Civ4 Beyond the Sword Patch v3.17 is out

Does anyone know if it's possible to have 3.13 and 3.17 installed side by side on the same machine? (i.e. in different directories).

Reason I ask is that I am involved in two long running 3.13 PBEM games (and going to 3.17 did cause problems - I had to reinstall and re-patch to 3.13), but I have other friends I'd like to play with who are running 3.17...
 
it is possible do the following:
find your bts folder - it should have the following path:

...\Program Files\Firaxis Games\Sid Meier's Civilization 4\Beyond the Sword\
now copy that folder so that you now have two folders looking like this
...\Program Files\Firaxis Games\Sid Meier's Civilization 4\Beyond the Sword\
...\Program Files\Firaxis Games\Sid Meier's Civilization 4\Beyond the Sword(Copy)\

then apply the 3.17 patch - it will patch
...\Program Files\Firaxis Games\Sid Meier's Civilization 4\Beyond the Sword\
while not doing anything to the copy folder. You can use the .exe in there to start 3.13 games - or just create a new shortcut to the 3.13 install :)
 
after i downloaded the patch and ran the .exe I got an error saying that "No version of Civilization IV: BTS was detected." What is the problem here?
 
I have been trying to get this patch to download and it wont work I have tryed ingame also and it still downloading like after 3 hours now whats up please help if can....
 
Should I upgrade to 3.17 or stay at 3.13?

My main concern is that Amra's mod will be broken by it. I like Rhye's and Fall mod as well but that shipped with it.

Is it really worth it to upgrade?
 
Take a look at the fix/change list on the front page. Only you can decide if those changes make it worth an upgrade. As for Amra's mod, there are some tips on having it work under 3.17 on the last couple pages of its topic. Start with post #514 and read through that before deciding.
 
My Civ BTS is working much better now for multiplayer. Im not timing out so much and stuff. So the patch was a good thing for me even though.
 
Has the annoying "nukers invulnerable to nukes bug" been fixed in 3.17? At least in 3.03 it completely ruins the counterforce strategy of nuclear warfare on land.

It's counterintuitive that the nuke rules of late game with SDI active give the defender a huge advantage, since he can position tactical nukes to cities inland close enough to the border to hold the attacker's ground forces and aviation at risk, while still out of reach from one turn's land march to take the cities after neutralizing their defenders with a first-strike.

The only option to counter this is with paratroopers and units with the Commando promotion, but the former are easy to counter with interceptors and the latter very difficult to acquire and keep safe.

It's also completely unrealistic, because counterforce is arguably the most important nuclear warhead targeting strategy and in many nuclear war scenarios a large portion of warheads, especially tactical ones, which are not deployed in extremely heavily hardened silos, would be lost to enemy strikes.

Since ICBM and Tactical Nuke don't have real strength values and won't take damage from nuclear blasts, one would at least expect them to be lost when in a tile subjected to nuke damage, perhaps with some high enough chance just like the random distribution of fallout.
 
Thats real easy to fix. Go into UnitInfos.xml and change <bNukeImmune>1</bNukeImmune> to <bNukeImmune>0</bNukeImmune> on the units you want nukes to have a chance of destroying.
 
Thats real easy to fix. Go into UnitInfos.xml and change <bNukeImmune>1</bNukeImmune> to <bNukeImmune>0</bNukeImmune> on the units you want nukes to have a chance of destroying.
This setting has no effect for the nuclear units, that is the bug. Also, the default setting of bNukeImmune for the Tactical Nuke is 0 to begin with.

The question was and still is if this bug is fixed in 3.17 or not. It should be easy to test with World Builder, just place some nukes for the other player in a city and then launch enough of your own that will suffice to destroy any other types of units and see if the nukes are still there at the start of the next turn.
 
I installed 3.17 and unfortunately can't confirm if there is any change at all. If there is any change in functionality, it is completely inadequate to address the problem.

After doing extensive testing with tens of nuke hits, I have established that nukes get destroyed (both Tactical Nukes with the default CIV4UnitInfos.xml and ICBMs with bNukeImmunity = 0) in 3.17, but at a horribly inefficient rate. Something like 10 hits are required for 1 nuke being destroyed.

This rate is only improved by removing the Bomb Shelter building from the target city. It is not realistic that it gives much better protection for nukes than for other units (which are still destroyed after 4-5 hits). It also appears the hits are not cumulative for nukes as opposed to normal units. In other words, after 5 hits all other units are always destroyed, but after 10 hits only 1 out of 10 nukes are destroyed and it takes another 10 hits (on average) to destroy another. These numbers could be off by something like 20 % due to the work involved in better testing, but the chances are thereabouts.

If we assume that "Bomb Shelter" represents superhardened (25,000PSI) silos for the missiles, that should still only reduce the probability of kill from a directly targeted strategic 500kt warhead to something like 25% per shot (assuming less than 500 feet CEP easily achievable by ca. 1995 guidance technology). For tactical warheads it might be somewhat less, but not much since their guidance must be assumed to be better, compensating for lower yield. This means that after 5 hits all nukes should be destroyed in almost all cases, even if there is a Bomb Shelter in the city.
 
The 3.17 patcher is dangerous. I don't install to the default path, ever, because I prefer to keep my things organized differently, but the patcher doesn't care, to the point where it changes the registry if you didn't install to the default location! FLAGRANT FOUL! Hit the showers, 3.17 patcher!

Weird thing is, it only changed the BtS location, despite ignoring the other two.
 
it does use the registry to find your bts install directory (and that is a subdirectory of your civilization 4 install directory) - it should not change your install directory - since that would make the patch useless...

edit:
and the way you describe it it just extracted to the new directory - so that would make the whole thing completely useless - are you sure that bts was properly registered in the windows registry before the patching?
 
Back
Top Bottom