v1.13.0 Bugs Thread

[Ancalagon]

Choosing to build a ship using pre-fabricated components, and then canceling the ship construction, does not return the pre-fabricated components to you. I found out when I canceled construction very early on (fixing a minor design issue) and reissued the construction commands, and suddenly had to wait 3 extra years for them to build. I feel like this is less than ideal.

SJW: This is WAI. If you are halfway through a normal ship construction and cancel it, nothing is returned either.

[nuclearslurpee]

Choosing to build a ship using pre-fabricated components, and then canceling the ship construction, does not return the pre-fabricated components to you. I found out when I canceled construction very early on (fixing a minor design issue) and reissued the construction commands, and suddenly had to wait 3 extra years for them to build. I feel like this is less than ideal.

It's unfortunate, but not a bug. The information that the ship was built with XYZ components is simply not stored once the construction begins. The components are consumed, the construction time and resources adjusted as needed, and that's the end of it. WAD, though perhaps not exactly WAI.

As I don't believe you can SM components to a planetary stockpile it may be a suitable workaround to re-build the components from factories and use SM to add the materials back to your stockpiles.

[Ancalagon]

Choosing to build a ship using pre-fabricated components, and then canceling the ship construction, does not return the pre-fabricated components to you. I found out when I canceled construction very early on (fixing a minor design issue) and reissued the construction commands, and suddenly had to wait 3 extra years for them to build. I feel like this is less than ideal.

It's unfortunate, but not a bug. The information that the ship was built with XYZ components is simply not stored once the construction begins. The components are consumed, the construction time and resources adjusted as needed, and that's the end of it. WAD, though perhaps not exactly WAI.

As I don't believe you can SM components to a planetary stockpile it may be a suitable workaround to re-build the components from factories and use SM to add the materials back to your stockpiles.

That's why I reported it.

[Ancalagon]

I'm 100+ years into a game, and the past few years I have been getting this error box once per construction cycle:



What is this error signifying?

Edit: This is an Earth in-spiral 0.01 AU/year game.

Edit Edit: It looks like this error is probably caused after the Earth/moon system is destroyed. The disaster appears to still be "enabled", but there is no longer an Earth to move closer to the sun. Disabling the disaster in the settings seems to have fixed the #1552 error.

SJW: Fixed for v1.14

[Black]

Ground Combat Command is still presend in Commanders window as parameter in right-down part where you can sort commander.

SJW: Fixed for v1.14

[Ancalagon]

I got two or three #2939 errors while processing the turn (I was expecting a new system to be jumped into and generated), and then the game froze for 10 minutes. I don't think it's going to recover, so I had to force-close it and resume from my last save a few minutes prior.

[Ancalagon]

There does not seem to be any place in C# to flag a system as having a "Suspected Dormant Jump Point" like there was in VB6. There is no place to set this flag on the Galaxy Map, System Map, or in the System Bodies Window.

[Zap0]

There does not seem to be any place in C# to flag a system as having a "Suspected Dormant Jump Point" like there was in VB6. There is no place to set this flag on the Galaxy Map, System Map, or in the System Bodies Window.

There is, not sure if it has any function though. Toggling it didn't seem to make it stick active for that system.

[Ancalagon]

There does not seem to be any place in C# to flag a system as having a "Suspected Dormant Jump Point" like there was in VB6. There is no place to set this flag on the Galaxy Map, System Map, or in the System Bodies Window.

There is, not sure if it has any function though. Toggling it didn't seem to make it stick active for that system.

That is just for display. There is no way to toggle the flag for the system (that anyone can find).

[Ancalagon]

Obfuscation strikes again! When my active search sensor passed over the hidden jump gate, it was detected. The game log displayed it thusly:



"New jump point detected in i4"

SJW: Fixed for v1.14. This will only affect the specific situation of detecting a transit through an unknown jump point.

[IanD]

The function number; 1.13.0
The complete error text; n/a
The window affected; various
What you were doing at the time; scrapping ships, exploring, systems missing comets,
Conventional or TN start
Random or Real Stars
Is your decimal separator a comma?  decimal separator
Is the bug is easy to reproduce; intermittent or a one-off? scrapping easy, missing comets intermittent, few warp points?
If this is a long campaign - say 75 years or longer - let me know the length of the campaign as well; 43 years


Potential bug 1: After you mark a ship design as obsolete those ships of that design no longer show up in shipyard lists for scrapping. Un-obsolete  them and they show up.

Potential bug 2; I set minimum number of comets per system as 10. However a number of systems appear cometless. This may be working as intended.

Potential bug 3; In setup I changed local system generation spread from 15 to 7 or 8 (tried both). I found that warp points were very sparse. that 7 local system generation spread game ran out of warp points at 15-20 systems (game deleted). The 8 local system generation spread found a maximum of 2 systems with 3 warp points the rest had 1 or 2 warp points for a total of 23 systems. With only 1 unexplored warp point left I changed local system generation spread to 15. I now have 55 systems explored with 10 systems having more than 2 warp points plus 6 systems not yet fully explored. However this may be working as intended.

SJW: #1 Can't reproduce. #2 Fixed. #3 Number of JP and Local Generation not related.

[Ancalagon]

A user on the discord playing a very small galaxy of 25 stars found a natural jump point that led to the same system it was in.

[Ancalagon]

Fleet history is greatly slowing down the save speed of my 100+ year game. For the first time since reinstalling 1.13 from scratch, I opened up the database in an SQL editor and deleted all but the most recent fleet history, which amounted to around 240,000 entries. There were also an inordinate number of GameLog messages about NPR fleets running out of fuel.

Once I deleted all log entries of those two types, saving my game went from 13 seconds before, to just 6 seconds after cleaning the database. (On an SSD, with a top-tier CPU)

I would recommend wiping Fleet History for civilian shipping lines after some number of years (10? 20?) and same with NPRs. Player naval fleet histories should be kept forever.

SJW: Suggestions rather than Bugs. However, I have removed NPR and Shipping Line fleet histories beyond five years.

[Ancalagon]

It can be a bit of a hassle to maximize your FAC design (quite frustratingly so!), because each time you go over 1,000 tons a bridge is automatically added, and in 1.13 it is still possible that you can't remove a bridge even though it would take you back under 1,000 tons when it is very, very close to the 1,000-ton limit. I assume this is because it isn't taking into account the armor or crew quarters that would also be removed when the bridge is taken off.

If there were something like a toggleable checkbox on the right side of the ship design window that says "

• No Bridge" and simply prevents a bridge from being automatically added to your ship design, that would solve this annoyance in a pretty reasonable way.

SJW: Suggestion rather than Bug. However, I have changed the automatic bridge code in a different way: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=12523.msg151016#msg151016

[nuclearslurpee]

It can be a bit of a hassle to maximize your FAC design (quite frustratingly so!), because each time you go over 1,000 tons a bridge is automatically added, and in 1.13 it is still possible that you can't remove a bridge even though it would take you back under 1,000 tons when it is very, very close to the 1,000-ton limit. I assume this is because it isn't taking into account the armor or crew quarters that would also be removed when the bridge is taken off.

If there were something like a toggleable checkbox on the right side of the ship design window that says "

• No Bridge" and simply prevents a bridge from being automatically added to your ship design, that would solve this annoyance in a pretty reasonable way.

This really belongs in the suggestions thread but I support it anyways.