RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> John Tiller's Campaign Series



Message

marcbarker -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/15/2008 11:00:58 PM)

I don't feel that I should after purchasing the game. It was open in 1.02 after complaints I presume from PBEM it gets shutdown. So I just requested to get a refund. I know that won't happen. I asked Jason if he could supply the users who wished to have that file he said no. All this stemmed from was after 1.04 in a few weeks , there won't be anything new till 2010 or 2011. That is hard pill to swallow. So I all I asked was to update my version as required for my needs and uses , no one elses, as soon as an oob gets edited for a campaign game lets say that get. I mean the company10.oob etc it won't synch with the other players if you play tcip or even hot seat. So if I edit the OOB at the core level ,I wanted the ability as I did in the original version, be able to add core units and weapons. This feature is no longer available so it does not matter. This is not the game I thought I bought nor want. Lesson learned. Since the Talonsoft Games work on XP I will just update that. So Jason you made matrix lose a 500.00 every 6 month customer go to another company over a few files. I know my Paltry sum does not mean much to Matrix but it mean a great deal to me. It is amazing I got no official response from Matrix Itself just a User, paid or unpaid makes no difference. This type of customer relation is by far not good.

I do alot of programming and work in a very time sensitive field. We have to deal with customers who purchase 50 million dollar aircraft. Regardless of what we think as a group the bottom line is customer satisifaction not customer distate. This was not meant as a slam to you Jason, but the concept of a non Matrix person dictates to a paying customer how this should be.

Good follow up answers:
You know there were some valid points you stated and I will pass it on.
This is not my responsibility but your view will be heard and stated. If the powers that be should decide to allow this then it will be in a future update and frankly the release schedule is such that it probably won't be for awhile.

That can be handled alot better then just no or anything like that. I wish you luck in your future obligations and opportunities.

so mote it be
Out



tide1212 -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/16/2008 12:18:41 AM)

LATER!!!! 



Chris Wilson -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/16/2008 10:55:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: barker

Again...update to a modded weapons file platoon file that we as a user could do....


Only by means of an unsupported third party hack that was never, ever distributed with the game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: barker
but in your capacity of I don't know what has said No can't do that because of some PBEM cheating issues. That is not me nor some others that support this game by our purchase thereby supporting Matrix. You could supply the those files to those that wish it. Then you could be free of this whole ordeal


There are several reasons why some files remain encrypted (as per the TS original - excepting of course the original EF 1, and 1.01) some of the more obvious ones being ...

Firstly of course there is the obvious one you've picked up on, to stop PBEM cheats.
Next of course is to make sure that future patches/expansions install correctly and work.
Then to ensure that the various scenarios and campaigns remain balanced,
... and of course to ensure that folks who don't know what they are doing but would like to think they do don't screw up their install and end up with a non functioning game.

Without in any way denigrating the original versions you get far, far more with the Matrix version of the game than you did with the original - and at a much reduced price, if you don't like it tough.

Constructive criticism is one thing, the mere ranting of a person who can't get his own way is another, reflect on that.



marcbarker -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/16/2008 12:25:04 PM)

Whats to reflect on...I stated my opinion and that is that. By the way the coding was not that hard to figure out. Old reference docs from the TS gang help. Besides it does not mattter either way.



borsook79 -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/16/2008 4:21:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris Wilson
Firstly of course there is the obvious one you've picked up on, to stop PBEM cheats.

There are more convenient ways of doing that - the game could compare the checksum of those files if it does not match display an error message. Encryption is completely unnecessary, plus it is cumbersome not only for users who have to send in their files but for Jason who has to run them in the encryption tool. While I do not like the tone of Barker's posts I also can't understand the stubbornness with which a solution that's bad for everyone is defended.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris Wilson
Next of course is to make sure that future patches/expansions install correctly and work.

I think the installer overwrites those files, hence that point is moot.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris Wilson
Then to ensure that the various scenarios and campaigns remain balanced,

If a user modifies the files he knows it may affect the balance, and that's his problem. Plus he can modify other files that would affect the balance of scenarios.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris Wilson
... and of course to ensure that folks who don't know what they are doing but would like to think they do don't screw up their install and end up with a non functioning game.

Since other files are moddable, and they can disrupt the way the game work just the same the point is moot.



marcbarker -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/16/2008 5:10:14 PM)

Borsook, I agree with you and yes my tone was adament and on the verge because I could not get the point accross that whatever files are manipulated that they are overwritten after the install. Even with the encryption if you are not familiar with actual scenario size you can edit those and those PBEM modded files. The checksum option is by far the best solution. I just think that it should be up to the user. If he screws up his install then he reinstalls and all the mods he made are poof gone.

Marc



marcbarker -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/17/2008 2:35:48 PM)

Also another reason for the release of those files is adding nations. Those files have to be editiable to add various nations and their units. Just a thought. Not bashing or anything just stating a fact



Ladmo -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/18/2008 12:31:04 AM)

A word on the discourse.

I too am very much in favor of being able to mod with UPSing files (just a joke, people), but I would urge those who argue on behalf of this ideal to remember a few little suggestions. In our arguments, let us conduct ourselves as officers and gentlemen and, barring that, people. I think things would get less heated if personalities were not invoked by name, especially as we cannot really be sure who does what on this matter.

I was less than thrilled with the announcement of encryption, but I have decided to try to embrace the idea, to cooperate and see what they have in mind. I've done a modest amount of graphics which I contributed and I plan for bigger things, hopefully for Divided Ground, if Matrix is interested. I am hoping Matrix Legion Encyrption will be as easy as it is advertised. I have even suggested documenting any changes, just to let them know what I am up to. Last I checked, I wasn't getting an answer on that one. Perhaps everyone is getting a bit tetchy on this subject. I have just found in the past, on these kinds of boards that militancy begets militancy and soon nobody talks and everybody shouts. I'd just as soon get out of the hobby before involving myself in that.

That said, usually, the guys here are kinder, smarter, and better behaved and more generous than those on the boards dealing with my other pursuits. Show your colors and all will be well...though it still may be encrypted (another attempt at humor -feeble though it be...)

Edited Due to My Notoriously Bad Spelling!!!



tide1212 -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/18/2008 1:54:57 AM)

Ladmo howdy. I haven't seen you post in awhile. Your always the gentleman [sm=00000436.gif]

Tide1



Ladmo -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/18/2008 8:36:25 AM)

Muchas gracias, Tide1.

Generally, this is such a well-behaved site, with nice people, but occasionally we let our passions get the best of us - I know mine have. When I'm in my right mind I am a big believer in common ground (as opposed to Divided Ground) *gag* I hate to see feelings get injured, though I intensely admire the dedication of everyone in our debates.



marcbarker -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/18/2008 11:59:24 AM)

This is true Ladmo. High regards for warhorse, Huib and others. They are gentlemen extroidnaire. I just quit the Campaign series is all, with all my mods. I did send copyright papers on what I was doing so no problem there. Have Fun all. But I will play hot seat with my son. That is all that counts. Besides our attention is going to another facet of warfare. The stargeic Level. The Civil War.



sfinlay -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/18/2008 1:32:14 PM)

Seeing as how the new encryption has already been "broken", thus giving any tech-savvy gamer a considerable advantage over others, and human nature being what it is, any type of encryption will tend to be overcome by some purely for the sake of it,  would it not make more  sense to look into Borsooks more elegent solution to the cheating problem?



marcbarker -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/18/2008 2:00:39 PM)

I would have to agree with you. A simple routine could validate a checksum table that is read only and  if that routine sees that the sum is off it won't allow that scenario to be played by PBEM. Problem Solved. Anyhoo, Later taters



Jason Petho -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/18/2008 4:34:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ladmo

I am hoping Matrix Legion Encyrption will be as easy as it is advertised. I have even suggested documenting any changes, just to let them know what I am up to. Last I checked, I wasn't getting an answer on that one.


Apologies, Ladmo

Thought I mentioned that would be an excellent idea.

Jason Petho



Krec -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/24/2008 7:44:34 AM)

this discussion is way too deep for me i just aim and shoot




[sm=comp16.gif]



dgk196 -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/25/2008 9:24:44 AM)

We're supposed to aim too?

Its always something, if it isn't this than its that............

Dennis [sm=cool0013.gif]



marcbarker -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/26/2008 7:28:54 AM)

I just play and that is it..no muss no fuss



Temple -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/28/2008 11:46:34 AM)

OK, I can't take it anymore, I have to say something...

Gentlemen, it's not "mute" or "mote". It's "moot".

From the American Heritage Dictionary:
quote:

NOUN: 1. Law A hypothetical case argued by law students as an exercise. 2. An ancient English meeting, especially a representative meeting of the freemen of a shire. TRANSITIVE VERB: Inflected forms: moot·ed, moot·ing, moots
1a. To bring up as a subject for discussion or debate. b. To discuss or debate. See synonyms at broach45. 2. Law To plead or argue (a case) in a moot court. ADJECTIVE: 1. Subject to debate; arguable: a moot question. 2a. Law Without legal significance, through having been previously decided or settled. b. Of no practical importance; irrelevant. ETYMOLOGY: Middle English, meeting, from Old English mt, gemt. OTHER FORMS: mootness —NOUN
USAGE NOTE: The adjective moot is originally a legal term going back to the mid-16th century. It derives from the noun moot, in its sense of a hypothetical case argued as an exercise by law students. Consequently, a moot question is one that is arguable or open to debate. But in the mid-19th century people also began to look at the hypothetical side of moot as its essential meaning, and they started to use the word to mean “of no significance or relevance.” Thus, a moot point, however debatable, is one that has no practical value. A number of critics have objected to this use, but 59 percent of the Usage Panel accepts it in the sentence The nominee himself chastised the White House for failing to do more to support him, but his concerns became moot when a number of Republicans announced that they, too, would oppose the nomination. When using moot one should be sure that the context makes clear which sense is meant.


Other than that... Jason, it amazes me how you can have so much patience.

barker, you need to step back and gain a little perspective on this issue. You may not agree with some of the things that Jason and his folks have done, but they have resurrected a great old game series and made it viable for today's users. And they have pretty much done it out of love. I'm not saying it's perfect, but it's much better than it originally was, and it's getting better with each (free!!!) update.



borsook79 -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/28/2008 12:04:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Temple

barker, you need to step back and gain a little perspective on this issue. You may not agree with some of the things that Jason and his folks have done, but they have resurrected a great old game series and made it viable for today's users. And they have pretty much done it out of love. I'm not saying it's perfect, but it's much better than it originally was, and it's getting better with each (free!!!) update.


You're right, but probably this all could be avoid if any valid logical reason for this controversial decision had been supplied. Of course if such a reason exists. :)



Jason Petho -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/28/2008 3:08:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Temple

Gentlemen, it's not "mute" or "mote". It's "moot".


I was hoping to silence the issue with mute.

HA!

Jason Petho



1925frank -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/28/2008 3:16:10 PM)

A moot issue that won't stand mute. 




sfinlay -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/28/2008 7:46:15 PM)

To be fair, Barker had a perfectly valid point. Other issues about the game, e.g. visibility and assault rule changes, have been discussed at length and have subsequently been made optional. I don't see why the subject of encryption should be any different. But then the point will remain moot as long as some remain mute.  [:)]



Jason Petho -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/28/2008 9:14:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: flying scotsman

To be fair, Barker had a perfectly valid point. Other issues about the game, e.g. visibility and assault rule changes, have been discussed at length and have subsequently been made optional. I don't see why the subject of encryption should be any different. But then the point will remain moot as long as some remain mute.  [:)]


Self-serve encryption is available with 1.02-1.02b.

Regulated encryption is available with 1.03+ by posting on the board.

Jason Petho



sfinlay -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/28/2008 9:30:56 PM)

Unfortunatley encryption is also "self-serve" with 1.03+  By those that know how.
As I mentioned earlier, this could potentialy put alot of players at a very big disadvantage.



Jason Petho -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/28/2008 9:38:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: flying scotsman

Unfortunatley encryption is also "self-serve" with 1.03+  By those that know how.
As I mentioned earlier, this could potentialy put alot of players at a very big disadvantage.


A never ending cycle.

There will always be a way by those so inclined.

Jason Petho




sfinlay -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/28/2008 9:47:55 PM)

Exactly, that's the point i'm trying to make. Why have it in the first place when it doesn't do what it's suppossed to ?
Other ways to combat the problem have been suggested on this thread. Would it not be a good idea to consider these ?
I'm not particularly technically minded but  it seems to me Borsooks ideas, if feasible, would appear to keep everyone happy ?



Jason Petho -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/28/2008 10:06:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: flying scotsman

Exactly, that's the point i'm trying to make. Why have it in the first place when it doesn't do what it's suppossed to ?
Other ways to combat the problem have been suggested on this thread. Would it not be a good idea to consider these ?
I'm not particularly technically minded but  it seems to me Borsooks ideas, if feasible, would appear to keep everyone happy ?


It is a work in progress.

I am sure 1.05 will see additional measures.

Jason Petho



marcbarker -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/30/2008 5:50:17 AM)

1.05 hmmmmm would that be 2010 or 2020 or later......I just gave up...At least the other games Matrix has does not do this alot....Forge of Freedom...great Game, Easily modded and easily playable. I have not read any issues of where the CSA had 12 navies with Ironclad going against the USN with Frigates....or a partisan group with Henry Rifles....Like I said prior....it is up to the individual of how he plays the game. Why not have an option on Instal to dim the PBEM on unencrypted (Non Functional). That way the consumer can choos on purchase what version they want...does that make any sense to the OOB Mafia...lol...just kidding....I really go so disgusted with this series of games I just turned elsewhere with a matrix product. Matter of fact they even help with the files so you can learn more of the game. Now that is cool support...not a funnel type of support.



borsook79 -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/30/2008 11:00:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: barker

1.05 hmmmmm would that be 2010 or 2020 or later......I just gave up...At least the other games Matrix has does not do this alot....Forge of Freedom...great Game, Easily modded and easily playable. I have not read any issues of where the CSA had 12 navies with Ironclad going against the USN with Frigates....or a partisan group with Henry Rifles....Like I said prior....it is up to the individual of how he plays the game. Why not have an option on Instal to dim the PBEM on unencrypted (Non Functional). That way the consumer can choos on purchase what version they want...does that make any sense to the OOB Mafia...lol...just kidding....I really go so disgusted with this series of games I just turned elsewhere with a matrix product. Matter of fact they even help with the files so you can learn more of the game. Now that is cool support...not a funnel type of support.

While I also dislike the encryption idea, this is still one of the best games I've ever played and it is getting better and better with every patch. One should not let the annoyance over one small issue overshadow that which is after all most important - that playing the game is fun.



tide1212 -> RE: WEST FRONT update 2010-2011 (8/30/2008 12:51:12 PM)

Although as stated in ealier posts it's not the grunts on the ground doing the work on this title that made the decision it was the boys in the office so it is a moot,mute,Mote? point [;)] 
As for no other update until 2010-2020 [:D]  That again is the boys in the office. They want us working on other stuff ( And it's gonna be good [8D] ) as posted earlier. With at the most a half dozen people working on these titles at any time the estimates are not that far off [8|] 

So sit back fire up your Panthers and enjoy blasting those T34's or Shermans or whatever. Or go find something else to play [X(] it's all fun.

The veiws and opinions stated in this post are not in anyway the veiws and opinions of Matrix Games or their sponsers.
They are just mine and they might be wrong [>:]

Sorry to much coffee [sm=00000939.gif]



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.046875