Serious bugs and flaws little known

[VictorK]

I posted these serious bugs and flaws nearly 2 years ago in the old official forum (which no longer exists). These bugs were reported in AC v3.0; since I found out these bugs I stopped playing the game. I don't know for sure if they weren't fixed in v4.0 or the expansion, but there was no mention that they were. These bugs seem to be known by relatively few people... I guess few people actually pay much attention to the numbers when playing a strategy game.

1. In the two hardest difficulty levels, your maintenance costs are significantly reduced. The reduction is higher in the hardest level than in the second hardest level. I think the maintenance costs are supposed to be reduced for the easiest levels, not the hardest ones. This bug significantly makes the harder levels much easier.

2. If you do not use the build queue, you get extra energy every time you complete a facility. The amount is equal to what you will get if you choose "stockpile energy". It is like a cheat that every player has been using unless he is aware of and consiously avoid it. To avoid it, the player must always allocate something to the build queue even if he doesn't know what to build next. (To clarify - the bug is that you get an unfair bonus when you do not use the build queue, not that you get penalized when you use it.)

3. Whenever you change your social engineering you may get huge mineral bonus from your supply crawlers if you're building a secret project. To fully exploit this "feature", just before you deliver your supply crawlers, change your social engineering to the worst possible industry rating. The worse the industrial rating, the higher your supply crawler is worth in minerals. After the supply crawlers are delivered, change your social engineering back to the previous setting (this can be done in the same turn, and it won't cost any energy). Another "feature" you can take advantage of is to improve your industry rating for one turn; this instantly reduces the cost of any facility you're building and doesn't affect the number of minerals already accumulated. (The latter is more well-known, but here are two related but different flaws - the first one is about increased value for supply crawlers which is little-known.)

4. When designing units, there are combinations which make your supply crawlers cheap to buy (hurry with energy) and yield a lot of minerals (in many cases better than 2:1 energy:mineral ratio, sometimes even better than 1:1, IIRC). These units not only significantly reduces the cost for SP construction, but they can be disbanded to produce units and facilities as well - this is cheaper than hurrying the units/facilities intended to be built.

There were a lot of other flaws (many regarding multi-player), but these flaws were enough to stop me from playing the game, single-player...

[Wiglaf]

Is that a joke? No wonder the top diffs are so easy. Hope that was fixed in the patch cause that's enough to totally ruin the game. Unless, of course, I can edit it in the txt files (sadly unlikely). How'd that make it past the testers?

[cbn]

I believe that all of these are fairly well known. For example there is a rule against using the stockpile energy bug in MP by inserting "stockpile" after every unit build. SE quickies are also disallowed but you can take advantage of the super-crawler feature by upgrading to high-cost crawlers at a much reduced cost versus building/buying the SP directly. The maintenace bug-- I think that that is fixed in SMAX 2.0(all I play now) but I have not run the numbers to check.

These are more serious matters in MP if players are not aware of them and agree not to use them. In single player you can just use self- handicaps- In SP I would not use any of those bugs and I would also not permit myself to bribe enemy units or bases etc. You can make the game as hard as you want by creating self-imposed rules. Other then the maintanance bug, the others require a positive act by the player to take advantage.

[Earwicker]

quote: Originally posted by cbn on 04-17-2001 11:22 AM These are more serious matters in MP if players are not aware of them and agree not to use them. In single player you can just use self- handicaps- In SP I would not use any of those bugs and I would also not permit myself to bribe enemy units or bases etc. You can make the game as hard as you want by creating self-imposed rules. Other then the maintanance bug, the others require a positive act by the player to take advantage.

I was suprised to learn of the stockpile bug a few weeks ago from the forums. The real drag about it is that it requires even more time spent in base micromanagement, slowing down the already tortoiselike pace of the game.

Just out of curiosity, cbn: why no probing units or bases? In my experience, this is a feature that favors the AI cheat MUCH more than the human player. Case in point: a gaian faction with about 150 energy reserves bribes away two 6r rovers without an appreciable dip in her energy (I had about 4000, much of it drained from her coffers). When I turn around to bribe a former for the front lines, it's going to cost me about 700. Now I know the general routine about the computation (a function of energy in the bank, base size, unit cost, proximity to HQ) and still think there's something fishy. A few turns later, Morgan's last remaining base (size 2) cost me 1200 energy -- it was worth it to get the AA inside -- and no change in the price when I used 3 other probes to drain energy from 35 to 8 credits.

I used to bribe enemy units a lot in Civ2 (to get the precious NON's) but rarely do in SMAC -- you can buy an SP for what it takes to bribe lousy size 4 empty Vale of Winds. Just walk in.

[Jokka das Trevas]

There is another "bug-like feature" of the game(I assume it can't be a bug because it exists since Civ)

If you're building a wonder or SP in two or more cities, when one finishes DON'T change other's cities build orders. As soon as you get another SP, to build, change to it.

You'll get all the minerals the cities were accumulating since then, and get the SP in a few(or even the next) turns.

I think this is a legit tatic, since your "obsolete build orders" cities aren't producing anything while storing minerais, what makes for a good disadvantage(mainly in early game, when there are few cities).

Also, the effect is the same as you be building supply crawlers until you got the next project to build, so I use this method BEFORE I have the Industrial Automation tech(crawlers) - and after then I use crawler wich are way better.


------------------
-----
Long live THE HIVE!

[cbn]

Earwicker

It is just one example of a self-handicap to make SP harder. The AI is unrestricted. It can and will probe away my bases or units. But no matter how much money I have, I do not permit myself that tactic. Its the same idea as when I tried games with no navy or no air force. It limits the human while leaving the AI with all options available. Ihave aso used: no tech-stealing, double blind, tech stag, no infiltration of others. the number of possible handicaps are limitless.


AS for the increasd micromanagement from the stockpile bug, I do not find that. The accepted fix in MP is that you are not forced to use build queues so after every facility is built you benefit. However it is considered a cheat to insert "Stockpile" after every unit is built to capitalize on the bug. The only way it should change the way you play is that you should not use build queues.

[Garth Vader]

It is easier in MP to accept the stockpile energy bug and allow it's use. I prefer that because I always like to insert something after a unit that way I can easily tell if a base is done.

[MariOne]

Hi VictorK, maybe you saw me posting as MoSe at owo times.

Just to keep you updated:

Preliminary:
a. bugs vs. cheats - not all bugs are cheats, some bugs unavoidably hit all players and can't be exploited at one's advantage, although unexperienced player can have problems from overlooking their effects
b. of course cheats are only relevant in multiplayer (or if you want to compare "solo-scenario" scores)

1. Bug (not cheat).
Pretty well known ("Maintenance Bug").
Reported many times, maybe lately taken for granted.
NOT fixed in SMACv4 (unavoidable, palyers just adapt their stile to its effects - not actually a show-stopper, SMACed).
FIXED in SMAX.

2. The "Most Debated Bug" Award.
Lack of Agreement about its nature & treatment.
Sensible words from cbn, key is making sure the players of a pbem are informed in advance, they can decide their preferred way to handle the bug in their game (that is, a cheat only if exploited without/against agreement).
Firaxis was so scorned when their nose was rubbed into the evidence of their misprogramming, that they decided to "declare" it a feature, afterwards, rather than attempt to fix it.
NOT FIXED, not even in SMAXv2.

3. "Bug" (or rather "loophole") & CHEAT.
The paradigm of a Cheat, the first significant one which was reported, since owo times, even before the enchantments.
Maybe not that debated nor repeatedly reported, as it's so obvious (you get something from nothing).
What you report as second effect is a built-in feature. Many disagreed with that mechanism, but that's how the game has been made.
Not the cheat, but the structural mechanism of IndustrySE/MinAccumulated/ItemCost has been the subject of innumerable threads and counterproposals, at the beginning ("...little-known"???? ).
The concept of "fixing" does not even apply, because these are the effects of a structural game mechanism. It wouldn't be matter of reprogramming, it would be matter of *redesigning* that aspect.
Basic element of reciprocal respect and mutual trust in MP, is not exploiting this loophole. Without that, SMAC MultiPlayer would be meaningless.

4. Borderline.
Actually, a mechanism of the game, pushed to its extreme limits.
It is not costless nor riskless, thus it doesn't fall in the same category of Quickies.
IMHO: I admit that it alters the relative worth of some elements in the game. But you CANNOT draw a precise line telling "you can do this, you can't do that", as the concepts of upgrading/disbanding/cashing units/crawlers are a continuum - which extreme is just blatantly cost-effective.
BTW, best effectiveness you can obtain, before late in the game (let's say as soon as you discover Fusion), is 12ec invested per extra-row obtained (thus the "cost per mineral" varies with your IndustrySE). Best overall Icould devise, is 10.82ec. Anyway, for the upgrade cost nature, it can NEVER get down to 10ec per row.
(I guess you got I'm in favor of using this feature, and I do indeed)

Finally, these flaws were enough for you to stop playing single-player? I agree! But then a sensible decision would have been indeed playing MultiPlayer, with previous interplayer agreement on how to handle these cheats to the common satisfaction...
[This message has been edited by MariOne (edited April 17, 2001).]

[cbn]

Garth Vader

I tend to agree with you that it is just as simple to let everyone exploit the bug. If everyone does it then there is no disadvantage to any player. But the only PBEM games I am playing are in the Apolyton tournament set up by Tau Ceti. The rules of that tournament state "Inserting Stockpile Energy into the build queue after a military unit is forbidden" .

That closed the issue for me in those games-- Its just one of those issues to establish up front so that everyone has equal opportunity.

[VictorK]

MariOne, I think I recalled MoSe in the old official forum... I didn't post a lot by then (compared to others) but I frequently checked that forum.

Maybe these bugs are more well-known now, but at the time I posted them they were little-known, and it wasn't like the game was completely new by then - IIRC it was out for over half a year. AFAIK I was the first person to report these bugs/flaws in the old forum (maybe not #4, but I am sure I was the first who reported #1, #2, and #3 regarding crawlers). I still say these bugs/flaws are little-known, even now, considering their severity; maybe people who hang around these forums know of them, but it remains that the majority of owners of this game don't. And if you ask people who write reviews on those game sites, I bet none has ever heard of these bugs/flaws.

For #3, there is no clear-cut way to define what constitutes cheating and what does not. If you're saying a player is cheating because he gets something for nothing, what if he waits for a turn (so he needs to pay just a little for switching SE)? And what if the player really wants to change the SE while a SP is being built - he doesn't intend to cheat, but his crawlers gain value because of that? Do players agree to never changing the industry rating in SE whenever he has a supply crawler in the map? Or do they agree to write down the SE setting every time he constructs a crawler, and whenever he delivers a crawler, temporarily revert to the same SE setting he has written down the time the crawler was built? The latter is the only way to ensure 100% fairness regarding this flaw, but I don't think anyone has imposed this rule on any MP games (or single-player, for that matter). #3 and #4 really have no difference in the nature of the flaw (in that they are "built-in" game mechanism - I would say even the supply crawler trick is "built-in", as longer as the player doesn't make the SE changes in the same turn so that it is free). The only difference is the significance of the advantage a player gains when they are exploited - not that #4 doesn't give a big advantage when exploited (it is big esp. with bug #1), but #3 would just make the game completely out of whack.

For me, these bugs and flaws were show-stoppers. #1 and #2 speak a lot about the quality of the programming (lack thereof). Really these bugs shouldn't have escaped testing, but at the very least they should have been fixed in a SMAC patch (not just the expansion - and #2 isn't even in that). #3 and #4 are just a few of the many flaws which demonstrate the philosophy in the game design: the designer would just throw any cool new feature he could think of into the tried-and-true Civ engine, and any sense of game balance was totally out of his mind. For #3, it shouldn't be a matter of redesigning the mechanism, it should be a matter of initial design (before the game was released). I don't think the mechanism was intended to work this way; there just wasn't any degree of thinking put into it. When SE was thrown into the game, the designer simply overlooked how minerals already accumulated could have an impact. For #4, the hurry build energy cost formula and normal mineral cost formula should have been more carefully thought out. When unit custom design was thrown into the game, the designer had just "making a stronger unit" in his mind, and completely overlooked the fact that the energy:mineral cost ratio alone could be exploited to great advantage.

[Earwicker]

quote: Originally posted by cbn on 04-17-2001 02:44 PM Earwicker AS for the increasd micromanagement from the stockpile bug, I do not find that. The accepted fix in MP is that you are not forced to use build queues so after every facility is built you benefit. However it is considered a cheat to insert "Stockpile" after every unit is built to capitalize on the bug. The only way it should change the way you play is that you should not use build queues.

Ooooooh. That makes complete sense. I usually queue things up to avoid micromanagement but was surprised to hear about queueing Stockpile. What a a nuisance that would be! Besides, I'd lose track and forget that my bases weren't building anything. Thanks for clarifying that.

[johndmuller]

quote: Originally posted by Earwicker on 04-20-2001 08:16 AM Ooooooh. That makes complete sense. I usually queue things up to avoid micromanagement but was surprised to hear about queueing Stockpile. What a a nuisance that would be! Besides, I'd lose track and forget that my bases weren't building anything. Thanks for clarifying that.

This is a bug that I wish I had never heard about.

All else being equal, I would prefer to use queues, particularly for building a typical slate of facilities and to reduce micromanagement; and, in the case of single builds, put Stockpile in the queue to avoid accidentally producing the unit over and over. Having learned of this bug, I feel like a cheat if I put a stockpile after a unit and I feel like I'm throwing away money if I use the queue for units.

Agggh!

[Googlie]

johndmuller:

you can, of course, click the box under "warning preferences" to stop when combat units are built - brings a pop-up window for the base in question. doesn't slow the game down any more than stockpile energy would, where, I presume, you use the F4 screen to look for bases with stockpile in the production readout, or, less reliably, manually scan the map if you have "display base production' activated

G.