Fresh install: 1.5.1 => 1.8.0 (deleted .exe and .db)
Start the game
press 30 days
Function 2786: The object reference was not set to an object instance.
When saving the game:
Function 1462: The object reference was not set to an object instance.
While saving aurora stopped working. After a restart the save had worked and the errors were gone.
its me again with the fun #2520 bug this time i tried it to be sure if it was still there, now it happens when typing in the class drop down box, press enter, and then click new ship class
i got the #2520 followed by a #2899
saving the game got me a #1462 followed by a #1465
letting the game run in 5 day increments gave me a #2786 every 30 days
i know its not a thing people would usually do but i just wanted to check if it was still there :)
Quote from: abdull link=topic=10990. msg126684#msg126684 date=1587500922its me again with the fun #2520 bug this time i tried it to be sure if it was still there, now it happens when typing in the class drop down box, press enter, and then click new ship class
i got the #2520 followed by a #2899
saving the game got me a #1462 followed by a #1465
letting the game run in 5 day increments gave me a #2786 every 30 days
i know its not a thing people would usually do but i just wanted to check if it was still there :)
Maybe just stop doing that :)
This May be working as intended but
You can't remove the bridge on a Ship even if removing it would make it lower than 1000 tons, going over 1000 tons automatically adds it. so making FACs is minorly annoying
To Test:
Make a 1001-1050 ton ship and try take off the bridge
This is annoying for if you are adding fuel up to the very max point of 1000 tons go 1 over to go back again and you cant because now the bridge has been added on automatically :/
Only a minor annoyance but not sure if you want to fix it.
Scipio class Missile Defence Base 8,265 tons 460 Crew 763 BP TCS 165 TH 0 EM 0
1 km/s Armour 0-50 Shields 0-0 HTK 90 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 1 PPV 150
Maint Life 0.06 Years MSP 57 AFR 546% IFR 7.6% 1YR 987 5YR 14,806 Max Repair 200 MSP
Magazine 150
Commander Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months Morale Check Required
Size 50 Missile Launcher (3) Missile Size: 50 Rate of Fire 215
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
This May be working as intended but
You can't remove the bridge on a Ship even if removing it would make it lower than 1000 tons, going over 1000 tons automatically adds it. so making FACs is minorly annoying
To Test:
Make a 1001-1050 ton ship and try take off the bridge
This is annoying for if you are adding fuel up to the very max point of 1000 tons go 1 over to go back again and you cant because now the bridge has been added on automatically :/
Only a minor annoyance but not sure if you want to fix it.
I think over 1000 tons you require a bridge. Was same for VB6 aurora, there it is the entry on the wiki http://aurorawiki.pentarch.org/index.php?title=Bridge
I am not sure this was removed on C# but I don't think so.
This May be working as intended but
You can't remove the bridge on a Ship even if removing it would make it lower than 1000 tons, going over 1000 tons automatically adds it. so making FACs is minorly annoying
To Test:
Make a 1001-1050 ton ship and try take off the bridge
This is annoying for if you are adding fuel up to the very max point of 1000 tons go 1 over to go back again and you cant because now the bridge has been added on automatically :/
Only a minor annoyance but not sure if you want to fix it.
v1.8The number changes based on assigned population. If you don't mind the NPR having a lower population then this is an acceptable workaround.
When setting starting tech points manually during game setup, on the second player created race, it sets itself to 100,000 and will revert any player input. This is with research speed set to 50. No idea if those factors matter or not.
v1.8The number changes based on assigned population. If you don't mind the NPR having a lower population then this is an acceptable workaround.
When setting starting tech points manually during game setup, on the second player created race, it sets itself to 100,000 and will revert any player input. This is with research speed set to 50. No idea if those factors matter or not.
There might be a lower limit at which an NPR becomes locked by its low tech level and is unable to progress, I think avoiding this is the reason for the 100k point lock in.
I'll note the default transnewtonian start costs about 30,000 research points, but even if you give an NPR that it will spend points on ship systems and other unnecessary stuff like ground construction and sorium harvesters, so I would be wary of reducing their starting points too much.
| Low Fuel | Barnards Star | Friedrich Bessel has only 0 percent of its maximum fuel (0 litres) |
| Low Fuel | Procyon | Edward Barnard has run out of fuel |
| Low Fuel | Barnards Star | Edmond Halley has only 0 percent of its maximum fuel (0 litres) |
After adding some more naming theme sets to my game, I press the auto rename all button for my commanders, and it keeps renaming them to my first original naming theme, and won't include the ones i added after game creation.
Not sure if this is a bug, or it is intended.
edit: I had to close the window and re open it, so disregard.
Still running 1.6.3 here, but I figured it's still worth reporting since it still might be in the game. I've run into the following errors occurring every construction cycle:
Function #2410: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #2409: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #1541: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #114: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Real stars, about 45 years into a conventional start, 50% research rate. I've just started exploring the stars and these errors started when I had first contact with what I presume are pre-TN aliens (since I detect no ships or shipyards around their colony); perhaps the errors are related to their existence. I've also uploaded the db file in case that would help
Still running 1.6.3 here, but I figured it's still worth reporting since it still might be in the game. I've run into the following errors occurring every construction cycle:
Function #2410: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #2409: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #1541: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #114: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Real stars, about 45 years into a conventional start, 50% research rate. I've just started exploring the stars and these errors started when I had first contact with what I presume are pre-TN aliens (since I detect no ships or shipyards around their colony); perhaps the errors are related to their existence. I've also uploaded the db file in case that would help
"Please do not post bugs from previous versions unless you confirm they are still present in v1.8.0" quoted from Steve.
Visual bug on the galactic map window
new 1. 8. 0. TN - default setting game, 10 year in
Please add this to known issues:
Minimum distance does not work for move to when it comes to bodies orbiting another body and construction phases.
Example:
Set a ship to move to Venus minimum distance 10 000 000 (10mil km)
Watch it complete the order as it should.
Now pass time through a construction phase, the planet will move in its orbit and the ship you ordered to move to before will now magically jump into 0km range and orbiting the planet.
This has been around since 1.0.
This May be working as intended but
You can't remove the bridge on a Ship even if removing it would make it lower than 1000 tons, going over 1000 tons automatically adds it. so making FACs is minorly annoying
To Test:
Make a 1001-1050 ton ship and try take off the bridge
This is annoying for if you are adding fuel up to the very max point of 1000 tons go 1 over to go back again and you cant because now the bridge has been added on automatically :/
Only a minor annoyance but not sure if you want to fix it.
Selecting a ship in the Naval Organization window with the following design results in this error: "Function #2801: Attempted to divide by zero."Code: [Select]Scipio class Missile Defence Base 8,265 tons 460 Crew 763 BP TCS 165 TH 0 EM 0
1 km/s Armour 0-50 Shields 0-0 HTK 90 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 1 PPV 150
Maint Life 0.06 Years MSP 57 AFR 546% IFR 7.6% 1YR 987 5YR 14,806 Max Repair 200 MSP
Magazine 150
Commander Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months Morale Check Required
Size 50 Missile Launcher (3) Missile Size: 50 Rate of Fire 215
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Non-TN start, real stars, should be easy to reproduce, just started a fresh game.
Instant research when setting up a race will research the tech whether it you could afford it or not (not in SM mode). I had 1,400 points left and thought I would only put 1,400 out of the 5,000 points required. Instead it researched the tech to 100%.
Function #2398: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
i have one NPR in the game.
right before it shows in the event log it said: This could be due to an action involving a non-player race, or do to fire controls set to open fire without active target.
its not me cause i am on a conventional start.
This May be working as intended but
You can't remove the bridge on a Ship even if removing it would make it lower than 1000 tons, going over 1000 tons automatically adds it. so making FACs is minorly annoying
To Test:
Make a 1001-1050 ton ship and try take off the bridge
This is annoying for if you are adding fuel up to the very max point of 1000 tons go 1 over to go back again and you cant because now the bridge has been added on automatically :/
Only a minor annoyance but not sure if you want to fix it.
I can't reproduce this one. The bridge is removed without a problem.
Version 1.8
Random Stars
Game Startup - SMing some ground forces.
This may be WAI, but was out of line with the impression I was left with after reading the 17 pages of changes.
My situation: I SM'ed 5x5000 size Formations (with an HQ5000) and 1x12,500 Formation (HQ12,500)
I linked ALL the 5000's to the 12,500.
I set 5% training bonus commanders in all of them, with appropriate command ratings for their HQ's.
My assumptions pre test:
1)I thought commanders in parent formations gave part of their bonuses to attached formations.
2)I thought that attached formations increased the effective size of the parent formation (for bonus calculations, in this example 37,500)
So I'm a little confused when after running some time, max morale on a the 5000 groups with the 5% training commander was still 125. I was expecting something like 20-25% of the parents 5% to add up to a new max of something like 130.
If this IS working as intended, then my question becomes what is the point of these high command limits? I've seen limits of over a million, but unless they have a million size personal formation, it would be wasted.
I believe I may have found a bug in missile engine power consumption above racial maximum boost, according to this post: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg102804#msg102804As far as I can tell, the 'fuel efficiency' box shows fuel per EPH, and the 'fuel per EPH' is actually fuel per hour (thus = fuel efficiency * engine power).
For a 5 MSP (12.5 Ton) missile engine, 500% boost, with:
Engine Power per MSP: 1 (Internal Confinement Fusion Drive Tech)
Fuel Consumption per EPH: 0.4
Racial Max Power Boost: 2.5
The missile should have (Engine size fuel boost modifier) * (engine power boost modifier) * (linear missile engine power overboost modifier) * (Fuel efficiency modifier) = fuel consumption per power hour:
(SQRT (10 / (12.5/50)) * (5^2.5) * (((5 - 2.5) * 4) + 1) * (0.4) = ~707 Fuel Consumption per Power Hour
In-game, Aurora 1.8 displays a whopping 17,677.67 Fuel Consumption per Power Hour!
I believe absolute fuel consumption is either incorrectly labeled as EPH, or EPH is multiplied by engine power erroneously.
Hello Steve,
Thanks for fixing the infrastructure bugs.
Order Delay does not seem to do anything. If you could get that working, and better yet have it work with cycle moves and/or templates, It would greatly help with scheduling orders, setting reminders, etc. Downside of the faster speed is looking up and wondering where the year went.
Version 1.8
Random Stars
Game Startup - SMing some ground forces.
This may be WAI, but was out of line with the impression I was left with after reading the 17 pages of changes.
My situation: I SM'ed 5x5000 size Formations (with an HQ5000) and 1x12,500 Formation (HQ12,500)
I linked ALL the 5000's to the 12,500.
I set 5% training bonus commanders in all of them, with appropriate command ratings for their HQ's.
My assumptions pre test:
1)I thought commanders in parent formations gave part of their bonuses to attached formations.
2)I thought that attached formations increased the effective size of the parent formation (for bonus calculations, in this example 37,500)
So I'm a little confused when after running some time, max morale on a the 5000 groups with the 5% training commander was still 125. I was expecting something like 20-25% of the parents 5% to add up to a new max of something like 130.
If this IS working as intended, then my question becomes what is the point of these high command limits? I've seen limits of over a million, but unless they have a million size personal formation, it would be wasted.
The parent HQ needs to be big enough to fit itself and all the formations under it.
In your case, 37500 HQ needed.
Version 1.8
Random Stars
Game Startup - SMing some ground forces.
This may be WAI, but was out of line with the impression I was left with after reading the 17 pages of changes.
My situation: I SM'ed 5x5000 size Formations (with an HQ5000) and 1x12,500 Formation (HQ12,500)
I linked ALL the 5000's to the 12,500.
I set 5% training bonus commanders in all of them, with appropriate command ratings for their HQ's.
My assumptions pre test:
1)I thought commanders in parent formations gave part of their bonuses to attached formations.
2)I thought that attached formations increased the effective size of the parent formation (for bonus calculations, in this example 37,500)
So I'm a little confused when after running some time, max morale on a the 5000 groups with the 5% training commander was still 125. I was expecting something like 20-25% of the parents 5% to add up to a new max of something like 130.
If this IS working as intended, then my question becomes what is the point of these high command limits? I've seen limits of over a million, but unless they have a million size personal formation, it would be wasted.
The parent HQ needs to be big enough to fit itself and all the formations under it.
In your case, 37500 HQ needed.
I really wish people would start doing their own research and testing before waving mine off as idiocy.
So I did your testing for you.
This time, I used 1x4775 (HQ5000) and 1x63(just the HQ12,500)
The HQ5000 is attached to the HQ12,500.
The 5000 has a R7 Ground Leader with 8500 GCC and 10% Training
The 12,500 has a R6 Ground Leader with 25,000 GCC and 15% Training
The 5000 caps at 150 morale, which is what is expected for 10% Training.
What is not expected for me is that the Parent Commander provides 0 training bonuses to attached formations.
Furthermore, tying into my original example, a parent commander doesn't include the size of his attached formations when calculating bonuses to his own personal formation.
Finally, ground forces officers have a Ground Combat Training bonus, which affects morale. Each construction phase, any formation element with less than 100 morale will regain that morale at a rate of 100 per year, plus the commander training bonus (so a 20% bonus would increase morale recovery to 120 per year). Formation elements can continue to improve morale above 100, using the following process:
The training bonus percentage (after any reduction for command rating and HQ rating penalties) is converted into a morale bonus at 1% = 1 morale point (so 10% training bonus = 10 morale bonus).
Maximum formation element morale is 100 plus 5x the morale bonus
Formation element morale increases at a rate equal to the morale bonus per year multiplied by the 'Morale Gain Modifier'
The 'Morale Gain Modifier' is calculated as 1 - ((Element Morale - 100) / (Maximum Morale - 100))
For example, a formation element has 140 morale and the commander of the parent formation has a Ground Combat Training bonus of 30%. However, he is commanding a formation that is slightly too large for his Ground Combat Command rating, so he has a Command Modifier of 0.8. The training bonus is 24% (30% x 0.8), which converts to a morale bonus of 24. The maximum morale for the formation is therefore (100 + (5 x 24)) = 220. The morale gain modifier is 1 - ((140-100) / (220 - 100)) = 0.667. Therefore, the formation will gain morale at 24 * 0.667 = 16 points per year.
Version 1.8
Random Stars
Game Startup - SMing some ground forces.
This may be WAI, but was out of line with the impression I was left with after reading the 17 pages of changes.
My situation: I SM'ed 5x5000 size Formations (with an HQ5000) and 1x12,500 Formation (HQ12,500)
I linked ALL the 5000's to the 12,500.
I set 5% training bonus commanders in all of them, with appropriate command ratings for their HQ's.
My assumptions pre test:
1)I thought commanders in parent formations gave part of their bonuses to attached formations.
2)I thought that attached formations increased the effective size of the parent formation (for bonus calculations, in this example 37,500)
So I'm a little confused when after running some time, max morale on a the 5000 groups with the 5% training commander was still 125. I was expecting something like 20-25% of the parents 5% to add up to a new max of something like 130.
If this IS working as intended, then my question becomes what is the point of these high command limits? I've seen limits of over a million, but unless they have a million size personal formation, it would be wasted.
The parent HQ needs to be big enough to fit itself and all the formations under it.
In your case, 37500 HQ needed.
I really wish people would start doing their own research and testing before waving mine off as idiocy.
So I did your testing for you.
This time, I used 1x4775 (HQ5000) and 1x63(just the HQ12,500)
The HQ5000 is attached to the HQ12,500.
The 5000 has a R7 Ground Leader with 8500 GCC and 10% Training
The 12,500 has a R6 Ground Leader with 25,000 GCC and 15% Training
The 5000 caps at 150 morale, which is what is expected for 10% Training.
What is not expected for me is that the Parent Commander provides 0 training bonuses to attached formations.
Furthermore, tying into my original example, a parent commander doesn't include the size of his attached formations when calculating bonuses to his own personal formation.
Are your ranks set up properly? It works fine for me.
Do you commanders have high enough GU size stat?
(https://i.imgur.com/R7EGV5U.png)
Version 1.8
Random Stars
Game Startup - SMing some ground forces.
This may be WAI, but was out of line with the impression I was left with after reading the 17 pages of changes.
My situation: I SM'ed 5x5000 size Formations (with an HQ5000) and 1x12,500 Formation (HQ12,500)
I linked ALL the 5000's to the 12,500.
I set 5% training bonus commanders in all of them, with appropriate command ratings for their HQ's.
My assumptions pre test:
1)I thought commanders in parent formations gave part of their bonuses to attached formations.
2)I thought that attached formations increased the effective size of the parent formation (for bonus calculations, in this example 37,500)
So I'm a little confused when after running some time, max morale on a the 5000 groups with the 5% training commander was still 125. I was expecting something like 20-25% of the parents 5% to add up to a new max of something like 130.
If this IS working as intended, then my question becomes what is the point of these high command limits? I've seen limits of over a million, but unless they have a million size personal formation, it would be wasted.
The parent HQ needs to be big enough to fit itself and all the formations under it.
In your case, 37500 HQ needed.
I really wish people would start doing their own research and testing before waving mine off as idiocy.
So I did your testing for you.
This time, I used 1x4775 (HQ5000) and 1x63(just the HQ12,500)
The HQ5000 is attached to the HQ12,500.
The 5000 has a R7 Ground Leader with 8500 GCC and 10% Training
The 12,500 has a R6 Ground Leader with 25,000 GCC and 15% Training
The 5000 caps at 150 morale, which is what is expected for 10% Training.
What is not expected for me is that the Parent Commander provides 0 training bonuses to attached formations.
Furthermore, tying into my original example, a parent commander doesn't include the size of his attached formations when calculating bonuses to his own personal formation.
Are your ranks set up properly? It works fine for me.
Do you commanders have high enough GU size stat?
(https://i.imgur.com/R7EGV5U.png)
In this image, your officer has a bonus of 20% training, and a unit morale of 180.
This is not capped. Swap it to a 10% training and it will fall to 150 after a construction tick.
What this means is that the 20% training bonus of your parent commander is not providing any trickle down bonus to your attached formations.
What this means is it does not matter how much you attach to your parent formations.
What this means is that a large GCC like 1,000,000 is completely meaningless because you will never have that much in a single formation.
Finally, ground forces officers have a Ground Combat Training bonus, which affects morale. Each construction phase, any formation element with less than 100 morale will regain that morale at a rate of 100 per year, plus the commander training bonus (so a 20% bonus would increase morale recovery to 120 per year). Formation elements can continue to improve morale above 100, using the following process:
The training bonus percentage (after any reduction for command rating and HQ rating penalties) is converted into a morale bonus at 1% = 1 morale point (so 10% training bonus = 10 morale bonus).
Maximum formation element morale is 100 plus 5x the morale bonus
Formation element morale increases at a rate equal to the morale bonus per year multiplied by the 'Morale Gain Modifier'
The 'Morale Gain Modifier' is calculated as 1 - ((Element Morale - 100) / (Maximum Morale - 100))
For example, a formation element has 140 morale and the commander of the parent formation has a Ground Combat Training bonus of 30%. However, he is commanding a formation that is slightly too large for his Ground Combat Command rating, so he has a Command Modifier of 0.8. The training bonus is 24% (30% x 0.8), which converts to a morale bonus of 24. The maximum morale for the formation is therefore (100 + (5 x 24)) = 220. The morale gain modifier is 1 - ((140-100) / (220 - 100)) = 0.667. Therefore, the formation will gain morale at 24 * 0.667 = 16 points per year.
a terraform bug. You can SM add none as a gas
V1. 8. 0 new game,16 year in, TN start and default setting
Yes after switching out commanders I noticed this too. I edited the original. It takes much longer than 1 construction phase tho.
Formations with commanders with 0 training get no bonuses with the parent formation has a commander with training for sure.
But after reading this:QuoteFinally, ground forces officers have a Ground Combat Training bonus, which affects morale. Each construction phase, any formation element with less than 100 morale will regain that morale at a rate of 100 per year, plus the commander training bonus (so a 20% bonus would increase morale recovery to 120 per year). Formation elements can continue to improve morale above 100, using the following process:
The training bonus percentage (after any reduction for command rating and HQ rating penalties) is converted into a morale bonus at 1% = 1 morale point (so 10% training bonus = 10 morale bonus).
Maximum formation element morale is 100 plus 5x the morale bonus
Formation element morale increases at a rate equal to the morale bonus per year multiplied by the 'Morale Gain Modifier'
The 'Morale Gain Modifier' is calculated as 1 - ((Element Morale - 100) / (Maximum Morale - 100))
For example, a formation element has 140 morale and the commander of the parent formation has a Ground Combat Training bonus of 30%. However, he is commanding a formation that is slightly too large for his Ground Combat Command rating, so he has a Command Modifier of 0.8. The training bonus is 24% (30% x 0.8), which converts to a morale bonus of 24. The maximum morale for the formation is therefore (100 + (5 x 24)) = 220. The morale gain modifier is 1 - ((140-100) / (220 - 100)) = 0.667. Therefore, the formation will gain morale at 24 * 0.667 = 16 points per year.
I believe it is WAI.
I noticed this in 1. 7. 3 and it still happens in 1. 8. 0, however I'm not sure if it's a bug or not.
I have a Space Station in orbit of Jupiter acting as a fleet base. It has a refueling hub, maintenance module, rec facilities, and 50 fuel harvesters to keep it topped up. When a ship is told to refuel at the hub, it will move to the base/Jupiter and remain there until after the refuel is completed. If you skip ahead 5 turns the ship will remain in a stationary position whilst Jupiter continues its orbit, leaving it behind. It would be cool if the ship would remain orbiting the planet the hub is at, but I'm not sure if this is a bug or not.
1. 8. 0 specific, I've noticed a lot of 'orders not possible' coming from standing orders where before they'd just be completely silent. Setting a grav/geo survey with standing orders and then just telling them to move to a system worked great in previous versions and needed very little input.
v1.8.0
I was getting this issue since older versions from time to time but not sure how to reproduce, now I think I've found it.
In "Class Design" Window, Choose Wide View
1. Select a ship design2. Remove any component from the ship(Not required step)
3. Double click a category (rather than a component), which I often accidentally do.
4. Got error "Function #242: Null Reference Exception"
(Further clicking on category items do not trigger error, only immediately after selecting a ship design.)
Game Information/New Game window
Following are for the mouseover descriptions for the vaious options.
Maximum Number of Systems - States it does not effect Real Stars games, but the option for that is instead labeled Known Star Systems. This could cause unnecessary confusion for players generating new games.
Local System Generation Chance % - States it does not effect Real Stars games, but the option for that is instead labeled Known Star Systems. This could cause unnecessary confusion for players generating new games.
Local System generation Spread - States it does not effect Real Stars games, but the option for that is instead labeled Known Star Systems. This could cause unnecessary confusion for players generating new games.
Research Speed - Missing description.
Teraforming Speed - Missing description.
Survey Speed - Missing description.
NPR Generation Chance (by Player) - oxy should be oxy or methane.
NPR Generation Chance (by NPR) - oxy should be oxy or methane.
Allow Human NPRs - Missing description.
Generate Rakhas - Missing description.
Allow Civilian Harvesters - Missing description.
Earth Mineral Deposits - Missing description.
Minimum NPR Distance - Missing description.
Maximum NPR Distance - Missing description.
Add Planet X to the Sol System - Missing description.
Suggestion: Make the description for options in the first column also appear when mousing over the option name and not just the data entry box, similarly to how it works for the checkbox items.
I have my Grav Survey ship under overhaul at Earth . Did not first give it a refuel and resupply order before the overhaul order. It moved to Earth and is now in overhaul.
However I now have a recurring ( 5 day ) event notification stating only has 19.5% of its maximum fuel.
DavidR
With the Events WindowMine has not been doing that since V1.0 --- though strangely (and someone noted it in...1.5 or so) that some of the colors are being remembered between saves (some w/ background and text colors). Most however I have to reset every time I reopen a save file.
For certain events i change the text and background colours.
However after I save the game , close the game down and then start game from the desktop i find that the Events texts have reverted to the default white on blue. The game is not remembering my colour preferences.
DavidR
Minor inconsistency in missile window:
In the image below, the flight time shows as 43 seconds. However, if we use the total fuel (861), engine fuel consumption (70217.21) to caluculate the flight time, it gives 861/70217.21*3600 = 44.143 which is apparently close to 44 seconds. Note that the fuel amount is rounded down in the display (0.3447 * 2500 = 861.75), so I don't understand why the flight time is 1 second less than it should be...
I have my Grav Survey ship under overhaul at Earth . Did not first give it a refuel and resupply order before the overhaul order. It moved to Earth and is now in overhaul.
However I now have a recurring ( 5 day ) event notification stating only has 19.5% of its maximum fuel.
DavidR
If it only has 19.5% of fuel that sounds like working as intended. Just order it to refuel and then go back into overhaul.
I have my Grav Survey ship under overhaul at Earth . Did not first give it a refuel and resupply order before the overhaul order. It moved to Earth and is now in overhaul.
However I now have a recurring ( 5 day ) event notification stating only has 19.5% of its maximum fuel.
DavidR
If it only has 19.5% of fuel that sounds like working as intended. Just order it to refuel and then go back into overhaul.
I cannot give the vessel a refuel order - the message " orders cannot be assigned to a fleet which contains ships undergoing overhaul " pops up as a warning.I can find no way of exiting overhaul before completion of the overhaul.
My tug ran out of fuel during tugging. Tugging the tug lead to generally wierd interaction. Assicated stations/ships are jumping between TG's randomly.
Likely a bug. . .
CIV Transports bringing trade goods to zero population colony. Earth to Ganymede
Quote from: CatchItGamer link=topic=10990. msg126720#msg126720 date=1587508250Selecting a ship in the Naval Organization window with the following design results in this error: "Function #2801: Attempted to divide by zero. "Code: [Select]Scipio class Missile Defence Base 8,265 tons 460 Crew 763 BP TCS 165 TH 0 EM 0
1 km/s Armour 0-50 Shields 0-0 HTK 90 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 1 PPV 150
Maint Life 0.06 Years MSP 57 AFR 546% IFR 7.6% 1YR 987 5YR 14,806 Max Repair 200 MSP
Magazine 150
Commander Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months Morale Check Required
Size 50 Missile Launcher (3) Missile Size: 50 Rate of Fire 215
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Non-TN start, real stars, should be easy to reproduce, just started a fresh game.
There must be something about that particular ship. Otherwise I would be seeing a lot of bug reports :)
Are you getting the same errors with all ships, or just that one?
a terraform bug. You can SM add none as a gas
V1. 8. 0 new game,16 year in, TN start and default setting
I feel like this is one of those bugs where the fix is just "don't do that"
My tug ran out of fuel during tugging. Tugging the tug lead to generally wierd interaction. Assicated stations/ships are jumping between TG's randomly.
Ye... I managed to tug my ship already being tugged(or if I tugged the tug already tugging), it was a hangar module with docked fighters; the entire hangar and every docked fighter exploded. Then I got weird stuff happening when I detached a tug from a fleet, moved the tug and did something and the thing it got detached from/tugged suddenly rejoined at new position.
v1.8.0
I was getting this issue since older versions from time to time but not sure how to reproduce, now I think I've found it.
In "Class Design" Window, Choose Wide View
1. Select a ship design2. Remove any component from the ship(Not required step)
3. Double click a category (rather than a component), which I often accidentally do.
4. Got error "Function #242: Null Reference Exception"
(Further clicking on category items do not trigger error, only immediately after selecting a ship design.)
I thought what bug was fixed a few versions ago. I can't reproduce it so I checked the code and nothing will execute unless a component is clicked. Please can you confirm 1.8.0 on Misc tab of Tactical Map?
The function number: 1868
The complete error text: "Unable to cast object of type 'ha' to type 'f4'." / "Unable to cast object of type 'iy' to type 'f4'."
The window affected: Order of Battle tab in the Ground Forces window
What you were doing at the time: Clicking the 'Change Rank' button while a planet or system is selected (see attached)
Conventional or TN start: TN
Random or Real Stars: Random
Is your decimal separator a comma? No
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? Found in 1.8.0, reproduced in 1.5.1
This is an update for the bug I signaled with 1. 6. 3, which I have confirmed still exists in 1. 8. 0.
Setup: a fleet with a ship with absolutely no fuel capacity, such as a station being towed by a tug.
If you select a tanker fleet and issue the 'join fleet and refuel' order, you will get a divide by 0 error 854. The errors (multiple per time increment) persist until you detach the tanker. If instead you have the tug/space station fleet target the tanker fleet and 'refuel from stationary tankers', you get a divide by 0 error 858.
v1.8
When setting starting tech points manually during game setup, on the second player created race, it sets itself to 100,000 and will revert any player input. This is with research speed set to 50. No idea if those factors matter or not.
v1.8The number changes based on assigned population. If you don't mind the NPR having a lower population then this is an acceptable workaround.
When setting starting tech points manually during game setup, on the second player created race, it sets itself to 100,000 and will revert any player input. This is with research speed set to 50. No idea if those factors matter or not.
There might be a lower limit at which an NPR becomes locked by its low tech level and is unable to progress, I think avoiding this is the reason for the 100k point lock in.
I'll note the default transnewtonian start costs about 30,000 research points, but even if you give an NPR that it will spend points on ship systems and other unnecessary stuff like ground construction and sorium harvesters, so I would be wary of reducing their starting points too much.
I'm aware there is a workaround, though that is somewhat counterproductive when attempting to create china. But I don't follow your later reasoning. First off, you can't increase them or decrease them, so it's a not a minimum. Moreover, the NPR when first generated does not have 100k points, only after modification, therefore one could assume all NPRs probably do not have 100k points, but rather have points scaled in other ways.
It's a bug, I feel characterizing it as a feature is a disservice to the game. While I understand that many wish to defend Aurora, I am persistently confused by the desire to whitewash bugs as features. Steve does not attempt to this, why would would fans of the game wish to? A minor bug is not an assault on the game or it's quality.
Don’t know if that was mentioned before: there are no messages in the log that a new production has began after another one was finished. Would be nice to have that as in VB6.
1.8.0, Economics window, Environment tab
If you switch to the Environment tab without switching colonies, the gas field shows Aestusium. Switching to a different colony and back shows the correct gas.
If you are adding water vapour and condensation occurs, the Maximum Atm field shows '0'.
Laser warheads were supposed to be removed for C# weren't they? Well, the techs are still there. Just research soft x-rays and watch the soft x-ray laser warhead tech appear. If you keep progressing, the rest will appear too.
Here's a small curiosity which may or may not be a bug:
Low Fuel Barnards Star Friedrich Bessel has only 0 percent of its maximum fuel (0 litres) Low Fuel Procyon Edward Barnard has run out of fuel Low Fuel Barnards Star Edmond Halley has only 0 percent of its maximum fuel (0 litres)
These three ships are all out of fuel (oops), but one of them has a different message. The difference is likely related to the standing orders they have.
V 1.7.3, but that wasn't reported
Function #311 null error
DB attached, the next increment will prompt up the bug
Edit: also the next 2000 increment :(. Think it killed my game
Was just passing time on the tactical map when an NPR started fighting (at least thats what I assume). Increments went down to 5sec for quite some time until I got spammed by errors in function #713. I clicked a lot of these away until I got a #1414 followed by a #1555 then repeated from there, on and on until I gave up clicking.
TN start with random stars, just 6 years into the game.
Made a fresh install when 1. 8 was released and I have changed my windows regional settings to UK.
Quote from: Guridan link=topic=10990. msg127108#msg127108 date=1587601372Was just passing time on the tactical map when an NPR started fighting (at least thats what I assume). Increments went down to 5sec for quite some time until I got spammed by errors in function #713. I clicked a lot of these away until I got a #1414 followed by a #1555 then repeated from there, on and on until I gave up clicking.
TN start with random stars, just 6 years into the game.
Made a fresh install when 1. 8 was released and I have changed my windows regional settings to UK.
Do you remember the text of the errors? The number tells me where but the text tell me what.
Frequently, a system will eternally report below 100% geo survey complete.
EX Konstantin Feoktistov (Projekt 5744 class Exploration Ship) 13,744 tons 313 Crew 3,439.5 BP TCS 275 TH 154 EM 0
4656 km/s JR 3-50 Armour 3-51 Shields 0-0 HTK 79 Sensors 28/28/4/4 DCR 41 PPV 0
Maint Life 5.43 Years MSP 3,720 AFR 137% IFR 1.9% 1YR 211 5YR 3,172 Max Repair 400.000 MSP
Kapitan pervogo ranga Control Rating 3 BRG ENG SCI
Intended Deployment Time: 36 months Morale Check Required
OKB-640 13750M83 FTL drive Max Ship Size 13750 tons Distance 50k km Squadron Size 3
Design Bureau 632 VMMP-0320 Fusion thruster (4) Power 1280.0 Fuel Use 28.28% Signature 38.4000 Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 2,750,000 Litres Range 127.3 billion km (316 days at full power)
AK-676M (4x10) Range 1000 km TS: 20,000 km/s ROF 5
NR41/R50 Nav. Radar (1) GPS 1400 Range 41.2m km Resolution 50
Active search radar MR103R100 (1) GPS 11200 Range 103.7m km Resolution 100
EM sensor E2M083 (1) Sensitivity 28 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 41.8m km
IR sensor T2M083 (1) Sensitivity 28 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 41.8m km
Improved Gravitational Sensors (2) 4 Survey Points Per Hour
Improved Geological Sensors (2) 4 Survey Points Per Hour
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Another issue with troop loading. Attempted to load a size 2000 unit into a fleet with 2 ships of 1000 capacity.In VB6 a single ground unit could only be loaded into one transport, I'm expecting that was not changed for C#.
I expected this was possible because the total capacity was sufficient, however this didn't work, which may be intended.
However, there was no message about insufficient capacity, the ship continued on its orders as if everything was fine.
Steve, not to be annoying, but did you see my bug report? I think it's a pretty major one.
I am having an issue (only with military fleets so far) where the ships become entirely immobile yet fully functional until they eventually die from lack of repair supplies.
Edit: I have discovered that the fleet will continue to move if in task force training, but is otherwise immobile.
Damage Output 3 Rate of Fire 15 seconds Range Modifier 10,000
Max Range 1,920,000 km Turret Size 22002.22 HS (1,100,111 tons) HTK 11216
Power Requirement 768 Recharge Rate 256
Cost 170308.96 Crew 954
Maximum Tracking Speed: 0 km/s
Development Cost 1703080 RP
Materials Required
Duranium 76.80
Neutronium 68388.64
Boronide 76.80
Corundium 256.0
Version : 1.8
Random Stars
Game Start - SM Galaxy Generation
This problem started in 1.7, but is still present in 1.8
Systems don't link to existing systems, or at least are exceptionally unlikely to. They don't seem to be following local system rules, and will generate beyond the maximum system limit.
I mapped two galaxies, the first in 1.8 C#, the second in 7.1 vb6.
My settings were random stars, 20 galaxy limit, 50%/15 for local connections.
vb6 you get the stringy mess I love so much. There are only 20 available systems. Force generating more causes a crash. Forcing new jump points just makes more connections to the existing systems.
In 1.8 you get lines of systems that simply extend from Sol (or whatever your start point) endlessly, never connecting. It seems to completely ignore the system limit when *exploring*, but if you try to force generate over 20 it still crashes.
When building a station through construction at the industry tab. The designs doesn't lock up.
Not sure if this has been reported. Version 1. 8. 0
I just finished creating freighter design. Then I created new colony ship class. I decided that it would be easier to just copy the old class. Copy goes fine, but when I try to switch The class of this new Freighter - copy, I get "Function 235: Cannot add or insert the item 'Mule' in more than one place. You must first remove it from its current location or clone it. Parameter name: node".
Edit: Once refreshing the design window, it is now visible in Colony Ship section.
a terraform bug. You can SM add none as a gas
V1. 8. 0 new game,16 year in, TN start and default setting
Quote from: Eretzu link=topic=10990. msg126920#msg126920 date=1587570705Not sure if this has been reported. Version 1. 8. 0
I just finished creating freighter design. Then I created new colony ship class. I decided that it would be easier to just copy the old class. Copy goes fine, but when I try to switch The class of this new Freighter - copy, I get "Function 235: Cannot add or insert the item 'Mule' in more than one place. You must first remove it from its current location or clone it. Parameter name: node".
Edit: Once refreshing the design window, it is now visible in Colony Ship section.
I couldn't create this one, but I will watch for it in future.
Tiny bug.
Cargo ships with cargo hold below 5k can't move cargo. The standard cargo orders doesn't appear.
I've created small freighter with 2 tiny cargo holds (1k capacity) just to move minerals (I don't use mass drivers) and cargo shuttles module and no joy.
When I edited in SM mode design adding 3 additional cargo holds the orders showed up.
v1. 8. 0
If primary order is not valid but secondary order is valid, we are still getting "Orders Not Possible" messages when the ship has no other orders (and stopping auto-turn).
1. Have a survey ship with both geo-survey sensors and grav-survey sensors.
2. Set a survey ship with Primary standing order "Survey Nearest Body" and Secondary standing order "Survey Nearest Survey Location"
3. Send the ship to a system with all bodies geo-surveyed (or having no stellar bodies at all) but have some grav-survey points remaining to survey
4. Every time the ship has no order Events prompt "<ship> is unable to carry out its default order (Survey Nearest Body) as there is no acceptable destination within ten billion kilometers. And stopping auto-turn too.
I am pretty sure VB6 Aurora does not have such behavior unless both orders are not valid.
Attached DB have this keep happening, if it helps.
I don't know if this is a bug , but should there be the facility to re-order each mineral by quantity in the Minerals screen. at present only Duranium is sorted by quantity.
DavidR
This is from 1.7.3 haven't updated to last yet, so it might be fixed already: My shipofficers, for now are going into retirement at the age of 31, 32 & 38...?
Survey class Survey Craft 4. 616 tons 140 Crew 1. 394,4 BP TCS 92 TH 400 EM 0
4332 km/s JR 3-50 Armour 1-24 Shields 0-0 HTK 31 Sensors 0/0/6/6 DCR 5 PPV 0
Maint Life 6,77 Years MSP 944 AFR 34% IFR 0,5% 1YR 36 5YR 536 Max Repair 200 MSP
Commander Control Rating 2 BRG SCI
Intended Deployment Time: 48 months Morale Check Required
J6000(3-50) Military Jump Drive Max Ship Size 6000 tons Distance 50k km Squadron Size 3
Internal Fusion Drive EP400,00 (1) Power 400 Fuel Use 17,68% Signature 400 Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 500. 000 Litres Range 110,3 billion km (294 days at full power)
Active Search Sensor AS113-R100 (1) GPS 10500 Range 113,8m km Resolution 100
Advanced Geological Sensors (2) 6 Survey Points Per Hour
Advanced Gravitational Sensors (2) 6 Survey Points Per Hour
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
1. 8. 0
Minor bug
I had this happened twice in succession. I transited jump ship and two grav surveyers with "transit and divide" -order. Once done I ordered jump ship to transit back, but I got Transit Failure cannot tranisit as there is no available jump drive capable of allowing fleet's commercial engines to enter the jump point.
In the following increment it jumps just fine so nothing game breakin, just weird.
Function #235: Cannot add or insert the item 'Abundantia Mk1A' in more than one place. You must first remove it from its current location or clone it.
Parameter name: nodeSelecting a ship in the Naval Organization window with the following design results in this error: "Function #2801: Attempted to divide by zero."Code: [Select]Scipio class Missile Defence Base 8,265 tons 460 Crew 763 BP TCS 165 TH 0 EM 0
1 km/s Armour 0-50 Shields 0-0 HTK 90 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 1 PPV 150
Maint Life 0.06 Years MSP 57 AFR 546% IFR 7.6% 1YR 987 5YR 14,806 Max Repair 200 MSP
Magazine 150
Commander Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months Morale Check Required
Size 50 Missile Launcher (3) Missile Size: 50 Rate of Fire 215
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Non-TN start, real stars, should be easy to reproduce, just started a fresh game.
There must be something about that particular ship. Otherwise, I would be seeing a lot of bug reports :)
Are you getting the same errors with all ships or just that one?
So all the Ground forces on earth just disappeared, they hadn't seen combat or anything, they were just gone, with no explanation in the event log.
This is a real stars trans-newtonian game at year 68 and my decimal separator is a period.
Sounds like a database would help Steve to sort that one out if you can upload it.Good point, its been attached to this post.
So all the Ground forces on earth just disappeared, they hadn't seen combat or anything, they were just gone, with no explanation in the event log.
This is a real stars trans-newtonian game at year 68 and my decimal separator is a period.
You will have to be more specific - there are 10 pages in this thread.
Two JPs in one system leading to a same system.This is working as intended.
DB attached. Two JPs in Esege Malan(3) lead to Ptah(4).
I believe one of the JPs were found in Esege Malan(3) and led me into Ptah(4). The other JP was hidden in Esege Malan(3) and was discovered during surveying Ptah(4). That hidden JP connected back to Esege Malan(3).
Two JPs in one system leading to a same system.This is working as intended.
DB attached. Two JPs in Esege Malan(3) lead to Ptah(4).
I believe one of the JPs were found in Esege Malan(3) and led me into Ptah(4). The other JP was hidden in Esege Malan(3) and was discovered during surveying Ptah(4). That hidden JP connected back to Esege Malan(3).
Quote from: SpikeTheHobbitMage link=topic=10990. msg127382#msg127382 date=1587669372Quote from: LuciusSulla link=topic=10990. msg127379#msg127379 date=1587668270Two JPs in one system leading to a same system.This is working as intended.
DB attached. Two JPs in Esege Malan(3) lead to Ptah(4).
I believe one of the JPs were found in Esege Malan(3) and led me into Ptah(4). The other JP was hidden in Esege Malan(3) and was discovered during surveying Ptah(4). That hidden JP connected back to Esege Malan(3).
I thought this was a fixed bug?
Might be a bug, might be WAI, if you fully terraform a planet/moon to 0 colony cost before putting any colonists there, and do not send any infrastructure (as it doesn't need any) civilian shipping lines won't be activated to start building ships and trading for the first time. I had to send infrastructure to the moon to get my civilians to wake up and do stuff.
There is/was a bug that creates duplicate Sol systems, but JP loops, including duplicates, are intentional.Two JPs in one system leading to a same system.This is working as intended.
DB attached. Two JPs in Esege Malan(3) lead to Ptah(4).
I believe one of the JPs were found in Esege Malan(3) and led me into Ptah(4). The other JP was hidden in Esege Malan(3) and was discovered during surveying Ptah(4). That hidden JP connected back to Esege Malan(3).
I thought this was a fixed bug?
It is a change from VB. Before, if you put a colony on a cost 0 world they would immediately start sending colonists, even if it was behind enemy lines. Or on an enemy homeworld. People complained about that for some reason.Might be a bug, might be WAI, if you fully terraform a planet/moon to 0 colony cost before putting any colonists there, and do not send any infrastructure (as it doesn't need any) civilian shipping lines won't be activated to start building ships and trading for the first time. I had to send infrastructure to the moon to get my civilians to wake up and do stuff.
I am quite sure it's WAI. In order to avoid civilian shipping to send unwanted infrastructure or colonist on a rock you may want to keep as automated mining colony only you have 2 ways to start off a colony with Civilians:
A - You drop off some infrastructure on a planet with a colony. The Civs will then establish a route to drop off colonists.
B - You drop off colonists on a rock with a colony. You will be able then to create an infrastructure contract to drop off installations from a colony to another. If you create the contract but there aren't any people the civs wouldn't still build ships.
Regarding point B I don't know if that changed for Aurora C#, but that was how it worked in Aurora VB6.
There is/was a bug that creates duplicate Sol systems, but JP loops, including duplicates, are intentional.Two JPs in one system leading to a same system.This is working as intended.
DB attached. Two JPs in Esege Malan(3) lead to Ptah(4).
I believe one of the JPs were found in Esege Malan(3) and led me into Ptah(4). The other JP was hidden in Esege Malan(3) and was discovered during surveying Ptah(4). That hidden JP connected back to Esege Malan(3).
I thought this was a fixed bug?It is a change from VB. Before, if you put a colony on a cost 0 world they would immediately start sending colonists, even if it was behind enemy lines. Or on an enemy homeworld. People complained about that for some reason.Might be a bug, might be WAI, if you fully terraform a planet/moon to 0 colony cost before putting any colonists there, and do not send any infrastructure (as it doesn't need any) civilian shipping lines won't be activated to start building ships and trading for the first time. I had to send infrastructure to the moon to get my civilians to wake up and do stuff.
I am quite sure it's WAI. In order to avoid civilian shipping to send unwanted infrastructure or colonist on a rock you may want to keep as automated mining colony only you have 2 ways to start off a colony with Civilians:
A - You drop off some infrastructure on a planet with a colony. The Civs will then establish a route to drop off colonists.
B - You drop off colonists on a rock with a colony. You will be able then to create an infrastructure contract to drop off installations from a colony to another. If you create the contract but there aren't any people the civs wouldn't still build ships.
Regarding point B I don't know if that changed for Aurora C#, but that was how it worked in Aurora VB6.
Multiple types of maintenance storage bays don't seem to stack. If you have a ship with a given type of maintenance bay, and then add another type, the MSP carried drop to that of the second bay plus the ship's inherent engineering capabilities. This seems to happen with all kinds of bays, like it's just looking at the most recent type on the ship.
The bug where the MSP of a ship get incorrectly calculated when you install a smaller Maintenance Storage Bay on a ship that has already an Engineering space AND a Larger Maintenance Storage Bay still persists
Fresh Install 1.51 -> 1.80
Windows 7
Seperator set tp point
Default game (that comes with the install) or any new created ones
Recreate:
Create a new ship, add a Large Maintenance Storage Module, then add a smaller one
That may be what is intended, but it isn't what happens.Multiple types of maintenance storage bays don't seem to stack. If you have a ship with a given type of maintenance bay, and then add another type, the MSP carried drop to that of the second bay plus the ship's inherent engineering capabilities. This seems to happen with all kinds of bays, like it's just looking at the most recent type on the ship.
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=11056.0
0.8x Composite Armour
1x Bridge
1x Crew Quarters - Small
2x Crew Quarters - Tiny
1x Engineering Spaces
1x Fuel Storage - Large
1x Fighter Maintenance Storage Bay
1x Large Maintenance Storage Bay
Hyuga class Ammunition Transport 665 tons 12 Crew 61 BP TCS 13 TH 0 EM 0
1 km/s Armour 1-6 Shields 0-0 HTK 4 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 1 PPV 0
MSP 77 Max Repair 20 MSP
Kaigun-Ch?sa Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months
Fuel Capacity 250,000 Litres Range N/A
This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes
Nagato class Ammunition Transport 665 tons 12 Crew 61 BP TCS 13 TH 0 EM 0
1 km/s Armour 1-6 Shields 0-0 HTK 4 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 1 PPV 0
MSP 2,057 Max Repair 20 MSP
Kaigun-Ch?sa Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months
Fuel Capacity 250,000 Litres Range N/A
This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes
Function #4: Object Reference not set to an instance of an object when advancing 30 days. Conventional start, 22 years in, no NPRs or spoilers encountered yet. Unfortunately, it appears to be a one-off, and I hadn't saved that game yet, so I don't have a db that can be helpful. :-/
So all the Ground forces on earth just disappeared, they hadn't seen combat or anything, they were just gone, with no explanation in the event log.
This is a real stars trans-newtonian game at year 68 and my decimal separator is a period.
Quote from: Steve Walmsley link=topic=10990. msg127452#msg127452 date=1587681871That may be what is intended, but it isn't what happens.Quote from: byron link=topic=10990. msg126946#msg126946 date=1587573654Multiple types of maintenance storage bays don't seem to stack. If you have a ship with a given type of maintenance bay, and then add another type, the MSP carried drop to that of the second bay plus the ship's inherent engineering capabilities. This seems to happen with all kinds of bays, like it's just looking at the most recent type on the ship.
hxxp: aurora2. pentarch. org/index. php?topic=11056. 0
Components:Code: [Select]0.8x Composite Armour
1x Bridge
1x Crew Quarters - Small
2x Crew Quarters - Tiny
1x Engineering Spaces
1x Fuel Storage - Large
1x Fighter Maintenance Storage Bay
1x Large Maintenance Storage Bay
Class 1Code: [Select]Hyuga class Ammunition Transport 665 tons 12 Crew 61 BP TCS 13 TH 0 EM 0
1 km/s Armour 1-6 Shields 0-0 HTK 4 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 1 PPV 0
MSP 77 Max Repair 20 MSP
Kaigun-Ch?sa Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months
Fuel Capacity 250,000 Litres Range N/A
This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes
Class 2Code: [Select]Nagato class Ammunition Transport 665 tons 12 Crew 61 BP TCS 13 TH 0 EM 0
1 km/s Armour 1-6 Shields 0-0 HTK 4 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 1 PPV 0
MSP 2,057 Max Repair 20 MSP
Kaigun-Ch?sa Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months
Fuel Capacity 250,000 Litres Range N/A
This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes
These two classes have identical component lists. The only difference is the order that the storage bays were added. The Hyuga's MSP is obviously wrong, but I suspect that the Nagato's is just subtly wrong.
Edit:
If the Engineering Spaces is removed, both designs have exactly 2020 MSP. Adding it back in returns to the incorrect numbers. AFAICT they should both have 2077 MSP.
Multiple types of maintenance storage bays don't seem to stack. If you have a ship with a given type of maintenance bay, and then add another type, the MSP carried drop to that of the second bay plus the ship's inherent engineering capabilities. This seems to happen with all kinds of bays, like it's just looking at the most recent type on the ship.
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=11056.0
I noticed this in 1. 7. 3 and it still happens in 1. 8. 0, however I'm not sure if it's a bug or not.
I have a Space Station in orbit of Jupiter acting as a fleet base. It has a refueling hub, maintenance module, rec facilities, and 50 fuel harvesters to keep it topped up. When a ship is told to refuel at the hub, it will move to the base/Jupiter and remain there until after the refuel is completed. If you skip ahead 5 turns the ship will remain in a stationary position whilst Jupiter continues its orbit, leaving it behind. It would be cool if the ship would remain orbiting the planet the hub is at, but I'm not sure if this is a bug or not.
Ground formation without an HQ unit can be assigned with a commander; and would even have commander auto-assigned to them. But as I understand the ground command rules (http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg110196#msg110196), the commander's bonus will not apply at all.
Am I misunderstanding something here?
I have a GSV Survey vessel that had its MSP highlighted in red as a warning. I therefore sent it to Earth for refuel , resupply and overhaul.
However after completion of overhaul its name in the Naval Organization screen remains in red whilst all other vessels are in normal white.
DB attached.
DavidR
I got the same bug back in 1.63 and now that I've tried again, I got the same bug. I'm trying to build forced labour camps and mines and it bugs out my game terribly. It gives the bug "#2217 An item with the same key has already been added" when I try to open the economy summary, and it turns into this:
(https://i.imgur.com/EtFJEBA.png)
Here's my DB
With the Events WindowMine has not been doing that since V1.0 --- though strangely (and someone noted it in...1.5 or so) that some of the colors are being remembered between saves (some w/ background and text colors). Most however I have to reset every time I reopen a save file.
For certain events i change the text and background colours.
However after I save the game , close the game down and then start game from the desktop i find that the Events texts have reverted to the default white on blue. The game is not remembering my colour preferences.
DavidR
Its nothing more than a nuisance, so I've not brought it up again, preferring to let more important things get fixed first :)
My tug ran out of fuel during tugging. Tugging the tug lead to generally wierd interaction. Assicated stations/ships are jumping between TG's randomly.
Ye... I managed to tug my ship already being tugged(or if I tugged the tug already tugging), it was a hangar module with docked fighters; the entire hangar and every docked fighter exploded. Then I got weird stuff happening when I detached a tug from a fleet, moved the tug and did something and the thing it got detached from/tugged suddenly rejoined at new position.
Quote from: Steve Walmsley link=topic=10990. msg126879#msg126879 date=1587564419Quote from: CatchItGamer link=topic=10990. msg126720#msg126720 date=1587508250Selecting a ship in the Naval Organization window with the following design results in this error: "Function #2801: Attempted to divide by zero. "Code: [Select]Scipio class Missile Defence Base 8,265 tons 460 Crew 763 BP TCS 165 TH 0 EM 0
1 km/s Armour 0-50 Shields 0-0 HTK 90 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 1 PPV 150
Maint Life 0.06 Years MSP 57 AFR 546% IFR 7.6% 1YR 987 5YR 14,806 Max Repair 200 MSP
Magazine 150
Commander Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months Morale Check Required
Size 50 Missile Launcher (3) Missile Size: 50 Rate of Fire 215
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Non-TN start, real stars, should be easy to reproduce, just started a fresh game.
There must be something about that particular ship. Otherwise I would be seeing a lot of bug reports :)
Are you getting the same errors with all ships, or just that one?
The design has armor thickness of zero, which seems to cause the error.
TN start, Random Systems, Rolled and deleted systems till I got a nice one & created a race and started the game.
At some point in I discover a system with a NPR, ran away and hoped they'd wither away. After a bit I get the 5 sec increments. Later I look back at the system and they seem to have been conquered and there's around 80 wrecks floating around. All this happened not even 3 years into the campaign.
Every time I advance in time I get the 1821 error.
DB attached. Separator is a dot, if it matters.
Version 1.8
SM'ed a bunch of stuff to facilitate a player to player homeworld take over.
Function #1555: Object reference not set to an instance of an object.
After Player A conquers Player B's Homeworld.
Edit: After many Function #1555's, There was one function #1554 and after clearing these. Happens every construction tick.
Function #1460 on saving.
EditEdit: Apparently after a save and reload there's no trace of any of this. I also uploaded the exe instead of the database XD
Getting this error every time I try to change targets of any ship in Battle fleet 03 on attached db.
(https://i.imgur.com/kvCTbPg.png)
1.8 new game. Normal settings.
I don't know if it's cosmetic but I have no sector commander listed despite appointing one. This is a random system game.
I know it's silly but may avoid some confusion with what is a bug and could be fixed soon or what is actually intended and may be implemented later. From your known bugs post you may change this:
Quote from: Thrake link=topic=10990. msg127582#msg127582 date=1587738064I don't know if it's cosmetic but I have no sector commander listed despite appointing one. This is a random system game.
You need to go to the Sector Management window and appoint the system to the sector.
Quote from: Cobaia link=topic=10990. msg127584#msg127584 date=1587738482Quote from: Thrake link=topic=10990. msg127582#msg127582 date=1587738064I don't know if it's cosmetic but I have no sector commander listed despite appointing one. This is a random system game.
You need to go to the Sector Management window and appoint the system to the sector.
Does the sector governor bonuses work for someone else?
And I mean governor is assigned as well as system to sector.
That's not the problem I was seeing. I was building a supply ship (commercial), and had about 30,000 MSP in large maintenance bays. I was just slightly under my tonnage target, and decided to round it out with a smaller maintenance bay, which immediately dropped me from 30,000 to like 400. I then played with it some, and no matter what happened, it would only calculate MSP based on the most recently added type of maintenance bay.Multiple types of maintenance storage bays don't seem to stack. If you have a ship with a given type of maintenance bay, and then add another type, the MSP carried drop to that of the second bay plus the ship's inherent engineering capabilities. This seems to happen with all kinds of bays, like it's just looking at the most recent type on the ship.
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=11056.0
I am having an NPR arrive at a point every 2 hours like clockwork then dissapearing from sensors, even though there is NO way they can get to that point without me seeing them?
https://i. imgur. com/6X3GI1G. png
i have no idea what a [PARTIAL] sensor contact means? their engines are more than within my thermal limit but they leave, then turn up again?
i will attach the DB for you to have a look at if you want but i understand if you want to ignore this since it's not 1. 8 :)
Was just passing time on the tactical map when an NPR started fighting (at least thats what I assume). Increments went down to 5sec for quite some time until I got spammed by errors in function #713. I clicked a lot of these away until I got a #1414 followed by a #1555 then repeated from there, on and on until I gave up clicking.
TN start with random stars, just 6 years into the game.
Made a fresh install when 1. 8 was released and I have changed my windows regional settings to UK.
Atmospheric pressure and absolute temperature can go below 0.
Created new game to experiment with terraforming cold worlds (Minerva moon to be specific)
Add a gas that freezes at current temperature.
Update body
GH factor and pressure are incrementally reduced every time you press the button, eventually going negative.
Also not sure if WAI, but since Greenhouse factor is limited to 3. 00, it is effectively impossible to make cold worlds viable. And with Aestium having a 100k freeze point, it is useless on a world below 33. 3k base temperature before albedo is taken into account.
Would you ever introduce a way to alter albedo to heat/cool worlds?
From a conventional start, you can create a missile with EM or Thermal sensors (maybe also active, once the first level of active sensor strength is researched and geosurvey when that's researched) even though you have no reactor tech. It shows the power requirement but the reactor MSP stays at 0. It did let me create the project. I didn't try researching and building it, so I don't know if the missile would actually work, but it should probably not allow sensors to be added until reactor tech is available. Another option would be a conventional level reactor tech with terrible performance to go with the conventional engine tech.
1. 8. 0 Any ruins generated using the SpaceMaster "Random Ruin" button disappear when the game is loaded back up.
All naturally generated ruins and any anomalies generated by "Random Ruin" button remain.
I ordered a Transport with only 1000 space to pickup a Formation that is 2000 tons.
The event log reports " TR Afgan has completed orders. Orbiting Earth"
Of course the transport is still empty. It should have given an error message about insufficient capacity.
It looks like WAI reading the Changes post (http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg103818#msg103818), but it can be a bug of model:
Small crafts ("fighters") are subjects to crew grade (that depends on academy level of quality in time of their production, and must affect battle effectiveness), but their cew grade levels are not trainable, eventually because small crafts have no command & control system by design.
1. 8. 0 Any ruins generated using the SpaceMaster "Random Ruin" button disappear when the game is loaded back up.
All naturally generated ruins and any anomalies generated by "Random Ruin" button remain.
Pressing the ruin button when a ruin already exists will delete the existing ruin. I've removed this behaviour as I suspect this was causing issues. Instead, you get a pop up explaining the ruin already exists.
Started a new game. Not to much explored, ran into two NRP's being almost nextdoor buddies(tm) . Get along decently with one of them, the other hostile.
Few years and then the 5s increments start. ...everythings moving fast, turning the event window off and I'am looking at almost a minute of ingame time per real life second. Huzzah, this awesome!
Now they've been at it for... 36 hours of 5s updates I think.
However it keeps throwing me interrupting Function #311's(Object reference not set to an instance of an object) irregurarly(0-4 times/hour) thinking this won't resolve due to whatever is throwing them errors.
Someone in the discord mentioned that they had the same problem and slapped a resolution 1 radar on their ship and the CIWS started firing.
I did the same and lo and behold, it worked.
It would be worthwhile for Steve to add a mention somewhere that CIWS still in fact require a missile detection radar for them to work
v1.8.0
If primary order is not valid but secondary order is valid, we are still getting "Orders Not Possible" messages when the ship has no other orders (and stopping auto-turn).
1. Have a survey ship with both geo-survey sensors and grav-survey sensors.
2. Set a survey ship with Primary standing order "Survey Nearest Body" and Secondary standing order "Survey Nearest Survey Location"
3. Send the ship to a system with all bodies geo-surveyed (or having no stellar bodies at all) but have some grav-survey points remaining to survey
4. Every time the ship has no order Events prompt "<ship> is unable to carry out its default order (Survey Nearest Body) as there is no acceptable destination within ten billion kilometers. And stopping auto-turn too.
I am pretty sure VB6 Aurora does not have such behavior unless both orders are not valid.
Attached DB have this keep happening, if it helps.
Tiny bug.
Cargo ships with cargo hold below 5k can't move cargo. The standard cargo orders doesn't appear.
I've created small freighter with 2 tiny cargo holds (1k capacity) just to move minerals (I don't use mass drivers) and cargo shuttles module and no joy.
When I edited in SM mode design adding 3 additional cargo holds the orders showed up.
v1.8.0, I can confirm this too, having orbital miners with a single Tiny cargo bay intended to "pack up the minerals" after mining, just to found myself unable to do so. :(
(Not so much luck to add cargo bay for me because I need to keep the design under 10k tons for my shipyards to build...)
(If needed, my database on the last post also have such designs)
When a ship goes above it's intended deployment time, there is no record of that in the log messages.
When generating a new race, build points are still locked at what ever the starting population size was. They do not adjust to changing the population like any other population stats.
Tracked it down. Forced Mines and Forced Construction have the same worker type (none). I'll fix it for v1.9. Thanks for the DB.
Not so much a bug but an annoyance but on the event log, when a Commander is promoted can the message show his command? I don’t use automated assignments and about 15-20 years in when I get a ton of promotions, the promoted officer is relieved if too senior for assignment and leaves their ship/unit posting and I don’t notice unless I check specifically for it.. It seems like it would be easy enough text to add to event log promotion notification.
1. 8. 0
Minor bug
I had this happened twice in succession. I transited jump ship and two grav surveyers with "transit and divide" -order. Once done I ordered jump ship to transit back, but I got Transit Failure cannot tranisit as there is no available jump drive capable of allowing fleet's commercial engines to enter the jump point.
In the following increment it jumps just fine so nothing game breakin, just weird.
1. 8. 0
Minor bug
I had this happened twice in succession. I transited jump ship and two grav surveyers with "transit and divide" -order. Once done I ordered jump ship to transit back, but I got Transit Failure cannot tranisit as there is no available jump drive capable of allowing fleet's commercial engines to enter the jump point.
In the following increment it jumps just fine so nothing game breakin, just weird.
That is working as intended. When you jump, the jump drive will not work again for a few minutes.
Two possible bugs.
I started with 3 Human races on Earth, me, the Western Alliance, a neutral UN and an NPR USSR. Standard start otherwise in terms of population, tech, etc.
In wanting to try out C# combat, I have run into two things I noticed.
1. I SM'ed 2 ELINT platforms orbiting Earth at the beginning. In the 8 years since start, the Intel window report 0 intel gathered.
2. I seem unable to be hostile with the Soviets. I do not see an option on the Intelligence and Foreign Relations window. Military cooperation is "unknown" even though communications are established. Diplomacy has stayed at 40 the entire game. In addition to this, in an effort to see if I could start hostilities, I attacked some ships in orbit. I was able to manually target them, and the Soviets certainly know about the war as in 5 seconds they began shooting back. However, my ships still saw them as neutral, did not use PD or otherwise recognize the other ships as targets even as diplomacy ratings went negative and my ships started to blow up.
It is entirely possible I am just missing things as new to C#, but otherwise the DB posted is before I started shooting.
Am I missing something or is there no way to balance fuel between ships in a fleet? One of the ships is a tanker with a fuel handling system, so it seems like it ought to be possible.
Am I missing something or is there no way to balance fuel between ships in a fleet? One of the ships is a tanker with a fuel handling system, so it seems like it ought to be possible.
Yea there is no real way to balance it without controling the time very well. I suggest you make your tankers have very large storages.
Am I missing something or is there no way to balance fuel between ships in a fleet? One of the ships is a tanker with a fuel handling system, so it seems like it ought to be possible.
Yea there is no real way to balance it without controling the time very well. I suggest you make your tankers have very large storages.
Even getting close would be nice; the tanker filled some ships to 100% and then left a few empty.
My commercially engined, military grade ships cannot use military grade jump drives.
My commercially engined, military grade ships cannot use military grade jump drives.
Quote from: DFNewb link=topic=10990. msg127715#msg127715 date=1587765899Quote from: db48x link=topic=10990. msg127704#msg127704 date=1587762987Am I missing something or is there no way to balance fuel between ships in a fleet? One of the ships is a tanker with a fuel handling system, so it seems like it ought to be possible.
Yea there is no real way to balance it without controling the time very well. I suggest you make your tankers have very large storages.
Even getting close would be nice; the tanker filled some ships to 100% and then left a few empty.
It is a change from VB where military jump drives worked with civilian engines and I can't find any mention of it in the change logs. As long as a tender or group transit leader can carry both types of drive I'm not concerned.My commercially engined, military grade ships cannot use military grade jump drives.
That's not a bug. Ships with commercial engines must use commercial jump drives, and ships with military engines must use military jump drives.
Hi,That sounds like one of the races picked Thumbs.db as its flag. Certainly a bug. The Thumbs.db files should probably not be included in the install package.
I haven't launch Aurora for a few days, so I install v1. 8, create a new game, change almost nothing in the settings except cosmetics in the race creation and just obtain directly a message box : "No image found for Flag: Thumbs. db". . . I haven't change anything in the Flags directory since I get v1. 0. If I opened the race information window, the flag's here, i tried and change it from there then change it back without a problem. . .
I haven't seen reports about flags since a long time, and I just tried to create a new game again with the same settings and it works fine. . . I imagine it's not a big deal, just disturbing
EDIT : I just deleted the 2 games I've created to check if the message box shows up, and now the original game (Federated Nations) and the first one I created are both named 'h0'. . . I read that in posts about previous versions but thought it had been fixed. . .
EDIT 2 : ok a last one. After that I stop testing and try to play :-) . . . When i quit Aurora and launch it again, the names of the 2 games were back to normal, if I select the game I created, i got the same message box (pict attached), and same thing if I switch between the 2 games, each time I launch the one I created, I got the message. . . even after savings the game after few 30 days increments, each time I launch the game it's the same
Thanks again
1. 8. 0
Minor bug
I had this happened twice in succession. I transited jump ship and two grav surveyers with "transit and divide" -order. Once done I ordered jump ship to transit back, but I got Transit Failure cannot tranisit as there is no available jump drive capable of allowing fleet's commercial engines to enter the jump point.
In the following increment it jumps just fine so nothing game breakin, just weird.
That is working as intended. When you jump, the jump drive will not work again for a few minutes.
Is there an event in Aurora C# for when the Precursors abduct your lifepods?
I had lifepods launched after losing a battle, ticked 8 hours forward, and suddenly the lifepods were gone with no message. In VB6, there is some sort of message indicating that they were captured.
hi,
i can't see the end of my research because the date format is too big
hi,
i can't see the end of my research because the date format is too big
That sounds like one of the races picked Thumbs. db as its flag. Certainly a bug. The Thumbs. db files should probably not be included in the install package.
Only the Flags/Thumbs.db is shipped with 151Full. It really shouldn't be. Agreed that it should be excluded from the picker.Quote from: SpikeTheHobbitMage link=topic=10990. msg127796#msg127796 date=1587784240
That sounds like one of the races picked Thumbs. db as its flag. Certainly a bug. The Thumbs. db files should probably not be included in the install package.
IDK if it's in the install, but if it's not I'm pretty sure Windows would just generate a new one. Should just be excluded from the files races can pick.
Only the Flags/Thumbs.db is shipped with 151Full. It really shouldn't be. Agreed that it should be excluded from the picker.Quote from: SpikeTheHobbitMage link=topic=10990. msg127796#msg127796 date=1587784240
That sounds like one of the races picked Thumbs. db as its flag. Certainly a bug. The Thumbs. db files should probably not be included in the install package.
IDK if it's in the install, but if it's not I'm pretty sure Windows would just generate a new one. Should just be excluded from the files races can pick.
I accidently openend Aurora again by clicking on the game icon - and it opened another copy of the game. :o Intended?
Quote from: JUTWIK link=topic=10990. msg127836#msg127836 date=1587806770hi,
i can't see the end of my research because the date format is too big
You have to change the date and time format in your windows settings. Its been repeated over again as is probably somewhere in the forum how exactly to do it. If you are on linux im not sure.
Not strictly a bug but the gal map has display options for low and medium cost worlds separated between normal and LG infra, while "habitable" does not. What this means is once you get the logistics colony cost reduction tech you get silly things like in the image I linked below. While the system does indeed have something like 8 habitable planets, most of those are inconsequential asteroids.
Encountered bug in Naval Organization, tested several times, it happens everytime. Version 1.8.0.
I have fleet with subfleets setup:
After that I save the game and exit. When I start the game the subfleet setup is broken:
1.8.0
Class design window error message
TN start, not progressed beyond start date, Real Stars
I got this error message:Code: [Select]Function #235: Cannot add or insert the item 'Abundantia Mk1A' in more than one place. You must first remove it from its current location or clone it.
Parameter name: node
To reproduce the error message:
Click new ship class, at the time I had the Abundantia selected. Note the Abundantia has hull class 'Mass Conveyor FT-M'
Click on the hull designation box (not the dropdown, the text).
Scroll the mouse wheel down and get the error message.
The new class disappears from the class list until you do something to refresh it (eg either of the tick boxes at the bottom).
So all the Ground forces on earth just disappeared, they hadn't seen combat or anything, they were just gone, with no explanation in the event log.
This is a real stars trans-newtonian game at year 68 and my decimal separator is a period.
I've got another one that's legitimately an issue and also freaking bizarre. I've got 7 planets over 100 mil and 4 over 200 mil. I keep getting messages that pickup failed for civvy ships trying to grab textiles of machinery or whatever. These pickup failed messages break autoturn, along with messages when civvies scrap old ships. IMO neither of these things should break autoturn, thoughts?
Oh and I suppose the fact that I'm running out of textiles might be an issue as well but I don't know if that's my fault or if the game's civvy production needs tweaking.
Ordnance
I am unable to load ordnance onto the battleships, I have ordnance on the planet, ordnance loaders on the planet and the ships, I set the order and no ordnance is loaded
Any ideas?
Selecting the table header on the jump point list in the system view (the table at the bottom left) causes this to occur on 1.8.0:
Function #3098: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #2471 Value cannot be null
Parameter name: value
I can no longer make or manage medals but i am still able to give them out. version is 1. 8. 0
So all the Ground forces on earth just disappeared, they hadn't seen combat or anything, they were just gone, with no explanation in the event log.
This is a real stars trans-newtonian game at year 68 and my decimal separator is a period.
I am getting "Function #300" error in a new test game on 1.8 when firing missiles at a population and they impact, attached below is the database and the image of the error.
So you can go negative in starting RP and BP. This isn't really an issue because I'd rather go a little over than have a little bit sitting around for forever.
What is an issue, is the ai going way over. I made an NPR far from sol, explicitly reduced its RP and BP. I go look in the database later, and it's sitting at -138k RP and -34k BP. Presumably this isn't intended behavior as I didn't really want this ai to be at a similar tech level as me.
v1.8.0
I think I reported this before but issue still persists, is it actually WAI?
1. Have a ship that has a broken component
2. Repair the ship
3. Being Overhaul (rewind clock) for the ship
4. When the ship has finished repairing, the ship stops overhauling (Even though maintenance clock is not zero yet).
When I click to an individual ship in a fleet, I always get "#2801 tried to divide by zero" exception. I think this is why I can not fire my weapons becuse in the fleet level my fire controls don't show up.
Known Star Systems=off
3x NPRs
separator='.'
Stock 1.8.0 database
Create Game
After confirming species parameters:
Function #3232: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #1609: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #1608: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #1562: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #1423: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Function #2939: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Hang with 100% CPU
Restored clean database and tried again. Again after confirming species parameters:
Function #1654: A null reference or invalid value was found [GDI+ status: InvalidParameter]
Small WAI bug.
Select space station in the drop down menu under industry, then switch to any other tab for that colony, or don't. If you have another colony with no industry or spaceport, swap to it and receive the "You can't build space stations here" error. It would be nice if when swapping to colonies that can't handle space stations it would just switch back to the construction/ordnance/fighter menu.
Quote from: Elysium43 link=topic=10990. msg127327#msg127327 date=1587658833So all the Ground forces on earth just disappeared, they hadn't seen combat or anything, they were just gone, with no explanation in the event log.
This is a real stars trans-newtonian game at year 68 and my decimal separator is a period.
Same thing happened to me just now. I saved the game last night and I opened it up today. First 5 day turn it told me that Mars and Luna had an unrest problem and when I look at the order of battle there are no units. I opened the game a few times and it's still missing my ground units.
If you look at the Ground Commanders the were assigned to a Ground unit but now they aren't.
This is 12 years into TN start. I started with real stars but changed it to random stars before leaving Sol. Most of my Units were Insta made but some were made normally. I have a period as a decimal separator and Windows 10. Also I had no error text during all my time playing 1. 8. 0
I'll upload the DB.
Thanks Steve for all the amazing work. I hope you get to play your game soon!
Edit: When I say Units I mean Formations. I tried to replicate this bug by creating some Formations moving them to my colonies and then saving the game and even restarting the computer but I couldn't replicate it. Weird thing is that it must have happened during my last save before going to bed, because I didn't had any Unrest messages before the save and after it they started to appear.
Not a bug, but oversight, or probably WAI.
Mines and automines now require only corundium, but that is not the case for orbital mining modules, which still retain 60/60 cost from VB6 which is inconsistent with other changes. I found that very useful when decided to go for big mining stations, but I wonder if it was intended on your side.
I am definitely on 1.8.0.1.8.0
Class design window error message
TN start, not progressed beyond start date, Real Stars
I got this error message:Code: [Select]Function #235: Cannot add or insert the item 'Abundantia Mk1A' in more than one place. You must first remove it from its current location or clone it.
Parameter name: node
To reproduce the error message:
Click new ship class, at the time I had the Abundantia selected. Note the Abundantia has hull class 'Mass Conveyor FT-M'
Click on the hull designation box (not the dropdown, the text).
Scroll the mouse wheel down and get the error message.
The new class disappears from the class list until you do something to refresh it (eg either of the tick boxes at the bottom).
I can't reproduce. As I scroll up and down the hull type changes on the tree view. Can you recheck version number please.
Not a bug, but oversight, or probably WAI.
Mines and automines now require only corundium, but that is not the case for orbital mining modules, which still retain 60/60 cost from VB6 which is inconsistent with other changes. I found that very useful when decided to go for big mining stations, but I wonder if it was intended on your side.
Fixed.
I was making a medal and the whole medal system became inoperableQuote from: Stoned link=topic=10990. msg127405#msg127405 date=1587674066Function #2471 Value cannot be null
Parameter name: value
I can no longer make or manage medals but i am still able to give them out. version is 1. 8. 0
What were doing when the error occurred?
v1.8.0
Trying to rename a prototype component in "Class Design" window when prototypes are not shown throws an NRE error.
1. Create a prototype component
2. Open "Class Design" Window.
3. Select a ship, use Wide View, Check "Prototypes" checkbox
4. Add the created component to a ship
5. Uncheck "Prototypes" checkbox
6. Select the new component from the ship
7. Hit "Rename Comp" button
8. Choose a name and confirm
9. Error: Function #278 Null Reference Exception
The component does get renamed, but not immediately reflected in the window.
More of a missing feature than a bug I guess, but under "Naval Organization" Window, "Shipping Line" tab, the value "Best Share Price" appears to be always 1.
Quote from: JuJo link=topic=10990. msg127484#msg127484 date=1587699192Quote from: Elysium43 link=topic=10990. msg127327#msg127327 date=1587658833So all the Ground forces on earth just disappeared, they hadn't seen combat or anything, they were just gone, with no explanation in the event log.
This is a real stars trans-newtonian game at year 68 and my decimal separator is a period.
Same thing happened to me just now. I saved the game last night and I opened it up today. First 5 day turn it told me that Mars and Luna had an unrest problem and when I look at the order of battle there are no units. I opened the game a few times and it's still missing my ground units.
If you look at the Ground Commanders the were assigned to a Ground unit but now they aren't.
This is 12 years into TN start. I started with real stars but changed it to random stars before leaving Sol. Most of my Units were Insta made but some were made normally. I have a period as a decimal separator and Windows 10. Also I had no error text during all my time playing 1. 8. 0
I'll upload the DB.
Thanks Steve for all the amazing work. I hope you get to play your game soon!
Edit: When I say Units I mean Formations. I tried to replicate this bug by creating some Formations moving them to my colonies and then saving the game and even restarting the computer but I couldn't replicate it. Weird thing is that it must have happened during my last save before going to bed, because I didn't had any Unrest messages before the save and after it they started to appear.
It sounds like this bug may be caused by some type of problem in saving the ground forces to the database. Did you get any error on the save?
1. 8. 0 Any ruins generated using the SpaceMaster "Random Ruin" button disappear when the game is loaded back up.
All naturally generated ruins and any anomalies generated by "Random Ruin" button remain.
Pressing the ruin button when a ruin already exists will delete the existing ruin. I've removed this behaviour as I suspect this was causing issues. Instead, you get a pop up explaining the ruin already exists.
I just tested:
Create new game in fresh database (all default settings)
SM On
SM GeoSurvey full system
Select Mars (which had no ruin) and hit random ruin. It generated a abandoned colony and an installation (Bio 100%)
Closed system window. Saved game. Exit.
Relaunch and check, the installation is still there, the ruin is gone.
I repeated again with another new game in a fresh database. Added ruins to mars, Venus, and mercury (none of which had one to start). Venus also got an installation. Saved, exit, reload. All the ruins are gone. The installation on Venus is still there.
Based on this, I don't think the bug is not only when hitting random ruin on a planet that already has a ruin.
Additionally, being able to re-roll ruins is a nice feature when setting up a game where you want something like a sizable ruin on mars to act as a jump-start to a conventional start, though that's obviously just a nice to have.
Hi
Trying to load the game up and I am getting function #3056 Object reference not set to an instance of an object
It started up with function #1170 the given key was not present in the dictionary
This happened on load up, didn't even get in to start the game
Cant close the game or do anything, the error just keeps coming up
Also cant Ctrl+alt+delete
It seems a geosurvey buoy that is not at a valid survey location causes an error
Function #1544: Object reference not set to an instance of an object.
Was messing with box launcher and launched a 2 stage missile at a random waypoint. the payload was a geosurvey buoy and I'm now getting the error on each construction phase.
Is there any way of deleting buoys?
Also, is it working as intended that a ship with a single large size box launcher can carry multiple small missiles? As expected I can only fire one missile and can't reload in deepspace but I can choose any missile it has onboard to be launched. So I can have 1 big launcher 3 different smaller missiles and fire which ever one would be best for the current situation. So the reloading is more a recharge rate. Once a launcher is charged it can be loaded with any missile and fired. Then it just needs to be recharged again before firing.
Two possible bugs.
I started with 3 Human races on Earth, me, the Western Alliance, a neutral UN and an NPR USSR. Standard start otherwise in terms of population, tech, etc.
In wanting to try out C# combat, I have run into two things I noticed.
1. I SM'ed 2 ELINT platforms orbiting Earth at the beginning. In the 8 years since start, the Intel window report 0 intel gathered.
2. I seem unable to be hostile with the Soviets. I do not see an option on the Intelligence and Foreign Relations window. Military cooperation is "unknown" even though communications are established. Diplomacy has stayed at 40 the entire game. In addition to this, in an effort to see if I could start hostilities, I attacked some ships in orbit. I was able to manually target them, and the Soviets certainly know about the war as in 5 seconds they began shooting back. However, my ships still saw them as neutral, did not use PD or otherwise recognize the other ships as targets even as diplomacy ratings went negative and my ships started to blow up.
It is entirely possible I am just missing things as new to C#, but otherwise the DB posted is before I started shooting.
I'm actually running a very similar situation.
1.8: 3 player races. One has an elint platform right over earth, and intel points are still at 0 after 3 years.
I even tested by setting human xenophobia to 0 and hostile, and running the game for a year. Still no intel points on the other earth or luna colonies.
1.8, DB attached, decimal as separator.
Dug up some Science Departments.
Couldn't use them in ship directly, so disassembled for the RP.
RP instead went into Aux Control tech line instead of Science Department tech line.
Version 1.8.0: (Fresh game, Known Star Systems off)
My gravitational survey ships found two jump points fairly close to each other. I gave a jump-capable ship the orders to standard transit to Unknown JP#1 and Unknown JP#2.
What I expected to happen: Ship moves to JP#1, discovers system, jumps back, moves to JP#2, discovers system.
What actually happened: Ship moves to JP#1, discovers system, moves the distance between JP#1 and JP# 2 in the newly discovered system (so that it was in the middle of space); then suddenly popped into JP#2, discovering it.
Edit: I think I know why this can happen - transit orders into unexplored JPs don't take you out of the original system's interface, so you can queue up multiple transit orders in the same system.
Edit^2: Yep. You can do it with any unexplored JP - the second transit order takes place in the new system.
(https://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1l62f8DYCYW_36zO2xiPSUQ-XWAPA9Dho)
Note that there are no other discovered JPs in the system.
Only the Flags/Thumbs.db is shipped with 151Full. It really shouldn't be. Agreed that it should be excluded from the picker.Quote from: SpikeTheHobbitMage link=topic=10990. msg127796#msg127796 date=1587784240
That sounds like one of the races picked Thumbs. db as its flag. Certainly a bug. The Thumbs. db files should probably not be included in the install package.
IDK if it's in the install, but if it's not I'm pretty sure Windows would just generate a new one. Should just be excluded from the files races can pick.
I think what's happening is that the new C# is set in a way that any image (but I think it's the file then) can be picked from the right folder for the creation of a new race. It applies to flags, races, etc. Probably, if possible, the code should source only for .png or .jpg not sure which one is more convenient or if both can be added. This should automatically sort the issue.
You can stabilise lagrange points multiple times, leading to there being multiple LP points on the same location.
Edit: If you have a population in orbital habitats the population will keep growing indefinitely irrespective of the orbital habitat capacity. Once said capacity is overfilled the game will begin displaying "Function 2244 attempted to divide by zero" every industrial increment. DB attached as an example.Edit: I'm getting "Function #2244 attempted to divide by zero" every industrial increment. Initially I thought it was due to issues with shipyard task destinations but I have completed all shipyard tasks and even deleted the destination fleet. No joy. DB attached below. Played on Windows 7.It seems the bug was connected to construction of one of my ships, the Heweliusz. Perhaps I moved its target task group or something. It's cleared now but I'm leaving the report and the database since its still a bug.I'm getting "Function #2244 attempted to divide by zero" every industrial increment. DB attached. Played on Windows 7.
V. 1.8
The statistic 'Unsurveyed Gravsurvey Locations' in the galaxy maps counts the opposite, namely the number of surveyed gravsurvey locations. The number starts with 0 and counts up as the grav survey ship does its tour.
Quote from: redivider link=topic=10990. msg127837#msg127837 date=1587806915Quote from: JUTWIK link=topic=10990. msg127836#msg127836 date=1587806770hi,
i can't see the end of my research because the date format is too big
You have to change the date and time format in your windows settings. Its been repeated over again as is probably somewhere in the forum how exactly to do it. If you are on linux im not sure.
No, no, no.
While . NET indeed uses the date format set in the Windows settings by default, the intrepid developer can and should set it to whatever they need, especially when their software doesn't have internationalisation. This is not user error, this is a bug, no matter how easy it is to work around it.
Ideally, Steve would set the CultureInfo. CurrentCulture for Aurora to something he expects will fit at all times.
Quote from: Prack link=topic=10990. msg127688#msg127688 date=1587759658It seems a geosurvey buoy that is not at a valid survey location causes an error
Function #1544: Object reference not set to an instance of an object.
Was messing with box launcher and launched a 2 stage missile at a random waypoint. the payload was a geosurvey buoy and I'm now getting the error on each construction phase.
Is there any way of deleting buoys?
Also, is it working as intended that a ship with a single large size box launcher can carry multiple small missiles? As expected I can only fire one missile and can't reload in deepspace but I can choose any missile it has onboard to be launched. So I can have 1 big launcher 3 different smaller missiles and fire which ever one would be best for the current situation. So the reloading is more a recharge rate. Once a launcher is charged it can be loaded with any missile and fired. Then it just needs to be recharged again before firing.
Geo survey was not checking for absence of system body. Fixed.
Launchers can fire any size missile up to the max for that launcher.
Was just passing time on the tactical map when an NPR started fighting (at least thats what I assume). Increments went down to 5sec for quite some time until I got spammed by errors in function #713. I clicked a lot of these away until I got a #1414 followed by a #1555 then repeated from there, on and on until I gave up clicking.
TN start with random stars, just 6 years into the game.
Made a fresh install when 1. 8 was released and I have changed my windows regional settings to UK.
I've fixed another bug that I think should also fix this.
Small WAI bug.
Select space station in the drop down menu under industry, then switch to any other tab for that colony, or don't. If you have another colony with no industry or spaceport, swap to it and receive the "You can't build space stations here" error. It would be nice if when swapping to colonies that can't handle space stations it would just switch back to the construction/ordnance/fighter menu.
unlike the rest of the colonies, Earth doesn't have a lack of protection penalty
Was just passing time on the tactical map when an NPR started fighting (at least thats what I assume). Increments went down to 5sec for quite some time until I got spammed by errors in function #713. I clicked a lot of these away until I got a #1414 followed by a #1555 then repeated from there, on and on until I gave up clicking.
TN start with random stars, just 6 years into the game.
Made a fresh install when 1. 8 was released and I have changed my windows regional settings to UK.
I've fixed another bug that I think should also fix this.
I think this might be related to a NPR losing it's naval headquarters (or the pop containing the headquarters) and thus not having a naval command anymore
No, no, no.
While . NET indeed uses the date format set in the Windows settings by default, the intrepid developer can and should set it to whatever they need, especially when their software doesn't have internationalisation. This is not user error, this is a bug, no matter how easy it is to work around it.
Ideally, Steve would set the CultureInfo. CurrentCulture for Aurora to something he expects will fit at all times.
Its actually a more general problem. The same date in the same format is still different lengths in different languages. If I fix the date format in the game, I am preventing people from choosing a suitable date format for their location.
1.8.0
I am getting about 60 "function #1414: value was too high or too low for a decimal" every turn for 5 to 10 turns.
No, no, no.
While . NET indeed uses the date format set in the Windows settings by default, the intrepid developer can and should set it to whatever they need, especially when their software doesn't have internationalisation. This is not user error, this is a bug, no matter how easy it is to work around it.
Ideally, Steve would set the CultureInfo. CurrentCulture for Aurora to something he expects will fit at all times.
Its actually a more general problem. The same date in the same format is still different lengths in different languages. If I fix the date format in the game, I am preventing people from choosing a suitable date format for their location.
He's saying that you can set the culture so that the date is always in English, and in the en_GB long format, so that the dates are always the expected length. Obviously there is some advantage to presenting the dates in the user's language, even if the rest of the text is not translated, and you would lose that.
The other option, of course, is to give the user a UI for controlling the date format. Letting the user choose between the system long date format, the system short date format, and a custom date format string would cover all the possibilities.
A further option would be to use a table control rather than a list control. The table controls can allow resizing any field, as well as nifty things like sorting by any field when the user clicks on a column header. As a bonus you could then eliminate all of the "sort by X" buttons that you have in some of the windows.
Point Defence
In C# Aurora, fire controls set to 'Final Defensive Fire' or 'Final Defensive Fire (Self Only)' will fire on hostile missiles, regardless of whether the fire control is set to 'Open Fire'. Fire controls set to Area Mode or for AMMs will only fire defensively when that fire control is set to 'Open Fire'.
When a missile reaches its target, a target ship will use its CIWS first. If that is insufficient, it will use any weapons linked to fire controls set to 'Final Defensive Fire' or 'Final Defensive Fire (Self Only)'. If that is still insufficient, ships or the same race or an allied race with fire controls set to 'Final Defensive Fire' will be checked in increasing order of distance from the target ship.
A target population will use any ground units assigned to point defence to shoot at incoming missiles. If that is insufficient, the same process as for ships will take place, checking same race or allied ships within point defence range of the planet.
You are unable to set fire controls to Open fire without a target for them
You are unable to set fire controls to Open fire without a target for them
Just click the fire control and click 'Open Fire FC'. There is no check for targets when you click the button.
You are unable to set fire controls to Open fire without a target for them
Just click the fire control and click 'Open Fire FC'. There is no check for targets when you click the button.
You are unable to set fire controls to Open fire without a target for them
Just click the fire control and click 'Open Fire FC'. There is no check for targets when you click the button.
Also having FC's set to open fire with no target forces the game into 5 second turns.
1.8.0
I am getting about 60 "function #1414: value was too high or too low for a decimal" every turn for 5 to 10 turns.
I'm running your game without errors. However, I had to delete GravS6 to get the game to load. Maybe that was causing the problem.
1.8.0
I am getting about 60 "function #1414: value was too high or too low for a decimal" every turn for 5 to 10 turns.
I'm running your game without errors. However, I had to delete GravS6 to get the game to load. Maybe that was causing the problem.
When I open it I get "function #1171: Can not perform a cast (?) of DBnull item into other types" or so. I do not get the function #1414 like I did previously though (I had runned a few turns after the save I sent you) and everything else looks fine. However GravS6 is missing in my save. I will keep playing and report if something else weird happens in the upcoming turns.
Quote from: redivider link=topic=10990. msg127837#msg127837 date=1587806915Quote from: JUTWIK link=topic=10990. msg127836#msg127836 date=1587806770hi,
i can't see the end of my research because the date format is too big
You have to change the date and time format in your windows settings. Its been repeated over again as is probably somewhere in the forum how exactly to do it. If you are on linux im not sure.
No, no, no.
While . NET indeed uses the date format set in the Windows settings by default, the intrepid developer can and should set it to whatever they need, especially when their software doesn't have internationalisation. This is not user error, this is a bug, no matter how easy it is to work around it.
Ideally, Steve would set the CultureInfo. CurrentCulture for Aurora to something he expects will fit at all times.
Its actually a more general problem. The same date in the same format is still different lengths in different languages. If I fix the date format in the game, I am preventing people from choosing a suitable date format for their location.
Do NPR factions operate civilian shipping companies - because I think they can still create commercial ships in their homeworld - even if there are no shipyards, no population etc...
Do NPR factions operate civilian shipping companies - because I think they can still create commercial ships in their homeworld - even if there are no shipyards, no population etc...
All NPR freighters and colony ships are civilian shipping. The NPR handles their tasks via contracts.
Not so much a bug but an annoyance but on the event log, when a Commander is promoted can the message show his command? I don’t use automated assignments and about 15-20 years in when I get a ton of promotions, the promoted officer is relieved if too senior for assignment and leaves their ship/unit posting and I don’t notice unless I check specifically for it.. It seems like it would be easy enough text to add to event log promotion notification.
I've added an event for commanders being unassigned.
1.8, random stars, Local System Generation doesn't seem to function.
Unsure if WAI, but with No Maintenance enabled, ships will still suffer maintenance failures during combat, consuming MSP if available as normal. The description for the No Maintenance toggle makes it seem like this shouldn't be the case.
1.8, random stars, Local System Generation doesn't seem to function.
How do you make your System map so clean?
I am not sure about this one, bug, missing feature or working like intended.
After queuing up a technology from one specific tree, technologies further down that tree do not show up before research completes. That makes researching one particular low-cost tree a bit tedious.
V1. 8. 0 created a new game, had two JPs in Sol, then both systems had no jump points after survey. Turned on SM and tried to 'Add Jump Point" in System Generation and Display screen, it did nothing. . . is it turned on? "Change Position" seemed to work.After adding a jump point you'll need to re-do the survey since the JPs aren't defaulted to visible.
1.8I am having a similar issue in a test game, the civilians from two different races refuse to trade with each other even though supply and demand do exist. This could potentially be because of sharing a homeworld, so I'll do another test to see if having different homeworlds will solve this issue.
To add to the list of missing functions, it appears like civilian trade between races just doesn't happen.
I have a multi-earth start, every race is set to 200 relations, and toggled to allow trade.
Every race has civilian freighters.
Two races have idle freighters when there is fur demand on Earth A and fur supply on Earth B. Very poor capitalists.
Edit: Mercury also has a fur demand and the fur suppliers are not willing to trade.
I've already posted an issue with this, The Added jump point isn't visible in the system window, which it probably should be when spacemaster is on as "unsurveyed"", and Furthermore there is a bug where the new jump point is literally undiscoverable if the system was already fully surveyed . (At least when spacemaster mode is used to survey). I havent tested if it also applies if the new points are added before every jump point is finished, or if the entire system is surveyed manually, but I suspect that might still be the case.V1. 8. 0 created a new game, had two JPs in Sol, then both systems had no jump points after survey. Turned on SM and tried to 'Add Jump Point" in System Generation and Display screen, it did nothing. . . is it turned on? "Change Position" seemed to work.After adding a jump point you'll need to re-do the survey since the JPs aren't defaulted to visible.
Unsure if WAI, but with No Maintenance enabled, ships will still suffer maintenance failures during combat, consuming MSP if available as normal. The description for the No Maintenance toggle makes it seem like this shouldn't be the case.I noticed this today as well.
Maybe not entirely a bug, but doesn't feel right.
The wealth cost of research is tied to research rate, which makes sense originally. Better research tech, means more expensive labs.
But it breaks a bit if you change the global research rate. Since this effects the research rate of labs, you end up with really cheap labs.
Sure you presumably pay the same amount of wealth pr research point, but once your industry gets going, wealth is the real limiter on research. So you can end up with the same amount of research, you just need to spend the minerals/time to build more labs. Which kind of removes the point of the global setting after a while.
I believe thats WAI, But the mechanic isn't ideal. I manually transfer Ships to a different admin command when they're in overhaul.Personally I think there should be a warning message when trying to give a fleet the overhaul command while the fleet is part of a training admin. Moving things around admin commands automatically sounds like it cause people to report more bugs like "why is my fleet missing".
If this is indeed working as intended. I would suggest that when a fleet is sent to overhaul it gets pushed from the training admin its current in up to whatever level of Command that training command is in, or none if the training command isn't nested. Then when the entire fleet comes out of overhaul it gets pushed back into the Training command.
There should probably be an interrupt for this, though maybe not, you do get interrupts for every ship thats finished overhaul. I would offer an addittional suggestion, maybe when multiple ships are sent in for overhaul an interrupt should only fire when the entire fleet is finished. If you really want a stop for each individual ship you could break that unit out into a subfleet.
Fleet AA, X out of Y ships completed overhaul, Z ships still undergoing overhaul
Fleet AA, all ships completed overhaulThe first would generate a log message only, the second would also interrupt auto-turns.
Hi, don't know if this is WAI, but playing 1. 8 I find that the Researcher I assigned as Academy Commandant is still available to lead research projects.
Hi. After discovering an opponent in the Gallowglass system, the game slows down a lot. And after trying to remove the system, errors #1555 and #713 occurred. Only killing the process allowed to exit the game.These errors have been fixed and I guess will be in 1.9.0. The issue is that the NPR lost it's naval headquarters and then their naval command and thus the naval side of the game fails
Hi. After discovering an opponent in the Gallowglass system, the game slows down a lot. And after trying to remove the system, errors #1555 and #713 occurred. Only killing the process allowed to exit the game.These errors have been fixed and I guess will be in 1.9.0. The issue is that the NPR lost it's naval headquarters and then their naval command and thus the naval side of the game fails
Version 1.8.0
Terraforming Mars i found switching to another Planet or Tab and back to the Environment Tab for Mars the "Maximum Atm" resets to "0"
I have a bug where my colony on Luna says it has no maximum on colonists yet is complaining about overcrowding. Perhaps a rounding error?
I can't figure out how to put pictures in the post, so I've attached them below with the database.
What you were doing at the time: Skipping forward in time
Conventional or TN start: Conventional
Random or Real Stars: Real
Is your decimal separator a comma: No, it's a dot
Campaign is about 85 years into
Version 1.8.0
Terraforming Mars i found switching to another Planet or Tab and back to the Environment Tab for Mars the "Maximum Atm" resets to "0"
The GUI isn't great, to the point that I agree it's a bug.
As a workaround, you need to click out of the "Maximum atm" onto somewhere else on the same screen before changing screens for the value to stick
Your Luna colony is over population capacity. The second column of data, the one which begins with "imperial population" is showing the capacity near the bottom being 890 million people. Your colony is 930 million.
Quote from: Haji link=topic=10990. msg128263#msg128263 date=1587915157Your Luna colony is over population capacity. The second column of data, the one which begins with "imperial population" is showing the capacity near the bottom being 890 million people. Your colony is 930 million.
Thanks, is there any way to increase that number?
Quote from: Haji link=topic=10990. msg128263#msg128263 date=1587915157Your Luna colony is over population capacity. The second column of data, the one which begins with "imperial population" is showing the capacity near the bottom being 890 million people. Your colony is 930 million.
Thanks, is there any way to increase that number?
No it's based on the surface area of the body and your race's starting stats
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg100078#msg100078
The Medals screen only appears to have an area for ribbons to be awarded - on the left side towards the bottom.
Where is the facility to award actual medals as Aurora 4X
Trying to use medals from Aurora 4X or other peoples medal downloads just compresses and distorts the medal image in the ribbon area.
DavidR
Cargo Fleet has cycle orders set but only has one order set up. As this can lead to an endless loop the cycle orders request has been removed.
Disclaimer: I'm quite new to the game, so I might be missing something. . .
During my current game I noticed, that cycle orders of cargo fleets, that consist of two commands, sometimes got canceled. In these cases my fleet had the commands "Load Installation (infrastructure) on Earth" and "Unload all Installations on Mars" on cycle together with standing orders for refueling and resupply.
From time to time I got "Orders Not Possible" events, that read:QuoteCargo Fleet has cycle orders set but only has one order set up. As this can lead to an endless loop the cycle orders request has been removed.
After that the fleet was orbiting Earth (so the pick-up planet - at least this time, when I tracked it down) without any orders. However, there were still installations to be transported and I also didn't get the message "picking up stuff not possible, because there is none".
So I assume the check, if there is only one command, sometimes hits the window, when one of the commands was just executed and is being moved to the bottom of the list.
Database from directly after the event is available, if that helps.
Disclaimer: I'm quite new to the game, so I might be missing something. . .
During my current game I noticed, that cycle orders of cargo fleets, that consist of two commands, sometimes got canceled. In these cases my fleet had the commands "Load Installation (infrastructure) on Earth" and "Unload all Installations on Mars" on cycle together with standing orders for refueling and resupply.
From time to time I got "Orders Not Possible" events, that read:QuoteCargo Fleet has cycle orders set but only has one order set up. As this can lead to an endless loop the cycle orders request has been removed.
After that the fleet was orbiting Earth (so the pick-up planet - at least this time, when I tracked it down) without any orders. However, there were still installations to be transported and I also didn't get the message "picking up stuff not possible, because there is none".
So I assume the check, if there is only one command, sometimes hits the window, when one of the commands was just executed and is being moved to the bottom of the list.
Database from directly after the event is available, if that helps.
Was Earth building the installations at the time?
Also know that if you do not have a refuel order somewhere along the cycle you could trigger a conditional order which would cancel the whole thing.
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=10990.msg127079#msg127079http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=10990.msg127520#msg127520
when opening the galactic map window, it goes to the background after several seconds
Quote from: Droll link=topic=10990. msg128294#msg128294 date=1587922193Also know that if you do not have a refuel order somewhere along the cycle you could trigger a conditional order which would cancel the whole thing.
I'm not sure what you mean, so let me explain the situation of conditional orders for the fleet:
The fleet did have a conditional refuel order and also a conditional resupply order. The cycle itself only contained the load and the unload order. I didn't see any indicators in the log suggesting, that one of the conditional orders was triggered. And even if such a conditional order would have been triggered, I would assume, that the cycle would continue afterwards.
1.8.0
I am getting about 60 "function #1414: value was too high or too low for a decimal" every turn for 5 to 10 turns.
I'm running your game without errors. However, I had to delete GravS6 to get the game to load. Maybe that was causing the problem.
Tarantul IIM class Missile Boat 5,989 tons 176 Crew 2,302.8 BP TCS 120 TH 157 EM 0
10895 km/s JR 1-50 Armour 1-29 Shields 0-0 HTK 43 Sensors 14/28/0/0 DCR 35 PPV 80
Maint Life 2.75 Years MSP 1,721 AFR 52% IFR 0.7% 1YR 328 5YR 4,922 Max Repair 1631.25 MSP
Magazine 80
Kapitan vtorogo ranga Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months Morale Check Required
OKB-640 6000M83 FTL drive Max Ship Size 6000 tons Distance 50k km Squadron Size 1
Design Bureau 632 RVS-1305 Fusion thruster (1) Power 1305 Fuel Use 35.80% Signature 156.60 Explosion 14%
Fuel Capacity 350,000 Litres Range 29.4 billion km (31 days at full power)
AK-676M (2x10) Range 1000 km TS: 20,000 km/s ROF 5
P-65 VLS system (8) Missile Size: 10 Hangar Reload 158 minutes MF Reload 26 hours
P-65 Guidance system (1) Range 73.3m km Resolution 100
P-70 "Kukushka" (8) Speed: 70,200 km/s End: 11.3m Range: 47.7m km WH: 10 Size: 10 TH: 234/140/70
NR41/R50 Nav. Radar (1) GPS 1400 Range 41.2m km Resolution 50
Perimetr Early Warning System (1) GPS 28 Range 11.2m km MCR 1.2m km Resolution 1
Active search radar MR103R100 (1) GPS 11200 Range 103.7m km Resolution 100
EM sensor E2-M083 (1) Sensitivity 28 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 41.8m km
IR sensor T1-M85 (1) Sensitivity 14 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 29.6m km
ECM 10
Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposesNablyudat class Resupply Base 141,774 tons 1,318 Crew 9,709 BP TCS 2,835 TH 0 EM 0
1 km/s Armour 10-242 Shields 0-0 HTK 198 Sensors 14/14/0/0 DCR 41 PPV 0
MSP 20,042 Max Repair 200 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 30,000 tons Troop Capacity 1,000 tons Magazine 2,000 Cargo Shuttle Multiplier 18
Kapitan pervogo ranga Control Rating 4 BRG ENG CIC PFC
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months Flight Crew Berths 600
Maintenance Modules: 10 module(s) capable of supporting ships of 32,000 tons
Fuel Capacity 10,000,000 Litres Range N/A
Refuelling Capability: 100,000 litres per hour Complete Refuel 100 hours
AK-676M (10x10) Range 1000 km TS: 20,000 km/s ROF 5
P-70 "Kukushka" (200) Speed: 70,200 km/s End: 11.3m Range: 47.7m km WH: 10 Size: 10 TH: 234/140/70
Ordnance Transfer Rate: 80 MSP per hour Complete Transfer 25 hours
Perimetr Early Warning System (2) GPS 28 Range 11.2m km MCR 1.2m km Resolution 1
IR sensor T1-M85 (1) Sensitivity 14 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 29.6m km
EM Sensor E1-M85 (1) Sensitivity 14 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 29.6m km
Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s
This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes
The function number - #407
The complete error text - Object reference not set to an instance of an object.
The window affected - Main window.
What you were doing at the time - Clicking 30 days.
Conventional or TN start - Conventional.
Random or Real Stars - Random.
Is your decimal separator a comma? - No a .
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? - Seems pretty random.
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - 71 Years
Db attached, click 30 days and you should get the error.
Hangar reloading is bugged or completely misleading in it's information for ships with box launchers.
The below design is a missileboat, it says hangar reload should take 158 minutes. It's been 3 days now and it's still not reloaded. Ship's ordnance template is set, there's missiles in the magazines of the station. Doesn't work.Code: [Select]Tarantul IIM class Missile Boat 5,989 tons 176 Crew 2,302.8 BP TCS 120 TH 157 EM 0
10895 km/s JR 1-50 Armour 1-29 Shields 0-0 HTK 43 Sensors 14/28/0/0 DCR 35 PPV 80
Maint Life 2.75 Years MSP 1,721 AFR 52% IFR 0.7% 1YR 328 5YR 4,922 Max Repair 1631.25 MSP
Magazine 80
Kapitan vtorogo ranga Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months Morale Check Required
OKB-640 6000M83 FTL drive Max Ship Size 6000 tons Distance 50k km Squadron Size 1
Design Bureau 632 RVS-1305 Fusion thruster (1) Power 1305 Fuel Use 35.80% Signature 156.60 Explosion 14%
Fuel Capacity 350,000 Litres Range 29.4 billion km (31 days at full power)
AK-676M (2x10) Range 1000 km TS: 20,000 km/s ROF 5
P-65 VLS system (8) Missile Size: 10 Hangar Reload 158 minutes MF Reload 26 hours
P-65 Guidance system (1) Range 73.3m km Resolution 100
P-70 "Kukushka" (8) Speed: 70,200 km/s End: 11.3m Range: 47.7m km WH: 10 Size: 10 TH: 234/140/70
NR41/R50 Nav. Radar (1) GPS 1400 Range 41.2m km Resolution 50
Perimetr Early Warning System (1) GPS 28 Range 11.2m km MCR 1.2m km Resolution 1
Active search radar MR103R100 (1) GPS 11200 Range 103.7m km Resolution 100
EM sensor E2-M083 (1) Sensitivity 28 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 41.8m km
IR sensor T1-M85 (1) Sensitivity 14 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 29.6m km
ECM 10
Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
The station it is landed to, which should reload it.Code: [Select]Nablyudat class Resupply Base 141,774 tons 1,318 Crew 9,709 BP TCS 2,835 TH 0 EM 0
1 km/s Armour 10-242 Shields 0-0 HTK 198 Sensors 14/14/0/0 DCR 41 PPV 0
MSP 20,042 Max Repair 200 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 30,000 tons Troop Capacity 1,000 tons Magazine 2,000 Cargo Shuttle Multiplier 18
Kapitan pervogo ranga Control Rating 4 BRG ENG CIC PFC
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months Flight Crew Berths 600
Maintenance Modules: 10 module(s) capable of supporting ships of 32,000 tons
Fuel Capacity 10,000,000 Litres Range N/A
Refuelling Capability: 100,000 litres per hour Complete Refuel 100 hours
AK-676M (10x10) Range 1000 km TS: 20,000 km/s ROF 5
P-70 "Kukushka" (200) Speed: 70,200 km/s End: 11.3m Range: 47.7m km WH: 10 Size: 10 TH: 234/140/70
Ordnance Transfer Rate: 80 MSP per hour Complete Transfer 25 hours
Perimetr Early Warning System (2) GPS 28 Range 11.2m km MCR 1.2m km Resolution 1
IR sensor T1-M85 (1) Sensitivity 14 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 29.6m km
EM Sensor E1-M85 (1) Sensitivity 14 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 29.6m km
Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s
This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes
I've found the communication bug. The NPRs never actually initiated communication (the equivalent of the player clicking the Communicate button).
This might be WAI - I don't think commercial hangar bays can reload military ships, though I could be wrong. Instead of landing the ships try using the ordnance transfer system onboard the station like you would with a collier.I haven't found a statement that they can't.
I took a gander at DIM_PlanetaryTerrain in the database, I think I spotted a typo.
I've taken a planet from a precursor civilization.
Landed my own colonists on the planet.
It now has political status 'occupied' or 'subjugated' and unrest increases without military presence.
There's no aliens left alive on the planet though...
Quote from: RedDagger link=topic=10990. msg128509#msg128509 date=1587994010I took a gander at DIM_PlanetaryTerrain in the database, I think I spotted a typo.
Not sure what you are looking at, but that isn't the table from the normal Aurora. db. Do you have some type of mod running?
The bug they are reporting is that Forested Rift Valley has a different minimum temperature from the other Forested types.I took a gander at DIM_PlanetaryTerrain in the database, I think I spotted a typo.
Not sure what you are looking at, but that isn't the table from the normal Aurora.db. Do you have some type of mod running?
This might be WAI - I don't think commercial hangar bays can reload military ships, though I could be wrong. Instead of landing the ships try using the ordnance transfer system onboard the station like you would with a collier.I haven't found a statement that they can't.
They are intended for transport of other commercial vessels, temporary transport of military vessels, reloading of box launchers and for repairing ships.
This might be WAI - I don't think commercial hangar bays can reload military ships, though I could be wrong. Instead of landing the ships try using the ordnance transfer system onboard the station like you would with a collier.I haven't found a statement that they can't.
In fact, this post (http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg103584;topicseen#msg103584) explicitly says that commercial hangars can reload box launchers.QuoteThey are intended for transport of other commercial vessels, temporary transport of military vessels, reloading of box launchers and for repairing ships.
Well thats me cooked
I've taken a planet from a precursor civilization.
Landed my own colonists on the planet.
It now has political status 'occupied' or 'subjugated' and unrest increases without military presence.
There's no aliens left alive on the planet though...
That is working as intended as it is the alien colony. There is nothing to stop you creating your own colony though on the same planet.
Function #1821: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Scenario: Epsilon Indi system ground combat against precursor outpost defenders - initial precursor force 20k tons and 2k STO, friendly ground forces is a mechanized assault brigade consisting of mostly mechanized with some armoured forces at around 100k tons (including logistics). STOs are firing at a battlecruiser in orbit and missing and orbiting warships are not doing any form of orbital bombardment.
Ground forces have 80 CAS fighters in orbit on ground support missions. 24 of those fighters are committed to supporting 2 armoured companies and 2 mechanized companies - all 4 of those formations are on frontline attack.
The exception is thrown every combat round - it seems to be preventing any CAS from firing since they still have all their ordnance - ground combat continued until 600 tons of enemy was left but would not progress further (telling the CAS to stop fixed it and the outpost was conquered). Similar exceptions also thrown when CAS fighters are on other ground missions.
Each CAS fighter consists of 2 size 12 strafing pods, 1 size 12 bombardment pod and 1 size 12 AtA pod. There are no precursor ground fighters present.
DB attached - planet of interest is Epsilon indi A-IV, the fighters should already be set to ground support so just play it for the next 8 hours and see what happens.
Edit: I just swapped out the AtA pods for a second bombardment pod - same result, its not because the AtA can't shoot at any fighters.
Authors note: When you have a lot of fighters giving support it becomes incredibly time consuming and tedious to assign them to their formations - i think you should make it so that fighters on ground support are automatically distributed to FFDs (6 per) that are in formations doing frontline attack (and maybe extend that to frontline defence too) and leave the fine tuning up to the player. This could also allow extra fighters to automatically replace downed ones as combat progresses.
P.S: If this is a problem I can work around without getting the next patch please let me know, like if its the AtA pods not having a valid target I'll just swap it out for another pod.
Second problem: I unnasigned the CAS to continue combat and now everytime I try to open ground OOB during combat I get:
Function #2355: Object reference not set to an instance of an object - this is preventing me from opening the ground OOB tab and persists beyond the ground combat (saving the game seems to have fixed the persistence but not the cause. I had also sent all fleets home so idk how I prevented the error from being thrown everytime I opened the OOB)
Edit: I think the second problem is related to unassigning fighters from supporting a formation - the references aren't being cleaned up properly.
I've taken a planet from a precursor civilization.
Landed my own colonists on the planet.
It now has political status 'occupied' or 'subjugated' and unrest increases without military presence.
There's no aliens left alive on the planet though...
That is working as intended as it is the alien colony. There is nothing to stop you creating your own colony though on the same planet.
How do I do that?
AFAIK there's a single colony (mine) that's human species. The aliens were precursors.
I tried clicking 'create colony' on the system window, but I dont seem to get another colony.
Will I need to remove the previous one first?
Unsure if WAI, but with No Maintenance enabled, ships will still suffer maintenance failures during combat, consuming MSP if available as normal. The description for the No Maintenance toggle makes it seem like this shouldn't be the case.
Im pretty sure this is WAI but you are right that "no maintenance" should be called something like "no overhauls"
Minor bug, if you have a tanker set to refuel a fleet and the fleet has a ship with fuel (for instance a tractor orbital hab) it throws a #854 attempted divide by zero.
The function number: #483, followed by #1367
The complete error text:
Function #483: exception of the type system outofmemoryexception was thrown
Function #1367: object reference not set to an instance of an object
The window affected: Aurora bootup (opening the game)
What you were doing at the time: opening the game
Conventional or TN start: TN
Random or Real Stars: Real
Is your decimal separator a comma?: Switched it to period, never had this issue before
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?: one-off, first time it happened
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: over 120 years
1.8I am having a similar issue in a test game, the civilians from two different races refuse to trade with each other even though supply and demand do exist. This could potentially be because of sharing a homeworld, so I'll do another test to see if having different homeworlds will solve this issue.
To add to the list of missing functions, it appears like civilian trade between races just doesn't happen.
I have a multi-earth start, every race is set to 200 relations, and toggled to allow trade.
Every race has civilian freighters.
Two races have idle freighters when there is fur demand on Earth A and fur supply on Earth B. Very poor capitalists.
Edit: Mercury also has a fur demand and the fur suppliers are not willing to trade.
I've already posted an issue with this, The Added jump point isn't visible in the system window, which it probably should be when spacemaster is on as "unsurveyed"", and Furthermore there is a bug where the new jump point is literally undiscoverable if the system was already fully surveyed . (At least when spacemaster mode is used to survey). I havent tested if it also applies if the new points are added before every jump point is finished, or if the entire system is surveyed manually, but I suspect that might still be the case.V1. 8. 0 created a new game, had two JPs in Sol, then both systems had no jump points after survey. Turned on SM and tried to 'Add Jump Point" in System Generation and Display screen, it did nothing. . . is it turned on? "Change Position" seemed to work.After adding a jump point you'll need to re-do the survey since the JPs aren't defaulted to visible.
The Medals screen only appears to have an area for ribbons to be awarded - on the left side towards the bottom.
Where is the facility to award actual medals as Aurora 4X
Trying to use medals from Aurora 4X or other peoples medal downloads just compresses and distorts the medal image in the ribbon area.
DavidR
It seems that when completing new ships when there is not enough MSP to fill them, makes all the fuel disappear from the colony.
I was poking around in the database, and made the simplest possible tech-tree:
(http://db48x.net/temp/Aurora Tech Tree.svg)
I can't help but notice that the "Power Boost 60%" and "Max Squadron Jump Radius - 2500k" techs have a prerequisite with no name, which means that the tech isn't in the database. Perhaps these are typos, or places where the tech tree has been edited to remove something?
A quick test in SM mode shows that you can't get to those techs by researching the earlier ones. Thanks!
Edit: also "Minimal Vehicle Armour - ARM 1"
1.8.0
I am getting about 60 "function #1414: value was too high or too low for a decimal" every turn for 5 to 10 turns.
I'm running your game without errors. However, I had to delete GravS6 to get the game to load. Maybe that was causing the problem.
I kept playing the same game and the same error appeared again.
It happened right after that the fleet Tug tractored the ship Cat 002 back home. In the fleet organization window, I have split the ship Cat 002 away from the Tug fleet and now when I click on this fleet, ScoutS2 in the naval organisation window, I get two errors: "#2976 value was too high or too low for a decimal" followed by "#916 value was too high or too low for a decimal". This fleet is composed of a single ship with 0 fuel which is ordered to refuel and resupply on the planet it is orbiting, but it won't do it for some reason.
When I load the game I get error 1171 and 1367 with "Can not perform a cast of DBnull item into other types" text. Errors are gone again and apparently ScoutS2 is gone this time. Could it be linked to the merging of fleets? Could the game keep track of the fleet that was automatically merged with the Tug fleet when I tractored the single ship of the ScoutS2 fleet and en error occured when I recreated a fleet with the same name?
This is almost a cosmetic thing. When you open the commander window and then change the viewing empire, the commander sorter Minimum Rank and Maximum Rank dropdowns don't update to the now viewing empire - the dropdowns keep the ranks of the empire that opened the window. Changing the commander type updates the ranks dropdowns.
Game Creation bug:
1) Click new game . . .
2) set "earth Mineral Deposits) to any other number above 100.
3) check minerals on earth
-> its the same no matter what is set (didnt test below 100)
Current fix: space master mod to set them manually :(
Sincerely
Game Creation bug:
1) Click new game . . .
2) set "earth Mineral Deposits) to any other number above 100.
3) check minerals on earth
-> its the same no matter what is set (didnt test below 100)
Current fix: space master mod to set them manually :(
Sincerely
What is the actual error and how do you know the minerals are not being generated correctly?
They should be different each game and it would be hard to tell if 80 or 120 are making a difference without checking a lot of samples.
The function number:
when loading up: #1170
once game has opened: #3060, appears 4 times
The complete error text:
1170: object cannot be converted from dbnull to other types
3060 (all 4 windows): object reference not set to an instance of an object
actual error: a whole bloody system disappeared, no bodies remain except the star
also, all of my ground units disappeared
had to reset windows for the Events window not to have the 'white screen' error anymore
The window affected: -
What you were doing at the time: opened aurora and loaded saved game
Conventional or TN start: TN
Random or Real Stars: Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma?: changed to period
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?: just look at the DB ;)
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: ~125 years
The function number - #407
The complete error text - Object reference not set to an instance of an object.
The window affected - Main window.
What you were doing at the time - Clicking 30 days.
Conventional or TN start - Conventional.
Random or Real Stars - Random.
Is your decimal separator a comma? - No a .
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off? - Seems pretty random.
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well - 71 Years
Db attached, click 30 days and you should get the error.
Quote from: Steve Walmsley link=topic=10990. msg128511#msg128511 date=1587994767Quote from: RedDagger link=topic=10990. msg128509#msg128509 date=1587994010I took a gander at DIM_PlanetaryTerrain in the database, I think I spotted a typo.
Not sure what you are looking at, but that isn't the table from the normal Aurora. db. Do you have some type of mod running?
I extracted the data from DIM_PlanetaryTerrain and put in a spreadsheet to see it more easily. Here a print of the table.
I gave an order to stabilzie a lagrange point on a planet.
Then I cancelled all orders for that fleet.
Afterwards I was unable to give the stabilize lagrange point order on that same body again.
Option simply didn't appear.
The function number:
when loading up: #1170
once game has opened: #3060, appears 4 times
The complete error text:
1170: object cannot be converted from dbnull to other types
3060 (all 4 windows): object reference not set to an instance of an object
actual error: a whole bloody system disappeared, no bodies remain except the star
also, all of my ground units disappeared
had to reset windows for the Events window not to have the 'white screen' error anymore
The window affected: -
What you were doing at the time: opened aurora and loaded saved game
Conventional or TN start: TN
Random or Real Stars: Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma?: changed to period
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?: just look at the DB ;)
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: ~125 years
This was another game with nulls replacing some doubles in the database.
Did you change to period for the decimal separator before you started the game?
Getting a lot of error messages with "Function #858: Attempted to divide by zero" when passing time on the tactical map. Happens again when I save and restart the game.
1. 8 Random stars, TN start with 1 NPR, 10 years into the game
Using UK windows settings
DB attached
AFAIK you can override the decimal separator, or check that it is set correct.
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.globalization.numberformatinfo.numberdecimalseparator?view=netcore-3.1
Just so that you don't need to chase know issues
AFAIK you can override the decimal separator, or check that it is set correct.
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.globalization.numberformatinfo.numberdecimalseparator?view=netcore-3.1
Just so that you don't need to chase know issues
At the moment, the game is using the local separator, which works most of the time but fails when I populate fields that include decimal points. I also tried to interpret the content of a text field and decide which to use based on user intention, but that fails for non-decimal because the thousand separator looks like a decimal point. Finally, I could populate fields based on the local separator but that might cause confusion for people who do enter the periods even when their system is set to comma.
The problem is confusion between the two. I think the simplest thing is to force the game to use periods and inform the user when their separator is set to comma that it will cause problems in the game.
The function number:
when loading up: #1170
once game has opened: #3060, appears 4 times
The complete error text:
1170: object cannot be converted from dbnull to other types
3060 (all 4 windows): object reference not set to an instance of an object
actual error: a whole bloody system disappeared, no bodies remain except the star
also, all of my ground units disappeared
had to reset windows for the Events window not to have the 'white screen' error anymore
The window affected: -
What you were doing at the time: opened aurora and loaded saved game
Conventional or TN start: TN
Random or Real Stars: Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma?: changed to period
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?: just look at the DB ;)
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: ~125 years
This was another game with nulls replacing some doubles in the database.
Did you change to period for the decimal separator before you started the game?
Quote from: Guridan link=topic=10990. msg128501#msg128501 date=1587991483Getting a lot of error messages with "Function #858: Attempted to divide by zero" when passing time on the tactical map. Happens again when I save and restart the game.
1. 8 Random stars, TN start with 1 NPR, 10 years into the game
Using UK windows settings
DB attached
Running without problems - I think this might be have been related to a bug I fixed when you try to refuel ships without fuel capacity.
The function number: #917
The complete error text: Value too big or too small for Int32
The window affected: Main game window
What you were doing at the time: Refueling ships and setting Join Fleet Order
Conventional or TN start: Conventional
Random or Real Stars: Random
Is your decimal separator a comma?: Yes
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?: Constant
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: 160 years long
I was able to save the game and remove the orders. Error stopped.
At the moment, the game is using the local separator, which works most of the time but fails when I populate fields that include decimal points. I also tried to interpret the content of a text field and decide which to use based on user intention, but that fails for non-decimal because the thousand separator looks like a decimal point. Finally, I could populate fields based on the local separator but that might cause confusion for people who do enter the periods even when their system is set to comma.
The problem is confusion between the two. I think the simplest thing is to force the game to use periods and inform the user when their separator is set to comma that it will cause problems in the game.
There have been several suggestions which would be better than that alternative. If you don't want to fix it properly, you can simply set the decimal separator to whatever you want, and then you don't have to rely on the user to set it up correctly.
My ship got destroyed, the commander managed to escape to a lifeboat, she was looking forward to a slow death from asphyxiation. But the bureaucratic machine never sleeps and she was immediately assigned to a new post (automated assignments turned ON).
I guess it can be done manually too, but somehow it feels wrong that the pencil pushers have power over space-time ;)
1.8.0
I am getting about 60 "function #1414: value was too high or too low for a decimal" every turn for 5 to 10 turns.
I'm running your game without errors. However, I had to delete GravS6 to get the game to load. Maybe that was causing the problem.
I kept playing the same game and the same error appeared again.
It happened right after that the fleet Tug tractored the ship Cat 002 back home. In the fleet organization window, I have split the ship Cat 002 away from the Tug fleet and now when I click on this fleet, ScoutS2 in the naval organisation window, I get two errors: "#2976 value was too high or too low for a decimal" followed by "#916 value was too high or too low for a decimal". This fleet is composed of a single ship with 0 fuel which is ordered to refuel and resupply on the planet it is orbiting, but it won't do it for some reason.
When I load the game I get error 1171 and 1367 with "Can not perform a cast of DBnull item into other types" text. Errors are gone again and apparently ScoutS2 is gone this time. Could it be linked to the merging of fleets? Could the game keep track of the fleet that was automatically merged with the Tug fleet when I tractored the single ship of the ScoutS2 fleet and en error occured when I recreated a fleet with the same name?
Nulls are appearing in your db for some double values. Do you have the comma as your decimal separator?
I tried creating 100 mines on my new colony on Mars. Got the attached error. Pretty sure it was due to the completion date being beyond 9999 since after clicking OK on the error message the screen showed "error" where it should have showed the completion date.
Quote from: Cobaia link=topic=10990. msg128608#msg128608 date=1588009145The function number: #917
The complete error text: Value too big or too small for Int32
The window affected: Main game window
What you were doing at the time: Refueling ships and setting Join Fleet Order
Conventional or TN start: Conventional
Random or Real Stars: Random
Is your decimal separator a comma?: Yes
Is the bug is easy to reproduce, intermittent or a one-off?: Constant
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well: 160 years long
I was able to save the game and remove the orders. Error stopped.
I think it was related to movement toward a very distant target. I've changed the value I think was the problem from an integer to a double.
Function #1821: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
Scenario: Epsilon Indi system ground combat against precursor outpost defenders - initial precursor force 20k tons and 2k STO, friendly ground forces is a mechanized assault brigade consisting of mostly mechanized with some armoured forces at around 100k tons (including logistics). STOs are firing at a battlecruiser in orbit and missing and orbiting warships are not doing any form of orbital bombardment.
Ground forces have 80 CAS fighters in orbit on ground support missions. 24 of those fighters are committed to supporting 2 armoured companies and 2 mechanized companies - all 4 of those formations are on frontline attack.
The exception is thrown every combat round - it seems to be preventing any CAS from firing since they still have all their ordnance - ground combat continued until 600 tons of enemy was left but would not progress further (telling the CAS to stop fixed it and the outpost was conquered). Similar exceptions also thrown when CAS fighters are on other ground missions.
Each CAS fighter consists of 2 size 12 strafing pods, 1 size 12 bombardment pod and 1 size 12 AtA pod. There are no precursor ground fighters present.
DB attached - planet of interest is Epsilon indi A-IV, the fighters should already be set to ground support so just play it for the next 8 hours and see what happens.
Edit: I just swapped out the AtA pods for a second bombardment pod - same result, its not because the AtA can't shoot at any fighters.
Authors note: When you have a lot of fighters giving support it becomes incredibly time consuming and tedious to assign them to their formations - i think you should make it so that fighters on ground support are automatically distributed to FFDs (6 per) that are in formations doing frontline attack (and maybe extend that to frontline defence too) and leave the fine tuning up to the player. This could also allow extra fighters to automatically replace downed ones as combat progresses.
P.S: If this is a problem I can work around without getting the next patch please let me know, like if its the AtA pods not having a valid target I'll just swap it out for another pod.
Second problem: I unnasigned the CAS to continue combat and now everytime I try to open ground OOB during combat I get:
Function #2355: Object reference not set to an instance of an object - this is preventing me from opening the ground OOB tab and persists beyond the ground combat (saving the game seems to have fixed the persistence but not the cause. I had also sent all fleets home so idk how I prevented the error from being thrown everytime I opened the OOB)
Edit: I think the second problem is related to unassigning fighters from supporting a formation - the references aren't being cleaned up properly.
The 1821 was caused by code that allowed the parent formations of formations attacked by CAS to respond with AA fire. Unfortunately, the code did not allow for the parent formation not to exist. Thanks for the DB.
2355 is the code that opens windows from the toolbar. Not sure that is throwing an error.
Hmm, it seems I can just stack more and more LG infrastructure on a LG world and have unlimited population capacity, regardless of the world's size.
Attached is a screenshot of Ceres with SM'd LG infrastructure. The population doesn't seem to be growing but it's not shrinking either, however, the theoretical capacity isn't limited to the 70m the System Generation and Display window suggests.
Is that intended?
I'm not sure if this is an issue unique to me but after not finding any NPRs to fight with gen chance set to 80% and discovering more than 80 systems, I decided to spawn one in manually using SM mode. It builds ships and colonies and seems to be exploiting its home system, but it hasn't left its home system. It's even scanned and knows of the four jump points, but it has never explored any of them. It's made 10 colonies and more than 40 years.
Thanks Steve for the incredible amount of work that you put into the new version and for sharing it with us.
I don't know if this was reported but I couldn't find it:
When designing a new Freighter class, adding several Cargo Holds makes the Build Time (yrs) behave erratically, even substracting years when Cargo Holds are being added. Removing Cargo Holds from the design makes the Build Time longer.
It seems that it would take longer to build a 50k tons ship than a 150k tons ship.
Is that WAI?
Thanks Steve for the incredible amount of work that you put into the new version and for sharing it with us.
I don't know if this was reported but I couldn't find it:
When designing a new Freighter class, adding several Cargo Holds makes the Build Time (yrs) behave erratically, even substracting years when Cargo Holds are being added. Removing Cargo Holds from the design makes the Build Time longer.
It seems that it would take longer to build a 50k tons ship than a 150k tons ship.
Is that WAI?
Quote from: moncu7 link=topic=10990. msg128760#msg128760 date=1588067395Thanks Steve for the incredible amount of work that you put into the new version and for sharing it with us.
I don't know if this was reported but I couldn't find it:
When designing a new Freighter class, adding several Cargo Holds makes the Build Time (yrs) behave erratically, even substracting years when Cargo Holds are being added. Removing Cargo Holds from the design makes the Build Time longer.
It seems that it would take longer to build a 50k tons ship than a 150k tons ship.
Is that WAI?
Larger ships can be built more quickly on a per-BP basis, so building a 150k ship does not take 3x longer than a 50k ship. There is a 'Build Rate' on the shipyard task list. Of course, you need a larger shipyard to build larger ships.
In real life, building a patrol boat is not linear in terms of time vs size compared to building a supertanker, because the yard building each one is intended for that task. There will be a lot more people and equipment dedicated to building the supertanker so it will progress faster per unit of cost.
Building a 150k ship that costs 1500 BP will still take longer than a 50k ship that costs 500 BP, just not 3x as long. However, a 150k ship that costs 500 BP will be faster than a 50k ship that costs 500 BP. At some point in-between there is a cross-over and this is likely to happen with large, low-cost components such as cargo holds.
Tarantul IIM class Missile Boat 5,989 tons 176 Crew 2,302.8 BP TCS 120 TH 157 EM 0
10895 km/s JR 1-50 Armour 1-29 Shields 0-0 HTK 43 Sensors 14/28/0/0 DCR 35 PPV 80
Maint Life 2.75 Years MSP 1,721 AFR 52% IFR 0.7% 1YR 328 5YR 4,922 Max Repair 1631.25 MSP
Magazine 80
Kapitan vtorogo ranga Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months Morale Check Required
OKB-640 6000M83 FTL drive Max Ship Size 6000 tons Distance 50k km Squadron Size 1
Design Bureau 632 RVS-1305 Fusion thruster (1) Power 1305 Fuel Use 35.80% Signature 156.60 Explosion 14%
Fuel Capacity 350,000 Litres Range 29.4 billion km (31 days at full power)
AK-676M (2x10) Range 1000 km TS: 20,000 km/s ROF 5
P-65 VLS system (8) Missile Size: 10 Hangar Reload 158 minutes MF Reload 26 hours
P-65 Guidance system (1) Range 73.3m km Resolution 100
P-70 "Kukushka" (8) Speed: 70,200 km/s End: 11.3m Range: 47.7m km WH: 10 Size: 10 TH: 234/140/70
NR41/R50 Nav. Radar (1) GPS 1400 Range 41.2m km Resolution 50
Perimetr Early Warning System (1) GPS 28 Range 11.2m km MCR 1.2m km Resolution 1
Active search radar MR103R100 (1) GPS 11200 Range 103.7m km Resolution 100
EM sensor E2-M083 (1) Sensitivity 28 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 41.8m km
IR sensor T1-M85 (1) Sensitivity 14 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 29.6m km
ECM 10
Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Tarantul III class Missile Boat 5,989 tons 177 Crew 2,306.2 BP TCS 120 TH 157 EM 0
10895 km/s JR 1-500 Armour 1-29 Shields 0-0 HTK 43 Sensors 14/28/0/0 DCR 36 PPV 80
Maint Life 3.03 Years MSP 1,844 AFR 48% IFR 0.7% 1YR 301 5YR 4,511 Max Repair 1631.25 MSP
Magazine 80
Kapitan vtorogo ranga Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months Morale Check Required
OKB-640 6000M92 FTL drive Max Ship Size 6000 tons Distance 500k km Squadron Size 1
Design Bureau 632 RVS-1305 Fusion thruster (1) Power 1305 Fuel Use 35.80% Signature 156.60 Explosion 14%
Fuel Capacity 350,000 Litres Range 29.4 billion km (31 days at full power)
AK-676M (2x10) Range 1000 km TS: 20,000 km/s ROF 5
P-65 VLS system (8) Missile Size: 10 Hangar Reload 158 minutes MF Reload 26 hours
P-65 Guidance system (1) Range 73.3m km Resolution 100
P-70 "Kukushka" (8) Speed: 70,200 km/s End: 11.3m Range: 47.7m km WH: 10 Size: 10 TH: 234/140/70
NR41/R50 Nav. Radar (1) GPS 1400 Range 41.2m km Resolution 50
Perimetr Early Warning System (1) GPS 28 Range 11.2m km MCR 1.2m km Resolution 1
Active search radar MR103R100 (1) GPS 11200 Range 103.7m km Resolution 100
EM sensor E2-M083 (1) Sensitivity 28 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 41.8m km
IR sensor T1-M85 (1) Sensitivity 14 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 29.6m km
ECM 10
Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposesNablyudat class Resupply Base 141,774 tons 1,318 Crew 9,709 BP TCS 2,835 TH 0 EM 0
1 km/s Armour 10-242 Shields 0-0 HTK 198 Sensors 14/14/0/0 DCR 41 PPV 0
MSP 20,042 Max Repair 200 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 30,000 tons Troop Capacity 1,000 tons Magazine 2,000 Cargo Shuttle Multiplier 18
Kapitan pervogo ranga Control Rating 4 BRG ENG CIC PFC
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months Flight Crew Berths 600
Maintenance Modules: 10 module(s) capable of supporting ships of 32,000 tons
Fuel Capacity 10,000,000 Litres Range N/A
Refuelling Capability: 100,000 litres per hour Complete Refuel 100 hours
AK-676M (10x10) Range 1000 km TS: 20,000 km/s ROF 5
P-70 "Kukushka" (200) Speed: 70,200 km/s End: 11.3m Range: 47.7m km WH: 10 Size: 10 TH: 234/140/70
Ordnance Transfer Rate: 80 MSP per hour Complete Transfer 25 hours
Perimetr Early Warning System (2) GPS 28 Range 11.2m km MCR 1.2m km Resolution 1
IR sensor T1-M85 (1) Sensitivity 14 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 29.6m km
EM Sensor E1-M85 (1) Sensitivity 14 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 29.6m km
Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s
This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposesQuote from: Steve Walmsley link=topic=10990. msg128611#msg128611 date=1588009620Quote from: Guridan link=topic=10990. msg128501#msg128501 date=1587991483Getting a lot of error messages with "Function #858: Attempted to divide by zero" when passing time on the tactical map. Happens again when I save and restart the game.
1. 8 Random stars, TN start with 1 NPR, 10 years into the game
Using UK windows settings
DB attached
Running without problems - I think this might be have been related to a bug I fixed when you try to refuel ships without fuel capacity.
That could very well be, I did have some tugs moving some of my terraformers and they had a refuel scheduled on the way to their destination.
Version : 1.8
Random Stars
Game Start - SM Galaxy Generation
This problem started in 1.7, but is still present in 1.8
Systems don't link to existing systems, or at least are exceptionally unlikely to. They don't seem to be following local system rules, and will generate beyond the maximum system limit.
I mapped two galaxies, the first in 1.8 C#, the second in 7.1 vb6.
My settings were random stars, 20 galaxy limit, 50%/15 for local connections.
vb6 you get the stringy mess I love so much. There are only 20 available systems. Force generating more causes a crash. Forcing new jump points just makes more connections to the existing systems.
In 1.8 you get lines of systems that simply extend from Sol (or whatever your start point) endlessly, never connecting. It seems to completely ignore the system limit when *exploring*, but if you try to force generate over 20 it still crashes.
That does look very odd. Anyone else have a similar problem in Random Stars?