v1.11.0 Bugs Thread

[Second Foundationer]

1.11.0, no nos, real stars, conventional start, 84 years

About an in-universe month before, I had encountered an error while downloading salvaged tech (reported before in 1.9.5: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=11298.msg134160#msg134160)
Now, on saving, the following error:
   1.11.0 Function #1429: constraint failed
   UNIQUE constraint failed: FCT_PausedResearch.TechSystemID,
   FCT_PausedResearch.PopulationID

The db loads, but on reloading, it produces:
   Function #1333: The key was not present in the dictionary.
and all contact/intelligence information about other races is gone. There had been three before saving (Ramanathapuram=allied NPR, Grandeel=hostile NPR, Atlanteans=precursors), and from what I can gather in the db from the 'AlienRace' table, the contact information seems still to be there, but in the 'Race' table, all but the player race seem to be gone.

The same 1429 save error, but with different context and result, was reported by SpikeTheHobbitMage in 1.9.5: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=11298.msg135021#msg135021

The attached is the one saved with error.
The last intact save I have before that is roughly half an in-universe year back; at that point, the salvage ship already contains the tech data that will go over the remaining RPs for one project, in case the tech salvage error is really related to the save error.

If you want to avoid missing image errors, use:
- Father Tim's named flags pack http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=11296.0, but added on top of the numbered flags because I had already started,
- plus the zipped RL-France-based custom ribbons. [And no, that's not a peace sign. Well, of course it actually is; but in this universe, it's the symbol of the Republic with a backstory.]

I was never able to confirm or reproduce the tech error, but I suspect that what happened with me was that I somehow managed to create two research tasks for the same prototype.

Ah, if the salvage tech is unrelated, that is a possibility. I had been designing a new generation of some beam ship classes in that year (I'm doing it all over right now, but in different order). Though I don't know how it could have happened; most of the time, I'm not too fiddly with designs, and I have yet to get used to the C# prototype system, so I use it rarely at all. I did prototype a few things in this universe, but wouldn't have needed to because I usually got what I wanted on the first try – not too many options at our tech level... Could things such as accidental double clicks be involved?

[SpikeTheHobbitMage]

Ah, if the salvage tech is unrelated, that is a possibility. I had been designing a new generation of some beam ship classes in that year (I'm doing it all over right now, but in different order). Though I don't know how it could have happened; most of the time, I'm not too fiddly with designs, and I have yet to get used to the C# prototype system, so I use it rarely at all. I did prototype a few things in this universe, but wouldn't have needed to because I usually got what I wanted on the first try – not too many options at our tech level... Could things such as accidental double clicks be involved?

I have no idea.  Sorry.

[Second Foundationer]

   1.11.0 Function #1429: constraint failed
   UNIQUE constraint failed: FCT_PausedResearch.TechSystemID,
   FCT_PausedResearch.PopulationID

After going back to the intact db, Aurora saved without trouble several times. But then I've hit the same 1429 error again at a different point. Attempt to reload produced 1333 and all knowledge of NPRs is extinct. And then again at a third point. Now, I managed to bypass it again in a fourth fork run.

I have avoided the salvage tech error by completing the tech before the salvager arrived. I avoided prototypes in designing the new ship classes. So, unless it was a previous prototype years ago or downloading salvage tech for a meanwhile completed project (no error, but a useless tech download message in the log) is a problem, those things should not be related. NPR-NPR interaction between our allies and our common enemies is my next least unlikely candidate; but I cannot really track it down.

External possibilities I had considered: Could long periods of Aurora running idly in the background affect the save process? Or having alt-tabbed in and out of Aurora often?

I could provide some intermediate dbs if it would help; but I suppose it's no use until it can be pinned down a little more precisely (?).

Later: I seem to have dodged the save error after the third occurrence. It's now almost three years later, and there has been no further sign of it. But I'm also no wiser as to what caused it in the first place.
Only that salvage bug has come back to annoy me a little with every salvager returning from Sirius where fighting has ceased for now; our little tech catch-up with our neighbours is picking up pace, but it would be even faster if that bug wouldn't prevent research points being downloaded or generated from disassembly from time to time.

Still later: Just when I had become more confident and increased the save interval, it happened again. Nothing particularly special happened before: Only, this time I saw our allies salvaging in battlefield Sirius, but I cannot narrow down if that is related or not because I do not know when the save error will occur beforehand, and once it occurs, the db is broken. I suppose I shall have to wait for a more stable Aurora before I invest more time in a universe where I have to do everything twice every odd year. But because I want to play Aurora now, I may still go with 1.11 for a simple no normal NPR, spoilers only, purist solitaire thing next one of these days – if NPR interactions are involved, then I'll be safe from the save bug; and if it does still occur, at least I know that they are not.

[SpikeTheHobbitMage]

The function number: n/a
The complete error text: n/a
The window affected: Economics/environment
What you were doing at the time: conquering a conventional npr
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?: 2nd time in as many games, shouldn't be too hard to reproduce
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: about 30 years in

The planet the NPR was on had too much CO2 and a colony cost of 2 for them.

Has anyone else seen this happen? Anyone who has the possibility please check in your games.

Attached database has two candidate races in "System #12".  While I don't have any species data for them, both of their home-worlds have dangerous atmospheres by human standards, and one also has a reduced hydrosphere.  I believe that I've seen a home-world with 0% hydrosphere before but don't have a database for it anymore.

[CharonJr]

Not sure if it is a bug or just extremely unlikely - I am trying to establish communications with a alien race for more than 1 year now (translation score right in the middle at 0), which seems very long to me.

Actually now that I think about it I might have never gotten any message about trying to establish communications actually, but they keep "talking" to one of my diplo-ships. Communication status is shown as "Attempting" and Diplo Rating is at -1.

Any ideas?

[skoormit]

Mass drivers don't utilize full capacity when planet has reserve levels set for minerals.

I have a colony with significant stockpiles of several minerals for which I have set reserve amounts larger than those stockpiles.
The colony also has smaller amounts of other minerals for which I have set no reserve amounts.
Of the ~20kt of minerals on the planet, ~17.8kt are reserved.
The colony has a single mass driver.
I would expect the md to produce packets totaling 5kt/yr of the non-reserved minerals.
Instead, the md produces far, far less.
I suspect the md is deciding the mineral proportions of each packet based on the ratio of stockpile sizes, without accounting for reserve settings.
After this calculation is done, the md checks reserve settings. If a mineral stockpile is smaller than the reserve amount, that mineral is removed from the packet.

For example, ~25% of the planet's stocks are duranium, which has a reserve amount higher than the current stock.
If my theory is correct, the md is devoting ~25% of the content of each packet to duranium, and then not putting any duranium into the packet (nor freeing up that packet space).

In the attached save, the colony is "ADE-A5M12 LG Shipbuilding".

[TeSparg]

The function number: none
The complete error text: none
The window affected: Starmap (or the starting window)
What you were doing at the time: Fighting some slow moving alien ships with slow moving missiles that have fast second stages.
Conventional or TN start: TN
Random or Real Stars: Real
Is your decimal separator a comma? '.  '
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? - easy, its in the database but you need to be carefull with the timing or you will miss it
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: 52yrs campaign

So I have some 26 size slow(4361km/s) missile that have a separation distance of ~4.  5/4.  6 m km but depending on whether the alien ships are coming at my ships or not the missile deploy at wrong distances ( to far or to close, depends on how the alien ships are moving) in the worst case they even run out of fuel before hitting anything (this is important because at first I was thinking that there was something wrong with the missiles ,maybe they didn't have a warhead or something silly, because it looked like they were about to hit but just disappeared, so I SM-ed a bunch of different new types of missiles to test and that was a big waste of time). 

What I think it happening is that the missile deploys not at the set distance from the target at 4.  5m km but from the point of intersection at 4.  5m km ( the point that the slow missile would be on top the alien ships ) and because the second stage is very fast (10x faster) this creates problems.   ( it will also place the very big, very slow missiles in AMM range something I was trying to avoid )

How to reproduce:
This happens in Lalande 21185 near Sol jump point, in the upper right corner (near 'main' fleet), the ships that are firing the missiles are of type CG Orca Artillery (a fleet that has the same name has them)
- two options to test for: 1) when the aliens are heading towards your missiles or 2) away from them. 

Option 1 when the alien ships are heading towards the missiles:

1)Move the 'main' fleet to Sol jump point.   (so that is doesn't get killed)
2)Wait till the missiles are close to the target. 
3)When they are close start passing time with 30 sec so you don't miss when the second stage deploys. 
4)When the second stage deploys measure the distance from the point of separation from the target. 
5)Wait for them to close in on the target. 
6)Pass time using 5 sec increments to not miss the fact that they run out of fuel (the normal rage of the second stage is ~6m km). 
7)To check that the missile can reach a normal stationary target wait for the other set of missile that where fired at a waypoint 7 to deploy. 
8)Measure the distance and see that its the normal ~4.  5m km and wait to see that the missile reach the waypoint. 

Option 2 when the alien ships are heading away from the missiles (for me it works every time)

1)Leave the 'main' fleet to get hit.   (after killing a ship they turn around and leave, going backwards, so it shouldn't take long)
2)Wait for the missile to get close
3)Start passing time in 5 sec increments
4)When they deploy measure the distance
5)See that they hit the target but they deploy well within AMM range at ~2.  6m km (for me)
6)To check that the missile can reach a normal stationary target wait for the other set of missile that where fired at a waypoint 7 to deploy. 
7)Measure the distance and see that its the normal ~4.  5m km and wait to see that the missile reach the waypoint. 

This might be working as intended for most cases? Because you assume that missiles are always a lot faster (so the distance at witch they intersect vs the actual distance of separation is small) but in this case with slow missiles its very big. 
I hope I am not wrong about this and I hope what i tested helps you.   (not a native English speaker so if there is something that is hard to understand please ask)

 

[Zap0]

I'm experiencing wildly increased fuel consumption on a tug moving a shipyard. Couldn't find anything about changes to fuel consumption for tugs, so I'm posting here.

Got a tug with 250k fuel, which will give it 40b+ range over 146 days at no load. I'm expecting it to still have that 40b+ range when tractoring something, just that it takes a lot longer. This was how it was in VB6 (iirc), the tugging ship does not burn more fuel, it just slows down, but it's range did not reduce (now there's argument that the range should reduce, but it wasn't like that afaik).

The situation in my attached DB (US empire) is me trying to tug a big commercial shipyard from Earth to Mars and the tug repeatedly running out of fuel on the way. Take a look at the tractor ship (creatively named just that), note it's fuel, process a 5 turn increment (it'll stop after 3 days, 4 hours) and look at it's fuel again. It burns nearly 100k fuel in those three days. It's engines say they normally should be using 5 434 fuel in 3 days, 4 hours.
Conventional random stars game 40 years in.

Edit: to clarify, the tug moves properly at reduced speeds - it does not burn all that fuel to move at full speed or anything.

[Iceranger]

I'm expecting it to still have that 40b+ range when tractoring something, just that it takes a lot longer. This was how it was in VB6 (iirc), the tugging ship does not burn more fuel, it just slows down, but it's range did not reduce (now there's argument that the range should reduce, but it wasn't like that afaik).

This was indeed the case in VB6, but was fixed in C#. Since tugs are supposed to work at max engine power when tugging things, it is reasonable the fuel consumption rate is the same.

[Iceranger]

Multi-staged missiles will not explode in a magazine explosion if its first stage does not contain warhead.

The function number: N/A
The complete error text: N/A
The window affected: N/A
What you were doing at the time: testing
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 to reproduce
If this is a long campaign - N/A

To reproduce, design a missile with a warhead (say Missile1). Then, design a second missile (say Missile2), using Missile1 as its second stage, and on its first stage, do not put any warhead.

Design a ship with nothing but a capacity 100 commercial magazine (and the crew quarters).

SM spawn the ship, SM fill the magazine with Missile2. In the fleet window, select the ship, and select the miscellaneous tab, and apply 1 internal damage to the ship. This damage is very likely to hit the commercial magazine and cause it to explode. Refresh the tactical window. You should see 'Secondary Magazine Explosion Strength 0' at the location of the ship.

SM spawn another copy of the ship (if the previous one was not destroyed, SM fix it). This time, fill the magazine with Missile1. Repeat the applying damage and refreshing tactical map steps. This time, the magazine explosion should be a positive value.

Confirmed

[bean]

The function number - N/A
The complete error text - N/A
The window affected - N/A
What you were doing at the time - Ordering a ship to stabilize lagrange point
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? - Easily reproduced
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - <1 year

The time required to stabilize a lagrange point doesn't update if the commander changes.  I instanted a stabilization ship, and it began work before commander assignments.  I then sent another ship to go in and take over the job, and time required dropped by about 25%. 

[bean]

The function number - N/A
The complete error text - N/A
The window affected - Naval organization
What you were doing at the time - Assigning missile launchers to FCs
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? - Easily reproduced
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - Early game

My primary missile cruiser has two different fire-controls, one R20, and two R100, all about the same range.  (The R20 is to cover the possibility of FAC and fighter attack, obviously.) There are 18 missile tubes.  When I hit auto FC, I get six tubes assigned to the R20 FC, and the other 12 tubes just vanish.  This happens no matter what state the ship is in initially.  I could have it totally set up, or there could be no assignments at all yet.  No matter what, those tubes seem to be gone until I copy an assignment from another ship of the same class.

Confirmed.

[Bughunter]

Byron, if you have a db to reproduce the above it may help. Any mods or db edits involved?

[Droll]

Byron, if you have a db to reproduce the above it may help. Any mods or db edits involved?

Do not have the DB but can confirm the same thing happened to me:

1- Design a missile ship with 2 or more FCs (each with ECCM - you might test without for completeness). My ships also had a BFC for gauss weapons set to final defensive
2- Have a certain amount of missile tubes (exact number doesn't matter but I had an even count for symmetry)
3- Use auto-assign FC on that ship

In my case I had a ship with 20 tubes and 2 MFCs, what happened is that the ECCM was fine, but for some reason only the 1st 5 leunchers were assigned to MFC1 and tubes 5-10 were assigned to MFC2. For some reason tubes 19-20 were visible under unassigned launchers but 11-18 were rendered invisible in the UI.

I resolved this problem by manual assignment on another ship of the same class and using the class assignment button, this correctly assigned all weapons on the affected ship.

Note: I also have AMM ships with 30 tubes and 2 MFCs. For some reason this bug did not happen on MFCs that auto-assign designates point defence modes for.

[Bughunter]

Ships with damaged engines moving at 1km/s seem to still act as if they are moving at their top speed when it comes to hit chance in combat. This is with a spoiler race invaders so maybe they have something I don't know about.

Attached is DB to check it out. Their engines were shot out by missiles.

In that db the hit chance goes up significantly on the next increment (cancel move order so distance is not a factor) for your ship firing at the spoiler. I'm not sure when the speed dropped to 1, but I cannot say I'm seeing what you are reporting. Could be related to the reload of course if you had previously fired on it for several increments without a change after the engine damage?