New Patch

[Charis]

There is simply no compelling reason for patching, AT ALL.

I have no plans to do so unless/until a newer version fixes all this mess.
No SG's should be using 1.20. They can't accidently upgrade because it can't
load the older save files, so they would have to be started as 1.20.
While folks are free to do that, I can say that no game I'm hosting, including
the two upcoming RBCiv C3C Scenario series, will use 1.20 or 1.22. If the Epics
move to 1.22 I will run two folders to keep both options open.

FWIW, there was consensus that having a choice in path was a very good thing
for industrial, but the removal of a tech was never mentioned, never suggested
or requested, but was found out when the beta testers got the new patch.
The response was a universal "Huh???" Alas, the time window Firaxis has for
any new and final features before all resources shifting to Civ 4 is shrinking, and
having to 'recover' from v1.22 will cut that time even shorter. Once that happens,
expect a 'final' Civ 3 patch that will be "it'. And since that will be the 'last one',
any significant changes would need to be tested and any 'new bugs' fixed before
its release. I would have to think that means the number of patches with new features
or key fixes will be in the 0 to 2 range.

Sticking with 1.15 for now (and maybe longer)
Charis

[Sirian]

Sticking with 1.15 for now (and maybe longer)

It would be most unfortunate if unnecessary changes late into the process result in leaving us an unfinished, unpolished "final patch" version.

I don't understand why a single person was assigned to do all the work. Wouldn't an effective team be able to accomplish more with the same resources? That's not a reflection on the person in this case, but a general concept about how to reach the best result.

I hope this works out. I can't say I'm thrilled about the notion of cutting off the process when the funding runs out, whether or not the work is finished. One HUGE problem in play here, which was not present in all earlier Civ3 patching, is the instability issue. Players need a stable version and a controlled number of variables and factors. If there are too many changes at one time, evaluating the true causes and effects of specific issues is undermined. Once you get something right, stop changing it! Players need time to play games, see how the changes are working out, then report back. I guess that is happening, but I have not taken part, since I've been waiting since the expansion came out for a version where everything that was working fine in PTW was also working fine in C3C. With some things that had been working OK undergoing changes and NO LONGER working well, that rather gets in the way of players helping the patching process.

Lethal air bombardment is one key example. Air was working fine before. Why was it changed? And what was done to balance out the changes?

I'm reminded a bit of the Diablo II patching process. They would fix bona fide problems, but also fix phantom problems with things that were working OK and end up breaking them. At no point did they learn to leave well enough alone on the good points, or what I thought were good points. They just kept tinkering and changing, then ran out of time without ever reaching a fully balanced and polished result. Not good.

Then there was the way Firaxis dropped Mac support like a hot potato, just ONE PATCH before they finally got it right. The Mac version was never updated with that final patch, never smoothed out the way it should have been. I've never understood that.


- Sirian

[Ozymandous]

Then there was the way Firaxis dropped Mac support like a hot potato, just ONE PATCH before they finally got it right. The Mac version was never updated with that final patch, never smoothed out the way it should have been. I've never understood that.

I thought Firaxis didn't do the Mac port or patching. I thought Atari/Inforgrames had contracted that out to someone else. I know Firaxis didn't do the initial Mac port so why should they be held accountable for something they didn't do int he first place? It seems all the venom from mac user's needs to find the correct target, namely the publisher and whichever company ported Civ3 to Mac to begin with.