Jump to content
COMBATSIM Forum

Herman Hum

Members
  • Content Count

    342
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Herman Hum

  1. It is interesting to note how problems are reported as though you discovered them through your own efforts. It is probably worthwhile to summarize at this time. 1) The reported database base problems were proven to be 100% accurate and true in all instances. 2) None of the reported database bugs have been corrected within the HUD4 database. 3) Every HUD scenario is afflicted and none of the reported database bugs have been corrected for any of the associated scenarios.
  2. The link was wrong. It should have been: Because of that oversight, I'll give you your third (and final) freebie. It's not the job of any player to test a database or scenario. The database bug is the inabilty of the MH-60S Knighthawk to fire the AGM-114A missiles at any ship under any speed, altitude, range, or circumstance. The fact that these ASROC and MH-60S bugs are so easily found with just the most superficial testing is simple testament to the incredible bugginess of HUD4. My time has been wasted thrice finding bugs that were discovered within minutes. I will not be wasting any more time pointing out such glaringly obvious database errors especially since any more efforts yield no results. If I have my time wasted encountering them, you can spend your own time actually hunting them down yourself. (a.k.a testing) Once again, I will pre-empt the usual stupid excuses of: 1) It has been reported (since it isn't a fix) 2) It will be fixed in the future (since the scen was released for play TODAY) 3) Find another weapon that actually works (since it isn't role of a player to need to FIND something that actually works)
  3. Tried to run this scenario and immediately stopped it as soon as this previously reported bug was encountered, as per the established doctrine regarding HUD4 scenarios and database bugs.
  4. Over 5 new aircraft, ships, submarines, facilities, classes, countries, and weapons have been added to the Harpoon3 PlayersDB with the official Database editor authorized by AGSI. The PlayersDB remains the sole functional Harpoon database. Get the PlayersDB-HUE on SubSim, HarPlonkHQ, or SimHQ. Get the PlayersDB-ANW on SubSim, HarPlonkHQ, or SimHQ. Get the PlayersDB on SubSim, HarPlonkHQ, or SimHQ. Additions include: EA-18G Growler USN 09 Su-33UB Flanker D RUS 10 - countless changes and improvements guaranteed not to crash any earlier scenario built with the PlayersDB Primum non nocere [First, do no harm] - Prime Directive of the PlayersDB. Harpoon HUE users can get the: Complete PlayersDB Harpoon HUE Library Harpoon ANW users can get the: Complete PlayersDB Harpoon ANW Library Harpoon3.6.3 users can get the: Complete PlayersDB Harpoon 3.6.3 Library Don't forget the Supplemental images for the PlayersDB at: ANW-and-HUE-Images "Harpoon for Dummies" channel PlayersDB for Harpoon on Facebook Frequently Asked Questions FilesOfScenShare
  5. Another video After-Action Report for Harpoon3 has been added to the YouTube Harpoon for Dummies channel to help Harpoon players navigate the complexities of the game and to deliver the best possible playing experience. You can watch the complete scenario: This AAR is an experiment with "giganto-scenario" play, but ANW isn't the best iteration to do that, as events will show. Dealing with triple threat axes can be a bit confusing over a large area.
  6. Or, worse. You might have to try and run through another HUD4 scenario.
  7. I'd be interested in the command sequence for the scenario editor which solves the aforementioned bugs within the HUD4 scenarios. This bug within the the ScenEditor command corrupts the entire scenario when the Re-build All Units Command is used in HUE. All land units re-named to default
  8. It is apparent that any thoughts or observations showing the multitude of problems within the HUD4 scenarios are conveniently ignored and not addressed.
  9. I notice that you have yet to repair the problems found and reported within your scenarios:
  10. AAR: Bay of Pigs A Harpoon3 scenario By Freek Schepers (who prefers AARs in a textual format) [ul]On April 14th, 1961, six ships departed a Nicaraguan training camp where they had spent months training with CIA instructors. Brigade 2506 was to land at the Bay of Pigs in southern Cuba, to overthrow Castro's regime. 16 B-26C Invader medium-range bombers were ready in Central America to support their invasion. Cuba's army and militia, while numerically strong, were thought to be poorly motivated and likely to switch sides when the invasion took place. Cuba's air force was poorly equipped, had low servicability, and would be destroyed on the ground by the rebel B-26s and by US strikes on the main airbases. After all, it was the CIA who had organised the invasion. In reality, President Kennedy had inherited the operation from his predecessors and, while unwilling to pull the plug, he severely limited the support that could be given and personally ordered a veto against air strikes on Cuban airbases.[/ul] http://forums.gamesquad.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=38013&d=1352050646&thumb=1&stc=1 My orders were to gather my scatter ships, conduct reconnaissance on the landing site, destroy army units defending the site, and bring the amphibious ships safely to the Bay of Pigs so that they can unload over four hours. http://forums.gamesquad.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=38012&d=1352050585&thumb=1&stc=1 I ordered my ships to rendezvous at RefPoint Zulu and launched a C-47 Dakota and an A-26K Invader to conduct the beach reconnaissance. The ships employed varied speeds in hopes of arriving at the same time. Even though I only used the Happy Valley base, the multiple rebel bases would (hopefully) prevent the enemy from knowing which axis of approach I would choose. The American CVBG Essex was in communication with me, but not under my command. http://forums.gamesquad.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=38011&d=1352050584&thumb=1&stc=1 The Invader arrived over the beachhead and started a low-level search. It was soon shot down by an undetected enemy unit. I did not even know if it was an aircraft or a ground unit. The Dakota suffered the same fate. This was already proving to be a tough scenario. http://forums.gamesquad.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=38010&d=1352050584&thumb=1&stc=1 A group of Invaders flew in and attacked a torpedo boat detected by the destroyed Dakota. Since I had no other mobile assets to protect the landing ships, I ordered them to attack the boat. She was such a small craft that I had a difficult time pin-pointing her location. When I finally did, the Invaders saved their heavier bomb ordnance and strafed the little boat into oblivion with their massed machine guns; performing not unlike their role in World War II. http://forums.gamesquad.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=38009&d=1352050583&thumb=1&stc=1 The invaders moved on towards Cuba. Meanwhile, the an enemy A-26 Invader was detected flying over the CVBG Essex! I classified it Hostile to help the AI prosecute it. Evidently, it the AA gunners were taken by surprise as not a shot was fired. However, a flight of four Skyhawks did launch and shot down the snooper. http://forums.gamesquad.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=38018&d=1352051652&thumb=1&stc=1 The flight of Invaders conducted reconnaissance, detected elements of the Cuban 3rd Brigade, and attacked with only minimal success. CVBG Essex launched a flight of four Skyhawks for Close Air Support to attack the 1st company. They scored hits, but lost two in the effort. The infantry company was capable of sustaining 500 damage points. In ANW, an attacker has to deliver a significant amount of damage in a short interval in order to overwhelm a ground unit. Otherwise, the unit miraculously regenerates totally! Therefore, I had to gather every surviving A-26K Invader and load them with the most potent ordnance: Mk82 bombs and Mk77 napalm (a.k.a. Snake and Nape) http://forums.gamesquad.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=38017&d=1352051652&thumb=1&stc=1 A flight of 14 Invaders was launched. This had the potential to deliver 700 points of damage. Hopefully, it would be sufficient to overwhelm the infantry company. On their approach, they flew over a gunboat Jose Moran! Compared to the virtually unarmed landing ships, this was like a dreadnought. Therefore, it had to be taken out! The flight leader immediately led an attack on the gunboat. As before, they reserved the heavy ordnance for the ground units and dove for a strafing run. The amount of firepower delivered was tremendous with the massed .50 cal machine guns, but the gunboat fought back bravely under the assault. The gunboat exploded, but not before killing one of her attackers. http://forums.gamesquad.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=38016&d=1352051651&thumb=1&stc=1 The surviving Invaders pummeled the hapless infantry and then took out two defending AAA sites and a Watchtower on their egress. http://forums.gamesquad.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=38015&d=1352051650&thumb=1&stc=1 The landing ships made their approach to the beach only to come under fire from hidden shore batteries. Marope took serious damage as they all turned to flee. Marope did not get out of range quickly enough and fires aboard consumed her. The flotilla thought it had escaped the coastal defences when another ship started taking fire. They ran, again. Another ship died by fire while a third sustained significant damage. The Invaders re-armed and returned to sweep the beaches, again. This time, they located a heavy flak unit, an artillery group, and two platoons of T-55 main battle tanks. The deadliest units were the flak and artillery batteries. They died first under a flurry of bombs and napalm. The enemy armour was hammered into submission through strafing attacks. http://forums.gamesquad.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=38014&d=1352051649&thumb=1&stc=1 Once clear of apparent opposition, the landing ships re-entered the bay and completed their landing operations. Victory was granted. It was a close-run operation as the loss of one more vessel would have doomed the invasion. Many thanks to The AlaskanBiker for a fine match and to Freek Schepers for writing such a fine scenario. For those fans who enjoy a visual AAR format, a new video for "Bay Of Pigs" has been added the YouTube Harpoon for Dummies channel to help Harpoon players navigate the complexities of the game and to deliver the best possible playing experience. You can watch scenario:
  11. The 60th NEW Harpoon scenario of the year! 14.0 A Friend in Need Sea of Dragons Battleset - Two Brothers - China invades Taiwan China flexes its muscles with lots of exercises around Taiwan. Although diplomatic objections are raised by a number of nations, the exercises continue. Then, the PRC declares a maritime blockade: any ships entering the waters around Taiwan will be stopped and 'contraband' goods confiscated. 'Contraband' is loosely defined, but vessels carrying coal, oil, and LNG would appear to be favoured targets. As coal, oil, and LNG stocks fall, the Taiwanese navy starts to escort convoys through the blockade zone. Then, something goes wrong. A convoy is intercepted and somebody fires on someone they shouldn't have. The PRC immediately launches an invasion fleet. This scenario was inspired by the situation depicted in the Sea of Dragons publication from Clash of Arms. Author: Herman Hum Harpoon HUE users can get the: Complete PlayersDB Harpoon HUE Library Harpoon ANW users can get the: Complete PlayersDB Harpoon ANW Library Harpoon3.6.3 users can get the: Complete PlayersDB Harpoon 3.6.3 Library "Harpoon for Dummies" channel PlayersDB for Harpoon on Facebook Frequently Asked Questions FilesOfScenShare
  12. Fixes to the HUD4 or game code would be nice, but are not necessary in order to write functional scenarios. Change the things you can and let others decide if they want to fix their own work. Regardless, I will keep everyone apprised on the current state of HUD4. If it is fixed, I'll make it known If it remains infested with bugs, I'll do the same so that everyone can make their own decision.
  13. As stated previously, that excuse is pure nonsense and rates the same as AGSI's claim that bugs will be fixed in the 'next' release - for another $70. The scenario was released now, run now, and needs to work now, instead of some ficticious future date. If it only works with some hypothetical future release, then either don't release it or say when it should be played in the future i.e. "Do not Open until Christmas 2016" Actually, they all are as I deal in scientific fact and the immutable laws of physics and mathematics but it is nice to see that you think your agreement is necessary to validate a bug. However, you are right about the deleterious effect a faulty ASROC has on gameplay. I have no intention of putting up with dishonest people who claim that the HUD4 is functional when it so obviously is not and then piss and moan about wanting help while they are really just looking for validation. Nor will I tolerate those whose only qualification is to claim, "It didn't happen" when there are videos, test files, crash reports, and images that show otherwise. It is true that anyone can fix bugs, make videos, write scenarios, edit databases, and help players. The difference is attitude, willingness, and effort. Oh, there are plenty who go around boast how great they are, proclaim their self-importance, and bemoan how Harpoon would collapse without them, but when it comes right down to actually doing anything, there are few who answer the call (and none are from the HUD world.) Pretty pointless since Guerin is neither willing nor competent to fix the single ASROC bug he's currently facing; a list would just be gilding the lily. Glad you agree that it is the task of the database manager to ensure his database actually works and for the scenario writer to do the same for his designs. So long as neither you nor Guerin are willing to perform your designated roles, it is superfluous to inflict your problems on the community of players. The fact that you openly admit your laziness towards testing is something that has already been apparent from your conduct within these fora, the scenarios you release, and does not help your case. Your own words just keep digging your grave deeper by revealing: 1) Your bug report was made "ASROC won't fire" (Started by Mgellis, Nov 12 2011 03:13 PM) 2) Since then, you have *knowingly and deliberately* posted over 10 scenarios with subs vs. ships relying upon faulty non-functional ASROC 3) You have made no attempt to fix your scenarios 4) You have made no attempt to warn users of your problem 5) You continue to claim that HUD4 works and ask for unsuspecting human guinea pigs and victims This intentional, wanton, and reckless disregard for the welfare of your users is the primary reason why you and HUD4 can never be trusted to do the right thing. If HUD were HiV, you would find yourself in serious hot water.
  14. Another video After-Action Report for Harpoon3 has been added to the YouTube Harpoon for Dummies channel to help Harpoon players navigate the complexities of the game and to deliver the best possible playing experience. You can watch the complete scenario:
  15. Gotcha! Trapped by your own words. I see that, once again, when you do not receive the answer you seek, you fall back onto your usual tactic. That's not going to work here. As promised, I will be relentless. You've been called out to either put up or shut up. Since you will neither put up nor shut up, I'll be on hand to make certain that everyone learns how badly HUD4 scenarios work. Anyone following this thread will see it easily: 1) You ask folks to try your scenario 2) Problems are reported along with a solution 3) You ignore the report and the solution. Instead, you keep asking for 'help', The general community experience with the HUD4 has been very negative. Those who actually try the HUD4 find it a waste of time due to the heaps of errors found within. The only logical choice is to ignore the HUD4 unless they have a surplus of time and enjoy the frustration of reaching dead-end bugs.
  16. As stated, I try all scenarios: good, bad or ugly (and even those made with the HUD4). I tried the latest scenario release and have encountered the same type of problem as I have found in every single HUD4 scenario: the predominant game problem encountered with the HUD4 is the fact that many, Many, MANY weapons fail to fire. Against my better judgement, I will give you this bug report as a freebie because it is not the purpose and function of players to be testing your scenario when such problems are so obvious. As per my policy with HUD4 scenarios, I played until I encountered the first database bug and then stopped because they are 100% avoidable and preventable. The database error lies with the RUR-5A Mod 4 (Mk46m5) missiles. It is easily replicated by ordering the destroyer found in this scenario (Rommel) to fire on any submarine. The database says that the weapons are rated for submarines, but they will not fire at the target at any combination of range or speed that I could find. If you find an instance whereby this weapon fires, I would be happy to test your findings. Just to be clear, the database version is HUD 4 V 1.1 beta 10 and the files are dated 24/03/2012 11:54:08a.m. The scenario is dated 24/10/2012 17:37h Just to save time and pre-empt the usual stupidity, saying that I should simply find another weapon that actually works in order to attack the submarine is as stupid as telling me to find another game that works and play it. You may as well be telling players to find a database that works in order to fire that particular weapon because this weapon works in the PlayersDB and other functional databases without any such faulty limitations. Equally stupid would be to tell me to launch the weapon in Bearing-Only-Launch mode as this is NOT a solution to this problem, but only a work-around to this particular HUD4 database bug. Lastly, the lame excuse of, "It has been fixed and will be released at some unspecific date in the future" is absurd and unacceptable. The scenario was released today and I am trying this scenario today with the database available today and not some future date when the database may or may not be fixed. Go ahead. Fix this problem. Put up or shut up. If you don't, I'm going to be relentless and continue making darned certain everyone knows just how buggy and problematic HUD4 scenarios are. You have no right to inflict your abuse on players with such faulty scenarios and databases.
  17. Whoa, there. I have the solution but you are the problem. Until you can recognize that fact, nothing's going to change. Your rude demand that I help you is part of it. You want my help or that of others. You ask for it. A proper common request is fine. Your snotty arrogance will only earn you a reply-in-kind. You really do not understand your conduct. Anyone following this thread will see it easily: 1) You ask folks to try your scenario 2) Problems are reported along with a solution 3) You ignore the report and the solution. Instead, you keep asking for 'help'. This total dishonesty is crystal clear and it is apparent that you simply want someone to agree with you and tell you how great thou art. Only those who agree with you and give you oral copulation are allowed to reply on your thread. It is abundantly clear that there is somehow a 'right' answer to your demand. If that is all you want, you need to stay at harpgamer since that's all that folks like TonyE and Guerin can do for you. This is the real world. You want help, be polite and cordial and you will receive it. Or, you can scurry back to hhq v2.0 so that you can speak badly about those who bothered to try your scenario whilst under the protection of the scumbag forum administrators.
  18. Of course you won't find many examples of HUD4 problems on the hhq v2.0 forum since anyone who reports them gets summarily banned. I'm sure you won't find any dissent in the DPRK (North Korea), either. The fact that you need to come to CombatSim in order to get a real picture of how badly your scenarios and HUD4 work is simply proof positive that harpgamer serves only as a meeting point for high-fives and handjobs. Let me draw your attention back to how a professional deals with problems: http://www.matrixgam...m.asp?m=2142890 Note how derisively, snidely, and rudely the problem was reported, yet it was still fixed in a perfunctory manner with no muss, no fuss, no drama, no recriminations, or denial. That's professionalism. The problems reported can only be with HUD4 since they do not exist in other databases. Your hubris is simply unbelievable. Now, it's MY job to "find a way to let the harpgamer community know about it"?! The problems were reported and I was subsequently banned. Rest assured, your HUD4 problems continue to be reported and discussed on all fora such as CombatSims, safely away from hhq v2.0 reprisals. Actually, that's exactly the reason for NOT checking out the HUD4. Since the editors and scenario designers won't waste their own time checking and fixing things, why should an unsuspecting player waste his precious time? Your problems are your own. The solutions have already been shown to you. So long as you refuse to address your problems, there is nothing anyone can do to help you. Your problems are 100% preventable and correctable by you and you alone. No one is going to force their help upon you or anyone else who does not want it.
  19. Regarding the number of errors found in HUD4, I notice how you like to try and ignore your own facts which consistently prove you wrong. The supposed lack of bug threads for HUD4 is due primarily to your conduct and that of your cohorts. If you act like a total jerk whenever anyone reports a problem with your work or HUD4, it's no wonder that folks just stop trying your work or using your database. They just give up and ignore you altogether so that you can wallow alone in your ignorance. This is the only logical explanation for the dearth of file downloads for your scenarios. Since there is clearly no competence on hhq v2.0, here is an example of how a professional deals with problems: http://www.matrixgam...asp?m=2142890 No muss, no fuss, no drama, no recriminations, or denial. Just fix the damn thing and move onwards. The unresponsiveness to any reported problems is probably the reason why more people will not try the HUD4. Most likely, they have tried a scenario, bashed their heads in frustration, and sworn never to waste time on another. A whole group of us did when we tried HUD in MP. Once again, you abuse the good nature of any players you might find. Players are not your personal guinea pigs nor an excuse for HUD4 incompetence or sloth. It isn't their role or function to test your scenario or HUD4. Their 'job' is to play and enjoy themselves; not de-bug the scenario or database for you. That's YOUR job. Fix your problems and you will have a chance to win them over. Or, continue on your current path of denial and end up begging and pleading for someone (anyone!) to try your scenario.
  20. Actually, it did not run fine for him as he also reported: Your reading and memory are selectively omissive. As well, I have neither read nor posted any reports of the HUD4 causing crashes outright. Currently, the predominant game problem encountered with the HUD4 is the fact that many, Many, MANY weapons fail to fire. This is 100% avoidable and reparable.
  21. A new video for "Malvinas" has been added the YouTube Harpoon for Dummies channel to help Harpoon players navigate the complexities of the game and to deliver the best possible playing experience. You can watch
  22. Therein lies the problem. You know that HUD4 has problems yet deliberately ask folks to try it. Why? So that they can experience the problems for themselves? This is just abusive of the players' time. You've been told exactly when and where your scenarios have problems. Instead of just fixing them for the benefit of players, you ask them to blindly try out a database that has been openly proven to be infested with bugs and problems. You certainly seem to be the only who claims that your scenarios and HUD4 works while, apparently, everyone else reports otherwise. In fact, I think most everyone has tried HUD4 at some point in time, however briefly. Instead of begging for players, you should be asking yourself why folks abandoned the HUD4 after their initial experience. It very likely is due to the number of bugs found.
  23. The 59th NEW Harpoon scenario of the year! War of the Euro Following the financial crises of 2008 and 2010, the Eurozone was transformed. Greece was bailed out in 2011 with 260 billion Euro and Spain took 490 billion in 2012. Draconian measures were enforced across Mediterranean countries. This included offering for sale Spain's sole Aircraft carrier, 6 Santa Maria-Class frigates, and the announcement of the disbandment of the Italian submarine force. Crews were laid off with immediate effect. In spite of these rescue funds, on Jan 2013, Spain and Greece defaulted on their debt payments. Northern Europe, facing a collapsing Euro and economy, bailed out both countries again. However, on June 9th 2013 Europe woke up to a surprise announcement. Italy, Spain, Portugal, and Greece all left the Euro at the same time. They announced that all debts would be converted to their new currency, the Certecius. In addition, the countries left the European Union, left NATO, formed a new pact called the Mediterranean Union, and appointed as its first President: Silvio Berlusconi. Immediately the Certecius halved in value against the Euro, which itself halved against the US dollar. The Eurozone creaked under pressure of the written-off debt to Italy, Spain, and Greece, and under the burden of debt to the Americans. EU president Guy van Rompes abdicated and Frau Dr Merkel, widely seen as the European equivalent to Margaret Thatcher, took the EU role. She promptly issued an ultimatum: the Mediterranean Unions debt, which largely matures on January 6 2015, is to be re-paid in Euros. Author: Freek Schepers Harpoon HUE users can get the: Complete PlayersDB Harpoon HUE Library Harpoon ANW users can get the: Complete PlayersDB Harpoon ANW Library Harpoon3.6.3 users can get the: Complete PlayersDB Harpoon 3.6.3 Library "Harpoon for Dummies" channel PlayersDB for Harpoon on Facebook Frequently Asked Questions FilesOfScenShare
  24. As I keep saying, I can only speak from my own experience and that of others. I and others have many problems with the HUD-4. I have observed many errors, none of which have been fixed once they get reported. Waiting over a year for a simple fix that never comes is probably within your level of tolerance, but not likely for anyone else. http://community.com...40#entry5147335 As I keep saying, I suggest people ignore the HUD-4 unless they have a surplus of time and enjoy the frustration of reaching dead-end bugs.
  25. As I keep saying, I can only speak from my own experience and that of others. I have many problems with the HUD-4. I have observed many errors, none of which have been fixed once they get reported. Waiting over a year for a simple fix that never comes is probably within your level of tolerance, but probably not for anyone else. As I keep saying, I suggest people ignore the HUD-4 unless they have a surplus of time and enjoy the frustration of reaching dead-end bugs.
×
×
  • Create New...