list of all current bugs in AC(X)

[scient]

I was wondering if anyone knew of a list of all the current bugs that exist in the game unresolved by the official patches? Alpha C is one of my fav classic games and I figured I'd see about working on an unofficial patch similar to project fixing engine bugs in Planescape: Torment.

Another question is should I be looking at Alpha C or Alien Crossfire? I've actually never played Crossfire so I'm not sure if it includes updates to the original game. Or are they separate games entirely? Or should I be looking at both?

If there isn't a list, could folks please post known or potential bugs here? Or links to topics that have any? I think there is one with aircraft interceptors? I'd just like to get an idea of how many problems I'm looking at to solve.

 

[vyeh]

You can start with this.

Some have been fixed by subsequent patches.

 

[scient]

Wow, that's a lot of bugs... Cheers for link, this will be a good starting point.

You said subsequent patches. Do you mean v2 for ACX and v4 for AC? Or has there already been an effort to make an unofficial patch? If so, I rather not reinvent the wheel by working on stuff that's already been done.

It also looks like exe's are separate for AC/ACX so that answers my question if I'll have to look at both or not.

If you know of anymore lists or threads please post em. I'll start to make a doc with all potential problems to look at. From that civgaming link I did see there is a thread with some updates albeit not posted in since 2004.

 

[Petek]

See here for a bug reporting thread from Apolyton. This thread (and the one posted by vyeh) predated at least some of the patches for both SMAC and SMAX and so have been addressed. Also, other bugs (such as the Data Angels probe rating rollover bug) were discovered after the last patch and so haven't been fixed.

However, these bugs probably cannot be fixed by anyone outside of Firaxis (or whoever currently holds the source code). All the bugs are hard-coded in the exe files. You'd have to disassemble the exe files to make any changes. See this thread on Apolyton for partial progress in this area, plus more discussion of the matter.

Petek

 

[scient]

See here for a bug reporting thread from Apolyton. This thread (and the one posted by vyeh) predated at least some of the patches for both SMAC and SMAX and so have been addressed. Also, other bugs (such as the Data Angels probe rating rollover bug) were discovered after the last patch and so haven't been fixed.

Thank you, will have a look.

However, these bugs probably cannot be fixed by anyone outside of Firaxis (or whoever currently holds the source code). All the bugs are hard-coded in the exe files. You'd have to disassemble the exe files to make any changes. See this thread on Apolyton for partial progress in this area, plus more discussion of the matter.

Yes and no. Source code would make things easier but not necessary to fix stuff. You just need a good knowledge of assembly (machine code). Plus I have ~5 years in reverse engineering which is why I was able to fix all the major bugs in PST as well as add in a few nice features.

As for that thread, I'm not sure why WBird784 is using the safedisc version of exe. After installing the xp/2000 compat patch, both AC(X) exe's are unprotected with cd check removed. I'll touch base with them tho. Do you happen to have the exe they posted that was removed?

Fixing bugs will violate the EULA, there is no getting around that. But those conditions were mainly setup to prevent circumvention of cd protection which doesn't exist in xp/2000 patch. Do you really think Firaxis will care? It's not like they're making any money off of it. I imagine one could track down the original devs and see about getting their blessing (I did something similar with PST).

 

[Petek]

Yes and no. Source code would make things easier but not necessary to fix stuff. You just need a good knowledge of assembly (machine code). Plus I have ~5 years in reverse engineering which is why I was able to fix all the major bugs in PST as well as add in a few nice features.

That's great! After 10 years we now have two individuals with the knowledge needed to fix the bugs.

As for that thread, I'm not sure why WBird784 is using the safedisc version of exe. After installing the xp/2000 compat patch, both AC(X) exe's are unprotected with cd check removed. I'll touch base with them tho. Do you happen to have the exe they posted that was removed?

I didn't realize until now that the CD check had been removed from SMAC. Interesting! However, the compatibility patch has no effect on SMAX. Terranx.exe isn't modified, only terran.exe (I just checked this to make sure).

If you send me a PM w/ your email address, I'll send you the exe file.

Fixing bugs will violate the EULA, there is no getting around that. But those conditions were mainly setup to prevent circumvention of cd protection which doesn't exist in xp/2000 patch. Do you really think Firaxis will care? It's not like they're making any money off of it. I imagine one could track down the original devs and see about getting their blessing (I did something similar with PST).

I don't know whether or not Firaxis and/or EA care about this. However the issue is whether the owners of this board (and also Apolyton) allow posting of any files that violate the EULA. They don't. However, such files could be exchanged by email and discussions could take place via PMs.

Petek

 

[vyeh]

This might be a long shot, but perhaps if someone knows a poster or a blogger that works for Firaxis or EA, it might be possible to get the companies to give permission for an "unofficial" patch to be posted on Apolyton or CivFanatics (probably conditioned by some kind of disclaimer saying the companies are not responsible for any damages caused by the patch).

Even though the two companies can't iron out their differences with regard to a sequel, they might both see the benefits of goodwill and if the liability issue is solved, an unofficial patch would not impact sales or a possible sequel.

I might be naive, especially about EA, but if someone knows an insider, that person can be sounded out.

After all, you're only looking for the companies to say to Apolyton or Civfanatics that they have no problem with a patch that meets certain conditions (e.g. it does not defeat copy protection).

If they're not being asked to release source code, it is kind of hard to imagine what they have to lose. Of course, I may be naive.

 

[GooglyBoogly]

One of the bugs, involving the Alien faction in the design workshop has already been fixed

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?t=176138&page=2

I would suggest starting your fix from this file, not the one Patek would send

Therer are also numberous multiplayer bugs, but I am not sure if you'd want
to tackle them

 

[Darsnan]

Bug: when popping a pod which produces multiple spore launchers, the SL sometimes attack each other. I don't think this should happen.

Bug of artificially inflating your clean minerals limit: by building Tree Farms, Hybrid Forests, Centauri Preserves, etc., you can then disband these facilities and still retain the increased clean minerals limit.

Minor Bug: in the #UNITS section of the alpha(x).txt if you try to change the CP chassis to something other than Infantry, the game won't recognize these new units and cosiders all but the first faction to be eliminated.

D

 

[vyeh]

For scient's convenience, I copied the last message to the thread where scient has been operating since February 13.

This was my message on that thread:

****
Darsnan posted this on scient's old thread in CFC.

"Bug: when popping a pod which produces multiple spore launchers, the SL sometimes attack each other. I don't think this should happen.

Bug of artificially inflating your clean minerals limit: by building Tree Farms, Hybrid Forests, Centauri Preserves, etc., you can then disband these facilities and still retain the increased clean minerals limit.

Minor Bug: in the #UNITS section of the alpha(x).txt if you try to change the CP chassis to something other than Infantry, the game won't recognize these new units and cosiders all but the first faction to be eliminated.

D"

I've seen the first bug.

The second bug is part of the eco-damage exploit that I have brought to your attention before. I regard the fact that you can affect the clean mineral limit of all bases by building a facility in one base to be an exploit.

****

 

[Darsnan]

Bug: if a Former is building a Forest and a forest spreads to the square, the Former continues to try and build the Forest even though it now exists there. Same happens for a Sea Former and a Kelp Farm.

D

 

[Darsnan]

Bug: human's can't build improvements on the top of Mt Planet, however the AI can build improvements (such as sensors, roads, and even cities). The AI should be prevented from building improvements here as well.

D

 

[Buster's Uncle]

Also, I believe formers can build a road across that center square if you use the build-road-to option, not if you move them to the square and hit r; same as with fungus during a long period when you aren't suppose to be able to do that at all. Sounds buggy to me, though I’d miss the latter..

 

[Darsnan]

Bug: humans can't raise terrain adjacent another faction without incurring a diplomatic penalty against said faction, however AIs can raise land which impinges upon a human's territory. Had this happen to me yesterday where the Drones made a land-bridge attaching to my territory when we were pacted.


D

 

[Darsnan]

Falls under the "Getting the AI to play more sensibly" bug: if an AI lands an Interceptor (i.e. the fighter was airborne at the beginning of the current turn) at a base which has an enemy needlejet adjacent to it, then if the AI has movement points left on its Interceptor it should then attack the enemy fighter (currently it does not).

Bug: sometimes when Probe Ships are repatriated, they are placed into bases which have no naval outlet.

 

[Darsnan]

Bug: if you are in treaty with an AI and you attack the AI's city which only has an artifact in it you suffer no diplomatic hit for this attack - you are still in treaty after this, even if it means your attack destroys the city.

D

 

[vyeh]

I've copied all of Darsnan bug reports to scient's main thread. When he last post on April 17, he said he had some other things to finish first. I think one of his early post implied he was a university student, so I think he may be referring to term papers, etc.

 

[Darsnan]

Can anyone confirm the following for me: if you take away the Progs starting techs from their text files, then start as said Prog faction, you still get the two techs (i.e. these tech selections are hardwired for the Progs). If this is confirmed would this be considered a bug or a feature? Personally speaking I'm leaning towards "feature" as it frees up space in the text files to insert other abilities.

D

 

[vyeh]

I recently checked the techs that the aliens got on starting a randomly generated game.

The Caretakers got Centauri Ecology, Progenitor Psych, Biogenetics, Information Networks and Field Modulation. However, this is the line from CARETAKE.TXT:

ALIEN, 0, DEFENSE, 125, SOCIAL, +PLANET, TECH, Biogen, TECH, InfNet, TECH, Ecology, FACILITY, 3

Note that Progenitor Psych and Field Modulation are not listed.

The Usurpers got Centauri Ecology, Progenitor Psych, Biogenetics, Applied Physics and Field Modulation. This is the line from USURPER.TXT:

ALIEN, 0, OFFENSE, 125, SOCIAL, +GROWTH, SOCIAL, +MORALE, SOCIAL, -PLANET, FACILITY, 3, TECH, Ecology, TECH, Physic, TECH, Biogen

Again note that Progenitor Psych and Field Modulation are not listed.

Comparing the faction characteristics in the SMAX manual on the disc with the faction text, one can infer that "ALIEN, 0" gives the two techs, "energy grid" in lieu of commerce, "space survey," nonblind research and deep radar ability for all units.

I went ahead and took away the Progs starting tech for each Prog and started each Prog. I will confirm that they both had Progenitor Psych and Field Modulation.

 

[Cmcastl]

I have asked this question before but maybe it is worth asking it again. A major, major, major bug is that SMAC tends to crash as it grows larger with more units, under XP. I have just crashed in year 2403. There is an XP patch but that doesn't seem to help. I read that there is a major problem in SMAC in handling large maps and units etc., with the unforeseen increase as far as the original programmers were concerned in home computing power, I am writing this fresh from my latest crash in the forlorn that some has been working on this?

Civ IV SMAC isn't too bad but it just doesn't have the atmosphere of the original.

Live long and prosper.