When you right click on multiple ships in the diplomacy screen to see where they are, then left click on one of them to trade it, it often selects a bunch of ships you don't want as well. It's minor but rather annoying.

It's been this way since 1.10 but it never annoyed me enough to actually report it until now.
[Message Edited]

vincible - It does this with Tech Trading also, as it seems to "highlight" it once you've right clicked it, and to stop it from happening you have to right click on it a second time, a real pain... is it something that can be looked into without much hassle? Hope so

can't remember if this was posted or what but after i wiped out the acreans in my last game and went to build starbases near to where they had theirs it wouldn't let me saying it was too close to another starbase, when there weren't any others around. i closed GC and loaded up the save and it worked, so only a minor bug, but when you have to exit and reload 4 times a game it can get annoying

~SDC~

I'll check into the morale trade goods, the trade list stuff, and the starbase thing.

I noticed something similar with aphrodesiac recently as well. My growth curve was level with the AI empires, I built aphrodesiac, and my growth curve remained level with the AI for quite a number of months. I eventually took over another planet, at which point the aphrodesiac seemed to kick in and I started growing more quickly. My morale was at 100% the whole time (or close enough as makes no difference.) OTOH, I have also had games where aphrodesiac kicked in immediately.

Again, a couple of minor bugs, consistent over the last four games or so (again-apologies if repeated):

1. Overlord Tech says that you have developed Excalibur-class ships in both the tech menu and the description you get whne having developed the tech. Only one example of this, as it was my first game in whihc I got that far up the tech-tree.

2. There seems to be a minor bug with the sector influence display on the mini-map. When I reload a game the display takes about two turns to correct itself as initially it displays much less influence for all the civilizations. Often having sectors black in the late game. Only on relaoad, only for at most 2-3 turns.

3. On reload in the ship display window, in the right column, it gets 16-20 boxes rather than remaining black. This has however no effect on gameplay and it may actually be intentional.

Also it's really cool to see that the programmers hang out here and have an excellent reponse time, stops me from getting annoyed with minor stuff in the game. Really looking forward the UP fix next week as I was considering going back to the 1.0 version to play with the full UP.

Thanks

Zed F -- morale bonuses are cumulative. If you already have 200% bonus, adding another 15% doesn't change things much. Check your stats screen to see what your cumulative bonus is, then add that the the planet's bonus.

Some techs (The ones that come after Corvet Technology. I don't know if any others are affected) don't show up when browsing the tech tree by right clicking on a tech. Corvet Technology has no techs that come after it according to the tech tree navigator. If you right click on the one immediately after Corvet Technology it says it has Corvet tech. as a prerequisite, but the later ones all show up as having no techs before or after them.

~SDC~

I fixed the overloard tech thing.

The influence does take awhile to reset when you load a save game because we have to re-calculate it.

Disrupters and Energy Focusing show up after Corvettes in my tech tree viewer.  This may be something that we've already fixed on our end.

 

What about the colony ships and transports behaving as if loaded while in orbit? What was the final decision on fixing that?

- Sirian

I still have to investigate that.

 

After a few moment of playing game, the game crashes and i would be returned to the windows/ bureau .

What can i do ? someone can help me ?

(:(

Greetings,

I have two possible starbase bugs to report...

1) If you intentionally disband a starbase and then attempt to place another starbase within 3 parsecs of the disbanded starbase, GC will complain that the new starbase 'needs to be at least 3 parsecs from another starbase'. (i.e. disbanding a SB doesn't seem to completely erase it from memory.)

2) This was probably already mentioned, but I've seen the AIs building SBs within 3 parsecs of each other, provided that there is a sector boundary between the two SBs.

Cheers,
mike

On a small map, I have over 75% of the map in my color, but the council pie chart shows me with a small sliver of the influence. I have been playing the game for a long time trying to win with influence and have planets defect.

dennis

TheFrolickingMan
you can also build starbases next to each other if there is a sector boundary in between *wink*

The "Ghost ship" problem is still with us at the 1.12.079 level. Has anyone tried to fix it? Or is the fix going into a new level (gc2, next expansion pack, etc.)?

Problem description: The ICONs for a ship type will sometimes dissappear during game play. Saving, quiting, and restarting with the saved game brings the ICONs for the ghost ships back.

I think it was mentioned somewhere that the bug was diagnosed, but the fix would require a complete rewrite of the core of the game, so it won't be fixed. Kind of like an inoperable brain tumor, I guess.

Bill

~SDC~

Cari: There's been a debate going in the Fellowship of the Ring thread about a possible bug with alignment as reported on the Metaverse.

The issue: does the Metaverse record games that should be counted as Neutral instead shown as Chaotic Good.

I have had numerous games with my final alignment in the 51-60 range, all reported as Chaotic Good. I just had another tonight. I took the Neutral options all the way through the game, until the final couple of events, which were both 1 point jobs. My final alignment ended at 52, and it was never outside the 50-52 range, yet the game is logged as Chaotic Good. That can't be right, can it?

This is why there are more Chaotic Good games, statistically -- there appears to be a bug. Anything from 51 to 90 alignment is reported as Chaotic Good. Shouldn't that be more like 61 to 90 or even 66 to 90?


- Sirian

So when can we expect this new update?

~SDC~

They haven't been anymore specific than sometime this week.

~SDC~

A bit more about alignment, from the Fellowship thread:

51 = chaotic good
50 = neutral
40 = neutral

this cheese needs to be fixed. I like the 3 parsec rule.
I have a suggestion for version 2:
Starbase and planet influence extends 7 parsecs into space. A starbase would influence all planets and ships within 7 sectors of it. Why should a base on the grid line influence a planet 14 parsecs away and not the one on the other side of the line, even thought it is only 2 parsecs away? I would like the map sectors to be just lines on a map. I don't know about the coding but this is more realistic.

I know this has been mentioned before, but I would like to know if it is intentional or a bug:

The minor powers, at the lower levels, are very strong in the early game. They often will have the most influence and be the most powerful until a couple turns before the game ends. They also have a tendency, mostly because they start with very good planets, to jump out ahead in both the tech and industrial development. In some games this has meant that they are sitting on 90% of the trade goods and wonders... I'm assuming this somewhat self-corrects at the higher levels as the AIs play stronger (which to me as a newbie is a bit intimidating). As a note, I also haven't seen any of the "evil" minors. Looking around here people mention at least three or four minors that I haven't seen (I only see the Alexians, Scotlingas and the C...oids in the early game and a couple of others come up later in the game, but none of the "evil" ones).

Walker,

Stardock is looking at limiting minors a little bit. They seem to have overcompensated for them too much in the last upgrade.

Not sure if this is a bug, or something, but I've been unable to submit scores to the metaverse since v1.1. I get this error message that says something like success=1 failure=0

~SDC~