Update Notes - 2.0.11.3 - 07/11/13

Important announcements and patch notes will be posted here.
Forum rules
Please do not start any New Topics in this Forum.

This Forum is only to be used for News Posts related to updates and any other topics will be removed.
Locked
TheProScout
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 1:06 am

Re: Update Notes - 2.0.11.3 - 07/11/13

Post by TheProScout »

Firefly Thankyou for not addin an Monk Filter..... NOT
This probebly would have been the best addition. but unfortunatly not.

Especially today, TO FILTER out All BIG resource stashes so their not blocking my view of Beatiful World 1 and the Biggest Monk storm in history of SHK,
Image
Image
Image

"We will spend our lives fighting to secure this Imperium,
and then I fear we will spend the rest of our days fighting to keep it intact...
In the far future, there will be only war."
User avatar
metroman
Posts: 883
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2010 11:02 am

Re: Update Notes - 2.0.11.3 - 07/11/13

Post by metroman »

Well deserved!!....<Bowing out of respect>
Gandydancer
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:03 pm

Re: Update Notes - 2.0.11.3 - 07/11/13

Post by Gandydancer »

Someone mentioned the new attack formations display crashing his system. It doesn't do that to me, but the selection box is barely functional. The mouse gets quite jumpy and works oddly. E.g., clicking above or below the scroll bar causes jumps of multiple screenfuls of listed formations (consistent jumps, it's not a multi-click issue), and it's impossible to grab the bar and move it smoothly. The absence of arrow-key navigation removes a workaround. I can twitch-click the bar to eventually bring up a view including the desired formation and with some difficulty bring the mouse to bear on the desired formation and choose it, but it's a real pain, makes the whole update a negative.

Add arrow-key functionality.

Selecting a formation should return you to the attack map (or that setting should be a choice).

Larger view of the formation list.

Formation tree (folders).

Would be nice if each formation were an editable plaintext file.

This functionality needs to be added to the castle display. And fix the * pitch-pot bugs, already.

And...

Can see why cancelling trades is a problem, but why can't monks be recalled?

Can't see why the flashing sword iconography can't be more informative. In particular there's no reason why incoming monks don't show, somehow.

Completion level of deleted parish buildings needs to be documented.

Something like the darkened view of castles should be implemented for parish buildings that shows footprints.
Gandydancer
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:03 pm

Re: Update Notes - 2.0.11.3 - 07/11/13

Post by Gandydancer »

The attack formation selection problem doesn't exist on my laptop. I thought it might be my autoclicker software, but the problem exists on the desktop computer even before I start up the autoclicker. The inability to scroll between your choices using arrow keys is in any case really lame and needs to be fixed.

This reminds me of a couple more needed fixes: I use the autoclicker (autoclickers actually, I've got a different one on the laptop) to work around a couple other lame implementations in the SK interdace: the slider bars for donations, etc., and the fact that trades are more remunerative if you send your merchants one at a time. The latter is a bug, not a feature, and the insensitivity and non-functionality of the former is idiotic and a step backwards from being able to enter a number.

Got a bit of detritus stuck in the middle of my last post, but I don't see how to edit it out. The choice of the always-readable white-on-black as the color scheme of this forum undoubtedly helps immensely.
Last edited by Gandydancer on Sun Nov 17, 2013 10:17 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
WRP_Beater
Posts: 970
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 7:25 pm

Re: Update Notes - 2.0.11.3 - 07/11/13

Post by WRP_Beater »

There's an "edit" function up there.
Regards,
WRP_Beater
Gandydancer
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:03 pm

Re: Update Notes - 2.0.11.3 - 07/11/13

Post by Gandydancer »

Here's another bug that needs fixing: When you play back a battle you don't necessarily get the same result as the first time. Firefly assures you that the first result is correct even if you can't see it happen in the replay, but they don't explain what causes the problem and if they don't know that they assuredly don't really know which process is correct. I noticed this bug when I lost a village despite plainly seeing all the enemy die, but i've now, alerted to the problem, noticed discrepancies other times. So it's not uncommon.

Then there's the bug where your Sally flails away at empty space for an ungodly amout of time (up to 30 sec?) after finishing off the last catapult. What's with that?
Gandydancer
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:03 pm

Re: Update Notes - 2.0.11.3 - 07/11/13

Post by Gandydancer »

It's perfectly obvious there is and can be no "calculator". Firefly takes an initial position and terrain and (probably) a seed for a pseudo-random number generator and runs a simulation which produces one report, and the game proceeds on the assumption that that result is correct. Then, on demand, they take the same (unless that is somehow the bug) initial position and terrain and (probably) seed for a pseudo-random number generator and run what should be the same simulation, this time generating a visual representation of what is going on. As I've already pointed out, if they can't figure out where the bug is they have no way of knowing which run, if either, is producing a result consistent with the intended rules. It's perfectly possible that the subroutine calls (or equivalent) that generate the visuals FIX a bug that is unfixed if they are skipped. I don't understand why you're not grasping that the assertion that the first run is "correct" is OBVIOUS balderdash, but it would probably help if you had had some experience with debugging code.
Gandydancer
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:03 pm

Re: Update Notes - 2.0.11.3 - 07/11/13

Post by Gandydancer »

Sorry if I sounded a bit surly, but the assertion that Firefly knows that the original simulation is "correct" is an obvious lie, a lie that was repeated to me when I filed a ticket on the original discrepancy, and lying to me doesn't put me in a good mood.

But if they lied to you too and you don't have the background to be incredulous, it's not necessarily your fault if you repeat what your're told as fact.

However... if SK were RISK you would have the choice of simulating a battle by generating simulated dice rolls or of "calculating" the result by generating one random number and referring to a table. I do not need to have access to SK's code to know that this is not possible for SK battles. They are just way too complicated. And the results of playbacks, which are clearly simulations, are way too close to the results of the original battles for the former not to be simulations too. There may be some "calculational" shortcuts in processing the first simulation, taking advantage of the fact that it is unseen, but that would mean that by any reasonable definition any divergence from the simulation displayed without shortcuts is INcorrect, not the other way around. And if Firefly said that they sacrificed exact fidelity to the intended unit interaction rules in the name of execution speed I wouldn't have a beef with that. But that's just one possibility. An uncorrected bug in the originall pass is a simpler explanation.
User avatar
Sean_MacLeod
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2013 2:50 am

Re: Update Notes - 2.0.11.3 - 07/11/13

Post by Sean_MacLeod »

Greetings, evry1! ^_^

So, I noticed six years ago when I first started playing SHK something about the card that, when played, gives a player 3000 gold. It is called "Gold Horde", and there's where I laughed, because I think horde is not the word they meant. I'm pretty sure it's supposed to be "Hoard", and was just wondering whether updating it was on the to-do list, because SIX YEARS LATER it's still sporting the word "Horde". I also need to report the same issue with the "Gold Horde" quests.

I dare the devs to check it out in both Oxford's and Webster's English Dictionaries (each of which I personally own a hardback copy). Pretty sure there will be a true facepalm moment. Also very surprised that nobody has updated it yet.

Sincerely,
SML
*Smiley of Doom says:*
HAVE A NICE DAY!
Locked

Return to “News & Client Updates”