Swedish Hero bring you folks....., ANOTHER BUG. THE AA INTERCEPTION BUG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Shaka of Carthage]

Bill101 made the point I wanted to make. This is Anti-Aircraft Radar. This may not be the intended effect that Mr H wanted, so in that case it could be considered a bug. But just as strong an argument can be made for why its a good idea, which is a good thing, especially since there is little chance of it being changed.

Zapp and Rambo have done a good thing in working out what happened. Thank you.

Zapp and Terif, its disappointing that the bad blood between the two of you can't be handled in a different way. Just like there is no point in asking for the two of you to patch it up between you, there is no point in asking for the two of you to stop being so sensitive when the other one says something, turning a discussion into an argument.

There is a old movie about two French officers, during the Napelonic era, who have a slight disagreement, and over the next few years, every time they meet, they have a duel. I think the name of the movie is called The Duel. Its a shame that dueling isn't legal anymore.

[ November 16, 2003, 05:05 PM: Message edited by: Shaka of Carthage ]

[Iron Ranger]

Zapp: You are right, I've just tested that. That is what needs to be amended, so that the radar helps both sides where applicable, rather than just the attacker.

Just tested it, I was wrong - makes the air war even worse (I think, still too new to see all ave).

The 'bug' is that attacking air that gets intersecpted becomes 'defensive' and gains the AA tech advantage. I had hope this was wrong and that only intersecpting air (since its acting in a defense role - though in game terms its 'attacking' would be the bonus). Its actuly the oppisite of would you would see in the real world.

So: if you attack a air unit in a city directly it gets the AA tech - same as we knew.

But:

1) if you attack with a air unit in a city and its intercepted - the ATTACKING unit gains the AA tech advantage becaue its now 'defending' against the intercepting air unit

2)If a Bomber attacks a ground unit and is intercepted from an air unit in a city with AA tech - then an air unit supports the bomber from a city with AA tech the roles are reversed - the intercepting air unit gets the AA tech (it is 'defending' itself from the supporting air unit)

This is not good the definition of intercepting air need to be swaped from Attacking (its going after the other are after all) to Defending (thats what its doing, defending the unit attacked).

This will be exploted, I would do it. And it makes attacking air units in citys with AA tech(or carriers in port) SUPER POWERFULL. They get to attack the first unit and carry their defesive bonus against the intersecpting air unit. Two powerfull punchs for the price of one.

By 1942 with high Jet and AA tech you'll see a single unit completely wipe out a 'defending unit'. I think once a side has contol or the air it will not be possalbe to take it back if they have AA and Jets.

Solotion - Air units can't base in citys - or you limit the # of air units on the board - or ?????????????

I don't like HRs yet I'm the person pushing them the most - maybe its time to quit this game - Rambos time sheet say's it all.

[Codename Condor]

Originally posted by Bill101:

Besides, it's a discovery that helps the allies more initially. Maybe it's one step forward to abolishing bidding?

Not at all. This bug really can help more Axis than Allies, it could be the best way when u plan to defend france. Initially it helps allies very little.

[zappsweden]

Iron Ranger. That things u said now are what I meant but I did not write enough words. Feeling the frustration?

You understand why I brought this up and why I got frustrated when some ppl (Terif) act like this is just a minor thing?

This is for real. The BUGS are back in town. Get me the exterminators and spray those BUGS out.

[Dragonheart]

Well very interesting story

I did not know about this bug. In one of my games against Zapp i tried something different and had 4 chits in AA, but i was unlucky and got only lvl 2

my air was dead before i would have had an advantage there. AA was not a crap before and not now...as German player you should avoid air and carrier training...and if you need your air somewhere else...you have to invest into AA.

I invested in AA in the past and i will invest in AA in future....but now i know how to use it better.

But like every gamble this has also a plus and a minus and a counter for sure.....

i wanna have strong infantry

i wanna have super-tanks

i wanna have LR

i wanna have Jet

I wanna have AA

i wanna have supersubs

i wanna have strong ships

and after all i want all of that cheap!! so i wanna have technology too.

Conclusion.....i have only 10 chits as axis maybe only 5 as allied ....where i should invest??????????

Do you all understand my point??? Now come back and play and have fun.....this is a message to everybody....you fools!!! ...don´t be angry for my sarcastic words.....but use your mind.

Over and out

Dragonheart

[Dragonheart]

Hi again

I have already new names for you

Zapp 2 ; Rambo 4 (the quattrologie), iron ranger 3

Terif 2 ROFL

no sense for humor hmmmmm? hehe

I consider quitting too....and have a riddle for you....what is my new name ?? ROFL

[Iron Ranger]

DH,

I think its a question of burnout. I think the four of us are the last of the v1.04 gang - Rambo being the 'oldest' of us. Just as the v1.00 gand turned over stuff to us so we too will quit and see others continue the game.

I enjoy the simple surface yet complex depth of SC, and the fact it can take 20-40 hours to play is, at times, a good thing. But we all have real lifes and sometimes seeing something we thought was fixed in the past makes you figure you should spend more time on it. I still enjoy the game, and I think I've found so real exellent HRs that make it balaced for both sides, but there are still bugs, and most of them are minor, but this one could significaly effect the game. Already we see alot of players quit at the first major mistake, they get depressed and want to start a new game. Its one thing to do this as a newbie another to do it as an experenced player. And I'm not talking about conceadeing in a hopless situation but this bug could significaly 'quicken'.

OK, I'm tired and rambleing along. Foolish me, forget it. Lots of bugs out there, make a list for Hubert? Zapp likes doing things like this, perhaps he will again. We'll know tomarrow as MR H has been responding to post alot lately.

Its too bad the intersecpting air doesn't get the tech Bonus, then I think this would be one of the great 'equalixations' in the game and bring air fleets back to earth.

Iron

[Curry]

Zapp, thanks for sharing this in the open and not keeping it to yourself.

Now that it is in the open isn't it equal for all to use? Could it at all help the allies?

[Hubert Cater]

It's unfortunate to hear you guys have probably found another bug, but to be honest I don't think it will really be feasible for me to do much about at this point. I'll think about it but tracking and fixing bugs on a closed game will take some time and believe me it's time that I would much rather spend on SC2.

I hope this doesn't come across the wrong way but this could and most likely would take a considerable amount of time.... some background on the process required is to track (re-familiarize myself with the SC1 code, as it's not 100% fresh in my mind anymore as my brain as progressed to SC2), test(internally by me), test (externally via beta testers), then double check there were no new bugs introduced, recompile and repackage which not only includes the Battlefront version but the variety of retail versions out there and in the end you could be looking at anywhere between 2-4 weeks before this would see the light of day.

Again, and just being honest, considering I am just a one man shop it's an amount of time I would much rather spend on SC2 to get it done that much sooner. Like most things and probably for most people, having my brain switch tasks is not a good thing as it takes a while to get that inspiration back and well just to get back on track (which is one reason I spent almost a year supporting SC1 after release, as a first game I wanted it to be as close to perfection before moving on).

Since engine wise there are some overlap similarities between SC1 and SC2 the least I can do is ensure whatever bugs are still (or continue to be) found in SC1 I will correct these for SC2.

Probably not the best answer but regardless I hope this helps,

Hubert

[jon_j_rambo]

Hubert --- Thanks for the response, the bug was found in a Heavyweight match (Zapp vs Rambo). When should I expect a check in the mail for finding stuff? I about launched my terminal after seeing the Luftwaffen get chewed up so early in the game.

Before you debut SC-2, let me know the time frame you need bugs logged.

Rambo, Legend of Smack

Rambo, Legend of Playing

Rambo, Legend of Testing

[ November 17, 2003, 10:08 AM: Message edited by: jon_j_rambo ]

[Iron Ranger]

Sad but not totally unexpected. I could go into the detail of what I've seen, but I've posted it above, if you need more info or my impression you can e-mail me and I'll try to convay my (and I think Zapps) thoughts.

Hey Moon, nice job on the quick lock - LOL.

[zappsweden]

Hubert.

I am very dissapointed since I though bringing bugs to the table would mean they got fixed.

After all, it is not us players responsability to test the software. The software should be properly tested before the release. If some things get through the testing phase undetected we at leist expect it to be fixed when we discover them. Especially since SC still is THE game. It would be different if SC2 was already standard because then SC would be outdated.

If SC is left with bugs still in it, it will lower the reputation and goodwill for the next game (not saying it is on a low level though). SC is an indication. A perfect SC would mean long term gains. I hesitate less if I know the last game was great.

For instance, I bought Railroad Tycoon 3 just after watching some screenshots and description. I never cared about a demo. Since RT1 and RT2 were great games I ASSUMED RT3 would be great. Indication.

[ November 17, 2003, 10:20 AM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[Desert Dave]

As originally posted by Terif:

Summary:

Condor is right, nobody detected this "bug" cause it has simply no effect on the gameplay and is not noticable in a normal game. Now players have more incentives to go for AA tech, but I think it is still a waste of mpp to invest much in this area. AA is nice to have, but usually there are lots of better investments

Condor and Terif are right.

There is no such thing as a PERFECT product, I don't care whether it is... a computer game, a shiny new Volvo or a #2 pencil.

For those who are "competitive perfectionists" and who scrabble around to find every TINY advantage, well, as Terif has also said... maybe it is time to just... have FUN again.

You CAN anyway have a house rule that AFs cannot base in cities, and the Carrier cannot attack from a port... whatever! After all, there are HRs for several other problem areas, why not this one as well... IF it bothers you. It doesn't bother me a whit.

***I IMPLORE you, Hubert... continue with SC2, and don't let this very MINOR glitch INTERFERE with that design and production.

Anyway, my guess is this: 99.99% of the gamers out here DO NOT truly care about this new "bug." I don't.

I would challenge anyone... name ONE finished computer game that does not STILL HAVE some small way to exploit game-play, whether you call it a bug or a hot-key cheat... c'mon guys, this is not worth the DELAY for SC2, no way, no how.

So.

I would say... let the FEW who cannot sleep right at night over this VERY TINY glitch, well, let them... not sleep quite right at night, and let's keep SC2 moving... FORWARD! :cool:

[Curry]

Mr. H.C.

Thanks for the answer. I for one totally agree with you and completely understand your thinking.

Please continue with SC-II. This is a bug that can be dwelt with by the players now that we all know about it.

[Jim Boggs]

Well now, I don't know about all this, but here's what happened:

I went into Subway and ordered a Swedish Hero with the works, as it were.

As I'm sitting there munching away, a damn bug crawls out from under the lettuce.

Well I was surely pissed about that and immediately called the manager to the table to complain.

"Now see here, my good man, I was told if I brought this bug to the table you would fix it, well?"

The manager took the bug, crushed it in his palm and sprinkled the remains atop the rest of my hero. With a twinkle in his eye he replied:

"Swedish Hero's are supposed to have bugs!!!

[zappsweden]

I have never seen another forum where some ppl seem to want to tone down or belittling faulties found in the game. Currently, in this forum it seems to be more legitimate to bash the complainers. How odd. This is a commercial product we are talking about. I am a consumer. I have my fully right to discuss it.

Immer Etwas does not speak for 99.99% of the players here but he speaks for 100.00% of himself. How does HE know if there are 5, 10 or maybe 100 players that do feel this is a relevant topic?

If a can name a few easily like Rambo, Zappsweden, Kuniworth and Iron Ranger then there are certainly more, so no 99.99% B.S

Why fight about if we care about an issue or not?

If you do not care then just do not read the posts.

Zappsweden>>>>>>>>>>>>>Former SC Player>>>>>>>OUT

[ November 17, 2003, 12:38 PM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[Jim Boggs]

Dear no more Mr nice guy

You have been instrumental in raising the bar on SC. You have devoted a ton of your personal time and effort in running the challenge Thread and then the Z-League. You are an icon of the SC community. I have always had a tremendous respect for what you have done for this game.

That being said, please consider the following:

1) The game cost $25

2) There have already be SEVEN patches to the game.

3) Hubert has shown more commitment to satisfying the players of SC than any software guy I have ever seen.

4) This is his livlihood, patches are free, although the time and effort to produce them are NOT

5) Check out the MOO3 board if you really want to see people trashed for critiscizing a game, and if I may say so MOO3 deserved to be trashed!! :mad:

Anyway, I would ask that you reconsider your exit strategy. Certainly when SC2 rolls out, it won't be the same without Zappsweden on the board.

[Desert Dave]

If you do not care, why read and why post?

If I didn't CARE I wouldn't have spent 18 months posting on this forum.

I have never bashed you about anything Zapp so let's just cool off a little, yes?

Anyway, consider this: IF it is D-Day time, and BOTH sides have... let's say, L2 AA, then BOTH sides will have equal advantage, true?

IOW, the Axis can attack from a city, with L2 AA, and force the Allies to intercept at a disadvantage.

Therefore, NEITHER side has a greater advantage.

Of course, this depends on whether either side will invest 250-500 MPPs for AA tech.

Some, like Terif perhaps, will forego that tech because they have OTHER strategies in mind.

I wouldn't complain unduly about this, unless and until you have MUCH MORE game-play evidence that it would NECESSARILY cause a serious problem.

My guess (... yes, Zapp, just like my other GUESS that MOST players wouldn't be bothered by this) is that there are surely... DISADVANTAGES to investing too many MPPs in AA.

And besides, wouldn't you REALLY TRULY rather have SC2, which will "clean up" many of these small quirks (... to include LC gambit and transport issues) sooner?

The sooner we get SC2, the sooner we can begin discussing, civily, ALL the New! and exciting game features!

You have been around awhile Zapp and have valuable insights and comments to offer... nobody is saying otherwise... :cool:

[pzgndr]

Zapp, just consider AA interception another "feature" and not a bug.

But as a "bug," it IS being addressed and fixed. Along with all the other unresolved bugs and issues in SC. The fix is called SC2. Time to move forward, yes?

[zappsweden]

Immer Etwas. I live in the present. I wont hold any breath for games being in the far future. If u buy a game and and it is not patched how do u know the same thing wont happen again?

You could say that Hubert patched many bugs but since that must imply that there WERE many bugs I do not know if it is just positive.

I rather have one game fully patched than have 3 games with some flaws. This new flaw was not evident but it would have been when ppl started adapting their strategies. I could foresee a major change in air strategy in the 1942-1946 phase of the game. AA L3-L4 would come late in the game but they would come, believe me. It does not matter if this thing benefits both sides as much because it will still produce odd behaviour. I wont play any games just to prove my point since it wont be fixed anyway.

[Bill101]

Immer Etwas speaks for me.

It is something that we will need to bear in mind now, either through preparing strategies to deal with it, or through house rules. I think that the allies, including the Russians, can benefit as much from this as the Axis.

It certainly doesn't ruin a great game.

Roll on SC2, but in the meantime I'm still having a lot of fun with SC1.

[zappsweden]

One more thing. I never said that this AA flaw is particularily better for Allies or Axis. I never said it would win every game. I only mean that it would CHANGE the mid-game and especially the end-game when tactics evolve around using it to gain air superiority. One single interception battle when a AA L4 bonus is used means 3-4 extra points of damage for one of the sides. Yes, the one with the air superiority would be the one capable of exploiting it.

[ November 17, 2003, 02:25 PM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[jon_j_rambo]

What's up with all the whimps? I must be living in the wrong period of time, because 90% of the people are blind, lost, spineless, followers of this world.

I'm backing Zapp all the way on this one, Zapp has shown nothing but concern about the quality of the game. Funny thing is, I was the one bitching him during the game for getting such good results with the RAF placed in London.

1) Rambo bitches, if I don't, nobody would even know about the bug

2) Zapp hears my complaints

3) Zapp investigates & tests the facts

4) the FACTS prove there is a BUG

5) Zapp posts the FACTS

6) Terif opens his piehole, attacking my strategy (independent of the bug, of course)

7) Terif attacks Zapp

8) Rambo posts Terif's timecard on SC

9) Zapp keeps the facts, talks about the BUG

10) All the weak minded come out of the closet, saying..."Come on guys, it's not a bug, quit caring about everything".

11) Some of the weak minded figure out it is a BUG & understand the impact.

It's a bug, plain & simple. It impacts the game. I'm sure there is somebody that knew about it, but I can't say there name or name(s), or there will be crying.

Now it is time to address the masses (Mass equals massacre):

Immer --- Did anybody EVER say NOT to continue w/ SC-2? Yes or no? Repeat, so you understand,"Did anybody EVER say NOT to continue w/ SC-2?". Yes or no. Don't even try to make Zapp or myself critical path for the next software project. Don't make testers feel guilty for reporting the truth. That is so typically of stupid people...Oh, you found a problem, now shut-up. I sleep very well regardless of the World's problems..."Well done thy servant, I give you my blessed rest" --- from the Bible. Next question: Did anybody (Zapp or myself) say that there is any perfect software in the world? ******** I implore you Immer, don't call Zapp or myself "project stoppers" *********** Far as your real game example, I don't think you have the game to back your talk.

Billy Macon-Georgia-Line --- You're comment is well taken, because it is a realistic take.

Billy 101 --- No, it doesn't ruin the game, but it does effect (or affect?) it. The testers did a sorry job testing, they just wanted their name on the credits. Remember, your name is Bill101 (freshman pledge), I'm Rambo777 (top of the class, Masters, PHD).

Curry --- Dude, maybe nobody should have reported all the other bugs found? Maybe there NEVER should have been any patches? Who are you to decide. Zapp & I played a game, reported the facts, & suddenly you're a FIRMWARE RELEASE MANAGER? Are you a FIRMWARE RELEASE MANAGER? Please let me know.

Jimmy "I'm not Bogus" Boggs --- I've never seen a Swedish sandwich at Subway. Actually, the Meatball sandwich is Italian. You hear about Hepatitis breakout in Pittsburgh? Never underestimate the value of bug killing. Your comments (FACTS) are well taken, I know Zapp will recognize it. There are seperate issues in your post. Camp Zapp will evaluate. Zapp has been neutral on many areas, finds bugs, & has set up a competitive enviornment. Just remember that other clown who promised to take over the ladder, he left in a week. Zapp has run things well for 6-months in the Ladders & is a made man.

Rambo doing my job >>> I'm backing Zapp >>> OUT

[Panzer39]

I would much rather see Hubert spend his time working on SC2. If anything this new "bug" will get players to spend some more mpps on AA research.

I've never bought a 25 dollar game and received this much enjoyment nor this many patches. I just hope Hubert starts releasing some more info on SC2 as it becomes prudent.

[Desert Dave]

As originally posted by jon_j_rambo:

Immer --- Did anybody EVER say NOT to continue w/ SC-2? Yes or no? Repeat, so you understand,"Did anybody EVER say NOT to continue w/ SC-2?". Yes or no. Don't even try to make Zapp or myself critical path for the next software project. Don't make testers feel guilty for reporting the truth. That is so typically of stupid people...Oh, you found a problem, now shut-up. I sleep very well regardless of the World's problems..."Well done thy servant, I give you my blessed rest" --- from the Bible. Next question: Did anybody (Zapp or myself) say that there is any perfect software in the world? ******** I implore you Immer, don't call Zapp or myself "project stoppers" *********** Far as your real game example, I don't think you have the game to back your talk.

:confused:

What is the point of this reply?

Can you not discuss issues without flaming someone?

Rather, not someone... but me. What's the matter, you don't... like me... oh, LOL! I am... STUPID...

You seem to be the only member who is allowed to get away with this kind of low level nonsense... very odd. There are others I can think of would be banned for these sort of personal attacks.

Grow up... finally?