Current Bugs and Issues List

Ask here if you experience technical problems with X³: Reunion, X²: The Threat, X-Tension or X-Beyond The Frontier

Moderators: timon37, Moderators for English X Forum

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

Re: Current Bugs and Issues List

Post by apricotslice » Wed, 19. Apr 06, 15:09

CBJ, I have taken the liberty of attaching your response post to the OP.

At this point, I am no longer going to update the OP, unless something there is pointed out to have been fixed. (I found one today).
CBJ wrote:Please re-read the explanation of why the rules in DevNet are as they are. ..... By all means discuss ideas to thrash them out, but not in there. Think about it. The developers couldn't possibly read through hundreds of 20 page threads full of people discussing which bits of an idea would and wouldn't work. The solution is to do the thinking and discussing elsewhere, and post the finished idea in there.
I made a point of reading everything before posting. If what your saying here is in there, then I missed it. And I was looking.

Maybe you need a more prominent explaination of the purposes of devnet done in very small words for the completely dumb. That way I may have found it and understood.

Be that as it may, it doesnt work. Since most of the requests in there, havent been discussed elsewhere, are not well thought out, and do contradict each other. The majority of them DO need someone to just point out why they wont work or what they will end up doing to the game when taken to the extreme, but without posting an alternative, this is "unhelpful".

What you really need is another level of devnet. Let people argue out the ideas in whats there, but have a few key people (like betatesters) who can recommend to a moderator to shift a really well thought out idea to somewhere else for the devs to really look at. Then if its decided to pusue it, an official thread can be opened by the recommending person to really thrash out the ins and outs and ramifications of the idea, after which a summary goes back to the dev section. Then you think about actually implementing it. Thats how I'd do it anyway. Millions will disagree I know.
Active and creative users are always welcome in DevNet, and I would urge you to consider the reasons for DevNet being managed the way it is and reconsider your decision not to participate.
I will do so. But ...... (and you saw that coming a mile away didnt you :) )
I dont think the existing structure can handle someone like me. I was a damned good analyst in my day, and I built systems that didnt fall over the moment they were implemented. And I was proud of it. The people above me hated me though, because I always pointed out the flaws in their designs before they could blame them on someone else.

I see the problems most other people miss. Its a gift and a curse at once.

My best use in such a forum is to play devils advocate to ensure that all the possible problems come to light before devs seriously address the ideas. Frankly, any idea that hasnt got something wrong with it pointed out in the thread, is something that should be treated with extreme suspicion, because the game is too complex for ideas with apparently nothing wrong with them to actually work. But the structure will not support someone like me in it.

I do not want to be the cause of arguments and stress for moderators. Hence my decision. I will rethink it though.

Jakesnake5
Posts: 2874
Joined: Fri, 17. Feb 06, 05:55
x4

Post by Jakesnake5 » Wed, 19. Apr 06, 19:37

I CAN verify 4 and 6. And a BETATESTER (AalaarDB) not only knows about it, but wrote a script (Ship Respawner) that logs the 'destroy'd' that occured from 'non-combat' vanishings. Here's a sample

This ship was destroyed and recreated: Harrier Raider Pirate Harrier Raider Split Equipment Dock(Thuruk's Beard) null COMMAND_NONE null null 760 100
This ship was destroyed and recreated: Your Paranid Pericles Pericles Vanguard Boron Equipment Dock(Menelaus' Paradise) null COMMAND_NONE null null 2191 65
This ship was destroyed and recreated: Your Teladi Harrier Pirate Harrier Vanguard Free Argon Trading Station(Nyana's Hideout) null COMMAND_NONE null null 689 68
This ship was destroyed and recreated: Your Teladi Harrier Pirate Harrier Teladi Trading Station(Home Of Opportunity) null COMMAND_NONE null null 506 56

The FIRST one, I have a save game in which this occures if the player leaves the system that ship is in, or the ship leaves the players system. Doesn't matter if its docked or not.

All ships listed were 'caps'.

All ships (and Im sure you noticed) are at stations with extremely LOW probability of being GOD'd. The stations STILL exhisted, which is why the ships HAD a station to be respawned at.

Here's an entry of a ship that was at a station that was 'destroyed' (by pirates):

This ship was destroyed and recreated: Your Argon Buster Pirate Buster Unknown Object(Unknown Object) null COMMAND_NONE null null 1705 54

Due to the fact the station no longer exhisted on respawn, you get the 'Unknown Object' report of its position. And ONLY this one got any report of being 'destroyed' in the log.

And it's a 1.4.x issue still.

Cycrow
Moderator (Script&Mod)
Moderator (Script&Mod)
Posts: 20600
Joined: Mon, 15. Nov 04, 00:26
x4

Post by Cycrow » Wed, 19. Apr 06, 19:48

BillyBoyFloyd wrote:Apricot Slice: I loved everthing you pointed out at the start of this thread, I am in 100% agreement. I consider them bugs too. One man's "developer decision" is this mans' "bug" called by a sugared name.
actaully thats quite incorrect.
a bug is something that stops a program working the way the developers intended it to.
a bug isn't something that the user things should be in the game but isn't.

Many ppl class the TS's not beable to dock a bug, but its not a bug, its the choise of the developers, even if everyone disagrees with the descition still doesn't make it a bug.

also, as far as the TS docking, the reason for removing this was clear, the size of TS's have dramatically increased, even thou there no where nr the size of a TL, docking them is still unrealistic. I've seen ppl comparing the sizes to work out that u can fit all these TS's inside a TL, but not taking into acount everything else thats in a ship. If you have 5 TS's docked inside, then there needs to be enough room to hold the 5 TS's as well as enough room for the docking mechanisiums, and enough room to allow each of these to individually dock and undock, then of course you still need room for the normal ships hanger, room to hold stations, and everything else in the ships like the engines and bridge, etc.

Personally, the more relalistic solution is to have a new class of ship, a shuttle craft, which would be smaller than the standard freighters but with big enough cargo hold to transfer alot of goods.

its like trying to dock aload of oil tankers inside an aircraft carrier

Jakesnake5
Posts: 2874
Joined: Fri, 17. Feb 06, 05:55
x4

Post by Jakesnake5 » Wed, 19. Apr 06, 21:25

Cycrow wrote:Personally, the more relalistic solution is to have a new class of ship, a shuttle craft, which would be smaller than the standard freighters but with big enough cargo hold to transfer alot of goods.
Won't quite work. Falcon Haulers are usuable as 'Cargo Shuttles'. Though M1's and TL's can dock them, M2's can't dock anything. And this is a major issue with those who buy them.

The only realistic way to get things onto an M2 is have a freighter go and buy the stuy, then dock both at a EQ Dock or Shipyard and transfer, or use a Transporter Device.

And if you use a start that makes goners hate you so they WON'T let you dock, you have to use a BBS script to get the TD's.

Falcon Haulers can carry XL cargo,

Armegeddon
Posts: 385
Joined: Fri, 26. Dec 03, 14:37
x4

Post by Armegeddon » Wed, 19. Apr 06, 21:47

Cycrow wrote:
BillyBoyFloyd wrote:Apricot Slice: I loved everthing you pointed out at the start of this thread, I am in 100% agreement. I consider them bugs too. One man's "developer decision" is this mans' "bug" called by a sugared name.
actaully thats quite incorrect.
a bug is something that stops a program working the way the developers intended it to.
a bug isn't something that the user things should be in the game but isn't.

Many ppl class the TS's not beable to dock a bug, but its not a bug, its the choise of the developers, even if everyone disagrees with the descition still doesn't make it a bug.
I was just waiting for someone to make a statement like that before I posted in here again, as I seem to invite alot of disagreement (if that's the right word for it) when I post my opinion on these issues.

EgoSoft had a decision to make when creating X3 (or any of the X games for that matter):
1) Make a game that included everything everyone wanted in it. Such a task would have meant we'd be waiting probably another 2 years before a release.
2) Make a game that contains a "functional" universe, but include powerful tools (script engine and mod ability) so that the community is able to expand the game for different play styles.

The second option is what we got.
Some people have referred to X3 (X2 also) as a "sandbox" game; a game where you can do anything you want and are not limited to specific paths or roles. It is this ability to do anything that gives the game it's appeal.
Obviously there are still some issues to make the universe as "functional" as it should be, and that is what ES should be focusing on, not adding content and features that can be (somewhat) easily added via scripts and mods. As has been said before, most of what people are considering bugs and issues are actually personal preferences for how they want to play the game. Not everyone wants those features in their games, and it is much easier to add something new in, than remove something that is an actual part of the game itself.
apricotslice wrote:What you really need is another level of devnet. Let people argue out the ideas in whats there, but have a few key people (like betatesters) who can recommend to a moderator to shift a really well thought out idea to somewhere else for the devs to really look at. Then if its decided to pusue it, an official thread can be opened by the recommending person to really thrash out the ins and outs and ramifications of the idea, after which a summary goes back to the dev section. Then you think about actually implementing it. Thats how I'd do it anyway. Millions will disagree I know.
Actually, what is needed is for the moderators to not move threads from the X-Universe forums into Technical Support just because they discuss bugs. Leave it upto the thread creators to start another post in Tech support or DevNet once all discussion has been taken care of, which I believe was the original point of this thread.

apricotslice, you have said multiple times that 'in your day' people would have been punished for releasing code that doesn't work as the customer wants. This isn't 'in your day', it has become standard practice for programs (mostly games) to be released with bugs to be patched later. Is this a good practice? Hell no, but as long as developers have deadlines that they cannot change (for whatever reason), they have no choice but to release what they have in order to meet that deadline, otherwise they risk not getting paid. I for one would rather have to download a patch to fix issues that couldn't be resolved by the release date than not have the game at all due to it being cancelled because it took too long. Some development companies are able to get their release dates pushed back if it takes longer than expected, but those are usually bigger companies with other products that can be released so they still have income to pay the staff. As far as I know, the X series is pretty much EgoSofts' only income, so they have to bow to the deadlines. (getting off track here so will stop before I get lost)
There is a thin line between genius & insanity i have erased this line

Armegeddon's X3 scripts and mods

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

Post by apricotslice » Thu, 20. Apr 06, 02:15

Armegeddon wrote:Actually, what is needed is for the moderators to not move threads from the X-Universe forums into Technical Support just because they discuss bugs. Leave it upto the thread creators to start another post in Tech support or DevNet once all discussion has been taken care of, which I believe was the original point of this thread.
Agreed.

User avatar
esd
Moderator (English)
Moderator (English)
Posts: 11578
Joined: Tue, 2. Sep 03, 05:57
x3tc

Post by esd » Thu, 20. Apr 06, 02:22

9. Discussion of any action taken by the site in relation to a user (i.e. a banning or a warning) is not permitted. This includes discussions about locked topics.
Continuing to discuss the moving of the thread will get it locked, and I doubt either of you want that.
esd's Guides: X² Loops - X³ MORTs

User avatar
esd
Moderator (English)
Moderator (English)
Posts: 11578
Joined: Tue, 2. Sep 03, 05:57
x3tc

Post by esd » Thu, 20. Apr 06, 03:36

Locked at OP's request.
esd's Guides: X² Loops - X³ MORTs

Locked

Return to “X³: Reunion, X²: The Threat, X-T and X-BTF - Technical Support”