Author Topic: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread  (Read 100134 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 7980
  • Thanked: 4488 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #900 on: June 24, 2019, 03:20:44 AM »
Quote from: Steve Walmsley link=topic=8144. msg115046#msg115046 date=1561325523
I have no idea what the TMP folder is.  Are you using some form of third-party tool with Aurora?

I originally found the issue with portable Aurora, so yes to 3rd party tool. . .  but I confirmed it occurs with vanilla Aurora as well (v5. 54 and v7. 10), so I thought I should report it here. 

To clarify "TMP" isn't the folder name, it is the name of the user variable that has a temporary folder path associated with it.  For example, in my system environment variables I have a user variable named "TMP" that has a value of "C:\Users\[UserName]\AppData\Local\Temp".

When you launch Aurora that folder has some files loaded to it (file names ~DFDBAF90C1113D4F66. TMP and JETFC9C. tmp).  If that folder is not present (because some other program deleted it. .   or because I deleted it for testing) you get the crash I mentioned above.  Once you close Aurora these temporary files are deleted. 

Does this make "TMP" seem more familiar? Maybe it's actually a bug with some dependent code working in the background?

There is no code in Aurora that creates file in that folder (or any other folder), so if files are being created it will be due to Microsoft code associated with VB and Access. I imagine removing the temp directory will cause problems with other programs beside Aurora.
 

Offline SpikeTheHobbitMage

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • S
  • Posts: 123
  • Thanked: 14 times
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #901 on: July 09, 2019, 10:19:49 AM »
A quick search didn't find these, so here we go.

Wrong weapon assigned to fire control
Individual Unit Details window, Combat Settings tab.

If an energy weapon is recharging, the charge is appended to the weapon number:
Selecting "R1.5/C3 High Power Microwave #1 (Ready To Fire)" works as expected.
Selecting "R1.5/C3 High Power Microwave #10/3 power recharged" assigns weapon #10.
There should be a space before "0/3 power recharged".

If the weapon name contains a #, the wrong weapon is assigned.
Selecting "Weapon #7 #1 (Ready To Fire)" assigns weapon #7.
It should match on the last "#" instead of the first.
 

Offline Kyle

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • K
  • Posts: 125
  • Thanked: 326 times
  • Quasar4x dev
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #902 on: July 15, 2019, 05:37:12 PM »
My search didn't find this one.

If a ship starts loading colonists, it will immediately fill up with colonists rather than spreading out the loading over the full duration of the loading time.  You can delete the fleet order and it will still be fully loaded, skipping the loading time. 
« Last Edit: July 15, 2019, 05:40:33 PM by Kyle »
 

Online Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 7980
  • Thanked: 4488 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #903 on: July 16, 2019, 03:05:05 AM »
My search didn't find this one.

If a ship starts loading colonists, it will immediately fill up with colonists rather than spreading out the loading over the full duration of the loading time.  You can delete the fleet order and it will still be fully loaded, skipping the loading time.

Yes, that is more of a feature than a bug :)

The load happens immediately and then the fleet is delayed for the appropriate amount of time. In C#, the delay happens before the loading.
 

Offline Kyle

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • K
  • Posts: 125
  • Thanked: 326 times
  • Quasar4x dev
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #904 on: July 16, 2019, 12:38:51 PM »
Another one:

If you tell a fleet with 2 ships with a total capacity of 20000 MaxColonists to load colonists, the time required will be 2550 minutes (after 1.15 tf logis bonus applied) as expected

But if you instead tell the same fleet to load a maximum of 15000 colonists, the time required will be 51000 minutes, exactly 20 x longer than it would take to load 20000 of them.

So the Load Colonists order with a specified number of colonists isn't usable if you care how long it takes.
 

Offline SpikeTheHobbitMage

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • S
  • Posts: 123
  • Thanked: 14 times
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #905 on: July 16, 2019, 02:26:51 PM »
Another one:

If you tell a fleet with 2 ships with a total capacity of 20000 MaxColonists to load colonists, the time required will be 2550 minutes (after 1.15 tf logis bonus applied) as expected

But if you instead tell the same fleet to load a maximum of 15000 colonists, the time required will be 51000 minutes, exactly 20 x longer than it would take to load 20000 of them.

So the Load Colonists order with a specified number of colonists isn't usable if you care how long it takes.
Oh, that's beautiful.

A few other goodies to watch out for:
Small cargo holds can't load PDC sections even though they would fit.  They also get bugged if they load ship components.
Loading installations and PDC sections doesn't honour amounts.  I suspect this is why civilians sometimes move 0.05 more research facilities than requested.
Load/Unload to Reserve order can't have any other orders queued after it or it screws up, it sometimes tries to load before unloading, and it also throws errors if the colony doesn't have a reserve set for every mineral.

I'm really looking forward to the new loading orders in C#.
 

Offline Kyle

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • K
  • Posts: 125
  • Thanked: 326 times
  • Quasar4x dev
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #906 on: July 18, 2019, 10:39:46 AM »
If you set the minimum distance of an order to be slightly less than the distance between two fleets, you can teleport resources around. For example, Refuel Target Fleet at 50000 k km

Edit: after some thought, I'm guessing that the philosophy more or less is that if something exploity can be done, it's not really considered a bug because the game is more like a tabletop game in that the player *wants* to follow rules and will go out of his/her way to avoid doing an action that is obviously unrealistic? 
« Last Edit: July 18, 2019, 11:08:08 AM by Kyle »
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • J
  • Posts: 1135
  • Thanked: 91 times
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #907 on: July 18, 2019, 11:05:53 AM »
Something that I don't know is a feature or fixed in Aurora C# is spinal weapons?!?

A ship can have one spinal weapon from each type... so I can have several regular spinal weapons and several advanced ones (on the same ship) as long as they are different weapons.

I think a better way of representing spinal weapons would be say they can not be more than a specific weight of the ship or some combination of factors. It sometimes feels a bit sad you can only fit one spinal on a rather big ship that potentially should be able to have more of them if they are small enough.

The spinal trait should perhaps be something other than just a bigger weapon. If a ship is large enough then some "spinal" versions could potentially be in a very large turret anyway due to the size of the ship. What is a spinal mount to a small FAC are basically a PD weapon on a 100.000t battleship.

I often feel that spinal weapons are not big enough to feel spinal to even moderately large ships like 15k or 20k tons.
 

Offline Garfunkel

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1363
  • Thanked: 161 times
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #908 on: July 18, 2019, 11:27:48 AM »
I think Steve said that C# allows only a single Spinal weapon on a ship.
 

Offline Kyle

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • K
  • Posts: 125
  • Thanked: 326 times
  • Quasar4x dev
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #909 on: July 25, 2019, 01:17:06 PM »
Unless I'm misunderstanding how hangar space works, it seems like you can land as many ships as you want on a mothership regardless of hangar size.  (Method: 1 TG of many parasites, target a second TG containing the mothership assigned to all these parasites, and tell the parasite TG to Land On Assigned Mothership)
 

Offline Father Tim

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1263
  • Thanked: 159 times
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #910 on: July 25, 2019, 05:35:53 PM »
Unless I'm misunderstanding how hangar space works, it seems like you can land as many ships as you want on a mothership regardless of hangar size.  (Method: 1 TG of many parasites, target a second TG containing the mothership assigned to all these parasites, and tell the parasite TG to Land On Assigned Mothership)

You can certainly issue that order, but it shouldn't work the way you're suggesting.  The mother will land as many parasites (in order of initiative) as it can hold, then throw an error about being unable to complete the order.  Also, trying to assign more parasites to a mothership than it can hold should give an error.
 

Offline SpikeTheHobbitMage

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • S
  • Posts: 123
  • Thanked: 14 times
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #911 on: July 26, 2019, 12:50:47 AM »
Unless I'm misunderstanding how hangar space works, it seems like you can land as many ships as you want on a mothership regardless of hangar size.  (Method: 1 TG of many parasites, target a second TG containing the mothership assigned to all these parasites, and tell the parasite TG to Land On Assigned Mothership)

You can certainly issue that order, but it shouldn't work the way you're suggesting.  The mother will land as many parasites (in order of initiative) as it can hold, then throw an error about being unable to complete the order.  Also, trying to assign more parasites to a mothership than it can hold should give an error.
There is no error assigning more parasites, but actually attempting to land them fails as you describe.  In my current game I assigned and landed a critically damaged 9.7kt ship on my 10kt capacity carrier for emergency field repairs.  It worked perfectly, but I had to launch my fighters first.
 

Offline Kyle

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • K
  • Posts: 125
  • Thanked: 326 times
  • Quasar4x dev
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #912 on: July 30, 2019, 03:27:49 PM »
Unless I'm misunderstanding how hangar space works, it seems like you can land as many ships as you want on a mothership regardless of hangar size.  (Method: 1 TG of many parasites, target a second TG containing the mothership assigned to all these parasites, and tell the parasite TG to Land On Assigned Mothership)

You can certainly issue that order, but it shouldn't work the way you're suggesting.  The mother will land as many parasites (in order of initiative) as it can hold, then throw an error about being unable to complete the order.  Also, trying to assign more parasites to a mothership than it can hold should give an error.
There is no error assigning more parasites, but actually attempting to land them fails as you describe.  In my current game I assigned and landed a critically damaged 9.7kt ship on my 10kt capacity carrier for emergency field repairs.  It worked perfectly, but I had to launch my fighters first.
Here's the bug in action

 
The following users thanked this post: SpikeTheHobbitMage

Offline Kyle

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • K
  • Posts: 125
  • Thanked: 326 times
  • Quasar4x dev
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #913 on: July 30, 2019, 03:32:56 PM »
Another one: The Detach Non-Survey Ships order sets the speed of the detached fleet to the speed of the ship with the lowest ShipID, even if the other ships in the Non-Survey fleet have a much lower maximum speed.

« Last Edit: July 30, 2019, 03:35:55 PM by Kyle »
 

Offline Garfunkel

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1363
  • Thanked: 161 times
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #914 on: July 31, 2019, 05:06:47 AM »
In Ship Design window, if there are no classes yet created - which is the standard for a conventional start - and the player ticks the "Size in tons" box, Aurora goes to error-message death spiral because of Error in PopulateLoadout (Error 91), requiring Task Manager to kill it.
 

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55