Colonization Patch ?

[PeaceGuy]

Sure the game has some issues but I think they will fix it as they did with other games. If you remember Alpha Centauri had a lot of problems too but they did fix it and some players consider it one of the best games ever.

About the old Col you seem to forget that terrible combat system, the fact that you had to equip new tools after 5 improvements, the fact that there were no borders (the AI would bring dragoons and fortify them on your roads) etc. Don't get me wrong I like the old Col but it sure had it's problems too.

Something I like about the new version is that you can finish a game in a few hours, that's a change and for me a good one.

Have in mind that Dale's patch includes some changes that are a matter of opinion. Treasure size for example (you can't carry more than one with his patch). Or you can try his "patchmod" which makes the game even heavier.

So my humble suggestion is play the game as is and wait for Firaxis. I still trust them.

 

[Dale]

Have in mind that Dale's patch includes some changes that are a matter of opinion. Treasure size for example (you can't carry more than one with his patch). Or you can try his "patchmod" which makes the game even heavier.

So my humble suggestion is play the game as is and wait for Firaxis. I still trust them.

Actually, that's the ONLY thing that could possibly be a matter of opinion. All the rest are strict bug fixes in the game.

Plus it's extremely simple to return treasure carrying to it's defect vanilla state too with one tiny simple xml change.

 

[PeaceGuy]

No it's not.

Warehouse overflow is another and also the F1 key when you are about to refuse tax increase. I think they are both in the "patch" IIRC.

 

[Dale]

Ahh..... you're one of those horsehockey that I blocked all the exploits.

That explains it.

BTW, if you cared to read the thread all the way through you'd find out that they are actually bugs which allowed exploits.

 

[Dale]

No it's not.

Warehouse overflow is another and also the F1 key when you are about to refuse tax increase. I think they are both in the "patch" IIRC.

Okay so here's my "opinion" on the three points you bring up of unit cargo bay size, F1 access during diplomacy and warehouse expansion overflow:

A. Regardless of whether thinking in terms of weight or size, when a unit requires a specific size ship for transport it should take up that size transport ship. If you add more weight or more size then that transport ship will sink. If a ship required a caravel to transport, it wouldn't ask for a galleon. That's basic logic. This is aside from the FACT that the programming link between the unit and the XML tag in Civ4UnitInfos.xml was BROKEN.

B. F1 access during diplomacy was blocked purely to stop an exploit which rendered tax parties bunk. Tax parties are a core component of the game and by moving goods away from the city via the F1 advisor whilst the tax party diplomacy window was open is a plain and simple exploit that renders the concept BROKEN.

C. Warehouse expansion overflow is TRADE. Trading is a core concept of the game. Every single instance of trade triggers certain in-game counters (eg: totalTrade) EXCEPT warehouse expansion overflow. It is possible to avoid tax and commodity price changes by using this exploit. Warehouse expansion overflow trade counters are MISSING.

Now let's look at your opinion:

A. You believe that it is possible to suspend all laws of physics and allow more mass or weight in a static sized container than physically allowed. Newton is rolling in his grave!

B. You believe it is your right to cheat by avoiding loss of goods during a tax party.

C. You believe you should be able to cheat basic economic principles of supply and demand, and taxation by utilising a flaw in the game bigger than the original Colonization's custom house bug. Adam Smith is also rolling in his grave!

So all up I have the opinion you're a dirty little cheater.

Tell me where I'm wrong.

 

[jenks]

lol

Dale makes some sense there!

 

[Greybriar]

After being required to ship only one treasure per galleon in the original Colonization, I was surprised when I found it was possible to transport six treasures in a galleon in the new version. And I have to admit it spoiled me, because reverting back to only one treasure in Dale's mod felt very limiting. But I agree that six treasures would be too many for a single galleon.

On the other hand, why should a treasure of, say, 500 gold take up as much space on a galleon as a treasure of 1,000 gold? Would it be feasible to limit the amount of treasure a galleon can transport to the total amount of gold instead of limiting the cargo space to just one treasure? I believe that would be more realistic, although I do not know whether or not it would be practical.

 

[jenks]

Its certainly more than "one tiny simple xml change."

... Besides, a treasure worth 500 gold could be a tonne of porcelain, a treasure worth 1500 could be a tonne of silver ornaments. Either require a vessel which can carry a tonne!

Greybriar, I disagreed when I first saw it in the changelog (I had too been spoiled myself ) but after playing, and thinking about the logic ... it simply has to be in the game

 

[Dale]

It certainly IS one simple XML edit to return treasures to a single berth:

			<iRequiredTransportSize>6</iRequiredTransportSize>
			[b]<iBerthSize>6</iBerthSize>[/b]

Just change iBerthSize to the number of berths a treasure takes up. Set to 3 and 2 treasures per galleon, set to 2 and fit 3 on a galleon.

 

[player1 fanatic]

Well, the thing is that 1 treasue limit isn't really balanced in Col2, considering how low values of treasure are and how slow the galleon is.

This is not Col1 (big treasures, quick galleons).

Although, I do see the point of having bug in XML file in regard to one of the unit attributes.

 

[L_Clan_Dalamar]

I made a few complainy posts myself about the lack of a patch but truth be told I am not gonna bother anymore. Once Dale adds the achievements and the alternative victory conditions to AoD2, I know that Firaxis will not come up with a better update. For all I care they can take a year-long vacation.

And saying that patchmod changes a lot is a huge exaggeration. It just fixes the most obvious issues. I am pretty sure that most of patchmod's changes would have been in an official patch as well whether or not you like them. I realized that the overflow thing was a bug in my first game and I had never even played Col1. I played all my games either in vanilla or with patchmod, never noticed a huge difference except for the silly amounts of bugs being gone.

 

[Öjevind Lång]

I made a few complainy posts myself about the lack of a patch but truth be told I am not gonna bother anymore. Once Dale adds the achievements and the alternative victory conditions to AoD2, I know that Firaxis will not come up with a better update. For all I care they can take a year-long vacation.

What makes you think they haven't?

 

[Ghost5786]

1. The REF won't land bug. Self-explanatory.

2. Rebellion sentiment stuck. I don't think this is a bug but a problem with the mechanics of the game. In the last 100 turns of the game I had 2 medium sized cities (pop around 10) and one large city (pop around 21). Even with the founding fathers maxed out and with the maximum amount of state improvements, I still could not up rebellion sentiment beyond 42% overall considering that both of my other cities had 100% and the large city had 62%. This is no doubt due to my high population but what could I do? If I were to build up dissent early then the king ups his REF and gets a huge head start. Irritating mechanic that makes it damned if you do and damned if you don't (See here for more info: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=295356).

3. Late game slowdown or memory leak (?). Unknown what the cause of this is but I've had the same issue appearing when I used to play Civ4 and it's a got to be a problem with the engine. In the space between that time I've gone between computers and upgrades and yet this problem *still* perseveres? Honestly, do they still not know their way around their own engine yet? This isn't news of course, Pirates! also had particularly sucky code imo with bad slowdown experianced during naval encounters (turning the graphical options down didn't do much). For me this isn't the worst problem because none of these games require twitch reactions from the player but still, c'mon! (More on this here: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=292779).

If these were all fixed then I would be a happy man.

 

[dalgo]

2. Rebellion sentiment stuck. I don't think this is a bug but a problem with the mechanics of the game. In the last 100 turns of the game I had 2 medium sized cities (pop around 10) and one large city (pop around 21). Even with the founding fathers maxed out and with the maximum amount of state improvements, I still could not up rebellion sentiment beyond 42% overall considering that both of my other cities had 100% and the large city had 62%. This is no doubt due to my high population but what could I do? If I were to build up dissent early then the king ups his REF and gets a huge head start. Irritating mechanic that makes it damned if you do and damned if you don't.

The reason for this is that your overall rebel sentiment is based on your total population, not just those in colonies. To increase this rebel sentiment you need to increase your liberty bell production. If you have a large population and a small number of colonies then yes your rebel sentiment may be stuck at a value below the required 50%. You can calculate your maximum possible rebel sentiment as follows:

Rebel sentiment = bells per turn x 25 / total population

Your overall rebel sentiment will trend towards this value over time. You can add up your bells per turn from the Domestic Advisor, while your total population is 'All Units' minus 'No Profession' from your Military Advisor.

There are two ways to work around this problem - reduce your total population (not recommended) or increase your liberty bell production. What I do in this situation is build a couple of small 'statesmen' colonies with 3 elder statesmen and a farmer in each. Put them inland so you won't have to defend them from the REF and build a printing press/newspaper there. Your liberty bell production will increase dramatically.

 

[Dale]

1. The REF won't land bug. Self-explanatory.

There's Mods that address this, including my own Age of Discovery II.

2. Rebellion sentiment stuck. I don't think this is a bug but a problem with the mechanics of the game. In the last 100 turns of the game I had 2 medium sized cities (pop around 10) and one large city (pop around 21). Even with the founding fathers maxed out and with the maximum amount of state improvements, I still could not up rebellion sentiment beyond 42% overall considering that both of my other cities had 100% and the large city had 62%. This is no doubt due to my high population but what could I do? If I were to build up dissent early then the king ups his REF and gets a huge head start. Irritating mechanic that makes it damned if you do and damned if you don't (See here for more info: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=295356).

You probably had a lot of colonists outside the colonies, including pioneers, soldiers and dragoons. You just need to understand how the formula works, or play Age of Discovery II which address this by excluding outside workers from the calculation.

3. Late game slowdown or memory leak (?). Unknown what the cause of this is but I've had the same issue appearing when I used to play Civ4 and it's a got to be a problem with the engine. In the space between that time I've gone between computers and upgrades and yet this problem *still* perseveres? Honestly, do they still not know their way around their own engine yet? This isn't news of course, Pirates! also had particularly sucky code imo with bad slowdown experianced during naval encounters (turning the graphical options down didn't do much). For me this isn't the worst problem because none of these games require twitch reactions from the player but still, c'mon! (More on this here: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=292779).

I just need to ask, did you read the thread all the way through? This is not a mem-leak, but an inefficient use of memory and cores. Set the core affinity to core 1 and the problem pretty much goes away. Also read the excellent explanation post on memory fragmentation near the end of that thread.

 

[Ghost5786]

Thank you for your reply, I will definately try AoD 2 as it looks quite impressive. Regarding the late game slowdown, I encountered the same problem with my old comp which utilized only one core. Perhaps it wasn't enough? What I am gathering from your post is that you suggest that Firaxis haven't properly implemented dual-core support.

Either way, I just find it annoying because it doesn't seem like Firaxis put the time in to do some proper playtesting. It feels kind of lazy.

 

[Dale]

That's correct, dual core as well as true Vista support are sadly behind in Civ4 and Col.

 

[jenks]

It certainly IS one simple XML edit to return treasures to a single berth:

			<iRequiredTransportSize>6</iRequiredTransportSize>
			[b]<iBerthSize>6</iBerthSize>[/b]

Just change iBerthSize to the number of berths a treasure takes up. Set to 3 and 2 treasures per galleon, set to 2 and fit 3 on a galleon.

stand corrected

 

[angry_rebel]

It was odd enough for them to include an option to "check for updates" in the main menu. It was almost as if they had expected to spend some time patching it before it even left the factory.

EDIT: Then again, they included a menu option for mods, too. So . . .

 

[player1 fanatic]

Well, there is still that modding contest, you know...