Complete descriptions of game settings, key commands, etc. available?

[CV32]

Why is it that nobody will simply answer the questions? That is, is it normal behavior? And is there any way to make the player's auto-defenses work comparably to the AI's defenses?

 

JoeK, stop and think for a second. No one would be asking you to produce test scenarios or savegames if what you were reporting was normal or expected behavior.

 

I would have thought (hoped) that was painfully clear by now.

[Joe K]

Why is it that nobody will simply answer the questions? That is, is it normal behavior? And is there any way to make the player's auto-defenses work comparably to the AI's defenses?

 

JoeK, stop and think for a second. No one would be asking you to produce test scenarios or savegames if what you were reporting was normal or expected behavior.

 

I would have thought (hoped) that was painfully clear by now.

It also has been painfully clear that it is futile to submit saved games when they reportedly don't reproduce their symptoms elsewhere, nor to continue trying to create test scenarios (on the HUE version, I assume) since we can't invoke the effect(s) in question there (so far, at least).

 

That's why I was attempting a different tack, in hopes of finding out which peculiarities might not be limited to my own installation, because clearly there is no point in wasting time on those that are (supposedly) only local manifestations.

 

Of course, if the presumption is that the entire litany of puzzling effects and behaviors all are local issues (and not due to any improper settings or "user error"), then the entire situation is moot... and perhaps I really should stop playing the game. (Is there a Harpooner's Anonymous or some such... to help me break the addiction?)

[CV32]

It also has been painfully clear that it is futile to submit saved games when they reportedly don't reproduce their symptoms elsewhere, nor to continue trying to create test scenarios (on the HUE version, I assume) since we can't invoke the effect(s) in question there (so far, at least).

 

If you have convinced yourself of that (though I must admit, I am not sure how, since you haven't given much effort at all in trying to help us help you by producing either test scenarios or savegames), then there is not much that can be done and we might as well stop trying.

 

That's why I was attempting a different tack, in hopes of finding out which peculiarities might not be limited to my own installation, because clearly there is no point in wasting time on those that are (supposedly) only local manifestations.

 

I don't see how repeating the same open ended questions - without giving folks the ways and means of being able to help you in any effective fashion - is a different tack. But we're apparently done here, so never mind.

 

Of course, if the presumption is that the entire litany of puzzling effects and behaviors all are local issues (and not due to any improper settings or "user error"), then the entire situation is moot... and perhaps I really should stop playing the game. (Is there a Harpooner's Anonymous or some such... to help me break the addiction?)

 

I think its called Usenet.

[TonyE]

It also has been painfully clear that it is futile to submit saved games when they reportedly don't reproduce their symptoms elsewhere, nor to continue trying to create test scenarios (on the HUE version, I assume) since we can't invoke the effect(s) in question there (so far, at least).

 

I go back to an issue report you posted, http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...amp;showbug=197 where you provided no metrics when given a GE built just to look at your issue. You said you ran through 12 times before posting the issue, how about running it twelve times again with the logging and see what results you get and whether they make sense? I fully expect you are seeing the game working correctly in that issue report, not some your computer only strangeness (I still don't buy the argument that your computer is special in that way).

 

Provide the logs and the summary and I bet you'll convince yourself that the right number of F-15s are being downed. 12 plays is 24 x F-15. You see from the logging that the final hit chance is 80%, that means 19-20 shoot downs of the 24 planes if you hit exactly 80%, more likely even over 12 runs you won't be normalized right at 80%, consider 17 shot down at 70% (lucky rolls for F-15) and 21-22 at 90% (poor rolls for F-15). Then hopefully you can mark the issue as working as intended or if you still don't think it is make a case for why. (to me these expected results mesh perfectly with your stated results "Near 100% hit rate for AI's AAMs")

 

This is what we're saying, you have the ability to provide metrics and specifics and saves and scens but you are not. It is even more puzzling when you are handed the tools on a silver platter and don't use them to provide the metrics that are needed.

[mavfin]

When I was starting to play the game a lot in the 1995-1997 time, I used to have some times I wondered some of the same things as Joe does now. However, once I looked deeper, it could almost always be explained by:

 

1) engagement cycles; i.e. speed of incoming and altitude of incoming dictating how many times I got to shoot at it.

2) point defenses (Kirov has a lot more point defenses than even the older Ticos w/o ESSM, for example)

3) engagement geometry; i.e. a ship on the outside of the formation getting hit, and the protecting missile ship was having to do a crossing engagement to protect it, or aircraft tail-chasing missiles. 'winders do fairly well from the front on high-speed Russian missiles, but can't even catch Sunburns from behind.

 

Usually, once I looked at those factors, any other difference was small enough to be just luck in PK, bad or good.

 

I didn't play anything newer than the 1.63 Mac version until 2009, when I got this computer, and VMWare, so I could run Windows XP in a VM. The new engine still runs engagements about the same way, and this time actually pays attention to horizons, so it's more even than before. Before, if I remember correctly, Soviet missile ships would start firing Grumbles at Harpoons from 60 miles out, because the AEW helo could see them. (Maybe I remember wrong. I know you couldn't loiter at Vlow at 30 miles in the old days!) Now they don't fire on Vlow targets till a lot further in (~23nm?), while Shipwrecks come in high, but you don't get many engagement cycles anyway, because they're so fast, and Sunburns...well, there's a reason they call those Aegis-killers. When you can't fire till ~23 nm, and they're coming in at Mach 2, you don't get to fire but one or two batches of missiles from the vertical launchers, let alone a Mk 26.

[Joe K]

It also has been painfully clear that it is futile to submit saved games when they reportedly don't reproduce their symptoms elsewhere, nor to continue trying to create test scenarios (on the HUE version, I assume) since we can't invoke the effect(s) in question there (so far, at least).

 

If you have convinced yourself of that (though I must admit, I am not sure how, since you haven't given much effort at all in trying to help us help you by producing either test scenarios or savegames),

That statement is totally false.

 

As far as game saves, every game save that I have submitted over the past few years that demonstrated an issue repeatably here has been met with the claim that it works normally when played "anywhere else". To me, repeating such efforts is futile.

 

... then there is not much that can be done and we might as well stop trying.

I believe I already said that (a few times).

 

That's why I was attempting a different tack, in hopes of finding out which peculiarities might not be limited to my own installation, because clearly there is no point in wasting time on those that are (supposedly) only local manifestations.

 

I don't see how repeating the same open ended questions - without giving folks the ways and means of being able to help you in any effective fashion - is a different tack. But we're apparently done here, so never mind.

First off, the new-tack questions are not "the same". Nor are they requests for investigations (unfounded opinions to the contrary notwithstanding). Is it unreasonable for me to ask questions about how to do something, or why something behaves as it does, without having to provide some sort of extensive documentation? I mean, yeah, if it turns out to be something truly abnormal that has to be looked into... but from my perspective, that's generally not the case - especially not at the outset.

[Joe K]

It also has been painfully clear that it is futile to submit saved games when they reportedly don't reproduce their symptoms elsewhere, nor to continue trying to create test scenarios (on the HUE version, I assume) since we can't invoke the effect(s) in question there (so far, at least).

 

I go back to an issue report you posted, http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...amp;showbug=197 where you provided no metrics when given a GE built just to look at your issue. You said you ran through 12 times before posting the issue, how about running it twelve times again with the logging and see what results you get and whether they make sense? I fully expect you are seeing the game working correctly in that issue report, not some your computer only strangeness (I still don't buy the argument that your computer is special in that way).

 

Provide the logs and the summary and I bet you'll convince yourself that the right number of F-15s are being downed. 12 plays is 24 x F-15. You see from the logging that the final hit chance is 80%, that means 19-20 shoot downs of the 24 planes if you hit exactly 80%, more likely even over 12 runs you won't be normalized right at 80%, consider 17 shot down at 70% (lucky rolls for F-15) and 21-22 at 90% (poor rolls for F-15). Then hopefully you can mark the issue as working as intended or if you still don't think it is make a case for why. (to me these expected results mesh perfectly with your stated results "Near 100% hit rate for AI's AAMs")

 

This is what we're saying, you have the ability to provide metrics and specifics and saves and scens but you are not. It is even more puzzling when you are handed the tools on a silver platter and don't use them to provide the metrics that are needed.

 

I am sorry. Between some SNAFUs with the launcher and GE 052 downloads, and some other issues yet to be resolved, I have not even gotten to try that case yet. And I (we) still haven't gotten the launcher figured out and working yet, albeit our time has been spent mostly with the other issues.

 

Regarding the platform-specific theory, it's interesting because early on you guys were saying that it was my machine that was screwed up - and I was doubting that... Now that I'm seeing evidence that it is machine-specific, you guys are saying that it's not. Very interesting...

 

BTW, In case you missed any of it, these are the reasons for my current opinions of the matter:

 

1. Few other people have reported seeing the anomalies - at least not to the extent that I see them.

 

2. You have said that none of my submitted game-saves have exhibited the reported problems when run on other machines. I have more or less confirmed this when running them on our two other machines - although they do hint of some of the behaviors, yet certainly not repeatably as they do on my primary machine. When I re-run them on my machine, they again demonstrate the problems repeatably (albeit, when given enough time and pre-work).

 

3. We have not been able to get any hint of the problems on the HUE version (which is on my "imaginary friend's" machine, along with one of the other two copies of Demo 050), either when running the relevent scenarios or when trying to create test scenarios that have only a few groups involved - even though they are the same platform types (I think - although the database might be different) as the ones involved in the problems in the game-saves.

 

4. There is some rather perplexing behavior of the VM manager on my machine, which is a bit suspicious in light of the nature and onset of the anomalies in the HCE Demo. Unfortunately, I have no more idea how to confirm any cause-and-effect connection than I have about why the VM Manager is so active in the first place. So this remains just a nagging suspicion, that tends to support the machine-specific view.

 

Bottom line is that, as far as I know, most of these anomalies in HCE (well, except maybe for the question about the relative level of response of the AI's and player's automatic missile defenses) manifest only on my primary PC - or at least are far more regular occurances there. That's the basis for my current opinion, FWIW... and why I have not pursued the anomalies any further, nor requested any further investigation, pending emergence of any new evidence to the contrary.

[CV32]

If you have convinced yourself of that (though I must admit, I am not sure how, since you haven't given much effort at all in trying to help us help you by producing either test scenarios or savegames),

 

That statement is totally false.

 

Which? That you've convinced yourself of the futility of helping us help you, by giving us something to work with (e.g. the 'metrics')? Or, that you haven't put much effort into helping us help you, by giving us something to work with (e.g. the 'metrics')? Either way, I invite you (ask you, implore you) to prove me wrong. Please. Really.

 

As far as game saves, every game save that I have submitted over the past few years that demonstrated an issue repeatably here has been met with the claim that it works normally when played "anywhere else". To me, repeating such efforts is futile.

 

How many times have you done that, exactly? Submitted a test scenario or a savegame? Tried using the logging feature? Used the GE specifically built for you? If the answer is not 'every single time I've been asked', then please don't bother raising the issue at all. You're wasting our time.

 

First off, the new-tack questions are not "the same".

 

When the questions are premised on an assertion that the AI is stacked against you, a la:

 

JoeK: "And is there any way to make the player's auto-defenses work comparably to the AI's defenses?"

 

That premise sounds awfully familiar to me and is therefore classified as 'old tack', imho.

 

Nor are they requests for investigations (unfounded opinions to the contrary notwithstanding). Is it unreasonable for me to ask questions about how to do something, or why something behaves as it does, without having to provide some sort of extensive documentation? I mean, yeah, if it turns out to be something truly abnormal that has to be looked into... but from my perspective, that's generally not the case - especially not at the outset.

 

JoeK, let's get something clear, I mean, crystal clear. This is where HCE development happens. Here, at HarpGamer.

 

If a forum member reports a bug or makes an allegation that the game is not working as he thinks it should, or his question is premised on something alleged as 'abnormal', then we like to investigate that issue. It's part of what we do.

 

And we invite (need) player participation in reporting bugs or flaws and we really like to elicit their assistance in getting to the bottom of it. Frankly, we could use the help, and it makes the process easier for everyone. In many cases, in fact, its impossible to figure out if a real issue even exists without the test scenario or savegame. We really don't have the time or inclination to be chasing our tails.

 

You appear convinced that the effort required on your part in this respect is either too 'extensive' or futile. In reality it is neither, and I can only say that if you're really not prepared to do the legwork, by at least giving us something to work with (the 'metrics', as Tony says), then PLEASE do not post an 'issue' at all. Full stop.

[CV32]

Regarding the platform-specific theory, it's interesting because early on you guys were saying that it was my machine that was screwed up - and I was doubting that... Now that I'm seeing evidence that it is machine-specific, you guys are saying that it's not. Very interesting...

 

I think your memory is flawed (not your PC memory, your biological memory). We were, from the start, and remain, skeptical that any of your experiences with 'invincible' AI and so forth are due to your PC installation. That said, I still think maybe your PC is a CyberDyne Systems model, so who knows?

 

I also note that you were pointed to the logging features, the 'show all' (Ctrl Alt S) keystroke, and the hot keys in general back in October and November 2009, and yet, here we are ... again.

[Joe K]

That statement is totally false.

 

Which? That you've convinced yourself of the futility of helping us help you, by giving us something to work with (e.g. the 'metrics')? Or, that you haven't put much effort into helping us help you, by giving us something to work with (e.g. the 'metrics')? Either way, I invite you (ask you, implore you) to prove me wrong. Please. Really.

I was referring to your assertion that I have not put any effort into addressing these problems. I don't don't know what additional "proof" of this would be any more satisfactory to you... as you seem to have your opinion well-entrenched.

 

As far as game saves, every game save that I have submitted over the past few years that demonstrated an issue repeatably here has been met with the claim that it works normally when played "anywhere else". To me, repeating such efforts is futile.

 

How many times have you done that, exactly? Submitted a test scenario or a savegame? Tried using the logging feature? Used the GE specifically built for you? If the answer is not 'every single time I've been asked', then please don't bother raising the issue at all. You're wasting our time.

 

Test scenarios: Unknown overall, but none since I've been using the HCE Demo (as you may recall, there is no Scenario Editor to use with the Demo).

 

Saved games: Five that I recall off-hand. All blown off as not showing the respective problem.

 

Logging feature: I assume you refer to logging features that are available through the launcher only? In such case, none - as we don't have the launcher set up and working yet. And this is only a recent "request" of yours anyway.

 

Why ask for further game-saves when past ones all have reportedly failed. (You're wasting my time in that case).

 

First off, the new-tack questions are not "the same".

 

When the questions are premised on an assertion that the AI is stacked against you, a la:

 

JoeK: "And is there any way to make the player's auto-defenses work comparably to the AI's defenses?"

 

That premise sounds awfully familiar to me and is therefore classified as 'old tack', imho.

That is colored by your own presumptions, and was not intended to be a claim of the AI being stacked against the player (or me?). From my view, that was an entirely legitimate question.

 

Nor are they requests for investigations (unfounded opinions to the contrary notwithstanding). Is it unreasonable for me to ask questions about how to do something, or why something behaves as it does, without having to provide some sort of extensive documentation? I mean, yeah, if it turns out to be something truly abnormal that has to be looked into... but from my perspective, that's generally not the case - especially not at the outset.

 

JoeK, let's get something clear, I mean, crystal clear. This is where HCE development happens. Here, at HarpGamer.

 

If a forum member reports a bug or makes an allegation that the game is not working as he thinks it should, or his question is premised on something alleged as 'abnormal', then we like to investigate that issue. It's part of what we do.

 

And we invite (need) player participation in reporting bugs or flaws and we really like to elicit their assistance in getting to the bottom of it. Frankly, we could use the help, and it makes the process easier for everyone. In many cases, in fact, its impossible to figure out if a real issue even exists without the test scenario or savegame. We really don't have the time or inclination to be chasing our tails.

 

I am sorry you feel that way, but in my defense, as soon as it became apparent (to me anyway) that certain anomalies were limitied to my machine, I did stop pursuing those, did I not? If you choose to lump all of my inquiries into that category, well, that's your problem... and so nothing much that I can do about it.

 

 

You appear convinced that the effort required on your part in this respect is either too 'extensive' or futile. In reality it is neither, and I can only say that if you're really not prepared to do the legwork, by at least giving us something to work with (the 'metrics', as Tony says), then PLEASE do not post an 'issue' at all. Full stop.

 

I am sorry that I (we) have not had the time (to date) to fully respond to all the requests that you guys have made. But rest assured, we have been trying, as time permits. So far, we've managed to:

 

- Resurrect two other test computers and get the HCE Demo 050 up and running on them, and a copy of his HUE version of HCE up and running on one of them.

 

- We have spent a lot of time trying to get a test scenario in HUE that showed any of the anomalies. So far, no joy at all.

 

- We have spent a considerable amount of time trying to get my game-saves on the two HCE 050 Demo versions to exhibit any of the problems that they show on my machine, and have seen only hints of them, but totally unrepeatable.

 

- I put in six or seven hours one day (to the detriment of some other projects) in trying to meet your demand to "prove" the situations that I observed re the THB scenario, apparently unsucessfully.

 

- I have been trying to perform the THB tests that VitP requested. but with a number of problems.

 

- We have been trying to get the launcher up and running on at least one of the machines with the HCE Demo, but ran into several snags - unfortunately including some "User Error". In any case, we still haven't gotten it to start up right.

 

So, your assertions that I'm not willing to do the legwork are grossly unfair, to say the least. I'm beginning to understand loud and clear why my "imaginary friend" became so upset... and so I will comply with your request for a full stop. Everything stops right here and now.

[CV32]

You appear convinced that the effort required on your part in this respect is either too 'extensive' or futile. In reality it is neither, and I can only say that if you're really not prepared to do the legwork, by at least giving us something to work with (the 'metrics', as Tony says), then PLEASE do not post an 'issue' at all. Full stop.

 

So, your assertions that I'm not willing to do the legwork are grossly unfair, to say the least. I'm beginning to understand loud and clear why my "imaginary friend" became so upset... and so I will comply with your request for a full stop. Everything stops right here and now.

 

Works for me, but let's be clear about why. See bolded portion of my text above.