v1.8.0 Bugs Thread 1.8.0bugs

[DFNewb]

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.

[Iceranger]

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#msg102804

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.

As 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).

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

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.   

Order delay now implemented. It is working with cycle orders, repeat orders and templates.

This is a DB change so the next version will be v1.9.0. This may be a day or two, because this release seems to have fewer bugs so I am not in any rush.

[Eretzu]

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.

[k]

a terraform bug.   You can SM add none as a gas

V1. 8. 0 new game,16 year in, TN start and default setting

[HeroicHan]

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.

[DFNewb]

In a previous bug thread you mentioned removing the auto turn breaker for fighter construction cause at some point you are gonna be making fighters every construction phase if you choose to go that route.
I notice it still remains in 1.8 as making a fighter produces the ship construction event which stops auto turns.

Also Civilian scrapping and replacing sometimes stops auto-turns, and it some times does not. I have not been able to pinpoint why this happens yet but it does not seem consistent in 1.8. Has anyone else noticed this?

If possible it would be nice to have auto-turns stop when a new civil mining colony opens up but not when one gets more complexes. When new ones open up I like to set them right away to purchase minerals and I think a lot of other players do too.

[DFNewb]

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.

EDIT:

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., 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.

Looks like its WAI.

I went through all the ground combat posts and nowhere is it mentioned that commander bonuses go into the smaller formations so either it's not in yet or it will never be in.

[HeroicHan]

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?

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.

[DFNewb]

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?

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.

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:

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., 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.

[Droll]

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"

[Eretzu]

Sry if already reported.  1. 8. 0

In Ground Forces window, STO Targeting tab.  When changing the formation targeting, it does not update in Target Type column, but needs window refresh.

[HeroicHan]

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:

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., 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.

And it may be.
But then why have GCC limits of 1,000,000?
If there are no trickle down bonuses, a top level general can command your entire forces just as effectively with a GCC of 5,000 or a GCC of 1,000,000. It only seems to affect his direct formation.

[baller deluxe]

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.

[DFNewb]

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.

People asked for this. It would be nice if it checked if the ship has TWO standing orders before giving the message tho.