FreeOrion

Forums for the FreeOrion project
It is currently Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:39 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Always mention the exact version of FreeOrion you are testing.

When reporting an issue regarding the AI, if possible provide the relevant AI log file and a save game file that demonstrates the issue.



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Issues in 0.4.1 RC 2
PostPosted: Sat Jul 28, 2012 11:27 pm 
Offline
Space Krill

Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 3:49 am
Posts: 8
I just loaded FreeOrion 04.1 RC2 and find a couple of items that puzzle me. I notice that you can't remote terraform (even if you have the tech) plants that should be able to be terraformed, but only have an outpost on them. You have to send a colony base/ship there first. The second item is I can't send a colony ship/base to a gas giant or asteroid belt even if I have learned Orbital Habitation. Are these expected behaviors? If so the descriptions on these techs should be changed.


Last edited by eleazar on Tue Jul 31, 2012 6:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
clarified title


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issues in 0.4 RC 2
PostPosted: Sat Jul 28, 2012 11:40 pm 
Offline
Designer and Programmer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 6:33 pm
Posts: 2058
Location: Orion
sjolley wrote:
I just loaded FreeOrion 04.1 RC2 and find a couple of items that puzzle me. I notice that you can't remote terraform (even if you have the tech) plants that should be able to be terraformed, but only have an outpost on them. You have to send a colony base/ship there first. The second item is I can't send a colony ship/base to a gas giant or asteroid belt even if I have learned Orbital Habitation. Are these expected behaviors? If so the descriptions on these techs should be changed.

I guess that's another thing the new outpost feature broke. Now that zero-population colonies don't have population, the effect to set next best planet environment is meaningless.

I'm starting to think more and more that outposts should have species associated with them, as there's a lot of content that seems to rely on them, and it will require quite a bit of effort to make sure stuff doesn't seem broken.

_________________
Warning: Antarans in dimensional portal are closer than they appear.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issues in 0.4 RC 2
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 12:20 am 
Offline
Space Krill

Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 3:49 am
Posts: 8
I guess I didn’t follow the reasoning to drop outposts to 0 population. I believe I saw somewhere that the argument was you shouldn’t be able to grow a whole colony from just an outpost. I would have set them more at a much lower number for population such as .01 or something smaller, so that any growth would be rounded down to no growth each turn. (I am assuming that the populations is rounded in that statement. :) ) That would have had the same effect and not broken so much else. (I think)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issues in 0.4 RC 2
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 5:09 am 
Offline
Programming, Design, Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Posts: 12045
Location: Munich
sjolley wrote:
I can't send a colony ship/base to a gas giant or asteroid belt even if I have learned Orbital Habitation. Are these expected behaviors?
The existence of "Orbital Habitation" probably wasn't considered, but asteroids and gas giants are supposed to be uninhabitable now for humans (and likely various other species).
Bigjoe5 wrote:
I'm starting to think more and more that outposts should have species associated with them, as there's a lot of content that seems to rely on them, and it will require quite a bit of effort to make sure stuff doesn't seem broken.
Old content is going to have to be rewritten... It's unavoidable when adding and reworking game mechanics. There are properties of planets, ClockwiseNextPlanetType and CounterClockwiseNextPlanetType, which don't presently have parsing, but will soon, which could be useful for less automatic terraforming implementation, and which don't depend on a particular species.

Regardless, I'm inclined to leave these issues in v0.4.1 unless there are major objections.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issues in 0.4 RC 2
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 10:13 am 
Offline
Space Dragon

Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 5:33 pm
Posts: 429
Not bugs, but wishes:
I'd like for aggressiveness settings to actually relate to something. And for neutral (not-at-war) empires to be unable to park fleets/go through systems you own.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issues in 0.4 RC 2
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 1:03 pm 
Offline
Release Manager, Design
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm
Posts: 4305
Location: Sol III
Zireael wrote:
I'd like for aggressiveness settings to actually relate to something.
I'm not sure if I understand what you mean by that. Because they definitely acutally do something...
Zireael wrote:
And for neutral (not-at-war) empires to be unable to park fleets/go through systems you own.
Well, ATM there are only two diplomatic relationship "states", "peace" and "war", so we don't have something like "neutral" now. There are more planned of course (you've seen that in the ongoing discussion on fleet aggressiveness).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issues in 0.4 RC 2
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 1:34 pm 
Offline
Design & Graphics Lead Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:09 pm
Posts: 3858
Location: USA — midwest
I see these errors message in RC 2, revision 5079

Code:
ERROR Client : Cyclic key expansion: POP_PER_PRODUCTION in: /Users/jbjerk/Desktop/FreeOrion.app/Contents/Resources/default/eng_stringtable.txt.
ERROR Client : Cyclic key expansion: INFRA_PER_PRODUCTION in: /Users/jbjerk/Desktop/FreeOrion.app/Contents/Resources/default/eng_stringtable.txt


I'm not sure if it means things are working as intended or not, but messages like: "increases target industry ... by the greater of .2 per 5 units of population, or .4 per 8 units of infrastructure" -- is surely not the clearest way to communicate what's happening.

_________________
—• Read this First before posting Game Design Ideas!
—• Design Philosophy

—•— My Ideas, Organized —•— Get an Avatar —•— Acronyms —•—


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issues in 0.4 RC 2
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 2:54 pm 
Offline
Space Dragon

Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 5:33 pm
Posts: 429
Vezzra wrote:
Zireael wrote:
I'd like for aggressiveness settings to actually relate to something.
I'm not sure if I understand what you mean by that. Because they definitely acutally do something...

Another thread (linked to below) suggests that they are misleading, so I don't know...


Vezzra wrote:
Zireael wrote:
And for neutral (not-at-war) empires to be unable to park fleets/go through systems you own.
Well, ATM there are only two diplomatic relationship "states", "peace" and "war", so we don't have something like "neutral" now. There are more planned of course (you've seen that in the ongoing discussion on fleet aggressiveness).


Should "peaceful" fleets be able to go through my systems, then?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issues in 0.4 RC 2
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:03 pm 
Offline
Vacuum Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 2:51 pm
Posts: 500
Geoff the Medio wrote:
Old content is going to have to be rewritten... It's unavoidable when adding and reworking game mechanics. There are properties of planets, ClockwiseNextPlanetType and CounterClockwiseNextPlanetType, which don't presently have parsing, but will soon, which could be useful for less automatic terraforming implementation, and which don't depend on a particular species.

Or, remote terraform could use the species of the originating planet if destination planet has none.

_________________
[...] for Man has earned his right to hold this planet against all comers, by virtue of occasionally producing someone totally batshit insane. - Randall Munroe, title text to xkcd #556


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issues in 0.4 RC 2
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:38 pm 
Offline
Release Manager, Design
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm
Posts: 4305
Location: Sol III
Zireael wrote:
Should "peaceful" fleets be able to go through my systems, then?
As far as I've seen from my playtesting 0.4.1 so far, things work this way ATM:

If you're not at war (=at peace) with an empire, your fleets don't engage in combat at all, regardless of aggressivness setting. If you're at war with an empire, your fleets are engaging in combat if at least one fleet in a given system is set to "aggressive". If all fleets in a system are set to "passive", no combat is triggered, even if the empires involved are at war.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issues in 0.4 RC 2
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 6:05 pm 
Offline
Release Manager, Design
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm
Posts: 4305
Location: Sol III
Did another round of playtesting, found two issues in RC2:

  • Apparently the size of the thumbnail images in the finished designs list is not the same for predefined and player defined designs for the basic small hull type. I didn't check this for other hull types, maybe this applies to them as well.
  • We have several techs in the tech tree that enhance detection range, however, I didn't see any that increase detection strength. Apparently there haven't been added respective techs after the detection mechanics had been changed. This is a problem, as there is currently no way to ever detect universe objects who's stealth is greater than your default detection strength.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issues in 0.4 RC 2
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 6:21 pm 
Offline
Designer and Programmer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 6:33 pm
Posts: 2058
Location: Orion
eleazar wrote:
I see these errors message in RC 2, revision 5079

Code:
ERROR Client : Cyclic key expansion: POP_PER_PRODUCTION in: /Users/jbjerk/Desktop/FreeOrion.app/Contents/Resources/default/eng_stringtable.txt.
ERROR Client : Cyclic key expansion: INFRA_PER_PRODUCTION in: /Users/jbjerk/Desktop/FreeOrion.app/Contents/Resources/default/eng_stringtable.txt


I'm not sure if it means things are working as intended or not, but messages like: "increases target industry ... by the greater of .2 per 5 units of population, or .4 per 8 units of infrastructure" -- is surely not the clearest way to communicate what's happening.

No, but it's a heck of a lot easier to maintain while still conveying what's actually happening. As you've pointed out, I like changing effects more than I like updating stringtable entries. This way, if we decide that we want to scale population or infrastructure resource bonuses by a certain amount, we don't need to redo all the stringtable entries, but can just modify a macro instead. I definitely wouldn't want to see descriptions like that in the finished game, though...

As for the Cyclic Key Expansion, I think that's a bug in the parser. There is no such cyclical reference. However, I've noticed that when I use the same macro key twice in the same entry, the second one doesn't get parsed, and remains as [[WHATEVER]].

_________________
Warning: Antarans in dimensional portal are closer than they appear.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issues in 0.4 RC 2
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 6:29 pm 
Offline
Programming, Design, Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Posts: 12045
Location: Munich
Bigjoe5 wrote:
As for the Cyclic Key Expansion, I think that's a bug in the parser. There is no such cyclical reference. However, I've noticed that when I use the same macro key twice in the same entry, the second one doesn't get parsed, and remains as [[WHATEVER]].
There is a bug of that nature with stringtable entries. I had to rewrite some code for content file macro substitution to avoid it, but didn't bother at the time for the stringtable substitution.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issues in 0.4 RC 2
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 6:46 pm 
Offline
Pupating Mass

Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 9:15 pm
Posts: 94
I was unable to enter any text in my game (for instance for renaming or designing ships). Restarting the client fixed this. I presume it might be because I tried to alt-tab, behaviour which seems to not be supported in the client (as it simply does not work, I see my menu bar, but FreeOrion stays on top otherwise).

Beyond this, whenever I hover over items in the production list, there are lots of green (PASSED).

Finally I found it very confusing that things like The Imperial Palace were available for building on my home world, later on I found out they had already been built there!

Oh, and maybe a way to change the seed of the game, because all games I so far created seem exactly identical thus far.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issues in 0.4 RC 2
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 7:08 pm 
Offline
Programming, Design, Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Posts: 12045
Location: Munich
Sai wrote:
...I tried to alt-tab, behaviour which seems to not be supported in the client (as it simply does not work, I see my menu bar, but FreeOrion stays on top otherwise).
If you want to see other windows while running FreeOrion, run in Windowed mode.
Quote:
Beyond this, whenever I hover over items in the production list, there are lots of green (PASSED).
And? Why is this a problem?
Quote:
Oh, and maybe a way to change the seed of the game, because all games I so far created seem exactly identical thus far.
Add or remove a star. Reproducible galaxy generation is intentional, mainly for making reproducible testing possible.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group