Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Alex]

@RawCode: Replied here. Don't want to derail this thread.


As far as the logging code, just to be clear: that's perfectly fine to do that way as far as I'm concerned. It's not directly touching any obfuscated core stuff.

[Flunky]

Here's a bug in RC2 (downloaded about 2.5 hours ago, I think):

Bought a Vigilance, noticed the upgrade available at the omnifactory but thought I'd save my money for now and didn't buy one. Went back to storage and dropped off my Vigilance. Took off and received a happy notice that my upgrade was complete.

In other words, I upgraded the Vigilance without buying a blueprint first.

[Uomoz]

Here's a bug in RC2 (downloaded about 2.5 hours ago, I think):

Bought a Vigilance, noticed the upgrade available at the omnifactory but thought I'd save my money for now and didn't buy one. Went back to storage and dropped off my Vigilance. Took off and received a happy notice that my upgrade was complete.

In other words, I upgraded the Vigilance without buying a blueprint first.

Fixed! if-if code lines were badly concatenated .

Gonna release official 17.1 soon.

[Merlon]

Love the new version and the eventsystem in particular.

I've run into a few bugs though: (Note:  I'm playing with the vanilla faction choice.)

• Once a political event fired with the following message: "Internal conflict in the null Bloc: nullnull and null are at war".
• The faction responsible for protecting the omnifactory is hostile to the omnifactory trader. Is this intentional?
• I've had the cheat detection system trigger on a legitimate sale: I had just beaten 3 lotus fleets and sold a few of the captured ships and all the loot to the omnifactory. The total was apparently enough to brand me a cheater. Could you please remove this check?

[Uomoz]

Hey, welcome to the forums and to U'sC!

Thanks for the feedback, fixing the first 2, removed the cheat detection.

[RawCode]

Some hullIDS missmatch filenames:
junk_pirates_goat_Support is good exsample.

Currently i working on code that will automatically detect such issues without just creating every hull somewhere, will post it later.

I suggest to evoid unnessesary pain - check every hull\variant for missmatches or just create every possible hull\variant just to check, othervice users will encounter painfull unrecoverable errors.

[Uomoz]

Some hullIDS missmatch filenames:
junk_pirates_goat_Support is good example.

The only example that I'm aware of, and I forget to fix it every time I update JP.

[RawCode]

Code

32094 [Thread-6] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.D  - java.lang.RuntimeException: INVALID FILES DETECTED: barracuda
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: gedune_bakoros
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: gedune_byakuri
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: gedune_chua
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: gedune_dahaki2
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: gedune_duri
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: gedune_kitsune
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: gedune_kitsune_attack
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: gedune_kitsune_support
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: gedune_kyirus
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: gedune_kyra_drone
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: gedune_mozok_f1
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: gedune_mozok_t1
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: gedune_mozok1
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: gedune_nanda1
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: gedune_tenzen
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: gedune_tenzen2
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: gedune_tychrea
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: gedune_viper
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: gedune_wraithii_drone
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: junk_pirates_goat_Support
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: rive_hunter
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: squilla
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: enforcer_Support
		INVALID FILES DETECTED: tempest_Balanced

All this files have invalid signature, attempt to create hull with provided names will crush game.

invalid == variantid and filename missmatch, you still can create hull by id, but this is stupid and counter intuitive, shoud be fixed.

ps. check this
http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=5782.0
it for character creation compatability for up to 32 mods.

[Uomoz]

I don't get it, you have false positives.

ex.
gedune_bakoros_variant.variant

gedune_bakoros_variant (id).

The only real fix I had to do was the rive, thanks for catching that.

[RawCode]

well, false positives confirmed and fixed in my current detector version.

[Griffinhart]

removed the cheat detection.

\o/

A lesson in why anti-cheating measures don't work.

(The best part is that you can scale this lesson up to "anti-piracy".)

-- Griffinhart

[RawCode]

there is no reason to add any type of cheating prevention to singleplayer game.

only possible viable limit is forcing devmod off, everything else is useless.

[SainnQ]

removed the cheat detection.

\o/

A lesson in why anti-cheating measures don't work.

(The best part is that you can scale this lesson up to "anti-piracy".)

-- Griffinhart

He removed the cheat detection I'd imagine mainly due to it being incredibly inaccurate.
It was actually throwing off false positives about his own mod. Things like starter ships from another mod that he's done with the fellow behind the Antediluvian faction (I think)

Or if you sold too much *** in one go.

Also, Uomoz are you ready for 17.1 release yet or are you still on Release Candidates?

[Uomoz]

removed the cheat detection.

\o/

A lesson in why anti-cheating measures don't work.

(The best part is that you can scale this lesson up to "anti-piracy".)

-- Griffinhart

He removed the cheat detection I'd imagine mainly due to it being incredibly inaccurate.
It was actually throwing off false positives about his own mod. Things like starter ships from another mod that he's done with the fellow behind the Antediluvian faction (I think)

Or if you sold too much *** in one go.

Also, Uomoz are you ready for 17.1 release yet or are you still on Release Candidates?

I think I'm ready.

No the system had only 1 false positive (the other are all other bugs, mostly incompatibilities), the guy who sold too much stuff. I could easily make it better and make it a very accurate system.

@Griffinhart Lesson? Do you think that I'd stop making features because they are "unpopular"? I make the mod as I like, LW made some good points in his argument.

[Shield]

is 17.1 going to require that lazylib thing?