Author Topic: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread  (Read 99702 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Kyle

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • K
  • Posts: 124
  • Thanked: 319 times
  • Quasar4x dev
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #915 on: August 01, 2019, 01:57:31 PM »
Just a display bug but:



The correct morale (what's stored in the db) is 89%.  It's lower than 100% due to survivor overcrowding.
 

Offline Kyle

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • K
  • Posts: 124
  • Thanked: 319 times
  • Quasar4x dev
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #916 on: August 01, 2019, 02:04:30 PM »
Just curious, given that VB6 is no longer getting updates (right?), how useful is it to even report bugs here?  Does any of the stuff reported in the last couple pages help with the C# development?
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 7976
  • Thanked: 4481 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #917 on: August 01, 2019, 03:06:55 PM »
Just curious, given that VB6 is no longer getting updates (right?), how useful is it to even report bugs here?  Does any of the stuff reported in the last couple pages help with the C# development?

C# is entirely new code so bugs caused by coding errors should be fixed (and possibly new ones created). Bugs caused by logic errors might still exist. So its worth posting the bugs just in case.
 

Offline TMaekler

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 495
  • Thanked: 71 times
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #918 on: August 02, 2019, 06:40:14 AM »
Just curious, given that VB6 is no longer getting updates (right?), how useful is it to even report bugs here?  Does any of the stuff reported in the last couple pages help with the C# development?
There is also a clone reprogramming in progress (Quasar 4x), which will be a one on one copy of V7.1 (just lot quicker); so also good to find these bugs so they don't transfer to Q4x.
 

Offline amram

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • a
  • Posts: 49
  • Thanked: 31 times
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #919 on: August 02, 2019, 05:41:02 PM »
^^ they (Kyle) are the author of quasar4x, lol

Of course, that changes nothing about how useful further reports are.

Having bugs reported lowers the chance they will make it to c#, since it either alerts Steve to a newly discovered bug, or reminds him of an old one.

It lowers the chance clones reproduce the bug by alerting them to it as well.  Escpecially relevant to Kyle's approach with Quasar4x, mimicking Aurora so closely means inevitably finding and perhaps implementing the bugs as well.

It also benefits us players by making us aware of what is not quite right, since these bugs are for the latest version of aurora we have at current.

Its not my call, but if it were mine, I wouldn't stop them for those reasons alone.  Even for a long dead version, they have merit imo - its astonishing what we sometimes don't see when we look at code without a specific context to frame it with - having it pointed out has no doubt stopped one or more from making the leap to c# already.
 
The following users thanked this post: TMaekler, Kyle

Offline SpikeTheHobbitMage

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • S
  • Posts: 123
  • Thanked: 14 times
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #920 on: August 02, 2019, 06:17:50 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
Bug confirmed.

Further testing shows that a mixed size fleet can have some ships land and others fail due to insufficient space.  What appears to be happening is that each ship in the landing group checks for enough space individually and then any that passed the check land together regardless of actual available space.

Release/Recover buttons work correctly.
 

Offline Stryker

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • S
  • Posts: 7
  • Thanked: 3 times
Leadership filter bug
« Reply #921 on: August 04, 2019, 12:34:37 AM »
On the lower right hand corner of the leadership tab there are multiple filters for finding the leader you want to use.   Currently, v7. 1, the secondary ability filter is inclusive and should be exclusive.

For example:  I wish to find an admin.  with both factory and mining skills.   I put factory as primary and mining as secondary.   The list that I will then be given includes all admins.  with factory, mining and factory + mining.

The secondary filter should exclude all admins.  from the primary ability filtered list (factory) who do not have the mining ability, rather than including all admins.  from the basic list that have mining.
 

Offline Kyle

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • K
  • Posts: 124
  • Thanked: 319 times
  • Quasar4x dev
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #922 on: August 06, 2019, 02:27:56 PM »
The "Resupply from own Supply Ships" fleet order increases supplies on your supply ships instead of decreasing them. 

So, as long as you have a supply ship in your fleet, you never have to run out of supplies.

This might be related to this older bug.
 

Offline Kyle

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • K
  • Posts: 124
  • Thanked: 319 times
  • Quasar4x dev
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #923 on: October 04, 2019, 10:12:56 AM »
The more slipways a shipyard has, the faster it takes to retool the shipyard, even though the BP cost increases.

For example, if it costs 171 to retool a 1-slipway shipyard with 1680 mod rate on 25th Oct, it completes on the 1st Dec.
If I change the number of slipways to 2, it costs 228.1 as expected, but completes on 19th Nov.
If I change the number of slipways to 4, it costs 342.1 as expected, but completes on 13th Nov.

It doesn't just predict these dates, it actually retools this fast.  I suspect the # of slipways is being divided out to simulate parallelism, but parallelism is already built into the build cost.
 

Offline Xenotrenium

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • X
  • Posts: 6
  • Thanked: 1 times
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #924 on: October 10, 2019, 10:20:25 PM »
Moving PDCs as parasites Last version of aurora, no edits, fresh install

Using the naval organization window in the Task Groups window, I made pdcs into parasites of a ship with a hangar.  Landing the branch etc works and they are now part of the TG.
"No orders possible for task groups with PDCs" show up and prevents any new orders being given.
By simply removing the parasites in question, making an order and then reassigning the pdc parasites, one is able to transfer the pdcs around, including depositing the pdcs in the dead of space.
 
The following users thanked this post: Kyle

Offline Luminouscus

  • Able Ordinary Rate
  • L
  • Posts: 2
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #925 on: October 30, 2019, 07:06:39 PM »
Errors 3020 AND 3021

I'm attempting to set up a custom Hive race campaign that's expanded through it's system already - I've set up 3 NPR's in a sol system that's a few jumps away, and chose a system to create my home world.      When I select a colony in the population tab, I get both of these errors (I think I get it 21 times in a row?).      It also happens when I attempt to give my race a technology.      I had tried giving my race all the 1RP techs that it should have, hoping it would fix the problem, but it hasn't.    No ships yet, so no sensors of my own.     Anybody know what the issue could be here? Is it possible to fix? Please see linked vid.     
v7,10
(about a min thirty, remove the space that's generated after the period)
https://youtu. be/LnnsPFZYzK8
« Last Edit: October 30, 2019, 07:14:03 PM by Luminouscus »
 

Offline Luminouscus

  • Able Ordinary Rate
  • L
  • Posts: 2
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #926 on: November 01, 2019, 01:28:26 AM »
Quote from: Luminouscus link=topic=8144. msg116710#msg116710 date=1572480399
Errors 3020 AND 3021

I think I figured it out.  Apparently there was an abandoned installation on the same planet.  Tried creating a race on a different planet, no errors.  Not 100% sure that's what caused the error (obviously), but the game seems to be running just fine now.

Cheers!
-Luminouscus
 

Offline Kyle

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • K
  • Posts: 124
  • Thanked: 319 times
  • Quasar4x dev
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #927 on: November 07, 2019, 11:25:33 AM »
Ground units without a commander gain morale at 200 per year -- I believe it should be 100 per year

This means that it is harmful to your ground forces to have a commander with less than 100 Ground Forces Training rating, because that causes their morale to rise at only (100 + TrainingRating) / year.

 

Offline L0ckAndL0ad

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • L
  • Posts: 48
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #928 on: November 15, 2019, 01:29:41 PM »
My intelligence service has gotten an enemy blueprint. There's something fishy about 0cm lasers.

Game version 7.1.0.

Off-Topic: show

Reaper-J class Jump Destroyer    9 600 tons     208 Crew     724.5 BP      TCS 192  TH 275  EM 0
1432 km/s    JR 3-50     Armour 1-40     Shields 0-0     Sensors 10/5/0/0     Damage Control Rating 4     PPV 46
Maint Life 1.63 Years     MSP 189    AFR 184%    IFR 2.6%    1YR 84    5YR 1256    Max Repair 183 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 6 months    Spare Berths 1   

J9750(3-50) Military Jump Drive     Max Ship Size 9750 tons    Distance 50k km     Squadron Size 3
25 EP Nuclear Thermal Engine (11)    Power 25    Fuel Use 95%    Signature 25    Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 400 000 Litres    Range 7.9 billion km   (63 days at full power)

0cm C1 Visible Light Laser (23)    Range 0km     TS: 1432 km/s     Power 0-1     RM 2    ROF 0        0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S02 40-1250 (1)    Max Range: 80 000 km   TS: 1250 km/s     88 75 62 50 38 25 12 0 0 0
Pressurised Water Reactor PB-1 (12)     Total Power Output 24    Armour 0    Exp 5%

Active Search Sensor MR31-R112 (1)     GPS 6720     Range 31.7m km    Resolution 112
Thermal Sensor TH2-10 (1)     Sensitivity 10     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  10m km
EM Detection Sensor EM1-5 (1)     Sensitivity 5     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  5m km

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
 

Offline Kyle

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • K
  • Posts: 124
  • Thanked: 319 times
  • Quasar4x dev
Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Reply #929 on: November 20, 2019, 02:39:28 PM »
Some ground units get a commander readiness bonus for replacements when they have no commander.

When looping through commander-less ground units applying replacement battalions to their readiness, the bonus from the commander last seen in the loop appears to be used.  I haven't thoroughly tested this but if it's true then having many commanders of varying skill levels is worse for readiness than just having 1 or 2 extremely good commanders. 
 

 

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