New Bug?

[geoschmo]

The game is stock 1.91.

[mottlee]

Did any one see if the ship orders were to attack?...has happened to me.... [img]/threads/images/Graemlins/mad.gif[/img]

[AMF]

I really think the key to problem lies with the treaty issue.

Here's a recap:

Roanon and I are at peace with a military alliance at the beginning of the turn.

I declare war on him. From his end, he did not change our treaty status (Roanon chime in if I'm misrepresenting here)

I send my guys to attack him.

Battles ensue - in some cases, battles wherein his forces are coming through a warp point and my fighters are guarding it.

In the replays of these battles, his guys just sort of mill around, acting, for all the world, as if they are not at war with my guys.

My guys, on the other hand, have a field day bLasting as many of the hapless roanonians into bits. For example, 54 low tech fighters took out 10 battleships.

There were at least five battles in which this happened, including a few where my fighters took out defended planets and other battleships. So it's both ships and planetary weapons that did not fire on my guys. Talk about being asleep at the wheel!

Also in our turn results, and this I feel is key, our relationship is NOT listed as "At War" but is instead "no relationship"

Furthermore, I think I have heard tales of problems with the diplomacy model in which Messages are not received or treaties not enacted if diplomacy is done at the end of one's turn. In this case, I declared war on roanon in the middle of writing my turn, but did other diplomacy as the Last thing I did.

All his ships had quantum reactors I think.

The only case wherein his guys DID attack me was when they were given attack orders against an *Earth* colony (with whom they were at war) and I had a colony on the moon above that earth colony. In that battle, an unarmed troop transport of Roanons succesfully landed troops on my undefended planet, and they took it.

All in all, I think his guys acted *as if* they were at peace with me, except in that single battle I just mentioned above, while my guys acted *as if* they were at war with him. The not entirely illuminating but interesting factor is the fact that our treaty status is currently "none" rather than "at war"

I say send it to Malfador. In fact, ideally, they could be the ones to take all the PLR files, run the turn correctly and let us continue the game as it should have been processed in the first place.

I mean, I ain't complaining that we did pretty well, but, still it is clearly wacky and should be examined.

Just my two cents.

Alarik

[Ruatha]

The game is on hold until further notice.
Let me know when something happens Geo.

[geoschmo]

alarikf said:
I really think the key to problem lies with the treaty issue.

No, one thing I am certain of is that the treaty issue is totally separate from the problem of Roanans ships not performing correctly in combat. Roanans ships should have fought back. You can test this yourself. If you break treaty with another empire and attack them their ships will fight back, regardless of whether you openly declare war or not.

There are two separate issues here. What caused your treaty to break is a question. But the more important question is why didn't Roanans ships fight back in combat.

[Suicide Junkie]

The treaty status could be a key symptom.

Perhaps the declaration of war was hit by a comm interception intel op or something, so they were only half at war...

[AMF]

Ok, there's an interesting idea. You're postulating that my declaration of war was intercepted, so it never reached them, but I was at war as far as my guys were concerned but they were not? That seems like a plausible funky result of the interplay between comms intercepts and treaty declarations...but, still, as Geo says, once combat begins, shouldn't they at least defend themselves?

EDIT: spelling/grammar

Suicide Junkie said:
The treaty status could be a key symptom.

Perhaps the declaration of war was hit by a comm interception intel op or something, so they were only half at war...

[Roanon]

No, one thing I am certain of is that the treaty issue is totally separate from the problem of Roanans ships not performing correctly in combat.

I'm not convinced of that. I think the game has registered that the Aether Lords are at war with me, but not registered that I was at war with them. Two proofs, my ships did behave normally in all combats against a already declared enemy, the Federation, and also in the combat involving both the Federation and the Aether Lords only fought agains the Federation, not fighting against the Aether Lords. This is possible, because there is a flag per player at which player they will fire, otherwise multiple player battles involving neutral parties would not be possible.
Second, most important, the Aether Lords were NOT affected by my minefields, while their minefields damaged my ships.
I think Malfador should take a look at this if even a rerun (on a machine with larger memory?) causes the same problem.

[Roanon]

I think it happend like that:

Alarikf declared war on me. This was instantly flagged on the client side, and this flag has been taken over by the host. (OT: this should NEVER be done with Online games, client has to be allowed to send commands only and not to change ANY data directly, host data MUST BE modified the host programm validating and evaluating client-issued commands only. I hope this is done more striktly in SEV).

The host program run the turn, somehow loosing the Messages before evaluating them. There are known problems with Messages in large games, we all know that trades tend to get lost when not done as the very Last thing during the turn. The result was that Alneyans already flagged empire shot at me, while the lost message never resulted in a like change of the flag on my empire's side.

[Renegade 13]

Therefore, if you re-send your declarations of war, your ships should behave as they should have in combat.