Sergei Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sivodsi Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 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! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chainsaw Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted November 12, 2008 Author Share Posted November 12, 2008 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmar Bijlsma Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmar Bijlsma Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted November 12, 2008 Author Share Posted November 12, 2008 The silly Dutch boy is right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Other Means Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted November 12, 2008 Author Share Posted November 12, 2008 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 OK, fair enough. No changes made then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Moon, this can be filed under "No good deed goes unpunished". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt Joch Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 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! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmar Bijlsma Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoolaman Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jenrick Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 No one going "+1" when they agree with a post off the top of my head. -Jenrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teeps Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 Not sure if vBulletin will actually allow those things to be changed will it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Other Means Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 +1 ______________________________________________________________________________________________ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts