unbekannt1984
-
Posts
204 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by unbekannt1984
-
-
Hi koonschi,
Can you post the beginning of the log as well? I've set a few patches live, I need to know what version you have exactly.
2018-12-21 13-09-05| Avorion server Beta 0.20.2 r13560 ea7d01cb9b83 running on Debian GNU/Linux buster/sid starting up in "/home/torsten/.avorion/galaxies/avorion_galaxy"
-
Sorry, it took a little longer to crash:
2018-12-21 16-20-11| Sending crash report ... 2018-12-21 16-20-13| Crash report sent successfully! 2018-12-21 16-20-13| Hang of at least 30 seconds detected, sending stack trace 2018-12-21 16-20-48| Sending crash report ... 2018-12-21 16-20-50| Crash report sent successfully! 2018-12-21 16-20-50| Hang of at least 30 seconds detected, sending stack trace 2018-12-21 16-21-23| Sending crash report ... 2018-12-21 16-21-24| Crash report sent successfully! 2018-12-21 16-21-24| Hang of at least 30 seconds detected, sending stack trace 2018-12-21 16-21-57| Sending crash report ... 2018-12-21 16-21-59| Crash report sent successfully! 2018-12-21 16-21-59| Hang of at least 30 seconds detected, sending stack trace 2018-12-21 16-22-32| Sending crash report ... 2018-12-21 16-22-32| Crash report sent successfully! 2018-12-21 16-22-32| Hang of at least 30 seconds detected, sending stack trace 2018-12-21 16-23-06| Sending crash report ... 2018-12-21 16-23-07| Crash report sent successfully! 2018-12-21 16-23-07| Hang of at least 30 seconds detected, sending stack trace 2018-12-21 16-23-41| Sending crash report ... 2018-12-21 16-23-42| Crash report sent successfully! 2018-12-21 16-23-42| Hang of at least 30 seconds detected, sending stack trace 2018-12-21 16-23-55| Received valid shutdown message, shutting down. 2018-12-21 16-24-16| Sending crash report ... 2018-12-21 16-24-17| Crash report sent successfully! 2018-12-21 16-24-17| Hang of at least 30 seconds detected, sending stack trace 2018-12-21 16-24-52| Sending crash report ... 2018-12-21 16-24-53| Crash report sent successfully! 2018-12-21 16-24-53| Hang of at least 30 seconds detected, sending stack trace 2018-12-21 16-25-27| Sending crash report ... 2018-12-21 16-25-28| Crash report sent successfully! 2018-12-21 16-25-28| Hang of at least 30 seconds detected, sending stack trace
The server is still running according to "top":
torsten@debian:~/.avorion/galaxies/avorion_galaxy$ top top - 16:28:41 up 6:36, 1 user, load average: 5,90, 5,10, 3,98 Tasks: 183 total, 3 running, 180 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie %Cpu(s): 89,0 us, 9,6 sy, 0,0 ni, 1,4 id, 0,0 wa, 0,0 hi, 0,0 si, 0,0 st MiB Mem : 7924,1 total, 594,5 free, 5505,9 used, 1823,7 buff/cache MiB Swap: 1906,1 total, 1906,1 free, 0,0 used. 1955,7 avail Mem PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 3881 torsten 20 0 1928696 596588 53884 S 294,1 7,4 76:37.00 AvorionServer 845 root 20 0 954392 137604 98012 R 29,4 1,7 34:44.12 Xorg 3820 torsten 20 0 4529604 1,6g 106088 S 17,6 20,6 183:06.14 Avorion
-
Hi koonschi,
Thanks to the hang reporter I've gotten some valuable data and identified some potential issues causing the hang. Please try it out and tell me if it still happens!
I've beaten the guardian twice (and salvaged one time) in a row now, no crashes to report. Seems like everything is working properly now.
Enjoy your weekend and Merry Christmas.
-
Hi koonschi,
Thanks for the input, we'll keep trying to reproduce the error. In the meantime, the update with the hang detector has gone live, we should be able to see the error now (but make sure you have crash sending enabled).
in the system.ini
[system] sendCrashReports=true
?
Let me go for the guardian, usually I crash the server within 2 hours then :)
-
Hi,
SO:
Is it possible to defend my ship from torpedoes/fighters using mostly fighters of my own? What kind of fighters would perform best in this/these roles?
I'm using just 4 PDCs (one on top/bottom/left/right) on my bigger ships, that's enough to deal with torpedoes. In the worst case, up to 3 of those PDCs can shoot in the same direction.
Dealing with fighter-spam is much worse. I'm still trying to find the best weapon for that purpose, but a fighter made out of a PDC works good and is cheap, because of low DPS. Lasers might work better (because of 100% accuracy, doesn't need to be a PDL), but the weapons' range might be an issue.
-
Hi,
I'm also experiencing problems with the server crashing on singleplayer games. I already posted the serverlog in the Releasenotes-Thread for 0.20.1, but once more:
2018-12-13 15-01-16| Triggered saving of all server data. 2018-12-13 15-01-16| scheduled save for sector (-1:0), 0x7fbd200017a0, entities: 44 2018-12-13 15-01-16| saving sector (-1:0) 2018-12-13 15-01-16| sector (-1:0) saved to "/home/torsten/.avorion/galaxies/avorion_galaxy/sectors/-1_0" 2018-12-13 15-01-16| scheduled save for sector (0:0), 0x7fbd206e3550, entities: 121 2018-12-13 15-01-16| saving sector (0:0) 2018-12-13 15-01-16| sector (0:0) saved to "/home/torsten/.avorion/galaxies/avorion_galaxy/sectors/0_0" 2018-12-13 15-01-16| scheduled save for sector (114:-164), 0x7fbd20372740, entities: 79 2018-12-13 15-01-17| saving sector (114:-164) 2018-12-13 15-01-17| sector (114:-164) saved to "/home/torsten/.avorion/galaxies/avorion_galaxy/sectors/114_-164" 2018-12-13 15-14-57| Received valid shutdown message, shutting down. 2018-12-13 15-16-15| RCON[127.0.0.1] Logged in. 2018-12-13 15-19-37| RCON[127.0.0.1] Logged in. 2018-12-13 15-21-54| RCON[127.0.0.1] Logged in.
Well, I was able to log-in using RCON, but commands were not executed. And here is the clientlog of those few minutes:
2018-12-13 15-00-38| <> (114:-164) Solar Cell Factory XXL verkaufte 273 Solarzellen für 126.863 Credits. 2018-12-13 15-00-38| (114:-164) Solar Cell Factory XXL verkaufte 273 Solarzellen für 126.863 Credits. 2018-12-13 15-01-07| <> (114:-164) Solar Power Plant S verkaufte 278 Energiezellen für 6.968 Credits. 2018-12-13 15-01-07| (114:-164) Solar Power Plant S verkaufte 278 Energiezellen für 6.968 Credits. 2018-12-13 15-14-56| Starting thread [OnlineServerQueries WorkerPool Thread 0]... 2018-12-13 15-14-56| Started thread [OnlineServerQueries WorkerPool Thread 0] with id 140346677294848 2018-12-13 15-14-56| Starting thread [OnlineServerQueries WorkerPool Thread 1]... 2018-12-13 15-14-56| Started thread [OnlineServerQueries WorkerPool Thread 1] with id 140346668902144 2018-12-13 15-14-56| Refreshing servers 0 2018-12-13 15-14-57| Starting thread [MainMenu Plan]... 2018-12-13 15-14-57| Started thread [MainMenu Plan] with id 140346386380544 2018-12-13 15-14-57| Error sending message of type: 2: can't send a when not connected 2018-12-13 15-14-57| Starting thread [server Shutdown]... 2018-12-13 15-14-57| Started thread [server Shutdown] with id 140346299066112 2018-12-13 15-14-57| Starting thread [uDP Connection Receive]... 2018-12-13 15-14-57| Started thread [uDP Connection Receive] with id 140346290673408 2018-12-13 15-14-58| Thread [uDP Connection Receive] with id 140346455602944 exiting... 2018-12-13 15-14-58| Thread [uDP Connection Receive] with id 140346455602944 exited 2018-12-13 15-14-58| UDP closed 2018-12-13 15-14-58| Client UDP: Connection closed 2018-12-13 15-14-58| Thread [uDP Connection Receive] with id 140346685687552 exiting... 2018-12-13 15-14-58| Thread [uDP Connection Receive] with id 140346685687552 exited 2018-12-13 15-14-58| UDP closed 2018-12-13 15-14-58| Client UDP: Connection closed 2018-12-13 15-15-02| Serverbrowser refresh complete: Responded 2018-12-13 15-15-02| Not responded: 2018-12-13 15-15-58| Unable to shutdown server. 2018-12-13 15-15-58| Thread [uDP Connection Receive] with id 140346290673408 exiting... 2018-12-13 15-15-58| Thread [uDP Connection Receive] with id 140346290673408 exited 2018-12-13 15-15-58| UDP closed 2018-12-13 15-15-58| Client UDP: Connection closed 2018-12-13 15-15-58| Thread [server Shutdown] with id 140346299066112 exiting... 2018-12-13 15-15-58| Thread [server Shutdown] with id 140346299066112 exited 2018-12-13 15-15-58| Thread [MainMenu Plan] with id 140346386380544 exiting... 2018-12-13 15-15-58| Thread [MainMenu Plan] with id 140346386380544 exited 2018-12-13 15-15-59| Startup successful.
It just took me just about 2 hours to crash the server, I've beaten the wormhole-guardian at 0:0 and had a Salvager (with 12 Salvaging-Fighters) recycling it.
-
Hi koonschi,
2. Can you reproduce it?
it just happened. I also have an rcon-connection to the server... Would you like me to try anything before I terminate it?
Serverlog ends like this:
2018-12-13 15-01-16| Triggered saving of all server data. 2018-12-13 15-01-16| scheduled save for sector (-1:0), 0x7fbd200017a0, entities: 44 2018-12-13 15-01-16| saving sector (-1:0) 2018-12-13 15-01-16| sector (-1:0) saved to "/home/torsten/.avorion/galaxies/avorion_galaxy/sectors/-1_0" 2018-12-13 15-01-16| scheduled save for sector (0:0), 0x7fbd206e3550, entities: 121 2018-12-13 15-01-16| saving sector (0:0) 2018-12-13 15-01-16| sector (0:0) saved to "/home/torsten/.avorion/galaxies/avorion_galaxy/sectors/0_0" 2018-12-13 15-01-16| scheduled save for sector (114:-164), 0x7fbd20372740, entities: 79 2018-12-13 15-01-17| saving sector (114:-164) 2018-12-13 15-01-17| sector (114:-164) saved to "/home/torsten/.avorion/galaxies/avorion_galaxy/sectors/114_-164" 2018-12-13 15-14-57| Received valid shutdown message, shutting down. 2018-12-13 15-16-15| RCON[127.0.0.1] Logged in. 2018-12-13 15-19-37| RCON[127.0.0.1] Logged in. 2018-12-13 15-21-54| RCON[127.0.0.1] Logged in.
-
Hi Kamo,
This may also have caused the Konno Prototype, last week, to go away~ ???
is that ship still in your list of ships? I almost lost a miner, if that ship is still in your list, you've got a chance to get it back. It would be best, if it is in an otherwise empty sector. I was able to switch to that ship, it was stuck in some starless corner of the sector (unable to turn, use hyperspace or anything else; I pressed Tab to target anything and got a target - Distance NaN km :( ), then I used the teleport-command to move it to an empty sector.
You should note the sector coordinates and shut down the server now. I simply deleted the sector-file, after starting the game again, the ship was back in the middle of that empty sector. (Maybe it looses turret-groups and so on, but that's not a big loss.)
-
Hi koonschi,
1) I noticed it yesterday for the first time, I can't tell you if 0.20.0 had the same problem.
2) Kind of... I had 2 different instances of the server running yesterday evening.
3) I think there were no ships with orders in other sectors.
4) I did have at least 2 stations with attack-orders in another sector (both equipped with hangar-bays and fighters)
I did a quick search for "left", it's not in that serverlog... But I also took a look at older logs:
2018-12-05 21-19-12| Avorion server Beta 0.20 r13397 d685b09ce4da running on Debian GNU/Linux buster/sid starting up in "/home/torsten/.avorion/galaxies/avorion_galaxy" 2018-12-05 21-19-12| CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) 5350 APU with Radeon(tm) R3 4 Cores 2018-12-05 21-19-12| RAM: 7GB ... 2018-12-05 21-19-22| <Server> Player unbekannt1984 joined the galaxy 2018-12-05 21-19-22| Player logged in: unbekannt1984, index: 1 ... 2018-12-05 21-19-52| <Server> Player unbekannt1984 left the galaxy
That's the last serverlog that ends with the normal shutdown (where the server noticed me logging out)...
-
Hi,
seems like the current Beta-Branch has got a Server-Shutdown problem in single-player mode (on Linux).
The inbuilt server simply doesn't recognize when a player is disconnected or logs off and keeps running.
I even tried to send the server some of the signals to shut it down, from the serverlog:
2018-12-11 19-29-24| Received valid shutdown message, shutting down. 2018-12-11 22-16-16| Caught signal 1. Initiating shutdown. 2018-12-11 22-16-57| Caught signal 15. Initiating shutdown. 2018-12-11 22-18-14| Caught signal 3. Initiating shutdown.
I think just Sigkill worked.
When I wanted to shut-down my computer, I saw that there was a high system-load, I switched to a console and used htop to get an overview. It was the Avorion Server, that was still running.
I hope you are able to reproduce the problem, I could also post the logs, if you need those.
-
Let's think about the top material at the moment: Avorion.
The biggest problem with Avorion is: There's no Avorion Armor, if you want to mount Avorion Turrets on your ship, you can't get the benefits of Armor. If there was an Armor-Alloy, that allowed mounting Avorion Turrets and that stops railgun-projectiles, I'd use it, even if it doesn't have significantly more hp then Ogonite Armor.
That's kind of irrelevant given turret mount blocks - you can just mount a strip of Avorion Turret Mount on top of Ogonite Armor. This is a non-issue.
It is an issue... You just don't understand it :P
I've got about 12 million Avorion and just 500k Ogonite. Now you tell me to get back into a boring part of the galaxy, to collect an obsolete material just to build the armor for new ships. And even worse, I'd still have to put another ugly block on top of that armor, just to be able to put a turret there.
What's about properties of the materials? The first thing that comes to my mind is weight... Any Alloys or composite materials with Titanium or Trinium shouldn't be too heavy. Using those as Armor could offer some advantages to stats like maneuverability and acceleration/braking (well, just because of the mass).Again, it sounds like a buff for no purpose.
Well, there may be a little buff, but just like the missing Avorion armor, there simply doesn't need to be a buff.
-
Hi,
sounds like you have had a lot of fun with the new AI :)
- [uBR] Fixed ships boosting away or into things
- [uBR] Fixed ships boosting for too long while following
Thanks :)
- [uBR] Fixed ships boosting away or into things
-
Hi koonschi,
This issue has been fixed with the latest patch, ...
are you talking about 0.20.0, or did you release any hotfixes since the release of 0.20.0?
I've got to admit: I stopped playing after 0.20.0 was released to the beta-branch, because it introduced many bugs.
-
Hi,
Yes, but the suggestion is a statement for developers to consider and act upon. A good suggestion has to clearly state what should be done, and then the reason why it should be done for the betterment of the game. With the suggestion given here as it is, we will either get the alloys, that are better than the pure materials, which will make the pure materials meaningless and applying them more tedious, or allows that are weaker than the originals, which will in turn render them unnecessary.
well, those alloys don't need to be stronger then the original materials to be useful. And we shouldn't think just about alloys, there are also composite materials (think about carbon-fiber or glass fiber epoxy materials, ferroconcrete,...).
Let's think about the top material at the moment: Avorion.
The biggest problem with Avorion is: There's no Avorion Armor, if you want to mount Avorion Turrets on your ship, you can't get the benefits of Armor. If there was an Armor-Alloy, that allowed mounting Avorion Turrets and that stops railgun-projectiles, I'd use it, even if it doesn't have significantly more hp then Ogonite Armor.
Which other advantages would alloys offer? Well, if you just started a game and start progressing towards the core, you usually have got tons of the old materials, the first material that you encounter that is not available in the whole galaxy is Naonite.
Naonite allows you to build shields for the first time, but it also offers advantages in generators (which you need to power those shields) and so on. So you would focus your efforts on constructing shields and upgrade your generators with the first bits of Naonite.
If there were any Naonite-Titanium or Naonite-Iron Alloys or composite materials, that would allow you to quickly upgrade your Armor or other important parts of your ship, wouldn't you use those?
What's about properties of the materials? The first thing that comes to my mind is weight... Any Alloys or composite materials with Titanium or Trinium shouldn't be too heavy. Using those as Armor could offer some advantages to stats like maneuverability and acceleration/braking (well, just because of the mass).
And finally we've got some blocks like the inertial dampener, which can be built just out of Iron or Avorion, because of some subspace-properties... Well, maybe some parts of these blocks could be built out of Trinium or other materials, too. These slightly upgraded versions might offer just little bonuses (like weight-reduction and maybe slightly improved stats).
You see, there is no need to make alloys, composite materials or "mixed blocks" overpowered. There could be some minor advantages, like ferroconcrete offers to buildings (on earth).
-
Hi,
0.19.1 is the current version. The current beta branch version is 0.20.0 .
Are Mods from old versions (0.19.1 etc) compatible with the current version?
Well, mods that require just a clientside installation should still work in 0.20.0, if a mod requires server- and clientside installation and both sides need to communicate with their counterparts, then the mod will need some work.
-
Hi,
which version of the game are you using?
It *should* be fixed in the current Beta-Branch (Avorion 0.20.0), but the Beta-Branch is too buggy for playing atm.
-
Hi,
Kind of my thought too - hard-coding trigger discipline is boring. If you don't want to accidentally shoot friendlies, then make sure they aren't in the line of fire.
could you tell that my AI-captains and auto-turrets, too?
Friendly fire isn't a side-effect, it was actually planned to be in the game.
Yes, I don't want that feature on Plasma-Turrets or Chainguns... But Rockets (especially Seeker-Rockets) should behave a little bit different :)
-
Hi Hammelpilaw,
I think I've got the old 0.1.1 to work with the current beta-branch (0.20.x). I wanted to mail you a patch or the file itself, but I wasn't able to...
Well, I hope it helps you with the experimental version...
EDIT: Almost forgot, I added PDLs and stuff from the current vanilla-file, too ;)
-
Do the AI actually chase/catch up with you if you try to flee an encounter? Because that's a game-changer.
Well, the new AI changes the game a lot... May we call this update: "Xsotan on the run"?
-
- Improved flight behavior of AI ships
- AI ships can now use boost
they are using boost too often now... Well, I just had a Miner-Ship crashing into me, the Miner-Ship lost 30% Hull. Do you think the script doesn't confuse boost and brake?!?
- Improved flight behavior of AI ships
-
Hi,
what would you think about a friend/foe-detection for some weapons? Well, I thought about Rocket-Launchers, it would be nice, if a Rocket that is about to hit an allied-faction ship/station would think about self-destruction...
I can't think about other weapons then rockets and maybe torpedoes, that could use a mechanic like this...
-
Hi,
The new harvest AI works very well! I order my starting shuttle to mine and it boosts away at 493m/s towards the nearest asteroid, comes to a stop and faces the turrets at it and starts mining away very efficiently.
I'll have to modify my current miners... But I didn't update to the latest Beta yet and just killed the Guardian at 0:0 - need to wait for the old salvage-ai to finish clearing the sector...
-
Hi,
I have had a look at the logs, it seems to me like it's related to the character-set of the server.
2018-12-03 02-13-56| Data of a loaded sector is at version #·@-Š629VË!½»ÔÄ¿PIÜ‹Të@GxÔÝ[îuÛqvÆv€Üš¼¶¹îäÁ}H€¼
should be readable.
Take a look at some files on your old server:
torsten@debian:~/.avorion/galaxies/avorion_galaxy/sectors$ cat 98_-134v <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <view numCrafts="2" numWrecks="2" numAsteroids="1033" numStations="1" influence="9.5170002" factionIndex="70" deathLocation="false" manuallyTagged="false"> <coordinates x="98" y="-134"/> <titles> <title str="Smuggler Hideout"/> </titles> <wormholes/> <gates/> <shipNumbers> <ships n="2" faction="70"/> </shipNumbers> <shipUuids> <ships uuid="bd96cb6a-6e2f-44f5-a0be-a493d07a91d7" faction="70"/> <ships uuid="f544b185-e246-4d2f-a526-d96a8e27c756" faction="70"/> </shipUuids> </view>
Compare a few files on your old and new server: On your new server you should see another character-set (encoding at the top of the file) in such files (at least, if you visited the sector).
Since the sector-files are usually recognized as text-files, but are binary, I think there was a conversion that broke them. You could simply delete files in the sectors-folder, then copy all files with a "v" in the end (so your map can display stations in the sector and so on).
Everything the players and the alliance owns is saved in other files, you might just need to get into the sector again and you'll get it back. The server should simply generate the deleted sectors again.
Well, you could also copy the old sector-files in binary-mode again (see the manual of scp, ftp or whatever you are using for instructions about that), or you could compress the files (that way everything is binary-data) and decompress on the new server (binary-data shouldn't be corrupted this way).
-
Hi Kamo,
Replying to my own post, but I discovered that, when you make a Military Outpost, since almost all the things are very pricey, relations with the locals go up really fast as the station buys things from the locals :).
But there should maybe be a cap per minute (like, 80k) on how much a relation can drop.
well, it's easier to find a sector with trade-routes in it and let a freighter with goodshauler work on your reputation (and btw. earn some money for you). But goodshauler would just make profitable deals (or at least deals without loss) :)
The one thing that is killing relations is a ship with a captain (or fighter with pilot), if those think they could hit an enemy, they'll shoot, if there is a ship/station between them and their target doesn't matter - once the hole in it is big enough, they could hit.
Well, the AI might need some improvement, too.
The relations system has a big scaling problem.
Since relations decrease is due to absolute damage and not relative damage, as one gets closer and closer to the core and as ships become bigger and bigger, it gets easier and easier to lose relation points to friendly fire ...
Agreed, it needs some scaling...
Server lockup/crash
in Bugs
Posted
Hi koonschi,
is that fix live? Or do we need to wait for 0.20.3?