Jump to content


UC 2.00.11 Patch Released


  • Please log in to reply
63 replies to this topic

#41 Supreme Cmdr

Supreme Cmdr

    Supreme Cmdr

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,734 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Florida
  • Interests:Keeping commanders in line!

Posted 02 July 2004 - 10:38 AM

quote:


Originally posted by mentis:
I just threw it on my desktop

I'm not even going to respond to that.

Anyway, I have added the checksum for the patch file to the first post in this thread.

#42 Freyar

Freyar

    Ensign

  • Moderators
  • Pip
  • 361 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Utah
  • Interests:BattleCruiser Series, America's Army, Other Sneaky-Type Games

Posted 02 July 2004 - 11:30 AM

Dude, It's a general rule for 3000ad products to put the patch in the UC/BCMG game folder.

#43 DennyMala

DennyMala

    Prime Fleet XO

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,430 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Livorno - ITALY [GMT +1/GMT+2 on dayligh saving]
  • Interests:Computers, Gaming, Beers, Motorbikes, Weapons and Military Tech.......

Posted 02 July 2004 - 11:39 AM

Yep...

#44 mentis938

mentis938

    Ensign

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 90 posts
  • Location:Montana, USA
  • Interests:Art, Philosophy, Computers, Gaming...

Posted 02 July 2004 - 06:30 PM

Okay okay...settle down everybody...I just meant that I DOWNLOADED it to my desktop. I know full well where you have to place the exe when you run it. ...how long have I been here now?

#45 Guest_Shingen_*

Guest_Shingen_*
  • Guests

Posted 02 July 2004 - 09:46 PM

Any ETA on the next patch? UC MP isn't working too well with the current one.

#46 Charles Lindsey

Charles Lindsey

    Chavik

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,850 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Birmingham, Al
  • Interests:PC games, UC; Thief II was hard, never finished, reading, cooking, cars

Posted 02 July 2004 - 09:47 PM

I agree. LOTS of server disconnects.

#47 Mascot

Mascot

    Ensign

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 10 posts
  • Location:Norway

Posted 03 July 2004 - 06:01 AM

I don't mean to be a pest, but what checksum algorithm did you pick? When md5 failed I went and found utilities for another 12 different algorithms without being able to find one resembling what you posted. Either both my downloads are corrupt (though I'm playing fine), or I'm a complete nitwit (wouldn't be the first time), or I just can't figure out what you've used.

#48 Supreme Cmdr

Supreme Cmdr

    Supreme Cmdr

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,734 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Florida
  • Interests:Keeping commanders in line!

Posted 03 July 2004 - 08:06 AM

quote:


Originally posted by Shingen:
Any ETA on the next patch? UC MP isn't working too well with the current one.

No ETA but I plan another release before the end of July.

quote:


Originally posted by Cmdr Chavik:
I agree. LOTS of server disconnects.

Nothing I can do about that as this wasn't a problem before and I see no reason why it would - all of a sudden - be a problem now.

#49 Guest_Shingen_*

Guest_Shingen_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 July 2004 - 05:03 PM

quote:


Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr:
Nothing I can do about that as this wasn't a problem before and I see no reason why it would - all of a sudden - be a problem now.

It happens all the time on server3 since the 2.0.11 patch. A lot of people say it's the server, others say it's the patch.

#50 Supreme Cmdr

Supreme Cmdr

    Supreme Cmdr

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,734 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Florida
  • Interests:Keeping commanders in line!

Posted 04 July 2004 - 08:45 PM

I don't care WHAT people say, if it was the patch, it would affect all servers. And since the servers are all identically configured, that simply can't be it.

And since there is nothing in that patch which would cause it, thats not it either otherwise it would have been happening since the patch was released.

If its not working as you would expect, don't play it. I can't fix what I can't reproduce - and multiplayer experiences will be different for everyone.

And since I download and check the server logs EVERYDAY, unless you have some supa sekret society where you all get together and talk about it, I no such indication of everyone as you stated. One or two people != everyone.

Please don't post about tech support issues in this thread again. If you have a definite and 100% reproducible problem that is not already logged, you know where to post it. This is an announcement thread, not a tech support discussion thread.

#51 Supreme Cmdr

Supreme Cmdr

    Supreme Cmdr

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,734 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Florida
  • Interests:Keeping commanders in line!

Posted 09 July 2004 - 02:26 PM

I have edited the first post to provide and MD5 hash file for the patch file.

#52 Ditto00

Ditto00

    Ensign

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 59 posts
  • Location:USA

Posted 12 July 2004 - 02:31 PM

SC, I think your MD5 hash is incorrect.

quote:


6c0b69137f321742e39dce3013a4314c uc2.00.11.exe

Shouldnt that be uc2[1].00.11.exe ?

#53 Supreme Cmdr

Supreme Cmdr

    Supreme Cmdr

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,734 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Florida
  • Interests:Keeping commanders in line!

Posted 12 July 2004 - 03:18 PM

No. The filename for the patch is as it appears on the downloads page and in that MD5 file.

If you are getting a different filename, its not coming from me, you may have another file of the same name somewhere on your system or in your cache.

#54 Supreme Cmdr

Supreme Cmdr

    Supreme Cmdr

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,734 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Florida
  • Interests:Keeping commanders in line!

Posted 18 July 2004 - 02:55 PM

people keep reporting that sometimes when downloading the patch via the registration page using IE, the filename is different and is displayed as uc2[1].00.11.exe.

I have NO idea why that is. So, after downloading the file, just rename it to the proper file name which is uc2.00.11.exe and then test its MD5 signature to make sure the file was downloaded correctly. Then run the patch after copying it into the game folder.

[ 07-18-2004, 06:48 PM: Message edited by: Supreme Cmdr ]

#55 Guest_Shingen_*

Guest_Shingen_*
  • Guests

Posted 18 July 2004 - 06:15 PM

quote:


Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr:
people keep reporting that sometimes when downloading the patch via the registration page using IE, the filename is different and is displayed as uc2[1].00.11.exe.

I have NO idea why that is. So, after downloading the file, just rename it to the proper file name which is uc2.00.11.exe and then test its MD5 signature to make sure the file was downloaded correctly. Then run the patch after copying it into the game folder.

It does with both IE's browser and SBC/Yahoo's browser, but I've never had any problems installing a patch with the uc2[1].00.11.exe filename.

#56 Supreme Cmdr

Supreme Cmdr

    Supreme Cmdr

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,734 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Florida
  • Interests:Keeping commanders in line!

Posted 18 July 2004 - 07:46 PM

On my end, it works fine with Mozilla Firefox and Opera. I get the same different filename with IE. Dunno.

#57 Joel Schultz

Joel Schultz

    Lieutenant

  • Moderators
  • PipPip
  • 566 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Penn Hills, PA, USA
  • Interests:UC, ping-pong, pinball, & *stuff* (tm)

Posted 19 July 2004 - 09:46 AM

AFAIK IE always has done that under certain conditions. I think it has to do with identical file name collision avoidance, possibly in the Internet cache folders. You can also get [2], [3] etc too. It may also have to do with how the download is being conducted too. I never made a study of this...

IMHO its dumb. Why couldn't MS just have done ye olde "File exists. Replace existing file? Y/N" box?

#58 martinstretton

martinstretton

    Ensign

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 33 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 21 July 2004 - 06:18 PM

Okay I`ve downloaded the patch checked the MD5 signature, all is fine. On checking the save folders log file it says 2235 full save profile 0, it also says 2235 quick save profile 0. I have only used the save and quit option. Does this mean that if I apply the v2.00.11 patch that it will delete my saved games, also as I have only used save and quit why does the log file say 2235 quick save profile 0?

#59 Supreme Cmdr

Supreme Cmdr

    Supreme Cmdr

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,734 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Florida
  • Interests:Keeping commanders in line!

Posted 21 July 2004 - 06:49 PM

You have no business messing around in the saved game files. And I think the reason it says quick save (when it probably isn't), has already been discussed. All games with the 2.00.11 patch won't say that any longer.

And yes, the patch will delete your saved games if they are not 2.00.00 compliant of if they contain a quick save signature.

And if you moved the saved games out of the folder so that the patch doesn't get to them and you later move them back and play with them, your game will get corrupted at some point in the near future.

#60 martinstretton

martinstretton

    Ensign

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 33 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 22 July 2004 - 09:42 AM

Okay patched to v2.00.00 and then to v2.00.11 lost the saved games, but no big deal. No problems with it so far. Thanks SC for taking the time and effort to help me. As a lay computer user your help and guidance are much appriciated, and thats the reason I have stuck with the series from BC300Ad v1.0. Great work!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users