Where is the Patch?

[vmxa1]

All the beta patches were fine by me. I mean they were aimed at players that are on top of the game and the web. So tossing out several is no big deal. Those that would have problems with that are well advised to stay away from beta patches.

It was not very long before they came out with 1.15 and all previous beta patches could be ignored.

While I will be happy to see the next patch, it is not so important that a few more weeks is critical.

[player1]

The thing is that official patch would be over in late february if plan was to keep it same as beta 1.15.

Remember, it takes a month to switch from beta to final, if you don't change the code.

Then we would get same old 1.15 with official stamp.

Better to let them work on it a little bit more and get something better then official 1.15.

[DrSpike]

Yes, some people waiting not so patiently for the patch haven't installed the 1.15 beta patch. This is insane, especially now it has proven stable. Install it now or else!

[ducki]

As counterpoint to Doc, there are many people that simply don't install beta software. Period.

Nothing wrong with that. In fact, it's fairly admirable in some ways.

Personally, I'm quite comfortable with fdisk and know right where my WinXP Installation CD is, simply because some beta software is so painful that fdisk is the only way out.

This beta patch is not one of those, but I can understand why some folks would rather wait for the official patch. Especially considering the official "warnings" that accompanied both 1.12 and 1.13 and the fact that they were not all too graceful about the install/uninstall process - they were beta, after all. Me? I'm happily playing the beta patch, and happily played both 1.12 and 1.13, as any of the three are preferable to the released version of Conquests, at least in my opinion.

I wonder if we'll hear from Jesse soon...

[vmxa1]

Well beta software and patches for OS or key apps is one thing, but for a game? All you have to worry about is losing compat with the previous saves. Anyway in XP it is nothing to roll out a patch via the add/remove.

[DrSpike]

Yeah, quite Vmxa1, I think that post was a tad melodramatic Ducki.

I am as paranoid as they come. It's a beta patch so I installed a new version of Civ3 to patch. I advise everyone else to do the same. Better safe than sorry.

[Rommel2D]

This dribble of patches is making PBEM games a joke. From what I can tell, each version uses different calculations for each player's turn. Most players are so burnt out from the relative onslaught of beta patches, no one bothers to cooridinate what version they are using.

On the plus side, the next beta is supposed to fix the SP load bug/exploit and enforce version compatability. :-7

[vmxa1]

It has been over 2 months since 1.15 came out so that is plenty of time for all to get it. I don't think it was much more than a month from the 1.12 beta to 1.15.

[Aqualung71]

Yes, the main bugs are well fixed in 1.15b, and it seems that the official patch (1.18?) will be introducing some more game tweaks. So, better they test it thoroughly knowing we've got a very solid version in the meantime, than rush it out full of bugs that will take us right back where we started....just because "we" wanted some more goodies to play with.

[player1]

Originally posted by Rommel2D
This dribble of patches is making PBEM games a joke. From what I can tell, each version uses different calculations for each player's turn. Most players are so burnt out from the relative onslaught of beta patches, no one bothers to cooridinate what version they are using.

Well, they can always wait for end of June, when no more new patches will be added.

[Paddy]

hahahahaha

thought I heard that in December about the so called late February Patch

which was why this thread got started in the first place: to find out where was the so called late Febraury patch

[alexman]

The final patch was never intended to be in February.

[Paddy]

cool, but the feb patch was meant to be a substaintial patch...

better than 1.15 and 1.18

yes or no?

[DrSpike]

February was a date mentioned for the first non beta patch, though earlier it was suggested the official patch would be later.

[ducki]

Since I went to the trouble of finding it yesterday, I guess I should link to it.
On Jan. 15 this year, Jesse did say there would be a ... well, I was going to quote it, but I've read it half a dozen times and it's not clear if he meant there would be an official, final, release-grade patch released at the end of Feb or if he meant it would be a full compilation of all the beta fixes so far at the end of Feb., which I lean towards the more times I read it, though the cessation of beta patches mentioned is the bit that's confusing me most.
Either way, software is not like traditional forms of publishing and even less like manufacturing - projected release dates are just that - projections, predictions, estimates - and not to be taken as writ in stone. Ever.

Anyway, so as not to take any of it out of context or misquote Jesse, I'll just link to the original.