Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: playable yet? Part II

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815 >> RE: playable yet? Part II Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: playable yet? Part II - 1/31/2009 8:38:13 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thresh

And I don't disagree with you there Borner.

What I do disagree with is the notion that complaining is the first, last and only option as "help" is wrong.

Todd




Who here has that attitude???

I have been giving suggestions going on five years now! "Help" isn't wrong and neither is giving negative reviews for a game which so deserves it!

Don't make things up simply because you disagree, ok?

(in reply to Thresh)
Post #: 211
RE: playable yet? Part II - 1/31/2009 9:08:05 PM   
Thresh

 

Posts: 393
Joined: 12/25/2006
From: KCMO
Status: offline
Settle down Veruca...

I have yet to hear of a movie reviewer who goes to see the same bad movie again and again (and again) to cry how bad it is. Heck, Joe Siegal walked out of the screening of Clerks II, did he go see the movie again so he could walk out of it again? Does a restaurant reviewer who savages an eatery go back the very next day to see if anythings changed?

Besides, you don't think this game bears any resemblance to Empires in Arms in the first place, unless I am somehow misreading
quote:

If that's what it is then Matrix should have marketing it as such and not tried to fool everyone into thinking this was EMPIRES IN ARMS, which it's not!!


so I'm wondering what your motivation for continually posting on these sorts of threads is....

Todd

(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 212
RE: playable yet? Part II - 1/31/2009 11:18:58 PM   
iamspamus

 

Posts: 433
Joined: 11/16/2006
From: Cambridge, UK
Status: offline
Nothing else better to do?


quote:

ORIGINAL: Thresh

Settle down Veruca...

I have yet to hear of a movie reviewer who goes to see the same bad movie again and again (and again) to cry how bad it is. Heck, Joe Siegal walked out of the screening of Clerks II, did he go see the movie again so he could walk out of it again? Does a restaurant reviewer who savages an eatery go back the very next day to see if anythings changed?

Besides, you don't think this game bears any resemblance to Empires in Arms in the first place, unless I am somehow misreading
quote:

If that's what it is then Matrix should have marketing it as such and not tried to fool everyone into thinking this was EMPIRES IN ARMS, which it's not!!


so I'm wondering what your motivation for continually posting on these sorts of threads is....

Todd


(in reply to Thresh)
Post #: 213
RE: playable yet? Part II - 1/31/2009 11:20:32 PM   
borner


Posts: 1485
Joined: 3/20/2005
From: Houston TX
Status: offline
what is your todd?   Mine is to see this game go from a "2" to a "4"



(in reply to Thresh)
Post #: 214
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/1/2009 12:34:36 AM   
Thresh

 

Posts: 393
Joined: 12/25/2006
From: KCMO
Status: offline
The game is never going to be a 4 for many people.  I'd be OK with a three plus...

The game is never going to be an exact port of the boardgame, and honestly I do think I'd want that, there were enough issues with it that caused many a FtF group break up. 

But there are some pretty critical rules missing IMO, and a more robust easier editor would be nice.  But the games in crawl/walk phase IMO.  It'll get there.

Just not fast enough for some people.

Todd

(in reply to Thresh)
Post #: 215
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/1/2009 1:22:58 AM   
borner


Posts: 1485
Joined: 3/20/2005
From: Houston TX
Status: offline
And opinions like that are exactly the point of this thread

(in reply to Thresh)
Post #: 216
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/1/2009 2:46:47 AM   
Thresh

 

Posts: 393
Joined: 12/25/2006
From: KCMO
Status: offline
Borner,

Is this where I call you a fascist pig?



Todd

(in reply to borner)
Post #: 217
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/1/2009 3:18:46 AM   
borner


Posts: 1485
Joined: 3/20/2005
From: Houston TX
Status: offline
Well, name calling is never becomming, and in most cases a sign of lesser intelligence        Pig I may be ok with, but you will need to explain the Fascist part... unless you broke into the Republican party database and pulled my ballot for the last election or something.

(in reply to Thresh)
Post #: 218
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/1/2009 12:26:51 PM   
Tarleton


Posts: 49
Joined: 12/6/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Thresh

Borner,

Is this where I call you a fascist pig?



Todd


Whatch out Thresh....use of the word Fascist, even in jest is a sure sign of high stress, brought on by playing a buggy game you still enjoy and seeing it posted on about 217 (now 218) times or so. I might recommed a trip to St. Helena to prevent a full blown stress attack utilizing epithets charging Authoritarian Political Affiliations.


< Message edited by Tarleton -- 2/1/2009 12:30:06 PM >


_____________________________

Tarleton
Unofficial and Unlicensed Matrix EiA Forum Consulting Psychotherapist

Haya Safari!

Marching song of the Schutztruppe Ost-Afrika

(in reply to Thresh)
Post #: 219
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/1/2009 1:56:57 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thresh

Settle down Veruca...

I have yet to hear of a movie reviewer who goes to see the same bad movie again and again (and again) to cry how bad it is. Heck, Joe Siegal walked out of the screening of Clerks II, did he go see the movie again so he could walk out of it again? Does a restaurant reviewer who savages an eatery go back the very next day to see if anythings changed?

Besides, you don't think this game bears any resemblance to Empires in Arms in the first place, unless I am somehow misreading
quote:

If that's what it is then Matrix should have marketing it as such and not tried to fool everyone into thinking this was EMPIRES IN ARMS, which it's not!!


so I'm wondering what your motivation for continually posting on these sorts of threads is....

Todd


Agreed. I have seen many a people go back to see a movie they thought was bad but they knew just had some potential, especially if they thought it could be reworked!!

(in reply to Thresh)
Post #: 220
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/1/2009 10:52:37 PM   
mr.godo

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 4/19/2008
Status: offline
I'm sure Saint Harry approves of the game as is. Ready to go. Look at the last release announcement. Just a few minor bugs to fix! Hurrah!

Everyone knows the great game designers are German! ;-)

Sorry. A big 'screw u' to panzer grenadier. Do some research on the software development life cycle. Development and bug fixing don't mix! I know they promised some features after 1.0, but all that says to me is planned feature creep. The game has inherent design flaws imo and they don't have the time to fix bugs and provide sensible enhancements. The gui is horrible. Awful. Ugly. Bad Bad Bad. That's just an opinion, but if you really like the gui they're using, maybe you should upgrade from Windows 3.11 and try something a little more modern.

The difficulty should be in playing the game, not using the game. EiA needs a 2.0.

(in reply to Thresh)
Post #: 221
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/2/2009 1:03:12 AM   
pzgndr

 

Posts: 3170
Joined: 3/18/2004
From: Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

Sorry. A big 'screw u' to panzer grenadier. Do some research on the software development life cycle. Development and bug fixing don't mix! I know they promised some features after 1.0, but all that says to me is planned feature creep. The game has inherent design flaws imo and they don't have the time to fix bugs and provide sensible enhancements. The gui is horrible. Awful. Ugly. Bad Bad Bad. That's just an opinion, but if you really like the gui they're using, maybe you should upgrade from Windows 3.11 and try something a little more modern.
The difficulty should be in playing the game, not using the game. EiA needs a 2.0.


Alright. Do you feel better now? There's really no point in wasting any time arguing with you and NeverMan and a couple others with an axe to grind, is there? Tell you what mr.godo, we'll all sit around and wait to see what happens in this bright new year. Maybe, just maybe, Marshall Ellis and Matrix Games will make an announcement terminating EiANW and start work on EiA 2.0, with a more gooder gui, whatever that is. Uh-huh. Pigs may fly too. Much more likely, however, Marshall Ellis and Matrix Games will proceed with game development as described and do exactly what they say they are going to do. With your blessings or without them. We shall see, yes? Onward. Zip-A-Dee-Doo-Dah, Zip-A-Dee-Ay...

(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 222
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/2/2009 1:47:37 AM   
Thresh

 

Posts: 393
Joined: 12/25/2006
From: KCMO
Status: offline
Godo,

Do you think Harry calls Matrix everyday to let them know how disappointed with the game, if indeed he is?

Or would once be enough?

Perhaps the difficulty in using the game is a PBKAC error on your end...

Todd


< Message edited by Thresh -- 2/2/2009 1:48:42 AM >

(in reply to mr.godo)
Post #: 223
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/2/2009 2:25:02 AM   
Tarleton


Posts: 49
Joined: 12/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thresh
Perhaps the difficulty in using the game is a PBKAC error on your end...


Thresh,

PBKAC?


_____________________________

Tarleton
Unofficial and Unlicensed Matrix EiA Forum Consulting Psychotherapist

Haya Safari!

Marching song of the Schutztruppe Ost-Afrika

(in reply to Thresh)
Post #: 224
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/2/2009 3:19:47 AM   
Thresh

 

Posts: 393
Joined: 12/25/2006
From: KCMO
Status: offline
Don;t they have Google on St. Helena?



Todd

(in reply to Tarleton)
Post #: 225
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/2/2009 3:31:31 AM   
Tarleton


Posts: 49
Joined: 12/6/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Thresh
Don;t they have Google on St. Helena?



Todd


Be careful....or I'll have to recommend yet another trip there for you.....


_____________________________

Tarleton
Unofficial and Unlicensed Matrix EiA Forum Consulting Psychotherapist

Haya Safari!

Marching song of the Schutztruppe Ost-Afrika

(in reply to Thresh)
Post #: 226
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/2/2009 3:05:01 PM   
mr.godo

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 4/19/2008
Status: offline
more gooder gui?

Graphical User Interface. It's the thing with all the buttons and colours on your screen. It's got nothing to do with the game other than to allow you to interact with the computer programming.

Matrix will do whatever they choose to, I'm not an idiot who would think that someone could expect to control a corporation in that way. Relax, panzer grenadier. What I would really like to know is what their development cycle is rather than hearing from you that it's a fly by the seat of their pants release cycle. Correct me if I'm wrong, but he's not putting in feature changes, he's just making fixes. A lot of fixes.

I've read it suggested that one of the excuses for the game not being as good as it should be, interpreted by some as not playable, is that it isn't a finished product. That might be a general understanding between the developer and the niche, but for people who don't want to buy into a development cycle, it may not be all that interesting. Let's change the thread to 'Is it a finished product?' since the game is technically playable.  I'm sure that will go over well.

(in reply to Tarleton)
Post #: 227
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/2/2009 8:58:51 PM   
Tarleton


Posts: 49
Joined: 12/6/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mr.godo
Let's change the thread to 'Is it a finished product?' since the game is technically playable.  I'm sure that will go over well.


Frankly this is the most sensible advice I have heard regarding the validity of this thread. That is essentially what this thread is about now, and "Playable?" or "Unplayable?" are black and white options which lead to the hyperbole and create a zero sum discussion which all of us (even Never Man....I see you over there Never Man) agree is not the situation at hand.

Mr. Godo, you do NOT need a trip to St. Helena. You deserve a day at Malmaisson.

Tarleton


_____________________________

Tarleton
Unofficial and Unlicensed Matrix EiA Forum Consulting Psychotherapist

Haya Safari!

Marching song of the Schutztruppe Ost-Afrika

(in reply to mr.godo)
Post #: 228
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/2/2009 9:23:32 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline
Sadly, I'm not hard to find. :)

Playable was always intended to be this, unfortunately, there are people who will always want to argue semantics when the conversation goes south for them. It seems we do have a few of those that keep posting here (for some reason or another).

(in reply to Tarleton)
Post #: 229
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/3/2009 2:59:29 AM   
borner


Posts: 1485
Joined: 3/20/2005
From: Houston TX
Status: offline
I think they just like to stir things up and watch the chaos!

(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 230
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/3/2009 3:24:32 AM   
pzgndr

 

Posts: 3170
Joined: 3/18/2004
From: Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

It's the thing with all the buttons and colours on your screen.


We all know what a gui is, thank you. What we do not know is what you and others mean by "bad" gui and what specifically a "good" gui should have. It means nothing to just say this or that is bad, for you. For me it is an acceptable gui; it is functional and handles the game functions well enough. I've seen worse, and the fancier ones with pretty graphics do not necessarily do anything better. The gui is not an important issue right now; it can be improved later after the game features are squared away.

quote:

I've read it suggested that one of the excuses for the game not being as good as it should be, interpreted by some as not playable, is that it isn't a finished product. That might be a general understanding between the developer and the niche, but for people who don't want to buy into a development cycle, it may not be all that interesting.


There's really no suggestion or excuses or might be about it. The deal between Matrix and the forum community was to get the game out as it was rather than wait another year or more. Sorry, that was the deal mr.godo. Go back and read the forums prior to December 2007 and see for yourself. Since you joined in April 2008, one has to wonder if you did any research yourself about this purchase - did you read the forums, the game reviews, anything? If you did, how could you possibly have reached the conclusion that you were not buying into a development cycle?? The game was released as is with issues to resolve, scenarios to add, an Editor to add, etc. Again, that was the deal, for good or bad. If anything, what most of us did not anticipate was how bloodly long this would take! But here we are, waiting still, continuing to improve slowly but surely, and like Old Man River the game keeps rolling along. And like Old Man River the course is not likely change, however slow it is going.

quote:

What I would really like to know is what their development cycle is rather than hearing from you that it's a fly by the seat of their pants release cycle. Correct me if I'm wrong, but he's not putting in feature changes, he's just making fixes. A lot of fixes.


You think I make this stuff up?? Marshall Ellis and Erik Rutins and occassionally David Heath have all spoken up repeatedly about this game's development, and have repeatedly acknowledged the known issues and have committed themselves to resolving them. Again, read the forums and see for yourself. So yes, I shall correct you because you are wrong. There are planned feature changes beyond just bug fixes - new scenarios to add, classic EiA scenarios and map to add, scenario Editor to add, TCP/IP network play to add, various standard and optional rules to add, new game options to add, AI enhancements to add, etc. But go ahead and don't listen to me. Use the search function and see what Marshall and Eric and David have had to say over the past couple of years. Do your own "research" for a change. Then ask yourself why you would buy into a development cycle when it was plainly obvious to a casual observer that this game was (and is) still a playable work-in-progress.

So, here we are. You can bitch about history if you want to but it won't change anything in the past. Better to stay focused on the future and stick with constructive criticism moving forward, yes?

(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 231
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/3/2009 1:02:34 PM   
borner


Posts: 1485
Joined: 3/20/2005
From: Houston TX
Status: offline
I could not agree more about being constructive.... as for being playable, that has been a matter of opinion, that people are allowed to debate here. As I said, personally, I think Marshall has put a lot of hard work in, and have moved from the non-playable group to marginally playable. Viva 2.33!!!!


(in reply to pzgndr)
Post #: 232
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/3/2009 2:57:05 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline
1. There's no question or doubt that Marshall has put a ton of work into this thing. No one is questioning Marshall's work ethic, that is certainly not in question.

2. I don't care what "deal" Matrix had with the community, this game is still in the development cycle and any respectable software company doesn't publish software in the development cycle. I don't think the company can or should use some "forum deal" as an excuse to why their product is not a finished one.

3. IMO, the GUI is so-so. At first I really thought it sucked but after awhile you just get used to it and it takes a serious backseat to all the other problems with this game.

4. While the game is getting better, the real problem comes in that Marshall/Matrix are still willing to question solutions/features which even the majority of the community thinks needs to be changed, this is a problem. This was their ORIGINAL problem too, which is why we have some craptastic EiH variation! Even more damaging then just the product is that Marshall/Matrix seems to be unable to learn from their mistakes, which is not good.

(in reply to borner)
Post #: 233
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/3/2009 4:41:07 PM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
4. While the game is getting better, the real problem comes in that Marshall/Matrix are still willing to question solutions/features which even the majority of the community thinks needs to be changed, this is a problem. This was their ORIGINAL problem too, which is why we have some craptastic EiH variation! Even more damaging then just the product is that Marshall/Matrix seems to be unable to learn from their mistakes, which is not good.


What, very specifically, are you referring to here?

Regards,

- Erik


_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC




For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 234
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/3/2009 5:56:29 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins


quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
4. While the game is getting better, the real problem comes in that Marshall/Matrix are still willing to question solutions/features which even the majority of the community thinks needs to be changed, this is a problem. This was their ORIGINAL problem too, which is why we have some craptastic EiH variation! Even more damaging then just the product is that Marshall/Matrix seems to be unable to learn from their mistakes, which is not good.


What, very specifically, are you referring to here?

Regards,

- Erik



For starters, the entire EiH disaster. But that's really just the beginning.

And rather than doing a classic EiA as a base and building on top of that EiH is used for the base and now classic EiA is going to be a "scenario" of that? Just seems inside out to me.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 235
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/3/2009 7:37:48 PM   
anarchyintheuk

 

Posts: 3921
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan


quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins


quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
4. While the game is getting better, the real problem comes in that Marshall/Matrix are still willing to question solutions/features which even the majority of the community thinks needs to be changed, this is a problem. This was their ORIGINAL problem too, which is why we have some craptastic EiH variation! Even more damaging then just the product is that Marshall/Matrix seems to be unable to learn from their mistakes, which is not good.


What, very specifically, are you referring to here?

Regards,

- Erik



For starters, the entire EiH disaster. But that's really just the beginning.

And rather than doing a classic EiA as a base and building on top of that EiH is used for the base and now classic EiA is going to be a "scenario" of that? Just seems inside out to me.



You were in favor of an EiA classic version? I didn't know that. Where's a sarcastic smiley when you need one? Congratulations, I made it here almost 5 years w/o green buttoning anyone and you're the first.

(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 236
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/3/2009 8:00:46 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk


quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan


quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins


quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan
4. While the game is getting better, the real problem comes in that Marshall/Matrix are still willing to question solutions/features which even the majority of the community thinks needs to be changed, this is a problem. This was their ORIGINAL problem too, which is why we have some craptastic EiH variation! Even more damaging then just the product is that Marshall/Matrix seems to be unable to learn from their mistakes, which is not good.


What, very specifically, are you referring to here?

Regards,

- Erik



For starters, the entire EiH disaster. But that's really just the beginning.

And rather than doing a classic EiA as a base and building on top of that EiH is used for the base and now classic EiA is going to be a "scenario" of that? Just seems inside out to me.



You were in favor of an EiA classic version? I didn't know that. Where's a sarcastic smiley when you need one? Congratulations, I made it here almost 5 years w/o green buttoning anyone and you're the first.



OH, that's where the ignore button is, thanks!

(in reply to anarchyintheuk)
Post #: 237
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/4/2009 12:28:04 AM   
pzgndr

 

Posts: 3170
Joined: 3/18/2004
From: Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

the real problem comes in that Marshall/Matrix are still willing to question solutions/features which even the majority of the community thinks needs to be changed, this is a problem


What problem? On behalf of Matrix Games staff, Erik Rutins just asked you what specific problem "the majority of the community" wants changed that somehow Matrix is refusing to consider, and you blew him off.

So the game was designed around EiH. So what. Now Marshall is adding the classic map and classic OOB scenario to the game, which is a change in response to the community and yourself, and this is still a problem??

Anybody else remember the Foghorn Leghorn cartoons? Remember the weasel running around slobbering and spitting all the time and not accomplishing anything? I'm just saying...








Attachment (1)

(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 238
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/4/2009 3:02:36 AM   
Dancing Bear

 

Posts: 1003
Joined: 2/21/2008
Status: offline
Well, Eric, I know you asked Neverman, but the question is too much to resist. Likely the shortest answer that the game came out with some critical bugs that took time to uncover and fix, and I think many of us who were not on the forum before 2007 were not prepared for the initial set backs this caused. I would say that the internal game testing (both the actual game and the concept) process failed in this case to uncover some serious problems, and may be flawed.

For a longer list of major problems, I would include the following (not in order of importance):

1. Bugs (this was almost licked in 1.04, but came back with a vengeance in 1.05)
2. Security during battles (the Marshall has proposed an acceptable fix due for 1.06)
3. Naval Evasion (also in proposed for 1.06?)
4. Very slow game PBEM speed (need to automate/compress some player interactions beyond skipping, not sure how this was missed in game design).

So, 1.06 might fix problems 1 to 3. Then a couple of improvements to speed up non-AI play (problem 4), and we'd have the game that most of us wanted about a year ago (1.07?).

Some outstanding second rank issues would be to get rid of automated single corps battles, too many insignificant minors willing to fight the Grand Armee to the death (slows game and is unrealistic), a better naval system (no light fleets and maybe naval chits?), and a better graphic interface.

The Marshall has come along way, and my sense is we are maybe over half way there.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 239
RE: playable yet? Part II - 2/4/2009 3:44:47 AM   
borner


Posts: 1485
Joined: 3/20/2005
From: Houston TX
Status: offline
I agree, half-way there is about right. In may ways I still think of us as playtesters. It is clear Matrix released this before it was ready, but that was a while ago. Plus, a project as complex as this was sure to have new bugs come out once more people started playing. I will say that if EiH ever goes away, we all need to have a party! 

my hope is that they get the thing de-bugged and working properly, then come out with an EiA version, then work on the AI and Naval system.

(in reply to Dancing Bear)
Post #: 240
Page:   <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815 >> RE: playable yet? Part II Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

3.016