yet another XML bug in Base Game 2.5...

from GalCiv3 Forums

In addition to the "<EffectType>Food</EffectType>" to "<EffectType>FoodIncome</EffectType>" issue all over the place which completely breaks food, sigh, you guys ignored my post in the 2.5 thread, as usual (other people get "Fixed!" replies; why don't I ever? sigh). Thus, the "ProtoType Survey" ship design is also broken in Base 2.5.

In short, you removed the Proto Survey Module from ShipComponentDefs.xml to match Crusade, but as I warned, you never updated the ProtoTypeSurveyBlueprint in ShipBlueprintDefs.xml, so it's requesting a component that no longer exists (and also is still specifying Small hull size rather than the new Tiny setting for this role). Thus AI players won't be able to build any working ProtoType Survey ships, and human players will have to design their own manually.

To fix this I just copied in the relevant entry from the ShipBlueprintDefs.xml file in the Crusade DLC folder, but now I'm wondering if I should copy the ENTIRE file and then go through and manually delete the Citizen-specific blueprints since who knows what else is broken with this thing now. I really shouldn't have to be doing THIS kind of work in my mod, this is basic simple stuff you only ever miss when rushing new releases out the door as fast as humanly possible, but that's just how these guys operate apparently, sigh.

29,106 views 8 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

My apologies.  We sometimes forget to acknowledge every bug report.  We've already added the foodIcome fix to the build.  I'll look into the  "Proto Survey Module" as well.  

Reply #2 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Quoting pshaw, reply 1
I'll look into the  "Proto Survey Module" as well.
End of pshaw's quote

Thanks!

I'm sorry for sounding harsh, it's just that when I work on XML for a game like this, I always double-check everything, and more importantly, whenever I make any change more substantive than just numerical values, I always always ALWAYS ask myself "what other things in what other files does this have any chance of affecting?". And I go check, with text searches in whole folders of XML files if I'm not absolutely sure. I do this all the time - rigorously. I'm slow, deliberate, and I almost never have any bugs or problems like this as a result. The approach you guys take comes across, to me personally, as casual, lazy, and seriously lacking in both obsession with the subject matter, and attention to detail. In my opinion, you lose more time having to fix multiple bugs afterward, than you save by releasing these major patches so quickly.

That being said, I do have Asperger's so maybe I'm being a little unfair, and I do love this game or else I wouldn't be here, so I guess I should try to stay positive. :p

Groupy 2 - Organize multiple applications into grouped tabs on your Windows desktop
Reply #3 from Stardock.net Forums Top

i think these type of games are like our virtual paradise almost for us with Asperger's. Between Gal Civ Element: FE + FE:LH we are talking many thousands of hours. Even if I to complain a lot, I wouldn't bother if I didn't greatly enjoy the game

Reply #4 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

I don't have Asperger's but I noticed a great deal of inconsistencies in how Crusade was originally released and spent over month going over the XML files and over bug reports on the forums.  Last time I made an effort to fix the Crusade XML files to my liking I found still a good number of bug fixes not implemented or addressed months after the release and I find the numerous implementations of the Indestructive trait for building humorous and in most cases it is game breaking as we are already having planetary tile problems in order to add farms to planets to support Cities for population expansion above the base population allowed by the ColonyCapital.  Unless you want to greatly increase the number of tiles per planet.

You need to hire a few people with Asperger's to bring consistency and maybe even common sense to patches to this game.  A few things get excessive attention that fixes problems that only affect a few vocal players with their own peculiar preference for playing the game.  As I have said I understand need to conform the game to the needs of the masses that buy the game but only want a simply quick to play game with limited complexity.  Perhaps it is time to support an official "real" Strategic game players mod that returns the ability to play the game more towards what it was before all the Crusade changes nerfed its playability. 

 

Reply #5 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Quoting Charch, reply 3

i think these type of games are like our virtual paradise almost for us with Asperger's. Between Gal Civ Element: FE + FE:LH we are talking many thousands of hours. Even if I to complain a lot, I wouldn't bother if I didn't greatly enjoy the game
End of Charch's quote

Glad that you've enjoyed our games.  We like making them! 

We value your feedback and I am personally don't mind "complaining" so long as its constructive and actionable :)  

 

Reply #6 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Quoting barrybeal, reply 4
I don't have Asperger's but I noticed a great deal of inconsistencies in how Crusade was originally released and spent over month going over the XML files and over bug reports on the forums.  Last time I made an effort to fix the Crusade XML files to my liking I found still a good number of bug fixes not implemented or addressed months after the release and I find the numerous implementations of the Indestructive trait for building humorous and in most cases it is game breaking as we are already having planetary tile problems in order to add farms to planets to support Cities for population expansion above the base population allowed by the ColonyCapital.  Unless you want to greatly increase the number of tiles per planet.
End of barrybeal's quote

Well I knew I STILL couldn't play Crusade yet b/c of all the bugs, but ugh, looks like I'll have to go back to 2.33 on the base game as well. Still working on my mod so I haven't had a chance to try out the city thing yet, but it sounds like I don't need to bother. :(

Reply #7 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Fyi, we re-added the prototype survey module

Reply #8 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Well I assumed you would copy over the Crusade version of the ship blueprint, but you left the blueprint alone and restored the ProtoSurvey module instead. That's great, I actually prefer that solution. :)

However, it does leave me with one small thing to point out still: The ProtoSurvey *blueprint* still has "<ShipHullType>Small</ShipHullType>" from 2.33, but all of the ProtoSurvey *ship designs* in ShipClassDefs.xml have "<ShipHullType>Tiny</ShipHullType>" since this is your new combined master list that's even mentioned in the 2.5 patch notes. I'm not actually sure whether this will cause a problem in-game or not lol, but I assume it'd be safer and better to have them both match?

Of course if going back to Small is what you actually intended for the 2.5 base game, that could be a slight problem heh. Anyway, sorry for beating a dead horse here but I don't really have a choice. ;)