Dune Wars 1.9 Final Release Feedback

Alright, as promised, here's the 1.9.2 patch with the latest changes:

major gameplay changes
- fractional xp
- changes to spy return(see this post)

minor fixes
- polar region trade fix (thanks Prylak)
- fremen workers keep sandrider promo (as opposed to sandworker) after 'stillsuits' tech
- no 'stillsuit' goody if unit already has the better sandrider promo
(applies to any goody promo result that's normally blocked by an existing promo)
- larger maps default to 9 players to avoid duplicate civs
- fixed wrong xml xp values for buzzard thopters and worms (caused incorrect xp with victory over these units)

Important
This is intended as a patch to 1.9.1 (Download here is you don't have it) and includes the previous 1.9.1.2 patch for convinience. So if you have the latest patch installed already, you can install this right over it, no need to uninstall anything. If you are installing from scratch, install the 1.9.1 full download linked above, then this patch (no need to install 1.9.1.2 first)

Also, this should be technically save game compatible with 1.9.1.2, however any experience any units have upon loading the first time will be divided by 10 due to the new system viewing what was for instance 10xp before now as 1.0xp. All experience gained after that initial load will be added as intended though.

>>>>>>>>>> DuneWars 1.9.2 patch download <<<<<<<<<<

In addition to bug reports, I'm particularly interested in reactions to the new spy return mechanism. This should be considered the first in a line of incremental beta patch releases leading up to a full 2.0 release in the coming months.

p.s. I know I'm changing the version number convention since 1.9.1 was a full download, but I felt the four digit version numbers where confusing people more than this could.

Ooh, shiny! I'll start a new game tonight (if real life lets me).

On the ongoing general spy discussion topic:

If all factions can get counterespionage promos, perhaps the Atreides should be allowed to build spies after all, but ONLY allow them to have counterespionage promos, and ONLY perform counterespionage missions?

clearbeard said:

If all factions can get counterespionage promos, perhaps the Atreides should be allowed to build spies after all, but ONLY allow them to have counterespionage promos, and ONLY perform counterespionage missions?

Click to expand...

Hmmm.. Atreides building spies would really detract from their identity IMO.
Also, if they get the Security promotions, should they get Stealth as well? If not, you'd still have a unit that can't do anything with their xp after 3 promotions..

That may be a general problem with spy units; their promotion paths aren't deep/varied enough to do anything useful after a couple of promotions. (Although, barring the Ordos issue, I have never seen that become a problem in any of my games. Just thought it'd be worth taking into consideration.)

The Atreides already get de facto counterespionage from the duke's bench and intelligence posts, so I'd think we could still leave them without spies if we gave everyone access to counterespionage. We can adjust the cost and success rate of counterespionage missions and give certain civs free promos or just access to promos that increase success, and lower costs, or extend the effects perhaps.

Chris

ChrisAdams3997 said:

Alright, as promised, here's the 1.9.2 patch with the latest changes:.

Click to expand...

Thanks for doing this. The idea of a three digit release is that the user should install only the main release 1.9, and then this file. That is, there may be some files which have an old version in 1.9, a new version in 1.9.1, and no version in 1.9.2 (the file is not in the 1.9.2 zip). If there are any such files, then installing just 1.9 and 1.9.2 will not work. Please avoid that. The release instruction thread shows how you can make a release which contains all the changed files over 1.9; I am afraid that your partial release may leave things just as confused as they are today.

Please feel free to link your release post from the three most often watched threads:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=338329
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=335213
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=362479

If you can make one release (maybe 1.9.3) which includes all the changed files so only 1.9 plus this are needed, then I will be happy to update the introductory posts on those threads to point to that release. This will be good practice for the next step, an official full 2.0 release.

That's how I would have liked to do it, but 1.9.1 messes it up as a full release (NOT a patch to 1.9) which makes 1.9 obsolete (short of finding every change between 1.9 and 1.9.1), making

so only 1.9 plus this are needed

Click to expand...

impossible. We have to treat 1.9.1 as the main download, followed by any patches.

I thought for a while about whether to do a full release or patch and how to name it and every approach had drawbacks. Relatively few files have been changed since 1.9.1, so I decided against doing a full release for the sake of those who were already patched to 1.9.1.2. I'm also foreseeing several incremental patches leading up to a 2.0 full release rather than trying to do it all at once, largely for the sake of getting feedback as we go. So patches definitely seem the way to go, where each increments (1.9.3, 1.9.4, ...), includes the previous post 1.9.1 patches (so only the most recent is needed) and installs on top of either a clean 1.9.1 install or any patched version of it (keeps it simple).

Nobody should be downloading 1.9 period at this point (if they want it patched at any rate).

If we list 1.9.1 in the welcome thread as the main download, then the newest patch below it, the numbers won't matter too much, people will understand to install whatever it says is the latest main download, followed by what it says is the latest patch. There's absolutely no reason for 1.9 to still be in there.

And I'll put links in those threads at some point this evening (edit: done). Thanks David.

Chris

I don't think we have the same understanding of the contents of 1.9.1. If a player has no dune wars installed, and they install 1.9.1 only, they cannot play the game. There are many files in the 1.9 release which are not in the 1.9.1 patch. So your instructions to uninstall 1.9 and then install 1.9.1 do not seem correct.

Following the instructions in the release howto thread, you can make a zipfile containing all the files which are newer than 1.9. This is the best way to make a minor release.

davidlallen said:

I don't think we have the same understanding of the contents of 1.9.1. If a player has no dune wars installed, and they install 1.9.1 only, they cannot play the game. There are many files in the 1.9 release which are not in the 1.9.1 patch. So your instructions to uninstall 1.9 and then install 1.9.1 do not seem correct.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but you're NOT right. I started playing DW only a few weeks ago, and the ONLY things I downloaded were 1.9.1b (having 122 MB) and 1.9.1.2 (having 5 MB) and the music pack). Despite your post, I AM able to play the game .

Thus, chris seems to be right with his understanding of the EXISTING version system, whether intended or not.

Ahh, now I see the source of the confusion. Yeah, as KHM said (and Deliverator can verify), the 1.9.1 linked in the 'release note' link on the welcome page is a full release independent of and replacing 1.9. We probably need to update the download file in the civfanatics database to reflect this as well. There's no more reason to install 1.9 at this point than 1.8 or 1.7, only 1.9.1 - yes the numbering isn't ideal, but it is what it is until we have another full release at 2.0.

From the 1.9.1 release page (emphasis mine):

Note: 1.9.1 is the latest full version of Dune Wars - you need to install it first before installing 1.9.1.2.

Click to expand...

If you get a minute, download it and do a fresh install and see for yourself.

Chris

I don't have BTS installed on my current system. I guess I had forgotten that 1.9.1 is an exception to the rule of the previous 20 releases where a "three number" release does not include all the files.

I have updated the first post in the welcome thread and the main forum thread to show that 1.9.1 is the latest main release and 1.9.2 is the latest patch.

I would still prefer if subsequent versions used 1.9 as a base; it does not make much sense from a numbering perspective if you have to install 1.9.1 and then 1.9.2. But since I am not doing any work on this, it is possible that my preference does not matter.

Also, there are several benefits to putting the new releases into the civfanatics download database. The download count is public, and people searching the download database will find the newest release. What I have done before is to host the file at mediafire (as you have done) but add an entry into the civfanatics database. Then the welcome thread and forum thread would contain a link to the database entry, instead of directly linking to mediafire. If you are interested in doing that, please post here and I will update the first post on those two threads.

Downloading and starting a new game. Nice work Chris. I'll second Natasha's statement above about Atriedies and the spy issue.

Your preference does matter to me David , but we've got to choose the lesser of two evils at this point until a 2.0 release. It's either use an unfortunately inconsistent three digit number, or a long and confusing 4 digit number. I shrugged my shoulders and went with the three. I'm going to look at how to update the civfanatics download this weekend.

Downloading and starting a new game. Nice work Chris. I'll second Natasha's statement above about Atriedies and the spy issue.

Click to expand...

Thanks , and that's my take on the Atreidies and spies as well for now. Looking forward to any feedback.

Chris

Well, the current Ordos spy situation definitely doesn't feel right. They get tons of free xp, but can only spend it on evasion 1, 2, and 3... then what? Following the recent discussion, we can give them access to at least the initial counterespionage promo (don't think saboteurs should get really good at it though, so only the first?).

Maybe introduce some new tags that let us improve their primary ability, sabotaging things . I'm considering introducing promo tags that can increase the success rate or decrease the cost of specific espionage missions. Thus, a really good saboteur could really cause problems for an enemy and be alot of fun - while a novice saboteur will need to earn his stripes the hard way. I want to take away the free xp (it's not really a fun or engaging mechanic I think, nor does ti scale to game speed), and give instead very occasional free evasion promos. So, they'll still get better over time(though less predictably), involve less micro of leveling each to the same thing , while the real promotions that actually enhance their saboteur skills actually require them to get out and earn it (by, naturally, destroying things ).

The proposed tags could have applications for other espionage promos as well of course.

Chris

ChrisAdams3997 said:

Well, the current Ordos spy situation definitely doesn't feel right. They get tons of free xp

Click to expand...

The Ordos spy gets free XP? We figured it was gained from defending against enemy spy units.. that explains a lot!

I can see why you would limit access to Counterespionage to 1 lvl only, that sounds fair.
Do they actually need free xp/promotions?
I like the idea of fiddling with success chance/effect of certain missions (for any spy unit, not just Ordos). I'm thinking these should be relatively small effects though, lest spies become too powerful.

Ordos spies getting free XP is one of their major benefits. However, only spending on evasion does not sound right. The discussions about spies and civ-specific missions can be found on these threads (which I have not re-read recently).

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=409665
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=376783
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=342301

It "sounds like" the civ-specific missions for Ordos have been accidentally blocked.

Yea, there's python code that gives them 1xp each turn until they reach 100xp.

Do they actually need free xp/promotions?

Click to expand...

I think the intention was perhaps that they should be better at sneaking around enemy territory, so the free xp lets them pick up the evasion promos, but it might also be left over from before the espionage overhaul Deliverator and Ahriman did. I still want them to get the evasion promos easy, but not through xp, while giving them something else to spend xp on.

I like the idea of fiddling with success chance/effect of certain missions (for any spy unit, not just Ordos). I'm thinking these should be relatively small effects though, lest spies become too powerful.

Click to expand...

Agreed. The idea, as it stands in my head right now, is to make some of the missions a little costlier/more difficult by default, but with promotions it gets back to where it is now, or for well promoted units a little cheaper/easier. I'm not sure how it'll really play out though, or when I'll have time to really get into it. There are easier, more pressing matters I'll be getting to first.

Chris

The discussions about spies and civ-specific missions can be found on these threads (which I have not re-read recently).

Click to expand...

Yep, I've only had time to go over some of the discussions. Trying to get around to all of them.

It "sounds like" the civ-specific missions for Ordos have been accidentally blocked.

Click to expand...

One major difference here is that most of the civ-specific promos have three tiers, the ordos does not. Most of those tiered promos increase durations or amplitude of missions, which doesn't apply to either of the ordos missions, you either destroy an improvement or you don't for example. That's where the ideas above came from, something for extra tiers for their promo(s). Any other ideas there are welcome.

ChrisAdams3997 said:

One major difference here is that most of the civ-specific promos have three tiers, the ordos does not. Most of those tiered promos increase durations or amplitude of missions, which doesn't apply to either of the ordos missions, you either destroy an improvement or you don't for example. That's where the ideas above came from, something for extra tiers for their promo(s). Any other ideas there are welcome.

Click to expand...

This suggests to me making sabotage scalable as well.
At tier 1, you could decrease the unit's movement (or make it only able to move once every x turns).
At tier 2, also decrease its strength by x%
At tier 3, destroys the unit.
It seems that the lesser effects could be implemented by passing a 'Sabotaged I' or 'Sabotaged II' promotion to the targeted unit. This might even make it possible to increase their duration and effect.

If you want to be nasty, tier 3 sabotage could, instead of outright destruction, set strength and movement to 0, making the controlling player actively having to destroy it themselves. "It's useless. Scrap it. Damn these blasted saboteurs!" This would make the effect even more transparent as well.

Well, I'm a good bit into a new game with Chris' new patch. I must say I love the XP changes, and my earlier concerns seem groundless. Usually the only time I see the 0.5 minimum XP is where it's deserved, like putting the final shot into a quad that withdrew from combat. I also like that it's still 1.0 XP for withdrawing (thanks for listening!) and I LOVE that you get XP when your foe withdraws. So far all the fractional gain rates feel right, but it's still early to know if those little extra bits will add up to be too much in the long run. Playing Atreides, so I don't expect I'll have much to weigh in on the spy debate from this game.

Some minor bugs I've noticed, to consider as polish for the next release:

Water Cache reduces damage from air strikes and nukes. Is this intentional? As I recall from my Fremen game from an earlier patch (and checking the 'pedia), their unique replacement Deathstills only save water on growth.

Atreides' Beesting interceptors only get +50% against other hornets, while the normal version gets +75%. Is this intentional? Seems odd, especially noting the upgrade Locust also has +50%.

The 'pedia entry for CHOAM says the founder gets a free emissary, but I didn't.

Not a bug per se, but should Harkonnen slaves be changed into regular workers when captured/freed? On the subject, I'm finding captured slaves to be immensely useful as pre-builders. It's clearly an exploit, but if you stop a slave the turn before he finishes, and finish with a regular worker, you get the benefit of the faster work rate, plus keep the slave.

That's it so far, thanks for all your great efforts! I'm glad to see this mod getting some fresh attention. More notes to come, as I note them.