Testing Reports

Describe your experience with the latest version of FreeOrion to help us improve it.

Moderator: Oberlus

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.
Message
Author
User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 13587
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: Testing Reports

#16 Post by Geoff the Medio »

LienRag wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:05 pm A few bugs though :
Here my Stability is said to be raising at the rate of 1 per turn until it reaches a small but positive number, yet it gets down at a rate of 1 per turn instead...
Very confusing and quite demoralizing to see things deteriorate without any way to even understand what's happening.
Can't tell what's going on with the single time screenshot. The prediction seems consistent, as -3 = -4 + 1
LienRag wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:03 pmI restarted after modifying the Stability requirement for NAI and putting it at 10.
Fine with me. Will do in master. The existing thresholds weren't chosen very carefully.
LienRag wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:09 pmYet the next turn after invasion I still have 11 troops instead of 6 ?
Probably protection focus troop regen.
LienRag wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:17 pmThe enemy had this planet that should have been invadable but is not :
Maybe the same effect as above? Not sure what the order of invading vs. meter modifications is... Might need a not-attacked-recently activation condition.
LienRag wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:11 pmThe new way of presenting ship damage in Fleet panel is totally undecipherable
Is that in master? I can't find TT_BREAKDOWN_AUGMENTED_SUMMARY in the C++ code or FOCS and that's not what a weapons tooltip on a ship looks like for me.

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Reports

#17 Post by LienRag »

Geoff the Medio wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:29 pm Is that in master? I can't find TT_BREAKDOWN_AUGMENTED_SUMMARY in the C++ code or FOCS and that's not what a weapons tooltip on a ship looks like for me.
Latest Snap from Ophiuchus (downloaded last Friday I believe, from the "edge" channel).

Geoff the Medio wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:29 pm
LienRag wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:05 pm Here my Stability is said to be raising at the rate of 1 per turn until it reaches a small but positive number, yet it gets down at a rate of 1 per turn instead...
Can't tell what's going on with the single time screenshot. The prediction seems consistent, as -3 = -4 + 1
Yes I know, that's why I explained that it goes down each turn instead of going up as it says it would.

Geoff the Medio wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:29 pm
LienRag wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:09 pmYet the next turn after invasion I still have 11 troops instead of 6 ?
Probably defensive focus troop regen.
Troops regenerate even with an enemy fleet in the system and no shields ?
Seems like a bad idea to me, removes a lot of strategy.

Geoff the Medio wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:29 pm
LienRag wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:17 pmThe enemy had this planet that should have been invadable but is not :
Maybe the same effect as above? Not sure what the order of invading vs. meter modifications is.
Which effect ? Stealth ? I don't think there's a Policy that improves stealth without it appearing on the Planet panel...
Or do you mean previous invasion ? I hadn't invaded this planet yet.
I have a military ship in the system, a troop fleet, shields are at zero and still no "invade" button.
Geoff the Medio wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:29 pm
LienRag wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:03 pmI restarted after modifying the Stability requirement for NAI and putting it at 10.
Fine with me. Will do in master. The existing thresholds weren't chosen very carefully.
Good, I think. I recommend vividly to also consider the modification to the Imperial Palace bonus. +3 is way too low.

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Reports

#18 Post by LienRag »

This one's on me, actually, but it's still interesting to note : I have added the Whumsoom focs file as is¹, and here's the result after conquering a Whumsoom belt :
FO no focus.png
FO no focus.png (713.92 KiB) Viewed 1187 times
Note also that they don't cost any Influence, and actually it could be a perk for some Species (only those who cannot colonize, of course).
More generally, we have the good/bad Influence trait to simulate the capacity of a Specie to rule (produce Influence points) but we could also have a Trait for their easiness with which they are ruled : so, a modifier to the Influence cost of each Planet of this Specie.


¹ The one I posted in their thread, which parses with the new version, and cannot colonize.

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 13587
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: Testing Reports

#19 Post by Geoff the Medio »

LienRag wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:48 pmLatest Snap from Ophiuchus (downloaded last Friday I believe, from the "edge" channel).
Apparently it has stuff that's not in master.
Geoff the Medio wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:29 pm
LienRag wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:05 pmHere my Stability is said to be raising at the rate of 1 per turn until it reaches a small but positive number, yet it gets down at a rate of 1 per turn instead...
Can't tell what's going on with the single time screenshot. The prediction seems consistent, as -3 = -4 + 1
Yes I know, that's why I explained that it goes down each turn instead of going up as it says it would.
To rephrase: I can't tell what's going on from what you've shown. That screenshot in isolation looks fine.

Maybe there's some script that wasn't designed to handle target values below 0, though I'd still expect the prediction to be accurate even in that case.
Geoff the Medio wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:29 pm
LienRag wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:09 pmYet the next turn after invasion I still have 11 troops instead of 6 ?
Probably defensive focus troop regen.
Troops regenerate even with an enemy fleet in the system and no shields ?
Seems like a bad idea to me, removes a lot of strategy.
What restrictions should apply?
Geoff the Medio wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:29 pm
LienRag wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:17 pmThe enemy had this planet that should have been invadable but is not :
Maybe the same effect as above? Not sure what the order of invading vs. meter modifications is.
Which effect ? Stealth ?
Sorry, I was confusing the protection focus troop effect with this.

I can't tell what the issue is from that screenshot either. Invadability requires being at war, no shields, visibility, not already being invaded, and some suitable invasion ships available or selected. Would need to investigate the save to diagnose the issue.

Edit: maybe you just need to select the ship, not the fleet? Not sure why it doesn't autoselect a ship, though... /Edit
the capacity of a Specie to rule
The singular of species is species, apparently due to how latin grammar works.

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Reports

#20 Post by LienRag »

Geoff the Medio wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 10:01 pm
Troops regenerate even with an enemy fleet in the system and no shields ?
Seems like a bad idea to me, removes a lot of strategy.
What restrictions should apply?
With the KISS principle in mind, I'd say "no troop regeneration when there are no shields".

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5714
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Testing Reports

#21 Post by Oberlus »

In previous versions troops regen happened when planet hadn't been attacked on previous turn.

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 3433
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Testing Reports

#22 Post by Ophiuchus »

LienRag wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:48 pm
Geoff the Medio wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:29 pm Is that in master? I can't find TT_BREAKDOWN_AUGMENTED_SUMMARY in the C++ code or FOCS and that's not what a weapons tooltip on a ship looks like for me.
Latest Snap from Ophiuchus (downloaded last Friday I believe, from the "edge" channel).
Yes, I had (have?) an edge build which includes the damage estimation branch (and probably also the missiles prototype).

That is because I am experimenting with the auto-publish feature (in which case the snap edge build would be on latest master).

beta channel follows the weekly releases (after doing a smoke test).
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Look, ma... four combat bouts!

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 3433
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Testing Reports

#23 Post by Ophiuchus »

LienRag wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:48 pm Troops regenerate even with an enemy fleet in the system and no shields ?
Seems like a bad idea to me, removes a lot of strategy.
Looking for suggestions which do not make defense focus useless after enemies come into system and kill of shields and defense.
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Look, ma... four combat bouts!

defaultuser
Juggernaut
Posts: 854
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 6:15 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#24 Post by defaultuser »

LienRag wrote: Fri Apr 30, 2021 8:03 pm A few turns later I have a sitrep for a Small Snowflake arriving at a planet, even though I don't have enough detection to see small snowflakes.

I had a derelict scout in the vicinity the turn before, though.
It's always been that way, one extra turn of detection from DS. There a few things you can do with that.

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Reports

#25 Post by LienRag »

Ophiuchus wrote: Mon May 03, 2021 10:11 am
LienRag wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:48 pm Latest Snap from Ophiuchus (downloaded last Friday I believe, from the "edge" channel).
Yes, I had (have?) an edge build which includes the damage estimation branch (and probably also the missiles prototype).

That is because I am experimenting with the auto-publish feature (in which case the snap edge build would be on latest master).

beta channel follows the weekly releases (after doing a smoke test).
Oops !
My mistake then, I followed the example you gave on dual-channeling snaps and didn't notice the difference between Beta and Edge.

Anyway, I don't know if this bug is specific to Edge but I saved a game to see if Native Appropriation produced Research Bonus from planets gone independent (it doesn't, good).
Then (after clicking on "next turn" and seeing the result of Native Appropriation) I reloaded the saved game.
FreeOrion crashed and now after reloading the default options of FreeOrion (language, music off, ...) are reset.

Here's what is shown on the console :

Code: Select all

[2021-05-06 20:02:47.753808] [0x00007fe4172da780] [info]    Cleaned up FreeOrion Python interface
The key you just pressed is not recognized by SDL. To help get this fixed, please report this to the SDL forums/mailing list <https://discourse.libsdl.org/> X11 KeyCode 151 (143), X11 KeySym 0x1008FF2B (XF86WakeUp).
[2021-05-08 13:56:26.130296] [0x00007f9660fd1780] [info]    AIClientApp exited cleanly for ai client AI_7
[2021-05-08 13:56:26.130290] [0x00007faa01e9a780] [info]    AIClientApp exited cleanly for ai client AI_4
[2021-05-08 13:56:26.130296] [0x00007f8ba03a4780] [info]    AIClientApp exited cleanly for ai client AI_1
[2021-05-08 13:56:26.130316] [0x00007fa679ecd780] [info]    AIClientApp exited cleanly for ai client AI_5
[2021-05-08 13:56:26.133694] [0x00007fa679ec4700] [info]    Client connection disconnected by EOF from server.
[2021-05-08 13:56:26.134827] [0x00007f9660fc8700] [info]    Client connection disconnected by EOF from server.
[2021-05-08 13:56:26.134828] [0x00007faa01e91700] [info]    Client connection disconnected by EOF from server.
[2021-05-08 13:56:26.135606] [0x00007f9ca8af1780] [info]    AIClientApp exited cleanly for ai client AI_3
[2021-05-08 13:56:26.135771] [0x00007f9ca8ae8700] [info]    Client connection disconnected by EOF from server.
[2021-05-08 13:56:26.138263] [0x00007f8ba039b700] [info]    Client connection disconnected by EOF from server.
[2021-05-08 13:56:26.138473] [0x00007ff3f87d42c0] [info]    ServerApp::~ServerApp
[2021-05-08 13:56:26.138492] [0x00007ff3f87d42c0] [info]    Server exited cleanly.
[2021-05-08 13:56:26.157659] [0x00007ff3f87d42c0] [info]    Cleaned up FreeOrion Python interface
[2021-05-08 13:56:26.178048] [0x00007fa679ecd780] [info]    Cleaned up FreeOrion Python interface
[2021-05-08 13:56:26.196856] [0x00007f8ba03a4780] [info]    Cleaned up FreeOrion Python interface
[2021-05-08 13:56:26.213525] [0x00007faa01e9a780] [info]    Cleaned up FreeOrion Python interface
[2021-05-08 13:56:26.251510] [0x00007f9ca8af1780] [info]    Cleaned up FreeOrion Python interface
[2021-05-08 13:56:26.301777] [0x00007f9660fd1780] [info]    Cleaned up FreeOrion Python interface
execv failed: /snap/freeorion_edge/207/usr/bin/freeoriond: No such file or directory
Processus arrêté

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 3433
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Testing Reports

#26 Post by Ophiuchus »

LienRag wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:11 pm The new way of presenting ship damage in Fleet panel is totally undecipherable, I never know what damage my or enemy ships will do in combat.
Apparently it's even buggy :
Yes, the version you used seems to have a bug. It seems that ship has a single arc disruptor. So you know which tech you have? Arc disruptor with standard settings should show 144/9.

It's different from the current one. The first part gives you the total combat damage, so it shows the maximum of how much enemy structure decreases. The second part is how many shots are targeted at fighters, so it shows the maximum amount of fighters which will be destructed. Note that this includes damage from fighters. Also note that arc disruptors and strikers count for both numbers
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Look, ma... four combat bouts!

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Reports

#27 Post by LienRag »

Ophiuchus wrote: Sun May 09, 2021 4:14 pm
LienRag wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:11 pm The new way of presenting ship damage in Fleet panel is totally undecipherable, I never know what damage my or enemy ships will do in combat.
Apparently it's even buggy :
Yes, the version you used seems to have a bug. It seems that ship has a single arc disruptor. So you know which tech you have? Arc disruptor with standard settings should show 144/9.

It's different from the current one. The first part gives you the total combat damage, so it shows the maximum of how much enemy structure decreases. The second part is how many shots are targeted at fighters, so it shows the maximum amount of fighters which will be destructed. Note that this includes damage from fighters. Also note that arc disruptors and strikers count for both numbers
OK, thanks for the explanation.
I still find it somehow undecipherable : many times when preparing for combat you want to know if you'll be able to destroy the enemy fleet on the first round, and it's very hard to do so with your new UI.

With the usual UI it's easy, and by just multiplying by two (and adding fighter damage) you can know if you'll destroy the enemy at round two, and so on.

Maybe make your new UI an "expanded" view, like how Fighter damage view expends when keeping the mouse on the fighter icon of a ship ?

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Reports

#28 Post by LienRag »

Geoff the Medio wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 10:01 pm
Geoff the Medio wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 9:29 pm Can't tell what's going on with the single time screenshot. The prediction seems consistent, as -3 = -4 + 1
Yes I know, that's why I explained that it goes down each turn instead of going up as it says it would.
To rephrase: I can't tell what's going on from what you've shown. That screenshot in isolation looks fine.

Maybe there's some script that wasn't designed to handle target values below 0, though I'd still expect the prediction to be accurate even in that case.
Here's two screenshot of two consequent turns :
FO aterf.png
FO aterf.png (708.4 KiB) Viewed 1076 times
FO aterf2.png
FO aterf2.png (697.3 KiB) Viewed 1076 times
Yes connection to Imperial Thingy has been cut off, but even cut off Stability should be positive from what the UI predicts (so actually growing instead of going down).

And it keeps going down as shown in next screenshots :
FO aterf3.png
FO aterf3.png (666.76 KiB) Viewed 1076 times
FO aterf4.png
FO aterf4.png (638.08 KiB) Viewed 1076 times
FO aterf5.png
FO aterf5.png (652.41 KiB) Viewed 1076 times

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Reports

#29 Post by LienRag »

I noticed that there are "there was a ground battle" sitreps even when a planet has been fully evacuated :

(Baade gamma asteroids here)
FO baade ground.png
FO baade ground.png (647.88 KiB) Viewed 1076 times

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Reports

#30 Post by LienRag »

Also Chaos Wave are apparently able to destroy non-existing Population :
(Roy alpha was already depopulated from an earlier Black Kraken attack)
Attachments
FO chaos wave.png
FO chaos wave.png (603.87 KiB) Viewed 1076 times

Post Reply