Playing an older version of the game.

TractorBoy said:
Here you go again, talking about my statements of a game breaking bug as if I am making it up, there is large element of disbelief in your responses.
Click to expand...

You got me there. I do find it unlikely that they seriously broke things that had earlier been patched, and other than this one thread, this is not something I have heard about. But then, it is not clear to me that vanilla fans have much of presence on this forum. I also think your characterization of this as a “game breaking bug” is hyperbolic.

What I am saying is that for anyone who purchases the Vanilla game as a package in it's current condition would also think it is crap and how many potential future civ fanatics have been lost in this way?
Click to expand...

Zero future civ fanatics have been lost in this way. The vanilla game as a package in its current condition is pretty good. The bug that troubles you so much would not be noticed as a bug by someone who had not played V before. Someone who has patience for vanilla will have patience for workers waking sometimes unnecessarily. The bugs and odd quirks are not going to be the tipping point between someone thinking the game is crap and not.
 
TractorBoy said:
Could you please tell me how to up the difficulty level that I play on?

Such is my weakness of character, I would find it impossible to compete against others who do use the bug without using it myself. My solution to this conundrum is to not play at all!
Click to expand...

The science bulb exploit/feature/bug has been outlawed for HoF and GotM. You would be competing on a level field. I have tried to stay neutral in the likes and dislikes part of this discussion but BNW really is better. Try to get it really cheap on Steam next time it's on sale. You can disable it if you don't like it and you wouldn't be out much.

Workers stopping work when in danger seems helpful to me, but I am just an average player.
I too thought healing units never woke even in early Vanilla.
The science bulb thing is a mini game in itself making it work. And as I mentioned it has been outlawed.:)
 
beetle said:
Do you good links to the patch summaries handy?
Click to expand...

No, sorry. Also just googled 1.09. Regarding Civ IV I think - in spite of some problems in the beginning - they really did a good job fixing things up in the end. And this is what really counts for me. Vanilla was still patched with version 1.74 long after Warlords and BTS were out. And I also think the bugs still unfixed in the final version are not that severe. For a game of that complexity this is solid job - and I wish Civ III (and many other games around) had been treated the same way.
 
I agree that they did a good job fixing things up with IV in the end. My complaint is that all three games (III, IV, V) felt like beta version upon release, and all three took many months before they were really stable and decent. I hope they circle back to V for one more patch, as it seems like there are still a lot of loose ends (not the least of which is the science overflow exploit), but I agree with you that the bugs still unfixed in the final version of V are not that severe. I think III never was really polished off because IV came out and interest with it picked up so quickly (and it needed so much work). Hopefully CivBE won’t cannibalize V, and it will be more like what happened with Colonization.
 
Answering some of my own questions, here’s a link to IV Launch problems. Patch history segment immediately follows that. TLDR: IV released 25 October 2005, and very major patch (v1.61) 13 April 2006, almost five months later. (I remember it taking longer, and no mention of the difficulty levels being adjusted.)

I am not finding discussion of the difficulty level being seriously reworked for III or IV, but the issue with corruption in III was enough on its own to justify characterizing the release version as beta quality. III was released 30 October 2001 and we got the v1.29f patch on 18 July 2002, more than eight months later.
 
beetle said:
I agree that they did a good job fixing things up with IV in the end.
Click to expand...

pvtjava said:
Sorry, I read the bug thread. More to it than I thought from your posts in this thread. I can see how that would be frustrating.
Click to expand...

So it seems - despite all the initial controversy here - like we have a rather common understanding that it's a good thing for companies to take care of their games and try to fix bugs better sooner than later - and also not just in the most recent expansion but also in the Vanilla product. :)
 
It is interesting to me that the patches for V (as compared to III and IV) seem to be much less comprehensive. Is there general consensus regarding the date that V became reliably playable? I would guess that marker was not until the first patch for GnK! I also don’t recall arguments about patches for III and IV breaking earlier patches (but again, there seems to be fewer of them). Anyone have a link for information regarding the IV 1.74 patch? (That one did not turn up as I looked up dates for the others.)
 
I am going to answer my own question and assert that V was finally out of beta with the so-called “Fall Patch”, v1.0.2.13 on 1 November 2012, more than two years after the 21 September 2010 initial release! This is per the official 2K Patch Notes thread. That page is a little odd as both earlier and later patches follow the top most entry. I also note several 1.0.0.x, 1.0.1.x, and 1.0.3.x patches -- but only the one in the 1.0.2.x series. The latest is an unnumbered version from 3 November 2013, so this gives me some hope that we will someday see a 1.0.4.x patch that wraps things up nicely.

I am still not entirely understanding the vanilla bug complaint, even though pvtjava seems to have grokked it from this thread. Gps, have you had the same problem as OP? Anyone else know a thread where this has come up? OP, you never responded to my suggestion that a work around could be to stack a scout or warrior with a couple workers on the front line.
 
beetle said:
. The latest is an unnumbered version from 3 November 2013, so this gives me some hope that we will someday see a 1.0.4.x patch that wraps things up nicely.

OP, you never responded to my suggestion that a work around could be to stack a scout or warrior with a couple workers on the front line.
Click to expand...

November 3rd 2012 is the day I posted a complaint about the bug, like I said in my first post of this thread, I am a complete idiot when it comes to programming and the internal workings of a pc.

Just how would you deem it possible to play the game at high levels with a military unit guarding every worker, the cost both in gold and hammers would have a profound effect. It was an insult to my intelligence and further proof that you are dismissing this bug as trivial.
 
Yes, I think you are overstating the game impact of this bug. Nevertheless, I have tried to be as constructive as possible.

You should not need to guard every worker this way. I concur that each unit is precious, but I think we are talking about two scouts, which is something even I could manage, and I tend to be way too frugal with units.

I missed the that the dates are exactly the same, almost certainly not a coincidence! Very strange that they claim to have only tweaked a few unrelated things. From the bottom of that Patch Notes page:

[LOCALIZATION]
•Added support for Traditional Chinese

[BUGS]
•Fixed some issues with the Pitboss server.
•Corrected some multiplayer lobby issues related to WorldBuilder file names.
•Corrected a multiplayer exploit that could allow humans to steal other humans tradable items.
Click to expand...

Have you tried playing GnK or BNW with all the extra gameplay features turned off?
 
TractorBoy said:
Now that I know a lot more about the game my intention was to take on some of the top science victory times, but playing a wide game is unbearable!
Click to expand...

Okay, I re-read the thread to understand better where all your hate is coming from. I concur, at deity in a wide science game, the extra scouts necessary to work around the bug are untenable. I wish you luck figuring out how to enjoy vanilla civ since it looks it is not realistic for you to pursue posting to HOF.
 
beetle said:
I missed the that the dates are exactly the same, almost certainly not a coincidence! Very strange that they claim to have only tweaked a few unrelated things. From the bottom of that Patch Notes page:

Have you tried playing GnK or BNW with all the extra gameplay features turned off?
Click to expand...

From the patch notes you found and the date that I complained, it does kind of feel like some progress has been made, thanks.

I have made some entries on the HOF playing G&K with some success I might add, but my preference is to play Vanilla and to take the big boys on!
 
beetle said:
Okay, I finally started reading your workers stopping work Confirmed Bugs thread. The dates are a coincidence, November 3rd, a year earlier!
Click to expand...

One of the dates you quoted for a patch was 1st Nov 2012, this is the one I am referring to, because it took me a couple of days to try and figure out what was going on before I posted!

Sorry, I didn't notice Nov 3rd 2013, I guess it just felt like a eureka moment, it was only after I posted that my thoughts turned to the above mentioned!
 
beetle said:
It is interesting to me that the patches for V (as compared to III and IV) seem to be much less comprehensive.

I also don’t recall arguments about patches for III and IV breaking earlier patches (but again, there seems to be fewer of them).
Click to expand...

To be fair I think the content of the Civ III and Civ IV installations was much better separated than the various content packages for Civ V. Civ III and Civ IV had completely separate sub-folders and exe-files for the expansions while things in Civ V seem to be a bit more - mixed up.

beetle said:
Anyone have a link for information regarding the IV 1.74 patch? (That one did not turn up as I looked up dates for the others.)
Click to expand...

Right here on this formidable page of ours. ;)

http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=6183

beetle said:
Gps, have you had the same problem as OP?
Click to expand...

No, sorry. Can't say anyhing about it. I just made it a habit - before wasting a lot of time on broken or still WIP games - to check bug reports regularly and decide whether a game is really ripe for buying/playing. That's the reason why I still prefer playing Civ III PtW to the unfinished Complete.
 
From reading that confirmed bug thread, I am very impressed how the vanilla users all found each other, rather than new threads starting up now and again. (True, the moderators merged a few threads, but still.) I wish I dug that up sooner, as I see I was making naïve suggestions that had already been discussed.
 
beetle said:
I am going to answer my own question and assert that V was finally out of beta with the so-called “Fall Patch”, v1.0.2.13 on 1 November 2012, more than two years after the 21 September 2010 initial release!
Click to expand...

As far as I remember there was a very small HOTFIX (whatever that means) after which the game was broken and has been unplayable except for die-hards ever since. If this patch is the culprit and the patch people are made aware of it then surely it would be easy to sort out!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Tiramisu
[BNW] Bug? AI receiving thousand gold pert turn
Replies
3
Views
362
Tiramisu
Tiramisu
R
Few questions about vox populi and more
Replies
1
Views
209
Yerltvachovicic
Yerltvachovicic
ThermobaricPunch
Multiplayer desyncs (loading screen between turns) and weird bugs
Replies
1
Views
788
coolhandluke11
C
N
Issues with my UI
Replies
0
Views
195
neilkaz
N
foreverlost
Need help to advance to beating the AI Civs
Replies
4
Views
516
foreverlost
foreverlost
Top Bottom