1.3 Changelog got updated.

[deaconivory]

This is one update that you hope would not autopush. Image people are a good ways into a 1.2 campaign with lots of stealth shinobi, and suddenly the mod updates. Now suddenly their squads are ineffective as they were built around a stealth heavy game that has now bee altered. For this update people need to choose when it takes effect.

Quick note, the changes to stealth in 1.3 won't make any soldiers obsolete, or force players into some bizarre change in tactics. I have just completed my 3rd stealth mission in a month (in-game), and yes stealth missions are not the same as 1.2. However, they are doable and fun as hell. They are just not the be-all-end-all, and falling back on them too often will get you burned. In 1.3 I've had the widest variety of squad sizes in my 800 hours of LW2.

[deaconivory]

Back on Topic:

@Zloth, Sir, Davi
I agree, this is a big concern for players who solely utilize / depend on Steam Workshop. The changes in 1.3 may not break their saves, rendering them corrupt / useless, but it will make some fundamental changes to classes / progression timing / etc. that could ruin the experience of their 1.2 campaign. If anything, this is one of the first reasons why I still prefer 3rd party distrubutors for mods, and why I always manually install my mods. Having something that automates it, and doesn't allow for disabling it ( or checking in with you first ) can ruin a game experience pretty quick ( especially if it leads to crashing issues and you can't even play ).

There is a tiny bit too much hyperbole here. With the amount of balancing, and bug fixing (both in vanilla and in 1.2), as well as the new features, no one's game is going to be ruined.

I've spent a lot of time over the past 2 weeks playing an updated 1.2 save, and other than a few perks being moved there is nothing in this update that can ruin a players experience. The handful of changes a player will need to make will be outlined an a Long War 201 post when 1.3 is released. It shouldn't take very long at all to make the changes and be back in the game.

Rest assured we are all working very hard to provide the best gaming experience, not to break anyone's game, or ruin their experience. 1.3 is filled to the brim with improvements over 1.2, and FWIW I loved 1.2 a lot.

[JoeShmo]

Back on Topic:

@Zloth, Sir, Davi
I agree, this is a big concern for players who solely utilize / depend on Steam Workshop. The changes in 1.3 may not break their saves, rendering them corrupt / useless, but it will make some fundamental changes to classes / progression timing / etc. that could ruin the experience of their 1.2 campaign. If anything, this is one of the first reasons why I still prefer 3rd party distrubutors for mods, and why I always manually install my mods. Having something that automates it, and doesn't allow for disabling it ( or checking in with you first ) can ruin a game experience pretty quick ( especially if it leads to crashing issues and you can't even play ).

There is a tiny bit too much hyperbole here. With the amount of balancing, and bug fixing (both in vanilla and in 1.2), as well as the new features, no one's game is going to be ruined.

I've spent a lot of time over the past 2 weeks playing an updated 1.2 save, and other than a few perks being moved there is nothing in this update that can ruin a players experience. The handful of changes a player will need to make will be outlined an a Long War 201 post when 1.3 is released. It shouldn't take very long at all to make the changes and be back in the game.

Rest assured we are all working very hard to provide the best gaming experience, not to break anyone's game, or ruin their experience. 1.3 is filled to the brim with improvements over 1.2, and FWIW I loved 1.2 a lot.

Now wait a minute here, hyperbole? How is a legitimate concern hyperbole? It's not like I said the game was literally going to catch on fire with 1.3. I said people are concerned, and that those concerns are the reason why I don't use automated updating systems If I don't have to; which is a valid concern and a factual problem with games.

Now, I get it that you guys have combed over 1.3 to make it the best experience it can be, and that's appreciated; I don't dismiss that work or ethic, but I would be remiss about treating people's concerns as exaggerations of hearsay if they are not actually calling for the sky to fall. It's not as if there hasn't been someone typing out lines of text in each update saying "Best played with a new campaign" or anything.

When you say something like: "Significant changes on Shinobi, Specialist, Gunner, Ranger trees. Also changes to Assault, Grenadier, Sharpshooter, Psi Operative, Spark." we have a valid reason to be concerned.

When you say something like: "Reduced XP to level up on Rookie -> Commander. This is to offset the now-fixed bug that was causing some soldiers to level up too rapidly." we have a valid reason to be concerned.

When you say something like: "Significant rework of infiltration bonuses/penalties to 1) give infil bonuses for not carrying small items in utility slots and 2) Add a diminishing returns effect when stacking tons of infiltration-related items." we have a valid reason to be concerned.


Who's being hyperbole here? Us taking the word "Significant" at face value, or someone downplaying it as "just some minor changes" later? We didn't make up the text in our heads lol. ( Not trying to be combative here with you )

If what you say is true, then everything is peachy, but we're at a conflict here, of taking you at your word in this thread ...but also being asked to not take you for your word in the 1.3 reveal thread. But we, the players, wont' know if things will be as great as you say until we get our hands on it..and not to be snide..but every dev is going to say something uplifting like "We made this the best experience we could" ...even if it falls flat on its face. Nobody is perfect, or always aiming in the right direction, after all.

[Antifringe]

Hey man, I think you're over analyzing a bit. Deacon isn't trying to weave some sort of complicated labyrinth of double meanings, he's just saying that his direct personal experience with the 1.3 game is that he likes the changes, and it is opinion, as an official tester that they will fine. He's not trying to trick you, and getting hung up on a literalist interpretation isn't conducive to good communication. Relax. Or don't be relaxed, and by all concerned if you want. Fine. But come on, it's not some sort of dastardly plot for someone to say that changes are "significant" while also still being "minor." They can both be true!

I guess what I'm saying is that we should withhold any value judgements until we've actually played the game? We can all have thoughts about it, but without direct experience,we can't really judge?

[JoeShmo]

Hey man, I think you're over analyzing a bit. Deacon isn't trying to weave some sort of complicated labyrinth of double meanings, he's just saying that his direct personal experience with the 1.3 game is that he likes the changes, and it is opinion, as an official tester that they will fine. He's not trying to trick you, and getting hung up on a literalist interpretation isn't conducive to good communication. Relax. Or don't be relaxed, and by all concerned if you want. Fine. But come on, it's not some sort of dastardly plot for someone to say that changes are "significant" while also still being "minor." They can both be true!

I guess what I'm saying is that we should withhold any value judgements until we've actually played the game? We can all have thoughts about it, but without direct experience,we can't really judge?

I'm not over analyzing anything, what would I even be over-analyzing? He says the quoted section is hyperbole, and I questioned how he could come to that conclusion. I stuck very specifically to the context of the discussion. He wasn't "just saying" that his direct personal experience with 1.3 is that he likes the changes, he was saying that what I said was exaggerating a problem that wasn't there, despite me laying out why it's not an exaggeration from quoting their very own words. And no, literal interpretation is in fact conductive of good communication, because the premise of the conversation to begin with was misinterpretation and alluding to something that is counter to what they had literally said.

I never said he was trying to trick me, or that it was some sort of plot ( I feel like I should be describing hyperbole here ); the only thing even remotely close to an assumption like that was my comment about every dev up-selling changes to their game. It's a correct statement though, no dev has ever said that they were putting out changes that were to a detriment of the game; there's always at least a spin on perceived negative changes that ask you to look at the long term goal / overall picture..so that it ends up as being positive. It's like saying no Public Relations person is going to start a conversation about how bad something was...that runs counter to the point of the job.

No, a significant change cannot be a minor change; they're polar opposite terms. It's like saying empty can also be full, or light can also be dark, or dead can also be alive. There's no philosophical wiggle room.

Again this is turning into an off topic discussion for some apparent reason, because someone feels the need to defend something that wasn't even being attacked. ( not trying to start a fight with you either ).

No judgement was being made, Concerns were being expressed. I don't know why people interpret that as being outraged or making mountains out of molehills.

[Littlebob86]

Just settle down. We've all put a lot of hours into our games, but it's just a game mate.

Plus, starting a fresh will give the complete 1.3 experience.

So just chill and no need to write ridiculous sized novels and getting worked up.

[Icarus]

Bandwidth may be a concern for some, but I think for the majority of users it is not. For those that aren't concerned about 2 GBs, getting the mod from Nexus instead of Steam would be a solution.

[JoeShmo]

Just settle down. We've all put a lot of hours into our games, but it's just a game mate.

Plus, starting a fresh will give the complete 1.3 experience.

So just chill and no need to write ridiculous sized novels and getting worked up.

Who's getting worked up, and who's writing novels? Are longer than Twitter posts considered novels?

I find it ironic that the discussion was about concerns with having their 1.2 campaign altered from the 1.3 patch, while having some people be dismissive over it saying it's not going to change anything ...and then we get a comment like yours saying a new campaign will give the "complete experience". That would kinda be the entire point to the concerns no? That's why people are voicing their concerns, not writing angry novels. But when people are saying contradicting things, like yourself, then it makes people apprehensive about what's going to happen.

It's a discussion, mate.

Bandwidth may be a concern for some, but I think for the majority of users it is not. For those that aren't concerned about 2 GBs, getting the mod from Nexus instead of Steam would be a solution.

Well, we can't be dismissive just because "the majority" don't have an issue with it, I mean, a majority only has to be over 50%.

There's also the problem about updating your own mod edits after every patch, because there's little to no documentation or thinning of downloaded files so that you know what is or isn't updated ( Nexus is the main problem I have with this ). It's easier on everyone who mods to have only the files that are updated being sent down the pipeline, so that we aren't parsing through every single thing checking to make sure it hasn't been updated.

It just makes sense that you wouldn't spend extra time packaging files that don't need to be there for an upload, which makes the upload itself go vastly faster with less risk of interruption / complications. And this is inversely true for users downloading the file(s). I can't think of a single realistic reason why they wouldn't just upload the updated files, instead of the entire mod; or they could have both available; like every other company in the world that updates their games.

[LordYanaek]

'k, didn't want to get into this one so i'll make it short.

Mod is available on both Nexus and Steam, both have pros and cons and neither is the ideal mod distribution platform.

• People who are concerned about the size of the mod should get it from steam since incremental updates will save them a lot of bandwidth.
• People who want to finish their campaign with 1.2 should get the mod from Nexus since steam doesn't allow disabling auto-updates. It's a Steam issue, one i really dislike, but there is nothing the developers can do so no need to discuss it over and over here. If you got 1.2 from Steam just copy it (LW2's folder is 844674609) into <XCOM 2\XComGame\Mods> (create the Mods subfolder if you don't have it), rename LW2's folder "LongWar2" (i don't think it makes a lot of difference but it will be easier to read) and then unsubscribe and you'll have a local copy that won't be updated just like if you had downloaded it from Nexus. Then when 1.3 or whatever next version comes out, get it from nexus and you won't have to deal with auto-updates messing your campaigns.
• The alternative mod launcher can help you with config changes as it have the ability to change config directly from the launcher, save it to disk and load it or compare with new files.

[Zyxpsilon]

...so that we aren't parsing through every single thing checking to make sure it hasn't been updated.

In that regard.. simply looking for the files "DATE of creation" has already given me enough proof of any updated variations.

Doing two complex MODs like LAByrinth & qUIck_LW2 in my case requires extensive verification steps and, the most trustworthy method is certainly just scanning the code folders for obvious "differences".
Localization (special INT files) editing is a sharp (mostly manual) task that takes thorough compares. Mind you -- i keep authentic copies of such key files in-between versions to perform analysis directly.

Soooo.. i fully expect the transition from v1.2 to v1.3 will need more than just minutes for me to verify -- as it should. More like an hour or two of patience & precision!

[Icarus]

Bandwidth may be a concern for some, but I think for the majority of users it is not. For those that aren't concerned about 2 GBs, getting the mod from Nexus instead of Steam would be a solution.

Well, we can't be dismissive just because "the majority" don't have an issue with it, I mean, a majority only has to be over 50%.
[..]

Um, sorry, didn't mean to imply that minority issues should be disregarded. I just wanted to emphasize there's a solution for some, which i felt was mentioned, but kinda glossed over.

Basically just a hint "if the concern doesn't bother you, there's a solution". Didn't mean to imply anything if it does.

Anyway, LordYanaek summarized this quite well.

[MacroNova]

I am checking the subreddit and forums to see when 1.3 hits. If it hits and I don't want to upgrade at that particular moment, I'll run Steam in offline mode until I'm ready.

[JoeShmo]

...so that we aren't parsing through every single thing checking to make sure it hasn't been updated.

In that regard.. simply looking for the files "DATE of creation" has already given me enough proof of any updated variations.

Doing two complex MODs like LAByrinth & qUIck_LW2 in my case requires extensive verification steps and, the most trustworthy method is certainly just scanning the code folders for obvious "differences".
Localization (special INT files) editing is a sharp (mostly manual) task that takes thorough compares. Mind you -- i keep authentic copies of such key files in-between versions to perform analysis directly.

Soooo.. i fully expect the transition from v1.2 to v1.3 will need more than just minutes for me to verify -- as it should. More like an hour or two of patience & precision!

I agree, looking up the date of creation of a file is the first thing one should do, but that comes with caveats, like if the person uploading the files copied / zipped them ...then the date created changes, which is almost certain to happen several times on its way to your /mods/ folder. Normally, knowing when a file was created or accessed requires you to check the properties of a file, rather than using "detailed descriptions" in windows to see it next to the file name itself. You do get that information at the bottom of the window though if you select the file, but then you've lost some efficiency ( not that big of a deal for 1 folder though ).

The second thing one should do..and probably the more important one, is to check for the files modified date, which will tell you when the file was actually edited..rather than created. This would probably stop my search right there, and I wouldn't need to go further, except we run into a big issue here; who's files are we talking about? For example:

1.2 is uploaded on Feb 26
I download 1.2 on May 8

This should be a clear difference between the two files, but tells me absolutely nothing in regards to what has changed at a glance. So I need to check the altered dates, which should be exactly the same dates ( Say, Feb 20 ). Okay no problem.

Now what If I edited 1.2 to my own liking, now I have a new altered date, but the same created date ( but as I stated before, I just ignore it ) But what happens if 1.3 edits something I edited? Well, you just check for a difference in dates, right? But how do you know what the original date was? Remember..the original was Feb 20 ..and the new one might be May 5, or Feb 28. If I happened to edit my 1.2 file on May 15 I might just assume the new 1.3 file is still outdated because its an earlier date; so I'd need to compare the 1.2 dates with the 1.3 dates first.... which now makes this really annoying. And lets not forget that the folders themselves do not reflect changes made to files inside them. You can have a folder that says it was created and altered on Feb 28 ...but have files inside it that were altered on May 5 or Dec 5 of 7 years ago.

And that doesn't get into the nitty gritty of what changed inside the file itself ( which is a patch notes issue )

This, while not catastrophic, still requires people to drudge through the entirety of the mod, which could be partially alleviated by only having to download the actual altered files for that version. If steam allows for that...why wouldn't a place like Nexus? That hinges on whether PI is being lazy or not. And that's all I'm saying / asking for; some QoL treatment for mod users / makers; something that should be inherently present as default, as it is with 99% of games / mods.

I don't think I'm being unreasonable, am I? I'm giving them less work, and faster times, than they already do with their current way of doing it.

Um, sorry, didn't mean to imply that minority issues should be disregarded. I just wanted to emphasize there's a solution for some, which i felt was mentioned, but kinda glossed over.

Basically just a hint "if the concern doesn't bother you, there's a solution". Didn't mean to imply anything if it does.

Anyway, LordYanaek summarized this quite well.

No worries, I understand where you were trying to get at. And you're right, if bandwidth / time / etc. is not an issue, it's probably best to use the Nexus version of the mod. It wont solve the other issues with having to use it..but for an immediate solution to worrying about a mod updating and you not knowing if you want to use the new changes yet..its a good way of playing mods.

The solution provided by Lord ( and others ) though in regards to copying files, unsubbing, etc. is pretty convoluted for players, even moreso than if you had just got it off Nexus Mods instead. It also kinda runs counter to the point of Steam Workshop, having easy / no hassle access to mods and updated versions. Doing all that to avoid an update ...is quite a bit to ask when there use to just be a simple checkbox.

I think that in and of itself brings up why concerns about the changes in 1.3 are valid ones. It really shouldn't matter if the game is updated ...as it should be a positive transition ( though its hard to make nerfs to things positive ). I think that's one of the forefront concerns of game devs ( or should be ) ..making sure that the thing you are forcing on your players is for the right reasons..and won't ruin their experience of the game after the fact. I think when dealing with mods though ...that kind of concern gets put to the side in lue of sudden sweeping changes, because the creators are still trying to feel things out ( understandable ).

Lord does provide a good workaround, so it's good that he provided something extensive for people concerned.

[Icarus]

Since we can't change either nexus or steam to our liking, we have to try to make one of them work.

In my case, I've modded my XCOM, but made a copy of every changed file, so I know which ones I touched. But even if others didn't, there's probably some kind of comparer tool that would let you find your changes. I use Notepad++ Compare, but that works only on individual files as far as I can see, and would be too tedious for the whole directory.

Anyway, wasn't this thread mainly about the 1.3 changes and not about how to upgrade? Meanwhile there are a couple of threads dealing with the upgrade situation more specifically, for example:
http://www.pavonisinteractive.com/phpBB ... 15&t=25791
I'm mentioning this because this is getting _quite_ detailed (and useful IMO), but in a place where it is more easily overlooked by people on the lookout for this kind of solution.

[JoeShmo]

Isn't it kinda moot to discuss how nexus or steam hould distribute their mods? If you want nexus to change their way, you would need to take it to nexus, not here. And I guess that wouldn't hit before 1.3 even in the case they accepted. Since we can't change either solution to our liking, we have to try to make one of them work.

In my case, I've modded my XCOM, but made a copy of every changed file, so I know which ones I touched. But even if others didn't, there's probably some kind of comparer tool that would let you find your changes. I use Notepad++ Compare, but that works only on individual files as far as I can see, and would be too tedious for the whole directory.

Anyway, wasn't this thread mainly about the 1.3 changes and not about how to upgrade? Meanwhile there are a couple of threads dealing with the upgrade situation more specifically, for example:
http://www.pavonisinteractive.com/phpBB ... 15&t=25791
I'm mentioning this because this is getting _quite_ detailed (and useful IMO), but in a place where it is more easily overlooked by people on the lookout for this kind of solution.

Well, what I've been suggesting has nothing to do with Nexus Mods itself, it has to do with PI's uploading criteria. They just upload the entire mod, rather than giving an option to just download the files that were changed ( which means PI uploads a much ....much smaller zipped file to download ) It's something that generally every mod maker does, and every game maker that offers patches.

In regards to original intent of the thread...it was an open ended start; the OP neither directed the thread into a particular direction, nor offered any subject matter themselves. They simply said "the 1.3 patch notes have been updated, discuss" ; that's pretty empty of a reason to start a thread to begin with wouldn't you say? I think we've generally been on point though, minus some of the back and forth between me and some others.

And to be fair..this thread was created a few days before the one you linked

[Icarus]

Well, what I've been suggesting has nothing to do with Nexus Mods itself, it has to do with PI's uploading criteria. They just upload the entire mod, rather than giving an option to just download the files that were changed ( which means PI uploads a much ....much smaller zipped file to download ) It's something that generally every mod maker does, and every game maker that offers patches.

In regards to original intent of the thread...it was an open ended start; the OP neither directed the thread into a particular direction, nor offered any subject matter themselves. They simply said "the 1.3 patch notes have been updated, discuss" ; that's pretty empty of a reason to start a thread to begin with wouldn't you say? I think we've generally been on point though, minus some of the back and forth between me and some others.

And to be fair..this thread was created a few days before the one you linked

Okay, seems that I know too few about uploading processes in that area. I also didn't want to say you've been OT, just that this aspect's discussion is getting very specific while simultaneously easy to overlook, which would be a waste.

[JoeShmo]

Well, what I've been suggesting has nothing to do with Nexus Mods itself, it has to do with PI's uploading criteria. They just upload the entire mod, rather than giving an option to just download the files that were changed ( which means PI uploads a much ....much smaller zipped file to download ) It's something that generally every mod maker does, and every game maker that offers patches.

In regards to original intent of the thread...it was an open ended start; the OP neither directed the thread into a particular direction, nor offered any subject matter themselves. They simply said "the 1.3 patch notes have been updated, discuss" ; that's pretty empty of a reason to start a thread to begin with wouldn't you say? I think we've generally been on point though, minus some of the back and forth between me and some others.

And to be fair..this thread was created a few days before the one you linked

Okay, seems that I know too few about uploading processes in that area. I also didn't want to say you've been OT, just that this aspect's discussion is getting very specific while simultaneously easy to overlook, which would be a waste.

I get what you mean; It would feasibly be more constructive to have this particular discussion ( about continuing a 1.2 campaign and/or file size / etc. ) in the other thread ( minus all the back and forth ), but it's also pertinent to this thread ( in the context of the evolution of thoughts as the pages went on ). I think in that regard, its perfectly acceptable for you to link the other thread, as both a means of channeling discussion towards it, as well as pulling ideas from it ( like as a reference / shout out ). And if the thread wasn't so open ended to start ..Id say we should have moved those subjects towards the thread you linked instead.

The part about the thread getting very specific though is probably my doing ( at least the last couple pages ), as I don't mind talking at long lengths about a singular subject matter. ( And my posts tend to be rather lengthy compared to others..so they end up making new pages in threads quicker ).

[Jacke]

I agree, looking up the date of creation of a file is the first thing one should do, but that comes with caveats, like if the person uploading the files copied / zipped them ...then the date created changes, which is almost certain to happen several times on its way to your /mods/ folder. Normally, knowing when a file was created or accessed requires you to check the properties of a file, rather than using "detailed descriptions" in windows to see it next to the file name itself. You do get that information at the bottom of the window though if you select the file, but then you've lost some efficiency ( not that big of a deal for 1 folder though ).

The second thing one should do..and probably the more important one, is to check for the files modified date, which will tell you when the file was actually edited..rather than created.

This has been a long running issue, going back to UNIX not initially carrying over all the 'datatime' file values from MULTICS, including its 'cp' command by default setting the 'datetime' as 'created' rather than maintaining it as 'contents_modified'. Now there are multiple 'datetime' values but still they get mishandled unless a person takes extra care. Sometimes archive files help but only if the values are correct when they are stored in it.

[Dlareh]

The only dates that matter are those human-edited in readme files or changelogs, such as this one: http://www.pavonisinteractive.com/longw ... ngelog.htm

Anyone expecting to glean something significant from file modification datetimes is sadly mistaken.

[Jacke]

The only dates that matter are those human-edited in readme files or changelogs, such as this one: http://www.pavonisinteractive.com/longw ... ngelog.htm

Anyone expecting to glean something significant from file modification datetimes is sadly mistaken.

Only because they get stepped on so many times unless work process is set up to maintain them.

[Dlareh]

"Only"