Admiral Keth
-
Posts
480 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Admiral Keth
-
-
My name is Admiral Keth, and I am a CM:BB fanatic. I have been WoW-free for 27 days now.
-
Do you have a license for that minkey?
-
Am afraid the Cracker of the Whip is not with us anymore. Though his presence is still felt, he has moved on to directing a spin-off based on WKRP in Cincinnati.
/boggle?!? Whaaaa? When did this happen? But, but, but, but....
Waitaminit...I lurvs WKRP..mmmm...Loni Anderson...<drool>
Just send that to me and I will use all of my considerable influence to see that they ship the game to you sometime.A) You needs to pull from me stable of 26 recipes...yes, they are online...can ye find 'em? If you can find a photo of me with mash rake and a Luftwaffe Feldmütze, that's me. Yes, it's out there.
2) Folks have to come an get 'em. The ATF takes a dim view of shipping across state lines...yes, I have a very good reason to not ship it.
iii) Profit..no, that's not the reason.
-
I bugger off for a few years and you mangy gits are still around?
Yep, it's the ol' Admiral. No one was more pleased and surprised than I to see that the community is alive, well, and thriving...well, except for the lot in the Peng thread...they are looking a bit disreputable. Belay that; they have always been disreputable...they wear it like a badge of honor.
I am gratified and honored that The Scenario Depot II is doing well.
I was also delightfully surprised to return to see the immenent release of the new new CM:BN; yes, I have enthusiastically pre-ordered and I have been playing numerous CM:BB scenarios by means of whetting me appetite. Late April, you say? Matt...if you put mine near the front of the list, I have 5 gallons of homebrew with your name on it should you be in the area.
I have been away too long in the hinterlands of World of Warcraft. A time to return to me roots and me friends.
Gang, first round is on me...and none of that cheap swill, either.
-
All,
Additional posts have been made to Web Hosting Forum. I am far from alone in this mess.
If any of the CM community has sites hosted by any of Gunnel's shell companies, I would recommend finding a new web host ASAP. It appears as if more angry web developers are filing FBI fraud claims. Web Host Forum Link 2 has more details on specific shell hosts.
-
All,
Thank you very much for the kind words.
I have always considered Combat Mission to be "the thinking man's wargame". The community which endorses and continuously supports not only Combat Mission itself, but the associated fan sites, are the very best friends any wargaming community could offer.
With regards to resurrecting The Scenario Depot; I'm going to consider it over the next couple of weeks. Allow me time to acclimatize to Boeing and settle into a routine. In the spirit of "getting back on the horse" I could, at length, be convinced to rebuild from scratch, incorporating all of the features on the lengthy "SDv3 To Do" list.
Conversely, this may be the time when I start writing my " How To Brew" trilogy, or continue working on a miniature wargaming rules I started called GUMPS (Generic Universal Miniature Playing System).
In the mean time, I'm still preparing to hand off any data I have to GJK and The Proving Grounds. GJK has my complete confidence and esteem.
As an asides to another thread, my RL first name is Keith. The Admiral Keth comes from the callsign I was given by fellow Star Fleet Battles gamers after a well-played campaign (which included the capture of a starbase without firing a shot).
-
All,
The worst has come to pass. My web host, without so much as a "by your leave", has vanished. Email, database, files...all gone without any notice. The support phone number he provides is useless...the vmail box is full, preventing additional complaints (apparently I'm not alone in my extreme ire). Numerous emails go unanswered.
You have no idea how angry and embarrassed I am at this point. I feel as though I have let down the CM community. I genuinely apologize.
Those of you familiar with web hosting may recognize the web host - Steve Gunnels of FIDPAC. If any of you have sites hosted by any one of his myriad of shell companies, make provisions right now to get out. Those of you wanting to find out more about this situation may click here.
Based on my research at the Web Hosting Talk forum I have already signed up with a more reputable web host (Site5), and any correspondence to already established email addresses should work now. However, I doubt that I will have the time to recreate what needs to be rebuilt.
On the plus side, on 07.15.05, Boeing tendered an offer (and I accepted) for my services as a Technical Writer. As I am still a little unfamiliar with the boundaries of my TS clearance, I really can't say more beyond that.
I am corresponding with The Proving Grounds for GJK to assume control of whatever latest backup I have, as well as all of the archive files that I have locally. This archive contains some of the oldest scenarios created for Combat Mission.
Mind you that I am not going away, by any means. I'll still annoy people with my presence and beer wisdom from time to time. Maybe GJK and I can work out some co-admin arrangement.
Non the nonce, it has been a distinct pleasure serving the CM community all this time. You are the greatest group of guys and gals on the net.
-
i've just visited the site and was wondering about the same thing as the above post - i want to play and review cmbo battles best played against the AI </font>Originally posted by easytarget:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Steiner14:
Why is it not possible to search for 2player or battles against AI? Or did i miss something?
-
All,
This is one of those features that will be implemented in SDv3. Additional files, such as screen shots, supporting text or pdf files, and other scenario-related material will be uploadable by the author to author-specific folders.
However, landing a job is my first priority, as I have other mouths to feed than my own.
-
All,
At the moment, I have no intention of allowing The Scenario Depot to fall by the wayside. I have always been committed to providing a quality site for scenario exchange.
However, I am still unemployed (<shakes fist eastward> farging East Indians) and as such my free time is filled with:
Job hunting - Not going so well in this really soft economy. Between actual hunting, chatting up recruiters, job fairs, and interviews, this takes two days out of the week.
Side jobs - Building and expanding existing commercial. Not getting paid at the moment, but accruing invoices which will be submitted after my unemployment insurance runs out <shhh...don't tell California>. I have committed four days of the week to two different projects.
That leaves me with Sunday to rest and resurrect.
Yes, I have an expanding list of things to implement at The Scenario Depot. I'm planning (you all are familiar with that mouse/man adage) to accomplish these tasks between landing a job and actually starting. As that is a nebulous date, I'm unable to give you an estimate of when the SDv3 feature set will be in place.
I genuinely appreciate everyone who has contributed to the diversity, longevity, and financial stability of The Scenario Depot. Rest assured that I haven't given up on it yet.
-
My dad, who landed at Utah beach on D-Day with the 90th ID, picked up a couple of 9mm broomhandle Mausers when he captured a medic and a sergeant in France near Metz. Both weapons are in excellent condition, and even included the wooden holster which attached to the butt of the pistol to act as a shoulder stock. The only deterioration is the inside of the muzzles. According to dad, the materiels used in making primers in Germany at the time were highly corrosive, and it definitely shows.
-
OK guys, try it now.
I zipped the file, although I'm uncertain as to why this would make any difference. If you have pop-up blockers enabled, this might be a cause; as Michael noted, there is a .php page in between the synopsis page and the actual download page which updates the database with some statistics.
I have developed a completely different methodolgy for downloads which:
1) Eliminates this particular issue.
2) Allows for additional supporting files to be posted.
3) Allows for author upload of screenshots.
4) Allows for author updating of the scenario file.
However, these features will not be implemented until The Scenario Depot v3. I am researching and developing various methodolgies to support this new version, but actual work will not begin in earnest until I have secured gainful employment.
-
Odd...just tested and it works fine using IE 6. What browser are you using, Michael?Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:There is a problem with the file at the Scenario Depot - it is not zipped. My browser opens the file up as text on the screen. When I rightclick the download link and hit "save target as", I get a .php file instead...any chance of zipping?
I just got KGP II during the Moving Sale at MMP, looking forward to both of these. Glad someone is getting mileage out of their HASL(!)
-
Kingfish,
Apologies for the delay in response; life is stranger than normal of late.
With regards to scenario packs -
Submit all of the synopses as normal. There are two methods that you can use to post the actual file. First, however, go ahead and zip all of the files together into one zip file.
Method 1: When you post the first synopsis, go ahead and perform the associated file upload. You would then manually enter the same URL in the zip file field for subsequent synopses.
Method 2: Post all of the sysopses without performing a file upload. Email the scenario pack to me and I'll post it the following day.
-
Great...the twits running my webhost (PrimeTimeHost a.k.a. HostingServices.com) have succeeded in completely screwing up. Now I have no email, ftp, http or any other access to the site, even after paying them a boatload of money. I'm going to beg everyone's patience in this matter.
-
As previously explained in this thread my web host is experiencing some issue.
I'm beginning to suspect that some piece of equipment on their part which listens for the domain name and then forwards it to the proper place is having a problem.
This address works...
http://ns9.super-hosts.com/~dragonlair.net/combatmission/
...but this one does not...
I am heckling them hourly to fix this, as I host a couple of other sites and they are experiencing the same issue.
-
The page return time on a list like that would be prohibitive. It all has to do with the load being placed on the server-side PHP engine, and what it can realistically return in a respectable amount of time before the person who clicked on the link gets bored or thinks it locked up.Originally posted by Panther Commander:Would it be possible to see the entire list of scenarios for each game ranked instead of just the top 20? Or maybe the top 100, since there are 757 CMBB scenarios at this very moment.
Possible, but again, I'd be concerned about page return time. I can code it up and give it a try, but this one will go somewhere near the bottom of The Giant List of Sceanrio Depot v3 Things To Do.Originally posted by Panther Commander:What about a feature that shows the scenarios that have gotten the most downloads, for a set period, such as 30 or 60 days? That would be another indicator players could use to choose scenarios.
There must be a balance between the author's ability to glean useful information from reviews, and players ability to place those reviews, offset by some burden upon the player to come back and contribute. So far reviews have been 100% voluntary, but there seems to be some call for semi-compulsory reviews. The jury is still out.Originally posted by Panther Commander:One line of reasoning, that often comes out in these threads, that puzzles me, are the comments about why cater to the scenario designers. Unless I am mistaken, and I could be, that is why everybody goes to the Sceanrio Depot. To download the scenarios they have uploaded. If you don't make them happy there won't be anything to get all upset over. Now will there? :confused:
Just a puzzle that continues to pop up now and again.
Good Hunting.
-
The implicit desire for some authors to have their scenarios _always_ at the top of the lists was one of the stronger reasons why the Cumulative Rating System was abolished. There _were_ authors who wanted especially low rating reviews excised in order to increase their standing.Originally posted by Emar:Gotta say I like the depot the way it is now. I think the reviews now are a lot more honest now that there is no motivation to either promote or demote scenarios to make the list. Would also think that a particualary good or bad scenario would tend to make the top 20 most reviewed list that is currently featured.
Trolling has pretty much been nipped in the bud with having to register, as well as my ability to ban people completely from the site. I have not had to do this yet, but the feature is in place, waitng to utilized.Originally posted by Emar:Also I would have to think that now that you are required to log in and give out your e-mail address to post a review that trolling has pretty much dwindled off (have not seen much of Tommy Tiddlywinks or whatever his name was). Before it was entirely possible for anyone to make up a name and post a review and I think that this could be one of the reasons for less reviews now.
That's why I'm thinking a different ratio; 1 review = 2 DL's, or 1 review = 5 DL's. I would want to strike a fair balance between requiring reviews and allowing downloads, especially if the player wants to just get a couple for entertainment purposes.Originally posted by Emar:Not sure that all folks would want to have to post a review in order to download another scenario. Sometimes I download a bunch but then only play the ones that appeal to me. Would think that this might lead to people posting bogus reviews just so they could download again.
You are correct with regards to the 'bogus review' issue, but that is a possibility now.
True, a player's opinion of a scenario may be biased based on his experience level. A scenario which the author intentionally made challenging for experienced players may overwhelm a novice, thus coloring their response to how the sceanrio was actually to be played. Therefore, they may return an unfavorable review.Originally posted by Emar:And as for the "best scenario" lists well one mans treasure is another ones trash. And most players only play a scenario once, even though anybody who thouroughly playtests a battle or op knows a CM scenario can play out a hundred different ways. At the CM level of combat balance of a scenario often depends on the success of one or two tanks or priority units. Score a lucky hit on a critical enemy unit and suddenly people are griping about how unbalanced your scenario is. I know from playtesting ops that if you play it 50 times you are likely to see a full spread of results, just as if you were rolling dice.
To counter this, what about attaching some kind of experience level to scenarios? For example, the author may indicate that this scenario should be played by beginners to CM, or by experienced grogs.
Hmm. A bit too much rigmarole for people to deal with. Ease of use for both the author and the reviewer is the watchword here.Originally posted by Emar:Having said all that if you do decide to intitute a top 10 list perhaps the worst review or 2 could be ignored in the scoring (but not deleted). Another possibility is that when a review is posted it could be set up to not officially affect the scenario score until the author can reply to it. Then have it set up so the reviewer would have to reply again to confirm or change his review depending on their satisfaction of the authors explanation and rebuttal.
Emar, thanks. It's a challenge to design a system which is at once useful, easy, and informative.Originally posted by Emar:Admiral I certainly appreciate and applaud your efforts for the CM community. There is no other site like yours
-
Agreed. So far the credit count is 10 free downloads prior to needing to input 1 review. Anyone want a different ratio? Perhaps 1 review = 2 DL credits.Originally posted by GJK:You've got to give credit when a member joins or else they wont be able to download a scenario in order to review it.
Field level help would go far to assisting with this idea. This would require criteria from authors as to the nature of the information they want they reviewer to enter.Originally posted by GJK:Perhaps a "Reviewers Guideline" is in order as well. I personally tend to just go middle of the road unless something exceptional stood out in a positive or negative way, but I can guarantee that if I stacked up a couple of my reviews together, I would see several instances of "hmmm, gave that map a 5 and this one a 4, yet the second one was actually better in my opinion".
-
Is this something authors really want? Although it is easy to implement, what would the authors want to do with the data? Sure, the authors can get a list of people who downloaded your scenario, but do the authors want to then begin pestering players for reviews?Originally posted by GreenAsJade:Heck, make it so you have to register to download too, so we can see who's downloading heaps and reviewing little...
GaJ.
Even if there is simply a list of usernames and download counts ratioed to review counts, that's a feature that might cause many people to stop downloading and playing altogether.
This will really have to be justified by the authors and approved by a large number of players prior to implementation.
-
No worries, mate! Every forum member who cares about supporting the author's ability to refine and enhance their work should be participating in this discussion.Originally posted by GreenAsJade:Adm - thanks so much for listening to our feedback and being prepared to contemplate change yet again!
True, but the simpler, the better. I'm looking for systems which have a broad degree of usefullness to both players and authors, yet are easy to implement and use.Originally posted by GreenAsJade:There will be as many different system suggestions as people responding, I'm sure.
Something similar to (I know it's atrocious English, but...):Originally posted by GreenAsJade:The issue of the person being reviewedm not liking reviews is not unique. Even EBay has it, and copes, with an (mostly) automated system.
Here is my suggestion...
1) Get rid of all existing numeric scales and replace them with one: recommendation for the scenario - a rating of 1 to 5.
This is really the most useful thing that you can record a number for - to help users quickly find highly recommended scenarios. This is the thing that has gone away in V2.
My Scenario Recommendation
1 Excellent
2 Good
3 Fair
4 Below Average
5 Poor
Everyone MUST keep in mind that ANY numeric scale is subjective to the reader. Thus, it will be incumbent upon the reviewer to clarify their position through the text review portion.
Simple enough.Originally posted by GreenAsJade:2) Have a check box to indicate whether the recommendation is for PBEM or AI, and make both the PBEM and AI ratings of scenarios available.
People are looking for either PBEM or AI, not both at the same time (usually).
OK, although eliciting that information from people is usually like pulling teeth. This can be alleviated by me providing more explicit instructions above the text area, which ddescribes the type of information the player should be discussing. Conversely, I could create field-level help which provides information specific to the field in question.Originally posted by GreenAsJade:3) Have a text review section where people are encouraged to discuss map design, play balance, briefing etc, but not give ratings to those.
I'm liking this, although I also forsee implementation of the "Was This Review Helpful?" for the players. Thus, both players and authors get to rate the review.Originally posted by GreenAsJade:SO:
When I review a scenario, I log in, click "PBEM" or "AI", select a number from 1 to 5 as recommendation rating, and optionally provide a text review.
The rating is _clearly_ subjective (so we don't have arguments about the details of how to come up with it) and the review process is made very easy for those who want to provide feedback quickly.
4) Make it so that you have to register to review.
The _designers_ can give the _reviewers_ a rating.
One rating from each designer for each reviewer - a "fairness" number, and some text to explain why. The designers can probably change their rating if things change. Everyone can see a reviewer's ratings, just like EBay. Maybe list the "Top 10 review contributors" and "Top 10 fair reviewers".
It's early and I'm having some trouble following this. I'll have to re-read it more carefully later on. I'm also a little concerned about page load time with the number of calculations that would need to be performed.Originally posted by GreenAsJade:...And the average of a reviewer's rating is used to weight their recommendation rating on the overall score for every scenario they review.
Ideally, the overall recommendation calculation for each scenario that a reviewer has reviewed would be revised each time that reviewer's rating changes.
Many of these thoughts do have significant merit. Let's see how they either stand on their own, or can be meshed with other ideas.Originally posted by GreenAsJade:Hence repeat offenders become less and less significant in ratings, while becoming more and more obvious in their own rating page.
This moves the argument away from one bad review ... one bad review: put up with it... if they are really a troll, it will emerge.
Whadaya reckon?
GaJ.
-
Point taken.Originally posted by DEY:I think the review system that is in place is fine, if people want to post a review then they do so, if not, thats fine also. Everybody has a different idea of what or how a battle should play out like. If you only download a battle because of a review then I would call that stupid. If I'm made to review a battle before I can download other battles then I won't be around that site anymore.
Yep, it's a little awkward right now; that's wht it's being updated.Originally posted by DEY:As far as I'm concerned, what needs a major overhaul at SD is in the author administration area, this as it is, is a nightmare. As it is right now I'm not even going to attempt to upload anymore battles, or update the ones I have there, for that matter either. I only hope that the things keith has said would be done in that area, well be done, because that to me needs immediate attention.
These items are being coded as we speak...er, write.Originally posted by DEY:Those things are the ability to overwrite previous battles, able to delete previous battles. able to change data fields in the scenario data page without having to upload the battle again.
So far, no dice. Although they have extended my employment to the end of next January, it's only a Stay of Execution, not a Reprieve.Originally posted by DEY:I hope your job prospects have worked out well for you Keith.
-
All,
I'm out of town for the rest of today and most of tomorrow. I'll respond in detail to everyone on Monday.
-
v1 was in operation for 21 months with a total of 5879 reviews (CMBO/CMBB/CMAK battles/operations/maps) = 279.95/monthOriginally posted by Richie:Can I ask if you get more reviews since v2 or less reviews?
v2 has been in operation for 4 months with a total of 470 reviews = 117.5/month
A lot of old timers coming back
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
Old?!? I like to think of it as well-preserved, especially given all of the high ABV potables I have brewed and consumed of late.