Keydet
Member
I think 5 or so seeing as I am 72. Being so broken down gives an older impression.
SITREP
- Thread starter Dave 'Arjuna' O'Connor
- Start date
- Copy link Copy link
Dave 'Arjuna' O'Connor
Panther Games Designer
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2014
- Messages
- 3,416
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Canberra, Australia
- Website
- www.panthergames.com
I turn 69 in February, So I must be decaying at a faster rate than I thought. 
MarkShot
Member
Don't mind me, Dave. Maybe it was just the meetings that had been set up for you in DC which were stressing you out. I remember, but for the meal, you went back to the hotel to continuing preparing your presentation.
Just hang for 10 more years and both you and CO2 can have your own personal weights generated for an LLM and be immortal. You remember how in DC, they wanted the engine to handle helicopters (paras and gliders had lost their significance)? Now, you got even more coding, since anyone who purchases for commercial use will want drone recon and swarming attack behavior.
When I started as a software engineer in the 70's, AI was a big joke and black sheep of the field. Finally, Big Blue beat Kasparov, but all we go out of it was not thought, but a specialized algorithm and some heuristics for playing chess. It would become: Stockfish, Fritz, Shredder, HiArcs, ...
AI is no joke now. But I will tell you it is not Computer Science, it is alchemy. Most progress is the result of tinkering without theory or mathematics behind. The greatest use of Computer Science is creating the training Corpus and the electrical engineering CAD design and production of the silicon.
Just hang for 10 more years and both you and CO2 can have your own personal weights generated for an LLM and be immortal. You remember how in DC, they wanted the engine to handle helicopters (paras and gliders had lost their significance)? Now, you got even more coding, since anyone who purchases for commercial use will want drone recon and swarming attack behavior.
When I started as a software engineer in the 70's, AI was a big joke and black sheep of the field. Finally, Big Blue beat Kasparov, but all we go out of it was not thought, but a specialized algorithm and some heuristics for playing chess. It would become: Stockfish, Fritz, Shredder, HiArcs, ...
AI is no joke now. But I will tell you it is not Computer Science, it is alchemy. Most progress is the result of tinkering without theory or mathematics behind. The greatest use of Computer Science is creating the training Corpus and the electrical engineering CAD design and production of the silicon.
Chelco
Member
Hi Dave,
I hope you are recovering.
Hi Mark,
How is going? It has been eons.
I hope you are recovering.
Hi Mark,
How is going? It has been eons.
MarkShot
Member
Mi hermano. Vivo. Vaya bien!
I live in Greater China now. As a Latino, you would be in for serious culture shock. They love their beans here too, but serve them sweet in deserts; and they eat fruit with salt. Send me some plantanos verdes, I will pay in gold. 'Nuf said.
Fantastic to hear from you. PM if you want email.
I live in Greater China now. As a Latino, you would be in for serious culture shock. They love their beans here too, but serve them sweet in deserts; and they eat fruit with salt. Send me some plantanos verdes, I will pay in gold. 'Nuf said.
Fantastic to hear from you. PM if you want email.
Chelco
Member
I'm Argentinean, not Mexican, Dude!
PM is going your way with my e-mail.
Cheers,
JC
PM is going your way with my e-mail.
Cheers,
JC
Zovs
Member
Greetings! I am new to this forum and to Command Ops 2. For whatever reason I missed seeing the original games (HTTR, COTA, and BFTB) back in the early 2000s at Matrix Games, and did not know about Panther Games or Command Ops 2 until the last few weeks. I used Steam to give the base game a try and am very blown away with the system.
I hope that there is a patch that was discussed and that more DLC's come out. Looking forward to the Steam sale on the 21st and hope some discounts are available.
Thanks Dave for the game and Devin for getting me able to post here.
I hope that there is a patch that was discussed and that more DLC's come out. Looking forward to the Steam sale on the 21st and hope some discounts are available.
Thanks Dave for the game and Devin for getting me able to post here.
Dave 'Arjuna' O'Connor
Panther Games Designer
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2014
- Messages
- 3,416
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Canberra, Australia
- Website
- www.panthergames.com
SITREP Fri 15 Dec 23
Hi all,
Back at my desk now this last fortnight since the cast came off my arm. It's slowly regaining strength. My typing is almost at full capacity. The autotest-bug fix cycle continues. I've fixed most of the bugs introduced with the overhaul of the attack code.
Unlike the earlier attack code, the new code sees more cases where the subject of a plan is hived off from the main force group (FG). The aim is to see the force move as one from its current position to the assembly loc, then to the reserveLoc, FUP and finally assaulting the objective loc. For complex attacks the sequence is startLoc, assemblyLoc, bossResLoc, subResLoc, FUP, objLoc. At the bossResLoc we drop off the Bde HQ and support units. At the subResLoc we drop off the Bn HQ and its support uniuts. In each case the rest of the mainFG continues on to the next loc.
So, now we have cases where the various HQs get hived off. They then stop processing the moveToReserve task and start their next task, which is a defend at the resLoc. All good, so far. The rest of the mainFG is supposed to then start the move to subResLoc or move to FUP task (whichever is appropriate. Alas they are not because the boss has failed to advise them that he has stopped the task.
II did a double take when I first saw this and assumed I must have clobbered some of the scheduling code. But after an exhaustive review I realise that this bug has been in the code a long time. It was just that previously we rarely hived off the subject, so the FG would not have changed between his current and next task and his subordinates would have received new orders as part of his next task.
So, I'm knee deep this afternoon coding up a new CompleteTask event to address this shortcoming. I've done a first cut but will need to finish this off next week.
I would like to take this opportunity to wish you all a merry Xmas to all. May it bring you peace, especially to those in war torn affected areas. May all the warped egos that have brought conflict to this world see the error of their ways.
Hi all,
Back at my desk now this last fortnight since the cast came off my arm. It's slowly regaining strength. My typing is almost at full capacity. The autotest-bug fix cycle continues. I've fixed most of the bugs introduced with the overhaul of the attack code.
Unlike the earlier attack code, the new code sees more cases where the subject of a plan is hived off from the main force group (FG). The aim is to see the force move as one from its current position to the assembly loc, then to the reserveLoc, FUP and finally assaulting the objective loc. For complex attacks the sequence is startLoc, assemblyLoc, bossResLoc, subResLoc, FUP, objLoc. At the bossResLoc we drop off the Bde HQ and support units. At the subResLoc we drop off the Bn HQ and its support uniuts. In each case the rest of the mainFG continues on to the next loc.
So, now we have cases where the various HQs get hived off. They then stop processing the moveToReserve task and start their next task, which is a defend at the resLoc. All good, so far. The rest of the mainFG is supposed to then start the move to subResLoc or move to FUP task (whichever is appropriate. Alas they are not because the boss has failed to advise them that he has stopped the task.
II did a double take when I first saw this and assumed I must have clobbered some of the scheduling code. But after an exhaustive review I realise that this bug has been in the code a long time. It was just that previously we rarely hived off the subject, so the FG would not have changed between his current and next task and his subordinates would have received new orders as part of his next task.
So, I'm knee deep this afternoon coding up a new CompleteTask event to address this shortcoming. I've done a first cut but will need to finish this off next week.
I would like to take this opportunity to wish you all a merry Xmas to all. May it bring you peace, especially to those in war torn affected areas. May all the warped egos that have brought conflict to this world see the error of their ways.
Grognerd
Member
Merry Christmas to you too Dave & may you and your family have a great new year!
jimcarravallah
Member
Merry Christmas to you and yours, Dave.
john connor
Member
All the best, Dave! Enjoy the Xmas break!
MarkShot
Member
Merry Christmas to you Dave. God bless you.
Chelco, I will write late. I get a case food poisoning. Over the worst, but weak, getting back into bed. !Veliz Navidad!
Chelco, I will write late. I get a case food poisoning. Over the worst, but weak, getting back into bed. !Veliz Navidad!
Agent Smith
Member
Happy New Year to all; may '24 be a whole lot better than '23.
(with all the medical posts... me, a mere youngster at 58 gives me something to look forward to.)
(with all the medical posts... me, a mere youngster at 58 gives me something to look forward to.)
john connor
Member
How's it going, Dave? Any chance of an update on the update? Any chance, realistically, of 2024 being the year that this update gets released? Or is there a lot more work still to be done?
Last edited:
Dave 'Arjuna' O'Connor
Panther Games Designer
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2014
- Messages
- 3,416
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Canberra, Australia
- Website
- www.panthergames.com
Peter,
1. Good.
2. Yes. I'm in the final stretch where I continually auto-test and fix bugs till there are no more asserts.
3. Definitely
4. There is always more work to be done.
Last week's auto-test resulted in 20 recordings. The most common one (six of the twenty) was to do with the FUP and objective offsets for sub-attacks. When a Bde launches a complex attack, it creates a number of sub attacks and assigns a subordinate HQ to each along with line and support units. Each of these sub attacks has its own FUP and objLoc and these need to be offset from the Bde one according to the attack formation - either line or echelon.
I had completely rewritten part of this code but not the other part. Guess what... the assert was in the other part. So, this week I rewrote that part. Today I got it working only to realise that the left sub attack in a line of three had 670 personnel in its force but it included two HQs, a base and a mortar platoon, all of which are not assault capable. These would end up in the sub attack's reserveLoc, leaving a lone inf company and an AT unit to stretch across the entire frontage allotted to it. The solution is for the offset code to use the force's assaultPersQty rather than the totalPersQty. But I will have to modify the code that allocates forces to an attack to use this value as well, so it more evenly distributes the assault capable units. That I will do tomorrow. This is just a typical week at the office for me right now.
1. Good.
2. Yes. I'm in the final stretch where I continually auto-test and fix bugs till there are no more asserts.
3. Definitely
4. There is always more work to be done.
Last week's auto-test resulted in 20 recordings. The most common one (six of the twenty) was to do with the FUP and objective offsets for sub-attacks. When a Bde launches a complex attack, it creates a number of sub attacks and assigns a subordinate HQ to each along with line and support units. Each of these sub attacks has its own FUP and objLoc and these need to be offset from the Bde one according to the attack formation - either line or echelon.
I had completely rewritten part of this code but not the other part. Guess what... the assert was in the other part. So, this week I rewrote that part. Today I got it working only to realise that the left sub attack in a line of three had 670 personnel in its force but it included two HQs, a base and a mortar platoon, all of which are not assault capable. These would end up in the sub attack's reserveLoc, leaving a lone inf company and an AT unit to stretch across the entire frontage allotted to it. The solution is for the offset code to use the force's assaultPersQty rather than the totalPersQty. But I will have to modify the code that allocates forces to an attack to use this value as well, so it more evenly distributes the assault capable units. That I will do tomorrow. This is just a typical week at the office for me right now.
john connor
Member
Wow. As ever, the complexity seems truly daunting. But good news you're positive, still going at it and hopeful of a result! Well done. Thanks.
Guy Miller
Member
no offense, but, is this ever going to get done? doesn't feel like it.
Not a terribly productive question, is it? Suppose, the developer answers “Yes, it will get done” - it will not change the pace of work, hence nothing will change. Suppose he says, “not sure, taking a while so far” - again, nothing changes. I am not considering a straight “no” - makes no sense, given the ongoing efforts.
