Matrix Games Forums

Ageod takes you back to the Civil War Battle Academy iPad and PC 50 per cent off!Close Combat Last Stand Arnhem v5.60.53 update Allied Corps Walkthrough playlist and AARConflict of Heroes: Ghost Divisions Released!Pandora Beta Playthrough VideosGermany at War: Barbarossa 1941 Announced!Great Battles Medieval coming to your tablet with a 50 per cent off launch sale!Matrix Games / Slitherine / AGEOD are recruiting AGAIN!Battle Academy: Blitzkrieg France Let's Play Video		 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: IJA Armor units

 
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] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: IJA Armor units Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/1/2011 6:21:06 PM   
Rainer

 

Posts: 1162
Joined: 11/21/2000
From: Neuching, Bavaria, Germany
Status: offline
quote:

Just a clearing of the air


Much needed.
As one of the long time members of the forum I find it highly irritating when someone tries to convey the idea he is or had been part of the olymp (developers). It doesn't matter if this is done on purpose or not.
For newbies it is difficult enough to extract the information and hints to avoid frustration.
They have to rely on the validity of what they are reading here in the forum.
Please try to take that into consideration when posting.

Advice for newbies: members of the development team are listed on the "Credits Screen" (hit the C in the upper right corner of the game).
Messages from those members can (and should) be trusted. Please note that Beta Testers listed on that screen were not members of the developers team.

< Message edited by Rainer -- 6/1/2011 6:24:06 PM >

_____________________________

WitP/AE Devs Fan Boy
1.7.11.23m beta
Data base changes by Andy Mac October 16, 2012
Scen #1 Allied vs AI Level Hard Daily Turns
Art Mods by TomLabel and Reg

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 31
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/1/2011 6:38:34 PM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1872
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Covina,CA,USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rainer

quote:

Just a clearing of the air


Much needed.
As one of the long time members of the forum I find it highly irritating when someone tries to convey the idea he is or had been part of the olymp (developers). It doesn't matter if this is done on purpose or not.
For newbies it is difficult enough to extract the information and hints to avoid frustration.
They have to rely on the validity of what they are reading here in the forum.
Please try to take that into consideration when posting.

Advice for newbies: members of the development team are listed on the "Credits Screen" (hit the C in the upper right corner of the game).
Messages from those members can (and should) be trusted. Please note that Beta Testers listed on that screen were not members of the developers team.


Jeez Louise I have read what Sid has said he stated he work with Joe on CHS that is CHS WITP and not AE. He mentioned that some of the work "eluded" making it to AE. For those speaking English as a second language that would mean it didn't make it into AE.

I don't know whether Sid knows how to read code or not, but he may and therefore may understand what is greek to me and may not be speaking out of turn when he refers to the code.

Let's face it there is a group of you that just don't like Sid for what ever reason and will take EVERY SINGLE OPPORTUNITY YOU CAN TO TROUNCE HIM.

I have had my issues with him back with WITP, but it was one on one not a gang rape.

Buck

(in reply to Rainer)
Post #: 32
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/1/2011 7:32:15 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 12433
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		Buck,

As you know from many, many posts in the WITP forum I worked with Sid quite a bit testing & playing RHS and giving Sid feedback on it. I am not out to trash him or trounce him and I wish him well. Some things do need to be said. For one, it doesn't matter if he understands reading code if he has never been privy to it. I'm not sure if you've gotten the idea that he has been but your last post seemed to indicate that. Sid did a lot of testing on his own with WITP to try and reverse-engineer how certain things worked. Applying those results to AE is invalid. For one thing, as you know, test results can be misleading when you don't know what is inside the code. What you think is a general result might only apply to the specific circumstances of the test. But much more important, the changes from WITP to AE are legion, and tests done with WITP are simply not valid when talking about AE.

We are also dealing with many issues of historical fact, and those facts are difficult to determine with accuracy. Often impossible. Some issues will wind up being one person's best estimation or understanding versus another person's best estimation or understanding. Just because someone regarded as an historian wrote something in a book and it was published does not mean that it happened that way. If it were so then historians would never disagree with each other, and they disagree plenty. I'm sure you understand that. I became so frustrated with Sid's closed-mindedness in general that I simply stopped dealing with him. When it comes to the historical issues being discussed here, you see the same thing manifested - if it's in a book that Sid referred to then all the research done by a large team which worked for 2 or 3 years consulting many sources is somehow not worth discussing and they just need to be shown what to read.

Repeating the same things over and over without actually discussing the points raised certainly is going to be misleading to many readers and I understand why many developers have felt compelled to speak up. There is no such thing as 'proof by repeated assertion'. On subjects that are less clear than 2 + 2 = 4 people will often wind up in some degree of disagreement, but sincere discussion of the merits of points raised is important. Obfuscating by including volumes of irrelevancies does not help, such as 'Joe this' or 'Joe that', or quantities of historical anecdotes that do not bear on the subject.

I hope Sid produces whatever scenarios he wants to, and that whoever wants to gets to enjoy them with him. For the benefit of others it is important that misleading information be countered.

(in reply to Buck Beach)
Post #: 33
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/1/2011 7:54:59 PM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1872
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Covina,CA,USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Buck,

As you know from many, many posts in the WITP forum I worked with Sid quite a bit testing & playing RHS and giving Sid feedback on it. I am not out to trash him or trounce him and I wish him well. Some things do need to be said. For one, it doesn't matter if he understands reading code if he has never been privy to it. I'm not sure if you've gotten the idea that he has been but your last post seemed to indicate that. Sid did a lot of testing on his own with WITP to try and reverse-engineer how certain things worked. Applying those results to AE is invalid. For one thing, as you know, test results can be misleading when you don't know what is inside the code. What you think is a general result might only apply to the specific circumstances of the test. But much more important, the changes from WITP to AE are legion, and tests done with WITP are simply not valid when talking about AE.

We are also dealing with many issues of historical fact, and those facts are difficult to determine with accuracy. Often impossible. Some issues will wind up being one person's best estimation or understanding versus another person's best estimation or understanding. Just because someone regarded as an historian wrote something in a book and it was published does not mean that it happened that way. If it were so then historians would never disagree with each other, and they disagree plenty. I'm sure you understand that. I became so frustrated with Sid's closed-mindedness in general that I simply stopped dealing with him. When it comes to the historical issues being discussed here, you see the same thing manifested - if it's in a book that Sid referred to then all the research done by a large team which worked for 2 or 3 years consulting many sources is somehow not worth discussing and they just need to be shown what to read.

Repeating the same things over and over without actually discussing the points raised certainly is going to be misleading to many readers and I understand why many developers have felt compelled to speak up. There is no such thing as 'proof by repeated assertion'. On subjects that are less clear than 2 + 2 = 4 people will often wind up in some degree of disagreement, but sincere discussion of the merits of points raised is important. Obfuscating by including volumes of irrelevancies does not help, such as 'Joe this' or 'Joe that', or quantities of historical anecdotes that do not bear on the subject.

I hope Sid produces whatever scenarios he wants to, and that whoever wants to gets to enjoy them with him. For the benefit of others it is important that misleading information be countered.


Got me wrong witpqs, I am not trying to validate anything Sid has said or what he can or can not do only his right to express himself, within the rules of the forum, without being subject to a public lynching.

Hey I can identify with "I became so frustrated with Sid's closed-mindedness in general that I simply stopped dealing with him." and that is the way one should deal with an issue.

I think I have said more than enough to get myself alienated by everyone on the board. I'm done with the subject.

< Message edited by Buck Beach -- 6/1/2011 7:59:33 PM >

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 34
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/1/2011 8:00:21 PM   
JWE

 

Posts: 6576
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rainer
quote:

Just a clearing of the air

Yes, needed perhaps.

As a developer, I have a personal interest in making sure that this game gives the most enjoyment to as many people as possible, no matter which side thay play. All of us, in the development community, have done the best we could to provide relevant,and realistic, responses to questions from the user community. Much of the code has changed, in certain ways, but with implications that we are coming to grips with. The developers tend to understand the new code, and are trying to internalize user comments.

People who claim to have a special (nonexistent) understanding by virtue of their (equally nonexistent) communications with a person who, frankly, lets us do what we did, and doesn't truly know squat about what's in source, but who trusts us, have a serious psychological problem. I have a professional problem with people like that.

As a veteran, I have a serious personal issue with someone (anyone) who fakes a history that makes themselves look polished enough that the uninformed will think them informative, given their representations.

That's about it. Just simple stuff. Most of you will "get it".

_____________________________

Home of DaBabes

(in reply to Rainer)
Post #: 35
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/1/2011 8:43:45 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8021
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Buck,

As you know from many, many posts in the WITP forum I worked with Sid quite a bit testing & playing RHS and giving Sid feedback on it. I am not out to trash him or trounce him and I wish him well. Some things do need to be said. For one, it doesn't matter if he understands reading code if he has never been privy to it. I'm not sure if you've gotten the idea that he has been but your last post seemed to indicate that. Sid did a lot of testing on his own with WITP to try and reverse-engineer how certain things worked. Applying those results to AE is invalid. For one thing, as you know, test results can be misleading when you don't know what is inside the code. What you think is a general result might only apply to the specific circumstances of the test. But much more important, the changes from WITP to AE are legion, and tests done with WITP are simply not valid when talking about AE.

We are also dealing with many issues of historical fact, and those facts are difficult to determine with accuracy. Often impossible. Some issues will wind up being one person's best estimation or understanding versus another person's best estimation or understanding. Just because someone regarded as an historian wrote something in a book and it was published does not mean that it happened that way. If it were so then historians would never disagree with each other, and they disagree plenty. I'm sure you understand that. I became so frustrated with Sid's closed-mindedness in general that I simply stopped dealing with him. When it comes to the historical issues being discussed here, you see the same thing manifested - if it's in a book that Sid referred to then all the research done by a large team which worked for 2 or 3 years consulting many sources is somehow not worth discussing and they just need to be shown what to read.

Repeating the same things over and over without actually discussing the points raised certainly is going to be misleading to many readers and I understand why many developers have felt compelled to speak up. There is no such thing as 'proof by repeated assertion'. On subjects that are less clear than 2 + 2 = 4 people will often wind up in some degree of disagreement, but sincere discussion of the merits of points raised is important. Obfuscating by including volumes of irrelevancies does not help, such as 'Joe this' or 'Joe that', or quantities of historical anecdotes that do not bear on the subject.

I hope Sid produces whatever scenarios he wants to, and that whoever wants to gets to enjoy them with him. For the benefit of others it is important that misleading information be countered.


I have to say I agree with this. Well put. I also agree with much of what others have said. In fact, Sid has been on my Green Button list for some time. If you all would not quote him in your posts I'd never see his.

In the past, Sid has taken things I told him and announced them to the forum as his own discoveries. Others I know have had the same experience. And he does seem to have a contrary opinion on just about everything. Everyone, as they say, is entitled to his own opinion. Just not to his own facts.

Still fell a bit sorry for the fellow after so many posts.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 36
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/1/2011 9:24:37 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 40072
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Better man than me, Don...

_____________________________

There is no version of this where you come out on top - Tony Stark


(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 37
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/1/2011 9:29:48 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 14647
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		Don't cry for me, Argentina! In truth, I have more simple motives than are sometimes assumed.
I surely never announced as my discovery something someone else taught me, except in the sense
that if I believed it, I would say it as something I believed. I had no idea anyone thought I ought to
be giving them credit - even if it were true I got something from them? In most cases, I get something
from multiple places, not only one.

I offer information for those who might find it beneficial. And I do so positively and constructively - even
if I suggest something might be better done in one sense or another. I do not regard it as honorable to
throw mud, and if the first mud thrower above has no problems with his honor, it is because he has done
so much of it he has forgotten the terms of use of the Forum. Those who do that, as another commenter
noted, ruin their reputations, not mine.

I will quote a private message - without saying from whom to protect the guilty - and note that I have
a number of emails over time from people who left the Forums because of nasty behaviors which were
not entirely constructive. And one of the bigger names at Matrix has written he has given up on making
the Forums what they could be and should be. I do not require agreement from anyone. I do not need
approval from anyone either. But I do value ALL of you - WHEN you are positive and constructive - or
even when you are constructively critical of me.

QUOTE

We gamers colectively have this gift, AE, that can be made better if people are interested in improvements. It is bothersome to me that some people are more interested in their ego than a historically accurate map.

That tread response group will not listen to any constructive ideas because they think they have a perfect game all things considered. You are punching holes in their beliefs and designs which in turn is causing them embarassment.

These guys are rightly proud. But evidently from your comments the game can still be improved.

I like your NG trail thoughts....Dont understand why they allow supply into every hex.

END QUOTE

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 38
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/1/2011 10:42:00 PM   
herwin

 

Posts: 6057
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rainer

quote:

Just a clearing of the air


Much needed.
As one of the long time members of the forum I find it highly irritating when someone tries to convey the idea he is or had been part of the olymp (developers). It doesn't matter if this is done on purpose or not.
For newbies it is difficult enough to extract the information and hints to avoid frustration.
They have to rely on the validity of what they are reading here in the forum.
Please try to take that into consideration when posting.

Advice for newbies: members of the development team are listed on the "Credits Screen" (hit the C in the upper right corner of the game).
Messages from those members can (and should) be trusted. Please note that Beta Testers listed on that screen were not members of the developers team.


Please go back to the opening message of this thread. I don't see anything about the developers team.

_____________________________

Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com

(in reply to Rainer)
Post #: 39
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/1/2011 11:12:22 PM   
treespider


Posts: 9735
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Knoxville
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin


Please go back to the opening message of this thread. I don't see anything about the developers team.





quote:

Long ago, Joe Wilkerson and I did research on IJA Airborne and Armor units
This research seems to have eluded the AE data set


quote:

Same as the tanks, Joe and I collected papers and books, and did OB research
which seems to have not survived into AE - where people are being creative
or making assumptions.


quote:

I did slightly participate in the discussion when the pre release map showed removal of trails at PM. I have several times reviewed the matter - including this week - and cannot reconcile the removal with how the historical campaign was done - or the options players ought to face.


quote:

And for the record, no one put in more man years of work on the economic model than I did. I am not doing entirely new research - just looking it up again. Because it is done.



What is the inference from these recent statements by L. Sid?

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to herwin)
Post #: 40
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/1/2011 11:21:26 PM   
herwin

 

Posts: 6057
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider


quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin


Please go back to the opening message of this thread. I don't see anything about the developers team.





quote:

Long ago, Joe Wilkerson and I did research on IJA Airborne and Armor units
This research seems to have eluded the AE data set


quote:

Same as the tanks, Joe and I collected papers and books, and did OB research
which seems to have not survived into AE - where people are being creative
or making assumptions.


quote:

I did slightly participate in the discussion when the pre release map showed removal of trails at PM. I have several times reviewed the matter - including this week - and cannot reconcile the removal with how the historical campaign was done - or the options players ought to face.


quote:

And for the record, no one put in more man years of work on the economic model than I did. I am not doing entirely new research - just looking it up again. Because it is done.



What is the inference from these recent statements by L. Sid?


That Sid was working with Joe several years ago. That's consistent with what I know about them. That he has done a lot of work on economic modelling of the Pacific War. That's also consistent with what I know about Sid. Remember, there was a lot of work done before the AE team was assembled, and a lot of people who did that work were not on the AE team.

_____________________________

Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com

(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 41
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/1/2011 11:37:51 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 12433
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		Harry, I think it is pretty clear that the overall impression being given is that he has/had the inside track and special knowledge, and even the posts above are certainly a reproach of the AE Team for not accepting his work and conclusions (although I'm not sure how or in what form he provided it). I urge you to look at more than just this one thread.

(in reply to herwin)
Post #: 42
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/1/2011 11:38:02 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 40072
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider


quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin


Please go back to the opening message of this thread. I don't see anything about the developers team.





quote:

Long ago, Joe Wilkerson and I did research on IJA Airborne and Armor units
This research seems to have eluded the AE data set


quote:

Same as the tanks, Joe and I collected papers and books, and did OB research
which seems to have not survived into AE - where people are being creative
or making assumptions.


quote:

I did slightly participate in the discussion when the pre release map showed removal of trails at PM. I have several times reviewed the matter - including this week - and cannot reconcile the removal with how the historical campaign was done - or the options players ought to face.


quote:

And for the record, no one put in more man years of work on the economic model than I did. I am not doing entirely new research - just looking it up again. Because it is done.



What is the inference from these recent statements by L. Sid?


He's inferring that he was on the team, and lying his ass off as usual.

_____________________________

There is no version of this where you come out on top - Tony Stark


(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 43
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/1/2011 11:39:02 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 40072
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Harry, I think it is pretty clear that the overall impression being given is that he has/had the inside track and special knowledge, and even the posts above are certainly a reproach of the AE Team for not accepting his work and conclusions (although I'm not sure how or in what form he provided it). I urge you to look at more than just this one thread.


He provided NO work/ideas/knowledge/conclusions whatsoever for AE. None. Zip. Zero. Nada. Zilch.

_____________________________

There is no version of this where you come out on top - Tony Stark


(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 44
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/1/2011 11:46:14 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25219
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Harry, I think it is pretty clear that the overall impression being given is that he has/had the inside track and special knowledge, and even the posts above are certainly a reproach of the AE Team for not accepting his work and conclusions (although I'm not sure how or in what form he provided it). I urge you to look at more than just this one thread.


He provided NO work/ideas/knowledge/conclusions whatsoever for AE. None. Zip. Zero. Nada. Zilch.



Apparantly it's Sid's "beat" that goes on and on and on.

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 45
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/2/2011 12:56:36 AM   
Mac67

 

Posts: 485
Joined: 3/7/2006
From: Essex, England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Easy, Mac... "JWE" is just reacting to "el cid again" and his looooooong history of disingenuousness on the forum.


I'm aware of that, but this is not the first time I have seen JWE acting in such a way towards another poster here. Also, threatening to drop El Cid's service record on Matrix reeks of playground bully tatics to me.

Not to mention a clear violation of forum rules. It gets tiresome seeing "oldboys" getting away with stuff that "noobs" have been warned or banhammered for.

Whats good for the goose is good for the gander and all that...

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 46
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/2/2011 1:54:41 AM   
Blackhorse


Posts: 1926
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

I agree with Andrew and Don on this one


+3

_____________________________

WitP-AE -- US LCU & AI Stuff

Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Moriarty: Crap!

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 47
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/2/2011 1:55:42 AM   
Rainer

 

Posts: 1162
Joined: 11/21/2000
From: Neuching, Bavaria, Germany
Status: offline 		EDIT: This is a message to herwin

quote:

Please go back to the opening message of this thread. I don't see anything about the developers team.

No need. See next quote from him (Thread "Sloops" Post #7, 25 May 2011).

quote:

In AE different designations have different code effects.


He does try to mislead newbies (and those unsuspecting) by pretending to have code knowledge (which he can't have).
You may prefer to ignore that. I don't.
But I think we should put it rest. Doesn't make sense really.

< Message edited by Rainer -- 6/2/2011 2:05:20 AM >

_____________________________

WitP/AE Devs Fan Boy
1.7.11.23m beta
Data base changes by Andy Mac October 16, 2012
Scen #1 Allied vs AI Level Hard Daily Turns
Art Mods by TomLabel and Reg

(in reply to herwin)
Post #: 48
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/2/2011 7:33:26 AM   
herwin

 

Posts: 6057
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Harry, I think it is pretty clear that the overall impression being given is that he has/had the inside track and special knowledge, and even the posts above are certainly a reproach of the AE Team for not accepting his work and conclusions (although I'm not sure how or in what form he provided it). I urge you to look at more than just this one thread.


Why does that lead to ad hominem attacks? What the AE team did was extremely impressive and can stand on its own objective merits.

_____________________________

Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 49
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/2/2011 7:46:35 AM   
herwin

 

Posts: 6057
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rainer

EDIT: This is a message to herwin

quote:

Please go back to the opening message of this thread. I don't see anything about the developers team.

No need. See next quote from him (Thread "Sloops" Post #7, 25 May 2011).

quote:

In AE different designations have different code effects.


He does try to mislead newbies (and those unsuspecting) by pretending to have code knowledge (which he can't have).
You may prefer to ignore that. I don't.
But I think we should put it rest. Doesn't make sense really.


Just curious--you know the difference between white-box and black-box testing? You can make valid claims about what the code is doing based on black-box testing. See such papers as this and this. I suspect what Sid means is that he has inferred that the code does certain things based on its behaviour. That's a valid claim and requires no explicit code knowledge.

_____________________________

Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com

(in reply to Rainer)
Post #: 50
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/2/2011 8:09:11 AM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 12433
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Harry, I think it is pretty clear that the overall impression being given is that he has/had the inside track and special knowledge, and even the posts above are certainly a reproach of the AE Team for not accepting his work and conclusions (although I'm not sure how or in what form he provided it). I urge you to look at more than just this one thread.


Why does that lead to ad hominem attacks?


I didn't say it should. I did say misinformation should be challenged.

(in reply to herwin)
Post #: 51
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/2/2011 8:57:40 AM   
herwin

 

Posts: 6057
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Harry, I think it is pretty clear that the overall impression being given is that he has/had the inside track and special knowledge, and even the posts above are certainly a reproach of the AE Team for not accepting his work and conclusions (although I'm not sure how or in what form he provided it). I urge you to look at more than just this one thread.


Why does that lead to ad hominem attacks?


I didn't say it should. I did say misinformation should be challenged.


There are acceptable and unacceptable ways to challenge misinformation. ad hominem argument is usually unacceptable.

_____________________________

Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 52
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/2/2011 1:46:39 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8021
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
Time to end this thread, me thinks.

(in reply to herwin)
Post #: 53
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/2/2011 2:20:52 PM   
Rainer

 

Posts: 1162
Joined: 11/21/2000
From: Neuching, Bavaria, Germany
Status: offline 		deleted

< Message edited by Rainer -- 6/2/2011 3:20:33 PM >

_____________________________

WitP/AE Devs Fan Boy
1.7.11.23m beta
Data base changes by Andy Mac October 16, 2012
Scen #1 Allied vs AI Level Hard Daily Turns
Art Mods by TomLabel and Reg

(in reply to herwin)
Post #: 54
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/2/2011 2:31:41 PM   
herwin

 

Posts: 6057
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline 		One last comment before this goes to bed.

I asked Sid and confirmed that he meant he has inferred that the code does certain things based on its behaviour. That's a valid claim--particularly from a tester--and requires no explicit code knowledge. I study the neural production of behaviour, and drawing inferences about the neural code is exactly what I do. Usually, I don't have access to *that* source code.

Bye,

_____________________________

Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com

(in reply to herwin)
Post #: 55
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/2/2011 4:07:46 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25219
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		You keep missing the point, It's all in how one presents themselves. One can clearly state that one thinks, based on testing, or whatever that code seems to do this or that. Sid doesn't just imply code knowledge based on 'testing', he words his posts to make it appear that the code DOES do this or that and WILL do this or that and then justifies it with inferences and false claims that it's due to insider knowledge via access to the code itself or having the ear of someone like JoeWilkerson. There is nothing legitimate about making false claims and inferences to try to strengthen one's standing and opinion. It's deceptive and misleading. It is not scientific in any way shape or form. You should know that based on your own signature. Sid can dance around that fact all he wants while you quibble over what he really means vs. what he writes, but that essential truth remains.

But like Don said.....it's time for this thread to end. Sid will continue to do what he's always done. The important point is that unwary posters know the score now.


(in reply to herwin)
Post #: 56
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/3/2011 7:04:43 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 14647
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		Nik

I am a trained deception specialist as well as something of a wordsmith, particularly in English.
And the Forum is not a place for formal writing - it is a place for off the cuff comments made without review -
as informal as writing gets. Deceptive communication does not stand the test of time ( usually ) - it is a
poor strategy and I NEVER use it - outside an arrest situation ( on military police duty ) or combat of some
sort. Your assertion is based on an assumption, and it is an incorrect assumption. You might be well
advised to make less negative assumptions.

As a technical guy, if I know something, I take responsibility for saying it, directly, in the simple assertion
sense. And as a tester, I have a good handle on figuring out how something works. I also do have the
ability to ask if I want to bother someone with access to code. [Someone it is said, as incorrectly as that
I am deceptive, I do not know.] At one point, after years of working on a specific part of code, he felt I
had as good a grasp of how it worked as he did. It is common for code NOT to work as intended. A tester
tells you how it ACTUALLY works, whatever the coders may think about how it is supposed to work. This
because the tests (usually) reveal what output range is possible for given inputs, other things being held
constant.

I happen to really be respectful - in general - and of you in particular. I think you are reading what is
written with too negative a set of assumptions. I am not here to argue - only to illuminate and inform -
and to be corrected or illuminated if someone can do that? I will not be drawn into hostile name calling,
and I do not assume - even when you are wrong ( as you are when you assume I was ever deceptive )
that you are my enemy. This is supposed to be an open forum - yet more than half a dozen people have
written me saying they feel it is closed - that it is too much of a hassle to dare to try to say anything other
than "everything is perfect already." I don't believe in perfection, or in one size fits all - or in looking for
trouble when no one is trying to dish it out. If I say it - possibly imperfectly as this is not a paper
submitted for publication - it is to the best of my ability true. Even in the face of the enemy, I use truth
as the SOP, the only way to have a shot at slipping in a deception that will work even for a moment.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 57
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/3/2011 8:07:58 PM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1872
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Covina,CA,USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Nik

I am a trained deception specialist as well as something of a wordsmith, particularly in English.
And the Forum is not a place for formal writing - it is a place for off the cuff comments made without review -
as informal as writing gets. Deceptive communication does not stand the test of time ( usually ) - it is a
poor strategy and I NEVER use it - outside an arrest situation ( on military police duty ) or combat of some
sort. Your assertion is based on an assumption, and it is an incorrect assumption. You might be well
advised to make less negative assumptions.

As a technical guy, if I know something, I take responsibility for saying it, directly, in the simple assertion
sense. And as a tester, I have a good handle on figuring out how something works. I also do have the
ability to ask if I want to bother someone with access to code. [Someone it is said, as incorrectly as that
I am deceptive, I do not know.] At one point, after years of working on a specific part of code, he felt I
had as good a grasp of how it worked as he did. It is common for code NOT to work as intended. A tester
tells you how it ACTUALLY works, whatever the coders may think about how it is supposed to work. This
because the tests (usually) reveal what output range is possible for given inputs, other things being held
constant.



Sid, I don't think it helps your credibility to pontificate your purported expertise in the atmosphere of this forum. At this point it would be very helpful for you to site specific verifiable sources of the training and background expertise to be able to muster a base of respect that you have apparently lost.

I don't say this to further pile on with the others. I read and appreciate all information from everybody, and when I find exception, after verification, I follow my own course in my Mod.

< Message edited by Buck Beach -- 6/3/2011 8:12:04 PM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 58
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/9/2011 7:08:13 AM   
dwg

 

Posts: 278
Joined: 1/22/2008
Status: offline
quote:

I asked Sid and confirmed that he meant he has inferred that the code does certain things based on its behaviour. That's a valid claim--particularly from a tester--and requires no explicit code knowledge.


There is an essential caveat to that, and to black-box testing in general. The completeness/validity of the assumptions you draw depends very heavily on whether you know all of the possible inputs and outputs to the piece of code in question. If you know all of the inputs then you can make definitive assertions about the behaviour, if you don't know all of the inputs, then there may be fundamental sensitivity to conditions you aren't testing. If you don't know all the outputs, there may be side effects you are completely unaware of that invalidate what you assume is identical behaviour across several different sets of inputs and the resultant outputs.

(Simple example for the non-coders, imagine testing the behaviour of a piece of code by varying A and B, the two inputs you know about, but what if there is a third input, C, and the code says that if C is false, reverse the result..., your assumptions based on the behaviour observed with A and B is then only true in some cases).

I don't know anything about the internal coding of AE, but what I've read in various places hints that the code is very likely riddled with conditional rules based on scores of different inputs, and not knowing what those inputs are and which are significant in which piece of code means we draw assumptions from black-box testing at very considerable peril of those assumptions being incomplete if not outright wrong. I would be very loathe to say 'X is true' about the code without one of the development team having confirmed it first.

(in reply to herwin)
Post #: 59
RE: IJA Armor units - 6/9/2011 10:53:45 AM   
herwin

 

Posts: 6057
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dwg


quote:

I asked Sid and confirmed that he meant he has inferred that the code does certain things based on its behaviour. That's a valid claim--particularly from a tester--and requires no explicit code knowledge.


There is an essential caveat to that, and to black-box testing in general. The completeness/validity of the assumptions you draw depends very heavily on whether you know all of the possible inputs and outputs to the piece of code in question. If you know all of the inputs then you can make definitive assertions about the behaviour, if you don't know all of the inputs, then there may be fundamental sensitivity to conditions you aren't testing. If you don't know all the outputs, there may be side effects you are completely unaware of that invalidate what you assume is identical behaviour across several different sets of inputs and the resultant outputs.

(Simple example for the non-coders, imagine testing the behaviour of a piece of code by varying A and B, the two inputs you know about, but what if there is a third input, C, and the code says that if C is false, reverse the result..., your assumptions based on the behaviour observed with A and B is then only true in some cases).

I don't know anything about the internal coding of AE, but what I've read in various places hints that the code is very likely riddled with conditional rules based on scores of different inputs, and not knowing what those inputs are and which are significant in which piece of code means we draw assumptions from black-box testing at very considerable peril of those assumptions being incomplete if not outright wrong. I would be very loathe to say 'X is true' about the code without one of the development team having confirmed it first.


I'm in agreement. After a while, particularly if you've run sensitivity tests like el_cid has, you will have a reliable black box model of what the system does. JFD once described it as the COW effect--a lot of the details come out in the wash--even up in the end--if you have a valid model. If you've been overrun by the detail, you get another effect--see Military Modelling for Decision Making, 3rd edition, Wayne P. Hughes, Jr., ed., 1997. Starting on page 50, he writes "On Model Stricture, or Stifling Thought", where he criticises the way complicated opaque models inhibit imagination and creativity. "Too much detail for the sake of realism is confusing and self-defeating." He then gives examples of systems that had to be abandoned because they "contain coding mysteries that produce counterintuitive, unexplained results."

_____________________________

Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com

(in reply to dwg)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: IJA Armor units Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   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

1.015