Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[nightwhips]

How compatible are updates?

I downloaded about a month ago or so, and have slowly worked on only a couple of forts. Can I dl the newest version and still run those forts, or does this mean start over?

[NotPete]

You can play old forts on new updates, usually. All you need to do is copy the save over from the old version to the new one. You would not have any of the new necromancers/werewolves/cities/everythingelse, because they wouldn't exist in that world. To get all the new features, you'll have to make a new world, hence a new fort.

[Knight Otu]

We won't know until the next version is out, but the plan is that new versions remain compatible with old saves to a reasonable extend (a transferred fort wouldn't get vampires and werewolves, but would get the new justice system, for instance). Of course, certain developments can cause incompatibility (I believe Toady mentioned problems with the new city maps in old worlds). In such a case, you could keep the old version to play your old forts, and install the new version in a separate folder.

[YetAnotherStupidDorf]

Almost certainly new big update will be incompatibile with 0.31.x. Too much changed. Usually saves between subversions are compatibile.

[Cruxador]

You can play old forts on new updates, usually. All you need to do is copy the save over from the old version to the new one. You would not have any of the new necromancers/werewolves/cities/everythingelse, because they wouldn't exist in that world. To get all the new features, you'll have to make a new world, hence a new fort.

That's not to say there won't be some new features though - the justice system isn't part of the world and thus would apply to old saves. If you're in an evil region, the dead will rise according to the new system. The gem rewrite, with cabochons et all, is available to you, as are multi-z designations. The Unit list change, flesh burning and historical figure immigration will work. It's pretty much just cities, night creatures, and books that won't. Of course, cities and night creatures are the biggest features added.

Almost certainly new big update will be incompatibile with 0.31.x. Too much changed. Usually saves between subversions are compatibile.

I see no reason this wouldn't be compatible. Toady usually leaves the structures that support old things in place. It might be a bit buggier, at worst. Only thing I can think of that might cause trouble is the new identities with regards to demons pretending to be gods.

[YetAnotherStupidDorf]

Almost certainly new big update will be incompatibile with 0.31.x. Too much changed. Usually saves between subversions are compatibile.

I see no reason this wouldn't be compatible.

I just mentioned reason. Too much things changed - that requires changes in various data structures, from dead tracking and lunar phase info to body information needed to properly handle interactions.

Toady usually leaves the structures that support old things in place.

And this is why 40d saves can be read by 0.31.x. Oh wait...

[USEC_OFFICER]

Toady usually leaves the structures that support old things in place.

And this is why 40d saves can be read by 0.31.x. Oh wait...

Of course, because the jump to 0.32.x (or whatever) is completely comparable to the jump from 40d to 0.31.x and definitely not hyperbole at all. Not at all (See, I can be sarcastic too).

I downloaded about a month ago or so, and have slowly worked on only a couple of forts. Can I dl the newest version and still run those forts, or does this mean start over?

If your saves aren't compatible with the next version then simply keep playing them in whatever version they were made. You don't have to move to the next version if you don't want to. And once your fortress have fallen or you quit due to boredom, you can download the new version. When it actually comes out that is.

[YetAnotherStupidDorf]

And this is why 40d saves can be read by 0.31.x. Oh wait...

Of course, because the jump to 0.32.x (or whatever) is completely comparable to the jump from 40d to 0.31.x

Do you know at all what new got in since 0.31.25? Seems like you do not know. Read devlogs NOW. No, NOW. From 03/28/2011 to today. There is more than enough to screw over saves ten times in row.

Anyway, this is moot discussion, because I found statement where Toady clearly said saves will not be compatible here:

(...) The main downside of the way I'm doing it is save compatibility, since most tweaks to the map code will cause old saves to create maps differently even if you've been there before.

And I do not think this map handling issue is only and one reason for save incompatibilty. Why anyone would care for this at all, anyway? This is not like old version stops working when new version get released.

[Footkerchief]

Anyway, this is moot discussion, because I found statement where Toady clearly said saves will not be compatible here:

(...) The main downside of the way I'm doing it is save compatibility, since most tweaks to the map code will cause old saves to create maps differently even if you've been there before.

I think you're misinterpreting that quote.  I read Toady as saying that compatibility is available with the new map code, just with some quirks. 

[YetAnotherStupidDorf]

(...) The main downside of the way I'm doing it is save compatibility, since most tweaks to the map code will cause old saves to create maps differently even if you've been there before.

I think you're misinterpreting that quote.  I read Toady as saying that compatibility is available...

Really? I read Toady as saying "save compatibility goes out of window because I handle maps now in different way".

...with the new map code, just with some game-breaking results and possibly crashes.

FTFY.

[Il Palazzo]

Will you promise to eat your hat should the saves prove to be compatibile after all, YASD?

[Cruxador]

Toady usually leaves the structures that support old things in place.

And this is why 40d saves can be read by 0.31.x. Oh wait...

Fun fact: The reason DF 2010 took so long to come out was because Toady knew he was going to have to break saves, so he piled a ton of save-breaking updates into one release, so he wouldn't have to keep breaking saves all the time.

(...) The main downside of the way I'm doing it is save compatibility, since most tweaks to the map code will cause old saves to create maps differently even if you've been there before.

I think you're misinterpreting that quote.  I read Toady as saying that compatibility is available...

Really? I read Toady as saying "save compatibility goes out of window because I handle maps now in different way".

...with the new map code, just with some game-breaking results and possibly crashes.

FTFY.

Toady's saying if you go to cities there can be bugs. It has no bearing on forts, though.

[YetAnotherStupidDorf]

Will you promise to eat your hat should the saves prove to be compatibile after all, YASD?

Define compatibile. Successful loading with crash every five minutes or going totally wonky a la magma mountains and 2k z-level spires IMO don't count.

Toady's saying if you go to cities there can be bugs. It has no bearing on forts, though.

I claim there will be save incompatibility in general. You indirectly admitted that at least adventurer mode will be incompatibile.

We will see how it will really be. I will be surprised if old saves would load at all and totally astonished & amazed if old saves will work decently.

[Lac]

(...) The main downside of the way I'm doing it is save compatibility, since most tweaks to the map code will cause old saves to create maps differently even if you've been there before.

I think you're misinterpreting that quote.  I read Toady as saying that compatibility is available...

Really? I read Toady as saying "save compatibility goes out of window because I handle maps now in different way".

I'm confused because "[creating] maps differently even if you've been there before" sounds more like a 'save continuity' issue than a 'save compatibility' one.  And I agree with Footkerchief that you can't assume it means "saves will not be compatible" - in a technical sense; but I agree with Stupid that Toady is probably worried about new logic working with old worldgen data increasing the risk of "game-breaking results and possibly crashes" rather than just visual/continuity oddities - otherwise why isn't the solution to save each city after it is encountered for the first time? (the save bloat would then only be as big as your wanderlust, and there's no worldgen time penalty).

[Cruxador]

Toady's saying if you go to cities there can be bugs. It has no bearing on forts, though.

I claim there will be save incompatibility in general. You indirectly admitted that at least adventurer mode will be incompatibile.

No I didn't. I acknowledged that there's substantially increased potential for bugs. That doesn't mean it's not compatible.