Thanks to the production team for making changes in a day or so and fooling us fools

[oSiyeza]

I am quite excited by the Tech and Civic Shuffle Mode.

I dont understand how the AI plans research, but I kind of read that the shuffle mode forces the player to act the same way the AI does normally. As the AI only decides from the inmediate available techs with some weighting factor but is unable to plan ahead.

Im unsure if this is true, but could mean that the shuffle mode can reduce a bit the natural advantage of the player.

Does anyone know about this?

I continue to be frustrated by how opaque the patch notes are. I think it is safe to assume that Firaxis does have a comprehensive list of changes internally, and I'm not sure why these changes are not being shared with us.

I would assume is an issue about documentation. They probably have a list of tasks with the status of different bugs and changes in an planning software. But writing and releasing actual public easy to understand documentation, may be just something that takes more time than the available.

 

[topsecret]

All in good fun.

 

[Morgawr]

I dont understand how the AI plans research, but I kind of read that the shuffle mode forces the player to act the same way the AI does normally. As the AI only decides from the inmediate available techs with some weighting factor but is unable to plan ahead.

Im unsure if this is true, but could mean that the shuffle mode can reduce a bit the natural advantage of the player.

Does anyone know about this?
.

It definitely takes away some of the planning advantage from the human player which is why I like it. Spent about three hours playing last night and my whole usual order of picking and researching eurekas and civics got turned upside down on it's head. (And even city build order) I spent most of my time trying to figure out where the stuff I wanted was.. you can't just chain eurakas and wait to get one to feed another. Hard to explain without giving specific details but essentially I ended up researching a lot without any boost. It's like that card game where the cards are facing down and you don't know what's behind

 

[Laurana Kanan]

I continue to be frustrated by how opaque the patch notes are. I think it is safe to assume that Firaxis does have a comprehensive list of changes internally, and I'm not sure why these changes are not being shared with us.

I would assume is an issue about documentation. They probably have a list of tasks with the status of different bugs and changes in an planning software. But writing and releasing actual public easy to understand documentation, may be just something that takes more time than the available.

After posting the patch notes, this was literally the first thing I commented on in that thread. FXS used to be generally good about itemizing most changes in the patch notes pre-NFP, but lately it seems we're getting more generalized statements. For example, stating that there are "Additional crash fixes", but not elaborating on what they are, doesn't really help someone who's experiencing crashes and wants to know if their issue has been addressed.

Similarly, are statements like "Various...bug fixes". Well, what are they? Whenever I encounter a bug, I always first try to see if it's something I can fix on my end (like the recent forest fire duration bug), and if I can, I'll generally post about it. But, over time these add up and it's frustrating to have to go over everything each update and see if the bug has been fixed or not. @Pfeffersack I'm sure can sympathize.

Lastly, there were three specifics in the August patch notes about the AI and then there's something about "Various AI improvements". I'm not sure what the point of that statement is when we don't know in what area of the AI it applies. I mean it doesn't have to be ultra specific, but take a look at the patch notes from September of last year and compare it to the recent August one.

We shouldn't have to pour over the files, look through a diff file, or play test to see if a bug or issue has been corrected or improved, when it could be more easily communicated directly through the patch notes. I actually am pretty happy and satisfied with the content that's been released since NFP, but this is one area I think FXS needs to work on.

 

[Gedemon]

And the API... or changes related to modding in general... changes to load order, dependencies, references, game capabilities...

They are rarely mentioned, and without the ability to do a diff on the source code, changes to the API are most likely ignored unless used in a new scenario or found by pure luck.

Remember civ5 ? We had real patch notes then...
April 2011 patch notes, June 2011 patch notes

I can understand that they lack time to sort the raw patch notes, and that marketing doesn't know which ones may be relevant to the community, but maybe Frankenstein would be happy to help with that task.

 

[Pfeffersack]

After posting the patch notes, this was literally the first thing I commented on in that thread. FXS used to be generally good about itemizing most changes in the patch notes pre-NFP, but lately it seems we're getting more generalized statements. For example, stating that there are "Additional crash fixes", but not elaborating on what they are, doesn't really help someone who's experiencing crashes and wants to know if their issue has been addressed.

Similarly, are statements like "Various...bug fixes". Well, what are they? Whenever I encounter a bug, I always first try to see if it's something I can fix on my end (like the recent forest fire duration bug), and if I can, I'll generally post about it. But, over time these add up and it's frustrating to have to go over everything each update and see if the bug has been fixed or not. @Pfeffersack I'm sure can sympathize.

Lastly, there were three specifics in the August patch notes about the AI and then there's something about "Various AI improvements". I'm not sure what the point of that statement is when we don't know in what area of the AI it applies. I mean it doesn't have to be ultra specific, but take a look at the patch notes from September of last year and compare it to the recent August one.

We shouldn't have to pour over the files, look through a diff file, or play test to see if a bug or issue has been corrected or improved, when it could be more easily communicated directly through the patch notes. I actually am pretty happy and satisfied with the content that's been released since NFP, but this is one area I think FXS needs to work on.

Absolutely. Beside the frustration it causes when you are one of the player hunting bugs while playing and providing as many reports as possible, it shouldn't be underestimated that the level of detail provided in the patchnotes also has an effect how the patch "feels" at least for the die-hard fans. I personally just love to read the notes before starting to actually play with the new update. The meaty-er they are, the better for me I'm aware that the time we are living in also has to please a more casual audience, which does not want to read through walls of text and I respect that. But companies like Paradox arrange their patchnotes in away both side are served - they highlight the big, key additions at the top...and who is interested in every small piece can read through the details at the end (it has to be said that even they don't suceed in listing every fix and change in the end, but they attempt at least to do so, which I appreciate)

 

[oSiyeza]

Agree with the sentiment. Specially liked to go trough the AI changes. And it seems AI changes are still being made.

In a big Software company, documentation is key. Even more, if you want to be quality certified, documentation is mandatory for every process. So I assume internal documentation exist, and that they use also sofware management tools to coordinate tasks. There is no way this is not the case unless the NFP has being totally put to the side, and is managed like a personal effort. Which I dont think is the case.

So, either they are very very busy, like having to scrap time from other tasks for civ, so they need to prioritize; or having very low man poer in the NFP; or maybe patch notes were managed by someone in public comunications, that either is not there anymore or is mostly in other tasks.

Whatever the case, I bet for a management - time asignment issue.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

Agree with the sentiment. Specially liked to go trough the AI changes. And it seems AI changes are still being made.

In a big Software company, documentation is key. Even more, if you want to be quality certified, documentation is mandatory for every process. So I assume internal documentation exist, and that they use also sofware management tools to coordinate tasks. There is no way this is not the case unless the NFP has being totally put to the side, and is managed like a personal effort. Which I dont think is the case.

So, either they are very very busy, like having to scrap time from other tasks for civ, so they need to prioritize; or having very low man poer in the NFP; or maybe patch notes were managed by someone in public comunications, that either is not there anymore or is mostly in other tasks.

Whatever the case, I bet for a management - time asignment issue.

or maybe current situation is the problem- you know something called covid 19? Maybe it is preventing clear communication. I know the internet is a thing but writing e-mail is still difficult and can be unclear than saying things face to face.

 

[Josephias]

I’m pretty sure @oSiyeza may be working remotely due to covid19, like others, like myself.

If any, working remotely should help having a list of things to do / done, as this kind of coordination is even more needed when you are not at the same office talking face-to-face.

There are reasons covid may impact patch notes quality, but it is not “oh no, poor people are working from home”. Not for people which usually work with computers anyway. And these may be lack of staff, mismanaged time (everyone working in SW know they should document, but then, no manager accepts allocating sensible time for that). Or that writting outside comunications is managed by PR instead of development and, in this case yes, Covid makes more difficult/time-consuming the task of a person that has not been directly involved in development to go go trough all developers to confirm what to put in the note.

Nevertheless I was just browsing some ‘pedia translations yesterday and I’m afraid either due covid, or due NFP not being priority, QA has loosened.

 

[GrumboMumbo]

This is an interesting bit of feedback, because it includes valid concerns ("what we got was underwhelming and I'm concerned about the value proposition for what we are getting") with personal insults and ad hominem attacks. Why would you ever assume that the developers of the game (who are self-stated superfans) don't care about the game? And if you think that developers don't want to release the most polished product possible, that shows how little you know about developers in general.

Look, wanting improvement is good. But if you can't provide criticism in a constructive manner, you really should take a step back and learn how to do so. Communicating criticism effectively is a skill that most of us haven't learned very well, and it's worth practicing to help in personal and professional communication. People respond better when they're not personally attacked.

I don't believe you when you say you care about the game if everything you say about the game is derogatory and is just you venting your spleen on the people who are creating this thing you claim you love. Your feedback really should be more than minimum effort...

Firstly, I think what you said was a bit condescending. However, if anyone at firaxis feels personally attacked or insulted by what I said, then I am sorry about that. I can't possibly know if employee's care or not, so it is unfair and incorrect for me to express my displeasure that way.

I will however try my best in the future to refrain from referring to they or Firaxis or devs, and instead just focus on commenting about the work that has been created, and not a person or business.

With that being said, I find the work they have created in the last few months to be of poor quality and I therefore don't have confidence in purchasing something like a pass subscription. If you compare this years NFP + free patches with last years Gathering Storm Expansion + free patches (which both cost the same so I think it is a fair comparison) They are not even close to being of similar quality so far in my opinion (I know we are not all the way through NFP, but with what we have I am not confident for future patches).

I personally don't enjoy optional 'modes' especially when they are largely unbalanced and lacking polish. I don't really care much about new leaders (especially if they are unbalanced). And the balance choices so far have been more 'shifting the goalposts' instead of really fixing key areas of concern (like last years patches did). Seriously, go read the patch notes. There was a lot packed into each one, and they really reinvigorated the balance of the game. Impactful changes to IZs, Lumber mills, Coastal cities, Governors, Buildings etc. We are getting small samples of what they did last year, but it's nowhere near impactful enough.

I could go into changes that I think they should make myself, but I already have in other threads, and so have many people here. This forum is full of constructive criticism. But at the end of the day, it's not my job to make the game. It is my job to vote with my wallet. And if my venting about it has annoyed anyone, I apologise for that.

I want to be excited about future content and enjoying that ride, but unfortunately I don't have much confidence left after the direction that has been chosen for the game. And I can only express my frustration here, and wait for civ7. If I had my business head on, I can't help but speculate that this patch and the lack off dll release is a shrewd move to boost sales of civ7. And I don't like it, but it's just business.

 

[BrotherInJah]

You are free to be as impolite as you want or mock me as much as you like, but your comment does not apply. I dont care about the ammount of resources they use in other projects when I critisize the lack of resources they use for this one. Since I am discussing about this project, with the perspective of a player of this game and regarding the effort I think the players of this game are reasonable to expect from them.

Just stop it. You brought your experience to back your opinion here, not me. How it is impolite to comment on that?

 

[oSiyeza]

I want to be excited about future content and enjoying that ride, but unfortunately I don't have much confidence left after the direction that has been chosen for the game.

Now Im kind of used to the thought of this game being a enjoyable mess. It maybe disjointed and unpolished and may never live to the potential it certainly has. But regardless, I kind of apreciate the attempt of going to new places with the NFP.

Even if I am the first in criticizing its shortcommings, and I am realist, I also think the people working on the game shares the passion of the community and there is always hope while the game is active that Fxs pays a bit of attention and gives a bit of care.

While the August patch lacks in all fronts, we all had a hard summer and I will still keep an eye on the next one.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

. If you compare this years NFP + free patches with last years Gathering Storm Expansion + free patches (which both cost the same so I think it is a fair comparison) They are not even close to being of similar quality so far in my opinion (I know we are not all the way through NFP, but with what we have I am not confident for future patches).

I think that is bit unfair since we are only 1/3 of that NEP... Now if you made that comment in November... I would understand.

 

[Revanchist]

I just want my byzantium and alexios, nobody needs to get hurt, just drop the september update and everything goes nice and easy...

 

[Andrew Johnson [FXS]]

Nevertheless I was just browsing some ‘pedia translations yesterday and I’m afraid either due covid, or due NFP not being priority, QA has loosened.

What did you find to be lacking or problematic? The 'pedia is an evolving document, and feedback is important.

 

[topsecret]

What did you find to be lacking or problematic? The 'pedia is an evolving document, and feedback is important.

*Sees Firaxis tag*

*Rolls out red carpet*

*Buys gourmet meal*

*Bows*

*In a whisper*:
Patch notes.

In all seriousness, more detail in the patch notes would be ++++++.

 

[Josephias]

Thanks Andrew for the interest.

Actually the civilopedia comment was a small nitpick that I just happened to find some minutes before writing the post. (I provided you the details by PM). I have to admit it seemed a bigger flaw at that moment than actually is.

I think some things we notice in NFP, as the less detailed patch notes and reused models, may make us even see more ghosts than there are actually. As always there are things that could be improved, but you are doing great work, thanks!.