Gameplay Bugs and Issues List Tech Support Summission Discussion.

General discussions about the games by Egosoft including X-BTF, XT, X², X³: Reunion, X³: Terran Conflict and X³: Albion Prelude.

Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum

Colonelnj10
Posts: 433
Joined: Mon, 6. Feb 06, 04:56
x3

Post by Colonelnj10 » Tue, 29. Aug 06, 22:54

if you want to kill off smugglers yourself, get in line

User avatar
iridian
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon, 20. Feb 06, 20:41
x3

Post by iridian » Tue, 29. Aug 06, 23:45

Is it normal that the Yaki do not appear as a «race» to me ?
they are simply blue - not in the race list (foe / friendly) and they only turn red when I scan them and find «something» wich is quite randon - eg. 2 ships with same loadout- only 1 of them turns red...
after I attack the red (yaki pirate) the rest turns red on me too...
but every time I re enter the sector , they are blue again

Yes I did finished the plot

There are also some ships I cannot enter/ comunicate to
Eg. Mercury (speed 0... nothing happening) in the sector of the Marauder
The Soul... thing ship (goner) wich has stopped moving in ore belt
and I guess there is a duplicate of it flying in and out argon prime (confuses the hell out of me)


BTW; when you get this pirate smuggler (in a TS class vessel to drop all of his freight.. AND BAIL OUT) and you get him to collect all wares in the sector (the stuff he dropped - by transporting a special comm soft. to his ship) then all of the stuff wont fit in his cargo bay becouse all upgrades are *destroyed ???*

quite lame if you ask me

thx in advance

and sorry if it was posted somewhere but I looked here and in this topic (front pages, didnt read all the replys after that)

User avatar
Mophus
Posts: 121
Joined: Sun, 14. May 06, 23:29

Post by Mophus » Wed, 30. Aug 06, 00:33

Well, this isn't exactly a "gameplay" bug (it's more of an interface bug), but it seems Egosoft has some problems acknowledging it (I've posted in the forum, contcted them by e-mail, other players have reproduced it, etc.).

- Mophus

User avatar
apricotslice
Posts: 13734
Joined: Sun, 16. May 04, 13:01
x4

Post by apricotslice » Wed, 30. Aug 06, 02:32

Mophus wrote:Well, this isn't exactly a "gameplay" bug (it's more of an interface bug), but it seems Egosoft has some problems acknowledging it (I've posted in the forum, contcted them by e-mail, other players have reproduced it, etc.).
Reply put in that thread. I'm not able to reproduce that as I dont have that complicated a joystick.

Edit : It isnt a gameplay issue as such, and your tech support thread is the appropriate way to report it. You did get a Egosoft response pretty quickly, which surprised me. So either the problem isnt gereatable by anyone there, or its something that cannot be fixed. Be nice if they said so, but most of the time they dont.

User avatar
apricotslice
Posts: 13734
Joined: Sun, 16. May 04, 13:01
x4

Post by apricotslice » Wed, 30. Aug 06, 07:00

The submission to Tech Support is now available for final comments.
http://circleofatlantis.com/X3forum/vie ... hp?p=83#83

If there is no further comment or additions, I'll post it in tech support tomorrow.

jlehtone
Posts: 17249
Joined: Sat, 23. Apr 05, 21:42
x4

Post by jlehtone » Wed, 30. Aug 06, 09:16

Did you miss?
ISSUE? I did build a mine, The default name was "Silicon Mine L alpha". So were all the other too. I did rename them to contain the yield in the name. The targeting still says "Silicon Mine L alpha". That is understandable. Then I joined them into complex. Now every one of them is again "Silicon Mine L alpha". The name was not preserved.
Bug (related to 13): The addition of a station into complex does not preserve its name. The name resets to default.


And Bug 10 (Model problems) should definitely list Shark for its turrets.

User avatar
apricotslice
Posts: 13734
Joined: Sun, 16. May 04, 13:01
x4

Post by apricotslice » Wed, 30. Aug 06, 10:02

jlehtone wrote: Bug (related to 13): The addition of a station into complex does not preserve its name. The name resets to default.
This is part of the overall loss of station identity when combined with a complex. Only the hub retains an in game entity.

I suspect this is by design.

I also suspect CBJ would class this as a "player want" rather than a bug.

Edit : What are you trying to do that needs the individual stations with individual names ?

And Bug 10 (Model problems) should definitely list Shark for its turrets.
Added. I hadnt seen anyone mention this one before.

apogee
Posts: 1104
Joined: Thu, 22. Jul 04, 13:35
x3tc

Post by apogee » Wed, 30. Aug 06, 10:38

re combining stations above, in some circumstances when joining a new fab to an existing complex, the buying/selling prices get re-set to average and sometimes the jump range gets re-set to 9. This is annoying.

Oh and another bug, can the undock ship from a docked TL/M1 be addressed, either stop it happening, or allow it to work! This is if you change ships in a docked tl/m1, it causes a ctd. Not sure what happens if you order a ship in a docked tl to leave the ship though.

jlehtone
Posts: 17249
Joined: Sat, 23. Apr 05, 21:42
x4

Post by jlehtone » Wed, 30. Aug 06, 10:43

apricotslice wrote:Edit : What are you trying to do that needs the individual stations with individual names ?
One was that I had recorded the yield in the name of a mine. Sure, you can recompute that from cycletime, but even that is difficult to see in a complex member. Suppose I have an incomplete loop, and want to improve it. And I have forgotten how much mineral production I already have there.

Some of the production variables of individual members are clearly used. Why would the "name" variable be thrown away and not used? They probably won't release the memory anyway.

Since they loose identity, I assume that they will not regain it if the hub is destroyed?

And what is the point of the " alpha" suffix on the "name" of each member of the hub in its details view?


Oh, forgot:
Bonuspack 3.1.01 now includes a script that rebuilds one Tractor Beam Forge.
So there is a now an official workaround.


And another: Occasionally, killing a Xenon J/K will cause CTD. The ship may have more equipment onboard than the ship can carry. Apparently, the "death-and-drop-containers" procedure makes the space check. The equipment spawn is a bit generous. That has been on some freighters too. IIRC, people used to capture freighters with more cargo than space.

There is a corollary to this. The Xenon K. Can mount 40 GPPC. That would take 6,000 cargo units. Xenon K has only 5,000. That is ok as player ship, but I would like to face NPC K's with full selection of guns. Because if I do now, the NPC cheats and I face the danger of CTD.

CTD cannot be a design feature, can it? Sorry for being slow to remember, it has been a while I had one, but it was 1.4.03.

User avatar
apricotslice
Posts: 13734
Joined: Sun, 16. May 04, 13:01
x4

Post by apricotslice » Wed, 30. Aug 06, 10:51

CTD's should be addressed through the patch thread. or in tech support on their own.

Added in the jumps value.

apogee
Posts: 1104
Joined: Thu, 22. Jul 04, 13:35
x3tc

Post by apogee » Wed, 30. Aug 06, 11:27

Re-complexes, Would it also be possible to specify a particular product(s) as the primary output. In some cases i have compexes where all of the goods are classified as intermediate, but i only want one of the goods to be tradable to npc/ut's etc. It would be nice if you could specify which intermediate goods can/cannot be traded at an individual level. ok this is not a bug but an enhancement.

User avatar
apricotslice
Posts: 13734
Joined: Sun, 16. May 04, 13:01
x4

Post by apricotslice » Wed, 30. Aug 06, 13:00

apogee wrote: ok this is not a bug but an enhancement.
Yes it is.

Unfortunately, enhancements have to be presented through Devnet, under the rules of that forum.

apogee
Posts: 1104
Joined: Thu, 22. Jul 04, 13:35
x3tc

Post by apogee » Wed, 30. Aug 06, 13:05

apricotslice wrote:
apogee wrote: ok this is not a bug but an enhancement.
Yes it is.

Unfortunately, enhancements have to be presented through Devnet, under the rules of that forum.
Thought as much :)

Though the following is, can something be done about the logic used to build the tubing linking complexes/fabs together. I linked 2 Silicon mines together and one of the tubes spears right through the asteroid one of the mines is sitting on, it should go round. I have other instances of tubes "passing through" stations, i think collision detect on tubes/stations must be de-activated as they never seem to be a problem. But it does look bad.

User avatar
apricotslice
Posts: 13734
Joined: Sun, 16. May 04, 13:01
x4

Post by apricotslice » Wed, 30. Aug 06, 13:14

apogee wrote:Though the following is, can something be done about the logic used to build the tubing linking complexes/fabs together. I linked 2 Silicon mines together and one of the tubes spears right through the asteroid one of the mines is sitting on, it should go round. I have other instances of tubes "passing through" stations, i think collision detect on tubes/stations must be de-activated as they never seem to be a problem. But it does look bad.
The trouble is, if you add more stations, the tubing will move too.

Personally I think the tubing should be removed altogether. Somewhere back in time I put up a proposal for changing complexes to remove the randomness of the tubing, and make them properly modular, so all tubing was primarily straight and ran like a backbone down the middle of 2 rows of stations. In effect, the player would say add station to complex, and the AI would attach it to the next logical module position, adding the tubes as needed. Result is a nice compact complex with minimal tubing.

But the purists will prefer to place themselves, and that is what Egosoft went with when they designed the whole thing, previous game players who wanted to join factories themselves, in their own way. So that is what was designed, and most people ahve spagetti complexes as a result.

Not sure where that thread is now, I didnt keep track of them back then.

apogee
Posts: 1104
Joined: Thu, 22. Jul 04, 13:35
x3tc

Post by apogee » Wed, 30. Aug 06, 13:56

@apricotslice, yes when i first saw the NPC production facilities, like light shield fabs etc, i thought why cant we have something like that, and expanded so a single fab contained all the components (as you say modules) to fully replace the current complex construction idea.

On another note, why does the first hub have to point north??? why cant i place it and give it a direction i want! aaargh

Locked

Return to “X Trilogy Universe”