Pls explain: how can "simple" bugs be introduced through a new patch

[GeusBlues]

ok, I do understand CIV is a complex game and that when you want to tweak something it can have a major impact (bug) on another aspect of the game.

What I don't understand are the "simple" bugs which get introduced:
until the previous patch you could select multiple paratroopers and have them jump into enemy territory, with 3.13 they can only jump one by one.

Selecting multiple units and having them perform an action is a "basic" feature of the game, not a complex interaction with other things.

Anybody care to explain how it is possible that these kind of "simple" bugs are introduced?

I'm a noob at programming but I compare it with making a high-tech change to the gearbox of a car and afterwards I can't open my trunk anymore.

(just trying to understand that complex world at the other end of my window )

 

[Colossian]

It'simple. Out of their hands.

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

? I don't get the response, Colossian.

 

[LiberiGlacialis]

Because a piece of coding can affect a lot more then what some people think?

(think about as a piece of your gearbox is helping keep that trunk closed, and you broke it)

 

[gps]

Well, with some programming background, I can asure you, that there are no "simple" features or bugs. The simpler a feature or a function might seem to an ordinary human beeing, the more complex it is often to "explain" it to a computer. And in a complex environment like a Civ-Game basically every feature of the game is in logic interaction with almost every other feature of the game. You can't really blame the game designers/programmers don't know in advance, what crazy ideas Civ-Players might come up with (e.g. continuous planting and chopping of trees for speed-up production!). If you know it, then it's easy - but would you have thought about it, if no one told you??? Same goes for real bugs. You can't test on every available hardware. You can't test each and every possible situation in every context while having limited manpower and budget - and if you don't, bugs keep slipping through. That's normal and there's no way to change that.

 

[GeusBlues]

Gps, I agree with you but then again:

Break CIV down in components:

- One of the first components is creating the map. You set some variables in the beginning (climate, age...) and then the component runs. It has no interaction with the rest of the game and once the game starts this component will never be used again. So any changes/patches you create later on in the code won't effect the map creation.

- Next I would code those "basic" features. One of them is the movement of units. This has some input variables too: choice of unit (to choose the "subcode" for the graphical movement of the unit), terrain, occupied by enemy or not... But it remains a basic feature which shouldn't interact with anything else.
Once the unit is moved (the "basic" feature/component/routine is finished)you move back to the core of the game which "calculates" the impact of your move on military, culture and other "complex" things.
Sorry if I don't use the correct programming language but I would describe it as: you end the subroutine, a subroutine which hasn't any loops which could interact with anything else in the game.

- Then I would create the intelligence of the game which in the case of CIV is so complex that changing something to the code can have an effect on a lot of other things and create unwanted affects or bugs.

So I don't understand why a "basic" feature can become buggy after a patch when it worked ok before.
If there is a valid technical reason for it that would mean (in my opinion) that after a patch you can also have created a bug in the map creation component.

I hope you can follow this Belgian logic

 

[gps]

Break CIV down in components:

I guess, that's exactly what they did...

- One of the first components is creating the map. You set some variables in the beginning (climate, age...) and then the component runs. It has no interaction with the rest of the game and once the game starts this component will never be used again. So any changes/patches you create later on in the code won't effect the map creation.

...so as far as I remember, no bugs in that component.

- Next I would code those "basic" features. One of them is the movement of units.

Think about the problems Civ III Conquest has with invisible units. Or the inmovable units like the Princess, that need to switch sides to be able to brought home. True, they did a sloppy job there, no excuses for not finishing properly - but I can understand the job is tough! But to your example of stack movement of paratroopers, here you must always check if each unit still has movements points left to move with the stack - otherwise it has to drop out of movement. Problems here: units might have different movement points. Units might already have moved manually / automatically. Terrain. Airlift. ZOC/Blocking. Forget a comma in one of those checks or a minor misspelling - and that's the end of formation parachuting.

- Then I would create the intelligence of the game which in the case of CIV is so complex that changing something to the code can have an effect on a lot of other things and create unwanted affects or bugs.

That's exactly what they did, they explain it in detail on the Chronicles bonus DVD. But you can't really separate rules for the player and rules for the AI, because they basically have to be the same, although AI and human beings function in completely different ways and also have a totally different interface for playing, yet the human player always wants to feel the illusion of beeing equal to the AI. And if you introduce new features for an addon like BTS you alwas have to include that logic seamlessly both into the exisitng AI programming and into the established players interface - which work completely differnt but have to lead to the same results.
That's one of the biggest challenges there are in computer gaming. And although Sid and his Firaxis people are top knotch in their field, obviousley even they make mistakes. Can't blame them for it. The only thing I would blame them for is not trying to fix as many bugs as possible and reasonable - as they did with Conquest. I can really understand the frustration of the fanbase. Let's hope, they do a better job for BTS - and no problem for me, if it takes some time. I'll stick with Warlords, until BTS is playable.

I hope you can follow this Belgian logic

That was Belgian? Must be a natural...

 

[Quagga]

So I don't understand why a "basic" feature can become buggy after a patch when it worked ok before.

As I pointed out in your thread reporting the paratrooper multi-select, it was broken before. It's just that the fix broke it in a new way.

 

[GeusBlues]

Quagga:
I didn't realise it was bugged before, I never had problems with it before... this said, I rarely used the paradrop feature so might as well never noticed the problem before.
In my present game, just before I applied the 3.13 patch, I had paradropped a stack without problems so I assumed the "bug" was introduced by the patch.

GPS:
Thanks for your patience and explaining. Just for your info: I never doubted the programmers (or Firaxis) skills, I believe they made an excellent series... and I can prove that: I'm 48 and the CIV series are the only games I play since +- 1995

To conclude this:
- I'll have to do some better research before I talk about "a bug which wasn't there before". I understand now why forummembers call some posters "whiners": I accused the "patch-people" of introducing a new bug which was in already. Sorry guys
- For my own defence: I knew somebody would give me a valid explanation on something I couldn' understand. Never to old to learn

 

[Lobsang1979]

Quagga:
I didn't realise it was bugged before, I never had problems with it before... this said, I rarely used the paradrop feature so might as well never noticed the problem before.
In my present game, just before I applied the 3.13 patch, I had paradropped a stack without problems so I assumed the "bug" was introduced by the patch.

GPS:
Thanks for your patience and explaining. Just for your info: I never doubted the programmers (or Firaxis) skills, I believe they made an excellent series... and I can prove that: I'm 48 and the CIV series are the only games I play since +- 1995

To conclude this:
- I'll have to do some better research before I talk about "a bug which wasn't there before". I understand now why forummembers call some posters "whiners": I accused the "patch-people" of introducing a new bug which was in already. Sorry guys
- For my own defence: I knew somebody would give me a valid explanation on something I couldn' understand. Never to old to learn

It's great to see humility and honesty every now and again... most people just did their heels in! Good luck GeusBlues!

 

[jray]

As a software developer myself, I can attest to the difficulty in avoiding weird apparently-unrelated side effects in a game this complicated. BUT, many of the problems created by the 3.13 patch could have been caught by basic regression testing---that is, spending some time just checking the overall health of the game without focusing on the changed stuff. It's basically the same thing as the first few eager players getting 3.13 and immediately noticing things like "Hey, where did the culture and EP displays go?" So my guess is that Firaxis cut some corners in their regression testing. It's a shame that they don't have public beta testing of patches, because we could do a ton of regression testing for free!

 

[gps]

It's basically the same thing as the first few eager players getting 3.13 and immediately noticing things like "Hey, where did the culture and EP displays go?" So my guess is that Firaxis cut some corners in their regression testing. It's a shame that they don't have public beta testing of patches, because we could do a ton of regression testing for free!

True, but after all the flaming they got - I can fully understand their strategie. Now some of the flamers have been silenced for a while and once again turned into unpaid Beta-Testers. And that way the bugs are identified within hours and days instead of weeks and months with a handfull of people at Firaxis having to do the job. It's a win-win from my point of view.