Client lacks support for Seltorian web breakers/shield crackers. These have their own step in the SOP, between shields and transporters.

Instead, the SC/WB weapons are selectable during the direct fire weapons step. These weapons can not be used at that point.

By William T Wilson (Sheap) on Sunday, April 10, 2011 - 03:55 am: Edit

There is a problem with move costs of interceptors, which have a move cost of 1/6. The client treats them as having a decimal move cost of .17 which results in every six hexes of movement costing 1.02 instead of 1. This messes up the EA forms as the client usually thinks the interceptor is like .08 energy over its power budget from these rounding errors.

For whatever reason, the problem doesn't affect 2/3 and 5/6 move cost ships but does affect interceptors.

By Kerry E Mullan (Nomad17) on Sunday, April 10, 2011 - 01:36 pm: Edit

As well Paul for the gorn CA/BC its BPV is incorrect ie it is at 200 bpv which is the BPV for the gorn BCH, which the BC(this is actually the std gforn CA with Storps), most definitely is not.

As well for interceptors, pallets and modules is there anyway to get the standard housekeeping corrected for em?

By this I mean that pallets, modules, and interceptors pay no housekeeping of any kind but the EAF form auto fills it. It isn't too big of a thing thuogh as it's easy to just correct it if you are aware of it and anyone should be so aware of it.

William,

For interceptors I was self fixing the movement by noting the spare energy was to the full point. ie if I am moving spd 24 and putting 3 into rein I would actually be putting in 2.88 into rein but stating that due to movement differences it should be represented as 3 full points of rein.

Obviously that's just a work around.

By William T Wilson (Sheap) on Sunday, April 10, 2011 - 10:24 pm: Edit

yeah that's a good workaround. I worked around by increasing the available warp power by .08 or whatever I needed.

And also true, I think all size-5 units have wrong auto housekeeping. Under the rules, ground bases and PFs pay for shields but not fire control or life support, and interceptors don't pay any housekeeping at all. Wrong auto housekeeping isn't as bad though (just a mild irritant) as it is easily corrected when filling out the form.

Also, having one interceptor is less annoying than if you have a dozen ;)

By Paul Franz (Andromedan) on Sunday, April 17, 2011 - 10:42 am: Edit

William,
I have fixed the Interceptor movement. It will be in the next update. I have also added support for Pallets/Module and Interceptors EAs.

By William T Wilson (Sheap) on Sunday, April 17, 2011 - 01:20 pm: Edit

Excellent, thanks

By Paul Franz (Andromedan) on Sunday, April 17, 2011 - 05:33 pm: Edit

Just a note. That is Aaron will need to update the Pallets/Modules and the Interceptors to uses the new type before it can take effect.

By William T Wilson (Sheap) on Sunday, April 17, 2011 - 06:02 pm: Edit

Hmm ok,
Since there's a ship def change involved, can a game in progress safely be upgraded or will things break?

By Paul Franz (Andromedan) on Sunday, April 17, 2011 - 08:51 pm: Edit

You can upgrade and the change will not take effect. It will be safe.

By aaron_staley (Awwwdrat) on Monday, April 18, 2011 - 06:39 am: Edit

Hey folks, concerning the interceptors/modules/pallets, let me know what specific races you're using currently so I can start with those, otherwise I will have to start at R1.0 and work through it all step by step.

By William T Wilson (Sheap) on Monday, April 18, 2011 - 03:14 pm: Edit

I'm using the Gorn Interceptors but since the scenario is already underway it may not matter.

By Aaron M. Staley (Awwwdrat) on Monday, April 18, 2011 - 03:23 pm: Edit

Ok, I'll just start from R1.0 and go from there after the next update posts.

By William T Wilson (Sheap) on Saturday, April 23, 2011 - 05:52 am: Edit

The "edited filter" feature to filter units in the game control window does not work very well. The problem is that it only updates the list of units when the filter is actually edited. (It does not even update the list when the filter is applied, you actually have to go into the edit filter dialog).

To be useful, it needs to update continuously, like the predefined filters. For instance, one of the uses I would love for a custom game control filter is to show the units that still need to move; it would have to update whenever a unit moves. And so on.

By William T Wilson (Sheap) on Monday, May 02, 2011 - 02:29 am: Edit

There are various problems with sabot plasma torpedoes:
1) Type-D and type-K launchers, and sometimes type-F launchers (not sure exactly when it happens to type-F, maybe just on fighters?), can not be selected to fire a sabot torpedo.
2) It's not possible to set a torpedo to speed-40 manually.

The combination of these two problems causes difficulty when trying to use sabot versions of these torpedoes.

Additionally, the 'move status' column in game control for sabot torpedoes shows only 'Y' or 'N' meaning that it is possible to miss a move for sabot torpedoes. The client does track whether it's moved once or twice (it will pop up an error if you try to move it three times, but does allow you to move it twice) but just doesn't display it. Better would be to display 'N' in the status until the unit has completed its move, not switch to 'Y' if it's only half moved. This is a fairly minor issue as it will be caught by the client when advancing the impulse or calling IA.

On an unrelated note, there are three issues with the fire summary:
1) The range of the fire is not displayed in the summary
2) If manual firing orders are put in, they are displayed twice
3) Weapons are grouped according to the type of weapon they are, rather than the type of weapon they fired as. So if you fire an actual phaser-3, and a phaser-1 as a phaser-3, you get two entries in the summary that are both for phaser-3. Not sure what happens if you mix actual phaser-1, p1 as p3, and actual p3 all at the same time (I'll investigate and describe the behavior)

By William T Wilson (Sheap) on Saturday, May 07, 2011 - 04:30 pm: Edit

The bug where impulses rewind when new observers join the room has returned (or perhaps it never really left). It seems to be more prevalent when one of the players has a bad (slow, not disconnecting) connection.

By David Zimdars (Zimdarsdavid) on Sunday, May 08, 2011 - 09:54 am: Edit

Secret and simultaneous does not report the announcement of one player.

By Francois Lemay (Princeton) on Sunday, May 08, 2011 - 09:34 pm: Edit

Simul orders does not work for either player in our game.

By Francois Lemay (Princeton) on Monday, May 23, 2011 - 01:31 pm: Edit

One thing about the summary in the log, it does not show what text orders were given such as a change of EW.
It shows the text order ok in the chat but not in the log.

Thanks

Cheers
Frank

By Paul Franz (Andromedan) on Tuesday, May 24, 2011 - 09:04 pm: Edit

I will look into this.

By Aaron M. Staley (Awwwdrat) on Wednesday, May 25, 2011 - 11:48 am: Edit

Hey Paul, the Hydran Pallets aren't showing up on the list when players try to add them to a game room. They are having to use the "Add User Defined Ship" feature.

By Paul Franz (Andromedan) on Wednesday, May 25, 2011 - 10:54 pm: Edit

I need to look at it. It seems the file gets corrupted on download.

By David Zimdars (Zimdarsdavid) on Thursday, May 26, 2011 - 11:33 am: Edit

The log shows the announcement of a speed change and the change of speed as happening on the same impulse (the impulse of announcement). The speed actually changes the following impulse.

By Paul Franz (Andromedan) on Thursday, May 26, 2011 - 08:28 pm: Edit

David,
The speed change takes effect on the next impulse but changing the speed on the current has no effect.

By David Zimdars (Zimdarsdavid) on Friday, May 27, 2011 - 09:34 am: Edit

Paul,

Perhaps there is a better way to do this, but I was trying to look at the log to reconstruct my opponent's speed plot and number of hexes moved. The log will say something like, "1.24 xxxx anounces a speed change to 24" and the next entry is "1.24 xxxx has changed speed to 24". The increase in speed appears to happen on the same impulse as the announcement. This confused me until I figured out the discrepency by looking back at the text log file (not the log saved with the game).

By Peter Thoenen (Eol) on Monday, May 30, 2011 - 02:57 pm: Edit

Paul:

Believe you have small memory leak somewhere in the client (or maybe it's just java being nuts again). Computer was acting sluggish fso fired up task manager and noticed SFBOL was using around 748MB RAM to watch ONE game. Ja I know java is a memory hog with horrid memory management but still seems a bit high given the amount of stuff open.