2.50-Super long build times for M ships - bug or tweak?

[zarrazee]

Hi guys
I'm enjoying the new 2.50 patch.

The 1st 10 ARG M Drill Vanguards I built were all <2 mins build time each. I'm about to build some more and I noticed a very long estimated build time (9 mins, 12sec), even though "Everything is OK" at the ARG wharf. Anyone else know if this is a bug or change in 2.50? (Soz for the big images, dont know how to make 'em smaller)

https://i.imgur.com/x7sej3s.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/XdJbtc2.png

{oversized images replaced by links - CBJ}

[Ezarkal]

It's not 2.50.

I had an issue in 2.21 where building a Shuyaku at ANT shipyard took something like 50 minutes, despite the shipyard having enough wares.

I'll try to reproduce and provide a savegame if possible. Didn't think of it back then.

[zarrazee]

It's not 2.50.

I had an issue in 2.21 where building a Shuyaku at ANT shipyard took something like 50 minutes, despite the shipyard having enough wares.

I'll try to reproduce and provide a savegame if possible. Didn't think of it back then.

OK cool, thanks. Just completing a bug report now. Will send save file over the Egosoft if they want it.

Out of Interest, once that ship had been built, was the problem resolved?

[graphicboy]

There is some kind of randomness being applied to build times. If you build 100 Ms in one go, about every 3rd group of 8 will take 2-3 times as long as the prior 2. No idea on the cause.

[Ezarkal]

It's not 2.50.

I had an issue in 2.21 where building a Shuyaku at ANT shipyard took something like 50 minutes, despite the shipyard having enough wares.

I'll try to reproduce and provide a savegame if possible. Didn't think of it back then.

OK cool, thanks. Just completing a bug report now. Will send save file over the Egosoft if they want it.

Out of Interest, once that ship had been built, was the problem resolved?

I haven't build any ships after that. Budgets for building plans sapping out all of my money, and stuff...
I'll check it up as time allows.

[zarrazee]

I'll check it up as time allows.

Just requested another M ship from same wharf after waiting for 9min ship to be built. Back to 1 min 57 secs. Definitely something weird going on. Not sure how to reproduce it, first time I've seen it in 180 hours of playtime (noob).

[Kernel Panic]

I bet it's the build drones getting lazy. I filed a bug report about it in beta 4. For some reason the Wharf or Ship yard in question will have all of the build drones except one go idle for for a long time. Then they start working again for a while, then they go idle again.

[Techedge]

Doesn't the waiting time of the second batch decrease together with the time of the first batch?
E.g.
1) 10 ships--> 2 min
2) 10 ships--> 4 min
3) 10 ships--> 6 min

Then, after the first batch finishes:
2) 10 ships--> 2 min
3) 10 ships--> 4 min

I've noticed that if you order 1-10 ships (or maybe less?, don't remember because it's been months since last game) you get a timer, even if you order, say, 3 then 7 (for the grand total of 10). Then, the next "batch" until the new limit (say 20) gets more fixed time, and so on. Could this be intended?

I've also noticed that the timer seems to adjust while building, going faster than it should be (but maybe that was during station building and I'm going mad…).

[Imperial Good]

Check if the station has available construction drones. Someone did report that construction drones were not being made available or used (I forget which) after a while during continuous batch production of ships. The bug report was not really investigated further since no reliable test/recreation case was provided.

[unit757]

Around 9 minutes is typical for M and S sized ships in my game.

[Nort The Fragrent]

I used to work in a shipyard ! There are times when things slow down. Tea Brakes, Lunch, Skiving off for a chat, going for a wonder, Then it's home time. Just take a look at the employed staff on the landing bays, they do nothing. Typical shipyard workers by the looks of things. So you need to give the poor under paid worker credit, They suffer appalling conditions and get paid peanuts. EG have nailed the shipyard intermittent aspect of a yard perfectly.
So when your shinny ship is delivered give a moment of your time to thank the hard working underpaid workers for getting dun in minuets, not months.

Oh! And a tip doesn't go a miss……

[Kernel Panic]

Check if the station has available construction drones. Someone did report that construction drones were not being made available or used (I forget which) after a while during continuous batch production of ships. The bug report was not really investigated further since no reliable test/recreation case was provided.

viewtopic.php?f=192&t=416822&p=4867465#p4867465

Looks like it was reported, a save game was provided, and no evidence of investigation was given. It's possible more save games could be provided if needed but perhaps they should come from other sources to dissuade any notions of bias.

[Imperial Good]

Looks like it was reported, a save game was provided, and no evidence of investigation was given.

The problem was that the report lacked simple/clear instructions to recreate the issue other than the suggestion that one tries restricting trade of ships and it might fix whatever is happening.

What is needed is a save where the warf/shipyard starts out without orders (already restricted trade), the player orders some number of standard ships (e.g. X times a Y ship using Z standard loadout) and then after some amount of production occurs (can run SETA to skip this) the bug happens. Such save and steps provide very easy verification that a bug exists and can be used by Egosoft to debug and verify any fixes.

[radcapricorn]

What is needed is a save where the warf/shipyard starts out without orders (already restricted trade), the player orders some number of standard ships (e.g. X times a Y ship using Z standard loadout) and then after some amount of production occurs (can run SETA to skip this) the bug happens. Such save and steps provide very easy verification that a bug exists and can be used by Egosoft to debug and verify any fixes.

This should be something the developers could recreate on their own in controlled environment, instead of leaving it up to players to painstakingly work to create ideal conditions. Players aren't exactly paid to do this.

[Kernel Panic]

Looks like it was reported, a save game was provided, and no evidence of investigation was given.

The problem was that the report lacked simple/clear instructions to recreate the issue other than the suggestion that one tries restricting trade of ships and it might fix whatever is happening.

What is needed is a save where the warf/shipyard starts out without orders (already restricted trade), the player orders some number of standard ships (e.g. X times a Y ship using Z standard loadout) and then after some amount of production occurs (can run SETA to skip this) the bug happens. Such save and steps provide very easy verification that a bug exists and can be used by Egosoft to debug and verify any fixes.

All that was needed was to load the save game and play it. That was why it was provided. If you have copy of the save game from the time it was available you could do that yourself and you would then know too. If you don't then you are speaking about things which you have very limited knowledge of. I see posts like yours all through these forums. A certain subset of user names that are always attacking the worthiness of a bug report or game play feedback or wish lists of future features. Their technical arguments rarely have any good points past the first two logical steps of the argument and their emotional appeals are just that. To attack me personally and come mere centimeters from calling me a liar really pisses me off. I didn't just volunteer to beta test the Linux version X4. I paid to do it. Now I pay an extra $10 a month for the cloud storage that I took my time to learn how to set up and use. These past two weeks I see my time being wasted and that pisses me off even more. I guess you just don't know what I know.

So let me introduce myself. I am Kernel Panic. I am not a young man. I have played video games since before there were personal computers. I know why the 5 classes of IPv4 addresses are numbered the way they are. I know the difference between a hard link and symbolic link. I wrote KB articles for Microsoft when the worlds largest email provider was CompuServe. I know how UPD port 42 and Windows .dll files are related. I know that if you and the rest of the Sock Puppet Army keep trying to shout down those of us trying to help you will wind up doing the opposite of what Egosoft assembled a Sock Puppet Army to do. I know that I can find many other things with my time and my grey-bearded-UNIX-retirment-paychecks. I know that if Egosoft wants any more of either they need to tug on your leash.

[Imperial Good]

This should be something the developers could recreate on their own in controlled environment, instead of leaving it up to players to painstakingly work to create ideal conditions. Players aren't exactly paid to do this.

Is it easy to recreate though? If it occurred during the limited play testing the developers perform or the more thorough testing that QA performed then it would likely be fixed already, or at least scheduled to be fixed.

To attack me personally and come mere centimeters from calling me a liar really pisses me off.

Nowhere did I call you a liar... I was stating a likely reason why the developers did not look into it. Clear/scientific instructions to recreate an issue are very helpful to make sure developers see what you saw and experience what you experienced. It also prevents time being wasted in case for some reason what you experienced did not happen (e.g. due to RNG) since otherwise the developer might be left playing for potentially hours waiting to see an issue that was supposed to have already happened.

I paid to do it. Now I pay an extra $10 a month for the cloud storage that I took my time to learn how to set up and use.

Not sure why that would be directly required for beta testing. One can use a free dropbox account to share the saves/screenshots, and after a year or so when they are no longer required they can be deleted to free up space.

[radcapricorn]

Is it easy to recreate though? If it occurred during the limited play testing the developers perform or the more thorough testing that QA performed then it would likely be fixed already, or at least scheduled to be fixed.

How easy it is is really not my concern. They're developers. The first thing they should have is a debugging sandbox. So it "should" be easy. Whether it is or not is their problem.

One can use a free dropbox account to share the saves/screenshots, and after a year or so when they are no longer required they can be deleted to free up space.

Free dropbox is 2Gb. One core dump for the Linux version is 500Mb. Anything else?
Also, saves could've been ~4x smaller even before compression. But we've been over this already.