posted 08-16-99 11:26 PM ET        

Now I am aware, of course, of the "easy to read" bug list. However, several of those are not bugs at all, and many have yet to have any proof. So please keep the following in mind:

** Do NOT list enhancements here. An enhancement is something you think could have been done better but wasn't. These are not bugs, of course.

** Do NOT guess: If you think it's a legitimate bug (not a "design decision"), try to recreate the bug and SAVE THE GAME. We will be sending saved games documenting these bugs. Otherwise, FIRAXIS will continue to imply that we are whiners while they are the gods of programming and customer service.

Now, if not enough people are interested in such an effort at this point, I totally understand. I'm busy as it is myself. However, since FIRAXIS has essentially said there will be no patch 5.0 both because the game is nearly perfect as is and because we are a bunch of whiners, I would really like to see them staring down well-documented bugs supported by saved games and see what they say.

Finally, I personally will not be buying SMACX until SMAC itself has proven itself to be a game supported by a company (a QA department in particular) that has at least a fundamental respect for and understanding of the "low-life" gamers who make their cushy jobs possible in the first place. I'd ask all of you to join me in the effort, but I realize the temptation to buy SMACX will be too strong for many of you. All I ask is that you join this patch 5.0 effort first and see the reaction from FIRAXIS. If you are not satisfied, DO NOT buy SMACX. We need to speak with our money. If you are satisfied and plan to buy SMACX as soon as you can, please start your own bug list for SMACX and consider yourselves Beta Testers.

posted 08-17-99 12:08 AM ET            

#1 IRM

Missiles still can hit anywhere on the map. All you need is the SE to verify this.

#2 Incorrect Maintenance on Thinker and Transcend

Unsure as to percentage discounts given. No .SAV required, happens every game.

#3 Hovering Needlejets

This would require a .SAV game, even though it has been observed numerous times.

#4 Messing with workers and specialist on F4 Base List

Plan. Governor or Infiltrator can alter assignment of citizens in enemy cities by right and left clicking. No .SAV needed always happens.

#5 Assigning a waypoint patrol to mindworms leads to Demon Boil status

Easily verified without .SAV game as well.

#6 .SAV games not saved to load directory for PBEM

Been there since v1.0. Very aggravating if you like to organize your saves.

#7 Calling Planetary Council in IP MP can lead to a freeze

Lots of testimony on this one. A .SAV file could be problematic.

---------

That should get us started.

SMAX n ... Ted S.

posted 08-17-99 01:19 AM ET            

Please give a (relatively) detailed explanation of the bug so we can 1) understand it and 2) try to verify it ourselves. Obviously, if we can't verify it, something else might be wrong or, as in the case of the missile bug, only certain conditions will trigger it, which brings me to:

SEND SAVED GAMES TO:

[email protected]

The title of the saved game should clearly mark what you are documenting, otherwise the saves are meaningless. Along with the save, please send me a detailed account of the bug, how to find/recreate it, etc. Finally, please use your forum name so you can get proper credit if the bug gets fixed because of you.

Well, it isn't exactly "fun" work in the traditional sense, but I would think making an airtight case for a SMAC 5.0 will be pretty rewarding (for several reasons).

Again, unlike the list we made for SMAC 4.0, this list will be accompanied by saved games and a detailed account of the bugs in question. This will not only keep us from looking like whiners, but it should make it a crime for FIRAXIS not to fix what we will soon prove to be broken.

Thanks,

posted 08-17-99 06:35 AM ET            

Yin's address should read : [email protected]

posted 08-17-99 08:38 AM ET            

#9 Also, a Spartan ship was firing artillery at my base and then disappeared. I fired my artillery back at the blank water (no fungus) terrain and hit it. Then it disappeared again. This cycle repeated until I was finally able to destroy it. The ship was only 2 spaces away from my base, I had sensor arrays, and obviously it was within range to see because it was within range for long-range fire.

I haven't gotten save files (I will try though) for either of these situations, but I am positive they happened. If these consistently happen, it would make the game very difficult to play fairly. (And since I have no way of knowing whether an object is invisible unless I see it, there is no way of knowing how often it happens.)

posted 08-17-99 09:15 AM ET            

I find the maintenance bug at thinker and transcend absolutely unforgivable.

I suggest that you email the final list to JKM, Tim Train, Brian Reynolds, Sid Meirer, And Jeff Briggs. My decision to purchase SMACX will hinge on the response to this list.

posted 08-17-99 09:21 AM ET         

Just to check we're talking about the one where AI jets fail to crash if you surround them with your units - instead they just sit there.

Beta-1

posted 08-17-99 10:03 AM ET            

ugh....
I still can't get CTP to work right for 1 full game. Settlers dissapear when trying to found cities, and the cities never appear. The game crashes when i move a stack of 2 fusion tanks onto an enemy tile improvement...I've mailed them it, they're working on it, but trust me, SMAC is far more reliable and better than that.

posted 08-17-99 10:45 AM ET            

I'm not interested in the relative bugginess of SMAC v. CtP. CtP is a piece of crap, though the jury is out as to what it might be after 5 patches and the fans who keep coming up with mods. After 1.2 comes out, I'm loading up Harlan's graphic update and CD's 4.2 mod. At this point, I'm just curious to see if a truly horrible game can be redeemed.

But as for SMAC, I was more than happy to leave SMAC at version 4.0 and only occasionally if ever play it again. I was planning, in fact, to check out some of the official scenarios when I heard talk about the missle bug not being fixed. True or not, I didn't really care, since I could always disable conventional missles anyway.

What got me was the attitude from Jeff and then Tim's comment that there are not any significant bugs left in SMAC (to his knowledge) so please rush out and buy SMACX. I'm sick of that attitude.

So all this, I guess you could say, is just for the (broken) record...A happy little reminder that some of us are paying attention.

HMFIC,

"Yin the Prick" Thanks for the memories!

But it is precisely "what FIRAXIS has said" that brings me back to do this yet again. If there ever were a time to watch them carefully, this is it: BEFORE we send them more money. If SMACX and CIV3 are handled the same way SMAC was and still is being handled, I'm not interested--and I think a number of people share that same feeling.

posted 08-17-99 01:59 PM ET            

If you ARE going to send them a Top Bug list, lets keep it to bugs people. Enhancements should be placed in a Top Wish List. Otherwise, as we have been informed from the Version 3 Bug List Created, Sponsored, and Shepparded by Yin, it does make the users look like whiners. (BR's comments wasn't it?)

Khan Singh, you are a pathetic waste of carbon. Yin is trying to improve the game you claim to like. You already ENJOY the fruits of his and all the other contributors previous work, and yet, you try and insult him and those that would aid him. Might as well tell Brian Reynolds, Tim Train, or the other Firaxians that worked on the game to get a life for being pathetic low lifes. So why don't you go and get drunk, sit down at your computer, and go play SMAC on citizen level until the pretzel crumbs and spilt beer short circuit your machine. Oh, so you know how much we love you, I'd like to quote the great Hardman so that you might understand the amount of respect you have earned here at alpha.owo: "u r a lusr gay twat that liks to wat u mommy n tha bath whil i do her!".

Comments on bugs:
*****************
re: Aircraft Infinite Fuel
Aircraft bug is SUPPOSE to be repeatible by these instructions by user:

1) Turn off Auto Return.
2) Hit space bar (end this unit's turn) when a needle jet is the selected unit awaiting orders.

I'll give this a try and report my findings for fuel comsuption the next time I power up SMAC (if someone doesn't confirm this before me).

re: Disappearing Bases/Units/Shields
Akathisis - I reported the disappearing base/unit/shield problems back within the first hour of patch 4 release. Something in the new version seems to cause the graphic engine to drop displaying map overlays more often than it used to. The WORKAROUND is to go to view cursor mode, and move the cursor over the square in question. That seems to force it to repaint that tile, and restores the base/unit. I doubt we will get a save that demonstrates THIS bug, do to it being an apparent clipping/paint problem. But I have experienced it repeatily.

People, please make sure you are using version 4, and all games/scenarios were started with version 4. Thanks.

posted 08-17-99 03:43 PM ET            

Like Yin stated, the problem is the complete denial of defects from a few representatives of Firaxis. These denials were published on large websites, as opossed to the company site. Therefore, many people who have read these interviews think that SMAC V4 is a bug free product. Those of us who are fanatics about the game know that this is not true.

Anyone who plays at transcend or thinker level and thinks that they are getting the greatest challenge possible, you will be sadly disappointed to hear that the game is cheating in your favor. The game only charges you for 33% of the maintenance that you should be incurring. The effect is that at these levels you can buy your way to victory. This also lets you adjust your tax rate so as to increase your research rate to astronomical levels... transcendance in 150 years?!?!

To all of the Transcend Ironmen who so proudly proclaimed their victories... YOU CHEATED and you didn't know it!!!! NOBODY... NOBODY has beat this game at thinker level or transcend level, because these levels do not exist!!

I found this bug in March, but I thought there was some legitimate reason for the extra energy that appeared in my account each turn. I thought that maybe one of my Special Projects had an undocumented feature, or maybe my faction (Morgan at the time) got an extra economic boost!! Maybe that energy bank that I'd built in all of my bases had an undocumented feature. Imagine my disappointment when I learned that all (yes, ALL... I've never played below thinker) of my victories since February were forfeited... I never actually beat the game system at transcend. I think about all of the time I invested, and the resulting thrill of victory that was completed wasted.

All of this could have been avoided if Firaxis had admitted to the bugs that exist in SMAC. I trusted Firaxis to publically inform me of known bugs. Therefore, since there was no admission to this bug, I continued to assume that it didn't exist. If I'd known about the bug, I would not have been as excited about winning at the most difficult level. I would have lobbied for the bug to be fixed. Public admission of the bug would have meant that Firaxis had to fix the bug instead of sending their programmers onwards to SMACX or CIV3.

It is really sad that after countless TI threads, that many players think that they are SMAC masters when in fact they aren't. If you are a TI you should feel cheated because of this... seven months of bragging about being one of the SMAC elite rendered null and void.

posted 08-17-99 04:25 PM ET            

Your points are well taken. However, I am unsure of your tone.

Please let me clarify one point. The TI threads provided an opportunity to discuss complex game issues and strategies in an environment free of flame and venom. Nothing more, nothing less. Therefore, we do not set ourselves part from the general communuty as we openly welcome any contribution such as yours.

Unfortunately, those discussions quickly identified the plethora of weaknesses and bugs in this game and many of us have felt cheated for a long time. Your reasons have now been added to the public record.

posted 08-17-99 06:19 PM ET            

Maybe we should start a new topic for substantive bug replies and another for comments. Just a thought.

posted 08-17-99 07:13 PM ET            

My venomous tone is caused by a variety of things: The fact that I supported Firaxis in thier patch stategy, the realization that I'd spent seven months playing a game that wasn't giving me the challenge that I paid for, Tim Train's public denial of the existence of bugs, and probably a bad day at work! Also, I'm hoping to goad the TI's into feeling completely enraged as I do right now.

I played my first game at thinker, my second at transcend, and the rest (too many to count) at transcend ironman. Since I did not participate in the TI threads, I cannot with clear conscience call myself a TI. But, in all actuality, nobody is a TI because transcend level does not exist. The same is true for thinker level.

I've won many games at TI and my strategy usually consited of buying my base improvements by midgame. I could buy any military unit that I needed, and upgrading ALL of my units was a certainty. In games where I shifted my energy allocation to research, if I could get the tech required to build a special project, then I only needed a few turns to buy the darn thing. If I allowed my energy to stockpile, then the AIs would see that as a threat and their attitude would shift dramatically to the negative, even if they were a pact brother/sister.

I have no doubt that this one bug is the reason that many people can end the game early; it's why no body seems to get excited about the late game techs; it's why people proclaim "I transcended in 150 years". We do not know how this game plays at transcend or thinker. The game is so unbalanced with the existence of the bug that many tried and true strategies will probably not work in the absence of this bug.

This realization has been further clarified recently because I have been playing Civ2 ToT. At deity, I have managed to get my butt kicked once, and I'm in the midst of a "classic Civ struggle" with my second game.

My temper has really risen since Tim Train's comments. I simply want others to know that they have not been sufficiently challanged. You said that the TI threads existed to discuss complex game issues and strategies. How does it feel to know that all of your discussions involved a game that was playing 1 to 2 levels "easier" than what you thought?

posted 08-17-99 07:22 PM ET            

I'm sorry. I just read your post to yin26. I have posted significant offhand comments in a thread that was designed for true bug reports.

I will not reply anymore in this thread unless it is a true bug report. I mean this with all sincerity and not sarcasm, as it could be taken either way.

posted 08-17-99 07:42 PM ET            

In most respects I couldn't agree with you more. However, I felt as you do now by the time I played my second game, so my anger is for the most part long gone. Sorry if I'm not much help for this. In fact, you can look back at those early days and see that Yin and I carried the same cross and both of us are just tired at this point. We're still pact brothers though.

Regarding feeling cheated at the TI level. Well, I have found this game to be no challenge at any level so you're not really going to light my fire with this particular idea. There are literally dozens of other major flaws like bargain buys on needlejets and the like that show the poor game architecture, coding and testing. But if you want to build your case for this particular cheat, you'll have a lot of support from all of us.

Look at the bright side, you won't have to deal with all of the hatred that we had to endure to get your points across.

A final note on Tim Train. To me his comments were like biting into a bunch of rotton apples. The first one is awful, but you'll just stop eating apples after biting into the 50th.

Good luck with your crusade.

uncleroggy out

posted 08-17-99 10:36 PM ET            

The "Just the bugs, mam..." thread is up. Let's keep this thread open for long discussions and use the other thread for bug-specific talk. With any luck, both threads will be VERY interesting.

Could you guys please repost your bugs there so we can get a new, refocussed start? Thanks.

posted 08-18-99 12:47 AM ET            

Sorry Pact Brother. I didn't mean to derail your noble efforts.

Please forgive me!

posted 08-18-99 01:28 AM ET            

While I of course greatly admire your efforts in getting a Bug Free SMAC, I have a few small concerns with this.

The major gameplay issues with the A.I are what makes SMAC single player so irritiating. Particularly the A.I's tendancy to use offensive units as placebo defenders, even when they would be much better used in their capacity as attackers, to destroy the invading units.

This is NOT a bug, by any definition. It is purely a design issue. However, it makes the game almost unplayable from a competitive A.I point of view - in SMAC, a good player will almost never lose to the A.I, because of this and a few other issues.

The point being that a purely bug free SMAC will not add much to the gameplay experience, it will just eliminate the worst of the human or A.I cheats - about a 5-15% improvement in performance. While bugs seem to be the main touch stone for the net community when complaining about SMAC, I remain to be convinced that they are truly where the game's greatest weakness is.

I admire your efforts, but the goal must be always be to get a BETTER SMAC. Hence 'Enhancements' are still needed, because the major issues are gameplay ones.

posted 08-18-99 02:34 AM ET            

I'm all for it! Of course, A.I. should be given its own section on the list, just to make it clear that we all know what's a bug and what's a feature request.

I agree that the A.I. sucks and a bug-free game would just be a bug-free game with a crappy A.I. So, this effort could kill two birds with one stone:

1) Here are the bugs you say don't exist/aren't important...

2) Here is a way (or two or three...) to actually make the game worth playing for years to come...

I'm up for it, but we need specific things. If we just say: "Make the A.I. better," we are lost before we start. We'll need to get VERY specific as to what we want to see in what particular situations.

Finally, I think Shiny just volunteered to head that effort (or am I dreaming things again?). Shiny, why don't you head the A.I. (potentially Overall Enhancement) effort while I stick to bugs? Although SMAC is probably a dead issue for the FIRAXIS team, I think we need to make a clear statement about what is still clearly wrong and what clearly should have been done better a long time ago.

posted 08-18-99 05:00 AM ET            

Yin and Shining1... even if the effort does NOT result in a new SMAC enhancement, if Brian Reynolds and team take some of the suggestions for improving the Opp Engine's behavior, or closing out the same bugs in Civ3 (it IS SMAC code expanded... remember that), then the community's time would not be wasted. Most SMAC fans are going to buy Civ3. Even some NOT SMAC fans would.

Closing out the bugs should be seperate from game enhancements. And serious suggestions would be needed for the game enhancements. BR has been made aware of what the vocal strategists thought of ICS, and has stated repeatily he'd like serious suggestions on how to correct that issue. This is a good thing. Whether you are a SMAC fan, a Civ fan, a BR or SM fan, it's better to try than to not. Otherwise, we really ARE only whining to practice our typing skills.

posted 08-18-99 10:18 AM ET            

With respect to the transcend/thinker energy bug, does anybody remember the exact details of this bug. I beleive that the game only charges 33% maint for base improvements that cost 1 or 2 energy per turn to maintain. Improvements that cost more than 2 energy per turn are calculated correctly. I'll load some old game saves and do the math tonight, but I am looking for independent confirmation!

posted 08-18-99 10:21 AM ET            

I have spent the last week trying to learn STARS. I downloaded the demo, and find the challenge much more interesting than putting up with a poorly functioning heap of s**t called SMAC.
If any of you wish to improve the game play use SNAC 1.2, it helps a lot, and shows just what is possible with a lot of balancing, although the stupid A not so I is still there.

Maybe by SMACX Ver5.0, I may consider buying it, but OLD_WARRIOR'S, once fool me, twice fool you. Will keep my dollars out of their pockets for quite a while.

I will still call in, here and ACOL, from time to time to see if your legs are all wet from all that pissin in the wind.

posted 08-18-99 12:24 PM ET            

RLMullen... the energy maintainence bug is:
Transcend Infrastructure (AFAIK, ALL of it) cost 33% of norm.

Thinker Infrastructure (AFAIK, ALL of it) cost 66% of norm.

The general opinion is someone either swapped a sign or a level constant. It's been the opinion that the 33% of cost break was meant for CITIZEN (Level 1) and 66% of cost break was meant for TALENT? (Level 2). Or... there is suppose to 1.66% increase (Thinker) and 2.33% increase (Transcend).

Considering the boost the Opp Engine gets in building and non-drone problems already on the upper levels, I tend to go with wrong level constant uses in cost modifier code.

posted 09-09-99 01:24 AM ET            

Chag's is that he thinks he got ripped off, and won't believe any future products with Brian's, Sid's, or Firaxis's name on it is worth more than a bargain bin price. But your idea is even BETTER for lack of respect or trust and contributing NO finacial support. Warez all their stuff, if you like. Go ahead. Preach away.

So what's all the hot sites that you want to have shut down? Let's start with yours...

posted 09-14-99 01:49 PM ET            

Humm? What trick? They are taking the SIM name from Maxis, and putting it on Bullfrog's ThemePark World. I'm not kidding. SimThemePark World. Apparently, they think that it's the only way they can get Bullfrog's sequel to ThemePark, called ThemePark World by Bullfrog, to penetrate the American market since ThemePark wasn't well liked. So they are going to get the Sim fans, who will be stoked aftered the release of Maxis's TheSims, into paying for the worldwide marketing. (You can find out about SimThemePark World by surfing EA site to Maxis and then following the link. SimThemePark World's web site is still Alpha Marketting, just as the game is still in Alpha. Uses Bullfrog's 3D World Engine as seen in Populous 3 and DungeonKeeper II.)

Imagine... Hasbro Interactive's and Electronic Arts proudly presents: Firaxis's Sid Meier's Brian Reynolds' SimThemeWorld Civilization 4! The ultimate in Broad Market Brand Name Recognition Marketing as owned by Electronic Arts.

I wonder if they could fit in John Madden and Jane for the American Localized version?