2.41 Bugs

[Kurt (OP)]

The situation is as follows:
I have established a major colony on a planet in the same system as my home planet.  After some minor terraforming, the colony planet is a 0.00 colony cost planet, and I have removed the infrastructure originally placed there so that other planets could utilize it.  The colony has a 22.62 million population.  

In spite of the fact that the colony has a 0.00 colony cost, it has a negative population growth, -0.11 percent to be exact, and the political stability modifier is falling at a steady, if slow, rate.  After some experimentation, I've figured out why.  

At first I thought it was because it was undefended, but the colony planet is in the same system as the home planet, and thus enjoys the somewhat dubious benefit of being covered by the home planet's defense bases, and so has an actual protection level of 896, compared to its requested protection level of 15.  As a test I shifted several warships from their orbits over the home planet to the colony, to see if that changed anything, but it didn't.   The political stability modifier continues to fall and the growth rate remains negative.  

Finally, out of desperation, I shifted some infrastructure back to the planet, and sure enough the pop growth rate immediately went back to positive numbers, and the stability modifier started increasing.  

Based on that, I think that the colony cost is not actually 0, but is instead some very small number, like 0.001.  Aurora is reporting that it is 0.00 but it obviously isn't.

Kurt

[SteveAlt]

The situation is as follows:
I have established a major colony on a planet in the same system as my home planet.  After some minor terraforming, the colony planet is a 0.00 colony cost planet, and I have removed the infrastructure originally placed there so that other planets could utilize it.  The colony has a 22.62 million population.  

In spite of the fact that the colony has a 0.00 colony cost, it has a negative population growth, -0.11 percent to be exact, and the political stability modifier is falling at a steady, if slow, rate.  After some experimentation, I've figured out why.  

At first I thought it was because it was undefended, but the colony planet is in the same system as the home planet, and thus enjoys the somewhat dubious benefit of being covered by the home planet's defense bases, and so has an actual protection level of 896, compared to its requested protection level of 15.  As a test I shifted several warships from their orbits over the home planet to the colony, to see if that changed anything, but it didn't.   The political stability modifier continues to fall and the growth rate remains negative.  

Finally, out of desperation, I shifted some infrastructure back to the planet, and sure enough the pop growth rate immediately went back to positive numbers, and the stability modifier started increasing.  

Based on that, I think that the colony cost is not actually 0, but is instead some very small number, like 0.001.  Aurora is reporting that it is 0.00 but it obviously isn't.

Aurora rounds to two decimal places on the summary view so its definitely possible. A value of 0.002 for example would show as 0.00. I'll change it to 4 decimal places to avoid that in future.

Steve

[sloanjh]

The situation is as follows:
I have established a major colony on a planet in the same system as my home planet.  After some minor terraforming, the colony planet is a 0.00 colony cost planet, and I have removed the infrastructure originally placed there so that other planets could utilize it.  The colony has a 22.62 million population.  

In spite of the fact that the colony has a 0.00 colony cost, it has a negative population growth, -0.11 percent to be exact, and the political stability modifier is falling at a steady, if slow, rate.  After some experimentation, I've figured out why.  

At first I thought it was because it was undefended, but the colony planet is in the same system as the home planet, and thus enjoys the somewhat dubious benefit of being covered by the home planet's defense bases, and so has an actual protection level of 896, compared to its requested protection level of 15.  As a test I shifted several warships from their orbits over the home planet to the colony, to see if that changed anything, but it didn't.   The political stability modifier continues to fall and the growth rate remains negative.  

Finally, out of desperation, I shifted some infrastructure back to the planet, and sure enough the pop growth rate immediately went back to positive numbers, and the stability modifier started increasing.  

Based on that, I think that the colony cost is not actually 0, but is instead some very small number, like 0.001.  Aurora is reporting that it is 0.00 but it obviously isn't.

Aurora rounds to two decimal places on the summary view so its definitely possible. A value of 0.002 for example would show as 0.00. I'll change it to 4 decimal places to avoid that in future.

Steve

I think the "maximum population" field on the summary view will show as "unlimited" if the colony cost is truly 0.

John

[Kurt (OP)]

The situation is as follows:
I have established a major colony on a planet in the same system as my home planet.  After some minor terraforming, the colony planet is a 0.00 colony cost planet, and I have removed the infrastructure originally placed there so that other planets could utilize it.  The colony has a 22.62 million population.  

In spite of the fact that the colony has a 0.00 colony cost, it has a negative population growth, -0.11 percent to be exact, and the political stability modifier is falling at a steady, if slow, rate.  After some experimentation, I've figured out why.  

At first I thought it was because it was undefended, but the colony planet is in the same system as the home planet, and thus enjoys the somewhat dubious benefit of being covered by the home planet's defense bases, and so has an actual protection level of 896, compared to its requested protection level of 15.  As a test I shifted several warships from their orbits over the home planet to the colony, to see if that changed anything, but it didn't.   The political stability modifier continues to fall and the growth rate remains negative.  

Finally, out of desperation, I shifted some infrastructure back to the planet, and sure enough the pop growth rate immediately went back to positive numbers, and the stability modifier started increasing.  

Based on that, I think that the colony cost is not actually 0, but is instead some very small number, like 0.001.  Aurora is reporting that it is 0.00 but it obviously isn't.

Aurora rounds to two decimal places on the summary view so its definitely possible. A value of 0.002 for example would show as 0.00. I'll change it to 4 decimal places to avoid that in future.

Steve

I think the "maximum population" field on the summary view will show as "unlimited" if the colony cost is truly 0.

John

You are correct, and this was what first gave me a clue as to what was going on.  Instead of saying unlimited, it said N/A after I removed the infrastructure from the colony.

Kurt

[ShadoCat]

I was starting a new game and got this error message right before it asked me if I wanted to name the home planet:

Error 3163 was generated by DAO.Field
The field is too small to accept the amount of data you attemted to add.  Try inserting or pasting less data.

I had created the homeworld with a 1000m pop and had converted all ordinance and fighter factories.  I don't know if that had naything to do with it.

[Kurt (OP)]

I was starting a new game and got this error message right before it asked me if I wanted to name the home planet:

Error 3163 was generated by DAO.Field
The field is too small to accept the amount of data you attemted to add.  Try inserting or pasting less data.

I had created the homeworld with a 1000m pop and had converted all ordinance and fighter factories.  I don't know if that had naything to do with it.

I've had this pop up as well.  It doesn't do it every time, and I haven't been able to connect it to anything I've done.  I was wondering if it was something Aurora is doing in the background, like assigned a randomly generated name that is too long for the field it is going into.  

Kurt

[sloanjh]

I think there's a bug in wealth calculation when a research project ends - I suspect the cost of running the research facilities is being applied twice in the update cycle (once for the old project that just finished, once for the new).  The reason I suspect this is that I get dinged for an extra 150 units of wealth or so every time I complete a project on my homeworld (~40 labs).

John

[sloanjh]

I think there's a bug in wealth calculation when a research project ends - I suspect the cost of running the research facilities is being applied twice in the update cycle (once for the old project that just finished, once for the new).  The reason I suspect this is that I get dinged for an extra 150 units of wealth or so every time I complete a project on my homeworld (~40 labs).

John

Aha!!  I think it might just be that the new project was in the specialty of the governor and the old wasn't.  I hadn't realized that the wealth cost was proportional to the research points generated, rather than the number of labs.

Hmmm - could you (Steve) change things so that this doesn't happen?  It doesn't feel right that research (and mining, construction, etc) effienciencies obtained through tech or governor don't result in any cost advantages.

Thanks,
John

[sloanjh]

I think ground unit training outside of PDCs might be broken.  I've not seen any morale increases, even though I've got a CO with a very high training rating in an HQ

John

[SteveAlt]

I was starting a new game and got this error message right before it asked me if I wanted to name the home planet:

Error 3163 was generated by DAO.Field
The field is too small to accept the amount of data you attemted to add.  Try inserting or pasting less data.

I had created the homeworld with a 1000m pop and had converted all ordinance and fighter factories.  I don't know if that had naything to do with it.

I have seen this too but I haven't pinned it down yet.

Steve

[SteveAlt]

I think ground unit training outside of PDCs might be broken.  I've not seen any morale increases, even though I've got a CO with a very high training rating in an HQ

That's a feature rather than a bug. You can only train ground units that are based in PDCs. This is to allow you to train much more specifically as you can put a HQ into a PDC along with the units you want it to train. Each PDC can use a different HQ to train.

Steve

[Kurt (OP)]

Steve- I've just finished fighting out my first ever ground combat, and several weird things popped up.  

First off, I got an error message when I ordered my ground units to stop attacking the enemy - "Error in cmdCeaseGroundAttack_Click".

Secondly, I'm not sure ground combat is working right, the battle was between 1 mobile infantry and three garrison units on one side, and three heavy assault divisions, three mobile infantry, two assault divisions, two garrisons and an HQ on the other side.  To further unbalance things, the side with the eleven divisions had researched ground unit strength 14, while the weaker side only had the basic level (10, I think).  After three combat rounds, the weaker side had lost the mobile infantry division and one garrison, while the stronger side had lost the following:
Heavy Assault: 2
Assault: 1
Mobile Infantry: 2
Garrison: 1

While certainly within the bounds of possibility, it seems that this result is highly unlikely.  

Finally, preceding the ground battle, orbiting cruisers initiated a general bombardment, just to teach the rebels a lesson.  The results were gratifying, especially given the outdated weaponry used (thermal torpedoes).  The results were so good, as a matter of fact, that I stopped the bombardment after just one round.  The problem is, every time I run a turn more damage is being done to the planet, even though all of the ships ceased fire a long time ago.  In fact, I moved them away from the planet just to eliminate them as a possible cause, and at this point they are far beyond the range of their weapons.  Even so, I continue to get the following message in the Event screen:
               suffered 1 hits for a total of 4 points of damage. Casualties...

Note the blank at the start.  I think that relates the name of the rebels.  After the resolution of the battle I deleted them, but for some reason Aurora is continuing to bombard them.  The above message is followed by another indicating that the loyalist population on the planet has also been hit for the same amount of damage.  The radiation level increases every turn as well.  

This is very perplexing.  I'd appreciate any insight you might have.  

Kurt

[Kurt (OP)]

Steve- I've just finished fighting out my first ever ground combat, and several weird things popped up.  

First off, I got an error message when I ordered my ground units to stop attacking the enemy - "Error in cmdCeaseGroundAttack_Click".

Secondly, I'm not sure ground combat is working right, the battle was between 1 mobile infantry and three garrison units on one side, and three heavy assault divisions, three mobile infantry, two assault divisions, two garrisons and an HQ on the other side.  To further unbalance things, the side with the eleven divisions had researched ground unit strength 14, while the weaker side only had the basic level (10, I think).  After three combat rounds, the weaker side had lost the mobile infantry division and one garrison, while the stronger side had lost the following:
Heavy Assault: 2
Assault: 1
Mobile Infantry: 2
Garrison: 1

While certainly within the bounds of possibility, it seems that this result is highly unlikely.  

Finally, preceding the ground battle, orbiting cruisers initiated a general bombardment, just to teach the rebels a lesson.  The results were gratifying, especially given the outdated weaponry used (thermal torpedoes).  The results were so good, as a matter of fact, that I stopped the bombardment after just one round.  The problem is, every time I run a turn more damage is being done to the planet, even though all of the ships ceased fire a long time ago.  In fact, I moved them away from the planet just to eliminate them as a possible cause, and at this point they are far beyond the range of their weapons.  Even so, I continue to get the following message in the Event screen:
               suffered 1 hits for a total of 4 points of damage. Casualties...

Note the blank at the start.  I think that relates the name of the rebels.  After the resolution of the battle I deleted them, but for some reason Aurora is continuing to bombard them.  The above message is followed by another indicating that the loyalist population on the planet has also been hit for the same amount of damage.  The radiation level increases every turn as well.  

This is very perplexing.  I'd appreciate any insight you might have.  

Kurt

By way of an update, the continuing infliction of damage stopped after I closed out Aurora and restarted it.  

Kurt

[Brian Neumann]

The above message is followed by another indicating that the loyalist population on the planet has also been hit for the same amount of damage. The radiation level increases every turn as well.

This is very perplexing. I'd appreciate any insight you might have.

This raises a question.  Should there be any radiation from bombardment by energy weapons?

Brian

[SteveAlt]

Aha!!  I think it might just be that the new project was in the specialty of the governor and the old wasn't.  I hadn't realized that the wealth cost was proportional to the research points generated, rather than the number of labs.

Hmmm - could you (Steve) change things so that this doesn't happen?  It doesn't feel right that research (and mining, construction, etc) effienciencies obtained through tech or governor don't result in any cost advantages.

Currently the commander bonuses increase the speed of construction rather than reducing its cost. So a new shipyard costs the same whether you have a bonus or not but the bonus helps you build it more quickly.

However, I do think you have made a good point and that better management is likely to reduce wealth cost if the ship or installation is built more quickly. I have changed the code for v2.5 so the extra production gained by commander bonuses in installation construction, ordnance production, fighter production, research, shipbuilding, etc. does not cost any extra money. This means you can build/research things more cheaply (in wealth terms) if you have a governor with bonuses. However you will still use up the required minerals for construction projects.

Steve