Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
C# Suggestions / Re: Reintroduce missile series
« Last post by Ektor on Today at 04:23:00 PM »
I'm also missing the feature.
2
C# Suggestions / Re: C# Suggestions
« Last post by Ektor on Today at 04:21:52 PM »
I'm rather satisfied with colony auto-assign, actually. I'd love a similar feature for admin commands.
3
C# Suggestions / Re: C# Suggestions
« Last post by froggiest1982 on Today at 03:33:40 PM »
Auto assign for admin command would be great, as well

While I understand why many people ask for this and as said all other times it popped up, I am against that as it could lead to confusion assigning officers not suitable for the task. I think a solution similar to the colony governors that it's optional would be better.

Polemic Note
Off-Topic: show
However, on this last point, something that I pointed out it's already happening. People are complaining because the auto assignment is not behaving as they want. This is the problem with automation: it's automatic. If you want control it's called manual.
4
Game/Book Reviews / Re: Terra Invicta KS starts soon
« Last post by Elouda on Today at 03:05:20 PM »
Terra Invicta KS in its final hour, and <$5k away from a stretch goal for an awesome sounding scenario set in 2300 as an extra.

At $25 for the basic edition it seems like a pretty good deal.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/terrainvicta/terra-invicta

Some awesome looking footage and coverage by ASpec in this video;
5
C# Suggestions / Re: C# Suggestions
« Last post by Ektor on Today at 02:34:00 PM »
Could we get a separate message when an administrator or admin commander leaves duty? I usually don't bother reading the reports of who retired because given the several tens of officers I usually have, there's always some random person retiring, but it's actually super important to admin commands since for some reason there's no auto assign for them. Auto assign for admin command would be great, as well.

Also, another thing I've thought about, the "load minerals until full" order has been added which is an absolute lifesaver and I'm really glad it got added, but there should be a similar order for refuelling. "Refuel from hub until full." Why? So we could set transport tankers parked on fuel harvesters that would function the same way as mineral transporters.
6
C# Bug Reports / Re: v1.12.0 Bugs Thread
« Last post by db48x on Today at 01:39:43 PM »
I would specifically check for overflow so that I could use the maximum usable tracking strength instead of wrapping around. Looks like that would top out at a maximum detection range of 113 light years, which is silly enough that nobody would be bothered that they can't increase it further.

Bonus points for actually allowing detection of units in other star systems if the detection range is big enough…

This would be brilliant in the suggestion thread. I think an interesting extension would be to add JP listening which would allow you to use a small % of your sensor sensitivity to "peek" through the other end of a JP.

Heh, I was actually being a little bit facetious. At the maximum of 3750 sensor strength per tracking station, it would take 687,842,178 tracking stations to be able to see into the Proxima Centauri system. Good luck mining the 137.6 billion uridium you'll need.

But letting radar go through stable wormholes would be a welcome addition, I think.
7
C# Bug Reports / Re: v1.12.0 Bugs Thread
« Last post by Droll on Today at 01:20:53 PM »
I would specifically check for overflow so that I could use the maximum usable tracking strength instead of wrapping around. Looks like that would top out at a maximum detection range of 113 light years, which is silly enough that nobody would be bothered that they can't increase it further.

Bonus points for actually allowing detection of units in other star systems if the detection range is big enough…

This would be brilliant in the suggestion thread. I think an interesting extension would be to add JP listening which would allow you to use a small % of your sensor sensitivity to "peek" through the other end of a JP.
8
C# Suggestions / Improvements to the Sol system
« Last post by db48x on Today at 01:12:29 PM »
I was reading up on the upcoming NASA mission to 16 Psyche, and I began to wonder if it was in Aurora's database or not. It is, but some of the details are wrong; observations over the last few years have refined our measurements of its radius, mass, and density. I suspect that the same will have happened to other minor planets as well. Perhaps we ought to think about updating these values for all objects already in the database? We could divide up the work between interested volunteers, or maybe a clever script could extract the data from Wikipedia automatically.

To get things started, updating 16 Psyche can be done with this SQL statement:

    UPDATE DIM_SolSystemBodies SET Radius = 111, Mass = 4.0352e-6, Density = 4.2 WHERE SystemBodyID = 108265;

Probably the surface gravity and escape velocity need to be updated as well, but those aren't don't have much effect on the game, and I'm not exactly sure what units they're in.

Including 101955 Bennu would be fun now that a probe has sampled it, even if it is a tiny speck by comparison with most of the other items in the database.
9
C# Bug Reports / Re: v1.12.0 Bugs Thread
« Last post by db48x on Today at 11:41:25 AM »
conventional start, real stars, 200+ yrs.
reproducible in a fresh game with both real and non-real stars.

deep space tracking ranges seem to "wrap around" where the 10,000 range resets to a smaller value,  then the 1,000.  then the 10,000.  etc, as the number of stations, or tech levels grow.  sometimes the 10,000 range disappears entirely. im not sure if its a display issue on the system map or a range limit.

reproduceable by sm mode.  give yourself a high planetary sensor strength tech (2000 was my test). 
turn on passive vs signature 1,000 and 10,000.
then add deep space tracking centers a few at a time.

seems to happen around 11-12m km range

first occurs at 215,000 tracking station strength ~11.58m range
and again at 644,000
and 1,074,600
and 1,503,000

etc etc at ~430,000x+215,000 tracking strength.  each time the passive vs signature 10,000 range resets.

That's clearly integer overflow. With the new passive sensor model, the formula for the range is Detection Range = SQRT(Passive Sensor Strength * Target Signature ) * 250,000 km.

215,000 * 10,000 > 2^31-1, so it doesn't fit into a signed 32-bit integer. Using an unsigned 32-bit integer would delay the overflow until the sensor strength was 430,000. At the highest tech level, the range wraps around after 57 deep space tracking stations. This gives a maximum tracking range of 11.58 bkm, or 77.4 au.

Using an unsigned 64-bit number instead would delay the inevitable until the sensor strength was 1.844×10¹?, which is a pretty big number. At the highest possible tech level that will still be more than 491 billion tracking stations. Even then, I would specifically check for overflow so that I could use the maximum usable tracking strength instead of wrapping around. Looks like that would top out at a maximum detection range of 113 light years, which is silly enough that nobody would be bothered that they can't increase it further.

Note that once that bug is fixed, there will be another overflow bug when multiplying by 250,000 km. Might as well fix both at the same time. I don't know C# or .Net very well, but perhaps there are library functions for checked multiplication, or for saturating multiplication. Using them would do most of the work.

Bonus points for actually allowing detection of units in other star systems if the detection range is big enough…
10
Quasar4x / Re: Patch Notes q4x
« Last post by Kyle on Today at 11:26:44 AM »
- Fixed: Refuel From Colony conditional order was sometimes selecting remote systems in code that expects local system only
- Fixed: Fleet orders > Center Fleet on Map checkbox wasn't doing so until fleet reselected
- Fixed a few issues with pathing thru lagrange points
- F2 window > Transfer Team to Ship: Removed civilian ships from list
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk