Reckall

Yes, I happened to hear about "intellectual property": I work with intellectual property. I produce intellectual property for a variety of media - videogames included. I got a WGA nomination for it. I have to know the international law. I have a lawyer that assists me in these matters. Nothing of this is a secret. Google my name. Search the WGA(West) database. It is all in the open. When various parties contacted me re: "DB plagiarism!!!!!111" I drew from all these sources before answering them, explaining why my full support is still behind PDb. Did anyone ever tell you this about me? I guess not. I wonder how many other things they never told you. No, they never did. Speaking with the qualifications I just showed you, I can tell you that whoever created DB2K cannot lay a single claim on PDb. Wanna know why? Fine. I can show you by quoting law, paragraph and practical examples. But why you never just contacted me about it, ever? I mean, it would be normal for someone to her both sides of a story before making a call - exp. a story with so many twisted lies and a so low willingness to check for facts like this one is. BTW. True, HUD4 is officially supported by AGSI, as "Dawnguard" is the official expansion of "Skyrim". But "Skyrim" thrives also thanks to phenomena like this: skyrim.nexusmods.com Lucky game. Anyway, and I will repeat this once more, if someone wants my support for HUD4 he only has to ask. Hosting space, testing, advice... even legal counseling, now that I think about it Ah, one last thing: Yes, I think my so-called "ugh" site is helping. I also notice how if you write "ugh" here it comes out as "uhg". See? Childishness indeed.

Er... if the blame were on the game the PDb would flounder like everybody else. After offering my free help and money to help HUD4 only to see both refused due to delusional beliefs, the only thing left for me to offer is the major obstacle that, IMHO, HUD4 has to overcome if it wants to succeed: delusional beliefs. Herman has been described as almost obsessive-compulsive in his hard-work for Harpoon; but for some reason he should have started by copying someone else's instead of devoting the 1/1000th time it was needed to recreate a new DB from scratch. Especially now, in the 2000s, when info is much more readily available. Fantasy-minted concepts like "Plagiarism! Copyright violation!" etc. weren't distributed in the Harpoon community by the PDb. Actually they were initiated and still actively perpetuated by people who, right now, are working on a competing project, hate both Matrix and Harpoon, and only want to see both to flounder. Interestingly enough, by mindlessly embracing their agenda people end up going nowhere in their efforts to do something for Harpoon. I'm now following this thread out of idle curiosity. My opinion on the biggest torpedo HUD4 just ate? Gunny's pre-canned rant about "those plagiarists". It cut with a single stroke some among the biggest venues of help HUD4 could get - HarpGamer included! I'm sure that, somewhere, someone is rubbing his hands and laughing. I will give you an hint as who: not someone who has Harpoon's well being as his main interest. Meanwhile my offer of help to HUD4 - testing, hosting space, you name it - is still and will always be open. You write: True. But one can also have issues when you create something with your hard work and someone else - acting out an open and freely admitted agenda - claims that it was "his own". Of course no one ever considers this possibility. I daily hear the "plagiarism!" speeches parroted as facts by people who never even bothered to contact the other side for their version. Then everybody marvels because their efforts to improve Harpoon go nowhere at maximum speed (ironically enough, everything in The Plan to Beat PDb is to BE the PDb...) Robert McKee (someone that Mark should know well) once wrote how one should work with "principles", not "rules". A rule says "This is the truth!" and acts mindlessly out of it; a principle says "check the facts" and acts according to the findings. Act out of rules instead of principles and you will end up with a broken vision of what's real, a broken DB (one stems from the other after all...), and a broken community. And meanwhile, somewhere, someone is still rubbing his hands and laughing.

You've just been show (quite graphically) how the HUD fails scenarios within 5 minutes of play. If this is acceptable to you, then fine. However, there are very good reasons why people are not playing those scenarios (something, correct me if I'm mistaken, you are wondering about). You've just been shown three. If you wish to ignore them, that is your prerogative. So do I, if you have read my post. Well, my feeling is that HUD4 did a better job at attacking itself than the Sparrows did against those T-34s You were annoyed with someone who actually told you exactly what he would do in the previous video? And that he actually took the time and effort to load your scen, run it, and make a video for you? (and I won't mention the time I spent in checking both before putting them on the channel) True (even if a player should be aware of how the resources allowed are supposed to work), but it is still a bug somewhere in the scenario/DB coupling. A bug that can jump out again in a different occasion with even more unwelcome consequences. Personally I find bug chasing so time consuming that I'm always glad when someone lends an hand, but that's me. My job, in real life, includes vetting scripts and texts so to ensure that they are of publishing-level quality (*). It is a long and hard job: sometimes I spend nights checking a script, literally, for bugs (AKA "plot holes"). And yet the hardest part is still when I point out the problems to the author. For some reason they always consider it a personal attack of sorts. It isn't. The truth is more simpler: either they hear about these problems from me (or another editor) or they will hear about them from the public - usually with total silence. There is no way around this. None. Not in writing and publishing, not in modding, and not in database/scenario creation. OTOH, there are billions of ways to explain "How something could have been if only... (insert evil entity here on whom put the blame)" (*) This, BTW, allows me to know a couple of things more about copyright than those who liberally use words like "plagiarism" and "ownership" over the internet. I'm always amazed by the ignorance that surrounds these issues. You can see an example in this very thread: Did anyone ever tell the Subsim owner, Neal Stevens, that he is "hosting copyrighted files without permission" and checked for his reaction? Does anyone here even know that Neal and DonG spoke about this ages ago, and that this a non-issue since when Italy won her last World Cup? Does anyone knows why? I guessed so.

Beside improving the database, you could consider making it work. I feel it would be a good first step. Re: where to post HUD4 scenarios, here (my personal Harpoon site), Files of ScenShare, SubSim, and SimHQ accept submissions from anyone. We are not competing with anyone, they only draw us as such If you want a space on my site for your HUD4 scenarios just ask. You certainly were not banned for posting your HUD scenarios to FoSS, already.

Well, since I helped Herm both to test your scenarios and make the videos, I'll put my 2 cents in. First of all, I would like to point out what I feel being a misconception: True, but this is what the "equipment failure chance" is for. It should be a chance not a rule; because, were it a rule, in real life they would check the equipment and find a fix. If, both in RL and in game, a stray failure becomes a rule then it means that something is broken. Which is what I feel is happening here. [bTW, we think to have found where the "Sparrows vs. T-34" bug lies. But it is not our DB, so we didn't really delve into the problem.] Still, there is something I don't understand. True, we all know how Herman plagiarized others' hard work, caused the crack of Lehman Brothers, killed Kennedy and lives in Edmonton. And, true, we all also know both how three of these notions are delusional, and from where the delusions come from. However, you still went to him when looking for someone to actually TRY/TEST your scens. When you found it, instead of discussing it, you run back here to the folks who initially ignored you. You re-tested both those problems YOURSELF and confirmed them. Now, you are being told that they aren't bugs and that everything is functional. What's the point? To be honest I find a bit surreal to have talked with Herman but not with you about the problems found in your scenarios running under HUD4 - exp. after you asked us for an opinion. Regarding the Emilio Jacinto: ..I saw the same thing when I tested the scenario - mostly because it is the very first thing one notices when he runs it. But, who knows, maybe that ship will move as long as you wave the pertinent spreadsheets at it! Cheers, Vince

As someone who was watching from the sidelines but did some work for it, I can confirm. Proof is: you will not find my name near anything I did An interesting side of the story is that the best way to understand the worldview of the guys involved one only has to read what they accuse others of. When they do this, they actually describe themselves in an eerily exact way. It comes from the idea that if you are the center of the universe then all the universe must be like you, I guess.

Feel free to do it - everything I post on the internet is for free

What I honestly do not know is if the AEGIS radar looks vertically, too. If so, it wouldn't even be limited by the "radar horizon", but it could track objects coming down from space. Then there would be the question if the AEGIS system's software is programmed to intercept them. They did tests vs. ballistic missiles, IIRC. It is an academic discussion as of now, but it could become interesting if, in the future, weapons will be deployed on satellites.

What does this have to do with Megan Fox? Focus people Obviously the baddies have a sophisticated guidance system ... which could be very useful with Megan Fox Anyway, she is very beautiful but I find her as lively as a fire idrant. The geek in me is more into wild girls like Milla Jovovich

From my part, use whatever you wish of the ideas I propose. I make my living in a totally unrelated sector. There, you have it in writing. Re: the netiquette of the debate itself, however, what about "quoting" other games' mechanics as examples? During the IRC chat we named some third-party games (not all of them naval based) as possibile guidances. However, I understand that it would be completely different to name other intellectual properties in a debate about a HCE rewamping ("hey, let's do this like they do in game XY!...") I think that quoting other games as examples would be acceptable, but I would like some guidance here.

There are several places to start from: Google groups - looking for "Harpoon" starting in 1991 http://groups.google.it/groups/search?hl=i...=N&start=10 [Keen eyes will spot a report for a bug that still hasn't been fixed ] Then "The Convergence Zone" mailing list archives (1990-1997). http://firedrake.org/harpoon/cz/ Then the HULL (Harpoon Users League List) mailing list archives (1999-present) http://www.teuton.org/mailman/listinfo/hull In the latter you can find my "homage" to Harpoon's early years (written in 2003) * * * I spent last week-end putting order in my collection of HC/97 scenarios, in anticipation for HC2002 (yes, at the moment I'm single ), and in the proceedings I re-read almost all of the fictional storilines/"probable futures" created by the designers of the scenarios in the early '90s. PC Harpoon choose a bad time to come out, with Perestrojka on the rampage and the Cold War almost over, so many of them were quite creative! What follows is a collection of the most recurring, interesting and funny themes. Specific scenarios' references are obviously omitted - if you are one of the designers, please don't be offended: I did the same myself when creating/refeering games for Harpoon Third Edition on paper. They were times when: - Gorby got couped/killed/exiled by "Old USSR hardliners" in about 75% of the scenarios. - Said "hardliners" then proceeded to rebuild the WHOLE Soviet military machine in about ten days or so, and on the eleventh day they lauched a surprise attack on Europe. - Optionally, ex-Soviet Union "disintegrated", and rogue newly-formed republics attacked NATO/whatever with immense and totally unrealistic assets. - Sometimes the war broke out for no discernible reason ("We are at war for reasons which are not of your concern. Your mission is...") - It could happen that the surprise was SO total that the US had NO assets in the Atlantic, and UK had to go against the Soviets all alone. - If so, USA actually had no assets available for WWIII due to the turmoil caused by the Second Civil War. - NATO/BLUE orders usually started with "FROM THE THEATRE COMMANDER TO TF COMMANDER YYYYYYY". SOVIET/RED orders where missing three times out of four ("Blue side only...") and one third of the times they where present they started with "FROM THE KREMLIN: TIME HAS COME TO KICK OUT THE IMPERIALIST DOGS FROM EUROPE!" - One out of five of the (very rare) order file for the USSR/RED side when opened said "This scenario is for the blue side only". - There were more submarines in the Baltic than in the Atlantic - but all diesel ones. - "Red Storm Rising" reigned, and if the scenario didn't start with Keflavik already controlled by the Soviets, then NATO had to race to Keflavik before the Soviet got there... - ...Meanwhile, US subs where attacking the Kola Peninsula with Tomahawks... - ...This, of course, if NATO wasn't "resurging" and sending one to three battlegroups into the Barents Sea. - One scenario out of three had a convoy in it. - Captains escorting UNSPEAKABLY VITAL convoys to what-the-place were actually advised to ignore the "ships running aground" messages. - The USA had good reasons to be nervous about the Northern Front, since Norway used to seceed from Europe and join the Soviets/CSI at random times, and for no discernible reason. - Once a week a submarine from either side defected, and had to be hunted down/protected until the defection was complete. - If "Red Storm Rising" didn't reign, then "The Fleet Series" by Victory Games did, and Beirut and Naples received a convoy every other day. - For reasons unknown Qaddafi launched AGAIN random missile strikes against Lampedusa/Sicily, calling the full fury of Italian Navy upon him (the first part was realistic, the second wasn't). - Norway was either fully occupied by soviet forces on W+1, OR still hanged by a thread on W+45 - On W+40 or so there still were three US carriers and two Kievs in the Atlantic, all with a full complement of airplanes and hi-tech weapons for their battlegroups. - George Bush Sr. was serving a second mandate, and a Second Confrontation with Saddam erupted for some reason or other. - Saddam had NO weapons of mass distruction. - WWII battles from Midway to the Battle of Britain used to be refought regulary. - Soccer World Cup "classics" like Italy vs. France, Germany vs. UK and France vs. UK didn't happen on the pitch but on the battlefield . - If France was not "the only ally left to US" then it was US bitterest enemy. - Conflicts between Peru and Ecquador were fought in the Indian Ocean! - China and Japan didn't exist. North and South Korea existed on paper ONLY if UK had to go alone against the Soviets AND if the USA weren't split by a new Civil War (event which had allowed to them to send ALL, and I mean ALL, their assets to take part in the new Korean War). - Guidelines from the "Harpoon Scenario Wharehouse" stating "There should be an ASCII text file associated with the scenario. This text file should have the victory conditions and some background information and anything else you wish to add" were the ONLY text file to be found in the .ZIP

Today I checked the TF2 trailer on Youtube. It would seem that the SAM firing routines of the US Navy are bugged http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gb2fUOW1ne4&feature=fvst (look at 0:27 - 0:50) Best portrayal ever of a CVN hit by Russian missiles anyway (even if here they are evil Transformers).

Well, blow ME down if they didn't stole this image... Harpoon 3 Article. Page 2 ...from my preview of Harpoon ANW written for Armchair General. http://www.armchairgeneral.com/preview-har...val-warfare.htm I created it with the editor (with Herman's help) because I wanted to match the screen that you can see in the Kennedy's CIC image posted on its right.

Sea: The Kirov and her sisters. The lines were beautiful, and the ship was a fearsome platform in all areas of naval warfare.