Aurora 4x
VB6 Aurora => VB6 Mechanics => Topic started by: Wolfius on May 30, 2014, 01:08:36 PM
-
Was skimming the System Information Window when I noticed something curious.
Asteroid #72, colony cost: N/A, surface temp -100.6, Gravity 0.14, distance 400m km, diameter 2000 km
...that is, incidently, well above the lower bound of my gravity tollerance - geosurvey even gave it about 2 million tons of minerals. I have colonies on smaller moons that work normally.
I guess bodies flagged as asteroids can't have a colony cost?
And yes, I know underground infrastructure means I can colonise it now. It's just curious - and would have been a terraforming candidate if not for this.. odd quirk? Oversight in programming? I'm assuming it's not a bug.
-
This may be a bug actually, one in asteroid generation routine. If this object really is two thousand kilometers in diameter, it should probably be classified, and treated as, a dwarf planet. Interestingly, this may not be an isolated incident, as I never check asteroid sizes and their gravity fields, so I wouldn't be surprised if there were some objects like that in my games. However, I'm also pretty sure that this was completely unintended on Steve's part.
-
One of my games I had a chunk of rock which had over 0.1 G's and was colonsiable and had a colony cost so yeah this one sounds interesting? Although I think that chunk of rock might have been before Underground Infrastrucutre.
-
Objects with the BodyClass of "Asteroid" are not marked as inhabitable, even if they meet the gravity requirement. In my LP I had to change a couple large asteroids to be BodyClass Planet with BodyTypeID Asteroid for it to work properly, but they then show up as planets instead of asteroids in the F9 window.
-
Objects with the BodyClass of "Asteroid" are not marked as inhabitable, even if they meet the gravity requirement. In my LP I had to change a couple large asteroids to be BodyClass Planet with BodyTypeID Asteroid for it to work properly, but they then show up as planets instead of asteroids in the F9 window.
Note: (I assume this was done by modifying the database) This is exactly the sort of change that drives Steve to be reluctant to give out the DB password. He's worried that, for example, someone will make a change like this (breaking an assumption that BodyClass and BodyTypeID agree) and then log a bug when something goes wrong, leading him to burn a lot of time on a corrupted DB issue.
Just a reminder not to log bugs after changing the DB (or at least to disclose that one has done so in the report).
John