Page 4 of 11
Posted: Thu Aug 18, 2016 10:24 pm
by Dome
Wasp wrote:QUOTE (Wasp @ Aug 18 2016, 05:53 AM) If you look at the dates of our posts, you can see that we were discussing this on the 12th and 13th of August which was around 4 days ago.
He might be asking when R5 was released, or when the problem was introduced, to back up his claim that he told us so.
Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2016 12:53 am
by Zixzix
Dome wrote:QUOTE (Dome @ Aug 19 2016, 01:24 AM) He might be asking when R5 was released, or when the problem was introduced, to back up his claim that he told us so.
I thought so too, but maybe Wasp was telling him to read earlier posts that say when the problem was introduced (2009).
Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2016 2:19 pm
by Wasp
I know what he was asking for and why he was asking for it. He is looking to make an argument so I derailed him immediately.
He lost all credibility when he applied bayesian probability (trueskill) to the ranking system while ignoring the underlying premise that the players must be the sole responsible party for game outcome.
edit:typo
Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2016 6:12 pm
by Sgt_BakerII
Wasp wrote:QUOTE (Wasp @ Aug 19 2016, 03:19 PM) I know what he was asking for and why he was asking for it. He is looking to make an argument so I derailed him immediately.
He lost all credibility when he applied baysien probability to the ranking system while ignoring the underlying premise that the players must be the sole responsible party for game outcome.
Erm, yeah. Thanks for the derailing, as you put it.
Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2016 7:03 pm
by Wasp
Sgt_BakerII wrote:QUOTE (Sgt_BakerII @ Aug 19 2016, 02:12 PM) Erm, yeah. Thanks for the derailing...
wasn't difficult...
Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2016 7:58 pm
by Sgt_BakerII
And you wonder why nothing ever gets done around here?
Struggling to fix bugs introduced seven years ago yet still with the bickering and ad hominems?
Please, don't allow me to stand in the way of this paradigm of professionalism and grounded thinking.
Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2016 8:08 pm
by Wasp
Sgt_BakerII wrote:QUOTE (Sgt_BakerII @ Aug 19 2016, 03:58 PM) And you wonder why nothing ever gets done around here?
Am I wondering that?
Sgt_BakerII wrote:QUOTE (Sgt_BakerII @ Aug 19 2016, 03:58 PM) Struggling to fix bugs introduced seven years ago yet still with the bickering and ad hominems?
No, I'm using Visual Studio
Sgt_BakerII wrote:QUOTE (Sgt_BakerII @ Aug 19 2016, 03:58 PM) Please, don't allow me to stand in the way...
I won't
Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2016 11:39 pm
by Sgt_BakerII
(I image-googled "Fat Controller laughing". That's the best I could get.)
Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 7:45 pm
by Wasp
I threw this project out for "bid" and I got a few bites. The downside is that in each case, the Dx9 project is far more difficult than pushing the Dx7 version "up to date" so to speak.
I think the Devs got in over their head and was simply too ambitious when trying to leap from Dx7 to Dx9. Even though, Dx9 was put into place and you're stuck with it.
Given the history of the FA Organization, it will never be corrected so if you want it working, you'll have to do as they suggested 6 years ago..."fix it yourself".
Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 8:43 pm
by lexaal
I want to say that i currently reimplement allegiance. Instead of dx9/dx7 i will use node.js combined with assembler. This combo is popular for some reason.
CU in two weeks