Was FP Corruption Bug fixed? - Page 3

Kuciwalker · December 27, 2003, 19:59

Did Coracle make a DL?

EDIT: he's a King

Cerbykins · December 27, 2003, 20:21

If the AI is ever to be brought to human standards, then I want the top 4 difficulties abolished

Regent is suppsoed to be the 'break-evens' level, beyond that it's a given the AI has help to overcome it's stupidity

I WANT MY COMMERCE BACK!

DrSpike · December 27, 2003, 20:54

Quote:

Originally posted by skywalker
Did Coracle make a DL?

EDIT: he's a King

No JT is a distinct flavour of troll from Coracle. Welcome back JT.

Capt Dizle · December 27, 2003, 23:30

I only came back because I heard a rumor that Firaxis was making Civ4. Is that true? If they let that nitwit Soren screw up another edition of Civ I'll strangle someone.

Jaybe · December 27, 2003, 23:54

Have a good strangle, jt!

(Yes, I agree that a much better AI would be, ahh, "much better!")

vmxa1 · December 28, 2003, 02:42

Yup it is confirmed a fourth ediion is underway. Some of us would prefer it if you held off on that strangle until it is finished. Then we will let you know.

SporkPimp · December 28, 2003, 04:23

Quote:

Originally posted by ducki
Had it been changed before PtW, I doubt anyone would have had a problem, but how old is C3? Isn't that a bit long to wait for this sort of fix?

I don't understand this sentiment.

If it really improves the game, then it's never "too late" to implement it... cf. Diablo 2, where the 1.10 patch hugely changed the game, and almost universally for the better, even though it was released over a year after the last revision of the 1.09 patch.

Though the difference is, all of the wide-ranging changes to Diablo 2 were tested in a several-month public beta.

That helps.

-SporkPimp

Kuciwalker · December 28, 2003, 12:58

It is "too late" to implement if it would completely rework the game.

dexters · December 28, 2003, 13:02

I also want to point out that what's missing in all of this discussion is that the pro-corruption camp has seem to have forgotten that the current system now favours democracy strongly and this will make religious trait even more dominant as players using these civs can afford to switch to Demo in almost every game, whereas others may have to settle for Republic considering how late Demo is in the tech tree.

The more I think about it, the more I am leaning towards a fix to fix this fix. what a tongue twister :P

P.S. I don't understand the hostility towards Soren. He's done a wonderful job on the game and comparing Civ2 AI to Civ3 AI it was a big big leap forward. Civ2 AI was very simple even for its time.

vmxa1 · December 28, 2003, 14:38

I am starting to wonder if religious is not the way to go at any level over monarch anyway. I am startingto get very sick of having to suffer in despot for so long and then being stuck in my next one for the rest of the game. If I could calculate the loss production, I would probably decide to use religious all the time.

Bonaparte · December 28, 2003, 15:49

Quote:

Originally posted by dexters
I also want to point out that what's missing in all of this discussion is that the pro-corruption camp has seem to have forgotten that the current system now favours democracy strongly

Now I know this is slight off topic, but I have played several pathed and unpatched games and so far, at least in my games, the Fascist civs are the most powerful. Somehow they manage to be more technologically advanced than I even though I've been keeping my tech % around 70, their cities are huge and filled with improvements, and they are still able to attack me with no less than 10 stacks of units with no less than 130 units in each stack - there's no way this should be happening. And, frankly, the game gets really annoying when you have to take turn after turn doing nothing more than killing unit after unit after unit. I don't mind big wars, but 10 stacks of 130 is nuts. It stands to reason if you do nothing but build units you won't be able to build anything else so how the AI manages to do both is beyond me.

Corruption is bad, but the AI doesn't seem to have a problem with it. About two games ago 3 of 4 AI civs I was playing against had over 50,000 gold each...now how can that be...I never had that much myself let alone the AI having that much. Once I saw how rich they were I had to unleash my huge nuclear arsenal...biggest nuclear war I ever had...and eventually won, but it shouldn't be this way. Apparently corruption isn't the only problem.

Wittlich · December 28, 2003, 16:09

Quote:

Originally posted by Bonaparte
...About two games ago 3 of 4 AI civs I was playing against had over 50,000 gold each...now how can that be...I never had that much myself let alone the AI having that much. Once I saw how rich they were I had to unleash my huge nuclear arsenal...biggest nuclear war I ever had...and eventually won, but it shouldn't be this way. Apparently corruption isn't the only problem.

Was this prior to the Beta Patch or after?

It sounds like the AIs are enjoying the GPT bug to me and this should have been fixed in the Beta Patch...

Alex · December 28, 2003, 16:56

the behavior described by Bonaparte is probably a result of the GPT bug, but all accounts so far say that it was corrected in the beta patch. just like Witt, I would like to know if Bonaparte's games were played using the beta patch or not...

notyoueither · December 28, 2003, 17:10

Quote:

Originally posted by jshelr
I'm on my second game with the patch and, now that I know what to expect, I think I like the change. It surely favors builders vs warmongers and democracy over other governments. If you build the FP with "reasonable" expectations in mind and as part of a corruption reduction plan, it does help materially.

I don't by any means think I really understand how the FP will now enter into strategy in all situations yet, but exploring that looks like it will be fun.

I think you might be on the right track.

Best possible placement of palace relatively early, and then later placement of FP to bring a distant region up to productive, if not core like, levels.

Master Marcus · December 28, 2003, 17:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Wittlich
It sounds like the AIs are enjoying the GPT bug to me and this should have been fixed in the Beta Patch...

The GPT bug IS fixed, yes. Good for epic games of course ( no more extra money for artificially-enhanced mass rushbuilding each turn ), but speaking for the official scenarios it's not a feature that's gonna really change something, since only scarcely can we incite the AI for gpt deals and the amounts involved are much smaller than a standard epic game, but still...the most important bug is fixed; and in my mind if we want to play by the standard rules, we must accept the way the corruption is since it's an intentionnal feature- the most important thing about it for the devs is to code it right that it applies to every civ the same way. Personnaly, I still find the FP useful.

Good job Soren and the devs

notyoueither · December 28, 2003, 17:15

Quote:

Originally posted by jimmytrick
I only came back because I heard a rumor that Firaxis was making Civ4. Is that true? If they let that nitwit Soren screw up another edition of Civ I'll strangle someone.

Right, time away has not made you any less of a jerk. Back only a day and already you are launching personal attacks on specific members of the staff of Firaxis.

You really should seek help, jimmy. Pathologies like yours are really not healthy.

Alex · December 28, 2003, 17:17

/me gets his popcorn and sits to watch the show.

Bonaparte · December 28, 2003, 17:24

What I described occured after the game was already patched.

Bonaparte · December 28, 2003, 17:29

Just to double check myself will someone give me one of their links to the patch just so I can make sure I do have the correct patch.

notyoueither · December 28, 2003, 17:48

When you start C3C, on the main menu for chosing game types like MP, Conquests, or New Game, what does it say in the lower left corner of the screen?

Bonaparte · December 28, 2003, 18:18

It said 1.00, so I thought that I may have only downloaded the patch and not installed it, so I went to install it again and a screen came up telling me it was installed and asked me if I wanted to modify or repair it.
I selected repair and rebooted my PC yet it still says 1.00.

This is the name of the patch I installed... civ3_Conquests_v102
...I got it from Apolyton. Is this the correct patch.

vmxa1 · December 28, 2003, 18:23

If you apply the patch and keep playing the save from prior to it, the corruption is not fixed, so maybe the gpt is not either in that case.
IOW apply the patch and start a new game to be safe.

Jaybe · December 28, 2003, 18:25

Everyone with the BETA patch has version 1.12 (not 1.00 or 1.02).

Bonaparte · December 28, 2003, 18:30

I would assume that since I did not get the initial install screen that this patch was already installed...so what I am saying is that all what I mentioned before is happening with the patch installed and it hasn't fixed the problems. As to why it says 1.00 instead of 1.02...well...who knows, but this patch is definately installed and the game is still definately acting weird.

Bonaparte · December 28, 2003, 18:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Jaybe
Everyone with the BETA patch has version 1.12 (not 1.00 or 1.02).

Interesting...can you gave me a link to this patch please...I cannot continue to play this game the way it is right now.

dexters · December 28, 2003, 18:36

GPT bug is fixed from a continuation of a save file.

The original question that I started this thread is was to confirm whether corruption is the same using a saved file or starting a new game. I have yet to start a new game with 1.12, but subsequent posts appear to point out that corruption is indeed the way I've described in my original posts-- that is, it is worse and FP no longer is a second core.

notyoueither · December 28, 2003, 18:37

1.01 and 1.02 were localisation patches (for the Euro versions). They didn't change the exe, so it still says 1.00.

Apolyton decided not to mirror 1.12, since Dan called it a 'Beta candidate'. Have to get it off Atari by following this link.

Bonaparte · December 28, 2003, 19:37

Thanks...just finished downloading it...will let you know how it is in awhile...gonna start a new game now.

Capt Dizle · December 28, 2003, 19:51

Quote:

Originally posted by notyoueither

Right, time away has not made you any less of a jerk. Back only a day and already you are launching personal attacks on specific members of the staff of Firaxis.

You really should seek help, jimmy. Pathologies like yours are really not healthy.

Just for the record I want to state clearly that my purpose for coming back to the Civ forums was indeed to be critical of specific members of the Firaxis staff. For their professional work. It's business. It's not personal.

I will admit that my comments about Soren should be tempered by the fact the he just does what he is told. Briggs I think came up with the idiotic culture concept. Soren should quit rather than participate in the debasing of what was once the proudest game in computer gaming history. The fact that he does not quit only shows that he places more importance in a paycheck rather than acting honorably. This doesn't make him much different than a lot of people. It basically makes him an ordinary guy. Making an ordinary game. Which is a shame.

Capt Dizle · December 28, 2003, 19:59

I quit my former firm in 1999 when a new owner came in and let it be known that we would no longer provide anything near to the level of customer service that we had from the firm's inception.

In doing so I started my own business with just one client and my earnings were halved for three years.

Now the owner of the firm is bankrupt, the people he sold the business to are backrupt, the business is out of business and half of the orignal clients are mine.

Quality performance pays off in the long run.

The computer gaming universe is full of ex-this and thats who probably wish they hadn't settled for releasing buggy half finished, poorly designed games. Firaxis is headed for the scrap heap. Mark my words.