Author Topic: v1.9.4 Potential Bugs Thread  (Read 22235 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline klyoh

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • k
  • Posts: 5
Re: v1.9.4 Potential Bugs Thread
« Reply #120 on: May 04, 2020, 08:52:50 PM »
Various Ground Support Fighters Bugs and issues:

- "Planetary Search and Destroy" Mission for Ground Support Fighters does not seem to work if there are no Ground Units on the ground, contrary to what is written in Steve's C# changes post (hxxp: aurora2.   pentarch.   org/index.   php?topic=8495.   msg110233#msg110233)
Steps to reproduce:
   - Create a Ground Support Fighter Design (in case I am missing something: fighters < 500t with fighter pod bays, fighter pods (in my case autocannon) and small missile fire control, plus a carrier with the appropriate hangar space).    Create a fleet with the carrier and the fighters (assign fighters to mothership)
   - Move the fleet to a world with hostile ground forces (such as a precursor world whose naval forces have been wiped out).    In my last test, I had 17,900 tons of hostile Ground Forces detected.   
   - Create a fleet with exclusively fighters (use "detach" order from the Carrier Fleet/Ship List on selected fighters)
   - Select the fighter fleet and order the "Planetary Search and Destroy" Mission.    Note: There needs to be a colony on the planet or the Search and Destroy order will not appear.   
   - Wait however long you want, nothing happens.    I waited 2 weeks, until my fighters' intended deployment time was exceeded.   .   .   


- While testing the various Ground Support Fighter Missions (same set up as previous description, but with Ground Units on the ground, 24 fighters assigned to Ground support, 12 to Search and Destroy and 12 to Flak Suppression), I encountered the following errors (translated from french):
 1.   9.   4 Function #2712: The object reference is not set to an object instance  - Five times
 1.   9.   4 Function #327: The object reference is not set to an object instance - Two times
I don't know if it is linked, but in the combat summary report, I get the following anomaly:
- It seems a fighter (one of those assigned to planetary search and destroy) suffered from a catastrophic failure and exploded.    Nothing strange here
- However this seems to have happened twice, simultaneously, to the same fighter.   
- In one case, nobody survived, in the other one of the crew (they have 3 crew) survived (I might rename him Schrödinger if it is possible).   
- I have two lifepods corresponding to the same ship.    See attached image, which was taken a few days later as I didn't notice earlier
- I got two events of type "Combat Summary" with absolutelly no text.    See attached image.   

- The same messages happened 8 hours later, but this time with no fighter loss

- 8 hours later, again the same messages (I believe one less of the #327), with one fighter loss (catastrophic failure) but no duplication

- Again 8 hours later, only the #2712 message appeared, and only 3 times

- 8 hours later, #2712 appeared 11 times

- After that, combat stopped, though I still got  the "Ground Combat Intelligence" event with the Estimated Hostile force (and an empty Error Range that does not say much).    I believe this is because both forces are on the defensive.    I do not get any error message either.   

- Indeed, when I go on the offensive, combat starts anew, but still without any error message.    I do not know if it is because I am on the offensive, or because the problematic enemy units died in the previous fighting (or something else.   .   .   ).   

Following this test, I can conclude that none of my fighters did anything, on any of the missions, except die of catastrophic failures.   .   .    I believe this is also a bug, or I am missing something.   

Reproductibility: Systematic with the attached database.    Just load and hit 8 hours.   
After a few tests with it, I can state that :
- error #327 is linked to the loss of a fighter from Catastrophic failure, and systematically with one of those on the search and destroy mission.   
- If I cancel all fighter missions, none of the errors appear (=> errors are linked to fighter missions)
- If I cancel the search and destroy mission, error #327 disappears, but #2712 still happens (=> #327 linked to search and destroy missions)
- If I cancel the ground support missions, error #2712 disappears, but #327 still happens (=> #2712 linked to Ground Support Missions)
   => Additional test: If I put my ground units on the offensive from the beginning of combat, #2712 does not appear (=> #2712 linked to Ground Support Missions, when the supported formations are on the defensive)

I believe there are 3 bugs here: the two linked to error messages and the possibility of fighters on search and destroy missions to die twice simultaneously.

- Ground Support Fighters must be set up in support of ground units ship by ship instead of by fleet, contrary to what is written in Steve's C# changes post (hxxp: aurora2.   pentarch.   org/index.   php?topic=8495.   msg109886#msg109886).    This very significantly complicates the use of Ground Support Fighters.   
Steps to reproduce:
   - Create a Ground Support Fighter Design.    There doesn't even need to be a carrier as this also works at the homeworld
   - Create a fleet with exclusively fighters
   - Set the fleet order to "Provide Ground Support"
   - Check the Ground Forces Tab, the ships all appear under the "Ground Support Aircraft" Node, with no way to collapse them by fleet

Context:
The function number - #2712 and #327, plus other issues without error messages
The complete error text - The object reference is not set to an object instance, see text
The window affected - No particular window. 
What you were doing at the time - See description
Conventional or TN start - TN start
Random or Real Stars - Random Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma? - No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? - Systematic with the attached DB, unclear otherwise (though I would expect systematic, see text)
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: Short campaign, 4 years

Edit: Everything to here checked /Bughunter
« Last Edit: May 05, 2020, 09:11:47 AM by Bughunter »
 

Offline bankshot

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • b
  • Posts: 191
  • Thanked: 48 times
Re: v1.9.4 Potential Bugs Thread
« Reply #121 on: May 04, 2020, 08:59:38 PM »
Two related bugs:
1) Standing orders to load/unload colonists do not respect population capacity limits for small bodies
2) Civilian colony ships do not respect population capacity limits for small bodies

To duplicate: create a colony on Phobos, which is a tiny moon with a population capacity of .05m.  Deliver 50 LG infrastructure, which will give it a population supported by infrastructure value of .21m.  Then set standing orders to load/unload colonists on your colony ship, or wait until a civilian colony ship gets around to delivering colonists.  Either one will deliver colonists beyond the population capacity, triggering unrest due to overcrowding.

The function number  N/A
The complete error text N/A
The window affected Economics/Events
What you were doing at the time: setting standing orders or waiting on Civilian
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 - A year or two into the campaign, after the first civilian shipping company launched a colony ship.
 

Offline Bughunter

  • Bug Moderators
  • Rear Admiral
  • ***
  • Posts: 929
  • Thanked: 132 times
  • Discord Username: Bughunter
Re: v1.9.4 Potential Bugs Thread
« Reply #122 on: May 05, 2020, 02:30:35 AM »
The function number: N/A
The complete error text: N/A
The window affected: Tactical
What you were doing at the time: Processing turns
Conventional or TN start: Conventional
Random or Real Stars: Real
Is your decimal separator a comma?: No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce?: No
Campaign length: 45 Years

I uploaded a 15 sec video:

I don't know if this is a bug or just some weird glitch, but
one of my civilian ships appears to be stuck on a jump-gate.
It keeps jumping between the 2 systems connected by the jump-gate.

Edit: I just deleted the ship and there was an other ship with the same problem, so it's 2 affected ships.

Bug already reported so added your db & info to it. Thanks for a good example.
 
The following users thanked this post: Bubbaisagod

Offline ceselb

  • Registered
  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • c
  • Posts: 23
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: v1.9.4 Potential Bugs Thread
« Reply #123 on: May 05, 2020, 03:32:17 AM »
As moves completes, an open window with movement orders does not update accordingly. Switching tabs and back makes it correct again, as does closing and reopening.
1.9.4 dot conventional random about 10 years
 

Offline Bughunter

  • Bug Moderators
  • Rear Admiral
  • ***
  • Posts: 929
  • Thanked: 132 times
  • Discord Username: Bughunter
Re: v1.9.4 Potential Bugs Thread
« Reply #124 on: May 05, 2020, 04:25:05 AM »
Academy Commandant assignment rank restrictions don't work as described in this Aurora C# post: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg104092#msg104092

I am able to assign the lowest level naval commander (Lieutenant Commander) to a colony with level 5 military academy. The rule states that this should be restricted to:

Quote
A naval or ground forces officer must have a rank (with 1 being the lowest rank) at least equal to the number of military academies

Note that this restriction works correctly for Civilian Administrators and Scientists - issue is with Naval and Ground commanders only.

The function number: N/A
The complete error text: N/A
The window affected: Commanders
What you were doing at the time: Assigning Academy Commandant
Conventional or TN start: Conventional
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: Easy to reproduce, build more than 1 academy and try to assign lowest ranking officer.
If this is a long campaign: ~40 years

Thanks, moved into confirmed.
 

Offline Bughunter

  • Bug Moderators
  • Rear Admiral
  • ***
  • Posts: 929
  • Thanked: 132 times
  • Discord Username: Bughunter
Re: v1.9.4 Potential Bugs Thread
« Reply #125 on: May 05, 2020, 04:27:47 AM »
When creating a prototype research project - a bogus "Research Completed" message is generated instantly without advancing time. To reproduce:

1. Go to create research window and use the "Prototype" button.
2. You should see a new "Research Completed" message.

I think the message is confusing, as you have not researched the prototype yet (not even turned into RP yet).

The function number: N/A
The complete error text: N/A
The window affected: Create Research Project
What you were doing at the time: Creating a prototype Research Project
Conventional or TN start: Conventional
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: Easy to reproduce.
If this is a long campaign: ~40 years

Already reported and confirmed.
 

Offline Bughunter

  • Bug Moderators
  • Rear Admiral
  • ***
  • Posts: 929
  • Thanked: 132 times
  • Discord Username: Bughunter
Re: v1.9.4 Potential Bugs Thread
« Reply #126 on: May 05, 2020, 04:53:19 AM »
The function number: N/A
The complete error text: N/A
The window affected: Main and event window
What you were doing at the time: 5 days increment
Conventional or TN start: TN
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: one-off
If this is a long campaign: ~25 years

The event window (and on the main screen) shows that 40.0000 (instead of 40) MSP are required to repair an engine due to a failure.
The cost of the engine is 40 and the damage has been correctly repaired though, I do not know why it is showing this strange number 40.0000
I can say that just the increment before, the ship had exceeded the deployement time.

This seems slightly inconsistent, but could very well depend on some OS setting. For me it shows like:
"Repairs have been carried out that required 7.605 maintenance supplies".
So fractional supplies are shown like this. I feel hesitant to move this into bugs right now as it seems like more of a small cosmetic thing, but let me know if you don't agree.
 

Offline Bughunter

  • Bug Moderators
  • Rear Admiral
  • ***
  • Posts: 929
  • Thanked: 132 times
  • Discord Username: Bughunter
Re: v1.9.4 Potential Bugs Thread
« Reply #127 on: May 05, 2020, 04:57:21 AM »
Are standing orders supposed to override manual ones? I told a ship to refuel from a tanker rather than a colony and I have to turn off the standing order to make that happen.

I think this is WAI because manual orders could potentially leave a ship unable to perform the standing orders. I have a vague memory of Steve stating something like that but cannot find the post. If anyone can prove otherwise I'll report it as a bug.
 

Offline SpaceMarine

  • Bug Moderators
  • Rear Admiral
  • ***
  • Posts: 904
  • Thanked: 877 times
Re: v1.9.4 Potential Bugs Thread
« Reply #128 on: May 05, 2020, 05:02:01 AM »
Two related bugs:
1) Standing orders to load/unload colonists do not respect population capacity limits for small bodies
2) Civilian colony ships do not respect population capacity limits for small bodies

To duplicate: create a colony on Phobos, which is a tiny moon with a population capacity of .05m.  Deliver 50 LG infrastructure, which will give it a population supported by infrastructure value of .21m.  Then set standing orders to load/unload colonists on your colony ship, or wait until a civilian colony ship gets around to delivering colonists.  Either one will deliver colonists beyond the population capacity, triggering unrest due to overcrowding.

The function number  N/A
The complete error text N/A
The window affected Economics/Events
What you were doing at the time: setting standing orders or waiting on Civilian
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 - A year or two into the campaign, after the first civilian shipping company launched a colony ship.

Thank you for the bug report, it appears theres a bit of a problem with the understanding of mechanics, it is possible to put more population on a planet then there is population "capacity" the capacity does not refer to the max people you can put on the planet but rather the amount it can support, if you want to tell civilians to stop overcrowding planets with very small population capacities you need to set it as "stable" so colonists do not arrive, when populations are that small it just needs 50% of its max population capacity filled to be able to use that option, alternatively you can make it a military restricted colony and move 50,000 people in Phobos case, this is less of a bug and more of a misunderstanding of mechanics and also a slight QOL oversight, it would be ideal if civilians stopped shipping when you were at population capacity but if its still set as "destination" they will keep coming, this may be added in a future patch but it is not exactly a bug outright, and when you yourself do it, thats completely normal the max capacity is again how much it can support reasonably not how many you can actually put there, theoretically you can put 10 million people on phobos but you are gonna have a lot of issues and massive unrest etc.

I hope that clears it up, and I do advise that you make a suggestion in the C# Suggestions for the "destination" designation of a colony to be disabled when you reach past or at population capacity max supported. Either way thank you for the report.
 

Offline ceselb

  • Registered
  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • c
  • Posts: 23
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: v1.9.4 Potential Bugs Thread
« Reply #129 on: May 05, 2020, 05:16:15 AM »
Researching PP still gives 25% bonus with a LG speciality researcher. See attached image.
1.9.4 dot conventional random about 10 years
 

Offline SpaceMarine

  • Bug Moderators
  • Rear Admiral
  • ***
  • Posts: 904
  • Thanked: 877 times
Re: v1.9.4 Potential Bugs Thread
« Reply #130 on: May 05, 2020, 05:17:43 AM »
Researching PP still gives 25% bonus with a LG speciality researcher. See attached image.
1.9.4 dot conventional random about 10 years

that is WAI, all scientists will give their bonuses to any field of research but only scientists of the same specialisation as the field of research they are doing will give 4x that.
 

Offline SpaceMarine

  • Bug Moderators
  • Rear Admiral
  • ***
  • Posts: 904
  • Thanked: 877 times
Re: v1.9.4 Potential Bugs Thread
« Reply #131 on: May 05, 2020, 05:19:22 AM »
As moves completes, an open window with movement orders does not update accordingly. Switching tabs and back makes it correct again, as does closing and reopening.
1.9.4 dot conventional random about 10 years

Please clarify, I do not exactly know what you mean, if you mean movement orders in the naval organisation tab, yes you need to refresh to see the updated layout of the orders, this is WAI if that is the case.
 

Offline Kaiser

  • Commander
  • *********
  • K
  • Posts: 329
  • Thanked: 42 times
Re: v1.9.4 Potential Bugs Thread
« Reply #132 on: May 05, 2020, 05:45:43 AM »
The function number: N/A
The complete error text: N/A
The window affected: Main and event window
What you were doing at the time: 5 days increment
Conventional or TN start: TN
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: one-off
If this is a long campaign: ~25 years

The event window (and on the main screen) shows that 40.0000 (instead of 40) MSP are required to repair an engine due to a failure.
The cost of the engine is 40 and the damage has been correctly repaired though, I do not know why it is showing this strange number 40.0000
I can say that just the increment before, the ship had exceeded the deployement time.

This seems slightly inconsistent, but could very well depend on some OS setting. For me it shows like:
"Repairs have been carried out that required 7.605 maintenance supplies".
So fractional supplies are shown like this. I feel hesitant to move this into bugs right now as it seems like more of a small cosmetic thing, but let me know if you don't agree.

Don't know what say.
I am pretty sure it is not an OS setting because I've playing for a while and I had other repairs occurred with integer number instead of fractional.
On the other side, the repair was correctly performed, the cost was 40 so why showing a fractional number? It is probably a comestic, my only concern is that it could involve something more serious in the future.
For now I would move it in the typo 3D. :)
 

Offline Bluebreaker

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • B
  • Posts: 41
  • Thanked: 8 times
Re: v1.9.4 Potential Bugs Thread
« Reply #133 on: May 05, 2020, 07:01:00 AM »
Got a game ending bug, just loaded the game and open economics window and this error throws up.
Probably related to comercial shipyards, since they are gone and trying to add them via SpaceMaster also throws the error.

The function number: #2196
The complete error text: 1. 9. 4 Function #2196 Referencia a objeto no establecida como instancia de objeto.   (translation: Object reference not set as object instance)
The window affected: Economy window
What you were doing at the time: Load game
Conventional or TN start: Conventional
Random or Real Stars: Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma: ". "
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off: yes always.  just open game, open economics window
If this is a long campaign: 40 years

 

Offline SpaceMarine

  • Bug Moderators
  • Rear Admiral
  • ***
  • Posts: 904
  • Thanked: 877 times
Re: v1.9.4 Potential Bugs Thread
« Reply #134 on: May 05, 2020, 07:05:04 AM »
Got a game ending bug, just loaded the game and open economics window and this error throws up.
Probably related to comercial shipyards, since they are gone and trying to add them via SpaceMaster also throws the error.

The function number: #2196
The complete error text: 1. 9. 4 Function #2196 Referencia a objeto no establecida como instancia de objeto.   (translation: Object reference not set as object instance)
The window affected: Economy window
What you were doing at the time: Load game
Conventional or TN start: Conventional
Random or Real Stars: Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma: ". "
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off: yes always.  just open game, open economics window
If this is a long campaign: 40 years

Thank you for the well formatted report, I have looked at the DB and can confirm this, I will be sending this to the confirmed thread.

Edit: I think that between us we covered everything to here now /Bughunter
« Last Edit: May 05, 2020, 09:27:33 AM by Bughunter »