Matrix Games Forums

Okay I'm reluctantly re-opening this thread...

We will not release full database editing capability for as long as the Command development project is running. Full stop.

The rationale is given in detail here:
http://www.warfaresims.com/?page_id=2920#1100


Main points are:

"Second, the database for Command is very complex. Anyone who has spent time in the Harpoon2/3 database editor will immediately notice the increased number of parameters when they look in the Command DB Viewer. Editing or leaving out the wrong parameter could have rather negative impact on gameplay, generating a ton of unnecessary support tickets for the developer."

"Third, having multiple user-created databases makes continued expansion of Command far more difficult. Any schema changes would also have to be applied (correctly!) to any 3rd party databases, each of which may or may not have been abandoned by its author at that point in time. There would also be the risk of making associated material (scenarios) unusable. The Command database schema & enum tables are updated regularly and keeping all database hobbyists up-to-date would be a monstrous task, both on the dev end and on the 3rd party end. It would not take many weeks (or days!) before a new db author simply would give up."

Can you imagine the support burden this would create? Had we released the database editor you’re after, you’d soon fill our forum with similar messages as above, but this time yelling at us for not devoting 500 hrs of DB Editor support to you alone. And how many others would do the same?

So the problem would just shift one step to the left, but solve nothing. You still wouldn’t be able to use the editor much, and it would be a tremendous support burden on us. Loss-loss rather than win-win.

So... No.

Also, the Harpoon database editors were released AFTER the development of those games had ended, and for Harpoon2 the developer was pretty much bankrupt and they tried to squeeze a few more $$$ out of their game by releasing buggy developer tools.

Having said that, I’m curious to hear what db mods you need.

You can edit mounts, sensors and magazines, and comms via INI settings (yeah yeah, I never got around to adding a UI for that).

What is missing that makes it impossible for you to create your perfect scenarios?

(And I'm looking for a constructive dialog here, hint hint).

The most numerous requests we had is to edit loadouts while the aircraft is on base. Correct fuel, range profile etc. needs to be calculated. The second is adding base hull forms and airframes users can add dimensions for and add components. The third is a way to modify stats etc.

Mike

ORIGINAL: emsoy

Okay I'm reluctantly re-opening this thread...

We will not release full database editing capability for as long as the Command development project is running. Full stop.

The rationale is given in detail here:
http://www.warfaresims.com/?page_id=2920#1100


Main points are:

"Second, the database for Command is very complex. Anyone who has spent time in the Harpoon2/3 database editor will immediately notice the increased number of parameters when they look in the Command DB Viewer. Editing or leaving out the wrong parameter could have rather negative impact on gameplay, generating a ton of unnecessary support tickets for the developer."

"Third, having multiple user-created databases makes continued expansion of Command far more difficult. Any schema changes would also have to be applied (correctly!) to any 3rd party databases, each of which may or may not have been abandoned by its author at that point in time. There would also be the risk of making associated material (scenarios) unusable. The Command database schema & enum tables are updated regularly and keeping all database hobbyists up-to-date would be a monstrous task, both on the dev end and on the 3rd party end. It would not take many weeks (or days!) before a new db author simply would give up."

Can you imagine the support burden this would create? Had we released the database editor you’re after, you’d soon fill our forum with similar messages as above, but this time yelling at us for not devoting 500 hrs of DB Editor support to you alone. And how many others would do the same?

So the problem would just shift one step to the left, but solve nothing. You still wouldn’t be able to use the editor much, and it would be a tremendous support burden on us. Loss-loss rather than win-win.

So... No.

We, experienced players, do not need your support! We did not appeal to you 5-10 years ago, we do not appeal to you now!

We need an editor in the format "as is". Without support. Without service. "Disclaimer" and all these things.

We do not create any strain for you! And we are not going to create it!

I said straight and honestly - we do not need you. And it was not an insult. We really do not need you and we do not communicate with support at all.

The current situation is not win-win, it's a loss-loss-win-win. You do not want to see that there are four sides involved in the situation: experienced players (loss) - their fans and friends (loss) - developers (win) - beginning players (win). Four, not two!

You just do not notice that we exist and that we are losing because of your decision for beginners! You do not notice us precisely because we do not write to you and we do not go to complain when we have any problems with modifications!

I've been doing my custom databases for Harpoon Classic and Harpoon 2-3 for several years. And no one has ever heard of me - because I never complained and never wrote support tickets. And even more so, I never went to your topic about the databases of the DB2000-EC2003 at the forums. Just because I do not need you. And I can do everything myself.

I've never written in the topics of DB2000. And you are trying to force me to do this. And leave me no choice. But you know what? I will not write to them in any way. I dont want to participate in creating a joint database. It's slow and useless. And most importantly - I, like many experienced players, do not need it. And I need a lot of "what if", hypotetical or custom units. Dozens just for one scen. And i know your answer for them - "No".

"Editing or leaving out the wrong parameter could have a rather negative impact on the gameplay, generating a ton of unnecessary support tickets for the developer."

No! It happened before! You can simply say that you are not responsible for bugs with custom databases. "As is". And that's all.

It is not necessary to solve problems with custom databases. Just give up this support. And give us an editor.

"You still wouldn’t be able to use the editor much, and it would be a tremendous support burden on us."

I did a great job with editors for previous versions of Harpoon. As for Harpoon Classic, and for Harpoon 2-3. This is not a problem for me. As I say, dont underestimate us... [;)]

Also, the Harpoon database editors were released AFTER the development of those games had ended, and for Harpoon2 the developer was pretty much bankrupt and they tried to squeeze a few more $$$ out of their game by releasing buggy developer tools.

It was their fault! They needed to release the editor along with the release of the game! As an important part of the product! We expected this from you!

You focused on control - but it's a mistake! We need freedom and custom game experience. We pay you for it! And not for waiting and begging! We are not beggars - we can do everything ourselves.[8D]

Having said that, I’m curious to hear what db mods you need.

You missed about 10-20 soviet small ships and support ships. You missed about 5-7 soviet classes of submarines. You have errors in the list of sonars. You have giant errors in the organization of air defense units. You dont have some radars. You dont have many hypothetical and promising modifications of ships, planes and so on... You dont have many real loadouts. You do not have custom buildings and land units. And so on.

No, I will not create it all again every time, in every scenario. No, current scen editor's capabilities are not enough. No, binding to scen is not an option.

No, I will not beg and wait. Last time I had enough.

You can edit mounts, sensors and magazines, and comms via INI settings (yeah yeah, I never got around to adding a UI for that).

This is not enough. I need my own database. I do not want to do it again every time. For some missions I need a couple dozen custom classes of units! And I will not do it all again!

I have (draft) for my own global campaign and here it is possible to create many separate missions. Moreover, it relies on one russian book with several dozen real alternative projects of ships of the Soviet navy. Do you suggest that I do all this work again and again? [:-]

What is missing that makes it impossible for you to create your perfect scenarios?

(And I'm looking for a constructive dialog here, hint hint).

Database editor. Period. [&o] And i want INGAME database editor. [:D]

How about buying the professional edition? It features full DB edition.

ORIGINAL: gosnold

How about buying the professional edition? It features full DB edition.

I am not a .mil. [;)]

No. But you are a cock.
Enough already.

Give it a rest!

Not awfully constructive. But I guess its a start.

No. Its not a sustainable solution. At all. Period.

So probably need to think new.

ORIGINAL: spec111
You missed about 10-20 soviet small ships and support ships. You missed about 5-7 soviet classes of submarines. You have errors in the list of sonars. You have giant errors in the organization of air defense units. You dont have some radars. You dont have many hypothetical and promising modifications of ships, planes and so on... You dont have many real loadouts. You do not have custom buildings and land units. And so on.

That bad, huh [:)]

And just to be clear, you want to add all those units to your own private database, using an editor that is very tightly tied to the internal mechanics of the game engine, that only you make scenarios for, and do not share with anyone?

While we end up with a maintenance and user support nightmare?

Hm.

Why on earth would I say yes to such a deal?


So maybe the time has come to look at alternative solutions that might actually work for everyone.

You sounds like a creative soul. Feel free to suggest something.

ORIGINAL: spec111

You can edit mounts, sensors and magazines, and comms via INI settings (yeah yeah, I never got around to adding a UI for that).

This is not enough. I need my own database. I do not want to do it again every time. For some missions I need a couple dozen custom classes of units! And I will not do it all again!

I have (draft) for my own global campaign and here it is possible to create many separate missions. Moreover, it relies on one russian book with several dozen real alternative projects of ships of the Soviet navy. Do you suggest that I do all this work again and again? [:-]

Okay. How about you make a list of what operations you need to get you where you want?

I'm not saying we're going to implement anything, but I'm still interested in learning what the problem really is.

Ability to transfer custom mods between scenarios sounds like an issue? Mike brought up loadouts. Others?

Are you familiar with the (fine art) of writing specifications?

ORIGINAL: spec111

What is missing that makes it impossible for you to create your perfect scenarios?

(And I'm looking for a constructive dialog here, hint hint).

Database editor. Period. [&o] And i want INGAME database editor. [:D]

Okay I'm curious... is English your first language?

You could always pony up for the professional version, you know. I think then all your problems would solved and all would be sunshine and lollipops.

ORIGINAL: spec111

ORIGINAL: stilesw

Sigh! Once again, probably not much point in continuing this thread. Kinda like arguing with a 3rd rate lawyer - no real facts but an endless recitation of references and self accomplishments. I vote to lock it and let him stew in his own juices.

"For my fresh scenario, I need to create about 10 platforms, about 5 types of buildings and 3-4 types of combat loads! And also fix 3-4 errors in the database. And when will I get all this? Never. And how much does it take for me? No more than 1 hour of time."

This is a fact and a real situation. And this situation has already been repeated several times. The developers tried to protect the community of novice players and unload their support service, but they did not take into account the interests of experienced players with other, but pretty common for serious wargame, needs.

I demand the possibility of creating custom databases for myself! I'm not going to distribute them. Just like I'm not going to distribute my scens. But such feature is extremely important to me. I paid for the game for this. And I, like many other experienced players, do not like this situation.

ORIGINAL: emsoy

Not awfully constructive. But I guess its a start.

No. Its not a sustainable solution. At all. Period.

So probably need to think new.

ORIGINAL: spec111
You missed about 10-20 soviet small ships and support ships. You missed about 5-7 soviet classes of submarines. You have errors in the list of sonars. You have giant errors in the organization of air defense units. You dont have some radars. You dont have many hypothetical and promising modifications of ships, planes and so on... You dont have many real loadouts. You do not have custom buildings and land units. And so on.

That bad, huh [:)]

And just to be clear, you want to add all those units to your own private database, using an editor that is very tightly tied to the internal mechanics of the game engine, that only you make scenarios for, and do not share with anyone?

While we end up with a maintenance and user support nightmare?

Hm.

Why on earth would I say yes to such a deal?


So maybe the time has come to look at alternative solutions that might actually work for everyone.

You sounds like a creative soul. Feel free to suggest something.

You do not need to invent anything. You do not need to support anything. You do not need to service anything.

You just need to state that the editor is delivered "as is" and that no questions about the editor, custom databases and scens for them are accepted. Create a separate forum for users to support each other. And that's all.

This will work for everyone.

If you are afraid, then you can distribute the editor togrognards and set a condition that they will not distribute custom databases and scripts publicly. And you can give up support. This also suits everyone.

You do not understand that there are so many people who are ready to give up technical support as soon as they get database editor.

ORIGINAL: spec111

You can edit mounts, sensors and magazines, and comms via INI settings (yeah yeah, I never got around to adding a UI for that).

This is not enough. I need my own database. I do not want to do it again every time. For some missions I need a couple dozen custom classes of units! And I will not do it all again!

I have (draft) for my own global campaign and here it is possible to create many separate missions. Moreover, it relies on one russian book with several dozen real alternative projects of ships of the Soviet navy. Do you suggest that I do all this work again and again? [:-]

Okay. How about you make a list of what operations you need to get you where you want?

I'm not saying we're going to implement anything, but I'm still interested in learning what the problem really is.

Ability to transfer custom mods between scenarios sounds like an issue? Mike brought up loadouts. Others?

Are you familiar with the (fine art) of writing specifications?

I want to create new classes from scratch or on the basis of other classes. I do not want to make changes to the current database, it's not necessary. But I need to freely add my classes of ships, aircraft, submarines, sensors, weapons, buildings, ground units, loadouts and so on. I need to change all they parameters - from the amount of fuel and power, to stealth and weapons.

And I need the opportunity to freely transfer these changes between scens. I also need the ability to change them centralized and so on.

This is the custom database. No "good" surrogate can be created here. So i need database editor.

The editor is required in any case. The problem can be solved only by organizational measures - either you refuse technical support, or you limit its distribution.

The current system of adding sensors and weapons was created as a surrogate. Precisely because you understood that "some" editor is necessary in any case. But you do not understand that we need an editor. And such surrogates simply will not help. You can develop this surrogate - but now it is needed as a full-fledged editor and full-fledged custom databases.

ORIGINAL: spec111

What is missing that makes it impossible for you to create your perfect scenarios?

(And I'm looking for a constructive dialog here, hint hint).

Database editor. Period. [&o] And i want INGAME database editor. [:D]

Okay I'm curious... is English your first language?

Ragnar, english is not your first language too. I already answered. Database editor. Yes, there are a lot of other wishes - full professional toolkit for drawing on the map, custom ranging rings, adding text, auto-ETA and so on. But the database editor is main problem.

p.s.
Do I look like a person for whom English is the first language? Lol. 3rd. [:D]

IMHO, the problem is the lack of DB updates in the last months. That's all. If a person could be alocated to do DB updates,and be supported by some users (each one responsible of one or some countries) you can speed up DB updates.

I think that prioritize some request is also a good idea. For example....Correction in DB entries must have higher priority than new entries and Hypothetical units must have low priority at this moment.

For eample, we have an A-12 Avenger meanwhile MiG-29 has a lot of mistakes (reported months ago)...So that's not normal.

Another problem in this forums is the hostility to non native english speakers. Guys, English is not the first language by number of native speakers, not the second, maybe the third...So, you MUST understand all the typos and mistakes we commit. Use the lack of proficiency in English as a reason in a debate is not very tolerant. And o course, I encourage you to learn other languages and expand your frontiers. [:)]

there are still xenophobia by some users to Russian players...Pals, Cold War ended. Communist lost! [:D]
Don't buy Killary's propaganda. She lost the election. End[:'(]

Is this Herman griping here? [:D]

Seriously dude, tone it down. Squeaky wheels don't get greased around here often.

Think of the DB's as a tool. Im a mechanic and I value my tools as much as I do my wife. Don't ask to borrow my tools and wont ask to borrow your wife! [:)]

The simple fact is spec111 will not be reasoned with and will not be happy until he gets something that will not be given to him.

It's best to close this thread and put an end to it.

I always come back to the db whiners and that they need to do what the devs did. Go build your own game. If I was so upset that I would resort to violence, I would think that making your own little personal game would be the solution.

And why for goodness sake is anyone still playing a game that is so broken as to have 20 different Mig-29 errors? Again, if 20 Mig-29 errors is so egregious, I would crank up a compiler and start coding.

Very few games this complex with small dev teams allow any type of full db editing. My other two go-to games, Combat Mission and Steel Beasts, allow less than Command. And there is a similar cadre of Russian complainers there about Russian armor inferiority.

ORIGINAL: Zaslon

IMHO, the problem is the lack of DB updates in the last months. That's all. If a person could be alocated to do DB updates,and be supported by some users (each one responsible of one or some countries) you can speed up DB updates.

I think that prioritize some request is also a good idea. For example....Correction in DB entries must have higher priority than new entries and Hypothetical units must have low priority at this moment.

This^^^

ORIGINAL: thewood1

I always come back to the db whiners and that they need to do what the devs did. Go build your own game. If I was so upset that I would resort to violence, I would think that making your own little personal game would be the solution.

And why for goodness sake is anyone still playing a game that is so broken as to have 20 different Mig-29 errors? Again, if 20 Mig-29 errors is so egregious, I would crank up a compiler and start coding.

Very few games this complex with small dev teams allow any type of full db editing. My other two go-to games, Combat Mission and Steel Beasts, allow less than Command. And there is a similar cadre of Russian complainers there about Russian armor inferiority.

I honestly don't see any of their posts anymore so no worries here[:)]

I'd suggest closing the string though. Doesn't look like anything good is happening.

Mike

ORIGINAL: thewood1

....And there is a similar cadre of Russian complainers there about Russian armor inferiority.

This! Understatement of the century.

Ad hominems, ad hominems, ad hominems... Where is your arguments? Lol. [:D]

Okay good. Lets see if I got this straight:

What would help you is this:
* Ability to add new units
* Ability to update (visible) stats on existing units
* Transfer changes between scenarios
* Make changes centrally
* Change and make new loadouts

Then you would:
* Write and maintain documentation for minimum 10 years
* Handle user support
* Maintain 3rd party contributions
* Update 3rd party datasets as database updates (i.e. changes made in DB makes 3rd party contribution unnecessary, etc)


As for my English skills... Tone etc is very difficult to get right and usually takes years of practice. I'm still learning and screw up on a regular basis. Translating directly makes makes it sound staccato and downright Nazi. The fact that I got an 'engineer' rather than 'language' brain doesn't help hehe.

From where I stand you sound really angry and upset, ready to shoot the place up. But is that really the case?

ORIGINAL: spec111

Ad hominems, ad hominems, ad hominems... Where is your arguments? Lol. [:D]

It's refreshing that you have picked up some new words in Latin/English, but it would be even better to learn the definition before using as the core part of your debating skills.

Devs: Noted managerial problem: 80% of your time is spent on 20% of the problems. Don't worry about this guy and keep doing the wonderful work you do.

Let him build his own game.

My own experience with CMANO has been amazing. I need to get better at it. My problem, not your's... And I will get better!

T Rav