RE: Harpoon (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Modern] >> Harpoon 3 - Advanced Naval Warfare



Message


Spearfish -> RE: Harpoon (8/23/2010 3:36:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hermanhum

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spearfish

You should also check prompt SS-N-9 salvo striking British carrier group...Sirens are also hanging on balloons?

I believe that your reported SS-N-9 salvo is an error on your part; possibly confused with another scenario. There is not a single submarine in that scenario. I also looked for SS-N-9s hanging from a weather balloon and did not find any. Plenty of other invisible "Combat Weather Balloons", but none armed with SS-N-9.


From my AALog file:

quote:


14887
----------------------
Weapon Siren is resolving its attack against FF 1081 Aylwin
Attacking a surface target with base pH: 70%
Total countermeasures: -10%
Final pH: 60%
Roll: 7 (Hit)
----------------------
14887
FF 1081 Aylwin has been hit by a weapon
14887
FF 1081 Aylwin is Sinking!
14887
Siren has self destructed.
14887
Siren has self destructed.
14887
Siren has self destructed.
15091
----------------------
Weapon Siren is resolving its attack against FF 1068 Vreeland
Attacking a surface target with base pH: 70%
Shot down by point defense.
15103
Siren
Small airborne contact.
Contact lost.
Method: Visual
15104
----------------------
Weapon Siren is resolving its attack against FF 1068 Vreeland
Attacking a surface target with base pH: 70%
Total countermeasures: -10%
Final pH: 60%
Roll: 38 (Hit)
----------------------
15104
FF 1068 Vreeland has been hit by Siren
15104
FF 1068 Vreeland is Sinking!
15104
Siren has self destructed.


So I lost two Knox-class frigates destroyed by inexistent Sirens? Check these balloons more carefully! I am sure one SSGN Charlie-II hangs on the balloons over there... [;)]


quote:

ORIGINAL: hermanhum

In Clash of the Titans, it does not matter how you run (not 'play') the scenario, you are always going to lose 2 CVNs in the end. You could shoot down every enemy bomber and it would not affect the result. If you do not touch a single key and just let the AI attack you, you will lose the same ships each and every time. So, what's the point of 'playing' the scenario? You may as well rent a video to watch since the outcome is always the same and pre-ordained.


I also run this scenario and did not play it but only watched what was going on...two American CVNs were sunk. While JFK was actually hit by two or so AS-6, loss of Ike is very strange. I only got three bold of blue messages:

quote:


18179
CVN 69 Dwight D Eisenhower has been hit by a weapon
18179
CVN 69 Dwight D Eisenhower is Sinking!
18179
CVN 69 Dwight D Eisenhower has been detached from TG 401.2 [CVBG].


So it seems Ike was hit by some stealthy top-secret Soviet mega-weapon... [:D]

I think this screen-shot should explain a lot:

[image]local://upfiles/35891/F621EAFD0E2340838E63E0726D8AD389.gif[/image]




Spearfish -> RE: Harpoon (8/23/2010 5:08:23 PM)

Also Charlie II was found here:

[image]local://upfiles/35891/3DDA9A729D904BD491C5264E265CDE5F.gif[/image]

"Use full realism to play this..." [:D]




Erik Rutins -> RE: Harpoon (8/23/2010 5:19:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: hermanhum

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nebogipfel

But ctd´s for example bother me.

They bother me, too. But, to be honest, they are not even the worst problems on the List of Known ANW Issues). A CTD means a re-start from an old save while most of the other problems will plague the player throughout the game. [:(]

I absolutely want to see this game fixed. However, I will not squander a single second or cent on a supposed de-bugging process that is an exercise in pure futility by only reporting bugs via specific (buggy) databases.

I see that AGSI officialdom now follows this forum closely, so I know that this message will be read (even if it isn't understood):
AGSI,

You have wasted 6 years on ANW and it only gets worse and buggier with each subsequent release. The development process has always been conducted under 'the AGSI way' [which is always the same no matter how often you 're-organize' it].

When are you finally going to realize and accept that 'the AGSI way' simply does not work and be willing to explore other avenues?





I'd like to direct you to this post:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2498107

In particular, these sections:

quote:

Given this philosophy, we will still place a high value on feedback, and we always appreciate valid defect reports (aka bugs). However, because of Harpoon's complex history there are many issues that are specific to older databases or scenarios not of AGSI’s or Matrix’s making that haven't kept up with the modeling changes. We are responsible for the official databases and scenarios, and for informing the public regarding what changes each update entails. Third party designers are responsible for their own scenarios in this regard. If we have to choose between improving the simulation or maintaining backwards compatibility with third party data and scenarios, we will choose the former. We realize some fans of Harpoon may prefer to stay with older versions for whatever personal reasons, which is part of why we decided with the Ultimate Edition to include as many of the older Harpoon versions as we could fit into a single release. This allows us to meet the needs of both parts of the community - those that want the simulation to advance and those that want compatibility with older databases and scenarios.

It's also worth noting that in the past, we have heard a great deal from people who have never been to sea, who have never been trained as naval (or air) professionals, have never programmed or created a full database, with strongly worded opinions on how our simulation is supposed to behave. While constructive feedback from our customers is always welcome, we believe that the work by Bond and Carlson should be our guide in terms of how the simulation should work. As many Harpoon fans are aware, this community has seen some very unfortunate events in its history that have given rise to online flame wars, personal attacks and questions of intellectual property; both between community members and in terms of some copyrighted materials. We hope to see the end of this with the steps we are taking for the Ultimate Edition release and for the future of Harpoon. We want to make it clear that we will not accept non-constructive feedback on our official forums in the future. However well intended or misguided, this has caused harm to the game and the community and we will not allow that to continue.


quote:

Now as far as defects are concerned, there is a right way and a wrong way to report these. First, due to our limited resources and the seemingly endless permutations of data and game engines once third party databases and scenarios are added to the mix, we will automatically reject any claimed defects on our sites if they are not reproduced in the ANWDB or the HUD3 databases. We will take responsibility for correcting those defects that can be reproduced in one of the two aforementioned databases with the latest official release. We reserve the right to reclassify defects into bugs (something we'll prioritize for fixing), feature requests (stuff that folks want but the game doesn't currently have), user knowledge (i.e. user doesn't understand how the model works) and unsupported functionality (a user who does something with the game or scenario editor that we hadn't thought of and thus hadn't tested).


quote:


This also goes for our forums. As we explained above, we will no longer be accepting lists of bugs related to third party unofficial databases or scenarios. If you find an issue, please duplicate it with an official database and scenario before reporting it and please report it as noted above. Otherwise, you’ll have to seek out the owner of that third party product for assistance.

We want to provide the best possible simulation given the resource limitations. If you want to help, work with us, not against us. We have a long history of volunteers making a positive difference, politely and professionally. Our volunteers have received written credit, some swag, bragging rights, and a few even made some beer money for their efforts. We need scenario authors, database editors/authors, artists, testers and maybe some day, investors. Part of our philosophy and the policy stated above is to give credit to, and work with the members of our community who have put in their time to support Harpoon and who are willing to work with us as we continue to improve.


You've crossed this line again and again - despite claims that you are trying to help Harpoon, you are unwilling to actually work with us to help it. That's a shame as you could have had a very positive effect on the game and the community with the amount of time you've put in.

The net effect of the methods you chose instead is that you have harmed and are continuing to harm Harpoon and your past and current actions are splitting the community. Whatever your agenda, whether its self-promotion, some kind of grudge or just that you are genuinely misguided, this has gone far enough.

You are banned from this forum until further notice. Feel free to e-mail me at erikr@matrixgames.com if you have any questions.

To everyone else: We welcome help and involvement from the community and we hope that with the release of the Ultimate Edition, some past issues can be buried and a more constructive dialogue can emerge. We would love to have your help tracking down any issues in Harpoon - the only requirements are as posted in the Ultimate Edition thread. Because of limited development time, we need these reported per those rules.

Regards,

- Erik





Erik Rutins -> RE: Harpoon (8/23/2010 5:25:10 PM)

Locking up this thread - constructive discussions are fine, but this one headed off that track a while back.




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.578125