow.
Doesn't help they let Swarm out of the system.
The "Exclude Alien Controlled" toggle only affects autoroute orders, it will not influence standing orders nor will it prevent the player from issuing an order which would send the ship into alien-controlled systems.
-
I can check, but it was more than one year ago and the longest travel time is 4 months. And still, it would not explain the 'freeze' on current AM count when producing an extra 0.2
Attach your DB if you like. I'll send my SQL Raiders to find the missing 0.2 automines.
Thanks, but it's okay. No fuss, I moved past this point. I edited the database to change the 8.8 facilities on Earth to 9, and everything is happily humming along now.
-
Not quite do because the 0.2 automines are still somewhere, possibly taking up cargo space somewhere forever! Think of the lost efficiy! 😂
Edit:
Damn, posting from a phone sucks. I'll leave these horrible typos as my legacy.
-
I've hit three total error functions recently (though not at the same time) while running time with no specific window or identifiable context:
2.5.1 Function #2788: Object reference not set to an instance of an object.
2.5.1 Function #1531: Object reference not set to an instance of an object. (This occurred two different times)
#1531 may have something to do with an NPR generating a free colony with the default free 100 population and 1 naval command after being wiped out. I've been playing whack-a-mole with this NPR trying to wipe it out completely and have been generating quite a few free naval commands as a result; the logic there may warrant a look for more than just the function error. For #2788 I truly have no ideas unfortunately.
Standard info dump:
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 85 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2.5.1
Editing in: I've now received #1531 nine more times with even less context than the first two times. I'm still getting them after deleting my 'blocker' colonies that seemed to prevent the NPR from generating a free starting pop of 100 on the same body. The NPR also still has no colonies in the DB so perhaps the wiped-out NPR is not relevant after all.
Editing in a second time: I've hit a different error after rebooting Aurora; #1531 seems to have quieted with the reboot, but this one is new. It came after a tremendous amount of 5-second death but provided me with no context for its existence outside of the error text itself:
2.5.1 Function #3656: The given key was not present in the dictionary.
-
A civilian cargo vessel has taken orders to carry a genetic modification centre but is unable to do so because its cargo hold is already full. It is now generating auto-turn-pausing interrupts because it cannot load. Presumably the underlying logic should not have allowed this so I'll file it as a bug. SM mode did not allow me to remove its orders nor empty its cargo so I have had to delete the vessel entirely instead.
Standard info dump:
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- US decimal and time formats (I have not reconfigured for UK standards)
- Approximately 85 years into the campaign
- Campaign started and running on v2.5.1 (no mods or DB edits ever)
-
I ordered the construction of a freighter space station, using construction factories, at a colony that did not have a target fleet selected in the Space Stations list.
(This was the first time I had constructed any ship at this colony.)
When completed, the space station was placed into a civilian shipping fleet in orbit of the planet.
I had my own fleet in orbit of the planet at the time.
(I suspect the civilian fleet was chosen by default because its creation predates the creation of my own fleet.)
-
Hi All,
I've encountered a weird issue with the game which started this morning
When opening Aurora I'm getting error pop-ups, the first one is '2. 5. 1 Function #1170: Object cannot be cast from DBNull to other types'. This is then followed by hundreds of '2. 5. 1 Function #3040: Object reference not set to an instance of an object.
I can click through the pop-ups and eventually the game will load, but I've saved and exited and tried again and the errors simply start again.
I have no idea what the cause might be as I haven't done anything unusual in my playthrough and don't really know what it might be. I'm wondering whether it's an NPR issue?
Any advice would be really appreciated as my current game has been working brilliantly until now and I've been really enjoying it so I'm desperate to save it!
-
Hi All,
I've encountered a weird issue with the game which started this morning
When opening Aurora I'm getting error pop-ups, the first one is '2. 5. 1 Function #1170: Object cannot be cast from DBNull to other types'. This is then followed by hundreds of '2. 5. 1 Function #3040: Object reference not set to an instance of an object.
I can click through the pop-ups and eventually the game will load, but I've saved and exited and tried again and the errors simply start again.
I have no idea what the cause might be as I haven't done anything unusual in my playthrough and don't really know what it might be. I'm wondering whether it's an NPR issue?
Any advice would be really appreciated as my current game has been working brilliantly until now and I've been really enjoying it so I'm desperate to save it!
#1170 is the function that loads system bodies. If that fails, the game won't work. If you know how to look at the database file, you can check for a null value in FCT_SystemBody.
Are you definitely on v2.5.1, as I recall something on these lines in an earlier version?
-
Hi Steve,
Thank you so much for this, the game is now working perfectly!
I'm definitely running v2. 5. 1, it's the first time this has happened and I'm about 85 years into the game roughly.
Thanks again!
-
I've mentioned this before but I fear it has been lost in the noise.
If you start with Minerva in Sol and the game creates a gas giant with trojans, those trojans are listed in the Fleet Movement Orders view alongside inner system asteroids, which is a little annoying as it clutters the view when playing a super-early conventional start. They should, IMHO, come at the very end of the asteroids, seeing as they are the farthest away.
-
I don't know if it's a bug, it's certainly a curious thing: one of my GEVs was attacked by an unknown unit, the first broadside was absorbed and damage control repairs the faults... but MSPs grow to 147%?!
Aurora 2.5.1, vanilla, W10, conventional start, real stars
-
but MSPs grow to 147%?!
I see 3x Engineering Spaces on the destroyed components list - it is possible that the MSP storage was destroyed without destroying the MSP itself, leaving the ship well above available capacity. I'm not certain that's what happening as I seem to recall destroyed fuel tanks also destroying their contained fuel but maybe engineering spaces are different for some reason.
-
Minor issue: ramming attacks seem to occur once every sub-pulse, i.e. five per five-second increment, rather than once every five seconds. If you turn off one second sub-pulses they go back to attacking once per increment.
(I don't think I've ever actually seen a ramming attack succeed, even attacking five times per increment, so this doesn't really matter much, but they probably should be consistent.)
-
In v2.5.1, the smallest increment of jump drive tonnage, 10t, rounds to the nearest hull size in increments of 50t when checking if it can jump ships. A jump drive rated for 370t can only jump 350t, while a jump drive rated for 380t can jump a full 400t.
-
I started getting error "2.5.1 Function #1500: constraint failed UNIQUE constraint failed: FCT_ShipDesignComponents.SDComponentID" every time I save. Doesn't seem to harm anything, although I haven't since tried closing the game and loading the save, as I'm afraid it might not actually be saving or might be corrupting the save.
-
I started getting error "2.5.1 Function #1500: constraint failed UNIQUE constraint failed: FCT_ShipDesignComponents.SDComponentID" every time I save. Doesn't seem to harm anything, although I haven't since tried closing the game and loading the save, as I'm afraid it might not actually be saving or might be corrupting the save.
That sounds like you somehow have two components with the same ID, which shouldn't happen. Unfortunately, if that happens it prevents that table being saved at all. If you have only saved once or twice, you can go back to the one of the auto-backup saves.
-
I started getting error "2.5.1 Function #1500: constraint failed UNIQUE constraint failed: FCT_ShipDesignComponents.SDComponentID" every time I save. Doesn't seem to harm anything, although I haven't since tried closing the game and loading the save, as I'm afraid it might not actually be saving or might be corrupting the save.
That sounds like you somehow have two components with the same ID, which shouldn't happen. Unfortunately, if that happens it prevents that table being saved at all. If you have only saved once or twice, you can go back to the one of the auto-backup saves.
Unfortunately I've saved at least two dozen times since then across several in-game years of gameplay. Is there anything I can do to save (literally and figuratively) the game? I'm reasonably comfortable with DB editing from past experience updating the DB to implement "pre-release" changes of prior changelogs.
I hadn't edited this DB at all, so I'm not sure how I wound up with this error. Could it be caused by creating and deleting an identical component and deleting it, either before or after researching? I think I may have done that with a Particle Beam 6 component. Would it be possible to guess which units/ships have the component, delete all of those units, and save again, to see if that solves the problem? Or is it likely unfixable because the issue is not within the DB, it's within the working memory of the program, and being prevented from correctly saving in the DB?
Edit: I copied my entire game folder and ran the exe from there, then compared the ship list and found one ship that had a different mass. That ship had a shield component in research in my version of the game throwing the bug, and it was missing in the saved DB. It looked like everything else was fine (all other components I'd designed recently were there). I saved the DB, and it worked fine, no bug. Based on that, I felt safe closing and restarting my game from my normal folder, and upon re-launch, that shield component was missing from the in-progress research and from the ship that was using it as a prototype, but otherwise everything was fine and it saved with no bug. Problem solved!
-
Not sure if it might be a bug, probably no, I am in a 80 years campaign, I went at was with a NPR and now I get 5x 5 second increments and 1x normal increment then again 5x 5 second increment and 1x normal and so on, endless... is there something I can do or check?
EDIT: I just discovered that the increments up to 20 minutes work well, from 1h to 5 days is just 5s.
EDIT2: The issue seems solved now, after I destroyed an enemy ship which was stationing on a jump point the problem vanished, I suspect the ship was trying maybe to use the jump point (which did not have a gate), thus causing the issue?
Steve? I can upload my save if you want check for future potential issues.
-
Not sure if it might be a bug, probably no, I am in a 80 years campaign, I went at was with a NPR and now I get 5x 5 second increments and 1x normal increment then again 5x 5 second increment and 1x normal and so on, endless... is there something I can do or check?
I had an almost identical issue that I was able to track down using FCT_GameLog. In my case it also turned out to be a single ship; that ship was turning its active sensors on and off every 15-30 minutes for months on end while in range of an enemy's deep space tracking stations, breaking automated turns on every sub-pulse.
Very annoying but unfortunately maybe not strictly a bug if we assume that your issue is the same as mine. They really need to just leave their active sensors on if they want constant sensor data.
-
I started getting error "2.5.1 Function #1500: constraint failed UNIQUE constraint failed: FCT_ShipDesignComponents.SDComponentID" every time I save. Doesn't seem to harm anything, although I haven't since tried closing the game and loading the save, as I'm afraid it might not actually be saving or might be corrupting the save.
That sounds like you somehow have two components with the same ID, which shouldn't happen. Unfortunately, if that happens it prevents that table being saved at all. If you have only saved once or twice, you can go back to the one of the auto-backup saves.
Unfortunately I've saved at least two dozen times since then across several in-game years of gameplay. Is there anything I can do to save (literally and figuratively) the game? I'm reasonably comfortable with DB editing from past experience updating the DB to implement "pre-release" changes of prior changelogs.
I hadn't edited this DB at all, so I'm not sure how I wound up with this error. Could it be caused by creating and deleting an identical component and deleting it, either before or after researching? I think I may have done that with a Particle Beam 6 component. Would it be possible to guess which units/ships have the component, delete all of those units, and save again, to see if that solves the problem? Or is it likely unfixable because the issue is not within the DB, it's within the working memory of the program, and being prevented from correctly saving in the DB?
Edit: I copied my entire game folder and ran the exe from there, then compared the ship list and found one ship that had a different mass. That ship had a shield component in research in my version of the game throwing the bug, and it was missing in the saved DB. It looked like everything else was fine (all other components I'd designed recently were there). I saved the DB, and it worked fine, no bug. Based on that, I felt safe closing and restarting my game from my normal folder, and upon re-launch, that shield component was missing from the in-progress research and from the ship that was using it as a prototype, but otherwise everything was fine and it saved with no bug. Problem solved!
Well done on fixing it.
-
The "History" tab on the Fleet display in the Naval Organization window automatically scrolls to the bottom of the window when selected. Which, since the most recent entries are at the top of the list, is probably not what was intended.
-
What is Function #2424? It occurs when attempting to SM add new commanders (or when using the SM replace all function), but only to certain player races.
-
What is Function #2424? It occurs when attempting to SM add new commanders (or when using the SM replace all function), but only to certain player races.
Function #2424 is CreateNewCommander. What is the error text?
-
What is Function #2424? It occurs when attempting to SM add new commanders (or when using the SM replace all function), but only to certain player races.
Function #2424 is CreateNewCommander. What is the error text?
The error text is "Object reference not set to an instance of an object."
Ah, an update: this was one of those bugs that can be fixed by simply allowing a single construction increment to pass. I guess that teaches me to try and do all of the scenario prep before the first increment.
-
I just realized that in this post all types of mines have a mineral cost of 25% Duranium & 75% Corundium listed but ingame it seems to be 100% Corundium. Probably not a bug since the post is 5 years old but wanted to point it out just in case as I couldn't find any documented change post of the mineral costs after it ::)
https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg116382#msg116382
-
I just realized that in this post all types of mines have a mineral cost of 25% Duranium & 75% Corundium listed but ingame it seems to be 100% Corundium. Probably not a bug since the post is 5 years old but wanted to point it out just in case as I couldn't find any documented change post of the mineral costs after it ::)
https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg116382#msg116382
Yes, that post is out of date.
The great radioactiveslushee (http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?action=profile;u=23766) posted an updated version recently (http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13532.msg169446#msg169446).
-
I have a ship under tow that is still consuming fuel while being towed. I believe this is not WAI as I saw it in a change list, but I can't be sure as I haven't been able to find it searching the forums. The ship is definitely under tow; I checked the "Ship Design Display" and for Engines it says 0%, and when I have the tug release it, it changes back to 100%.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
With SM mode on, clicking "No Grav Survey" in the System Generation View does not seem to do anything. Any JPs already, whether explored or unexplored, remain. If the button is meant to just re-enable all Survey Locations, then a tooltip over the button should explain this and perhaps it would be possible to make a new button to hide JP knowledge, so that when creating specific system-connections there would no longer be need to use a disposable Player Race to setup the game.
-
Not sure if this is a bug or a QoL suggestion, but posting here since it seems to not fit the intended pattern: When designing sensors/fire controls, the menu defaults to using 0 Electronic Hardening instead of defaulting to the maximum available level of Electronic Hardening tech, the way every other tech behaves.
-
I have a ship with 3069 crew that just picked up 127 survivors from a life pod, and the ship is now reporting that it has "insufficient crew accommodations for the personnel on board (including any survivors not in cryo). This will increase the rate at which times passes for deployment purposes by 1.01x), but I have 1000 cryo berths and those 127 survivors are the only thing the ship is transporting.
Even if it was ignoring the cryo berths that math doesn't work, because it would then be (3069+127)/3069=1.04%. Something funny's going on.
-
Not sure if this is a bug or a QoL suggestion, but posting here since it seems to not fit the intended pattern: When designing sensors/fire controls, the menu defaults to using 0 Electronic Hardening instead of defaulting to the maximum available level of Electronic Hardening tech, the way every other tech behaves.
Electronic hardening is a specialized capability that will most likely just make your equipment more expensive for no benefit in common use; there's no point in using it unless your enemy is using HPMs and you are closing to beam range. Like thermal reduction for engines or squadron size & distance for jump drives, you need to decide if the specialized capability is needed.
-
I have a ship with 3069 crew that just picked up 127 survivors from a life pod, and the ship is now reporting that it has "insufficient crew accommodations for the personnel on board (including any survivors not in cryo). This will increase the rate at which times passes for deployment purposes by 1.01x), but I have 1000 cryo berths and those 127 survivors are the only thing the ship is transporting.
Even if it was ignoring the cryo berths that math doesn't work, because it would then be (3069+127)/3069=1.04%. Something funny's going on.
I don't imagine your ship has almost 100 spare berths ( which WOULD bring the overload rate to 1.01 ish ) but it might !
It is my recollection that there has been a reported "cryo berth pick up bug", but I can't point to a bug report, nor can I point to a bug FIX report.
-
I have a shipyard that can build my Ruin-1 class dreadnought. I upgraded sensors and such and called that a Ruin-1a. I was able to refit my Ruin-1 dreadnoughts to Ruin-1a, but I cannot build new Ruin-1a battleships at that shipyard, despite the priorities/misc tab in the Class Design window showing a Yes in the SY column both for the From and the To groups. It is only 4% or 6% of original/refit costs depending on which direction you go (Ruin-1 to Ruin 1a or vice versa) so I should definitely be able to build both in the same shipyard, but it's not an option.
It is, however, an option to build a Supply Ship/Tanker design I titled Succor which is a commercial ship of very different design and proportions, so I'm pretty confident this is a bug.
-
I have a shipyard that can build my Ruin-1 class dreadnought. I upgraded sensors and such and called that a Ruin-1a. I was able to refit my Ruin-1 dreadnoughts to Ruin-1a, but I cannot build new Ruin-1a battleships at that shipyard, despite the priorities/misc tab in the Class Design window showing a Yes in the SY column both for the From and the To groups. It is only 4% or 6% of original/refit costs depending on which direction you go (Ruin-1 to Ruin 1a or vice versa) so I should definitely be able to build both in the same shipyard, but it's not an option.
It is, however, an option to build a Supply Ship/Tanker design I titled Succor which is a commercial ship of very different design and proportions, so I'm pretty confident this is a bug.
Can you show the ship specs involved? This sounds weird, but if it's a bug it seems like something that would show up very commonly since the refit/interbuild mechanics are used very often by most players.
-
Responding to nuclear's request for details.
Ruin-1 class Dreadnought 79,967 tons 3,092 Crew 20,911.6 BP TCS 1,599 TH 15,000 EM 42,660
9378 km/s Armour 10-165 Shields 1422-632 HTK 496 Sensors 22/16/0/0 DCR 97-12 PPV 392
Maint Life 1.67 Years MSP 15,181 AFR 1088% IFR 15.1% 1YR 6,502 5YR 97,536 Max Repair 1,875 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 250 tons Troop Capacity 1,000 tons
Rear Admiral (Lower Half) Control Rating 5 BRG AUX ENG CIC FLG
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Flight Crew Berths 5 Morale Check Required
Ion Drive EP3750.00 (4) Power 15000 Fuel Use 246.48% Signature 3750 Explosion 30%
Fuel Capacity 7,000,000 Litres Range 6.4 billion km (7 days at full power)
Theta S158 / R632 Shields (9) Recharge Time 632 seconds (2.3 per second)
Particle Lance-12-40s (10) Range 240,000km TS: 9,378 km/s Power 37-5 ROF 40
Particle Beam-6-15s (20) Range 240,000km TS: 9,378 km/s Power 15-5 ROF 15
12cm C2 Near Ultraviolet Laser (8) Range 120,000km TS: 9,378 km/s Power 4-2 RM 30,000 km ROF 10
10cm Railgun V20/C3 (40x4) Range 20,000km TS: 9,378 km/s Power 3-3 RM 20,000 km ROF 5
BFC R256-TS8800 (2) Max Range: 256,000 km TS: 8,800 km/s ECCM-2 96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61
BFC R128-TS9600 (4) Max Range: 128,000 km TS: 9,600 km/s ECCM-2 92 84 77 69 61 53 45 38 30 22
Stellarator Fusion Reactor R402-PB20 (1) Total Power Output 402.3 Exp 10%
MD1284k-250t (1) GPS 80 Range 14.3m km MCR 1.3m km Resolution 1
EM2-16 (1) Sensitivity 16 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 31.6m km
TH2-22 (1) Sensitivity 22 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 37.1m km
Electronic Warfare Jammers: Fire Control 2 Missile 3
Strike Group / Ground Forces
2x S-2 Vanguard Scout Fighter Speed: 7540 km/s Size: 1.99
4x Marine Platoon
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a Warship for auto-assignment purposes
Ruin-1a class Dreadnought 79,686 tons 3,069 Crew 21,302.3 BP TCS 1,594 TH 15,000 EM 42,660
9411 km/s Armour 10-164 Shields 1422-632 HTK 492 Sensors 22/16/0/0 DCR 97-12 PPV 376
Maint Life 1.68 Years MSP 15,352 AFR 1081% IFR 15.0% 1YR 6,490 5YR 97,343 Max Repair 1,875 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 250 tons Troop Capacity 1,000 tons Boarding Capable Cryogenic Berths 1,000
Rear Admiral (Lower Half) Control Rating 5 BRG AUX ENG CIC FLG
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Flight Crew Berths 5 Morale Check Required
Ion Drive EP3750.00 (4) Power 15000 Fuel Use 246.48% Signature 3750 Explosion 30%
Fuel Capacity 7,000,000 Litres Range 6.4 billion km (7 days at full power)
Theta S158 / R632 Shields (9) Recharge Time 632 seconds (2.3 per second)
Particle Lance-12-40s (10) Range 240,000km TS: 9,411 km/s Power 37-5 ROF 40
Particle Beam-6-15s (20) Range 240,000km TS: 9,411 km/s Power 15-5 ROF 15
12cm C2 Near Ultraviolet Laser (4) Range 120,000km TS: 9,411 km/s Power 4-2 RM 30,000 km ROF 10
10cm Railgun V20/C3 (40x4) Range 20,000km TS: 9,411 km/s Power 3-3 RM 20,000 km ROF 5
BFC R64-TS10000 (70%) (4) Max Range: 64,000 km TS: 10,000 km/s ECCM-2 84 69 53 38 22 6 0 0 0 0
BFC R320-TS9600 (2) Max Range: 320,000 km TS: 9,600 km/s ECCM-2 97 94 91 88 84 81 78 75 72 69
BFC R160-TS9600 (4) Max Range: 160,000 km TS: 9,600 km/s ECCM-2 94 88 81 75 69 62 56 50 44 38
Stellarator Fusion Reactor R402-PB20 (1) Total Power Output 402.3 Exp 10%
MD-1725k-250t (1) GPS 105 Range 19.2m km MCR 1.7m km Resolution 1
EM2-16 (1) Sensitivity 16 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 31.6m km
TH2-22 (1) Sensitivity 22 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 37.1m km
Electronic Warfare Jammers: Fire Control 3 Missile 3
Strike Group / Ground Forces
2x S-2 Vanguard Scout Fighter Speed: 7540 km/s Size: 1.99
1x Marine Boarding Platoon
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a Warship for auto-assignment purposes
TK-1 Succor class Tanker 47,327 tons 284 Crew 1,314.3 BP TCS 947 TH 3,125 EM 0
3301 km/s Armour 2-116 Shields 0-0 HTK 72 Sensors 11/8/0/0 DCR 1-0 PPV 0
MSP 17 Max Repair 156.3 MSP
Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months
Commercial Ion Drive EP625.00 (5) Power 3125 Fuel Use 3.35% Signature 625 Explosion 5%
Fuel Capacity 20,000,000 Litres Range 2,267.5 billion km (7950 days at full power)
Refuelling Capability: 100,000 litres per hour Complete Refuel 200 hours
TH1.0-11.0 (1) Sensitivity 11 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 26.2m km
EM1.0-8.0 (1) Sensitivity 8 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 22.4m km
This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a None for auto-assignment purposes
(https://i.imgur.com/OuwpL4m.jpeg)
(https://i.imgur.com/nOA2PeK.jpeg)
(https://i.imgur.com/uXPeWBc.jpeg)
-
Definitely a bug, as the tanker is half the size of the dreadnought and by rule should not be possible to refit or build in the same yard, regardless of components.
Try saving and reloading the game if you haven't already, it may be some weird indexing thing in the game state which can be cleared by restarting. If that works, post here so Steve knows it's not a DB bug, if it doesn't work (or you've already tried) then probably Steve will need the DB as this would be difficult to reproduce.
-
Definitely a bug, as the tanker is half the size of the dreadnought and by rule should not be possible to refit or build in the same yard, regardless of components.
Try saving and reloading the game if you haven't already, it may be some weird indexing thing in the game state which can be cleared by restarting. If that works, post here so Steve knows it's not a DB bug, if it doesn't work (or you've already tried) then probably Steve will need the DB as this would be difficult to reproduce.
I just tried, and saving and reloading did not clear the issue. I've posted my DB here in case that helps.
-
I just tried, and saving and reloading did not clear the issue. I've posted my DB here in case that helps.
You listed info for Succor 1 while the dropdown is for Succor 2, which is 65k tons.
The reason you can't build the other Ruin class vessels is that you've marked them obsolete, the tooled class will always be in the dropdown even when obsolete (is this intentional?) but other obsolete classes won't show up.
-
I just tried, and saving and reloading did not clear the issue. I've posted my DB here in case that helps.
You listed info for Succor 1 while the dropdown is for Succor 2, which is 65k tons.
The reason you can't build the other Ruin class vessels is that you've marked them obsolete, the tooled class will always be in the dropdown even when obsolete (is this intentional?) but other obsolete classes won't show up.
You're right, I had the Ruin-1a and Ruin-1b marked as obsolete and that's why they didn't show up in the shipyard dropdown. Thank you!
You're right about Succor 2, it is a larger ship than Succor 1. I'm still very surprised that I can build that at the Naval shipyard tooled for Ruin-1. It's a ship 15ktons smaller, with almost no overlap in components (1 layer of armor vs ~10, no shields vs 9, no weapons, commercial vs military engines, etc etc). Should it really be buildable at that shipyard?
-
You're right about Succor 2, it is a larger ship than Succor 1. I'm still very surprised that I can build that at the Naval shipyard tooled for Ruin-1. It's a ship 15ktons smaller, with almost no overlap in components (1 layer of armor vs ~10, no shields vs 9, no weapons, commercial vs military engines, etc etc). Should it really be buildable at that shipyard?
Refit/interbuild is determined by the ratio of new component costs to the total build cost of the tooled-for class. You don't show the Succor 2, but the Ruin 1 dreadnought costs over 20k BP while the Succor 1 costs 1,300 BP, so I would guess the Succor 2 at 65k tons probably costs less than 2,000 BP. Since the Succor 2 costs around 10% what the Ruin 1 costs, it can be interbuilt pretty trivially despite the two ships being nothing alike.
This is a bit of a gap in the realism of the refit mechanics, but correcting it would probably require either (a) limiting refit/interbuild to not cross military/commercial designations, which is more than a bit artificial, or (b) reworking the mechanic entirely to use, e.g., a per-component-type replacement scheme, which would be really cool but also would take a lot of work for Steve for really no gain in terms of gameplay.
-
EDIT: Moved to typo thread. (Sorry, didn't realize that existed.)
-
A really minor one. When I assigned a ship to have a standing order to return to its entry jump point, but it's never left the system it started in, that shows up in the event log as an "Orders Assigned" event.
> Humans Orders Assigned Sol GSC-03 Schiehallion 003 has a standing order to return to its entry jump point. However, the entry jump point is not known
> Humans Orders Not Possible Sol GSC-03 Schiehallion 003 is unable to carry out its primary standing order (Survey Next Three System Locations) or its secondary standing order (Move to Entry Jump Point)
The Orders Not Possible event means you can figure it out, but that struck me as weird.
Usually this happens because you jumped the ship into the system as part of one fleet, then reassigned it to another fleet (e.g., by splitting it off into its own single-ship fleet). The Return to Entry Jump Point order only works for fleets, not individual ships.
-
Rescued crew from your own ships go into cryo seats, but "rescued" enemy crew do not (but should).
-
A really minor one. When I assigned a ship to have a standing order to return to its entry jump point, but it's never left the system it started in, that shows up in the event log as an "Orders Assigned" event.
> Humans Orders Assigned Sol GSC-03 Schiehallion 003 has a standing order to return to its entry jump point. However, the entry jump point is not known
> Humans Orders Not Possible Sol GSC-03 Schiehallion 003 is unable to carry out its primary standing order (Survey Next Three System Locations) or its secondary standing order (Move to Entry Jump Point)
The Orders Not Possible event means you can figure it out, but that struck me as weird.
Usually this happens because you jumped the ship into the system as part of one fleet, then reassigned it to another fleet (e.g., by splitting it off into its own single-ship fleet). The Return to Entry Jump Point order only works for fleets, not individual ships.
In this case, it was still in the system it was built in, and had never left. So there was no entry jump point because it had never jumped. But yeah, makes sense that your scenario would have the same effect.
The complaint here was that "Orders Assigned" is a really strange category for the situation where orders could not be assigned. I think it ought to be recategorized.
-
The complaint here was that "Orders Assigned" is a really strange category for the situation where orders could not be assigned. I think it ought to be recategorized.
Typo Thread (https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=10638.0) is probably the best place for this
-
When approaching an enemy home world, the ships at the planet blink into and out of sensor contact causing interrupts every 10 seconds. I think they're turning their active sensors on and off, and that's what's making me lose and reacquire contact? It's logical behavior to keep your active sensor off most of the time and just ping it occasionally to check, but it's causing contestant interrupts as I try to close the distance because of how many ships they have and how often they're doing it (if that is actually what they're doing).
I finally had to use SM to remove all thermal and EM sensors from my fleet, and that let me advance time enough to get close enough, then I put the sensors back in.
-
While using the Create Habitable button in the System window repeatedly to generate a good starting system for a race, I obtain the popup: "Error: Luminosity Key Count is 11" on occasion. This doesn't seem to break anything.
-
It seems that the 25% Thermal Reduction tech for engines is actually 24%.
I get the following thermal signatures when designing an inertial confinement fusion drive with 125% engine modifier:
Thermal reduction/Thermal signature(expected)
100%/1000(1000)
75%/750(750)
50%/500(500)
35%/350(350)
25%/240(250)
16%/160(160)
I discovered it when my Carrier(20000EP) had 4800 instead of the expected 5000 thermal signature.
Modify message
SJW: Fixed for v2.6. It's the text that is wrong - the tech should be 24%
-
Naval Organization -> Logistics Report
Exclude FACs checkmark doesn't do anything.
FACs are always included in the list.
Naval Organization -> Detailed Fuel Report
Exclude FACs checkmark doesn't do anything.
FACs are never included in the list.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
Distance from A (Scorpii) to B (Caledonia) is different than from B to A on Galactic Map.
-
Distance from A (Scorpii) to B (Caledonia) is different than from B to A on Galactic Map.
Is there more than one route between them?
-
Rescued crew from your own ships go into cryo seats, but "rescued" enemy crew do not (but should).
I couldn't find this problem, but I did discover that cryo was ignored for survivors after total life support failure, so it might have manifested as above depending on the situation.
-
Distance from A (Scorpii) to B (Caledonia) is different than from B to A on Galactic Map.
Is there more than one route between them?
Yeah.
Here's a bigger map:
-
Distance from A (Scorpii) to B (Caledonia) is different than from B to A on Galactic Map.
Is there more than one route between them?
Yeah.
Here's a bigger map:
Thanks. Its not a bug. The pathfinding algorithm ends when it finds the fewest number of transits. It is using different 5-transit routes between the two systems. if you want to prioritise one route, you can restrict a jump point and the distance check won't use it.
-
...The pathfinding algorithm ends when it finds the fewest number of transits....
What are the chances that could be changed to find the shortest route by actual distance rather than number of hops?
-
...The pathfinding algorithm ends when it finds the fewest number of transits....
What are the chances that could be changed to find the shortest route by actual distance rather than number of hops?
It's possible, but it's a lot of work. The current system is good enough in 95% of cases and is easily worked around when it doesn't, so there isn't the pressure to build a perfect system - especially with the chance of introducing new bugs. Currently, I just generate an expanding search, record each system the first time I reach it and then eliminate that system from the search. To check every route, I need to find the distance to each system by any route possible, which is an exponential task, as I can't eliminate any systems from the search as I progress.
EDIT - I managed to find a way to do it :)
Instead of eliminating each system after use, I ignore it (and any systems beyond it) when it is found for the second (or third) time, unless the distance is shorter than any previous time I found it, in which case it is added back into the expanding search. That allows for the speed benefit of eliminating systems, but allows for the option to find them again by a shorter route with more transits. This is only for checking distance, not auto-route. That is a larger problem.
-
...Instead of eliminating each system after use, I ignore it (and any systems beyond it) when it is found for the second (or third) time, unless the distance is shorter than any previous time I found it, in which case it is added back into the expanding search. That allows for the speed benefit of eliminating systems, but allows for the option to find them again by a shorter route with more transits. This is only for checking distance, not auto-route. That is a larger problem.
What if you considered the Jump Points to be the nodes, rather than the systems?
Distance between opposite ends of a jump point is 0.
Seems like you could then do a breadth-first search, and force the path to alternate intrasystem movement with JP transits. That way you eliminate all but straight paths between transiting jump points, and you eliminate the silly case of transiting a JP and immediately transiting back.
For pathfinding, the start and end nodes are the current and target destinations.
For system distance checking, the start and end nodes are the centers of the start and end systems.
-
That's a classic programming challenge, really.
I think considering jump and Lagrange points nodes in the search graph is a good idea. Breadth first, based on distance from your starting point.
The problem you may end up with is situations where you find previously visited nodes but because you search breath first based on distance it will always be either a node at the end of the graph, in which case you overwrite the distance value, or closer to your starting point in which case you eliminate the current path as an option instead.
You will also want to cache routes between jump points to make this thing fast.
-
I already consider the jump points. Each system is treated as a set of jump point nodes with zero distance to their counterparts in the next system and a matrix of distances between each other, plus each JP has a distance to the centre for the final leg. My explanation above was the simplified version. When I say ignore, or eliminate a system, I mean all the JP nodes in that system.
-
Pure graph theory wise though, systems aren't really relevant in the sense that they're arbitrary groupings of nodes.
It's quite possible for jump points to be arranged in such a way that two different routes to the same destination don't share jump points while still crossing the same system.
Of course I don't know the exact algorithm, and its been a while since I employed pathfinding algorithms in code. But it's fun stuff to consider. so apologies if I keep stating the obvious ;)
-
It's quite possible for jump points to be arranged in such a way that two different routes to the same destination don't share jump points while still crossing the same system.
It's even possible for the shortest path from system A to system B to involve transiting across system C more than once.
A-C-D-E-C-B, for example, if there are very short routes in system C from JP A to D and from JP E to B, and also the route is very short in system D from JP C to E and in system E from D to C, while the alternative path in C from JP A to B is longer than all of those combined.
-
Yes, both of the above cases are already handled.
-
Summary: Turret design parameters not matching with stated changes from VB6 --> C#. CIWS calculations not in line with other components.
The function number: N/A
The complete error text: N/A
The window affected: Component Design
What you were doing at the time: Designing components to reverse engineer cost and crew calculations
Conventional or TN start :TN
Random or Real Stars: Real
Is your decimal separator a comma, No.
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off: Easy
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: Game Start.
In building a spreadsheet to run calculations for PD designs to take into account the PD changes, I encountered a few things that don't seem to be working as intended.
In the C# 1.0 changes, you mentioned that crew reduction was doubled for turret designs compared to VB6:
A minor update. The benefits of multiple energy weapons in turrets have been doubled. A twin turret now has a 20% reduction in crew vs two solo weapons and has a 10% reduction in gear size. A quad turret has a 40% reduction in crew vs four solo weapons and has a 20% reduction in gear size.
Gear reduction is working as stated, but crew reduction is still at VB6 levels.
How to reproduce:
a 10cm single turret laser has a crew of 9 (unchanged from a base weapon). Expectation then is that a twin turret has a crew of 14.4 (so 14 or 15 depending on rounding rules), but design screen is giving me a value of 16, which is ~10%
A triple turret is expected to be 30% through implication, giving us a 30% reduction on 3x9, or 18.9. The design screen is telling me 23, which is ~15% reduction.
A quad turret is expected to therefore have a crew 40% smaller than 4x9, so 21.6. The design screen is giving me 29, which is ~20% reduction.
CIWS Design
Not sure whether this is a bug, or just undocumented calculations, but I am also having trouble reproducing the math for crewing a CIWS. I know it's five separate parts (gun, turret, fire controls, sensors, ECCM) and I can accurately model cost of the individual parts, but I cannot piece together how much each contributes to overall crew. Changing the Turret Tracking Tech (10%) tech level used is also modifying crew required, which is not matching with how turrets work (more gear % adds to size, but not crew required).
The best thing I can approximate here after testing many different settings is that crew for a CIWS =roundup(HS) regardless of individual parts.
Expected behavior: Crew = (2 * 50% Gauss Gun Crew *(1 - Turret Crew Reduction% (20%))) + (BFC Crew) + (Active Sensor Crew). Turret gear size should not affect crew.
I'm content if this is working as intended to simplify the calculations, I am simply seeking clarity on this one.
-
The Ground Forces Unit Series screen shows obsolete units as part of the available units to put in a series. I wouldn't call this a bug, exactly, but it impinges strongly on a certain use case: oops, I set something wrong (like noncombat on a unit that should see combat), let me just obsolete it and give the new one the same name as the old.
What I would like to see is a checkbox or button like elsewhere that toggles whether obsolete units are shown both in the units already assigned to series and those available to be assigned.
-
The Ground Forces Unit Series screen shows obsolete units as part of the available units to put in a series. I wouldn't call this a bug, exactly, but it impinges strongly on a certain use case: oops, I set something wrong (like noncombat on a unit that should see combat), let me just obsolete it and give the new one the same name as the old.
What I would like to see is a checkbox or button like elsewhere that toggles whether obsolete units are shown both in the units already assigned to series and those available to be assigned.
This is not a bug, since part of the purpose of the Unit Series tab is to see which units can be replaced by which other units.
-
The Ground Forces Unit Series screen shows obsolete units as part of the available units to put in a series. I wouldn't call this a bug, exactly, but it impinges strongly on a certain use case: oops, I set something wrong (like noncombat on a unit that should see combat), let me just obsolete it and give the new one the same name as the old.
What I would like to see is a checkbox or button like elsewhere that toggles whether obsolete units are shown both in the units already assigned to series and those available to be assigned.
This is not a bug, since part of the purpose of the Unit Series tab is to see which units can be replaced by which other units.
True but it would be nice to have a way of removing a unit , for instance when I accidentally design a unit called Divisional HQ but fail to put an HQ component in it , or after designing some none combat units my Heavy tank design is accidentally set as none combatant. So a way of deleting some incorrectly designed unit would be nice
-
The Ground Forces Unit Series screen shows obsolete units as part of the available units to put in a series. I wouldn't call this a bug, exactly, but it impinges strongly on a certain use case: oops, I set something wrong (like noncombat on a unit that should see combat), let me just obsolete it and give the new one the same name as the old.
What I would like to see is a checkbox or button like elsewhere that toggles whether obsolete units are shown both in the units already assigned to series and those available to be assigned.
This is not a bug, since part of the purpose of the Unit Series tab is to see which units can be replaced by which other units.
True but it would be nice to have a way of removing a unit , for instance when I accidentally design a unit called Divisional HQ but fail to put an HQ component in it , or after designing some none combat units my Heavy tank design is accidentally set as none combatant. So a way of deleting some incorrectly designed unit would be nice
I usually delete such mistakes in the research tab. Don't remember if you need SM to do this or not.
-
I usually delete such mistakes in the research tab. Don't remember if you need SM to do this or not.
You don't, and this is a good workaround, but it doesn't suffice if you're using SM to instant research the relevant units in the ground units window itself, e.g. at game start for use of your RP and BP.
-
I have assigned the order "Survey Next Three Bodies or Locations" to my geo and grav survey ships.
With this order, a couple of grav ships started to perform geo survey, even if they don't have geo sensors onboard (see images in the Suggestions Thread for v2.4.0).
SJW: Not a bug. Just don't order grav survey ships to do geo surveys. Use the grav survey standing order instead.
-
I usually delete such mistakes in the research tab. Don't remember if you need SM to do this or not.
You don't, and this is a good workaround, but it doesn't suffice if you're using SM to instant research the relevant units in the ground units window itself, e.g. at game start for use of your RP and BP.
It...does? The researched ground units still show up in the Research tab as completed projects and can be un-researched to remove them from the game if you make a mistake like (not) marking a unit (non-)combat. I do this all the time because I make mistakes a lot.
-
Summary: CIWS is firing, and reporting hits, but not actually stopping missiles. Additionally, CIWS does not appear to have a misfire chance like normal PD does (this may be intentional due to commercial status?)
The function number: N/A
The complete error text: N/A
The window affected: main screen
What you were doing at the time: testing PD setups to combat missiles
Conventional or TN start :TN
Random or Real Stars: Real
Is your decimal separator a comma, No.
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off: Easy
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: 80 years, but also reproducible in a fresh DB using the Example Game
I was having trouble catching leaking missiles with CIWS so I booted up a test environment to see if real life hit chances were on par with my calculations. Turns out there's a bug in CIWS PD fire.
I can confirm that I am on 2.5.1, see screenshots.
I fired 20 missiles at a 100 layer armor ship with 100 CIWS. From the design document on the changes to PD, CIWS should function like old-rule PD and fire each shot sequentially at each oncoming missile until the missiles are destroyed.
The firing seems to be working, and the game is registering the hits, but it doesn't destroy the missile.
According to the logs, all CIWS fired at the missiles, registering 808 impacts of strength 1 on the 20 missiles. After all CIWS fired, 11 of the 20 missiles impacted the ship, dealing damage, while the remaining 9 will attack next increment, due to missile retargeting being built into my test ASM.
I have attached screenshots of the logs from attacker and defender sides.
-
Summary: CIWS is firing, and reporting hits, but not actually stopping missiles. Additionally, CIWS does not appear to have a misfire chance like normal PD does (this may be intentional due to commercial status?)
Also reported on 2.5.1 here in case one or the other has extra useful information:
https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13464.msg168569#msg168569
https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13464.msg168699#msg168699
-
Looks like Repairyard cost was reduced from 2400 to 1200bp, but the listed mineral cost still remains the same as a regular SY (1200+1200)
-
Summary: Box Launchers never detonate.
I've been doing some exhaustive testing of box launchers, and I've noticed that unlike as the tech line seems to indicate, box launchers never seem to explode.
Here is one test I did:
Using the base technology of 100% explosion chance, I constructed a station with 1 armor and dozens of loaded missiles (with warheads). I then transferred the station to another player race set to hostile, and fired STR 16 missiles at that station one at a time. Each hit would destroy multiple box launchers, but never trigger any secondary explosions of the launchers detonating. I checked the target station, and the missiles were not even destroyed despite the box launchers carrying being destroyed.
it doesn't seem to matter at all if the missiles are "assigned" to launchers or MFC, or just sitting unassigned.
Expected Result: When a box launcher is destroyed, it should check its explosion chance and then detonate whatever missile it is assigned if it's triggered.
IMO, If it's not assigned a missile, it should pick one the size of the launcher or next smallest- that is over the ships regular magazine capacity in case the design has both magazines and box launchers.
In both cases when its destroyed it should also destroy the missile it was carrying.
As much as I like having no detonation chance for box launchers just in case for my own designs, this should probably be fixed :) I guess no one has just ever had a box launcher ship be internally damaged when missiles are still loaded before!
-
Restoring commanders not working. After game save and restart, restored commanders are gone.
-
A collier that is not in a subfleet and is designated to "Load Sub Fleet Ordnance" will load ordnance to ships needing that ordnance in any fleet, anywhere, that are also not in a subfleet.
Load a collier with some ordnance. Make sure the collier is not in a subfleet. EDIT: Give the collier the "Load Sub Fleet Ordnance" directive.
Have a ship in another fleet, but also not in a subfleet, that needs that same ordnance to complete its current ship template loadout.
Pass time in a large enough increment for ordnance transfer to handle at least one missile. (In my current situation, it had to be at least 3 hours.)
Notice that the collier has lost some ordnance.
Also notice that the other ship has gained some ordnance (or possibly not; check any other ships in your navy needing the same ordnance).
Probably the logic for subfleet reloading is only filtering the recipient list on the subfleetid matching the collier's subfleetid, which is 0 when not in a subfleet.
So, probably needs to also filter by fleetid matching.
-
The function number: 3656
The complete error text: 2.5.1 Function #3656: The given key was not present in the dictionary.
The window affected: main screen
What you were doing at the time: firing a box launched missile at an NPR commercial engined ship (I think it's a civvie freighter)
Conventional or TN start :TN
Random or Real Stars: Real
Is your decimal separator a comma, No.
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off: I think it might be something about this class-design. I have had it happen twice, both against this hull of ship.
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: just under 85 years.
Firing an ion era s36 missile with 8 decoys, retargeting, atg. All other ships have been hit successfully, but this particular class of ship gives me this error when the missile reaches it. No attack roll, no indication in the log that there was any interaction between missile and ship. Missile disappears.
It's a ship that keeps blipping in and out of a Jump Point defense stack I have, because I took a system cutting the NPRs empire in two. I haven't bothered to chase down the offending ship because it appears to be a civvie, so I don't know if all ships of this class are affected or only this specific ship for some reason.
-
Aurora 2.5.1, Modded Database to add New Higher-Capacity Maintenance Storage components, and to extend ELINT and Max Orbital Diameter Tech Lines to allow for new more-powerful ELINT modules and unlock orbital mining of larger bodies.
Display Bug: Picking up more research labs than a colony has available when the remaining labs are being used for a research project does not cancel the project and puts total lab count into the negative.
I had a 40% Ancient Construct (Construction) Colony, but found a 100% Ancient Construct (Construction) Colony so was in the process of mass-moving all research labs from one to the other using a large cargo fleet, capable of moving 3 Research Labs at once, and a smaller fleet, which could move 1.25 labs at once. As the labs moved, the game would normally reduce labs in-use by active projects as the lab count dwindled. Finally, there was 1 remaining Research Lab on the planet being used for a research project. However, when the large cargo fleet loaded the final labs, it didn't cancel the active research project, nor did it reduce the 2 labs still being used by the research scientist. The labs were indeed loaded, as they appeared in the fleets cargo hold and the Colony Summary no longer lists Research Labs. However, the scientist project is still displayed, and the research screen shows "Research Labs Available: -2" even through open/closing the UI and the game.
This does appear to just be a display bug, as advancing time does not decrease the RP remaining for the project. So no research is actually happening, it just looks like the project is active.
-
Summary:
Ship Commander works temp job outside of their lifepod, dies anyway.
The events:
Jul 31: A fighter of mine is destroyed by enemy fire. Lifepod contains 3 crew plus the commander.
Aug 1: The commander is assigned as commanding officer of a different fighter, in a system far away.
Aug 15: The commander dies when the lifepod expires.
-
For some colonies, selection via right-clicking the map (or the galactic map) does not work--the Econ window opens, but without a colony selected.
Happens for:
Colonies with no population and no installations, unless orbital miners are present (I have not tested with orbital terraformers).
Colonies with only a DST.
Does not happen for:
Populated colonies.
Colonies with CMCs.
Unpopulated colonies with orbital miners present.
-
Summary: Fleets with tractor beams fall out of orbit after executing order to tractor ship.
Repro steps:
Fleet A has a ship with a tractor beam, currently not in use, and is in orbit of a body.
Fleet B is a single ship (station, in fact) in orbit of the same body.
Give Fleet A orders to tractor any ship in Fleet B.
Advance time 5 seconds.
Fleet A is now tugging the ship that was in Fleet B. (And Fleet B has been auto-deleted, unless a shipyard task is targeting it.)
Fleet A is still in orbit of the body.
Auto advance time with 8-hour increments until body orbital movement occurs.
Result:
Fleet A did not move with the body. It is now in space at the body's previous coordinates.
-
Double-clicking a "Fighter Construction" event (on the main map or on the Events window) opens the Econ window with the first colony selected, not the colony where the event took place.
-
Summary: Fleets with tractor beams fall out of orbit after executing order to tractor ship.
Repro steps:
Fleet A has a ship with a tractor beam, currently not in use, and is in orbit of a body.
Fleet B is a single ship (station, in fact) in orbit of the same body.
Give Fleet A orders to tractor any ship in Fleet B.
Advance time 5 seconds.
Fleet A is now tugging the ship that was in Fleet B. (And Fleet B has been auto-deleted, unless a shipyard task is targeting it.)
Fleet A is still in orbit of the body.
Auto advance time with 8-hour increments until body orbital movement occurs.
Result:
Fleet A did not move with the body. It is now in space at the body's previous coordinates.
if you move the tractored station away from orbit and THEN BACK, does it then stay with the orbiting body?
-
Summary: Fleets with tractor beams fall out of orbit after executing order to tractor ship.
Repro steps:
Fleet A has a ship with a tractor beam, currently not in use, and is in orbit of a body.
Fleet B is a single ship (station, in fact) in orbit of the same body.
Give Fleet A orders to tractor any ship in Fleet B.
Advance time 5 seconds.
Fleet A is now tugging the ship that was in Fleet B. (And Fleet B has been auto-deleted, unless a shipyard task is targeting it.)
Fleet A is still in orbit of the body.
Auto advance time with 8-hour increments until body orbital movement occurs.
Result:
Fleet A did not move with the body. It is now in space at the body's previous coordinates.
if you move the tractored station away from orbit and THEN BACK, does it then stay with the orbiting body?
You don't even have to move it away. If you just give an order to move to the planet it is already orbiting, it will stay put.
-
Well, if its that easy to work around, then it might be a low priority to be fixed, although I suppose it still counts as a bug.
-
Well, if its that easy to work around, then it might be a low priority to be fixed, although I suppose it still counts as a bug.
(Easy to work around) * (Happens hundreds of times per game year) = Maybe somewhat higher priority
-
Well, if its that easy to work around, then it might be a low priority to be fixed, although I suppose it still counts as a bug.
(Easy to work around) * (Happens hundreds of times per game year) = Maybe somewhat higher priority
Good point
-
Steve already fixed the bug where ships/stations that joined a fleet first instead of entering orbit first where not counted as being in orbit. This seems like a leftover from that fix. But it hasn't been noticed because it is such a rare case. Most players will have their tugs move immediately after tractoring something instead of waiting in orbit. I play with 24 hour production cycle, meaning that planets move every day and I have never encountered this bug.
-
Steve already fixed the bug where ships/stations that joined a fleet first instead of entering orbit first where not counted as being in orbit. This seems like a leftover from that fix. But it hasn't been noticed because it is such a rare case. Most players will have their tugs move immediately after tractoring something instead of waiting in orbit. I play with 24 hour production cycle, meaning that planets move every day and I have never encountered this bug.
I play with 24hour cycle, and I have this bug all the time. I make heavy use of tugs, and often give orders to tractor ships upon arrival, but without further orders.
-
"Show Next Tech" checkbox doesn't show the impact of the next level of "Maximum Shield Generator Size" tech, i.e. the drop down doesn't show the new options for bigger shields.
-
High Power Microwave (HPM) 15cm should be 250t but it's actually 200t, same as 12cm.
This is out of line with progression on other weapons and appears to be out of line with the other calibers of HPM: 10cm is 150t, 12cm is 200t, and 18cm is 300t, so you'd expect 15cm to be 250t, not 200cm.
-
Unclear if this is a bug or not, but ships that move to a lagrange point don't stay at the lagrange point when bodies are moved during the construciton phase, i.e. the LP moves out from under the ship. If that's a bug, would be helpful to have it fixed, as it makes ambushing a fleet heading toward an intrasystem jump more difficult (ask me how I know, although I still managed it).
If it's WAI, would it be possible to add a "Follow" command for LP just like for orbital bodies, so we can at least intentionally follow it?
-
Either there's a bug in the surrender logic, or maybe an edge case and I just got super lucky, but I just had 450ktons of enemy combatants surrender en mass, with only one of their ships damaged, to <120ktons of my own fleet. I was slightly ahead in tech but not egregiously so, and many of my ships were older vintage scraped together for a desperate ambush to protect a mid-sized colony. I normally wouldn't provide what is going to be nearly an AAR, but I think it may be relevant.
My fleet was comprised of
1x CV Liverpool (64kton armed carrier)
1x CV Let Freedom Ring (20kton unarmed carrier)
24x Lightning (various vintages of fast fighters armed with a single HPM)
15x F-45 Starfires (500t railgun fighter)
08x F-46 Starfires (500t railgun fighter)
10x F-45 Starfires (490t railgun fighter)
11x F-53 Starfires (380t railgun fighter)
The enemy's fleet was comprised of
2x Kitee (52kt Battlecruiser)
5x Hyvinkaa (52kt Battlecruiser)
3x Pieksamaki (35kt Escort Cruiser)
When the enemy fleet finally performed their intrasystem jump, they landed roughly 500km away from my fleet. Both fleets closed the distance, with my fleet staying together at the speed of the CV Liverpool. Once the enemy fleet opened fire with their large railguns at around 240km, they delt armor damage to 6 fighters and intenral damage to a 7th, but no fighters were destroyed outright. I broke the fighters apart into fleets based on their speed, and ordered them all to close at their own best speed. CV Liverpool fired next as it's particle beams came into range, and landed a single strength 6 high. In the next 5 second tick, right as the first fighters got into range, but before they could fire, the entire enemy fleet surrendered! One of the Kitee had sustained about 30 to 40% armor damage from some prior engagement, but the rest of their ships were untouched. They were all at zero fuel, however.
Had they not surrendered I'm pretty sure the 24 HPM fighters would've taken out the enemy's sensors and fire controls and my fleet would've won, but each enemy ship had 3 BFC and enough railguns and lasers for each BFC (471 across the fleet, so ~20 guns per BFC) that each BFC would've been almost guaranteed to kill a fighter at close range. That would've been 24 fighters destroyed per round of fire, so it'd be a race to disable enemy ships via microwave before all my microwave fighters were shot down. I'm actually kind of bummed I didn't get to find out how it sorted out.
The only thing I can think of is that the high speed of the fighters was weighted heavily, and maybe the enemy fleet being out of fuel also was part of the calculation. I saved off the before and after DB in case anyone wants to poke into it.
Update: Boy did I get lucky they surrendered (for what ever reason). I re-ran from my prior save and they wrecked me, as is appropriate for a 4:1 tonnage advantage. Those railguns were not friendly to my fighters, that's for sure.
CV Liverpool (Liverpool class Carrier) 64,357 tons 1,025 Crew 8,006.1 BP TCS 1,287 TH 3,750 EM 10,200
2913 km/s Armour 8-143 Shields 340-510 HTK 284 Sensors 8/1/0/0 DCR 34-5 PPV 70.4
Maint Life 1.59 Years MSP 11,088 AFR 2367% IFR 32.9% 1YR 5,098 5YR 76,467 Max Repair 625 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 25,000 tons Troop Capacity 250 tons Magazine 16 / 0 Cryogenic Berths 1,000
Captain Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Flight Crew Berths 500 Morale Check Required
Ion Drive EP1250.00 (3) Power 3750 Fuel Use 18.97% Signature 1250 Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 4,000,000 Litres Range 59 billion km (234 days at full power)
Epsilon S85 / R510 Shields (4) Recharge Time 510 seconds (0.7 per second)
Particle Beam-6 (8 ) Range 200,000km TS: 5,000 km/s Power 15-3.75 ROF 20
12cm Railgun 60km-10s (4x4) Range 60,000km TS: 5,000 km/s Power 6-3 RM 30,000 km ROF 10
BFC R256-TS4000 (1) Max Range: 256,000 km TS: 4,000 km/s ECCM-1 96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61
BFC R128-TS4000 (1) Max Range: 128,000 km TS: 4,000 km/s ECCM-1 92 84 77 69 61 53 45 38 30 22
Magnetic Mirror Fusion Reactor R42 (1) Total Power Output 42.3 Exp 5%
M4 Silo (4) Missile Size: 4 Hangar Reload 100 minutes MF Reload 16 hours
Tele-Drone MFC (1) Range 14.1m km Resolution 100
SCT Tele-drone Mk1 (4) Speed: 7,200 km/s End: 3.8d Range: 2,373.5m km WH: 0 Size: 4 TH: 24/14/7
MD-393k-50t (1) GPS 12 Range 4.4m km MCR 393.3k km Resolution 1
TH1.0-8.0 (1) Sensitivity 8 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 22.4m km
EM0.2-1.6 (1) Sensitivity 1.6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 10m km
Electronic Warfare Jammers: Fire Control 2 Missile 2
***************************
CV Let Freedom Ring (Liberty Mk1a class Carrier) 20,000 tons 316 Crew 2,812.4 BP TCS 400 TH 2,000 EM 4,740
5000 km/s Armour 5-65 Shields 158-632 HTK 87 Sensors 11/1/0/0 DCR 28-14 PPV 0
Maint Life 2.12 Years MSP 4,230 AFR 390% IFR 5.4% 1YR 1,262 5YR 18,931 Max Repair 1,000 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 8,000 tons Troop Capacity 250 tons
Commander Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Flight Crew Berths 160 Morale Check Required
Magneto-plasma Drive EP2000.00 (1) Power 2000 Fuel Use 27.62% Signature 2000 Explosion 12%
Fuel Capacity 1,750,000 Litres Range 57 billion km (131 days at full power)
Theta S158 / R632 Shields (1) Recharge Time 632 seconds (0.3 per second)
TH1.0-11.0 (1) Sensitivity 11 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 26.2m km
EM0.1-1.1 (1) Sensitivity 1.1 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 8.3m km
Electronic Warfare Jammers: Sensor 1
***************************
FTR-148 B-2b Lighting 008 (B-2b Lighting class Fighter) 496 tons 13 Crew 121 BP TCS 10 TH 161 EM 0
16280 km/s Armour 1-5 Shields 0-0 HTK 3 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 0-0 PPV 3
Maint Life 4.47 Years MSP 65 AFR 20% IFR 0.3% 1YR 5 5YR 79 Max Repair 80.6 MSP
Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1
Intended Deployment Time: 15 days Morale Check Required
Ion Drive EP161.25 (1) Power 161.2 Fuel Use 1188.61% Signature 161.25 Explosion 30%
Fuel Capacity 23,000 Litres Range 0.7 billion km (12 hours at full power)
HPM-15km-5s (1) Range 15,000km TS: 16,280 km/s Power 3-3 ROF 5
BFC R19-TS14000 (SW) (1) Max Range: 19,200 km TS: 14,000 km/s ECCM-1 48 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Magnetic Mirror Fusion Reactor R3 (1) Total Power Output 3.1 Exp 5%
MD-136k-5t (1) GPS 2 Range 1.5m km MCR 136.2k km Resolution 1
***************************
FTR-01 F-45 Starfire 001 (F-45 Starfire class Fighter) 500 tons 11 Crew 72.7 BP TCS 10 TH 72 EM 0
7181 km/s Armour 1-5 Shields 0-0 HTK 3 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 0-0 PPV 3
Maint Life 4.15 Years MSP 29 AFR 20% IFR 0.3% 1YR 3 5YR 40 Max Repair 35.9 MSP
Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1
Intended Deployment Time: 15 days Morale Check Required
Nuclear Gas-Core Engine EP71.75 (1) Power 71.8 Fuel Use 442.90% Signature 71.75 Explosion 17%
Fuel Capacity 21,000 Litres Range 1.71 billion km (66 hours at full power)
10cm Railgun V20/C3 (1x4) Range 19,200km TS: 7,181 km/s Power 3-3 RM 20,000 km ROF 5
BFC R19-TS9000 (SW) (1) Max Range: 19,200 km TS: 9,000 km/s ECCM-0 48 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Gaseous Fission Reactor R3 (1) Total Power Output 3 Exp 5%
MD-136k-5t (1) GPS 2 Range 1.5m km MCR 136.2k km Resolution 1
***************************
FTR-302 F-53 Starfire 080 (F-53 Starfire class Fighter) 390 tons 11 Crew 107.6 BP TCS 8 TH 106 EM 0
13563 km/s Armour 1-4 Shields 0-0 HTK 2 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 0-0 PPV 3
Maint Life 3.66 Years MSP 17 AFR 12% IFR 0.2% 1YR 2 5YR 30 Max Repair 52.8 MSP
Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1
Intended Deployment Time: 15 days Morale Check Required
Magneto-plasma Drive EP105.60 (1) Power 105.6 Fuel Use 1661.74% Signature 105.6 Explosion 30%
Fuel Capacity 24,000 Litres Range 0.67 billion km (13 hours at full power)
10cm Railgun V20/C3 (1x4) Range 20,000km TS: 13,563 km/s Power 3-3 RM 20,000 km ROF 5
BFC R48-TS16k (SW) (1) Max Range: 48,000 km TS: 16,000 km/s ECCM-2 79 58 38 17 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stellarator Fusion Reactor R3-PB30 (1) Total Power Output 3 Exp 15%
MD-136k-5t (1) GPS 2 Range 1.5m km MCR 136.2k km Resolution 1
***************************
BCJ-03 Kitee 003 (Kitee class Jump Battlecruiser) 52,469 tons 1,617 Crew 9,073.3 BP TCS 1,049 TH 6,120 EM 0
5832 km/s JR 4-100 Armour 8-124 Shields 0-0 HTK 314 Sensors 18/12/0/0 DCR 18-3 PPV 234
Maint Life 0.71 Years MSP 1,945 AFR 1224% IFR 17.0% 1YR 2,725 5YR 40,875 Max Repair 1,270.5 MSP
Magazine 0 / 132
Captain Control Rating 3 BRG AUX ENG
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Morale Check Required
J52500(4-100) Military Jump Drive Max Ship Size 52500 tons Distance 100k km Squadron Size 4
Ion Drive EP510.00 (12) Power 6120 Fuel Use 74.72% Signature 510 Explosion 13%
Fuel Capacity 3,950,000 Litres Range 18.1 billion km (35 days at full power)
20cm C3.5 Ultraviolet Laser (39) Range 256,000km TS: 5,832 km/s Power 10-3.5 RM 40,000 km ROF 15
Beam Fire Control R256-TS6000 (3) Max Range: 256,000 km TS: 6,000 km/s ECCM-1 96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61
Magnetic Mirror Fusion Reactor R4 (39) Total Power Output 139.6 Exp 5%
Size 44 Decoy Launcher (3) Decoy Size: 44 Hangar Reload 331 minutes MF Reload 55 hours
Dart Ship Decoy (3) Signature: 8800 tons ECM-1 Size: 44
Active Search Sensor AS68-R110 (1) GPS 11880 Range 68.8m km Resolution 110
Thermal Sensor TH3-18 (1) Sensitivity 18 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 33.5m km
EM Sensor EM2-12 (1) Sensitivity 12 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 27.4m km
Electronic Warfare Jammers: Sensor 1 Fire Control 1 Missile 1
***************************
BC-06 Hyvinkaa 006 (Hyvinkaa class Battlecruiser) 52,452 tons 1,600 Crew 8,425.2 BP TCS 1,049 TH 6,120 EM 0
5834 km/s Armour 9-124 Shields 0-0 HTK 335 Sensors 12/12/0/0 DCR 18-3 PPV 272
Maint Life 1.12 Years MSP 1,807 AFR 1223% IFR 17.0% 1YR 1,458 5YR 21,873 Max Repair 255 MSP
Magazine 0 / 352
Captain Control Rating 4 BRG AUX ENG CIC
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Morale Check Required
Ion Drive EP510.00 (12) Power 6120 Fuel Use 74.72% Signature 510 Explosion 13%
Fuel Capacity 3,750,000 Litres Range 17.2 billion km (34 days at full power)
25.00cm C4 Ultraviolet Laser (1) Range 256,000km TS: 5,834 km/s Power 16-4 RM 40,000 km ROF 20
20cm C3.5 Ultraviolet Laser (44) Range 256,000km TS: 5,834 km/s Power 10-3.5 RM 40,000 km ROF 15
Beam Fire Control R256-TS6000 (3) Max Range: 256,000 km TS: 6,000 km/s ECCM-1 96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61
Magnetic Mirror Fusion Reactor R4 (1) Total Power Output 4.3 Exp 5%
Magnetic Mirror Fusion Reactor R4 (44) Total Power Output 157.5 Exp 5%
Size 44 Decoy Launcher (8 ) Decoy Size: 44 Hangar Reload 331 minutes MF Reload 55 hours
Dart Ship Decoy (8 ) Signature: 8800 tons ECM-1 Size: 44
Active Search Sensor AS68-R110 (1) GPS 11880 Range 68.8m km Resolution 110
Thermal Sensor TH2-12 (1) Sensitivity 12 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 27.4m km
EM Sensor EM2-12 (1) Sensitivity 12 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 27.4m km
Electronic Warfare Jammers: Sensor 1 Fire Control 1 Missile 1
***************************
CLE-04 Pieksamaki 006 (Pieksamaki class Escort Cruiser) 34,990 tons 1,057 Crew 4,676.3 BP TCS 700 TH 4,080 EM 0
5830 km/s Armour 8-95 Shields 0-0 HTK 187 Sensors 6/0/0/0 DCR 12-3 PPV 168
Maint Life 1.08 Years MSP 1,002 AFR 816% IFR 11.3% 1YR 864 5YR 12,958 Max Repair 255 MSP
Magazine 0 / 176
Commander Control Rating 2 BRG AUX
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Morale Check Required
Ion Drive EP510.00 (8 ) Power 4080 Fuel Use 74.72% Signature 510 Explosion 13%
Fuel Capacity 2,650,000 Litres Range 18.2 billion km (36 days at full power)
10cm Railgun V10/C3 (56x4) Range 10,000km TS: 5,830 km/s Power 3-3 RM 10,000 km ROF 5
Beam Fire Control R128-TS6000 (3) Max Range: 128,000 km TS: 6,000 km/s ECCM-1 92 84 77 69 61 53 45 38 30 22
Magnetic Mirror Fusion Reactor R4 (56) Total Power Output 200.5 Exp 5%
Size 44 Decoy Launcher (4) Decoy Size: 44 Hangar Reload 331 minutes MF Reload 55 hours
Dart Ship Decoy (4) Signature: 8800 tons ECM-1 Size: 44
Active Search Sensor AS9-R1 (1) GPS 51 Range 9.8m km MCR 883k km Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH1-6 (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 19.4m km
Electronic Warfare Jammers: Sensor 1 Fire Control 1 Missile 1
Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s
-
Hello, really enjoying the game and appreciating all the work you have put into it over the years, thank you so much for sharing it. I have found a few potential bugs I would like to share.
I believe I am playing 2.5.1 (as I followed all the instructions to patch the application to that version before playing) on a system that uses a period decimal point.
Clicking "Move Waypoint" locks the UI into moving waypoints and prevents new waypoints from being created (deleting works).
Steps to reproduce:
- Make two waypoints, either with normal or named.
- Click "move waypoint" and move one of the waypoints.
- Try to make a new waypoint and select a location: previously moved waypoint will move to the selected location.
- Click "delete waypoint" and delete the waypoint you just moved.
- Click "new waypoint" and select a location: nothing happens. Remaining waypoint can still be moved.
Workaround: Save and restart the game.
This can be done with one waypoint but I just wanted to show what happens when you have more than one to give more info about the observed behavior.
Please note that I have not tested this with other waypoint types besides "normal" and "named".
Researching upranked engine via template import does not research all needed supporting technologies.
Steps to reproduce:
- Create a class with an engine that has >1.25xPower output and/or >25HS max size.
- Create a template of the class.
- Start a new game with enough instant research points to research all needed tech.
- View the template of the class. Note that the technologies for Power Output and Max Engine Size do not show. (see image bug)
- Import the class using "Create Class".
- Class will import with the upranked engine. (see image bug2)
- In the Reseach tab, click the "Completed" radio button or select "Power and Propulsion" from the dropdown to verify that the >1.25xPower output and/or >25HS max size technologies are not researched.
Please note that I have not tested whether this is the case for other technologies. For example, in the template you can see in image bug2 the fire control upgrades were researched.
I think I found another couple bugs, but this is all I can remember for now. Thanks again!
(edited for clarity and to add the workaround i have been using)
-
Clicking "Move Waypoint" locks the UI into moving waypoints and prevents new waypoints from being created (deleting works).
Steps to reproduce:
- Make two waypoints, either with normal or named.
- Click "move waypoint" and move one of the waypoints.
- Try to make a new waypoint and select a location: previously moved waypoint will move to the selected location.
- Click "delete waypoint" and delete the waypoint you just moved.
- Click "new waypoint" and select a location: nothing happens. Remaining waypoint can still be moved.
Workaround: Save and restart the game.
This can be done with one waypoint but I just wanted to show what happens when you have more than one to give more info about the observed behavior.
Please note that I have not tested this with other waypoint types besides "normal" and "named".
I had issues with this as well.
-
Also, something I tried to do in one of my games is make a general purpose Colony Ship that can carry Cargo as well as Population. The roleplay idea was that the ship can carry needed materials along with the colonists to help get them started... However whenever I ask the Colony ship to load resources I get the error "[Fleet Name] was not able to load [Resource] from [Planet]" where the fleet name is the fleet that the colony ship is in. It's just the one ship in the fleet, no other ships. Cargo ships are able to load it just fine. Is this working as intended? I know that the game is intended as a story engine and so I thought that allowing Colony Ships to transport other stuff along with people would be thematic.
-
Hello, really enjoying the game and appreciating all the work you have put into it over the years, thank you so much for sharing it. I have found a few potential bugs I would like to share.
I believe I am playing 2.5.1 (as I followed all the instructions to patch the application to that version before playing) on a system that uses a period decimal point.
Clicking "Move Waypoint" locks the UI into moving waypoints and prevents new waypoints from being created (deleting works).
Steps to reproduce:
- Make two waypoints, either with normal or named.
- Click "move waypoint" and move one of the waypoints.
- Try to make a new waypoint and select a location: previously moved waypoint will move to the selected location.
- Click "delete waypoint" and delete the waypoint you just moved.
- Click "new waypoint" and select a location: nothing happens. Remaining waypoint can still be moved.
Workaround: Save and restart the game.
This can be done with one waypoint but I just wanted to show what happens when you have more than one to give more info about the observed behavior.
Please note that I have not tested this with other waypoint types besides "normal" and "named".
(edited for clarity and to add the workaround i have been using)
It was fixed a while ago for v2.6
Check this list for the known fixed bugs:
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13463.0
-
Also, something I tried to do in one of my games is make a general purpose Colony Ship that can carry Cargo as well as Population. The roleplay idea was that the ship can carry needed materials along with the colonists to help get them started... However whenever I ask the Colony ship to load resources I get the error "[Fleet Name] was not able to load [Resource] from [Planet]" where the fleet name is the fleet that the colony ship is in. It's just the one ship in the fleet, no other ships. Cargo ships are able to load it just fine. Is this working as intended? I know that the game is intended as a story engine and so I thought that allowing Colony Ships to transport other stuff along with people would be thematic.
I use colony ships that carry population and cargo.
Do you have cargo holds? Are they full?
Do you have cargo shuttles?
-
I use colony ships that carry population and cargo.
Do you have cargo holds? Are they full?
Do you have cargo shuttles?
Yes I have 50 KT cargo holds on them, which are empty, and 2 cargo shuttles on them. (the whole reason i designed them this way was so that they could easily be refitted into cargo ships and so cargo ships could be built from their tooled shipyards and i had to think of something to justify keeping those cargo shuttles on them).
-
Hi all!
Immediately upon loading I get the following sequence of errors
2.5.1 Function #483: file is encrypted or is not a database
file is encrypted or is not a database
OK
2.5.1 Function ~139: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
2.5.1 Function ~138: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
2.5.1 Function ~142: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
This last error loops pops up every time I press 'ok'
The window affected - these are pop ups but impact the whole game, it can't be played
What you were doing at the time - first booting up the game
Conventional or TN start - first booting up the game
Random or Real Stars - first booting up the game
Is your decimal separator a comma? - I have decimal separator, have checked calculator and excel to be sure
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? - Identical every time I start the game
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - first booting up the game, no campaign.
Thanks in advance for any help and sorry if this is a solved issue - have looked around to find a solution but no dice.
-
What is Function #115 ?
It says "object reference not set to instance of an object"
-
Hi all!
Immediately upon loading I get the following sequence of errors
2.5.1 Function #483: file is encrypted or is not a database
file is encrypted or is not a database
OK
2.5.1 Function ~139: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
2.5.1 Function ~138: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
2.5.1 Function ~142: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
This last error loops pops up every time I press 'ok'
The window affected - these are pop ups but impact the whole game, it can't be played
What you were doing at the time - first booting up the game
Conventional or TN start - first booting up the game
Random or Real Stars - first booting up the game
Is your decimal separator a comma? - I have decimal separator, have checked calculator and excel to be sure
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? - Identical every time I start the game
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - first booting up the game, no campaign.
Thanks in advance for any help and sorry if this is a solved issue - have looked around to find a solution but no dice.
Please register your account so that you can post normally and we don't have to manually approve of each post you make.
As to your problem, it sounds like you did not unpack the game. When you download the game, it is packaged into an RAR archive/package. You need a file compression/decompression program to unpack it. I recommend 7-Zip as it is freeware and handles pretty much every possible archive type known to man. Unpack the archive into a C:\Games\Aurora folder or something similar, not inside Program Files.
-
Playing version 2.5.1. Several salvos of enemy AMMs are still showing up on the map despite the launching ship exiting the system. Each salvo says it contains 0 missiles. I've advanced time several days and it's still showing.
-
v 2.5.1.
Dot "." as the decimal point.
TN start.
Real stars.
Sometimes, randomly, after 60 or 70 years in the game, clicking on a colony in the list on the left of the Economics window, I get this error message:
Function #2198: Value was either too large or too small for a Decimal.
I'm now around year 80 and it continues to present.
It appears twice.
Clicking OK, it disappears and the game proceeds normally.
If, after it, I click on another colony, it doesn't appear.
But clicking again the previous colony, it appears.
After running the turn, it can repeat or disappear, without any other sign. But anyway, in few turns it disappears, to return randomly.
What does the function #2198 do?
I searched in Google, and the first result says that this error "while executing a SQL query, typically occurs when the data being retrieved or manipulated in the SQL operation is outside the range that can be represented by a Decimal data type in .NET."
If it can help, I can report the address of the page of this text.
Thank you for an explanation.
-
On the Commanders window, with Academy Commandant selected in the dropdown for assignment types, the assignment list only includes assignments for which the currently selected officer is eligible, even if the "Eligible Only" checkbox is not ticked.
-
Summar log says "Ground Units Hi 7 Ground Units Destroyed 6", but detailed logs only show one unit destroyed. I did have "Show All Events" ticked. It seems to be repeatable, here's a 2nd instance of it happening not long after. Am I just misunderstatnding something, or is this a bug?
(https://i.imgur.com/VFmjMSf.jpeg)
(https://i.imgur.com/3i08BIG.png)
-
Summar log says "Ground Units Hi 7 Ground Units Destroyed 6", but detailed logs only show one unit destroyed. I did have "Show All Events" ticked. It seems to be repeatable, here's a 2nd instance of it happening not long after. Am I just misunderstatnding something, or is this a bug?
This is not quite a bug, more of a glitch in the system. It happens because for some reason, the game calculates the shots against an element of the targeted formation, calculates hits and kills, displays that kills value to the player, and then subtracts from the target formation and reports (in a different message) the number of units actually destroyed, which may be fewer than the previous calculation if the element had very few units remaining.
It's particularly hilarious when your overeager beavers report destroying 3,026 enemy headquarters in one go. ;D
-
I ran into this bug (first reported in v2.5.0) today in v2.5.1: https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13419.msg167533#msg167533
Tractoring a shipyard caused it to transfer to an "Alien Race" identical to my own. It occurred immediately after the shipyard was towed from Earth. This was the first time I attempted to tractor a shipyard in this game. The new race has the same name, images, etc. and I am allied with it. (Diplomacy Rating 10,000)
- Conventional start
- Real stars
- 141 years of play (start year 2024)
Here is the db, saved right when the event occurred: https://drive.google.com/file/d/17brqtodlXPQhFBfh-SH758kL4JCWbbzT/view?usp=drive_link
-
Genetic Modification cannot be stopped
Seems like once you start modifying a species on a planet, it will continue to convert the population, and pressing "stop" on the industry screen does not work. The only way to stop conversion of the population is to scrap the genetic modification centres.
-
Very benign bug, but a little confusing: When you create "Future Prototype" that includes tech you haven't researched yet you get an event saying "Research into XYZ COMPNENT completed". Instead it should say "A Prototype of XYZ COMPONENT has been created", or even better "A Future Prototype of...".
-
Having just conquered a major mining colony in the enemy's home system, my forces reviewed their new home and discovered there were ~300 automines plus 11 CMCs, and I was automatically paying for the minerals. A little strange, seems like those CMCs should be "nationalized" since I captured them, or at least I should get a wealth bonus for "selling" them to a comercial venture, but whatever, not a bug.
A few turns later (within days), my enemy civilization plants a NEW civilian mining colony with 3 more CMCs, a DST, and a mass driver, along with a new garrison. This seems like it should not be able to happen, since, ya know, I just destroyed 250ktons of enemy army and seized the prior CMC. I don't mind the extra CMCs, but... not really logical that it would happen. Maybe the selection of whether or not to create a new CMC should take into account the presence of a hostile force?
-
The squadron size calculations appear to be incorrect. I have a squadron that's showing as 7800 tons of military hulls, but it's actually 7860. This caused me quite some confusion when trying to load two additional 82 ton scouts, of which only one would fit. That one is now in it's own squadron showing as 50 tons of military hulls, despite being 82 tons.
-
Expanding and then collapsing a category of components in Ship Design wide view adds the last selected component (which can be something completely different) to the design.
-
Expanding and then collapsing a category of components in Ship Design wide view adds the last selected component (which can be something completely different) to the design.
Only if you do it in a very specific way.
1) Select a module (not a category) in the list.
2) Put your mouse over any node in the component category tree (expanded or collapsed).
3) Click the node twice, fast enough for your OS to register the action as a double click.
The node will rapidly change state twice (expand - collapse, or vice versa), and the ship component you selected in step 1 is added to the ship.
-
In the Naval Organization window, selecting a fleet with more than ~2.14bn colonist capacity causes a
Function #900: Value was either too large or too small for an Int32.
error. Not an issue 99.9% of the time, but it's possible to run into this if one is particularly zealous with ark modules.
-
I think this has previously been identified, but I recently received "Swarm Extraction Module" technology via espionage of an unrelated NPC. I don't know for sure, but I don't think the NPC in question would've had exposure to the Swarm (since I eradicated the only colony I've seen so far before this NPC was generated), much less an opportunity to gain that tech by capturing their ship via boarding and then salvaging enough modules to gain the tech.
-
I had a colony on a planet, and then started genetic modification to make the population more tolerant of the wide temperature swings. This created a 2nd population of "Human 2.0" on the same planet, with no installations and a different governor. I moved some installations over to keep that pop occupied. Later, the next level of bio tech for temp adaptation was researched, and I created a new species with wider tolerance ranges, and switched to generating that species. All good so far. However, when I moved some genetic conversion centers to the Human 2.0 colony, the Industry tab never showed the genetic conversion interface, so I am unable to convert my Human 2.0s into Human 2.1s.
SJW: Working as intended. You can't modify an already modified species.
-
In the very first round of combat on the invasion of an enemy homeworld, the Intelligence window in the ground units tab reported the following for "Infantry II"
Units Hit: 17,752
Armour Penetrated 17,752
Units Destroyed: 17,752
Now I know for a fact that I didn't hit that many Infantry, nor did I kill that many. The Combat log said I killed maybe 250 or so in that first round. I probably did kill every unit I hit, because my weapon tech is a bit higher than their armor tech, but this looks like a bug in the Intel calculations. This issue was present for every type of unit involved in the fight.
-
I had a colony on a planet, and then started genetic modification to make the population more tolerant of the wide temperature swings. This created a 2nd population of "Human 2.0" on the same planet, with no installations and a different governor. I moved some installations over to keep that pop occupied. Later, the next level of bio tech for temp adaptation was researched, and I created a new species with wider tolerance ranges, and switched to generating that species. All good so far. However, when I moved some genetic conversion centers to the Human 2.0 colony, the Industry tab never showed the genetic conversion interface, so I am unable to convert my Human 2.0s into Human 2.1s.
iirc this isn't a bug - and it's intended that you can't modify a modified species. Like. you can modify base humans to human 2.0 and base humans to human 2.1, but you can't mod human 2.0 to human 2.1
-
That makes sense, because otherwise you could just continuously modify a species to shift it's tolerance infinitely in one direction or another.
It makes less sense when applied to the +/- temp band tolerance, but that's an edge case and I can see why modding modded species can't be allowed for the reason above.
-
Autoroute by System ignores unticked checkbox for Auto-include Lagrange Points
I have a fleet with the Auto-include Lagrange Points checkbox unticked.
When I select the System Locations radio button and give orders, those order do ignore Lagrange points.
However, when I select the Autoroute by System radio button and give orders, those orders will include Lagrange points (in the current system and any system in the path of travel).
-
Summary:
"Mass Driver" column on Mining tab always showing 0 for minerals not mined locally.
Details:
I have a mining colony with a Mass Driver sending packets to elsewhere.
The Packet Content checkbox in the Display tab is ticked; I can see that the packets in flight contain six minerals.
The most recent packet shows: CB4 T1 B0 V3 S7 G1.
Of those five minerals, the colony is mining three (CB, T, and B).
On the Mining tab, the Mass Driver column shows the correct adjustment for those three minerals (-4, -1, and 0).
For the other three minerals (V, S, and G), the Mass Driver column shows only zeroes, instead of showing the appropriate adjustment for the most recent mineral packet.
Other info:
The Recent SP column shows correct amounts for all minerals.
For example, Gallicite shows -1. There is no local production or consumption of Gallicite; the -1 is due to the most recent mineral packet.
I do have a non-0 reserve setting for every mineral (which doesn't seem to be relevant but I mention it just in case).
For the three minerals in question, the current stockpile and the reserve amounts are:
V 4068 5
S 8705 5
G 2284 1000
-
Steve, in exploring some mapping alternatives, I ran into what seems to be a programming error. When I take the AU and Bearing values from the Galactic Map Overview tab for each jump point, and convert them from polar to Cartesian, I end up with a map that looks inverted from what the game displays, i.e. X and Y for each coordinate are swapped. I just used the standard Matlab function pol2cart and plugged in the theta matrix (bearing, converted from deg to radians using deg2rad function) and rho matrix (AU values) straight off the galactic map overview.
Whether the error is yours or mine remains to be seen. Is it possible you transposed the X and Y results when converting from polar to Cartesian? If I intentionally plot x as y and vice versa, I get a map that looks like what's in the game.
Not sure this matters, as long as it's consistent within the game, but just curious. Granted I'm pretty crap at coding, but I can't seem to find an error in my (3 lines of) code.
SJW: Not a bug - see below
-
Steve, in exploring some mapping alternatives, I ran into what seems to be a programming error. When I take the AU and Bearing values from the Galactic Map Overview tab for each jump point, and convert them from polar to Cartesian, I end up with a map that looks inverted from what the game displays, i.e. X and Y for each coordinate are swapped. I just used the standard Matlab function pol2cart and plugged in the theta matrix (bearing, converted from deg to radians using deg2rad function) and rho matrix (AU values) straight off the galactic map overview.
Whether the error is yours or mine remains to be seen. Is it possible you transposed the X and Y results when converting from polar to Cartesian? If I intentionally plot x as y and vice versa, I get a map that looks like what's in the game.
Not sure this matters, as long as it's consistent within the game, but just curious. Granted I'm pretty crap at coding, but I can't seem to find an error in my (3 lines of) code.
The X,Y coordinates are generated from the distance and bearing and the locations on the map match that distance and bearing. If there was a problem with the conversion, they wouldn't be in the right places.
-
Steve, in exploring some mapping alternatives, I ran into what seems to be a programming error. When I take the AU and Bearing values from the Galactic Map Overview tab for each jump point, and convert them from polar to Cartesian, I end up with a map that looks inverted from what the game displays, i.e. X and Y for each coordinate are swapped. I just used the standard Matlab function pol2cart and plugged in the theta matrix (bearing, converted from deg to radians using deg2rad function) and rho matrix (AU values) straight off the galactic map overview.
Whether the error is yours or mine remains to be seen. Is it possible you transposed the X and Y results when converting from polar to Cartesian? If I intentionally plot x as y and vice versa, I get a map that looks like what's in the game.
Not sure this matters, as long as it's consistent within the game, but just curious. Granted I'm pretty crap at coding, but I can't seem to find an error in my (3 lines of) code.
By convention, the reference direction (that is, the direction of a zero-degree angle) for polar coordinates is horizontal to the right from the origin (east, in other words).
For naval navigation, on the other hand, the bearing of zero degrees is vertical upwards from the origin (north, in other words).
I suspect you have observed not a transform of x and y, but a -90 degree rotation.
-
skoormit, you're absolutely correct, it was a frame of reference issue. Matlab treats polar angles as counterclockwise from the positive x axis, i.e. "math notation". Based on the Galaxy map Aurora appears to use clockwise from the positive y axis, i.e. "navigation notation". I had considered that the x vs y axis might be the zero point, but didn't consider that the "handedness" might be flipped. I'll adjust accordingly. Thanks for pointing it out.
-
I have an odd issue that came up in this game. I designed a size 30 missile launcher and the researched finished but I was then unable to locate the component anywhere.. I checked the ship design screen and even the tech screen but nothing was there.
Then when I went to research and checked the completed button I was able to find it. However it says its a missile instead of a launcher.
NOTE: It does not show up as a missile on the tech screen.
I have attached a screenshot showing the launcher and also the DB that this happened in.
Also worth mention is that someone had a similar issue back in 2.1.0 and posted about it. However they were getting errors in the game and I am not. I will post the link to previous bug report below.
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13050.msg161569#msg161569
-
I'm currently engaged in a home world invasion and my troops have been steadily consuming available supply trucks in the parent formation as expected. However, now that those supply trucks have run out, their supply % should be going down, but is not. I know they normally have enough supply internal to each unit to cover 10 rounds of combat, but it's been much longer than that and everyone's still firing away at 100% supply. I know for sure they still have supply because units set to Forward Attack are still periodically getting breakthroughs, which per the rules they can't do if they run out of supply.
Wondering if this is a consequence of the relatively recent fix that allows units to refill their 10 round reserve when out of combat... could it be allowing it while in combat too, by accident?
-
Repairing ships with crew losses drains crew from the academy pool without actually replenishing casualties. These screenshots were taken 1 construction cycle apart, no other ship construction, repair or crew replacement have taken place:
(https://i.imgur.com/BtcZ3kl.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/cTcQE2x.png)
772+((30*1000/5)/(365/5))-531 = 323 crew drained, as opposed to 328 crew capacity of the repaired ship.
-
The View Technology screen, when looking at CIWS components, does not show the actual ECCM built into a CIWS.
The correct value appears on the class design screen (looking at the CIWS in either race or class components view), and on the Create Research Project screen. Its easy to reproduce - just create a CIWS with any ECCM...
I'm guessing its just a display issue because it does appear correct in the other locations.
Also noticed that the TN start generated tech (and I'm guessing that AI generated tech as well) can build components impossible for the player to design.
For example, active sensor of size 3.6 or resolution of 111...
Not a big deal, just seems strange that we can encounter such components, but can never create them ourselves... ;)
SJW: CIWS display fixed for v2.6
-
What are Function #115 and Function #1658 ?
The error window only says "object reference not set to instance of an object"
-
A pretty minor one, but if you have a bunch of construction units and a small number of ruined installations to recover on a planet, you can get more recoveries than you have available installations. It seems to roll for all construction units first, and even though it will say that the ruins are fully exploited, it'll keep giving you more stuff after that.
In my case, I was doing some testing that happened to involve 102 construction units on a planet with 8 ruins. At the next construction phase, it showed me 8 "Factory Restored" events, a "Ruins Exploited" event, and then six more "Factory Restored" events after that. And it wasn't just cosmetic, the rewards did show up on the planet. (Each of those units was 1x INF-HQ2000 + 6x VEH-2xCON, if that matters.)
SJW: Fixed for v2..6
-
Lost Contact locations are often broken.
In my current game, I have many lost contacts displaying in positions in which I would never have seen them.
In some (maybe all) of these instances, the displayed location relative to the system center matches the relative position of the NPR's HW relative to its system center.
Presumably these ships are currently in orbit of their HW, and my contact info is updating with their current coordinates (but not their current system), even though I do not have a current contact for them, and even though my last contact with them occurred in a different system.
One possible clue:
I believe these ships were all last seen in the system adjacent to their HW.
They were on sensors in this system, near the JP to their home system, and I lost contact when I transited to their home system.
I remained in their home system for a only a few minutes, and transited back, at which point they would have been reestablished on sensors.
So, maybe there's an edge case in the code when a contact is established due to transit.
Possibly in this case the system of contact is recorded as the system that the transited ship left, rather than its current system.
And somehow, when contact is lost subsequently to that, the contact is not removed from the list of active contacts.
-
The input fields for "Range Bands" and "Target Speed" (far right side of Class Design window) allow multiline input.
If you inadvertently input a multiline value in either box, you will receive runtime errors.
2.5.1 Function #237: Input string was not in a correct format.
These errors can be hard to diagnose.
They do not indicate the source, and the input fields only display the bottom line of the input value (unless you return focus to the field and move the cursor up a line).
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
The "X" icon at the extreme top-right of the "Create New Race" screen is non-functional, it does not close the screen as anticipated. The "Cancel" button functions properly to close the screen, so it's obviously not a huge issue.
Specifically, I observe this when SM mode is active and selecting the "Create Race" button from the "System Generation and Display" screen. The "Create New Race" screen that is opened is the one that has the non-functional "X".
SJW: Working as intended, as per Known Issues post.
-
Genetic modification centers works regardless if they are on or not in the Industry tab.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
The "X" icon at the extreme top-right of the "Create New Race" screen is non-functional, it does not close the screen as anticipated. The "Cancel" button functions properly to close the screen, so it's obviously not a huge issue.
Specifically, I observe this when SM mode is active and selecting the "Create Race" button from the "System Generation and Display" screen. The "Create New Race" screen that is opened is the one that has the non-functional "X".
That is working as intended, to ensure that cancelling is done cleanly. It is mentioned in the Known Issues post.
-
Possible bug.
Capturing enemy colony ships by boarding, or forcing them to surrender, the player can obtain alien colonists.
However, it is not possible to create a colony to use these colonists on, the species is not added to the list of options for creating a new colony.
-
Double-clicking the "Overallocation of Labs" event opens the Econ window to the Mining tab instead of the Research tab.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
Right-clicking on the main map (or the galactic map) and selecting a colony opens the Econ window with that colony selected.
Except sometimes it opens the Econ window with no colony selected.
Of the colonies in my game, it works correctly for:
- Colonies with non-zero population.
- Civilian Mining Colonies.
- Colonies with orbital miners in orbit.
It opens with no colony selected for:
- Colonies with only ground units and/or a deep space tracking station
- Colonies with only a mass driver
- DSPs (I have one with nothing at all, and one with only maintenance capacity)
SJW: Can't reproduce - working normally for me.
-
Double-clicking the "Inactive Lab" event opens the Econ window to the Research tab with the homeworld selected, even if the event is at another colony.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
Lost Contact locations are often broken.
In my current game, I have many lost contacts displaying in positions in which I would never have seen them.
In some (maybe all) of these instances, the displayed location relative to the system center matches the relative position of the NPR's HW relative to its system center.
Presumably these ships are currently in orbit of their HW, and my contact info is updating with their current coordinates (but not their current system), even though I do not have a current contact for them, and even though my last contact with them occurred in a different system.
One possible clue:
I believe these ships were all last seen in the system adjacent to their HW.
They were on sensors in this system, near the JP to their home system, and I lost contact when I transited to their home system.
I remained in their home system for a only a few minutes, and transited back, at which point they would have been reestablished on sensors.
So, maybe there's an edge case in the code when a contact is established due to transit.
Possibly in this case the system of contact is recorded as the system that the transited ship left, rather than its current system.
And somehow, when contact is lost subsequently to that, the contact is not removed from the list of active contacts.
I don't fully understand this bug either, just wanted to share my observations:
https://imgur.com/a/APA25vX (https://imgur.com/a/APA25vX)
4 lost contacts displayed in a position where they were never detected, their position relative to the star matches that of 91 Pegasi V and its moons, where the NPR has a few colonies. The 91 Pegasi system is adjacent to the Kuiper 41 where they were detected, and incidentally it is their home system, though their HW is the planet 91 Pegasi III.
https://imgur.com/a/bA2PszN (https://imgur.com/a/bA2PszN)
A partial contact being displayed in two places at the same time, its actual position relative to the star (JP to the system where the fake contact is displayed) matches that of the fake contact.
Ultimately, it does seem to be a case of contacts getting duplicated upon transit (it's not rare that I get two notifications for a single ship transitting a JP where I have a sensor buoy, this might be related) and existing in two systems at once. Although I'm not sure what would cause them to get updated way past a player's detection capabilities like in case 1, as I've never had any detection around the 5th planet.
-
Double-clicking the "Mineral Shortage" event opens the Econ window to the Mining tab with the homeworld selected, even if the shortage is at a different colony.
Same is true for the "Mineral Exhausted" event.
SJW: Both fixed for v2.6
-
Changing the "Research Speed" game option to a value greater than 100 breaks research wealth costs in-game, causing research to consume no wealth at all.
Values of 100 or less function as expected.
Replication: Within any game, new or existing, simply set the "Research Speed" game option to a value greater than 100. Ensure any research project is active and pass at least one construction cycle. Observe the Expenditures table of the Wealth/Trade tab. If this is a new game, you will observe no research expenditure occurring at all. If this is an existing game you will see the amount spent on Research begin to decline, disappearing entirely after whatever time-frame you have selected (1 month, 3 month, etc.) has passed.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
Changing the "Research Speed" game option to a value greater than 100 breaks research wealth costs in-game, causing research to consume no wealth at all.
Values of 100 or less function as expected.
Replication: Within any game, new or existing, simply set the "Research Speed" game option to a value greater than 100. Ensure any research project is active and pass at least one construction cycle. Observe the Expenditures table of the Wealth/Trade tab. If this is a new game, you will observe no research expenditure occurring at all. If this is an existing game you will see the amount spent on Research begin to decline, disappearing entirely after whatever time-frame you have selected (1 month, 3 month, etc.) has passed.
I would actually prefer if the cost to run a Research Facility was fixed regardless of research speed value setting. This is because if you desire to change the difficulty of Research in terms of population and installations needed, isn't it logical to assume you want to also change the wealth cost needed too?
(if you need 10 times as many labs but they only consume 10% the wealth due to 10% speed as now the wealth cost / RP always remains the same )
I guess that is more of a suggestion, but it might simplify fixing this bug ;D
-
Changing the "Research Speed" game option to a value greater than 100 breaks research wealth costs in-game, causing research to consume no wealth at all.
Values of 100 or less function as expected.
Replication: Within any game, new or existing, simply set the "Research Speed" game option to a value greater than 100. Ensure any research project is active and pass at least one construction cycle. Observe the Expenditures table of the Wealth/Trade tab. If this is a new game, you will observe no research expenditure occurring at all. If this is an existing game you will see the amount spent on Research begin to decline, disappearing entirely after whatever time-frame you have selected (1 month, 3 month, etc.) has passed.
I would actually prefer if the cost to run a Research Facility was fixed regardless of research speed value setting. This is because if you desire to change the difficulty of Research in terms of population and installations needed, isn't it logical to assume you want to also change the wealth cost needed too?
(if you need 10 times as many labs but they only consume 10% the wealth due to 10% speed as now the wealth cost / RP always remains the same )
I guess that is more of a suggestion, but it might simplify fixing this bug ;D
If I dropped wealth costs for research along with speed of research, it would change the balance of wealth within the game.
C# has a 'feature' whereby if you code decimal x = int y / int z, it will always return an integer value, not a decimal, losing any fractional value. You need to cast the first int as a decimal before the calculation. I just missed that in this particular case, which caused the bug.
-
C# has a 'feature' whereby if you code decimal x = int y / int z, it will always return an integer value, not a decimal, losing any fractional value. You need to cast the first int as a decimal before the calculation. I just missed that in this particular case, which caused the bug.
Sweet, then it was a simple bugfix ;D
If I dropped wealth costs for research along with speed of research, it would change the balance of wealth within the game.
You are already dropping the wealth cost for research along with the speed. I'm suggesting NOT to do that.
Right now 100 labs at 10% research speed employ 100 million workers (generating alot of wealth in taxes), but they cost just 10% the wealth to run since wealth is connected 1:1 to RP generated.
-
If I dropped wealth costs for research along with speed of research, it would change the balance of wealth within the game.
You are already dropping the wealth cost for research along with the speed. I'm suggesting NOT to do that.
Right now 100 labs at 10% research speed employ 100 million workers (generating alot of wealth in taxes), but they cost just 10% the wealth to run since wealth is connected 1:1 to RP generated.
Agreed, I always thought it was weird that dropping the (racial) research rate made your economy easier. Not that wealth is usually a big challenge, but still.
-
What are Function #115 and Function #1658 ?
The error window only says "object reference not set to instance of an object"
GroundCombatSetup and AssignRegimentsToHQs
-
If I dropped wealth costs for research along with speed of research, it would change the balance of wealth within the game.
You are already dropping the wealth cost for research along with the speed. I'm suggesting NOT to do that.
Right now 100 labs at 10% research speed employ 100 million workers (generating alot of wealth in taxes), but they cost just 10% the wealth to run since wealth is connected 1:1 to RP generated.
Agreed, I always thought it was weird that dropping the (racial) research rate made your economy easier. Not that wealth is usually a big challenge, but still.
The code is:
Wealth Cost = Research Amount * Facilities * ROI * (100.0 / Research Speed)
So to me that means that cost should be independent of speed. If research speed is 25%, then cost should be 4x research amount. Is something else happening in reality?
Note this was the line causing problems with research speed above 100, because it resolved to zero before I fixed the problem. However, anything at 50 or below should increase cost per RP. It was a still a bug that it return an int, so 40 would be 2x and 60+ would be 1x, but less noticeable. 10 though should be 10x in v2.5 even with the bug.
-
The code is:
Wealth Cost = Research Amount * Facilities * ROI * (100.0 / Research Speed)
So to me that means that cost should be independent of speed. If research speed is 25%, then cost should be 4x research amount. Is something else happening in reality?
Note this was the line causing problems with research speed above 100, because it resolved to zero before I fixed the problem. However, anything at 50 or below should increase cost per RP. It was a still a bug that it return an int, so 40 would be 2x and 60+ would be 1x, but less noticeable. 10 though should be 10x in v2.5 even with the bug.
Does the "Research Speed" variable include the racial modifier? I always leave the global value at 100 and set the racial modifier, so as to give the NPRs some compensation for the player's ability to optimize tech rate and path better.
-
The code is:
Wealth Cost = Research Amount * Facilities * ROI * (100.0 / Research Speed)
So to me that means that cost should be independent of speed. If research speed is 25%, then cost should be 4x research amount. Is something else happening in reality?
Note this was the line causing problems with research speed above 100, because it resolved to zero before I fixed the problem. However, anything at 50 or below should increase cost per RP. It was a still a bug that it return an int, so 40 would be 2x and 60+ would be 1x, but less noticeable. 10 though should be 10x in v2.5 even with the bug.
I don't understand exactly what those other variables are, but with a racial research speed in the range 0.5 - 5, which is what I've played with, there seems to be a pretty direct proportional relationship where higher racial research speed costs more for the same number of research facilities. Perhaps 'Research Amount' and/or other values are being calulated with the racial research speed as a coefficient, and the result is cancelling out the divisor, or something like that?
-
The code is:
Wealth Cost = Research Amount * Facilities * ROI * (100.0 / Research Speed)
So to me that means that cost should be independent of speed. If research speed is 25%, then cost should be 4x research amount. Is something else happening in reality?
Something else is happening, but it's hard to say what, exactly.
In my 20% research speed game, I have 91 labs presently generating RP at a rate of 9154/yr (= 762.8/mo) according to the Research tab.
My wealth/trade tab tells me I spent 1541.3 wealth on research over the last month.
Seems like I'm paying 2 wealth per RP.
-
The code is:
Wealth Cost = Research Amount * Facilities * ROI * (100.0 / Research Speed)
So to me that means that cost should be independent of speed. If research speed is 25%, then cost should be 4x research amount. Is something else happening in reality?
Note this was the line causing problems with research speed above 100, because it resolved to zero before I fixed the problem. However, anything at 50 or below should increase cost per RP. It was a still a bug that it return an int, so 40 would be 2x and 60+ would be 1x, but less noticeable. 10 though should be 10x in v2.5 even with the bug.
The game in question I noticed this was played using a 2022 version of the game and using 70% Research speed setting. I did not verify by actually testing 10%, sorry!
-
The code is:
Wealth Cost = Research Amount * Facilities * ROI * (100.0 / Research Speed)
So to me that means that cost should be independent of speed. If research speed is 25%, then cost should be 4x research amount. Is something else happening in reality?
Note this was the line causing problems with research speed above 100, because it resolved to zero before I fixed the problem. However, anything at 50 or below should increase cost per RP. It was a still a bug that it return an int, so 40 would be 2x and 60+ would be 1x, but less noticeable. 10 though should be 10x in v2.5 even with the bug.
Does the "Research Speed" variable include the racial modifier? I always leave the global value at 100 and set the racial modifier, so as to give the NPRs some compensation for the player's ability to optimize tech rate and path better.
In my testing it does not seem to include the racial modifier.
If one lowers the game option research modifier for all races to a value less than 100, research costs per research point increase as you'd imagine. Or put another way, cost per lab stays the same.
However, if you lower the RACIAL research modifier to a value less than 1.00, research costs per research point stay the same, or cost per lab is reduced proportional to the reduction in modifier.
These two settings are inconsistent with each other, and personally I'd favor an approach that harmonized the racial research modifier to that of the overall game research modifier, otherwise lowering the racial research modifier unbalances wealth generation and kind of trivializes it, given what a large proportion of overall wealth research can eat up.
-
Double-clicking the "Civilian Mining Colony" event (for a new CMC) opens the Econ window to the Mining tab with the homeworld selected, instead of the new colony.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
What are Function #115 and Function #1658 ?
The error window only says "object reference not set to instance of an object"
GroundCombatSetup and AssignRegimentsToHQs
So if there's an error occurring, what might be happening, is it preventing NPRs building ground units, and would I be able to do anything about it ?
The only thing that I think I might have done that could have caused this, was transferring some ground units to a friendly NPR with the intention of helping them in a ground war against another NPR on the same body. So the NPR might still have some of those ground units left, which they wouldn't necessarily have the right ground force doctrine for.
-
The code is:
Wealth Cost = Research Amount * Facilities * ROI * (100.0 / Research Speed)
So to me that means that cost should be independent of speed. If research speed is 25%, then cost should be 4x research amount. Is something else happening in reality?
How can the cost be independent of the research speed when it is literally multiplied by the speed?
The cost of a research lab should be based on the number of people that it employed during the increment, not the amount of research that it accomplished. As it stands, at 10% research speed you just need to employ 10× the number of people (in 10× the number of labs), as you would at 100% speed. The total wealth cost will be the same either way, because each lab costs only 10% as much.
-
The code is:
Wealth Cost = Research Amount * Facilities * ROI * (100.0 / Research Speed)
So to me that means that cost should be independent of speed. If research speed is 25%, then cost should be 4x research amount. Is something else happening in reality?
How can the cost be independent of the research speed when it is literally multiplied by the speed?
I think because, in the above calculation, Research Amount has already been adjusted for the Research Speed game setting (presumably by multiplying by Research Speed / 100).
Therefore this cost calculation multiplies by the inverse factor to cancel it out.
-
Right-clicking on the main map (or the galactic map) and selecting a colony opens the Econ window with that colony selected.
Except sometimes it opens the Econ window with no colony selected.
Of the colonies in my game, it works correctly for:
- Colonies with non-zero population.
- Civilian Mining Colonies.
- Colonies with orbital miners in orbit.
It opens with no colony selected for:
- Colonies with only ground units and/or a deep space tracking station
- Colonies with only a mass driver
- DSPs (I have one with nothing at all, and one with only maintenance capacity)
SJW: Can't reproduce - working normally for me.
That's so weird.
Just to confirm, if you do this:
1) make a new colony anywhere.
2) right click the colony location on the main map, and select the colony to open it
Then the econ window opens with the colony selected?
For me, the econ window is blank. No colony is selected.
-
The code is:
Wealth Cost = Research Amount * Facilities * ROI * (100.0 / Research Speed)
So to me that means that cost should be independent of speed. If research speed is 25%, then cost should be 4x research amount. Is something else happening in reality?
How can the cost be independent of the research speed when it is literally multiplied by the speed?
I think because, in the above calculation, Research Amount has already been adjusted for the Research Speed game setting (presumably by multiplying by Research Speed / 100).
Therefore this cost calculation multiplies by the inverse factor to cancel it out.
Yes, that's correct.
-
The code is:
Wealth Cost = Research Amount * Facilities * ROI * (100.0 / Research Speed)
So to me that means that cost should be independent of speed. If research speed is 25%, then cost should be 4x research amount. Is something else happening in reality?
Note this was the line causing problems with research speed above 100, because it resolved to zero before I fixed the problem. However, anything at 50 or below should increase cost per RP. It was a still a bug that it return an int, so 40 would be 2x and 60+ would be 1x, but less noticeable. 10 though should be 10x in v2.5 even with the bug.
Does the "Research Speed" variable include the racial modifier? I always leave the global value at 100 and set the racial modifier, so as to give the NPRs some compensation for the player's ability to optimize tech rate and path better.
No, it is only affected by the overall game research speed.
I agree it probably is better to modify by the racial research speed as well. I'll add that to the game.
EDIT: The formula is now
Wealth Cost = Research Amount * Facilities * ROI * (100.0 / Game Research Speed) * (1 / Species Research Speed)
-
What are Function #115 and Function #1658 ?
The error window only says "object reference not set to instance of an object"
GroundCombatSetup and AssignRegimentsToHQs
So if there's an error occurring, what might be happening, is it preventing NPRs building ground units, and would I be able to do anything about it ?
The only thing that I think I might have done that could have caused this, was transferring some ground units to a friendly NPR with the intention of helping them in a ground war against another NPR on the same body. So the NPR might still have some of those ground units left, which they wouldn't necessarily have the right ground force doctrine for.
All NPR ground force formations have something called an Automated Template ID, which provides the AI with the function of that formation for deployment purposes. If you transfer something you designed to an NPR, it won't have that ID, causing the above error when the AI queries the formation.
How did you do the transfer? I need to remove that option if it exists in game.
-
How did you do the transfer? I need to remove that option if it exists in game.
I did it with the "Transfer Alien" button on the Ground Forces window.
-
Right-clicking on the main map (or the galactic map) and selecting a colony opens the Econ window with that colony selected.
Except sometimes it opens the Econ window with no colony selected.
Of the colonies in my game, it works correctly for:
- Colonies with non-zero population.
- Civilian Mining Colonies.
- Colonies with orbital miners in orbit.
It opens with no colony selected for:
- Colonies with only ground units and/or a deep space tracking station
- Colonies with only a mass driver
- DSPs (I have one with nothing at all, and one with only maintenance capacity)
SJW: Can't reproduce - working normally for me.
That's so weird.
Just to confirm, if you do this:
1) make a new colony anywhere.
2) right click the colony location on the main map, and select the colony to open it
Then the econ window opens with the colony selected?
For me, the econ window is blank. No colony is selected.
I've just created an empty colony in a random system, then right-clicked that system on the galactic map and clicked the colony. The Economics window opened with that new colony selected.
It is possible there was a bug in v2.5 that I accidentally fixed while working on other things.
-
How did you do the transfer? I need to remove that option if it exists in game.
I did it with the "Transfer Alien" button on the Ground Forces window.
Thanks - I'll either disable that for transfer to NPRs, or find a way to set a template ID for unknown formations.
EDIT: I've added some code that allows NPRs to analyse any transferred formation and assign them one of their own templates (infantry, armour, STO, Brigade HQ, survey, xeno, construction or decomtamination), depending on the composition of the formation and the designs of the units therein.
-
Double-clicking the "Unrest Increasing" event opens the Econ window with the homeworld selected, even if the unrest is occurring at a different colony.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
In the System Generation and Display window, using Wide View, the colony cost projection panel (bottom right) is blank for moons with no eccentricity around planets with non-zero eccentricity, even though the temperature on such a moon will vary by the planet's distance from the sun.
-
Auto Refit task gets faster each iteration.
I have a 1kt, 2-slip yard that is auto-refitting some fighter scouts.
The slips began the task simultaneously, and I have had no mineral shortages, so the tasks have also been completing simultaneously.
My current FCT_GameLog contains the last eight pairs of completion events, which indicate that the time between refits has been steadily decreasing.
timestamp Date H M S seconds delta
998452620 08/22/2056 03 57 00
1002134825 10/03/2056 18 47 05 3682205
1005221275 11/08/2056 12 07 55 3086450 595755
1007692540 12/07/2056 02 35 40 2471265 615185
1009554030 12/28/2056 15 40 30 1861490 609775
1010872480 01/12/2057 21 54 40 1318450 543040
1011583850 01/21/2057 03 30 50 711370 607080
1011853930 01/24/2057 06 32 10 270080 441290
(Note that this task has been ongoing for longer than the log shows. That first completion event above was not the first completion for this Auto Refit task.)
The next refit just started, and was projected to finish in just two days (1-26-2057).
I canceled the task and started a new one, and the projected finish is in 55 days (3-20-2057), which is the expected duration by my calculations:
The cost of the refit task is 43.
The build rate displayed for the task on the Shipyard Task tab is 286.
43/286 * 365 = ~54.9.
Other possibly pertinent info:
The source ship is 471 tons (9.4138 exact size).
The target ship is 500 tons (9.9994 exact size).
My governor's shipbuilding bonus is 30%. No sector.
My race is still at starting shipbuilding rate (400).
The planet has had 100% in all economic modifiers for the duration.
DB attached.
-
Ship components in a ship's cargo hold only occupy the space of a single component, no matter how many are there.
I have a fleet with a single ship with 400t cargo space.
I gave an order to load Crew Quarters (50t each) at a colony.
The ship loaded 8 (as expected).
After loading, the fleet's cargo capacity read "400 (350)", indicating that only 50t of space was being used.
I gave another order to load Crew Quarters.
The ship loaded 7.
I now have 15 of these 50t components loaded, despite only having 400t of cargo space.
SJW: Yes, I noticed this in my own game and fixed it.
-
Double-clicking the "Fighter Construction" event opens the Industry tab of the Econ window with the homeworld selected, even if the event occurred at a different colony.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6. The reason for the similar errors of this type is that the event generation function is overloaded and I haven't always used the full parameter list that allows the correct behaviour in these cases.
-
Not sure if this is a bug, or just a mechanic that needs more clarification in-game, but currently to disassemble a component for tech at a population, there's a pop-up saying it can only be done at a population "with at least one operating Research Facility."
While true, it appears that a corollary to this is you need at least one operating Research Facility that is also fully staffed. At a colony with 2 operating research facilities but suffering a severe workforce shortage, I was not able to disassemble the component, but once I raised the population/remove enough other facilities so that there were enough workers to fully staff one of the Research Facilities I was then able to perform the disassembly.
I think the fully staffed requirement may be intended as you need enough people to analyze an alien component, but the pop-up is misleading in that case.
SJW: Working as intended
-
TLDR:
It looks like you are using 1 AU = 1.496 bkm when calculating distance from parent at Aphelion/Perihelion, but 1 AU = 1.5 bkm when calculating current distance.
This results in very slight discrepancies between the Ap/Peri temperatures shown for a body, vs the actual temperatures experienced.
-----------------
Am I correct that DistanceToParent represents the distance to the surface of the parent body, and therefore is the appropriate value to use to calculate temperature?
(Moons use the value of their parent, of course.)
It seems that asteroids are using instead OrbitalDistance (distance to center of parent body).
This gives them very slightly lower temperatures in-game than would be expected by calculation.
It also seems that the aphelion/perihelion temperature calculation is using orbital distance (i.e. not subtracting out the radius of the star) for all bodies (not just asteroids), with the exception of non-asteroids with zero eccentricity.
This leads to a common situation for planets with low (but non-zero) eccentricity (and their moons) where the current surface temp in game is above the displayed min/max temp range.
EDIT: Maybe something even simpler is going on.
For all zero-eccentricity non-moon system bodies (excluding Sol) in my database, the value (as calculated by SQLite) of OrbitalDistance / DistanceToParent
is between
1.00267379679165and
1.00267379679124
For 8330 of the 8665 such bodies, the value is exactly
1.00267379679144
For a body with zero eccentricity, we would expect this ratio to either be exactly 1 for all bodies (if both values convey the distance from center of body to center of parent), or we would expect that ratio to vary significantly from body to body (if one value conveys the center-to-center distance, while the other conveys surface-to-surface or center-to-surface).
Since these ratios vary only a tiny amount, perhaps both values convey center-to-center distance, but some kind of rounding or unit conversion is happening differently in their calculations?
EDIT 2:
I bet it's conversion of km to AU.
1 AU = 1.496e+8 km
If you use 1.5 in one place, and 1.496 in the other, you'd have differences by a factor of 1.5/1.496 = 1.00267379679144.
SJW: Great spot! For some reason, I have two constants. AUKM and KMAU, with them set to 1.496 and 1.5. I'll fix it for v2.6. Thanks.
-
Double-clicking the "Civilian Mining Colony" event (for a new CMC being established) opens the Mining tab of the Econ window with the homeworld selected, instead of with the new colony selected.
SJW: Fixed for v2.6
-
Salvaged alien components that only exist inside cargo holds of freighters (not on any colony) are not shown as available for me in the Class Design list even when you have the "Use Alien Tech" flag set true in Priorities tab.
SJW: Working as intended. Only those components available to use in designs are shown. Components in freighters are not available.
-
Salvaged alien components that only exist inside cargo holds of freighters (not on any colony) are not shown as available for me in the Class Design list even when you have the "Use Alien Tech" flag set true in Priorities tab.
Not a bug AFAIK, you have to unload components to a colony first for them to be available for design work.
-
SJW: Working as intended. Only those components available to use in designs are shown. Components in freighters are not available.
Still a bit annoying for cases where I want to make a design to start retooling a shipyard but my freighter already loaded the components at the front and is on the way for it's 1 year journey home to main SY with them. I know it's an edge case though probably not worth making a special case for.
-
Tugs will lose their tractor links when their fleet gets absorbed if the tug's ShipID is higher than that of the ship it's tractoring.
To replicate:
1. Order a ship equipped with a tractor beam to tractor a ship that's older than it (preferrably a slow or engineless one).
2. Save, close and reopen the game.
3. Order another fleet to absorb the tug fleet.
4. Upon absorption the fleet will slow down to the speed of the previously tractored ship, the ship will remain in the new fleet if the tug is detached.
This is quite annoying to deal with if you're using tugs as jump tenders like I do. Changing the tugged ship's ShipID to a higher number "fixes" this, but I suspect it'll break some other stuff.
-
Hi. Today i continued to play my campaign and once in a while errors appears. I dont know what coused this errors, but there were no errors last time i played.
For example, I increment some time and errors appear, then they are gone. Then game goes without errors, time goes on and some time later they appear again.
Function: 2444
The given key was not present in the dictionary
Then
Function: 22
Object reference not set to instance of an object
The window affected: main
Conventional start
Real starts
Deciamal
Bug is intermittent
Comapign goes for 89 years
-
Tugs will lose their tractor links when their fleet gets absorbed if the tug's ShipID is higher than that of the ship it's tractoring.
To replicate:
1. Order a ship equipped with a tractor beam to tractor a ship that's older than it (preferrably a slow or engineless one).
2. Save, close and reopen the game.
3. Order another fleet to absorb the tug fleet.
4. Upon absorption the fleet will slow down to the speed of the previously tractored ship, the ship will remain in the new fleet if the tug is detached.
This is quite annoying to deal with if you're using tugs as jump tenders like I do. Changing the tugged ship's ShipID to a higher number "fixes" this, but I suspect it'll break some other stuff.
The same thing happens when giving a tug fleet orders to join another fleet.
-
When awarding medals that can be awarded more than once, the citation added during the award overwrites previous citations for all instances of the same medal.
-
Civilian colony ships get stuck frequently with multi-species empires.
If you have multiple species in your empire, even such things as a genetically modified species, then civilian colony ships and space liners will often become stuck, by picking up colonists from a world, then finding there is no drop-off point.
They will load up with colonists of a species, and then sit in orbit, if there is no other colony in the empire of that species.
To unstick them, you need at least two populations of each species in the empire.
-
Civilian colony ships get stuck frequently with multi-species empires.
If you have multiple species in your empire, even such things as a genetically modified species, then civilian colony ships and space liners will often become stuck, by picking up colonists from a world, then finding there is no drop-off point.
They will load up with colonists of a species, and then sit in orbit, if there is no other colony in the empire of that species.
To unstick them, you need at least two populations of each species in the empire.
You can also set all alien populations to destination rather than supply, which will then allow shipping lines to drop off their alien colonists and to pick up your primary species once again.
-
Civilian colony ships get stuck frequently with multi-species empires.
If you have multiple species in your empire, even such things as a genetically modified species, then civilian colony ships and space liners will often become stuck, by picking up colonists from a world, then finding there is no drop-off point.
They will load up with colonists of a species, and then sit in orbit, if there is no other colony in the empire of that species.
To unstick them, you need at least two populations of each species in the empire.
You can also set all alien populations to destination rather than supply, which will then allow shipping lines to drop off their alien colonists and to pick up your primary species once again.
That works for most colony ships, but the spaceliners will still get stuck in orbit, since they don't really follow the destination/supply settings.
-
Fighter factories can construct fighters even when components of said fighters are unresearched.
-
Conditional order "Clear Order List" not working, possibly only with cycling orders.
I had a tanker fleet with orders as follows:
--Refuel at Fleet Foo (delay 1 day)
--Move to Fleet Foo
The Cycle Orders checkbox was ticked.
Conditional order parameters were:
--Fuel tanks full
--Clear Order list
No standing orders set.
Fleet Foo is a harvester fleet, slowly gaining fuel.
When the tanker fleet fuel tanks were eventually full, the conditional order did not proc.
When I changed the conditional order to "Move to Entry Jump Point" it procced immediately.
I have not tested to see if Clear Order List works with non-cycling orders, or with other conditions.
-
Something strange is going on with "Refuel Stationary Fleet" orders.
Fleet A contains a tug and a tanker, moving towards a jump point.
Fleet B contains just a tanker, stationed (no orders) at the other side of the jump point from Fleet A.
Fleet A orders:
Standard transit J.
Refuel stationary fleet B.
Result: Fleet A transits and immediately reports completion of all orders, but did not transfer any fuel to B.
Weird, why no fuel transferred?
Let's back up and try it a different way:
Fleet A orders:
Standard transit J.
Refuel stationary fleet B (delay 10 minutes).
Result: Fleet A transits, waits 10 minutes, and then successfully begins transferring fuel to B.
Tried it again with a delay of 5 seconds instead of 10 minutes, and no fuel was transferred.
Tried it again with a delay of 10 seconds, and no fuel was transferred.
That was while using a 5-minute time increments.
Tried it again with a delay of 10 seconds and a time increment of 5 seconds.
Fuel was successfully transferred.
Perhaps during turn processing something related to updating a fleet's current system happens after fuel transfers?
I have not yet tested with tankers that are not being tugged. Could be that the transiting tug is being handled correctly in the code, but the tractored ship is not.
-
I would bet more on something related to jump shock.
-
I would bet more on something related to jump shock.
Jump shock that ends after 10 seconds for a standard transit?
(Read the last test case.)
-
Order delays are not applied to an auto-included Lagrange point transit.
1) select a fleet in a system with 2 or more LPs
2) With the "Auto-include Lagrange Points" checkbox ticked, give a move order, with a delay, to somewhere that will cause the inclusion of an LP transit.
Result: The delay is applied to the given order, rather than to the auto-included LP transit.
-
I have weird bahaviour from time to time but on regular basis - jumping population size to the very high values and almost instant mid game research
like 120bn population in sol
-
I have weird bahaviour from time to time but on regular basis - jumping population size to the very high values and almost instant mid game research
like 120bn population in sol
Is your decimal separator a comma?
-
yes it was
I am freshly moved to win 11 so I did not pay attention ( and it was hidden nastily deep)
I assume after switching there shouldn't be more problems ?
-
A fleet that has had its speed set via the Set Speed button (and with the "Use Maximum Speed" checkbox unticked) reverts to max speed (though the checkbox remains unticked) whenever another fleet joins, or whenever ships are detached from the fleet.
-
I recently landed a small scout on a carrier briefly--just long enough to refuel.
When it landed, the scout transferred to the carrier the single survivor (of my race) that the scout had been carrying.
Now (starting at the next construction cycle), I am getting the "Ship Overcrowded" message for the carrier.
The message says that the overcrowding on the carrier will increase the rate at which time passes for deployment purposes by 5.09x.
That seems rather a hefty penalty to be applied to an entirely undamaged ship with 136 crew for carrying a single extra person on board.
It is especially strange considering that I was getting no overcrowding message for the scout prior to the survivor transfer. (The scout design has 11 crew members.)
The carrier is carrying a 1kt missile station--a design that has just one crew member.
Perhaps the penalty calculation is using that parasite rather than the carrier itself?
-
When designing a box launcher, the explanatory text at the bottom of the righthand pane contains outdated information about reloading:
Note that Box or Decoy Launchers are not affected by increases in Reload Rate Technology as they may only be reloaded in a hangar deck or at maintenance facilities. Reload Rate 1 will automatically be used for their design
-
My game recently lost some information related to geo surveys.
Two different types of information I am aware of the game having lost:
1) Records of completed geo surveys.
2) The existence of ground-based survey potential at a planet.
1) Lost records of completed geo surveys.
Two different geo survey fleets of mine have entries in their fleet histories indicating completion of geo surveys for bodies that are nevertheless still showing as not surveyed.
I can see in the database (FCT_SystemBodySurveys) that there is no record of my race having surveyed the bodies in question.
The logged dates of all of the missing surveys are within a roughly two-week span (which happened a few months prior to my noticing the problem).
The histories of both fleets contain completed surveys (both before and after the "missing" surveys) for which the associated record in FCT_SystemBodySurveys is NOT missing.
None of my other survey fleets have any fleet history records for completed surveys in this two-week span.
It stands to reason that I lost all records of completed geo surveys within this span--it just so happens that only two of my fleets completed surveys during that window.
I save my game sometimes quite often (in terms of game time).
It would be not at all unusual for me to save a game just two weeks after my previous save.
So, the beginning and end of the time span of missing survey records could very likely correspond to two consecutive instances of me saving the game.
The strongest suspicion I have is that the data was lost while saving the game--somehow, FCT_FleetHistory was updated, while FCT_SystemBodySurveys was not.
2) Lost records of ground-based survey potential at a planet.
About a year prior to this, a geo survey fleet completed a geo survey which revealed the potential of a ground based survey at a planet.
I dispatched a troop transport with a ground survey team to the planet.
When the transport arrived and unloaded the survey troops, the planet no longer indicated that it had any ground survey potential.
It is not the case that the survey may have completed without my noticing--I inspected the planet immediately upon the unloading of the troops (which was the last order in the troop transport's order list, so caused an interrupt upon completion), and the survey would have taken nearly two years to complete.
Apologies for this somewhat vague report, but I feel the report is merited nevertheless, if only to give you something to be aware of, and perhaps provide some useful clue in case you do notice some similar behavior.
-
Minor display quirk:
On the main map, if the "Waypoints" checkbox in the Display options is unticked, any fleets located at waypoints won't have a visible dot (although the fleet text is still displayed near their location).
-
Double-clicking the "Ruins Exploited" event (for an ancient construct being fully surveyed) opens the Summary tab of the Econ window with the homeworld selected.
I would expect it to open the Ancient Constructs tab with the appertaining colony selected.
-
An NPR ship within active sensor range of my STOs on a planet (but within no other active sensor range, only in thermal range of one of my ships) fired on my STOs in three consecutive 5-sec increments.
The third increment provided an Intelligence Update event, because the ship was at greater range than we had previously seen it fire.
Great, it updated the known max range of the NPR's weapon.
I would have expected the ROF to be updated as well.
But no. The ROF shown for the weapon on the Intel window is still "99...".
Meaning that active sensors for STOs don't appear to be updating ROF intel for NPR weapons.
-
Ordnance Transfer Hubs currently do not function to reload box launchers. Tested multiple times with different designs and in different systems.
-
Error Message:
"2.5.1 Function #2186:Attempted to divide by zero."
Cause: Accidentally set 0% when creating Ground Units.
Reproducible by setting 0% on the GU Training tab in the Economy Window.
Error persists with reloading.
-
Ordnance Transfer Hubs currently do not function to reload box launchers. Tested multiple times with different designs and in different systems.
The purpose of Ordnance Transfer Hubs is to transfer ammo to/from magazines. Sounds like it's working as intended. For reloading box launchers, you want a hangar or (I think) a Spaceport.
-
The purpose of Ordnance Transfer Hubs is to transfer ammo to/from magazines. Sounds like it's working as intended. For reloading box launchers, you want a hangar or (I think) a Spaceport.
From Steve's post about reloading box launchers (http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg109127#msg109127):
For C# Aurora, box launchers can only be reloaded in a hangar, or at an Ordnance Transfer Point (a Spaceport, Ordnance Transfer Station or Ordnance Transfer Hub).
-
The purpose of Ordnance Transfer Hubs is to transfer ammo to/from magazines. Sounds like it's working as intended. For reloading box launchers, you want a hangar or (I think) a Spaceport.
From Steve's post about reloading box launchers (http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg109127#msg109127):
For C# Aurora, box launchers can only be reloaded in a hangar, or at an Ordnance Transfer Point (a Spaceport, Ordnance Transfer Station or Ordnance Transfer Hub).
Well there you go then. Maybe it's been a bug with transfer hubs all along and I've internalised it as 'how it's supposed to be'. Sorry for the bad info.
-
The purpose of Ordnance Transfer Hubs is to transfer ammo to/from magazines. Sounds like it's working as intended. For reloading box launchers, you want a hangar or (I think) a Spaceport.
From Steve's post about reloading box launchers (http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg109127#msg109127):
For C# Aurora, box launchers can only be reloaded in a hangar, or at an Ordnance Transfer Point (a Spaceport, Ordnance Transfer Station or Ordnance Transfer Hub).
Well there you go then. Maybe it's been a bug with transfer hubs all along and I've internalised it as 'how it's supposed to be'. Sorry for the bad info.
I reported this issue back in 1.13 version (https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=12522.msg156478#msg156478), so it seems to be the case, sadly.
Or do we miss something about how it's suppose to work?
-
Civ shipping lines *usually* will only ship colonists to a colony if sufficient infrastructure is in place to accommodate them.
However, they don't seem to take atmospheric dust into account when figuring out the current colony cost to determine how much space is available.
As a result, civvies can seriously overpopulate colonies with significant dust levels.
-
"5th Company of Engineers has recovered an abandoned Research Lab plus technical information on 10cm Advanced Laser Focal Size on Procul Astrum IV"
I'm pretty sure Advanced weapons used to be a thing you could discover, but I thought it was phased out. Is this a remnant? In the Wiki I found "You may find advanced versions of beam weapon technology when you gain technology from ruins. They as similar to the standard technology but with enhanced capability. For example, Advanced Lasers do more damage for the same size and power requirements. This also translates to better range as the base damage is higher. Advanced Torpedoes inflict also do more damage for a given size and power system. Advanced Railguns get one additional shot (5 shots instead of 4) per cycle time and Advanced Mesons have greater range."
I can't see any way to actually use this tech I've discovered... There's no weapon with that name in the tech lists or as a component in the class design and it's not listed as an option when I try to design a laser. It does show up as having been researched if I check under the EW "Researched" option. I can also now research 12cm Advanced Laser Focal Size, but again as far as I can tell that wouldn't do anything as I can't seem to design an "Advanced Laser" to use that tech.
-
I recently landed a small scout on a carrier briefly--just long enough to refuel.
When it landed, the scout transferred to the carrier the single survivor (of my race) that the scout had been carrying.
Now (starting at the next construction cycle), I am getting the "Ship Overcrowded" message for the carrier.
The message says that the overcrowding on the carrier will increase the rate at which time passes for deployment purposes by 5.09x.
That seems rather a hefty penalty to be applied to an entirely undamaged ship with 136 crew for carrying a single extra person on board.
It is especially strange considering that I was getting no overcrowding message for the scout prior to the survivor transfer. (The scout design has 11 crew members.)
The carrier is carrying a 1kt missile station--a design that has just one crew member.
Perhaps the penalty calculation is using that parasite rather than the carrier itself?
I posted the above a couple weeks ago.
A similar issue arose today:
A single parasite, very damaged (components and armor) lands on a carrier, which is also damaged (components and armor).
As the carrier moves back to base, all damaged components on both ships get repaired, and the armor on the parasite starts getting repaired.
Both ships run out of MSP, and I start getting the "No Spare Parts" event ("{ship name} ({fleet name}) unable to carry out armour repair due to insufficient maintenance supplies").
I'm running 8-hour increments, and this event occurs every increment for three days (which spans several const cycles--mine are 86399 seconds).
Then I get an event that an engine on the carrier has suffered a maintenance failure and could not be repaired (because no MSP available).
Okay, that's not great but no big deal, we're almost home and the repair crews there are on standby. We can limp along with the two remaining engines.
Now the bug:
Starting with the first const cycle after having an engine damaged, I start getting the Ship Overcrowded event for the carrier, with a 4.99x multiplier for deployment clock time passage.
Obviously a ship should not be considered overcrowded just because it has a damaged engine. The crew doesn't live in the engine room (usually; there are exceptions (https://firefly.fandom.com/wiki/Kaywinnet_Lee_Frye)).
Three things perhaps worth noting:
1) At no point did either ship suffer damage to a crew quarters component.
2) No survivors are onboard either ship. (Nor prisoners nor anything else.)
3) This is the same carrier design as in the prior report (but probably not the exact same ship). There is nothing unusual about the design--active sensor, armor, bridge, crew quarters, engines, eng spaces, fuel storage, hangar decks, maint storage, thermal sensor.
-
I think I finally found and fixed the CIWS bug. Essentially, missiles without decoys were registered as hit but not removed and there was also a separate issue around ECCM advantage causing the same result. Should be fixed now for v2.6.
-
Surveying a ruin will cause every ruin left behind by the same race to become fully surveyed as well. On the attached screenshot, only the top outpost was surveyed by archaeologists, while the middle ruin was never studied and the bottom ruin's body (pictured) was never even approached. Also used the DB to check another unsurveyed, yet fully known ruin: it belongs to the same race as another ruin I've excavated years ago.
I understand this is probably a feature, but maybe a geological survey or a troop landing should be necessary to learn the extent of a known race's ruin, as is the case for unknown ones? Being able to determine the exact amount of installations from billions of kilometers away feels like a bug.
Also, petitioning to make xenoarchaelogy operate in the same way ground geosurveys do, with a set number of survey points based on body and ruin size needed for completion instead of the RNG we have now.
-
I got a notification of mineral exhausted on Absolus, but I don't have any Absolus colony... I'm missing something?
Probably is connected to civilian mining colony? Still, I can't find the original name of the asteroid where mineral are exhausted. So probably the notification should have the colony name: Cadorna Ventures CMC etc...
-
I got a notification of mineral exhausted on Absolus, but I don't have any Absolus colony... I'm missing something?
There is a "System Body" checkbox beneath the colony list pane.
Tick that, and the body for each colony is included in parentheses after the colony name.
-
Double-clicking the "Alien Communication" event usually centers the map on the fleet that received the communication.
However, if the communication was sent to a colony rather than a fleet, it opens the Summary tab of the Econ window with the homeworld selected.
I would expect it not to open the Econ window, but to center the map on the colony that received the communication.
-
Error Message:
"2.5.1 Function #2186:Attempted to divide by zero."
Cause: Accidentally set 0% when creating Ground Units.
Reproducible by setting 0% on the GU Training tab in the Economy Window.
Error persists with reloading.
Yep I can also say I got that error. Copying the planet and deleting the broken one got rid of the error. Pressing the create task button in the ground troops window with no BP, breaks the game basically.
-
I'm not sure if this is a bug or working as intended, but firing missiles from a Military Station (Ship without engines) has a lower chance to hit then missiles fired from actual warships when all other tech remains the same. This seems to be happening to my beam weapons in addition to my missiles, in the screenshot's provided, do note the station (THOR Mk.I) has the same turret with a simple improved TS over the ship (Manchester)
-
Merry Christmas to you all! :)
I moved a waypoint.
Now, in the same system, I would like to add another WP. But the game let me only move the WP I moved before.
Selecting any other WP button is useless: no WP is created.
Even deleting the WP I moved is useless: no WP can still be added.
Only saving, closing and restarting the game resolves this behaviour.
Unfortunately, this means even if I share here the DB you cannot reproduce the issue.
-
Merry Christmas to you all! :)
I moved a waypoint.
Now, in the same system, I would like to add another WP. But the game let me only move the WP I moved before.
Selecting any other WP button is useless: no WP is created.
Even deleting the WP I moved is useless: no WP can still be added.
Only saving, closing and restarting the game resolves this behaviour.
Unfortunately, this means even if I share here the DB you cannot reproduce the issue.
"Move Waypoint" command is getting fixed in 2.6.0.
-
Thanks Ghostly!
Let's hope we have not to wait too much! ;D
-
Detaching multiple ships from a fleet with a one-character name causes an error popup with this message :
2.5.1 Function #2275: StartIndex cannot be less than zero.
Parameter name: startIndex
Clicking OK dismisses the popup, and the new fleet is created successfully--although it has the same name as the original fleet, rather than having " 02" appended.
-
NPR removes access to geological data - systems cannot be automatically resurveyed.
Encountered this in my game recently. A NPR had collected some geological data on a star system, and I later obtained the survey data, via a diplomatic agreement. Some time later, the NPR revoked access to their geological data.
I then found several systems where most of, in some cases all, the bodies had reverted to U for unsurveyed. To complicate things, those systems were not detected as needing surveyed by the automatic standing order "Move to system requiring geosurvey". Manually moving a survey ship to the system allowed it to survey the stellar bodies, but if the ship left due to deployment exceeded or low fuel, it would not return automatically.
Skoormit and Ragnar on the Aurora Discord suggested examining the database, and looking in FCT_RaceSysSurvey for the relevant flag, which is GeoSurveyDefaultDone. For the affected systems, that flag was still set to 1, despite the bodies now being U for unsurveyed. Setting the flag to 0 in the database, allowed survey ships with the "move to system requiring geosurvey" standing order to detect the systems and move there to survey them.
-
Hello guys, I'm not sure is a bug or intended gameplay. I conquer a colony of a spoiler race, with some Abandoned Installations. After the message of conquer, I think I got a copy of the excact same colony with DST and other structures. Planet is Epsilon Indi-A II, I'll attach screenshots. One colony is "occupied" in the Political Status, the other one no. Is it probably because I created a colony before actually conquer it with gorund forces? Shall I delete one of the colony with Spacemaster?
-
Hello guys, I'm not sure is a bug or intended gameplay. I conquer a colony of a spoiler race, with some Abandoned Installations. After the message of conquer, I think I got a copy of the excact same colony with DST and other structures. Planet is Epsilon Indi-A II, I'll attach screenshots. One colony is "occupied" in the Political Status, the other one no. Is it probably because I created a colony before actually conquer it with gorund forces? Shall I delete one of the colony with Spacemaster?
This works as intended.
No need to use space master for this. In Economics window, there is button Delete Pop, this will delete selected colony. There is also Delete Empty button, this will delete all empty colonies. Just be sure you will delete correct colony as all things in the colony will be lost when you delete it.
-
Hello guys, I'm not sure is a bug or intended gameplay. I conquer a colony of a spoiler race, with some Abandoned Installations. After the message of conquer, I think I got a copy of the excact same colony with DST and other structures. Planet is Epsilon Indi-A II, I'll attach screenshots. One colony is "occupied" in the Political Status, the other one no. Is it probably because I created a colony before actually conquer it with gorund forces? Shall I delete one of the colony with Spacemaster?
before deleting the emptier one, you might as well put your xenologists and engineers on it, to recover the installations
Then use cargo ships to take the installations and drop them onto the other one.
-
Hello guys, I'm not sure is a bug or intended gameplay. I conquer a colony of a spoiler race, with some Abandoned Installations. After the message of conquer, I think I got a copy of the excact same colony with DST and other structures. Planet is Epsilon Indi-A II, I'll attach screenshots. One colony is "occupied" in the Political Status, the other one no. Is it probably because I created a colony before actually conquer it with gorund forces? Shall I delete one of the colony with Spacemaster?
before deleting the emptier one, you might as well put your xenologists and engineers on it, to recover the installations
Then use cargo ships to take the installations and drop them onto the other one.
This is not a bug
The abandoned installaions from the ruins are in both colonies. ANy survivin spoiler installtions will be in one colony. If one colony has surviving installationsDST's etc, use the ground forces window to move your troops to the colony you intend to keep. (or load them back in their transports) then delete the empty colony , either the occupied one or the one you created. There is no need to move the installations between the colonies just pick one and keep it.
If the occupied colony is not a spoiler and is inhabited you may want to keep both colonies so you can put a colony of your race on the same body
-
what is function #5 ?
-
what is function #5 ?
RaceFleetOrders()
You'll need to be more specific about the error. What was the error text, what were you doing, is it intermittent, etc.? See the first post of this thread for details.
-
I have encountered an error when advancing time (possibly linked to construction timings):
The function number: #2780
The complete error text: 2.5.1 Function #2780 Object Reference not set to an instance of an object.
The window affected: System Map / All
What you were doing at the time: Advancing time after rebuilding / refitting all the designed ships.
Conventional or TN start: TN Start
Random or Real Stars: Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma?: Yes
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?: Yes
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: 53 year campaign.
-
I have encountered an error when advancing time (possibly linked to construction timings):
The function number: #2780
The complete error text: 2.5.1 Function #2780 Object Reference not set to an instance of an object.
The window affected: System Map / All
What you were doing at the time: Advancing time after rebuilding / refitting all the designed ships.
Conventional or TN start: TN Start
Random or Real Stars: Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma?: Yes
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?: Yes
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: 53 year campaign.
#2780 relates to loading a specific type of mineral. Is there any chance you gave that order and subsequently deleted the target population before it could be executed?
-
Thanks Steve!!!
That'll be it, old orders templates to a cargo ship to pickup minerals from a population that has since been mined out, had the minerals moved and deleted.
That'll do it.
-
what is function #5 ?
RaceFleetOrders()
You'll need to be more specific about the error. What was the error text, what were you doing, is it intermittent, etc.? See the first post of this thread for details.
the full error was "2.5.1 Function #5 Object reference not set to an instance of an object". Get two instances of it every time I press any time increment
What I was doing though, was a bunch of things with Spacemaster mode, to adjust some planets atmospheres, build and transfer ships to alien races, in an effort to adjust the current situation in my game. A whole bunch of stuff that wouldn't happen in normal gameplay. I forget exactly what I might have done though, because I was foolishly poking at things whilst suffering from insomnia, so I might have done something more serious without remembering it.
All I need to know is if this is something that perhaps I can fix by editing some bits of the database, (which I'm happy to attempt - it's not like I could make things much worse), or whether I should revert to a couple-months old backup (which would be disappointing but very little happened ingame since that backup, so not that big an issue).
Edit: by checking FCT_Fleet, I found some DIP ships, that I had created during my fiddling (I don't recall exactly how), and the fleets had NPROperationalGroupID = 0, when they should have it as 45.
Changing that, has cleared the error.
I'm still not exactly sure how I got into this mess, but at least I seem to have corrected it. Yay for me, lol.
-
what is function #5 ?
RaceFleetOrders()
You'll need to be more specific about the error. What was the error text, what were you doing, is it intermittent, etc.? See the first post of this thread for details.
the full error was "2.5.1 Function #5 Object reference not set to an instance of an object". Get two instances of it every time I press any time increment
What I was doing though, was a bunch of things with Spacemaster mode, to adjust some planets atmospheres, build and transfer ships to alien races, in an effort to adjust the current situation in my game. A whole bunch of stuff that wouldn't happen in normal gameplay. I forget exactly what I might have done though, because I was foolishly poking at things whilst suffering from insomnia, so I might have done something more serious without remembering it.
All I need to know is if this is something that perhaps I can fix by editing some bits of the database, (which I'm happy to attempt - it's not like I could make things much worse), or whether I should revert to a couple-months old backup (which would be disappointing but very little happened ingame since that backup, so not that big an issue).
Edit: by checking FCT_Fleet, I found some DIP ships, that I had created during my fiddling (I don't recall exactly how), and the fleets had NPROperationalGroupID = 0, when they should have it as 45.
Changing that, has cleared the error.
I'm still not exactly sure how I got into this mess, but at least I seem to have corrected it. Yay for me, lol.
Yes, that would be it. That function is part of the AI code and assigns NPR fleets to strategic tasks.
-
I have a new one, this one around one of the spoiler races boarding one of my ships.
I attempted to board it, and the boarding combat wasn't taking place every 60 seconds like it was supposed to.
There was a divide by zero error (I'm assuming because there wasn't any crew, as the aliens killed them all, and then the NPR code didn't add any for me to fight?)
Shortly after I blew it up, since I couldn't recapture it and got a sequence of 5 of the following error codes for every increment.
2.5.1 Function #1951: An item with the same key has already been added.
2.5.1 Function #1943: Object reference not set to an instance of an object.
2.5.1 Function #478: Object Reference not set to an instance of an Object.
Is your decimal separator a comma?: Yes
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?: Yes
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: same 53 year campaign.
Is there a database edit I could make to attempt to fix this?
UPDATE: I have begun playing the save and the error has gone entirely. To fix, simply save the database and reload!
-
Is there a database edit I could make to attempt to fix this?
Yes. I've seen that (edit:a similar) error before, here: https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13464.msg168707#msg168707
what caused it, was an Alien Race not assigning a class naming theme. Steve already fixed this bug for the next version.
How to solve it...
look in FCT_AlienRace, and look in the ClassThemeID column, for any values of 0. Change those 0's to any number you want for the theme IDs in DIM_NamingThemeTypes
Hmmm, maybe not the identical issue, you've got function #1951, rather than #1954. Still could be worth checking my suggestion.
-
Is your decimal separator a comma?: Yes
Frank, are you sure of this?
Is your decimal separator this character "," or this one "." ?
It must be ".": https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=10635.msg120829#msg120829
Otherwise, erratic behaviours can happen, whose effects can reveal even not at the game beginning.
-
Hi Paolot.
It's an English Keyboard, on an English system.
Pretty sure it's got the correct decimal seperator.
Thanks for checking though!
-
Ground Force Officers in command of STOs not awarded medals for shooting down enemy ships.
Recently had a situation where a STO shot down a hostile ship, and the officer did not receive the appropriate medal.
I have a medal that should be awarded for destroying hostile ships, and naval officers receive this medal correctly.
I can award the medal manually.
Investigating finds that the military tonnage is displayed properly for the ground officer, but the number of hostile ships is not displayed.
Examining the database for the officer concerned, shows that in FCT_CommanderMeasurement, the MeasurementType for type 7 (military tonnage destroyed) is present, but the MeasurementType for type 4, is not present.
Comparison with a naval officer in FCT_CommanderMeasurement, shows that they have records for type 4 and type 7, as expected.
adding a record for MeasurementType 4 for the officer concerned, and looking them up, shows the number of ships destroyed is then shown properly.
-
Sorry if this has been reported somewhere else, but I am getting a couple different repeating bugs in my save.
"2.5.1 Function #391: Object Reference not set to an instance of an Object" is occurring when I click on any naval commander in the officers tab (but not other officer types)
Update: this bug seems to be tied to a pair of enemy Destroyers (at the very bottom of my fleet list) that I captured that did not place their designs into my design list when I captured them. Deleting them makes the error stop.
Additionally, I am getting 1-3 instances of "2.5.1 Function #2397: Object Reference not set to an instance of an Object" occurring per production cycle.
Update: this bug goes away if I delete the two troop transports at the bottom of my fleet list that I had surrender to me, and as above did not place their design into my designs list.
This is an unmodded save
Decimal separator is a period (I had it down as comma originally, this is incorrect, sorry)
TN start
Real Stars, but swapped that setting off ~20 or so years in
Error is easy to reproduce in this save, but never seen it before.
Game is 47 years since game start.
-
Decimal separator is a comma
Correct this problem and see if the issues still exist.
-
Sorry I was having a brain moment as to which is the decimal separator. It's a period. 20,000 is 20 thousand for example.
-
Somehow, all aliens were removed from my game. One multisystem NPR, contact points were Woolley 9201 and HIP 97438 systems. As well as several systems with Precursors (36 Ophiuchi had large Precursor fleet and some seven planets with Rahkas. There were two Star Swarm, but I wiped both of them.
Now when I discover new system where presumabely aliens should spawn, I get Function #2659 error and no aliens are spawned.
First attachment is broken save, the other one is bit older save where all aliens are still present.
-
Somehow, all aliens were removed from my game. One multisystem NPR, contact points were Woolley 9201 and HIP 97438 systems. As well as several systems with Precursors (36 Ophiuchi had large Precursor fleet and some seven planets with Rahkas. There were two Star Swarm, but I wiped both of them.
Now when I discover new system where presumabely aliens should spawn, I get Function #2659 error and no aliens are spawned.
First attachment is broken save, the other one is bit older save where all aliens are still present.
The #2659 is Precursor generation, so it will fail if the precursor race does not exist.
Did you get any errors before all the alien races vanished? Have you modified the database in any way, or are you running any mods?
-
No mods and never touched the database, as I have no experience with editing it. I am unfortunately not sure if there was any error before I noticed that all aliens disappeared. I will see if the problem shows again as I now continue playing with the older database.
-
There seems to be an issue with tractoring shipyards that are currently building. I moved a shipyard from Earth to Mars, but the ships it was building still appeared in Earth's Shipyard Tasks tab, I believe still pulled minerals from Earth to build, and ended up being built into the original target fleet in Earth orbit. I also got some object reference not set to an instance of an object errors while they were being moved.
For a fix, maybe just don't allow shipyards that are currently building to be tractored. I think that would make in-game sense, and is presumably a simpler fix than handling the edge case of moving the builds.
SJW: Already in v2.6
-
Base info:
The complete error text: Aurora is not responding
The window affected: the entire application
Conventional or TN start: TN start
Random or Real Stars: Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma?: No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Reproducible 100%
If this is a long campaign: Yes, the year is 84 TN (from game start)
The issue:
I'm trying to test how to use Ordnance Transfer Hub with combat ships that have box launchers. I've built a Resupply Base (see below). I've sent it to Mars orbit, because nobody lives there. I've emptied one of my combat fleets (CruDesGroup 2) and sent to Resupply Base with "Replace at Ordnance Transfer Hub" order. When I do this exact order, the game hangs and stops responding in 100% cases.
Overall, I was never able to make the Ordnance Transfer Hub to work with box launchers. Despite what C# Aurora Changes said (https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg109127#msg109127):
Box Launcher Reloading
In VB6 Aurora, box launchers can be reloaded in a hangar or at maintenance facilities. For C# Aurora, box launchers can only be reloaded in a hangar, or at an Ordnance Transfer Point (a Spaceport, Ordnance Transfer Station or Ordnance Transfer Hub). Reloading at an Ordnance Transfer Point is 10x slower than in a hangar (similar to the penalty for maintenance facilities in VB6 Aurora).
Because of the changes to maintenance facilities in C# Aurora, it will be a lot easier to forward deploy facilities for full-size warships, both on planets and in space, which would increase the potential of box launchers if they could still use those facilities to reload, especially given they are immediately available in C#. The introduction of ordnance-specific facilities for C# provides a good alternative.
The existing changes post for Missile Launchers has been updated to take account of this new rule:
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg102815#msg102815
RB-01 Long Island (Long Island class Resupply Base) 150,000 tons 395 Crew 4,533.2 BP TCS 3,000 TH 3,200 EM 0
1066 km/s JR 3-50(C) Armour 1-251 Shields 0-0 HTK 80 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 1-0 PPV 0
MSP 5,018 Max Repair 2,400 MSP
Magazine 2,500 / 0 Cargo Shuttle Multiplier 2
Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months
Ordnance Transfer Hub - Capable of transferring ordnance to multiple ships simultaneously
JC150K Commercial Jump Drive Max Ship Size 150000 tons Distance 50k km Squadron Size 3
Commercial Magneto-plasma Drive EP800.0 (4) Power 3200 Fuel Use 2.24% Signature 800 Explosion 5%
Fuel Capacity 7,662,500 Litres Range 411 billion km (4461 days at full power)
Refuelling Capability: 80,000 litres per hour Complete Refuel 95 hours
ASM-120B Thrasher Anti-Ship Missile (158) Speed: 32,000 km/s End: 15.3m Range: 29.3m km WH: 16 Size: 12 TH: 140/84/42
AIM-11A Meteor Interceptor Missile (600) Speed: 51,000 km/s End: 0.7m Range: 2m km WH: 1 Size: 1 TH: 170/102/51
Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s
This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a None for auto-assignment purposes
How to reproduce:
1) Load my game db
2) Advance time (1 day)
3) ...
4) The Aurora app will stop responding
The critical order in this case is "Replace at Ordnance Transfer Hub" that's set for CruDesGroup 2 fleet aimed at RB-01 Long Island fleet.
-
Summary: All minerals just suddenly disappeared from my game.
General information:
Function number: 483
Complete error text: "Database disk image is malformed database disk image is malformed" (repeated twice, on two separate lines)
Window affected: the 'main screen,' I suppose; it appears when I try to load the game.
What I was doing at the time: loading the game.
Conventional start
Random stars
Not a comma decimal separator
Bug seems intermittent; I've never seen it before. But it does appear thus far every time when I attempt to load this save file.
Long campaign, around 90 years in.
This morning, I saved and then closed Aurora before putting my computer to sleep. A few hours later, I brought it up again, attempted to load the game, and got the error message #483 (image attached). Hitting 'okay' loaded the game... except that all minerals everywhere in the explored universe had disappeared. Every planet was now empty of minerals, as well as all asteroids, comets, gas giants, etc.
SJW: I've never seen this error before, but it looks like the database has somehow become corrupted. You will need to revert to the backup. Delete AuroraDB and rename AuroraDBSaveBackup to AuroraDB.
-
Is it bug that naval admin commanders (general or industrial) don't give any bonuses from their Production skill to stabilising lagrange point ship? Only production skill of ship commander gives bonus. Ship is in naval admin radius at this moment of course.
-
Unknown
None, this is a performance issue
Main system window
- What you were doing at the time
Zooming into earth.
TN Start
Real Stars
- Is your decimal separator a comma?
My separator is a period
- Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?
Easy: turn on "Passives vs Signatures X" and zoom in as far as you can
- If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well
Short, less than a year
Description:
During gameplay, I turned on "Passives vs Signatures X" and then tried zooming into earth. This was okay until I was down to a 1 m km zoom distance. Afterwards, the game takes a long time to calculate the next zoom level. Turning off "Passives vs Signatures X" removes the long compute time.
Steps to reproduce:
- Start with fresh example game in v2.5.1
- Select main window
- Ensure zoom is above 100 m km
- Turn on "Passives vs Signatures 100"
- Zoom in on earth until zoom level is less 1 m km
- Observe length of compute time increases dramatically with each new zoom level
Additional notes:
I'm playing this on linux via proton experimental, so I understand that maybe contributing to the issue. If someone can confirm that a bog standard game on windows doesn't see this, that would help me.
-
Conventional start, Real Stars, period separator, 57 years in.
Four of the largest NPR populations in my game (two starting NPRs' homeworlds, the homeworld of an NPR generated early on by a starting NPR but still unknown to me, Raider homeworld) are currently being terraformed by their owners to remove all hydrosphere. The 1st NPR has a 4.7b population capacity homeworld and currently has by far the lowest hydrosphere of 3.7%, and after reviewing my save backups, I've been able to determine that the 2nd NPR's homeworld population peaked at around 3.9b before they started removing their water, which would correspond to the growth penalty threshold of their 11.7b capacity homeworld. The planet's hydro was at 17% when I assualted it, however I haven't been able to locate any terraforming ships or installations.
I'm aware of the "NPR terraforming now works correctly." bit in 2.6.0 changelogs, but I haven't been able to locate any reports or mentions of this bug in particular, so I'm still bringing it to your attention.
-
Fleets lose orbit after tractoring ship.
1) Give a fleet (containing an unengaged tug ship) orders to tractor a ship from any other fleet in orbit of a system body.
2) Advance time until the order completes. (5 seconds will do if the tug is already at the same body.)
3) Advance time further until orbital motion processes (every con cycle, I think).
Result: tug fleet is no longer in orbit; it remains at the prior location of the body (which has moved onward along its orbital path).
-
What is function #828? it's poping up from time to time.
-
What is function #828? it's poping up from time to time.
Function #828 is CompleteWreckSalvage
-
Restoring characters is not working for me:
I would like to restore Nikodem Korona (pic1).
When I click Restore he goes to active section (pic2).
But, when i close the character window or click save. He disapears, even when I restart Aurora.
There is an information in the Event log, that he was restored, but he is not present in FCT_Commander in DB.
DB attached.
Edit: Also not working on a clean DB
Pic1
(https://i.ibb.co/9kRD8ptb/ret1.png)
Pic2
(https://i.ibb.co/8gd9C905/ret2.png)
-
Almost certainly not a bug but I thought I'd ask if particular behavior is working as intended. I designed an exploration cruiser with four size-12 missile launchers for probes. I went with four 30% reduced size-12 launchers, thinking that since they aren't box launchers their integral magazine space could be reloaded from a collier. So far, this isn't working (and doesn't work at a colony, either.)
I assume this is working as intended, because 1. it makes sense and 2. if it isn't it probably should be. I note that older versions (checking an old game from 1.95) didn't split the magazine readout (x/x) like in the current released version, so out of curiosity I thought I'd ask; normal launchers may be running afoul of rules written to regulate the unique behavior of box launchers.
If this was deliberate, as a Yankee I appreciate the attention to detail; I often have to load one from the magazine and top off the mag myself. You can load one directly into the chamber but depending on your "launcher" you're not always supposed to. ;D
-
Almost certainly not a bug but I thought I'd ask if particular behavior is working as intended. I designed an exploration cruiser with four size-12 missile launchers for probes. I went with four 30% reduced size-12 launchers, thinking that since they aren't box launchers their integral magazine space could be reloaded from a collier. So far, this isn't working (and doesn't work at a colony, either.)
I assume this is working as intended, because 1. it makes sense and 2. if it isn't it probably should be. I note that older versions (checking an old game from 1.95) didn't split the magazine readout (x/x) like in the current released version, so out of curiosity I thought I'd ask; normal launchers may be running afoul of rules written to regulate the unique behavior of box launchers.
If this was deliberate, as a Yankee I appreciate the attention to detail; I often have to load one from the magazine and top off the mag myself. You can load one directly into the chamber but depending on your "launcher" you're not always supposed to. ;D
This may be a dumb question, but do the collier and colony work, i.e., are able to reload ordnance for other ships of more traditional designs?
-
Almost certainly not a bug but I thought I'd ask if particular behavior is working as intended. I designed an exploration cruiser with four size-12 missile launchers for probes. I went with four 30% reduced size-12 launchers, thinking that since they aren't box launchers their integral magazine space could be reloaded from a collier. So far, this isn't working (and doesn't work at a colony, either.)
I assume this is working as intended, because 1. it makes sense and 2. if it isn't it probably should be. I note that older versions (checking an old game from 1.95) didn't split the magazine readout (x/x) like in the current released version, so out of curiosity I thought I'd ask; normal launchers may be running afoul of rules written to regulate the unique behavior of box launchers.
If this was deliberate, as a Yankee I appreciate the attention to detail; I often have to load one from the magazine and top off the mag myself. You can load one directly into the chamber but depending on your "launcher" you're not always supposed to. ;D
They should load fine. Even a ship with only box launchers can reload from a collier. The problem for box launchers is they won't cycle (recharge) without appropriate facilities. It sounds like there is something else going on. Is the collier flagged as a collier and does it work with other ships?
-
...Even a ship with only box launchers can reload from a collier. The problem for box launchers is they won't cycle (recharge) without appropriate facilities...
I have never been able to get a ship with only box launchers to reload from a collier.
-
... Even a ship with only box launchers can reload from a collier. ...
Sorry Steve,
In which version of the game can we do it? ???
In 2.5.1, creating a new box launcher, it says: "Note that Box or Decoy Launchers are not affected by increases in Reload Rate Technology as they may only be reloaded in a hangar deck or at maintenance facilities. ...".
-
Regarding box launchers, there is a difference between the launcher itself reloading and the parent ship having the missiles. You can put the missiles on the ship by any normal method. The code doesn't check launcher type when a ship loads ordnance. The only place in the code where the 'hangar reload only' flag is checked is when the launcher itself recycles. The recycle clock for the launcher will only decrease in a hangar or at an ordnance transfer location
-
OK.
Thank you, Steve!
If I understand well, if the ship that carries the box has also some missile magazines, these ones can be reloaded by a collier. But the missiles can be transferred from the magazines to the box only and only if the ship is inside a hangar (or in orbit around a planet with maintenance facilities and an ordnace transfer station), is it right?
In case the ship hasn't any magazine, the box cannot anyway reload directly from a collier, right?
-
Dormant Ancient Constructs' capabilities can get spoiled to the player somewhat due to the order they're displayed in on the tactical map in the Artifacts submenu. All Constructs are ordered by their Research Bonus, no mater if it's already known or not.
(https://i.imgur.com/WJOZRvy.png)
Both dormant Constructs have an actual Bonus of 90% and another dormant Construct way down on the list has a Bonus of 30%. I would suggest putting dormant Constructs below the active ones on this list and ordering them alphabetically.
-
They should load fine. Even a ship with only box launchers can reload from a collier. The problem for box launchers is they won't cycle (recharge) without appropriate facilities. It sounds like there is something else going on. Is the collier flagged as a collier and does it work with other ships?
Ahh, that's how you implemented it!
Regarding this, it turns out I was still playing version 2.3.0, so I made a clean install of the latest release (2.5.1) and threw together a quick test game with the exact scenario I ran across in my older version... and I've confirmed this behavior is still present. I've attached my save file: It'll be under "Test Game," with two ships in "Battle Fleet," one with reduced-size launchers but no stand-alone magazine, and a collier (properly flagged) with an ordinance transfer system and a loaded commercial magazine. Templates are set up. You'll note that the ship can neither load nor unload ordinance to the collier.
In my 2.3.0 game adding a magazine to the receiving ship allowed it to function as normal.
(Attached save file is from 2.5.1, to be clear.)
-
Apologies for the double-post, but I have something more to report. Ground support fighters (GSFs) are bugged:
1. There's a bug relating to GSF's being destroyed by hostile fire but the event being reported as a "catastrophic failure" from maintenance. This is visible both when they're assigned to normal ground support and when dispatched on independent operations. Conversely AA attacks against GSFs that do not destroy them are reported correctly in the combat log (see attached image; you still get a damage report for the fighter even though it was reported as a maint failure destruction event.)
2. Independent operations ("Search and Destroy" and "Flak Suppression") are completely non-functional. When fighters are ordered to conduct such operations on a system body (with and without a colony present, with and without friendly ground forces engaging present) the fighters will drop like flies from "catastrophic failures." I have actually seen an AA fire against fighter combat report generated ONCE, but this is not the norm. Then again, I also saw fighters on the system body with a "seek and destroy" mission get engaged by a 20CM railgun STO, which isn't supposed to happen... but only once. This is by far the worst bugged part; I find myself at a loss to detail all the weirdness I've seen while running tests. Most significantly, they appear to conduct no attacks against hostile ground forces at all.
3. GSFs providing ground support to ground formations seems to be working as intended.
4. The game throws a "Function #2047 : Object reference not set to an instance of an object" error when instant-designing Fighter Bombardment Pods (and ONLY fighter bombardment pods.) Probably insignificant but worth noting.
Due to the complexity of this I've taken the liberty of setting up a clean-sheet test game. The "Red Planet" moniker appears to have been taken the wrong way by some, as some dastardly Soviet Martians have been discovered on Mars. On a nearby asteroid you've been provided with some toys; a troop transport with ground formations that also have forward fire direction units (and a generous supply of spares in a separate detachment, with the formations generously equipped with FFDs so you needn't worry about counting as you click and drag,) and various fighters. The "weak fighters" are thinly armored but generously supplied with MSP and fuel, and already split into test and control groups to demonstrate that the catastrophic failures are definitely not from maint failure, but rather enemy action. The "tough fighters" are stronger and there's a group with both autocannon pods and bombardment pods for testing both. The Soviet Martians have ground forces, but their STO batteries are set to hold fire by default. Both parties are flagged hostile to the other.
I am aware that Steve doesn't maintain dev versions of older Aurora iterations and he strips out debug access before issuing release versions for good reasons, so he may have to recreate this in his 2.6 version to track down the issue, but maybe it will help anyway. :)
Both forum-searching and asking around on Discord indicate nobody was aware of these issues. I know nobody likes the micromanagement of setting up ground support, but unleashing a horde of cheap fighters to scour out STOs seems like a much more attractive alternative than bringing capital ships into horrible consequences range...
-
I am fairly certain I have seen issue 2 before , and that such missions are known to not work in the distant days of the past when I struggled to use ground support fighters I knew that such missions did not work.
-
Attached are two screenshots of a fleet of two ships, one with maximum crew grade (22%), and one with minimum crew grade (conscript crew, -10%) performing a transit through a jump point blockaded by enemy forces then opening fire as soon as possible:
1. Standard transit:
Transit is performed at 22:12:37, the max crew grade is able to open fire at 22:12:42, the min crew grade ship is able to fire at 22:12:47.
2. Squadron transit:
Transit is performed at 22:51:32, both ships are able to open fire at 22:51:37.
Now, the Fire at Will (https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=12035.msg146821#msg146821) post does say it will override any existing delay, but the current implementation is very broken and will trivialize any jump point assault. Maybe the order should consider whether the ship is experiencing jump shock before it gets "assigned a fire delay with a modifier of -50% vs normal", where a normal delay would include a transit-induced one when applicable?
-
Attached are two screenshots of a fleet of two ships, one with maximum crew grade (22%), and one with minimum crew grade (conscript crew, -10%) performing a transit through a jump point blockaded by enemy forces then opening fire as soon as possible:
1. Standard transit:
Transit is performed at 22:12:37, the max crew grade is able to open fire at 22:12:42, the min crew grade ship is able to fire at 22:12:47.
2. Squadron transit:
Transit is performed at 22:51:32, both ships are able to open fire at 22:51:37.
Now, the Fire at Will (https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=12035.msg146821#msg146821) post does say it will override any existing delay, but the current implementation is very broken and will trivialize any jump point assault. Maybe the order should consider whether the ship is experiencing jump shock before it gets "assigned a fire delay with a modifier of -50% vs normal", where a normal delay would include a transit-induced one when applicable?
AFAIK, The fleet training percentage effects the delay on firing not the crew grade so you would need that value to tell which ship should respond faster. So probably not a bug
-
AFAIK, The fleet training percentage effects the delay on firing not the crew grade so you would need that value to tell which ship should respond faster. So probably not a bug
You can see in the screenshots that the -10% grade ship has 0% fleet training as well, I somehow neglected to mention that. In any case, being able to open fire 5 or 10 seconds after a standard transit is definitely a bug.
-
Parasites don't seem to refuel from their carrier, if the carrier is on an order delay.
I've noticed this with carriers that are on a looped order to wait at a picket position, then come back and overhaul. I set them to wait at the picket position with a long order delay.
If I use its fighters and land them again, they don't start to refuel until the order delay period is up and the carrier starts to actually execute the order.
I've not tested if repairs and ordinance reloads are similarly effected.
-
The function number - 391/2397
The complete error text - Object reference not set to an instance of an object
The window affected - multiple
What you were doing at the time - see below
Conventional or TN start - Conventional
Random or Real Stars - real
Is your decimal separator a comma? - no
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? - reproducible in attached db
If this is a long campaign - 100+ yrs, this was a 2. 5. 0 game I upgraded to 2. 5. 1
2 bugs to report for 2.5.1, 1 larger one and a 2nd minor one
Bug 1: I encountered error conditions that arise after I capture raider ships via boarding.
Before the capture, no errors. Afterwards, this error: "Function #391: Object reference not set to an instance of an object"
occurs when opening Commanders window and clicking on a naval commander or when selecting options in the drop down like 'Fleet Commander' or 'Military ships' - and no ships appear in the display box underneath the drop down, so user is unable to assign commanders manually.
Also, after a capture, at the beginning of each increment, this error occurs: "Error Function #2397: same description as above"
I'm thinking the code is trying to find the raider ships in the commander window, and assign a CO during the increment turnover, but cannot do either, so throws errors.
The raider ships do not appear in the design window that I can see, so I cannot i.e. toggle that class as 'No officers'
The attached game (game3) has the boardings under way, just need to run through a few boarding combat cycles before the first ship is captured.
Bug 2: Appears to be a minor display issue with medals.
Using attached db, Open commanders window > Commodores dropdown > click on Bela Radacanu in middle of list > the images for two red medals have the same description in the popup text. But if you look at the history log for the character, you see they are 2 different medals assigned at different times with different descriptions: 1. Oct 2208 and 2. July 2204. Another example of this is Atshushi, 2nd listed Commodore. I believe in both cases it is the same medal awarded for different purposes.
-
The function number - 391/2397
The complete error text - Object reference not set to an instance of an object
The window affected - multiple
What you were doing at the time - see below
Conventional or TN start - Conventional
Random or Real Stars - real
Is your decimal separator a comma? - no
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? - reproducible in attached db
If this is a long campaign - 100+ yrs, this was a 2. 5. 0 game I upgraded to 2. 5. 1
2 bugs to report for 2.5.1, 1 larger one and a 2nd minor one
Bug 1: I encountered error conditions that arise after I capture raider ships via boarding.
Before the capture, no errors. Afterwards, this error: "Function #391: Object reference not set to an instance of an object"
occurs when opening Commanders window and clicking on a naval commander or when selecting options in the drop down like 'Fleet Commander' or 'Military ships' - and no ships appear in the display box underneath the drop down, so user is unable to assign commanders manually.
Also, after a capture, at the beginning of each increment, this error occurs: "Error Function #2397: same description as above"
I'm thinking the code is trying to find the raider ships in the commander window, and assign a CO during the increment turnover, but cannot do either, so throws errors.
The raider ships do not appear in the design window that I can see, so I cannot i.e. toggle that class as 'No officers'
The attached game (game3) has the boardings under way, just need to run through a few boarding combat cycles before the first ship is captured.
I'm not sure it's the same bug, but I've met a similar one in one of my games. I was playing multiple player races and NPRs, and one player race captured a raider. When I tried capturing another raider with another player race, the design wouldn't appear in the design window. I checked the DB and there the 2nd captured ship was classed under the raider copy design attributed to the 1st race with a captured raider. For your game, maybe a NPR captured a raider before you and got the copied design.
Though I don't recall having problems with commanders.
-
Is it bug that naval admin commanders (general or industrial) don't give any bonuses from their Production skill to stabilising lagrange point ship? Only production skill of ship commander gives bonus. Ship is in naval admin radius at this moment of course.
Are you sure they're not contributing? I use this all the time, with 3 stacked naval admins, and my construction ships regularly stabilize JPs almost twice as fast (in little more than half the time).
-
Is it bug that naval admin commanders (general or industrial) don't give any bonuses from their Production skill to stabilising lagrange point ship? Only production skill of ship commander gives bonus. Ship is in naval admin radius at this moment of course.
Are you sure they're not contributing? I use this all the time, with 3 stacked naval admins, and my construction ships regularly stabilize JPs almost twice as fast (in little more than half the time).
You probably have ship commanders with ~40% bonus to Production.
NACs do not provide any bonus to stabilization.
-
Not sure if this is intentional or not, but I discovered what I believe is a bug when messing with the database for fun and profit.
I was nervous about my abilities compared to the NPR, and discovered that despite setting the research speed to 20%, the NPR appears to have gotten the full 160k research points to spend at the start of the game, and I got 32k. Now that I know about this, I can compensate for it, but I had no way of knowing besides literally cheating and setting the NPR to a player race for a little bit so I could peek.
EDIT: I want to clarify that setting the NPR to a player race so I could peek was the only database edit I made, and I set it back before continuing gameplay.
EDIT 2: I checked the Known Issues thread and this is working as intended.
-
Conventional start, Real Stars, period separator, almost 60 years in, DB link (https://mega.nz/file/X9Y21ISS#iNJZdvCrkpdrTX7eVho1VbHvlddijDd946dqJTjrXbY) (couldn't attach normally, file too large)
My Swarms' AI is apparently broken, their survey and combat ships are stuck at jump points within my buoy range and do absolutely nothing. In-game this is visible in Phi Lyrae and Luyten Palomar 888-64 systems. Additionally, they hardly seem to produce any new ships, with Swarm #2 (Race #618) being somewhat of an exception, having produced 5 ships in a year. Swarm #1 (Race #609), now extinct, has produced a single Pyrovore in 8 years of existence.
Similarly, according to my DB's IndustrialProjects and ShipyardTask tabs, almost no NPR is building any new installations or ships, the only active NPR shipbuilding tasks belong to a near-extinct race.
Observations:
- No Swarm survey ship, except the sole surviving Lictor of Swarm #2, has any standing orders. However, each known Lictor has entered a new system at least once.
- Encountering my buoys and mines didn't prevent Swarm survey ships from attempting to carry on with their duties in the past.
- No Swarm ship has ever attempted a JP transit to catch one of my ships, they'd always camp the JP instead.
- The only races posessing Swarm Extraction Module tech according to the DB are my two starting NPRs. However, every Swarm Ripper has that module.
- No weird increment interrupts were observed.
Update:
- Every functioning survey ship has RedployOrderGiven=1 in FCT_Fleet. Swarm surveyors without a standing order have it set to 0. Not sure what that means.
Update:
- Swarm #4(#626) has gotten unstuck and resumed gravitational surveys 10 days after getting stuck. Swarm #3(#621) resumed gravsurveys roughly 10 months after getting stuck and still has no new ship entries in the DB.
-
A commercial carrier with maintenance modules won't maintain its strikegroup if no parasite has any maintenance storage, even if maintenance capacity/support is sufficient. Parasites' maintenance clocks will keep ticking, they won't drain MSP from the carrier and will be susceptible to maintenance failures. If at least one parasite has MSP storage, the rest will also be maintained.
Screenshot one: on the top, a small carrier failing to maintain its MSP-less strike group on the top, a fleet with a carrier successfully maintaining its mixed group of MSP and non-MSP-carrying parasites on the bottom.
Screenshot two: same small carrier one construction increment after SM-adding 5 MSP storage to the parasite design.
-
--- UPDATE: Turns out, the bug seems to be fixed. Finally, fighter sized colony ships and fighter sized cargo shunts are possible. HUZZAH! ;D
--- So this was and to my knowledge still is a long-standing bug, but fighter sized ships despite their descriptions / mechanical implications, cannot land on planets to unload / load things w/o a cargo shuttle bay or spaceport. I noticed in my 2.5.1 game that a Shuttle sized Cargo Bay now exists, so I intend to test whether or not this bug is no longer present and will edit the post if it has been. Mostly for future reference for myself and a good tracker for if the bug is still present. Will edit soon.
-
The function number - N/A
The complete error text - N/A
The window affected - Naval Organization -> Ship Combat
What you were doing at the time - Launching long range survey missiles at Minerva and it's moons from a 1000t craft with a size 99 box launcher
Conventional or TN start - Conventional
Random or Real Stars - real
Is your decimal separator a comma? - no
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? - consistent in attached db
If this is a long campaign? - No, started in 2.5.0 and upgraded to 2.5.1, but only 30ish years in (I don't remember the start year, am currently on 2053)
At first I though it was due to skill of my crew, but when it did not get any better after training got above 30% I decided to get out the calculator and verified exactly 1/10th the number of seconds that pass get removed from the count down. So, probably a format string issue.
-
Error Function #1516 occurs every increment due to ground forces.
Two formations exist as in the picture attached/below. Both were created via the organizations tab, with the 1st being created from the instant org button. Deleting the formations fixes the error. removing the MLRS companies from the formations also fixes the error. but re adding them causes it again. removing all the tank companies also fixes the error, they can be re-added but if there is 4 or more tank companies in one formation, or if there is 3 tank companies and at least one MLRS company, the error persists.
I have noticed from messing around with them that the tank company actually has 0 units of a construction/cap vehicle that i set to zero but forgot to delete, while the MLRS has 1 (intentionally). Im no programmer but i suspect some sort of float error or something with the total formation due to the existence of the 0 units in the tank company, since the error does not occur when the formation consists of only MLRS units. the error does not persist when the tank companies are under no hierarchy.
https://imgur.com/a/zoNuCKy
-
Conventional start, Real Stars, period separator, 60 years in.
Ordering a fleet with a tanker to "Transfer Fuel to Refueling Hub" will exceed the hub's fuel capacity and keep transferring fuel until the tanker is empty. Attached screenshot is how I found it in my game, also managed to replicate with a different tanker design and a brand new hub design (just fuel tanks and the hub module, no other modules). Something similar has been reported here https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=10990.msg126741#msg126741 (https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=10990.msg126741#msg126741) , though in my case one hub in the fleet is enough for the bug to manifest. This is problematic because the "Refuel Stationary Fleet" order is also unreliable as reported here https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13464.msg172115#msg172115 (https://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=13464.msg172115#msg172115) , I had to up my order delay for it from 10 minutes to 1 hour to make it work in increments above 8 hours.
-
TN start, Real stars, dot as decimal separator, 94 years in the game.
I have just discovered a system having the same name (Epsilon Horologii) of another one. See the attached image (I placed them side by side to do the screenshot).
The new system is the 216th that I met. These two systems are very different one another.
I wish to change the name of the most recent system. But, how can I choose a suitable name? especially a name not already present in the DB, and coherent with the real stars environment.
-
If the "real Stars" database doesn't have duplicates (Sirius + Alpha Canis Majoris) which I'm pretty sure it doesn't, then you can decide that, as astronomers have in the past, that Epsilon Horologii is an optical double star (two stars in the same place in our sky, but different places in the 3-D universe, and name it Epsilon(2) Horologii.
-
I have just discovered a system having the same name (Epsilon Horologii) of another one. See the attached image (I placed them side by side to do the screenshot).
I couldn't find Epsilon Horologii in the star names in the database at all. ???
Do you use a modded database ?
-
The list of stars in that constellation is
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_stars_in_Horologium
Of course most of these are nowhere near each other so for an Aurora star map pick any star name, or make one up and assume the one you are at was not visible from Earth because it was faint or obsucred by a nebula/dust cloud/dark matter cloud/ Giant space turtle/etc
-
...
I couldn't find Epsilon Horologii in the star names in the database at all. ???
Do you use a modded database ?
No. No modded DB.
I can open the DB using the program "DB Browser (SQLite)". In the table "Dim_KnownSystems", I applied the filter to the column "ConstellationName", so the names appear. In the attached image, the filtered content.
As you see, the "KnownSystemID"s are 36 and 384, and the names in the column "Name" are different. But in the galactic map the same name appeared.
If the "real Stars" database doesn't have duplicates (Sirius + Alpha Canis Majoris) which I'm pretty sure it doesn't, then you can decide that, as astronomers have in the past, that Epsilon Horologii is an optical double star (two stars in the same place in our sky, but different places in the 3-D universe, and name it Epsilon(2) Horologii.
Yes. Thanks, Steve!
I did so: Epsilon2 Horologii. :)
@Andrew.
Thank you.
In the list, the star GJ 1061 appears. It is the first Epsilon Horologii that I met.
I can't find GJ 3210. Searching online, nothing.
-
Error popup, often several times at once, occurs every few 5-day increments. It was originally #2661, now #2662.
2. 5. 1 Function #2662: Could not load file or assembly 'System. Data. Entity. Design, Version=4. 0. 0. 0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089' or one of its dependencies.
Started happening after, I *think*, making several ground forces with "Construct Org".
No mods, running 2. 5. 1 in aurora4x-docker.
I am having this issue as well. I do not believe that it was a ground forces issue in my case as I had not recently built any.
Additionally I encountered a problem where, after refitting a Stabilisation Ship to a Colony ship, it still had the order in its list to stabilize a jump point. I started a different game to check if this was still an issue and was able to replicate it. I also then refitted that same ship to a troop trasport and it still had the orders for both as well as the options to load and unload troops.
-
What an odd naming thing this is.
I can't find GJ 3210. Searching online, nothing.
It seems that it exists in this catalogue: https://exoplanetarchive.ipac.caltech.edu/cgi-bin/TblView/nph-tblView?app=ExoTbls&config=gjstars Don't know how helpful that is.
-
Thank you, Louella.
The coordinates of these two stars in this catalogue confirm that both are in Horologium constellation, but rather far angularly one another. So, their designation in the DB should be different.
-
I discovered a bit of a complex issue, not sure exactly what happened or why.
The situation:
1. Main Fleet is named the 1st Expeditionary Fleet. This fleet contains several sub-fleets, including four assault groups and two carrier groups. Three Assault Groups are currently detached from the main fleet
2. I detached the two carrier groups using the "Detach" button.
3. I launched fighters from the 1st carrier group using the "Launch All" button.
4. I detached the six scout fighters from the rest of the fighter group, again using the "Detach" button
5. I split the scout fighters into three two-ship groups, and sent them across the system to scout possible enemy locations.
6. I landed the 1st carrier group's fighters on their carriers using the "Land on Assigned Carriers/mothership" command. At this point only the scout fighters remain in space
7. The scout fighters discover enemy ships, and I detach one carrier from the 1st Carrier Group and launch its fighters using the "Launch All" button. The fighters launch an ultimately unsuccessful attack and head back to their carrier.
8. I launch all fighters from the 2nd Carrier Group to end the problem.
9. At this point I decide to consolidate the fleet and move to a location closer to potential targets. I order the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Assault Groups to join the 1st Expeditionary Fleet using the "Join as Sub-Fleet" command. I also order the 1st and 2nd Carrier Groups to join the 1st Expeditionary Fleet using the same command.
The problem appears when I hit the five second advance. The five groups join the 1st Expeditionary Fleet as intended, however, approximately half of the 2nd Carrier Group's detached fighter wing simply disappears, as does four of the six scout fighters from the 1st Carrier Group. Their fleets (containers) on the Naval Organization window still exist, but they have no ships within them, or, in the case of the 2nd's fighters, just under half of what should be there. They aren't in their correct fleets, and they aren't on their motherships. They appear to have just disappeared. At the time of disappearance they were approximately a billion kilometers from their carriers.
I was a bit frustrated, as there appeared to be no easy way to fix this. I could add in the missing fighters, but they would be at 0% training, which would be annoying given how much effort i put into getting them trained. Fortunately I found the thread on how Aurora makes backup saves, and restored to a previous save before the incident happened.
Still, annoying and worrying for the future. I suspect that the problem lies within the nested relationships between the fighters and their carriers, and their carriers moving from being independent to becoming a sub-fleet.
-
I discovered a bit of a complex issue, not sure exactly what happened or why.
The situation:
1. Main Fleet is named the 1st Expeditionary Fleet. This fleet contains several sub-fleets, including four assault groups and two carrier groups. Three Assault Groups are currently detached from the main fleet
2. I detached the two carrier groups using the "Detach" button.
3. I launched fighters from the 1st carrier group using the "Launch All" button.
4. I detached the six scout fighters from the rest of the fighter group, again using the "Detach" button
5. I split the scout fighters into three two-ship groups, and sent them across the system to scout possible enemy locations.
6. I landed the 1st carrier group's fighters on their carriers using the "Land on Assigned Carriers/mothership" command. At this point only the scout fighters remain in space
7. The scout fighters discover enemy ships, and I detach one carrier from the 1st Carrier Group and launch its fighters using the "Launch All" button. The fighters launch an ultimately unsuccessful attack and head back to their carrier.
8. I launch all fighters from the 2nd Carrier Group to end the problem.
9. At this point I decide to consolidate the fleet and move to a location closer to potential targets. I order the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Assault Groups to join the 1st Expeditionary Fleet using the "Join as Sub-Fleet" command. I also order the 1st and 2nd Carrier Groups to join the 1st Expeditionary Fleet using the same command.
The problem appears when I hit the five second advance. The five groups join the 1st Expeditionary Fleet as intended, however, approximately half of the 2nd Carrier Group's detached fighter wing simply disappears, as does four of the six scout fighters from the 1st Carrier Group. Their fleets (containers) on the Naval Organization window still exist, but they have no ships within them, or, in the case of the 2nd's fighters, just under half of what should be there. They aren't in their correct fleets, and they aren't on their motherships. They appear to have just disappeared. At the time of disappearance they were approximately a billion kilometers from their carriers.
I was a bit frustrated, as there appeared to be no easy way to fix this. I could add in the missing fighters, but they would be at 0% training, which would be annoying given how much effort i put into getting them trained. Fortunately I found the thread on how Aurora makes backup saves, and restored to a previous save before the incident happened.
Still, annoying and worrying for the future. I suspect that the problem lies within the nested relationships between the fighters and their carriers, and their carriers moving from being independent to becoming a sub-fleet.
I fixed a bug for v2.6 that involved disappearing fighters. It manifested after fighters were part of a fleet that was drag-dropped to another and then the original fleet was deleted. The fighters were duplicated rather than moved (but the originals were invisible), so when the fleet with the invisible originals was deleted, it also removed their duplicates.
Does it sound like that might have been the cause in this situation?
-
I discovered a bit of a complex issue, not sure exactly what happened or why.
The situation:
1. Main Fleet is named the 1st Expeditionary Fleet. This fleet contains several sub-fleets, including four assault groups and two carrier groups. Three Assault Groups are currently detached from the main fleet
2. I detached the two carrier groups using the "Detach" button.
3. I launched fighters from the 1st carrier group using the "Launch All" button.
4. I detached the six scout fighters from the rest of the fighter group, again using the "Detach" button
5. I split the scout fighters into three two-ship groups, and sent them across the system to scout possible enemy locations.
6. I landed the 1st carrier group's fighters on their carriers using the "Land on Assigned Carriers/mothership" command. At this point only the scout fighters remain in space
7. The scout fighters discover enemy ships, and I detach one carrier from the 1st Carrier Group and launch its fighters using the "Launch All" button. The fighters launch an ultimately unsuccessful attack and head back to their carrier.
8. I launch all fighters from the 2nd Carrier Group to end the problem.
9. At this point I decide to consolidate the fleet and move to a location closer to potential targets. I order the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Assault Groups to join the 1st Expeditionary Fleet using the "Join as Sub-Fleet" command. I also order the 1st and 2nd Carrier Groups to join the 1st Expeditionary Fleet using the same command.
The problem appears when I hit the five second advance. The five groups join the 1st Expeditionary Fleet as intended, however, approximately half of the 2nd Carrier Group's detached fighter wing simply disappears, as does four of the six scout fighters from the 1st Carrier Group. Their fleets (containers) on the Naval Organization window still exist, but they have no ships within them, or, in the case of the 2nd's fighters, just under half of what should be there. They aren't in their correct fleets, and they aren't on their motherships. They appear to have just disappeared. At the time of disappearance they were approximately a billion kilometers from their carriers.
I was a bit frustrated, as there appeared to be no easy way to fix this. I could add in the missing fighters, but they would be at 0% training, which would be annoying given how much effort i put into getting them trained. Fortunately I found the thread on how Aurora makes backup saves, and restored to a previous save before the incident happened.
Still, annoying and worrying for the future. I suspect that the problem lies within the nested relationships between the fighters and their carriers, and their carriers moving from being independent to becoming a sub-fleet.
I fixed a bug for v2.6 that involved disappearing fighters. It manifested after fighters were part of a fleet that was drag-dropped to another and then the original fleet was deleted. The fighters were duplicated rather than moved (but the originals were invisible), so when the fleet with the invisible originals was deleted, it also removed their duplicates.
Does it sound like that might have been the cause in this situation?
Similar. I didn't drag/drop, but rather gave the parent fleet orders to join another fleet as a sub-fleet. The effect sounds the same, though. I suspected that it might be something like what you say, the fighters still being in existence but invisible. It reminded me of something that used to happen with the SA program.
In any case, going back to a previous save resolved the problem, and I won't do something like that again, hopefully.
-
Two related issues:
1) A formation template created via the "Copy + Upgrade" button will have a required rank determined by the default logic (based on formation size), rather than simply copied from the original template.
2) If the replacement template for a formation has a required rank higher than the rank of the formation's current commander, the formation will not gain replacements during the Ground Replacement Phase.
As a result, if you reduce the required rank of a template from the default, and then later use the Copy + Upgrade feature on that template (and fail to realize that the required rank of the new template is higher than your original), then your existing formations built with the original template will not gain replacements as expected.
I see issue #1 as a clear bug.
I also see issue #2 as a bug, but I could also see an argument that it is WAI.
-
Two related issues:
1) A formation template created via the "Copy + Upgrade" button will have a required rank determined by the default logic (based on formation size), rather than simply copied from the original template.
2) If the replacement template for a formation has a required rank higher than the rank of the formation's current commander, the formation will not gain replacements during the Ground Replacement Phase.
As a result, if you reduce the required rank of a template from the default, and then later use the Copy + Upgrade feature on that template (and fail to realize that the required rank of the new template is higher than your original), then your existing formations built with the original template will not gain replacements as expected.
I see issue #1 as a clear bug.
I also see issue #2 as a bug, but I could also see an argument that it is WAI.
I've checked and the copy+upgrade does transfer the rank correctly. It's possible I already fixed this in v2.6.
-
I've checked and the copy+upgrade does transfer the rank correctly. It's possible I already fixed this in v2.6.
Interesting.
The template I noticed that this happened to was originally copied from a 3kt, then I expanded it to 6kt, then later upgraded it from there.
Maybe something about the particular upgrade path caused the issue.
I repro'd it originally (or so I thought), but I did not document the exact steps, and I can't repro it now.
Starting to seem like a run-of-the-mill PEBKAC.
What about formations led by under-ranked commanders not getting replacements?
-
I've checked and the copy+upgrade does transfer the rank correctly. It's possible I already fixed this in v2.6.
Interesting.
The template I noticed that this happened to was originally copied from a 3kt, then I expanded it to 6kt, then later upgraded it from there.
Maybe something about the particular upgrade path caused the issue.
I repro'd it originally (or so I thought), but I did not document the exact steps, and I can't repro it now.
Starting to seem like a run-of-the-mill PEBKAC.
What about formations led by under-ranked commanders not getting replacements?
Yes, that second one does sound like a bug, but I can't find any reference to commanders in the ground unit replacement code, so I don't understand why that is a factor. When I have more time, I will setup a test and try to reproduce the bug.
-
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:
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.
-
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".
-
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?
-
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.
-
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!
-
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.
-
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.
-
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):
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: 500
Warhead (some stats are slightly different due to upgraded tech):
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: 500
Also, I noticed that even though I zero out fuel on the buoy, it still adds 500 fuel to the device.
-
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.