Searching T-72

[Sergei]

I seem to be unable to use T-72 or T-62 as search key words in this... wonderful software. Neither do BMP-2 or T-34 work, which leads me to suspect that it's the hyphen that is causing issues here. Getting around that obstacle by using quotation marks or removing the hyphen doesn't yield results either.

Now, of course in a wargaming board that is excusable, because it's not very often that you'd like to look up discussions about some Soviet piece of armour, but nevertheless... if any of you knows a solution, do tell.

[Moon]

That's a valid point. There is a setting in vBulleting which allows me to include specific search terms despite other possible limitations (e.g. "vB" is added by default )

I have just added BMP-2, T-34, T-72, and T-62. If you can think of any others you want, post here. I haven't tested if it works yet. It's possible that it will take a few days because the search index needs to be refreshed first I assume.

[Sivodsi]

How about LAV-AT?

Also, I'm surprised that when I search for 'bug' nothing comes up. Its great news that CMSF has no bugs!

[Chainsaw]

That's a valid point. There is a setting in vBulleting which allows me to include specific search terms despite other possible limitations (e.g. "vB" is added by default )

I have just added BMP-2, T-34, T-72, and T-62. If you can think of any others you want, post here. I haven't tested if it works yet. It's possible that it will take a few days because the search index needs to be refreshed first I assume.

T-55 maybe?

[Sergei]

That's great, let's hope it works in a few days. Warning: this is going to be a long (and by no means all-inclusive) list...

BMP-1

BMP-3

T-55

T-54

T-64

T-90

T-80

T-84

KV-1

KV-2

KV-85

JS-1

JS-2

JS-3

IS-1

IS-2

IS-3

BA-10

BA-20

BA-64

T-26

T-28

T-35

T-37

T-38

T-40

T-50

T-60

T-44

BT-2

BT-5

BT-7

BT-42

SU-76

SU-85

SU-100

SU-122

SU-152

ISU-122

ISU-152

PT-76

ZSU-23

ZSU-57

T-800, T-1000

[Elmar Bijlsma]

Moon, while your offer is an example of the good service BFC want to provide, I ask myself (an now you) how realistic a solution it is. The military acronyms, unit and vehicle designations are near inexhaustible. And then there are those that fall outside that category but really need to provide a hit too, like the aforementioned 'bug'.

No chance the old search engine can come back? It was quite good.

As a workaround I've had some success searching with Google for forum posts. It's a bit hit and miss but for those searches the current system can't deal with, it's better then nothing.

[Moon]

Moon, while your offer is an example of the good service BFC want to provide, I ask myself (an now you) how realistic a solution it is.

Well, I can simply copy and paste the list from Sergei above. Takes a few seconds. Not sure if it will actually work, though. If not, tough luck

[Elmar Bijlsma]

I'm not sure were tuned to the same radio channel, Moon.

What if I'm looking for posts about the A9? It's not on Sergei's list. Do you take requests? Merely adding the US aircraft designations would keep you busy for a while. And then there are the Germans with their wacky designations.

[Sergei]

The silly Dutch boy is right.

[Other Means]

I'm not sure were tuned to the same radio channel, Moon.

What if I'm looking for posts about the A9? It's not on Sergei's list. Do you take requests? Merely adding the US aircraft designations would keep you busy for a while. And then there are the Germans with their wacky designations.

Word.

xxxxx

[Sergei]

Btw. I love it how the profanity filter bleeps out words such as ****, but it doesn't actually replace them (see for yourself by quoting this message), it just shows them in censored form. So, you can search for the F-word and it gives you the right threads. Awesome.

Now if this ****ing piece of **** just would find me all T-72 threads, I'd be happy.

edit: turns out I was wrong, I guess that only works for older posts.

[Moon]

OK, fair enough. No changes made then.

[dan/california]

Moon, this can be filed under "No good deed goes unpunished".

[Sgt Joch]

Btw. I love it how the profanity filter bleeps out words such as ****, but it doesn't actually replace them (see for yourself by quoting this message), it just shows them in censored form. So, you can search for the F-word and it gives you the right threads. Awesome.

Now if this ****ing piece of **** just would find me all T-72 threads, I'd be happy.

edit: turns out I was wrong, I guess that only works for older posts.

****ing awesome!

[Elmar Bijlsma]

Moon, this can be filed under "No good deed goes unpunished".

Nonsense, I asked a fair question relating to a shortcoming in the proposed idea.

[hoolaman]

If not, tough luck

Nice.

Why not reduce the minimum search string to TWO characters instead of three?

While you are at it, how about reducing the ridiculous minimum charater count per post to ONE instead of ten?

If there is one example where forcing people to post more than ten characters is useful I'd like to hear it.

[jenrick]

No one going "+1" when they agree with a post off the top of my head.

-Jenrick

[teeps]

Not sure if vBulletin will actually allow those things to be changed will it?

[John Kettler]

Moon,

The present character limit for searches is a huge pain. Recently, I tried searching for M61 AP, only to have my search rejected because it didn't like "AP." It took a lot of digging under the revised phrase "M61 armor piercing" to reply to a CMAK post with the thread in which the topic was first discussed, all because of the phrase length imposed. Further, the new search engine behaves like it's been on a bad trip, throwing up all sorts of crazy unrelated stuff for no apparent reason. Personally, I consider it the Great Leap Backwards compared to its predecessor.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Other Means]

+1

______________________________________________________________________________________________

[Moon]

Moon,

The present character limit for searches is a huge pain. Recently, I tried searching for M61 AP, only to have my search rejected because it didn't like "AP." It took a lot of digging under the revised phrase "M61 armor piercing" to reply to a CMAK post with the thread in which the topic was first discussed, all because of the phrase length imposed. Further, the new search engine behaves like it's been on a bad trip, throwing up all sorts of crazy unrelated stuff for no apparent reason. Personally, I consider it the Great Leap Backwards compared to its predecessor.

Regards,

John Kettler

Don't slam the search engine because it's infinitely better than the old one. Where the problem lies is in indexing all the old imported posts and threads. I am going to reduce the search limit to two characters.

[Moon]

Actually, thinking about it some more, no, I am not going to change it. A 2 letter limit would include a lot of extremely common clutter in to the search index, blow up the database a LOT, and be very server-intensive. Case closed.