Warcraft III - Patch 1.29.2

[StoPCampinGn00b]

Patch 1.29.2 is LIVE on Battle.net

The Battle.net ladder has been completely reset, and a flurry of more bugs have been squashed. 13+ player bugs, World Editor mini-map bug, and a few changes to some ladder maps and natives have all been implemented.

The Blizzard post also includes a list of known issues.

Stay tuned for more updates and make way for 1.29 projects utilizing things like the new natives, increased limits, and 24 players to come forth!

Spoiler: Old PTR Post

Path 1.29.2 (PTR)

You guys know the drill :]

The 1.29.2 PTR includes an even longer list of bug fixes than the previous 1.29.1 patch, including fixing the World Editor mini-map, fixing arranged team for ladder, some changes to a couple natives, a couple 13+ player fixes, and various changes to things like ladder maps and other technical aspects.

There also includes a statement on improving the process and expanding communication.

Full patch notes, statements, and download links to the PTR are located here on Blizzard's forums.
1.29 Megathread - 1.29.1 Thread

~Will edit this thread when the patch leaves PTR and goes live on the main Battle.net servers

 

[Kyrbi0]

Man, it's starting to get hard to keep up with them (in terms of making a Hive post whenever they update Warcraft 3).

Remember when Warcraft 3 was patched once a decade? Pepperidge Farm Remembers. ; )

 

[pyf]

Looks like Windows XP support is being phased out for good this time.

I see no mention regarding the current status of Windows Vista support for Warcraft 3.


Now, I would suggest Blizzard to please at the very least:

- make sure that the campaigns / stock maps do not crash.
- program a clean error message box that looks professional, for XP / 98SE / ME / W2000 users.
- provide a standalone downloadable installer, so that one can enjoy the latest and greatest version of the game which is compatible with his / her OS *and* works as intended (this might require a few more hotfixes?).

 

[Maxwell]

Minimap, finally.

 

[MyPad]

Insert the *chocolate guy from SpongeBob*

Ahahahahahahaha.... Finally!

 

[chusrubi2]

There is still 0 info about one of the most, if not the top, important priorities: HACKS.

 

[MyPad]

What kind of hacks? Does it have something to do with manipulation of streamed data in maps or maphacking in general?

 

[_lycan]

Looks like Windows XP support is being phased out for good this time.

I see no mention regarding the current status of Windows Vista support for Warcraft 3.


Now, I would suggest Blizzard to please at the very least:

- make sure that the campaigns / stock maps do not crash.
- program a clean error message box that looks professional, for XP / 98SE / ME / W2000 users.
- provide a standalone downloadable installer, so that one can enjoy the latest and greatest version of the game which is compatible with his / her OS *and* works as intended (this might require a few more hotfixes?).

Hope you're joking with the 98SE ME AND 2000 users...

 

[Maxwell]

Now.. Can we have multiboard moved to the right side? Would be.. nice.

 

[chusrubi2]

What kind of hacks? Does it have something to do with manipulation of streamed data in maps or maphacking in general?

Maphack, loadhack etc.

 

[pyf]

Hope you're joking with the 98SE ME AND 2000 users...

It is my way to point out that much OS compatibility and support has already been dropped. Before Patch 1.27a, Warcraft 3 could run on any of these OSes. When Blizzard switched from VS 2005 to VS 2013, it is obvious that compatibility with W9x/ME was also dropped in the process.

Fortunately, Warcraft 3 does not require to be online to enjoy the game. There are official downloadable standalone installers to patch the game, even for (semi-decent) compatibility with W10. But now, if XP support has to be dropped, I fear it will not be possible for XP customers to update their game to v1.29.0 anymore, since it requires to be online on Blizzard's servers. Even worse, this version is known to have game breaking bugs which prevent the player from enjoying the entire Rexxar campaign.

I therefore very much hope that Blizzard will enforce its QA even more before officially dropping XP support, and also make it possible for their customers to enjoy this game on every OS to the fullest allowed, and any way their customers see fit.

 

[Rui]

Hope you're joking with the 98SE ME AND 2000 users...

I mentioned it a couple of times in the threads of former patches^^ Full changelog mentioned they'd drop support for XP. It's an obvious blackmail to force you to get Windows 10, to the point posts denouncing this have been deleted in the official thread.

Now I imagine maintaining an artifact as complex as a game for several operating systems is a pain. But I am against dropping it when the game is unstable, moreover on a version that's broken as @pyf just mentioned. When it was said support for XP was being dropped, I could swear they meant this major patch.

 

[_lycan]

I mentioned it a couple of times in the threads of former patches^^ Full changelog mentioned they'd drop support for XP. It's an obvious blackmail to force you to get Windows 10, to the point posts denouncing this have been deleted in the official thread.

Now I imagine maintaining an artifact as complex as a game for several operating systems is a pain. But I am against dropping it when the game is unstable, moreover on a version that's broken as @pyf just mentioned. When it was said support for XP was being dropped, I could swear they meant this major patch.

Sup Rui, anyways to the point...

I never said anything about XP, I said I hope you're joking about 98SE, ME AND 2000 users because those operating systems weren't supported already, now about your point that they're forcing us to Windows 10, that's a lie. 7 is still usable (even Vista), they brought back Mac support and game runs on wine too (linux), XP is honestly an operating system that its own Creator does not support, Blizzard already had warned people at 1.29.0 that they wouldn't support it anymore, maybe one of the fixes was easier to do (took less time) utilizing the library of a newer operating system that didn't exist in XP, who knows?

 

[pyf]

I never said anything about XP, I said I hope you're joking about 98SE, ME AND 2000 users because those operating systems weren't supported already

When updating Warcraft 3 directly through Battle.net, users of any unsupported OS should see a clean and informative error message box. It should offer them the possibility to update the game to the latest supported version for their OS. The imho most convenient way to do so is by providing them a link to download a standalone patch installer.

Because Blizzard does not provide any such patches anymore since v1.27b, I am wondering what the availability of any future intermediate version of the game will be.

I very much encourage Blizzard to concentrate on fixing all the major issues of Warcraft 3 throughout the 1.29.x line of patches (especially for the *gamers*), before deciding to move on if that is their wish.

[...] It's an obvious blackmail to force you to get Windows 10 [...]

I don't think so. Even though Windows 10 *is* the future, for better or for worse.

[...] XP is honestly an operating system that its own Creator does not support [...]

Yes... and *no*.

maybe one of the fixes was easier to do (took less time) utilizing the library of a newer operating system that didn't exist in XP, who knows?

The lack of built-in TLS 1.2 support should not really be an issue afaik, for tech-savvy users.
One of the viable reasons to drop OS support could be related to the deprecation of the SHA-1 hashing algorithm for the Microsoft root certificate program? Who knows?

... but if this is indeed the case, then *only* online play through Battle.net should be deprecated imho. This is what Blizzard did with StarCraft last year:
- https://us.battle.net/forums/en/starcraft/topic/20754505576#post-6
- https://us.battle.net/forums/en/starcraft/topic/20754466871#post-5

 

[Razorclaw_X]

Dropping old OS support and adding support to more modern ones have done wonders with game load times.

 

[Tasyen]

1.29.2 was released:

 

[TheSilverWolff]

That was fast, time to wait for bots to update I guess.

 

[pyf]

Dropping old OS support and adding support to more modern ones have done wonders with game load times.

Can you please post your benchmark results for Warcraft 3 please?

 

[BobOfficialPando]

I've completely lost track of what works and what doesn't just hoping .29 will settle soon. Is there a dedicated topic for the state of new natives?

 

[Zephyrius2412]

Multiple custom values for 1.29.3 ?
Also a correction of the Dependency Equivalents - Hero in the custom game constants ?
Oh and, I'm gourmand but, something to create a new race, like a race editor ? Or just somthing to add a new choice when choosing the race in a game ? Just a suggestion

Thank you Blizzard for all your works to update the awesome Warcraft III !

 

[Kacpa2]

That may sound lil nitpicky, but i cannot really let the matter of Brown's glow rest till it's fixed to how it was xD Sorry if i may get too repetitive but it still not like it was, it's too orange....here is direct coparison between old and new glow agaisnt darker tiles and when game is paused:

As you can see there is clear difference, new one is.....literally orange now, old one is uniform with the team colour. I know that it's texture may look dim in editors and stuff but it works properly ingame. I dont mean to mock or anger anyone with this little nitpicky 'bug' report but it's just for the better if it gets restored to original team glow texture xD
I attach orignal glow pre 1.29 PTR glow texture so everyone can compare in case you dont have several back ups like i do :v

 

[Razorclaw_X]

Can you please post your benchmark results for Warcraft 3 please?

What makes you think I'm benchmarking it? I'm just telling you that it's loading my maps faster.

 

[anufis]

I've seen that 1.29.2 is faster while playing youTD and generating data for 240 waves in the beginning. It was 4-5 times faster.
Also need to check land generation in my map, will post results if I notice something.

 

[Kaijyuu]

The map selection screen for hosting a custom game or playing one locally takes 1/10 as much time as it used to. Haven't really noticed any other speedups.

 

[Dr Super Good]

- program a clean error message box that looks professional, for XP / 98SE / ME / W2000 users.

Not possible. That would mean still coupling to WindowsXP so code can run.

What should rather happen is that a warning is displayed when downloading Warcraft III from Blizzard that it does not support Windows XP if the OS being used to view the site reports that it is Windows XP. That is the best one can do without having to support XP to tell users it does not support XP.

- provide a standalone downloadable installer, so that one can enjoy the latest and greatest version of the game which is compatible with his / her OS *and* works as intended (this might require a few more hotfixes?).

They already have those? That is how the PTR is deployed. Also there are only 2 builds of Warcraft III, one for Windows and one for Mac.

Fortunately, Warcraft 3 does not require to be online to enjoy the game. There are official downloadable standalone installers to patch the game, even for (semi-decent) compatibility with W10. But now, if XP support has to be dropped, I fear it will not be possible for XP customers to update their game to v1.29.0 anymore, since it requires to be online on Blizzard's servers. Even worse, this version is known to have game breaking bugs which prevent the player from enjoying the entire Rexxar campaign.

Even if they could update their game it would not work. No XP support literally means no XP support. If you try to run it on Windows XP it will generate whatever default Microsoft error one gets for trying to run something on Windows XP that was built for a more modern OS.

Now I imagine maintaining an artifact as complex as a game for several operating systems is a pain. But I am against dropping it when the game is unstable, moreover on a version that's broken as @pyf just mentioned. When it was said support for XP was being dropped, I could swear they meant this major patch.

The problem is that XP support greatly complicates the build process. Since Microsoft no longer supports XP, one has to use special compatibility packs to build with. Additionally one cannot use any feature that requires Windows Vista or newer without having separate distributables which makes things even more complex.

7 is still usable (even Vista)

Vista support is being dropped as a blanket policy of Blizzard. All modern Blizzard games will soon, if not have already, dropped support for Vista. It is also possible in the distant future x86 support will be dropped meaning only x86-64 will work.

When updating Warcraft 3 directly through Battle.net, users of any unsupported OS should see a clean and informative error message box. It should offer them the possibility to update the game to the latest supported version for their OS.

That requires that the updater support their OS... If they drop XP support how can that updater run on XP to do this?

I am wondering what the availability of any future intermediate version of the game will be.

Blizzard's general policy is to not support intermediate versions. This is actually a pretty universal policy in professional software development. There is often a very good reason a patch was released, and supporting unpatched versions is contradictory to those reasons.

The lack of built-in TLS 1.2 support should not really be an issue afaik, for tech-savvy users.
One of the viable reasons to drop OS support could be related to the deprecation of the SHA-1 hashing algorithm for the Microsoft root certificate program? Who knows?

More likely because it is a real pain to build software that is compatible with XP seeing how all modern Windows development tools have dropped direct support for XP. One has to use hacky XP deployment kits to build such software. Also again, the dropping of XP support is a general Blizzard policy applying to all games.

 

[Kacpa2]

Another important thing(that i repost from other older thread because i feel like this one is the focus now) is complains about bots that not always are proper issue of any kind it often comes down from either lack of understanding or mild annoyance to some player...I have better suggestio for solution of such issues below the quote

I too wish the auto host bots were gone. It's rather hard to eliminate one without the other, though. Blizz's base hosting system is and was always garbage (I have no idea what they were smoking when they decided to not allow searching by game name or map name substrings), so it'd be a step down to get rid of bots entirely too.

The only way we're getting rid of auto hosting bots is if remastered wc3 comes out with enhanced hosting features (no need for refreshing, host commands, reconnections, currently active game lists outside of wc3, etc).

Or just make way to filter out autohosted games because some people play on those like Hero Push or Footies or others. You're talking about something that will hurt these smaller often competitive custom games communities. They also have a place in the game. All we need is filters that will get all games with lets say [ENT] prefix gone to be considered auto. Or for Classic team to cooperate with ENT and Diplomunion to improve both and make standarised stuff and make some distinction hosting on demand and auto 24/7 hosts. And blizzard would link to ENT from ingame...like it links to ladder and profile websites.

You need to think about bigger picture not just your own mild annoyences caused by current state of things with autobots. Most of people use games lists on ENT and MMH to find games hosted on demand by people themselves. I use both ingame browser(because its not that hard you just ignore all bots with prefixes that are obviously 24/7 lobbies) and these website games lists. It would be lovely to have better filters(currently old version of it we have is pretty much useless)And search option that narrows the found games according to written name alongside of just being used for direct joining.

Such more "official" recognition and cooperation could improve the game alot especially improving cross realm play, hosting itself by adding extra button sending people to ENT's site for example. Basicly integrating it to wc3. Hosting bots are much better than Sc2's arcade with benefits they give and control.

In summary
Such solution pleases everyone and improves the experience with custom games in general.
Auto-bot lobbies that host certein maps 24/7 have their place alongside human controlled 'on-demand' bots.....simple filters could solve the problem being a win-win for everyone and it can be done with cooperation between classic gsmes team and ENT for example as i said above already.

 

[Rui]

I don't think so. Even though Windows 10 *is* the future, for better or for worse.

Dropping old OS support and adding support to more modern ones have done wonders with game load times.

The problem is that XP support greatly complicates the build process. Since Microsoft no longer supports XP, one has to use special compatibility packs to build with. Additionally one cannot use any feature that requires Windows Vista or newer without having separate distributables which makes things even more complex.

Just to clarify my position; I don't defend Warcraft III should support XP forever, but it is somewhat disrespectful for the consumers to be left with a patch that leaves the game broken. I have no problem with Windows 10 other than disliking the whole Big-Brother-is-watching paradigm that governs every digital service nowadays. @Dr Super Good you stated earlier that being against it hints someone's doing something wrong, but the argument works both ways. It's exactly because I'm doing nothing wrong that Microsoft has no business spying on me. People have forgotten that privacy is an historical, civilizational acquirement crucial to our development of personality and independency that was not possible when everyone could know everything about everyone else.

 

[Kaijyuu]

The "you shouldn't care if you have nothing to hide" argument works much better directed at powerful groups like governments, religions, companies/corporations, etc. Not so much everyday individuals. Privacy is one of the few defenses regular people have against abuses of power.

Personally I'll be moving on to Linux once win7 goes out of fashion. Maybe ahem, "fixed" versions of later windows versions that don't send my info to others at the OS level, if I can acquire them.

 

[pyf]

What should rather happen is that a warning is displayed when downloading Warcraft III from Blizzard that it does not support Windows XP if the OS being used to view the site reports that it is Windows XP. That is the best one can do without having to support XP to tell users it does not support XP.

This is more or less what I had in mind. It can be done with a dialog box, or other informative messages. A link leading to a standalone offline patch download is the easiest way to do this imho. Even though the offline standalone patch might very well be as big as the game itself.

Not possible. That would mean still coupling to WindowsXP so code can run.

Are you a member of the Classic Team?

This is what Mark Chandler said about XP compatibility on May 1st, 2018:
https://us.battle.net/forums/en/bnet/topic/20762177984#post-13

The link leads to this page,
Windows XP and Windows Vista Aren't Supported
... which does not mention Warcraft 3 as of this writing
(note: Blizzard has it right when they say that Windows XP and Windows Vista are no longer receiving *standard* support from Microsoft).

Also, the official Warcraft 3 system requirements have not been updated (yet?)
Warcraft III System Requirements

They already have those? That is how the PTR is deployed. [...]

If the updater does not work anymore, then there has to exist other ways to update the game.

Even if they could update their game it would not work. No XP support literally means no XP support. If you try to run it on Windows XP it will generate whatever default Microsoft error one gets for trying to run something on Windows XP that was built for a more modern OS.

Why does this all feel like the second cutscene of Duke Nukem 3D (starring Blizzard as Duke Nukem) to me?


(note: not necessarily based on actual events)

[...] Since Microsoft no longer supports XP [...]

Microsoft supports Embedded versions of Windows XP until 2019, afaik.
Microsoft Update Catalog

Microsoft may also release hotfixes for XP SP3 and Windows Server 2003 under exceptional circumstances. It already happened in July 2017. The hotfixes were not pushed via Windows Update, therefore one had to download then. For French users, they are:
- WindowsXP-KB4025218-x86-Custom-FRA.exe
- WindowsXP-KB4024402-x86-Custom-FRA.exe
- WindowsXP-KB4024323-x86-Custom-FRA.exe
- WindowsXP-KB4022747-x86-Custom-FRA.exe
- WindowsXP-KB4019204-x86-Custom-FRA.exe
- WindowsXP-KB4018466-x86-Custom-FRA.exe
- WindowsXP-KB4012598-x86-Custom-FRA.exe
- WindowsXP-KB4012583-x86-Custom-FRA.exe
- WindowsXP-KB3197835-x86-Custom-FRA.exe
- IE8-WindowsXP-KB4018271-x86-Custom-FRA.exe
(unfortunately, this last cumulative update for IE does not enable built-in TLS 1.1/1.2 support for IE8 / Windows XP SP3 in the process).

The Microsoft Software Catalog can be browsed here:
Microsoft Update Catalog


Windows XP may also be supported through (expensive) paid support, for governments and organizations.

Vista support is being dropped as a blanket policy of Blizzard. All modern Blizzard games will soon, if not have already, dropped support for Vista. It is also possible in the distant future x86 support will be dropped meaning only x86-64 will work.

It would make sense that Blizzard drops support for XP and Vista at the exact same time. This is what Google did with Chrome. Ideally, this could happen when switching to a 64-bit executable and a move to DirectX 11. It could also be the occasion to update the development tools to Visual Studio 2017, to use the security features introduced with Visual Studio 2015.

Windows Vista 64-bit users may complain, though...

That requires that the updater support their OS... If they drop XP support how can that updater run on XP to do this?

It would appear that the problem comes from the online updater itself; more precisely the file agent.exe



This is what Microsoft says about GetThreadId:
GetThreadId function (Windows)
(minimum supported server: in Windows Server 2003 (!), but minimum supported client: Windows Vista)

Blizzard's general policy is to not support intermediate versions. This is actually a pretty universal policy in professional software development. There is often a very good reason a patch was released, and supporting unpatched versions is contradictory to those reasons.

I am talking about availability, not about support.

Previous offline standalone patches of the game for PCs are still available from Blizzard's servers, from 1.24a up to and including 1.27b. I am currently unable to find the equivalent patches for Mac.

The problem is, there is no offline standalone downloadable patch available after that. And it would seem that there is atm no way to update the game legally to the latest compatible version, for an unsupported OS like XP.

It is also a pretty universal policy in professional software development that critical bugs which prevent the gamer from playing the game are fixed. Even unsupported versions of software may receive fixes afterwards for critical issues. This is part of basic consumer service.

The problem is that XP support greatly complicates the build process. [...] one has to use special compatibility packs to build with. Additionally one cannot use any feature that requires Windows Vista or newer without having separate distributables which makes things even more complex.

This is not true for all software.

Since you are not part of the Classic Team afaik, how would you know that?

The problem is that XP support greatly complicates the build process. [...] one has to use special compatibility packs to build with. [...]

How are they 'special'?

More likely because it is a real pain to build software that is compatible with XP seeing how all modern Windows development tools have dropped direct support for XP. One has to use hacky XP deployment kits to build such software. Also again, the dropping of XP support is a general Blizzard policy applying to all games.

Unless there was a recent change in Blizzard's development tools for Warcraft 3, the game still uses Visual Studio 2013, which natively supports XP afaik.

I am pointing out that even the Visual Studio 2017 Runtime can be installed on XP. In order to build executables suited for XP, the developer must first install the official appropriate supplement pack by Microsoft. Therefore, I see nothing hacky about it.

 

[Dr Super Good]

How are they 'special'?

Because they need to be specifically selected when installing MSVC. One also has to make the project use it. It also limits what APIs you can use to XP at most.

 

[Selaya]

Could just make 2 builds, legacy for xp/2000/me/98 whatever's still flying around in asia, and normal (possibly 64bit?!?!?!)
May complicate releases tho

 

[Goblintrain]

Ok, here's a dumb question -but seriously! It has been so long since i have had to update WC3, i don't even remember how to do it! In the past, many years ago, the updates seemed to just patch when i logged into battlenet. Do i need to go re-DL the client from Blizzard again, or something?

Seriously, it has been so long that i don't even know how to ask the question without being stuck on stupid!

 

[Kaijyuu]

Redownloading may be the most pain-free. Be sure to back up all your user data, like maps and save files.

 

[Dr Super Good]

Could just make 2 builds, legacy for xp/2000/me/98 whatever's still flying around in asia, and normal (possibly 64bit?!?!?!)
May complicate releases tho

They could also just drop XP and below and maintain 1 build. Cheaper and easier to maintain that way. Leaves more time for bug fixes and new features.

 

[Lake Bodom]

Dear Hivers and Hivertesses You could notice of coming and settling me on this wonderful site, and its not occasionally but purposely. The "LOL" thing is i have just recently drowned damn Win10 in the Lake of Bodom and exactly got to the WinXP. The reason was that there are nothing to play on those platforms win7+ (Heaven forbid!, except the only Witcher3), ALL the good games have alreadybeen made and they are before Win7, and in advance, no, i will not deal with so called "fixes" to play those games on win7+, i`ve had enough of it. And bearly i was happy W3 will have its continue to develop, again my child dreams just stumbled and crushed on their face over XP is not supported for 1.29+. And thats sucks, if you didnt figured out why while reading above, then this: now i and turns out not only, have to have some damn win999+ ONLY to play W3. BUT, as all you mentioned what this W3 1.29+ is?:

1. All this looks like some MMO: whatever you do even 24/7 farm, all leads to force you to pay, to have access to some even important for gameplay "features". The same, as it turns out it concernes other games, dont no, not interested, so gathering all these in an overall picture, looks like, as said, it leads us to have win 10 and mostly only play "new" Blizzard games? Rhetorical question: will you play only those games for your entire life?

2. Warcraft3 1.29+ is to play only on Battlenet? Seriosly? I might didnt catch properly, but if so, that sucks

3.

Microsoft supports Embedded versions of Windows XP until 2019

Thanks to you now its not doomed for a while.

4.

How are they 'special'?

First!: Hey guys, its a Warcraft3!! Vice-versa, what`s the point to complicate W3??
Secondly: Even being now 1.29 it is still Warcraft "3"!!, thats leads to think it is made on purpose to unable to play Win7 and lower. Which, again, leads to point 1.

5.

Could just make 2 builds, legacy for xp/2000/me/98 whatever's still flying around in asia

Again, indeed. But i`m sure we shall have, dont know how you call it, like hack versions sooner or later on.

6. Count this as if my own words:
https://us.battle.net/forums/en/bnet/topic/20762177984#post-14
Especially:
Blizzard buried W3 for more than 5 years without live support and now decide to bring interest but why on this way?
Is there other than financial reason not to support old operation systems ?
I'm sure that it's not moral to do that with 15 year old game.

7. Yes, once i will be forced to use Win999+. But for now, i would rather wait for maybe some Warcraft4+ itself.

8. Edit: By the way, im 1.26.0.6401. I note most say its like a best version, anyway is there any reason to go to some between 1.27-1.28?

In conclusion, you all know for sure, how long it will be until we get W3 will FINALLY settles and be playable(?). Before this happens, i will probably manage to found my own Durotar, see my grandchilds and fcking die. I`m simply distressed with all of this.

 

[Dr Super Good]

All recent Blizzard games run on Windows 7. Only Vista and earlier support is being dropped. This is a company wide policy. All their modern games will be dropping x86 support soon, requiring not just Windows 7 or newer OS but a 64bit version of that OS.

 

[Lake Bodom]

All recent Blizzard games run on Windows 7. Only Vista and earlier support is being dropped. This is a company wide policy. All their modern games will be dropping x86 support soon, requiring not just Windows 7 or newer OS but a 64bit version of that OS.

Screw them. I already calmed down and will calmly wait: Warcraft 4+ come out and the nearest hacked 1.29+ Until then i`m going to enjoy hive`s offerings.

 

[Daffa]

All recent Blizzard games run on Windows 7. Only Vista and earlier support is being dropped. This is a company wide policy. All their modern games will be dropping x86 support soon, requiring not just Windows 7 or newer OS but a 64bit version of that OS.

That's interesting, what's with the x86 support drop?

Dear Hivers and Hivertesses You could notice of coming and settling me on this wonderful site, and its not occasionally but purposely. The "LOL" thing is i have just recently drowned damn Win10 in the Lake of Bodom and exactly got to the WinXP. The reason was that there are nothing to play on those platforms win7+ (Heaven forbid!, except the only Witcher3), ALL the good games have alreadybeen made and they are before Win7, and in advance, no, i will not deal with so called "fixes" to play those games on win7+, i`ve had enough of it. And bearly i was happy W3 will have its continue to develop, again my child dreams just stumbled and crushed on their face over XP is not supported for 1.29+. And thats sucks, if you didnt figured out why while reading above, then this: now i and turns out not only, have to have some damn win999+ ONLY to play W3. BUT, as all you mentioned what this W3 1.29+ is?:

1. All this looks like some MMO: whatever you do even 24/7 farm, all leads to force you to pay, to have access to some even important for gameplay "features". The same, as it turns out it concernes other games, dont no, not interested, so gathering all these in an overall picture, looks like, as said, it leads us to have win 10 and mostly only play "new" Blizzard games? Rhetorical question: will you play only those games for your entire life?

2. Warcraft3 1.29+ is to play only on Battlenet? Seriosly? I might didnt catch properly, but if so, that sucks

3.
Thanks to you now its not doomed for a while.

4.
First!: Hey guys, its a Warcraft3!! Vice-versa, what`s the point to complicate W3??
Secondly: Even being now 1.29 it is still Warcraft "3"!!, thats leads to think it is made on purpose to unable to play Win7 and lower. Which, again, leads to point 1.

5.
Again, indeed. But i`m sure we shall have, dont know how you call it, like hack versions sooner or later on.

6. Count this as if my own words:
https://us.battle.net/forums/en/bnet/topic/20762177984#post-14
Especially:
Blizzard buried W3 for more than 5 years without live support and now decide to bring interest but why on this way?
Is there other than financial reason not to support old operation systems ?
I'm sure that it's not moral to do that with 15 year old game.

7. Yes, once i will be forced to use Win999+. But for now, i would rather wait for maybe some Warcraft4+ itself.

8. Edit: By the way, im 1.26.0.6401. I note most say its like a best version, anyway is there any reason to go to some between 1.27-1.28?

In conclusion, you all know for sure, how long it will be until we get W3 will FINALLY settles and be playable(?). Before this happens, i will probably manage to found my own Durotar, see my grandchilds and fcking die. I`m simply distressed with all of this.

1. the new 1.29 is an attempt of resurrection for the game. The newer natives are ones that actually takes it to another level.

2. No, it's not only for Battle Net. You seem to have missed the information for the newer natives that just got into the track.

7. With WoW around, doubt W4 coming any time soon

8. I recall some fixes was made on 1.27a and 1.28c(?) versions. They're not major in comparison, but I personally favors 1.28 over 1.26, as they have support from Eurobattle server, which at least helps when getting a third party server. I prefer 1.29 over them due to the new natives and 24p support.

If they make updates too frequent like this year (heck, this is third patch since 1.29 enters), waiting for things you call hack will take time, and by the time they enter, another patch might already hit the official servers.

 

[Lake Bodom]

7. With WoW around, doubt W4 coming any time soon

All has its end, i still find once were worldwide great mmo`s, its rather like hope i can see W4.

waiting for things you call hack will take time, and by the time they enter, another patch might already hit the official servers.

Im not in a rushThe point of hacked meant to be for XP, not all the Baldurs Gate`likes are properly works on new age devices=(

favors 1.28 over 1.26, as they have support from Eurobattle server

To be correct, again, Im WinXP for long now, Only solo, so for 1.27-1.28+- i mean game itself if it has smth more/better/improvments etc. So is there point, i myself looking for descriptions of these versions.

 

[pyf]

To be correct, again, Im WinXP for long now, Only solo, so for 1.27-1.28+- i mean game itself if it has smth more/better/improvments etc. So is there point, i myself looking for descriptions of these versions.

Patch Notes
Uh-oh, it seems that we are a bit behind schedule...


In the meantime, please have a look here instead:
Patch 1.29.0 - Liquipedia Warcraft Wiki
(please use 'chronology' to go from version to version)

 

[Lake Bodom]

Patch Notes
Uh-oh, it seems that we are a bit behind schedule...

Thank ye So much. Now i see why 1.26 is fine, there are nothing in further versions except Script verify, only var. connect/install fixes.
Thank you ALL. It is DONE with this question.

In the meantime, please have a look here instead:
Patch 1.29.0 - Liquipedia Warcraft Wiki
(please use 'chronology' to go from version to version)

I have read every single word, mostly again. Still no XP added(missed smth?). So as for 1.29+ i only wait for some guys once make XP supported. That`s it.

[General] - Help to combine Wc3 ver 1.26 with editor compilation
And see this please

 

[pyf]

I have already pointed out in another post more than one year ago, that Blizzard was referring to the end of mainstream support (and not the end of extended support) for XP and Vista, to back up their decision to drop support for these OSes.

As of this writing, for Windows 7 SP1:
- end of mainstream support: January 13, 2015
- end of extended support: January 14, 2020

... and for Windows 8.1
- end of mainstream support: January 9, 2018
- end of extended support: January 10, 2023


More info:
Windows lifecycle fact sheet - Microsoft Support

 

[nnnnnnoT_T]

Sad..
A lot of people who play war3 still using winxp and probably will never upgrade their pc

 

[Wrda]

Well I don't know about you guys but having a winxp pc at this year seems really just counterproductive since games and tecnology is developing faster.

 

[pyf]

For people like me who are into (among other things) modern third-party game engines for old video games, this is not really and issue.

 

[Zephyrius2412]

Well I don't know about you guys but having a winxp pc at this year seems really just counterproductive since games and tecnology is developing faster.

I'm totaly agree with you, the new OS allow more and more possibilities and better performances for games. So, for those who are on Windows XP, just buy Windows 7+ or simply crack it ! (please )

 

[Lake Bodom]

Well I don't know about you guys but having a winxp pc at this year seems really just counterproductive since games and tecnology is developing faster.

The "LOL" thing is i have just recently drowned damn Win10 in the Lake of Bodom and exactly got to the WinXP. The reason was that there are nothing to play on those platforms win7+

It`s on russian, one of the many many comments, the whole meaning is:

I mentioned it a couple of times in the threads of former patches^^ Full changelog mentioned they'd drop support for XP. It's an obvious blackmail to force you to get Windows 10

win10 automatically leads to have some proper "device", all about the money, its simple.

 

[Lazarator]

Guys, how do I download and patch the game without getting this stupid Public Test Setup? It's ruining the singleplayer. I have already tried to install it and I did, but it required me to crack the .exe so that I can enter the game. But do I have to crack it with a simple game crack or with a 1.29 patch crack? I don't want to play on Battlenet, just wanna patch the singleplayer so that I can play some existing and future custom campaigns that are to be made with this latest patch, as well as the game itself. Thanks in advice and sorry for being a bit newbie That's why I'm asking for assistance

 

[Daffa]

You cannot use crack as far as I am aware for 1.29 patches. go buy legit from battle net.

you don't need the PTR version unless you want to get involved with the tests.

 

[Lazarator]

You cannot use crack as far as I am aware for 1.29 patches. go buy legit from battle net.

you don't need the PTR version unless you want to get involved with the tests.

But I've already patched it to 1.27 version without a single problem and it didn't require me to crack it. So why's it such a big deal to patch it to 1.29? By the way, if it matters anyhow, I bought the game from the store, I didn't download it from the internet.