Any more bug reports?
 

Not asking what features you would like to see added.(droens, etc.) Let's try to keep this thread just to actual bug's. Things that are obviously not working the way they are supposed to.

Even if you've already reported it to Malfador, let's hear about it. Maybe we can get some confirmation of the problem and try and get it fixed.

A lot has been fixed in the patch that's being beta tested right now. (See Latest Patch Status thread for details.) So maybe it's already fixed and you just don't know it cause the patch hasn't been released yet. (I have no idea when that will be by the way.)

Let's get it out there and try to get it fixed.

Geoschmo

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

here are a few:

stellar ability, star unstable does not work. assign any number to value one, nothing ever happens. the star does not explode.

map editor, starting positions. only the first one for each empire is used, multiple starting positions are ignored.

intel sounds like its being fixed.

many ability types are not checked for on units, IE boarding parties on fighters.

AI followthrough, after an AI player accepts a demand or request, it does not do anything to actually follow through. ever.

map editor, lots of little bugs. stelar objects from deleted systems appear at random in other systems. sometimes errors occur when generating cluster quadrants, and some other types. these quadrants can be generated with the game its self, then saved and edited in the map editor. for some reason I can not generate a 200 system cluster quadrant (and others..) with the editor though.

------------------
"...the green, sticky spawn of the stars"
(with apologies to H.P.L.)

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

Loading a SEQUENTIAL movement game from the command prompt leaves all vehicles with Zero movement remaining.

Reloading the same file within SE4 makes the movement appear.

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

A few more:

-AI does not use Master Computers.

-AI can be traded blind. i.e.: Trade empty ships for fully armed warships and loaded transports.

-I have *heard* shrines do not work at all (*I don’t play religious, so I am not sure*).

-Apparent uselessness of fighters and seekers (Perhaps the PDC is meant to eclipse them).

EDIT:

-Stock AI does not invade planets with troops.

[This message has been edited by Intruder13 (edited 08 October 2001).]

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

Fate shrines don't work, but the others do.

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

The carry-over bug. It used to happen any time you used shift-click to move several ships. That was sort-of fixed, but it still happens when you use shift-click to move several ships/fleets into combat. It's easy to duplicate. Just shift-click several ships/fleets and attack something. When combat is over, if you survive http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif, all except the very first item in the list will have 'ghost' orders to attack the sector they are currently in and if you execute your turn without clearing them they will each attack again. This could be a disaster if you can't afford to stir up more trouble. More likely it's just tedious as hell to have to click "next turn" 30 * <number of items in list>...


[This message has been edited by Baron Munchausen (edited 08 October 2001).]

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Intruder13:
A few more:

-AI does not use Master Computers.

-AI can be traded blind. i.e.: Trade empty ships for fully armed warships and loaded transports.

-I have *heard* shrines do not work at all (*I don’t play religious, so I am not sure*).

-Apparent uselessness of fighters and seekers (Perhaps the PDC is meant to eclipse them).

EDIT:

-Stock AI does not invade planets with troops.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The AI will use Master Computers if you just put the ability in the Misc. abilities list like any other ability you want the ship to have. The bug is that it will not remove the standard ship control components when a Master Computer is added.

Fighters are far from useless, at least in my personal mod. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif Give them good mini-shields and boost their weapon power a bit. They can be fairly powerful and can be massed in huge numbers since they don't pay maintenance. They do suffer if the game limit for units is set low.

Yes, seekers are pretty much toast if you are using a modded AI that uses more PDC and everyone has level V PDC. All of the possible solutions to make seekers more effective would either make them too powerful early in the game or would make fighters near invincible as a side-effect. This is a serious balance problem.

[This message has been edited by Baron Munchausen (edited 08 October 2001).]

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

1. Stratigy "Capture Planet" does not work when fully loaded troop transports are present in the fleet.
2. Sometimes large planets images are used but with small planet statistics. IE medium planet image, but can only hold 5 facilities. (Race Breathable)
3. Sometimes game will crash or lock up if you start to set up a game, but then choose not to play, and click Quit.
4. AI will not press its advantage. IE, it will enter a system, but not attack.
5. AI Races that are you allies always show "Murderous" in attitude toward you. Why is that, and if that is the case, then they should break there treaty with you.
6. AI expands too rapidly.
7. AI does not use the OBSOLETE function, therefore its ship roaster que is huge.
8. AI often attempts to retrofit ships that can not be retrofitted, and that results in an RCE.
9. AI does not use "Avoid System" and often will loose ship after ship to a black hole.
10. AI will only construct ships of the highest type, ie once Battleships have been discovered, that is all they will build. They do not build ships of other classes once a new class is discovered.


[This message has been edited by Atrocities (edited 08 October 2001).]

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Atrocities:
7. AI does not use the OBSOLETE function, therefore its ship roaster que is huge.
9. AI does not use "Avoid System" and often will loose ship after ship to a black hole.
10. AI will only construct ships of the highest type, ie once Battleships have been discovered, that is all they will build. They do not build ships of other classes once a new class is discovered.
[This message has been edited by Atrocities (edited 08 October 2001).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Regarding 7: It does for me. No problem here.
Regarding 9: That's because a black hole system is not per se a "avoid system". You have to manually set it to be so (and the Ai, of course, never does).
Regarding 10: It's not a bug, it's a feature. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

I agree with Atrocities. Even when you toggle "Avoid System" it only partially works. Colony ships and Transports avoid the system while warships merrily destroy themselves. I often bulid a few scouts and put them on autopilot. I dread it when a black hole winds up close by. Eventually all the scout will die unless I untoggle them and micromanage the exploration they could do. If a black hole is not found they do a great job sometimes Lasting most of the way through the game.

Another possible bug I and others have encountered on PBW(Simo Bug?) is phantom ministers. Ships/Fleets get orders you never gave or refuse your orders.(No Intel) Not all your forces just a handfull now and again. Also I have noticed that this is happening with research. It untoggles Repeat Project and fills out the research list with its own projects. Both instances the ministers were never toggled or ships/fleets put under comp control. It seem that if you activate all ministers and deactivate all ministers things go back to normal for a while. Of course this doesn't help when an experienced fleet is guarding a warpoint, disbands, then scatters in several directions.

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

1.) If your empire reached the "maximum units in space" limit, you are unable to launch fighters during combat and they are therefore almost completely useless...
except for...
2.) In ground combat it is impossible to take over a planet if fighters remain on the planet.

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

Atrocities wrote:
"1. Stratigy "Capture Planet" does not work when fully loaded troop transports are present in the fleet."
In my experience this works very well!

"6. AI expands too rapidly."

What do you mean by this???

[This message has been edited by Q (edited 08 October 2001).]

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

The "Use Component" command does not work with fleets, even if all the ships have the component installed. This makes the Emergency Propulsion Pod useless as a quick get-away device.

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

Handling resupply:

- the resupply minister will work for fleets only, didn't work when I tried it for individual ships

Attacking:

- the "attack" order does not work in sim. games if any ministers (e.g. resupply) are on for a ship/fleet.

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

Didn't someone report that some of the Cultural modifiers do not work, nameley Space Combant and one other. Racial modifiers work.

(Just noticed this was fixed in 1.45) Disregard.



[This message has been edited by Commander G2 (edited 08 October 2001).]

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

Biggest Bug in my Opinion for Simultaneous Games:

Movement in Player Ordinal Number. This gives a tremendous advantage in Warp Point conflicts. Automatic First Fire for lower ordinal position. These needs to at least be randomized.

Alternating/Incremental Movement/Firing would be better. Simultaneous movement and fire would be better, but that would undoubtably be much hard to program as damage would have to be deferred.



[This message has been edited by Commander G2 (edited 08 October 2001).]

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Q:
1.) If your empire reached the "maximum units in space" limit, you are unable to launch fighters during combat and they are therefore almost completely useless...
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Really? I'll have to test/confirm this one. My understanding was that it only stopped you from launching fighters in non-combat strategic mode, but that during combat figters would launch/be recovered as normal.

However, the new patch addresses the mines/sat's not self destructiong when ordered. This was the number one cause of hitting the units in space limit, so that alone should make this problem less serious.

Geoschmo

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

first some remarks:

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>-Stock AI does not invade planets with troops.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Some user made AI will use troops (Aquilaeian, Orks, TDM Sergetti, and the Space Vikings). However, troop transports do not always get included into attack fleets. Sometimes they sit in the home system literally forever and do nothing. Same with boarding ships. There is some problem with Attack bases (base ships) and Kamikaze ships as well, but Atraikius knows more about that.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>1. Stratigy "Capture Planet" does not work when fully loaded troop transports are present in the fleet.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I can not second this. Capture Planet works fine for me if a troop transport is present (both in my PBW games and in my tests for the Viking AI). The only problem with troop transports in the fleet is when you want to glass the planet and a troop transport is present, it doesn't work (that seems to fixed in the next patch, though).

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>6. AI expands too rapidly.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
That depends on the AI script and can be modded. (Btw, I think rapid AI expansion is a good thing.)

my bug list (mostly minister related): <UL TYPE=SQUARE>
<LI> research: the AI will research mines, after it runs into them. Not a bad thing and I would call this a feature if it would stop doing this at mines2 (or mines3 at the most), but researching mines5 in early to mid-game can really hurt the AI in getting important tech. Ergo, it is a bug.

<LI> intelligence: the choices of projects is very poor. What's the point of having 8 counter-intelligence projects against an enemy that doesn't generate intelligence points? If the AI can view all scores it should know better. Also there is no point for the AI using espionage projects, because it will just not use the obtained information.

<LI> analyze/scrap/retrofit: captured ships with research value are not analyzed. damaged captured ships with unknown racial tech are not scrapped or retrofitted.

<LI> colonization: this has been discussed before and there is an active topic right now. The improvement of the colonization minister is the most important IMHO.

<LI> cloaking: a cloaked fleet sometimes/(always?) does not decloak prior to an attack, but just move to the enemy position and do nothing. It will decloak the next turn in case of a planet, but enemy ships are likely to have moved by then.

<LI> fleets: as mentioned above, troop transports and boarding ships are not always included into fleets. Master Belisarius has stated that transports will wait for a fleet to pass through the system and then join. That works well enough sometimes, but if the transport was built in some backwater system that could take literally forever.[/list]
Rollo

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

Bug or feature?

I command a ship to fly through a black hole system with damaging warp points to a system on the other side. The ship is equipped with sufficient armor, shields and a repair component, so I'm not worried. It also has enough range to fly completely through the system and out the other warp.

HOWEVER! As soon as the ship enters the system and is damaged, it clears the orders! (I'm sure it was just the armor that was damaged, although it fixed it before I could verify there was nothing else damaged)

And if the warp point was even 1 square closer to the center (warp points appearing anywhere in system), it would have sucked my ship down before I had the chance to give it new orders! (PBW game)

------------------
-MegaTrain-
Athlon 1.3 GHz running at 1.6 GHz on an iWill KK266

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

- Cloaked ships can't remove mines. (If this is a feature, then, the AI must be fixed to decloak their cloaked minesweepers, before try to remove a minefield).

- The AI still want to lay mines, in a location with the max of unit allowed reached (in theory this was fixed in previous patches, but I'm 100% sure that it still happen).

- The AI never try to send population, to colonies that lost ALL the population (for example, after a random event, or after an enemy intel project).

- The AI never use the Resource Converters.

- The AI still want to colonize far away planets, without consider if the colony ship will have supplies or not (although some modded AI's have better colony ships).

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

Another one that's annoyed me for a long time is the 'auto-cloaked satellite group' problem with sat Groups and warp points. If there's even ONE satellite with 'stealth' armor in a sat group at a warp point, something in the code always assumes that the entire sat group is CLOAKED when enemy ships come through, even if it is not, and they can just sail by your defenses. Weirdly, this does not happen with ships, only sat Groups. Since I don't use fighters I don't know if it also happens with fighters. You'd have to make a "small" stealth armor and put it in a fighter to find out.

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Master Belisarius:
- Cloaked ships can't remove mines. (If this is a feature, then, the AI must be fixed to decloak their cloaked minesweepers, before try to remove a minefield).

- The AI still want to lay mines, in a location with the max of unit allowed reached (in theory this was fixed in previous patches, but I'm 100% sure that it still happen).

- The AI never try to send population, to colonies that lost ALL the population (for example, after a random event, or after an enemy intel project).

- The AI never use the Resource Converters.

- The AI still want to colonize far away planets, without consider if the colony ship will have supplies or not (although some modded AI's have better colony ships).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Minsweeping: This wouldn't be a problem if a cloaked ship was also undetected by the MINES it cannot sweep. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon9.gif Can we have consistency, at least?

The AI unit ministers are better than most of the other ministers, but still not very bright. I still wish there was a "maintain only" setting that would just restock mine fields or sat Groups that you created. This would let you keep control of your defenses but reduce the burden of maintaining your empire.

The AI population minister is still a joke in general. It loads up a half-dozen huge transports with thousands of millions population and sends them all to one medium sized planet, for example. Then they sit there full of 5 billion or more population for years of game time while other planets are nearly empty. There is just no internal planning going on. I've reduced the problem somewhat by capping population transport size at medium transport in my AI files.

The AI will build resource converters just like any other facility if you put them in the build queue. I don't know how to verify if they are actually used or not.

Colonyships: Yes, this is something rather easy to do. Since there is a special type just for colony ships we can mod them to be better, and it makes sense for a dedicated ship type to have a special ability that helps its function, doesn't it? http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif I've added supply storage to the colony ship hull(s) in my custom techs to extend their range. It's much, much rarer for the AI to have hordes of out-of-supply colony ships crawling around a 1 move per turn now.

[This message has been edited by Baron Munchausen (edited 08 October 2001).]

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Baron Munchausen:
Minsweeping: This wouldn't be a problem if a cloaked ship was also undetected by the MINES it cannot sweep. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon9.gif Can we have consistency, at least? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I would much rather see cloaked sweepers be able to sweep then have cloaked ships be able to slip past mines undetected. IMHO
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Colonyships: Yes, this is something rather easy to do. Since there is a special type just for colony ships we can mod them to be better, and it makes sense for a dedicated ship type to have a special ability that helps its function, doesn't it? http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif I've added supply storage to the colony ship hull(s) in my custom techs to extend their range. It's much, much rarer for the AI to have hordes of out-of-supply colony ships crawling around a 1 move per turn now.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>This is a very good idea Baron. Have you sent this idea to Aaron? What value do you use? It should be put into the stock game I think.

Geoschmo

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

Here's my Version of colony ships. Note that I've reduced the engine count to make them very slow like SE III colony ships as well as adding the supply storage. this means they use LESS supply per move, though, and combined with the integral supply capacity they now have very good range. They are blimps, though, and so I added the increased vulnerability. Oh, I've also modded my propulsion system sort of like the "newtonian" system discussed elsewhere, so that each engine produces 6 standard movement. The engines per move on these ships is different from what you'd expect. It would only be '1' and '2' in a standard game.

Name := Colony Ship
Short Name := Colony Ship
Description :=
Code := CY
Bitmap Name := ColonyShip
Vehicle Type := Ship
Tonnage := 400
Cost Minerals := 200
Cost Organics := 0
Cost Radioactives := 0
Engines Per Move := 6
Number of Tech Req := 1
Tech Area Req 1 := Ship Construction
Tech Level Req 1 := 1
Number of Abilities := 2
Ability 1 Type := Supply Storage
Ability 1 Descr := Integral high-capacity fuel tanks extend a colony ship's range (1000 extra supplies).
Ability 1 Val 1 := 1000
Ability 1 Val 2 := 0
Ability 2 Type := Combat To Hit Defense Minus
Ability 2 Descr := Large size and poor maneuverability makes this ship 20% easier to hit in combat.
Ability 2 Val 1 := 20
Ability 2 Val 2 := 0
Requirement Must Have Bridge := True
Requirement Can Have Aux Con := True
Requirement Min Life Support := 1
Requirement Min Crew Quarters := 1
Requirement Uses Engines := True
Requirement Max Engines := 4
Requirement Min Engines := 1
Requirement Pct Fighter Bays := 0
Requirement Pct Colony Mods := 50
Requirement Pct Cargo := 0

Name := Colony Ark
Short Name := Colony Ark
Description :=
Code := CK
Bitmap Name := ColonyShip
Vehicle Type := Ship
Tonnage := 600
Cost Minerals := 300
Cost Organics := 0
Cost Radioactives := 0
Engines Per Move := 12
Number of Tech Req := 1
Tech Area Req 1 := Ship Construction
Tech Level Req 1 := 4
Number of Abilities := 2
Ability 1 Type := Supply Storage
Ability 1 Descr := Integral high-capacity fuel tanks extend a colony ark's range (2000 extra supplies).
Ability 1 Val 1 := 2000
Ability 1 Val 2 := 0
Ability 2 Type := Combat To Hit Defense Minus
Ability 2 Descr := Large size and poor maneuverability makes this ship 40% easier to hit in combat.
Ability 2 Val 1 := 40
Ability 2 Val 2 := 0
Requirement Must Have Bridge := True
Requirement Can Have Aux Con := True
Requirement Min Life Support := 2
Requirement Min Crew Quarters := 2
Requirement Uses Engines := True
Requirement Max Engines := 8
Requirement Min Engines := 2
Requirement Pct Fighter Bays := 0
Requirement Pct Colony Mods := 50
Requirement Pct Cargo := 0

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

Ok, I see what you've done here. It wouldn't directly translate to the stock game because of the different propulsion system, but adding supply to the ship type is clever. I remember suggesting a while back to add supply storage to the colony component. I heard that some people tried it but then some of the AI's were then putting colony components on attack ships then to get the extra supply. This should avoid that.

How much slower are you making them here? Aren't they having problems with black hole systems? Even with the extra supply, if it takes a year to get across a black hole system, you're going to be in trouble.

Geo

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by geoschmo:
Ok, I see what you've done here. It wouldn't directly translate to the stock game because of the different propulsion system, but adding supply to the ship type is clever. I remember suggesting a while back to add supply storage to the colony component. I heard that some people tried it but then some of the AI's were then putting colony components on attack ships then to get the extra supply. This should avoid that.

How much slower are you making them here? Aren't they having problems with black hole systems? Even with the extra supply, if it takes a year to get across a black hole system, you're going to be in trouble.

Geo<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Look at the max engines, 4 and 8. So, speed 4. Just one slower than a transport, like in SE III. That's enough to escape a black hole if you are undamaged. You can work a solar sail into the Colony Ark anyway, and get real performance at the cost of further vulnerability. I've also modded the solar sail to increase 'to hit' probability since it's a big clumsy thing.

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>map editor, starting positions. only the first one for each empire is used, multiple starting positions are ignored.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>This worked the only time I tested it. I made a map with three random start points in each of three systems, and my three starting planets were all in the same system, on the worlds I'd marked as start points.

------------------
Cap'n Q
My first mod! Hypermaze quadrant
The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the
human mind to correlate all of its contents. We live on a placid
island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was
not meant that we should go far. -- HP Lovecraft, "The Call of Cthulhu"

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Atrocities:
1. Stratigy "Capture Planet" does not work when fully loaded troop transports are present in the fleet.


[This message has been edited by Atrocities (edited 08 October 2001).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


I had this problem too

More ones:
- Sometimes the retrofit minister tries to retrofit ships with more of the 50% difference cost. Of course, he can'ts and the warning window appears.

- The remote mining sats does'nt say the amount of resources that are mining. Ships do.

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

Baron: about the Colony ships, some examples of AI's that have better designes, but still use the standard tech, are the Vikings, Orks, Aquilaeian, Klingon, etc.

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

Followup to what capnq said about the map editor: I can sorta confirm. I set 8 different starting positions for 8 races, give each race 3 planets, and the computer will give them those planets close to the marker. (could be in 1, 2 or even 3 systems). Attempts to lock the position of all 3 planets by giving each race 3 starting position markers (in the same system or in 2 systems next to each other) will fail.

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

Another bug I think, I don't know why I haven't posted this before since its been bothering me a long time. This is in 1.41, simultaneous PBW game, : Messages get lost. (intel is disabled). Happened to me in my Last 3 games, at random. I sometimes had to propose a treaty 3 times in a row to a human player before he got it. Or I propose it, he confirms via email he got it and accepted it, then the acceptance message never reaches me, hence no treaty. Same for trades. This happened with different humans in different games, so it's not like my opponent was being dishonest or anything like that...

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

Fleets in simulator, please fix!

The other thing in the sim that needs fixing is, sometimes a ship shoots at something off the screen (in auto tactical combat) and you don't know what's going on, since the player has no control over the screen.

One more thing that I want to mention, can't really call this a bug but currently seekers self-destruct as soon as the target ship is destoryed. In my opinion that's not very logical. Self-destructing them would do you no good, if I'm the weapon designer I'd make them keep flying straight for no purpose other than to distract PD fire.

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by geoschmo:
Really? I'll have to test/confirm this one. My understanding was that it only stopped you from launching fighters in non-combat strategic mode, but that during combat figters would launch/be recovered as normal.

However, the new patch addresses the mines/sat's not self destructiong when ordered. This was the number one cause of hitting the units in space limit, so that alone should make this problem less serious.

Geoschmo[/b]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, I've seen it in a very large game where my AI opponent is crippled by the fact that he can't launch his fighters during combat, because he reached the maximum units in space limit. And as far as I saw it, the AI never self-destructs mines or sats.

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Regarding 7: It does for me. No problem here.
Regarding 9: That's because a black hole system is not per se a "avoid system". You have to manually set it to be so (and the Ai, of course, never does).
Regarding 10: It's not a bug, it's a feature. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks Mephisto http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif if 10 is a feature, would it be possible to (oops about to break the rule of this thread)*WARNING* possible to make it so that this feature and others like it can be editied easily for those of us who lack the fine skill of AI editing? In other words a "Out of Game Settings and Other Editor."

------------------
New Age Ship Yards

"We've made too many compromises already, too many retreats! They invade our space and we fall back -- they assimilate entire worlds and we fall back! Not again! The line must be drawn here -- this far, no further! And I will make them pay for what they've done!" -- Captain Picard STNG

Borg Breen Species 8472 Cardassian Dominion STNG Ferengi Klingon Romulan
Trek Movie era TOS Illuminati Starwolf

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Atrocities:
Thanks Mephisto http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif if 10 is a feature, would it be possible to (oops about to break the rule of this thread)*WARNING* possible to make it so that this feature and others like it can be editied easily for those of us who lack the fine skill of AI editing? In other words a "Out of Game Settings and Other Editor."
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It would be great to call ship names instead of ship classes. But I think we have to wait for SE5 for this to happen. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon9.gif

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CW:
Fleets in simulator, please fix!

One more thing that I want to mention, can't really call this a bug but currently seekers self-destruct as soon as the target ship is destoryed. In my opinion that's not very logical. Self-destructing them would do you no good, if I'm the weapon designer I'd make them keep flying straight for no purpose other than to distract PD fire.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, make them lock onto the nearest enemy target. (eg, the Dauntless Guidance System from MOO2.)

http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

Hi all, here comes my bug list. I already sent them to Aaron.

1.) Problem with the counting of produced units

Assume 20 Planets are present and colonized. This line should therefore produce 4 "Recon Satellites"
Entry 1 Type := Recon Satellite
Entry 1 Planet Per Item := 50
Entry 1 Must Have At Least := 0

In fact it will produce 4 "Recon Satellites" and puts them in the cargo bay. Everything is fine up to now. The moment the AI launches one satellite, it will forget all launched ones (i.e. here one) and will produce another one for the cargo hold. The problem is that the AI almost always launches all satellites and lays all available mines so there is a steady "drain" of the units out of the cargo. The AI will now try to meet the Entry 1 Planet Per Item:= 50 line again and starts to produce more of the units. This leads to 2 problems:
I.) The AI will not produce any items that are further down in the build list as it is always trying to meet this build line first.
II.) The AI will produce insane amounts of launched satellites and mines. My AI-Narn-Empire now has over 500 recon satellites for about 25 systems. Further the AI will hit the "Max Unit line" of the setting.txt. If so, it can't even launch fighters in a combat.
Solution: Count the spaceborn units just as the units in cargo.


2.) Boarding ships
Boarding ships will not actively engage an enemy ship even when armed with a "real" weapon like a depleted uranium cannon. The boarding ship (BS) will run for the battle field corner until any of the enemy ships lose all of it's shields. If enemy shields are down, the BS will board the enemy. Solution: Make the BS check if enemy shields are down. If not, close in and fire a weapon upon it. Recheck shield status and proceed until successful or destroyed.


3.) Multiplayer
In a multiplayer battle the topmost player of the player list will always move and fire first in a battle. To be added Last to a game (and therefore be at the bottom of the list) is a huge disadvantage in a multiplayer warp point battle.
Solution: A solution would be to make the defenders (i.e. all ships already present in the sector) always move and fire first. If more then one “defender” is present, let the first “mover” be chosen randomly.


4.) “Do not move through minefield”-line
The line is working very good – in fact too good sometimes. If this line is activated, even the AI minesweepers will avoid the mined sector. Therefore it is never cleared and you can even trap the Ai in it’s systems if you mine all there warp points.
1. Solution: Make Minesweepers ignore this line.
2. Solution: Alternatively you can split this line into to: “ALL ships avoid minefields” and “Ships avoid minefields EXCEPT Minesweepers”.


5.) Minesweepers will not enter a mined sector that has enemy units like satellites and mines present. This is good in general but bad if the sector contains mines. In this case, the Minesweeper will stay in an adjacent sector and wait for a warship to destroy the enemy units. Unfortunately the warship will wait in an adjacent sector and wait for a Minesweeper to clear the mines before entering the sector. This way the AI will stack large forces in front of a combo minefield/satellitefield but will never do anything about it.
Solution: Minesweeping is a suicide mission anyway so let the minesweeper enter mined sectors if they contain only satellites or planets. These units/planets can’t even harm a Minesweeper as it will stay out of range in a battle (“Don’t get hurt “ strategy). If the planet contains fighters and destroys the Minesweeper – so be it, at least he has swept the mines and cleared the path for the warships.


6.) Ships will sometimes sit in a enemy minefield (without critical damage) but will never move out of the field. Worse, for some reason the AI will initiate combat with the minefield (don’t know how he is doing this), that take a lot of processor time to process it (of course without a result) and in a simultaneous game he will even attack multiple times.


7.) The population transport minister will often load his cargo ships with population but will not bring it anywhere.
Solution: The Ai should either load and move them or don’t load them (bad because of lost bonuses on “loading” planet, no population growth for loaded population).


8.) The population transport minister will never move population to a planet with 0 population but &gt;0 facilities. As the Ai will not give up planets these 0 population planets are effectively lost for the AI.
Solution: Make the minister move population to 0 population worlds.


9.) Space Yard Ship Production
The AI will try to produce units (like troops) even if the SYS is in deep space.
Solution: Make the Ai check available cargo space in the sector before assigning unit production to a yard. If there is enough space for at least one unit, let it produce it. If not, proceed to a non-unit-item in the scripted build list.
This will also address another production problem. At the moment, the AI will assign an item to a production queue. If it was not successful with the production (i.e. not enough cargo), it will delete the item from the queue and will fill the queue again following the orders from the scripted build list. But there is problem with this: If there is not enough space in the whole empire to create a unit, the Ai will go on and delete it from it’s build queue (not enough space) and add it again (because the script file says so). A nice vicious circle that can stall the production of a whole empire.


10.) The Afterburner item description does not state: “Only one item effective per unit” but in fact only one Afterburner is effective.
Solution: Change the item description.


11.) Experience points for shooting down missiles/fighters
You can earn very much experience point by only shooting down missiles and fighters. Your ships and fleets can read legendary status in only one to two battles.
Solution: Reward fewer experience point for shooting down a missile/fighter. 1/10 would be a good choice IMHO.


12.) In “ship/fleet transfer” menu the ship list will always jump back to the top when you transfer a ship. This can be very annoying when many ships are present and the ships you want to transfer are at the bottom of the list.
Solution: Make the menu stay at the same “height” even if you move a ship.

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

okay, to steer this back on topic from the wishlist, i have another actual bug.

there are still integer overflows in large combats. perticularly sphereworlds. Load a sphereworld with weapon platforms packing (1) nothing but phased shields OR (2) nothing but crystal armor and one P.S. per plat OR (3) nothing but organic armor

and you will get an error when it takes damage. when i tried number 1, i got the error before combat had even begun. me thinks this needs fixing. even if most people dont build sphereworlds or ringworlds, people might want to use them for starting positions in a scenario game or a max tech game.

edit: not to insinuate that my bugs are better than anyone elses, or anything like that.. to expand on the above, i get the same integer overflow error when stationing 1000 fighters on a sphereworld too.. im sitting here with the simulator trying to figure out how to maximize the defenses on one, and i cant seem to do it without crashing the game. I have basically given up and im trying to figure out how to use all of the cargo space, if even on suboptimal defenses, and i cant seem to do that without causing a crash either.
------------------
"...the green, sticky spawn of the stars"
(with apologies to H.P.L.)

[This message has been edited by Puke (edited 10 October 2001).]

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

I just encountered a bug that I don't think has been posted before. (Either that or I need to get more sleep at night.)

If a computer controlled race does not have a design name file specified, the designs that are generated are "Design nn". This works fine. However, if there are two computer controlled races without a design name file specified, the designs for both get the same "Design nn" names and show up in the design lists for both races.

You can test this be starting a new game with 3 races. The first is your human controlled race. Create the second and third races using Add New and set them to computer control but do not specify a design file. Run a turn, then set the computer races to human control and look at the designs they have created. You will see some of the other race's ships in each race's design lists.

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

Dragonlord's comments made me review my test map more closely. He's right, putting multiple start points in one system doesn't work. I thought it had because I only looked at my own starting system, and not the AIs'. (And had misremembered which worlds I'd marked in my start system, too) Not only doesn't it work, but the multiple start points will override the "Can't start in same system" setting in the Set-Up screen, as well.

------------------
Cap'n Q
My first mod! Hypermaze quadrant
The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the
human mind to correlate all of its contents. We live on a placid
island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was
not meant that we should go far. -- HP Lovecraft, "The Call of Cthulhu"

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

to add on to AKs comments, this is a problem. not only what he said, but if two empires design a ship with the same name, it will (sometimes) show up on both their design lists. in multiplayer games, this is stopped because it will not let you use a name if someone else has it, but if you both design it on the same turn then it will cause the problem.

------------------
"...the green, sticky spawn of the stars"
(with apologies to H.P.L.)

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

It seems almost impossible to stop this thread from degrading into a wishlist...but where better to post this?

Wish: auto-rename ships after a retrofit.
Example: Lets say I have a fleet with 20 warships of class "Challenger". I get new tech and upgrade the design to "Challenger II" , then retrofit all ships. Now I have to go and manually rename every ship from "Challenger 0001" to "Challenger II 0001" etc. Very mind numbing..
Solution: retrofitted ships should get a name from the class it has been retrofitted to, the sequential identifier (000x) can be the next available one in the list for the new class.

[This message has been edited by Dragonlord (edited 11 October 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Dragonlord (edited 11 October 2001).]

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

yeah, but what if you named your ship "Bob's Bucket of Bolts" even though it belonged to the "scrub" class, and it had a +50 crew, and the computer goes and renames it to "mrship003" after you retrofit it to the mrship class. the whole legend of the B3 will die out! who will remember them? who will make the movies? and what would you do about the crew with the broken hearts? sure they would still have the +50, but they would be crying on the inside.

------------------
"...the green, sticky spawn of the stars"
(with apologies to H.P.L.)

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

Quote:

" 3.) Multiplayer
In a multiplayer battle the topmost player of the player list will always move and fire first in a battle. To be added Last to a game (and therefore be at the bottom of the list) is a huge disadvantage in a multiplayer warp point battle.
Solution: A solution would be to make the defenders (i.e. all ships already present in the sector) always move and fire first. If more then one “defender” is present, let the first “mover” be chosen randomly."


IMO this it the BIGGEST of the 'bugs', bigger than the 'intell bug'...We need an system of 'who goes first' based on ship speed/size/experience/and a random factor..Even the makers of Moo2 had to put out a patch with this type of system, otherwise, all things being 'equal' the topmost player will ALWAYS outfight you in multiplayer. Hence no real point in even playing!




------------------
"We are all...the sum of our scars"....(paraphrased) Matt. R. Stover-'Blade of Tyshalle'.

"Human existance is all imagination...Reality is no more than a simple agreement among its participants that this is where we shall meet, and these are the rules that we shall abide by."- Kevin McCarthy/David Silva "The Family:Special Effects"..

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

Yes, I agree. This is the biggest bug. Just make who goes first completely random. 50/50 chance. That would be the easiest (I am no programmer, but I assume this could be done in minutes), and also it would give the "weaker" player a fair chance of at least doing some damage. Has this been mailed to Aaron, yet? Perhaps this could still be part of the new patch (I wouldn't even mind waiting a little bit longer, if that means that it'll be included).

Rollo

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Wish: auto-rename ships after a retrofit.
Example: Lets say I have a fleet with 20 warships of class "Challenger". I get new tech and upgrade the design to "Challenger II" , then retrofit all ships. Now I have to go and manually rename every ship from "Challenger 0001" to "Challenger II 0001" etc. Very mind numbing.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I rarely bother to rename ships. It's not unusual for me to end up with things like a fleet containing Dire Wolf 0001, Dire Wolf II 0001, Dire Wolf IVa 0003, Dire Wolf VIc 0002, etc., with all of them actually retrofitted to Dire Wolf VIII class. About the only time I rename them is when a retrofit causes the name sequence to repeat and give me two ships with identical names.

------------------
Cap'n Q
My first mod! Hypermaze quadrant
The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the
human mind to correlate all of its contents. We live on a placid
island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was
not meant that we should go far. -- HP Lovecraft, "The Call of Cthulhu"

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Deathstalker:
IMO this it the BIGGEST of the 'bugs', bigger than the 'intell bug'...We need an system of 'who goes first' based on ship speed/size/experience/and a random factor..Even the makers of Moo2 had to put out a patch with this type of system, otherwise, all things being 'equal' the topmost player will ALWAYS outfight you in multiplayer. Hence no real point in even playing!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, first of all, the intel bug is fixed. So it's not a matter of having to choose which one to work one, becuase it's already fixed in the next patch.

Second, I totally agree with you that this is a problem. I have sent an email to Aaron about it. I know at least one other person has, possibly more. I have not heard anything, but hopefully this is something he can work into this patch.

However I think you are exagerating the impact of this bug. IMHO the intel bug was way more destabalizing. This is based on a whole lot of multiplayer games that I have played in. I have seen plenty of higher number plyers win these games. It's not always player one coming out on top. On the other hand the Intel bug has destroyed many, many games.

This problem really only affects warp point battles. And if you are aware of it, you simply avoid those kinds of battles unless you have an overwhelming force advantage. The intel bug is impossible to avoid. There is no work around except for disallowing intell.

The real problem with this "bug" isn't that the weaker player has no chance. The weaker player isn't supposed to have a chance in a battle. Where this bug is really nasty is when two forces of roughly equal strength meet. In a battle like that you would expect both sides to take heavy losses. But with this bug, the victor can come out basically unharmed, and the loser will be obliterated. This is wrong.

The key to you statement is "all things being equal". True. All things being equal, the higher number player will get pasted in a warp pont battle by the lower number player. The idea is to not allow yourself into a situation where all things are equal. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

To borrow a phrase getting a lot of play recently. It's called "asymetric warfare". Applying your strength to your opponents weaknesses.

Geoschmo

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

I've got a bug report that I haven't seen listed here yet. I emailed it to Aaron about two months ago, and aside from a request for additional information (which I provided) I haven't heard back.

I can't seem to get SEIV (ver. 1.41, no mods) to run on my Dell Inspiron 4000 laptop (ATI Rage Mobility 128 video card, PIII 900, 256 MB, Win ME). The same save game file that runs flawlessly on my Dell desktop crashes the laptop with a "Range Check Error" as soon as I select a fleet.

Obviously, if there's a known fix/workaround I'd appreciate hearing about it. Otherwise, maybe this can be added somewhere in the repair queue.

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR> Originally posted by capnq:
I rarely bother to rename ships. It's not unusual for me to end up with things like a fleet containing Dire Wolf 0001, Dire Wolf II 0001, Dire Wolf IVa 0003, Dire Wolf VIc 0002, etc., with all of them actually retrofitted to Dire Wolf VIII class. About the only time I rename them is when a retrofit causes the name sequence to repeat and give me two ships with identical names.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well if you don't rename, it becomes much harder to see which ships are still eligible for retrofitting, and to easily see what kind of firepower one of your fleets has...

Re: Any more bug reports?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Well if you don't rename, it becomes much harder to see which ships are still eligible for retrofitting, and to easily see what kind of firepower one of your fleets has.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>True, but I tend to track retrofits by sorting the F6 Ships/Orders list by class. Both the Fleet and Retrofit order windows list both the ship name and class, so I have the information there anyway.

I always know how much firepower I have: Not Enough. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

------------------
Cap'n Q
My first mod! Hypermaze quadrant
The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the
human mind to correlate all of its contents. We live on a placid
island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was
not meant that we should go far. -- HP Lovecraft, "The Call of Cthulhu"

[This message has been edited by capnq (edited 13 October 2001).]

[This message has been edited by capnq (edited 13 October 2001).]