RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message

mike scholl 1 -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/19/2010 3:58:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ade,

The notion that this product was knowingly put out there with bugs is pure bunk. I'm sure somebody thinks so and sent you PM's, but it's just nonsense. The craziness about faked moon landings has more credibility.

As far as the price tag, it has a far lower price per hour of play cost than any other game for the average player who finds that it is their cup of tea.

There you get to the possibility of a demo. Demos take time (and money) to produce, and with the depth of this game I for one am not certain how they could pull it off. The best way to get a feel for the game has been for prospective buyers to visit the forum, and quite a number have both done so and posted their questions.



I think you just made his case for a demo.... And at approx. $100 per copy, it's not an unreasonable request to "take a test drive" before purchasing. It might not be practical, but it's certainly not unreasonable...






Shark7 -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/19/2010 4:31:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ade,

The notion that this product was knowingly put out there with bugs is pure bunk. I'm sure somebody thinks so and sent you PM's, but it's just nonsense. The craziness about faked moon landings has more credibility.

As far as the price tag, it has a far lower price per hour of play cost than any other game for the average player who finds that it is their cup of tea.

There you get to the possibility of a demo. Demos take time (and money) to produce, and with the depth of this game I for one am not certain how they could pull it off. The best way to get a feel for the game has been for prospective buyers to visit the forum, and quite a number have both done so and posted their questions.



I think you just made his case for a demo.... And at approx. $100 per copy, it's not an unreasonable request to "take a test drive" before purchasing. It might not be practical, but it's certainly not unreasonable...






I agree, providing a demo would be a good thing. However, stealing a pirated copy and saying that you are 'using it for a demo' just reeks. For every person that is at least good enough to eventually buy a copy, you probably have 99 that never will. Why should they, they managed to cheat the system...

And for those that think people complaining about pirated copies are holier than though, how about we let someone steal money or property from you and see how much you like it. Because that is exactly what it is.



rader -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/19/2010 4:39:00 PM)

Won't this just get more search hits at a huge fatigue and ops loss cost? I think 100% is a bit excessive! Your boys need their R&R [:)]

But it might be a good idea to test different % search settings.


quote:

ORIGINAL: hunchback77


quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

I'll probably run a few more tests on search altitude (15,000 ft vs. 6000ft vs. 1000 ft) in the next couple of days, and maybe on radar or something when I get some free time. However, I do want to highlight that even if search arcs aren't working as intended, this is no way reduces my appreciation for the amazing accomplishment that is AE!

The amount of effort and devotion that went into this game is truly stagering and humbling.

Well done, AE team!! [:)]




Please try a test with search set at 100% Rader. Thank you for the testing you are doing.




vettim89 -> RE: Search arc statistical test (9/19/2010 4:43:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vonTirpitz

In case anybody missed it, one of the developers may have found something related to this issue in the tech thread.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2574254



Reading that post is fascinating as far as what michaelm said. I am have tempted to set up a test with my search arcs set backwards just to see what happens.


As to the cost of the game, I laugh. Yesterday my brother and I journeyed to Columbus, Ohio to watch THE Ohio State Buckeyes dismantle the Ohio University Bobcats on the football field. The game was a yawner and was over by half time. So lets see here:

Tickets $160
3/4 tank of gas: $32
Breakfast: $20
Dinner: $40
Sovenier Mugs: $18
two Cokes during the game: $8
Coffe/snacks on the trip home: $8

That's $286 for what was truly an enjoyable day. So $100 for a game I have played almost every day since I purchased it seems amazingly cheap. The "$100 is a too much" line of thought comes only from the fact that it is more than what other titles are typically selling for these days. Well my reply is that AE is more than what other titles are typically these days

PS: people pay $180 or more a year to play MMORPG and don't feel ripped off. WHy is a one time outlay of $100 so horrible?



Buck Beach -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/19/2010 5:05:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: n01487477

As for asking for your money back, well good luck with that - you obviously still play and are here -- so you must be getting some use out of it. Can I ask for money back on a half eaten hamburger? Yes I know unfair comparisons again ... but then you could always have a rant-fest with the guys who bought Empire TW... and have much more right than you to do so.




and, might lead to the use of the old pirate copy again as he continues to defend the use of it.



Sardaukar -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/19/2010 5:11:27 PM)

Well, at least search arc issue is being addressed by michaelm, so hopefully we see this fixed in next patch. [8D]



ade670 -> RE: Search arc statistical test (9/19/2010 5:17:52 PM)

Guys,

Just going through a few PMs - the name "elf" appears several times as one of the Devs that put this software together - is he around still to contribute some exact info regarding the search arc problem.

Good to read some of the responses, which appears to have stirred a few of you to life.

WE a few points:

1. This is not a bug - this is a fundemental flaw - a bug suggests that it is a minor function set back, this search arc issue is most more significant, especially given the on supplementing this feature with visuals on map etc - I would be interested to see how this plays out on an original release version of the Game - has anyone managed a duel install to put this into practice yet?

2. To say that I have stolen anything is unsound - I purchase all of my software and am proud to own original versions of everything - in this instance, given some mixed reviews as to playability (having not played UV or WITP previously) I sought out a demo. No demo = find trial version - like I said as soon as I trialled it , I purchased the sofware - so this piracy has actually achieved a sale in my case. In fact many software companies increment fixes in their software in order to hinder those that crack their codes. Perhaps this is what has happened in this case - I have now had several PM stating that the original WITP_AE was released to market with known issues and in many cases beta tested were banned from posting on the forums when they disagreed with the original release (the air war is still broken)

3. Value for money - I see your point , but take the football game, if the big screen failed half way through and play didn't follow that which was stated in the programme , I reckon you would eventually stop going...

- finally, I guess I would be more than happy to get involved but it needs more exacting standards, can one of the devs generate a very basic 'test' scenario that we can all use under pre-defined parameters so there is some meat on the bone to address this issue head on

Ade




Rainer -> RE: Search arc statistical test (9/19/2010 6:08:45 PM)

1 You owe a big apology to rader for stealing his thread.

2 You owe a big apology to the developers for your insulting remarks like
quote:

WITP_AE was released to market with known issues


3 You owe a big apology for insulting the community
quote:

stirred a few of you to life


4 You owe a big apology to Matrix and the developers for stealing their work.

5 Green Button. No question for me.



stuman -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/19/2010 6:46:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin

Wait, you bought the game because they added the Z button for arcs ? [X(]


And the cup-holder.


Wait a minute, all you guys got cupholders ?



hunchback77 -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/19/2010 6:51:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

Won't this just get more search hits at a huge fatigue and ops loss cost? I think 100% is a bit excessive! Your boys need their R&R [:)]

But it might be a good idea to test different % search settings.


quote:

ORIGINAL: hunchback77


quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

I'll probably run a few more tests on search altitude (15,000 ft vs. 6000ft vs. 1000 ft) in the next couple of days, and maybe on radar or something when I get some free time. However, I do want to highlight that even if search arcs aren't working as intended, this is no way reduces my appreciation for the amazing accomplishment that is AE!

The amount of effort and devotion that went into this game is truly stagering and humbling.

Well done, AE team!! [:)]




Please try a test with search set at 100% Rader. Thank you for the testing you are doing.




The reason I wanted you try 100% search Rader was that I had a suspicion that the searches were being run opposite of what we were specifying as Michaelm has confirmed. In your test case all 27 Nells searching 100% the wrong 320 degrees would not have spotted the 4 US task forces any better but all the Nells searching North 340-020 degrees in actuality searching 020-340 degrees would difinitely have had more hits.
I for one and I am sure others run 100% search for 2 to 3 days during critical times in the game, big Carrier battles or checking in front of Important Invasion Task Forces. Please re-run your test after the patch to confirm that the Devs have fixed the Search Arc bug, the results should be interesting. Thank you Rader for helping track down quite any important bug in the game. Good work Rader.



Nomad -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/19/2010 7:42:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: stuman


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin

Wait, you bought the game because they added the Z button for arcs ? [X(]


And the cup-holder.


Wait a minute, all you guys got cupholders ?


Of course we got cupholders. How else could we drink beer while doing turns? [8D][;)]



stuman -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/19/2010 7:53:30 PM)

Well I feel left out. I have been using my old " WHAM " cds as coasters for my beer.

Wait, I mean those are my wife's cds.



Terminus -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/19/2010 8:08:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ade670

lets not get off topic here fellas - I love this game and am really annoyed to see a function I have used so extensively turn out to be useless - End of chat

but seeing as you are keen to know.

In the absence of a demo I download a ripped edition as a trial and loved it so much that I purchased it - more or less in the same week

Really not sure what the drama is although a demo would have saved me at least 20secs of my life (20secs = the time it took to locate aformentioned item)

Damn me to hell......

Ade




By admitting you downloaded an illegal copy, you confessed to theft. Why should we see you as anything other than a liar when you claim to have bought the game afterwards?




pws1225 -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/19/2010 8:19:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nomad


quote:

ORIGINAL: stuman


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin

Wait, you bought the game because they added the Z button for arcs ? [X(]


And the cup-holder.


Wait a minute, all you guys got cupholders ?


Of course we got cupholders. How else could we drink beer while doing turns? [8D][;)]


... burp



The Gnome -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/19/2010 8:29:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: stuman


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin

Wait, you bought the game because they added the Z button for arcs ? [X(]


And the cup-holder.


Wait a minute, all you guys got cupholders ?


I feel outraged that I spent this much money on a game and got no cupholder. How could the devs release something with such an obvious and glaring flaw?

Clearly they are evil and have brocoli in their socks.



Terminus -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/19/2010 8:32:05 PM)

Also dumber than squirrels...



The Gnome -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/19/2010 8:34:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Also dumber than squirrels...


I don't see a need to insult the squirrels.



frank1970 -> RE: Search arc statistical test (9/19/2010 8:54:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rainer

1 You owe a big apology to rader for stealing his thread.

2 You owe a big apology to the developers for your insulting remarks like
quote:

WITP_AE was released to market with known issues


3 You owe a big apology for insulting the community
quote:

stirred a few of you to life


4 You owe a big apology to Matrix and the developers for stealing their work.

5 Green Button. No question for me.


Couldn´t have said it better.



witpqs -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/19/2010 10:28:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

I think you just made his case for a demo.... And at approx. $100 per copy, it's not an unreasonable request to "take a test drive" before purchasing. It might not be practical, but it's certainly not unreasonable...


No way. The cost of a demo is probably quite large.

And you managed to jack up the price by 25%.



ade670 -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/19/2010 10:51:13 PM)

This is significant - u guys all got Mechandise - I got demo - tell u what - let's release current version as demo ( features removed such as search arcs ) fix it and then put out new branded version which states - "product of more than one country"



pws1225 -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/19/2010 11:06:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ade670

This is significant - u guys all got Mechandise - I got demo - tell u what - let's release current version as demo ( features removed such as search arcs ) fix it and then put out new branded version which states - "product of more than one country"


no my friend, we did not get 'merchandise', we got a game ... a game that had a developer (michealm) respond to a user's question in a matter of days. you won't see that in a "Halo" piece of merchandise. I may be new to this franchise, but am very impressed with the involvement these guys have in developing and improving what they have built. Quite frankly, you are out of your league here, imho.



ade670 -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/19/2010 11:17:11 PM)

Still a game - just like halo

It's not real - sorry to burst your bubble

How much real life hours have been wasted setting up search arcs ???

Got to hurt !



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/19/2010 11:32:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sredni

Well, this thread was on track and useful until a bunch of holier then thou's jumped on something that has nothing to do with the thread at hand, and isn't anyone's business anyways (seriously, are you the cops? the devs? the neighborhood watch?).

Thank you all for derailing an informative thread.


"On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog."

However, you could have continued the thread itself, but instead decided to comment on the off-thread nature of some comments made. What does that make you?

If you'll look up-thread, you'll see that I, in addition to responding to the twerp in quesiton, asked seveal questions nobody has responded to. Chief among them, how does anyone, including the OP doing the testing, know that the ordered search arcs are always being completed? That seems to me to be a pretty important assumption is comparing to a random search with end-result data alone.



ade670 -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/19/2010 11:44:39 PM)

does this work

[image]local://upfiles/33432/59DB857D67574FA18AFE8265859454BB.jpg[/image]



USSAmerica -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/20/2010 12:37:21 AM)

Are you guys still feeding this troll?  Don't feed the trolls!  Feed the green button!  [8|]



jetjockey -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/20/2010 1:25:45 AM)

First time I've noticed the "Green Button." Consider it fed!



JWE -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/20/2010 2:57:58 AM)

This thread has gotten out of hand. Unfortunately Joe W is on walkabout, so I pushed this up to Matrix management with recommendations.

Forum regulars should know what this means, so now is the time to refrain from what ya really might wanna say.



USSAmerica -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/20/2010 3:09:31 AM)

Do you mean saying things like, "In before the lock?"  [:D]



Knavey -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/20/2010 2:07:54 PM)

Green button and IBTL.



pompack -> RE: Search by surface ships' floatplanes (9/20/2010 2:30:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Knavey

Green button and IBTL.


Oh I green-buttoned it days ago, but it hasn't helped because everyone is feeding this troll.

Fortunately Michael was fixing the bug while we were fixating on the troll [8|]



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.3125