rfouasnon Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Wholeheartedly agree...all that needs to be done is that the bugs need to be squashed , and dear Pete send us our corrected turns...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breoghan Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Problem with one turn - not complaining though. I was able to work it out for the most part. I can wait for the information - plenty to work with for now. I appreciate the effort Pete. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
looker Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Now, that scares me a little.. Me agreeing with the horny redhead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahdi Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Pete, Any idea when corrections might be coming out? Thanks, Craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chairman lar Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Now, that scares me a little.. Me agreeing with the horny redhead. For my part, if it's opposite Gender specific, I've always found that to be good thing! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RTGPete Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Pete, Any idea when corrections might be coming out? Thanks, Craig I'm sending out a note by email to everybody (affected or not, just to cover everyone). Unfortunately, there's no way to reprint the results for those affected because the text output for your industries and mines etc was simply never put to the disk (ie nothing new would show up on a reprint). Everything ran fine - mines, industries, shipyards, research and so on operated great - they just didn't report their output in some cases. Essentially, if you had a convoy route that flagged off output just before your industrial phase, your output in that section got chopped. That pesky bug has been fixed, and I'm very pleased with the new reporting system otherwise - unfortunately there's just no way to recreate that output text The data files I sent out late last night contain entirely accurate info, including newly-researchable items. I'm very sorry to say that I can't generate that text, as that would be a great solution. The good news is that the new reports are otherwise very popular and will go a long way toward getting the results out as early as possible. I really like the way it's working for the otherwise overly-repetitive convoy routes. I'm shooting for even earlier on Friday next time, a goal I think is very reasonable now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cestvel Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Any idea why the new convoy code not always triggered? I had a couple of SKIM convoys reporting every skim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RTGPete Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Any idea why the new convoy code not always triggered? I had a couple of SKIM convoys reporting everyskim. Interesting - I saw convoy routes with just SKIM orders work fine. Did yours cycle to run the convoy route (ie the SKIM order) numerous times? It can print convoy routes one or sometimes two times all the way through, but should restrict reprints after that. Oh, on another note - I'm looking into a way to generate ANZ's for newly-researched items, as I don't want players to have to issue actual ANZ's for items they just got (but didn't receive the free ANZ's this cycle). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cestvel Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Any idea why the new convoy code not always triggered? I had a couple of SKIM convoys reporting everyskim. Interesting - I saw convoy routes with just SKIM orders work fine. Did yours cycle to run the convoy route (ie the SKIM order) numerous times? It can print convoy routes one or sometimes two times all the way through, but should restrict reprints after that. Oh, on another note - I'm looking into a way to generate ANZ's for newly-researched items, as I don't want players to have to issue actual ANZ's for items they just got (but didn't receive the free ANZ's this cycle). It is in my #492 pdf for fleet 508. It executes the same "Skim" convoy route, just consiting of SKIM. Other instances of that convoy route worked fine and reported the "running to completion", but 508 filled up and reported every instance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahdi Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Improvements are good and sometimes need a little tweaking to get them perfect. We just put in a new DCS system at the plant and boy does it need some tweaking. Mahdi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locklyn Posted June 14, 2009 Report Share Posted June 14, 2009 While I aplaud the new turn format This error is not ok, this adds hours to my own turn processing checking for failed production and not knowing if it was resources, failed power or an act of god. I have to compare the tech lists to see if any new tech popped up. I have to check that all the new ships I built actually went where they were supposed to, I have no idea if I've lost essential installations in colonies with attrition and so on. Turns are hard work enough without me suddenly losing a major part of my turn information. There has been a lot of printout errors recently, are we assured this will not happen again? *frustrated* /Lars Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rfouasnon Posted June 14, 2009 Report Share Posted June 14, 2009 I do have to admit , Locklyn is right....not giving important information on what happened during the turn handicaps us in the ability to create a new turn....ultimately , it probably means a turn sheet if not more less because I am not going to do the math to the upteenth place to find out what might have happened . While it is admirable to do something to get us our turns earlier , there should be some kind of safeguards in place to where a resend of portions of the turn are available if the turn is for whatever reason truncated . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Capitan Posted June 14, 2009 Report Share Posted June 14, 2009 are we assured this will not happen again? No. And, knowing the history of this game, it's a bit ridiculous to expect that the answer to that question would be anything different. In fact, after years and years of playing this game, we can be assured that this will happen again. I'm sorry, but we are way past the point where we should have either accepted this or not. We are way past the point where if we have not accepted this fact, we should not be playing this particular game. I accepted a long time ago the limitations of this game. It was my decision to continue to play. When I can no longer deal with the fact that errors will ALWAYS pop up from time to time, it will be my time to leave the game. And I'm o.k. with that. No one is forcing me to play the game under conditions that are not satisfactory to me. To me, it's that simple. Am I satisfied with the game as it is? If the answer is 'yes', I continue to play. If the answer is 'no', I quit. In the recent past, some said they understood that errors would happen but they wanted RTG to be more responsive, communicative, and try to resolve the issues quickly. RTG has done exactly that. Pete was quick to respond on the board and also sent out emails to each player. He detailed the problem and clearly explained what could and could not be done to resolve the issue. They did exactly what the board community asked them to do. Yet they still get slammed for something. Some people will NEVER be happy playing this game. I cannot imagine spending money to play a game I was unhappy with or did not enjoy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flagritz Posted June 14, 2009 Report Share Posted June 14, 2009 are we assured this will not happen again? No. And, knowing the history of this game, it's a bit ridiculous to expect that the answer to that question would be anything different. In fact, after years and years of playing this game, we can be assured that this will happen again. I'm sorry, but we are way past the point where we should have either accepted this or not. We are way past the point where if we have not accepted this fact, we should not be playing this particular game. I accepted a long time ago the limitations of this game. It was my decision to continue to play. When I can no longer deal with the fact that errors will ALWAYS pop up from time to time, it will be my time to leave the game. And I'm o.k. with that. No one is forcing me to play the game under conditions that are not satisfactory to me. To me, it's that simple. Am I satisfied with the game as it is? If the answer is 'yes', I continue to play. If the answer is 'no', I quit. In the recent past, some said they understood that errors would happen but they wanted RTG to be more responsive, communicative, and try to resolve the issues quickly. RTG has done exactly that. Pete was quick to respond on the board and also sent out emails to each player. He detailed the problem and clearly explained what could and could not be done to resolve the issue. They did exactly what the board community asked them to do. Yet they still get slammed for something. Some people will NEVER be happy playing this game. I cannot imagine spending money to play a game I was unhappy with or did not enjoy. Well said, 100% agree with El Capitan, I don't think I could have said it any better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cestvel Posted June 14, 2009 Report Share Posted June 14, 2009 are we assured this will not happen again? No. And, knowing the history of this game, it's a bit ridiculous to expect that the answer to that question would be anything different. In fact, after years and years of playing this game, we can be assured that this will happen again. I'm sorry, but we are way past the point where we should have either accepted this or not. We are way past the point where if we have not accepted this fact, we should not be playing this particular game. I accepted a long time ago the limitations of this game. It was my decision to continue to play. When I can no longer deal with the fact that errors will ALWAYS pop up from time to time, it will be my time to leave the game. And I'm o.k. with that. No one is forcing me to play the game under conditions that are not satisfactory to me. To me, it's that simple. Am I satisfied with the game as it is? If the answer is 'yes', I continue to play. If the answer is 'no', I quit. In the recent past, some said they understood that errors would happen but they wanted RTG to be more responsive, communicative, and try to resolve the issues quickly. RTG has done exactly that. Pete was quick to respond on the board and also sent out emails to each player. He detailed the problem and clearly explained what could and could not be done to resolve the issue. They did exactly what the board community asked them to do. Yet they still get slammed for something. Some people will NEVER be happy playing this game. I cannot imagine spending money to play a game I was unhappy with or did not enjoy. We are paying top dollars for the game. So I expect a professional approach to its running. That would mean to test new features before letting them loose. For this it would mean to run a fake turn in between turns and check the output. Then restore the backup of the data and run it one turn later for real. Noone if bugproof, but there are simple things to employ to contain them. Some of them are: 1) run new features on Test-Empires first. 2) save the data in between steps. If random is involved, save a seed to be able to generate the same exact results if possible (if the change was in something random you are still screwed) 3) run the new stuff on fake in-between turns for hmself 4) try to squash the bugs reported to you. Known bugs on last turn alone: 1) wrong battle report 2) not initiated combat while on PAP 'War' 3) output omitted due to new feature (bug reported as fixed by Pete) 4) Flag Bridges not working (again!) 5) exploit detected and reported to Pete. And being responsive to customers is (at least should be) the priority of someone who wants money from its customers. Just my 2 cents worth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.