They weren't VLOOKUP though. They were B8< , which took advantage of the naming convention, checking to see if you had Improved sensors or better. I moved that to x38, and did index(match) through all the errors that checked for that.Sounds like you need a VLOOKUP hunt to kill them all at one go.
That's good. As I added above, you only have 588 cells with VLOOKUP remaining.They weren't VLOOKUP though. They were B8< , which took advantage of the naming convention, checking to see if you had Improved sensors or better. I moved that to x38, and did index(match) through all the errors that checked for that.
There were some HLOOKUPs too.That's good. As I added above, you only have 588 cells with VLOOKUP remaining.![]()
Got old fast.A mere 49. Sounds like a relaxing evening of piddling. Or not.![]()
I'll bet.Got old fast.
That would require a battery module, and the costs for a modular hull. It takes a while to change a module. You'd think the tender could charge the batteries in one round after hooking up in a dock/hangar, so that would be very costly for little benefit.For the battery-jump express boat, why not just swap out the battery pack with a charged one? The tender is huge and can recharge the packs.
If it went with TL12 fusion power, it could charge it back up itself by adding even one more point of power production.For the battery-jump express boat, why not just swap out the battery pack with a charged one? The tender is huge and can recharge the packs.
I've done everything from a TL9 10 ton fighter to a TL14 over the top Zhodani Stealth ship with electronics out the wazoo without anything else cropping up (who knew you could get a 3000 ton ship to cost over 10 billion!)That would require a battery module, and the costs for a modular hull. It takes a while to change a module. You'd think the tender could charge the batteries in one round after hooking up in a dock/hangar, so that would be very costly for little benefit.
Makes me wonder what the criteria is for a day version, verses a letter revision (on a different day) and now a number to go with the letter?More of those Main sensors less than.
I went through all the errors and replaced them with an Index(Match).
2025.05.03e1
It was the same error... I didn't fix it all the way or all of the fields the first time. So it was e but different.Makes me wonder what the criteria is for a day version, verses a letter revision (on a different day) and now a number to go with the letter?
Not that my versioning makes any more sense.
Thanks for the deep dive. That change will be in the next update.I've ported the last of my pods and hit no other errors. I did find that cells D142 and D143 on the 9b Options tab would benefit from an update to the formula they use. Changing the #,### to #,###.# allows it to have a decimal place while still having commas and those cells are likely to need them. Good work, @Arkathan.
So is this one final? I haven’t shared it on Farcebook because I wanted to be sure it was wrapped first.Thanks for the deep dive. That change will be in the next update.
I haven't had any new feature requests or error reports, and it will take a while to plow those VLookups under, so yes, we can call this one a stable release... but not a final one.So is this one final? I haven’t shared it on Farcebook because I wanted to be sure it was wrapped first.