Bomb Fuze Update

[LastRifleRound]

6 hours ago, rob10 said:

THIS!  I can't count the number of times where people have insisted they didn't need a track because it was soooo simple to reproduce and people spent a bunch of time trying to reproduce and couldn't and in the end the OP finally realized (or finally posted a track that showed the issue) they had missed something simple.  THAT is why a track is asked for even if it seems simple.

This is a legitimate question (not meant to be snarky, I really do want to understand): why are people so resistant to posting a track?  It's pretty simple to do.  Most of the time people probably spend more time typing why they shouldn't need to post a track than it would have taken to post it.  So why not?  I really am curious.

Because I've done it a 1000 times. Here's what happens 95% of the time:

1. Forum users post immediately and ignore your track, telling you how its definitely your fault anyway, often quoting a useless irrelevant truism from their favorite SME like "not that accurate"

2. If you do not jump on it and argue with people in step 1, thread will be marked "correct as is" without anyone bothering to look at your track. Start over at step 1

3. Congratulations! You made it past step 2. You're told someone will look into it

4. It has been 3 months, nothing has happened, you mention it again

5. "Post a track"

6. Link 3 month old thread

7. Start over at step 2

Also, I could turn this around on you. What's so hard about just trying the basic functionality yourself? In fact, what's so hard about testing the training missions BEFORE a major update?

Why is it my job to make sure ED's training missions work?

Edited July 28, 2024 by LastRifleRound

[Muchocracker]

55 minutes ago, LastRifleRound said:

This is why I hate tracks. You didn't even fully read my post. Look at my post history.

Not a single other thing in your pointless ramble about being asked to provide a track was relevant. Of course i'm not going to address it. You really must be a miserable person to be around if you can't possibly fathom that something you're doing is wrong and it's everything else. 
 

1 hour ago, LastRifleRound said:

You'll find loads and loads of reports with tracks and detailed analysis that hasn't amounted to much. Hows the AG radar designation being inversely affected by aircraft movement coming along?

Idek what you're talking about anymore, this is all entirely irrelevant to this post and my request for a track to diagnose the root cause of the issue through your playing of the mission. Your report on the A/G radar designation is reporting that the bug even exists. Do you not understand that those are 2 different things? And it was acknowledged by ED that it's reported at that, if the bug is acknowledged and reported there's no reason to need to post more tracks. You just raise the issue to get it pushed to be fixed. 
 

55 minutes ago, LastRifleRound said:

It's ED's own Hornet JDAM mission. It's an air start. For people trying to learn the game. Just test it as is. You know, the thing that's supposed to happen before major updates release.

Completely irrelevant whether it's an ED made mission, or your own, or a 3rd party campaign. What matters is the process of how the unintended behavior happens, that is why tracks are asked for. So the process of how the bug is produced can be observed and determine the root cause. 

Even just one example tells you why; A player has an issue with CBU-99's not dispensing the submuntions. Not other detail is given except they used VT1. There are a number of reasons that it may be happening;

-They loaded another pylon of CBU-99's with the mk-339 and caused an MC LOAD fault
-they chose VT1 2 instead of VT1 because of a prior issue where the settings were reversed and they dropped the bomb inside of the DUD envelope making the munition impact the ground before the timed function delay was reached
-the jet was an air start and so it had the old bomb config
-the jet was a ground start and used an old saved loadout which causes the same thing to happen. 

Different causes for the same effect. And that can multiply when you go outside of this scope and look at other weapons and systems. Every single detail matters matters when doing diagnosis, and tracks make that easier for everyone. For me, for other people trying to help, and for the developers. 

[LastRifleRound]

Is it your position that unless a user provides a track you find it literally impossible to find and correct a bug? If it isn't, then what the hell are you arguing with me for?

[Nealius]

If the beta testers spent as much time arguing on forums and insulting customers as they do testing, we wouldn’t have this bug in the first place. 

[Muchocracker]

29 minutes ago, LastRifleRound said:

Is it your position that unless a user provides a track you find it literally impossible to find and correct a bug? If it isn't, then what the hell are you arguing with me for?

Nice ad hom. Where did i say that they had to post a track? I said it makes it easier, espeically when there is no further detail of the failure mode. 

you should look at yourself and ask that question. You went on an angry rant about a completely irrelevant topic screaming at ED when all i prompted was for you to post a track producing the issue so i could give you the proper explanation of what is causing it in that case and the workaround. 

 

19 minutes ago, Nealius said:

If the beta testers spent as much time arguing on forums and insulting customers as they do testing, we wouldn’t have this bug in the first place. 

How do you know what is reported and not reported in testing before an update release? 
 

Edited July 29, 2024 by Muchocracker

[LastRifleRound]

20 minutes ago, Muchocracker said:

Nice ad hom. Where did i say that they had to post a track? I said it makes it easier, espeically when there is no further detail of the failure mode. 

 

How do you know what is reported and not reported in testing before release? 
 

Buddy, an ad hominem is when you attack someone instead of their argument. If I'm being charitable I think you meant strawman, but either way, my argument is that tracks should not be necessary for ordinary course-of-action items, because those are the sorts of things that should be well tested BEFORE updates release. Your argument is that I'm wrong because sometimes the user gets it wrong. I countered that sure, that's true, but when it's something like a training mission that's a bit of a stretch, as that sort of thing should have been tested before the update anyway. You side-stepped that and instead called what I said a rant, and quoted some unrelated prattle about CBU's, that has nothing to do with JDAM training missions. I then re-simplified the argument by trying to see if we can find some common ground. I find it hard to believe that you would actually think that every single bug whatsoever must have a track or it's just not reasonable to expect a fix. If I could get you to agree with that, then we agree in principle then it's a matter of degree.

Instead, you label that re-simplification an ad-hominem (it isn't, that'd be if I called you lazy or said you were a crappy tester or something like that, none of which I did) and here we are.

The funny thing is the bug was actually already reported in the bug section. I'm just pushing back on the way ED has been doing things lately because frankly, it's rubbing a lot of people the wrong way.

Quote

How do you know what is reported and not reported in testing before release? 

So ED has these bug reports on things they know are broken, but make us post tracks of them anyway? On top of that, they're aware that training missions are broken but just don't bother saying anything, leaving it for the users to find and jump hoops for? That's actually worse.

Edited July 29, 2024 by LastRifleRound

[Muchocracker]

4 minutes ago, LastRifleRound said:

my argument is that tracks should not be necessary for ordinary course-of-action items, because those are the sorts of things that should be well tested BEFORE updates release.

How mother of god bro how many times do i have to keep repeating this. Your initial post did not give me enough information to give the right answer to what's causing your bombs to DUD because there are many causes for it. I asked for a track to do that. What is so hard to understand about this? None of this has absolutely anything to do with whether the bug is repeatable or not, nor does it have anything to do with if it's tested before a patch release or not. It was to give you the right answer, not to confirm or deny the bug existed of which it was already reported and i was one of the first to confirm it was a known issue. 

[LastRifleRound]

3 minutes ago, Muchocracker said:

How mother of god bro how many times do i have to keep repeating this. Your initial post did not give me enough information to give the right answer to what's causing your bombs to DUD because there are many causes for it. I asked for a track to do that. What is so hard to understand about this? None of this has absolutely anything to do with whether the bug is repeatable or not, nor does it have anything to do with if it's tested before a patch release or not. It was to give you the right answer, not to confirm or deny the bug existed of which it was already reported and i was one of the first to confirm it was a known issue. 

THE BOMBS DUD IN THE JDAM TRAINING MISSION WHILE FOLLOWING THE INSTRUCTIONS. WHICH PART OF THAT SENTENCE CONFUSES YOU? WHICH PART DO YOU REQUIRE TO SEE IN REPEATABLE VIDEO FORMAT?

The second half of my post even told you what the issue was and what ED needs to do to fix. You are literally not necessary. No one needed you for anything. Well, we did, before the update, but now I think we're good.

[Muchocracker]

1 hour ago, LastRifleRound said:

THE BOMBS DUD IN THE JDAM TRAINING MISSION WHILE FOLLOWING THE INSTRUCTIONS. WHICH PART OF THAT SENTENCE CONFUSES YOU? WHICH PART DO YOU REQUIRE TO SEE IN REPEATABLE VIDEO FORMAT?

The second half of my post even told you what the issue was and what ED needs to do to fix. You are literally not necessary. No one needed you for anything. Well, we did, before the update, but now I think we're good.

I'm just going to repeat myself until you understand my words. 

There are a million different causes for any issue. You did not provide sufficient detail of your failure case to give an answer of what is causing it. So i asked for a track showing the issue happening to do that. To give you the right answer of what the issue is and what do do about it. 

None of that has anything to do with me playing the mission (which does not guarantee that i get the failure case in the same exact way you did), none of that has to do with confirming does or does not exist. Do you understand that? 

Edited July 29, 2024 by Muchocracker

[LastRifleRound]

You do not have to do A SINGLE THING THAT I SAY. Just fire up the FA18 JDAM training mission that COMES WITH THE GAME. Follow the instructions THAT YOU PROGRAMMED INTO IT. Report back your results. Good luck!!

[Muchocracker]

There are a million different causes for any issue. You did not provide sufficient detail of your failure case to give an answer of what is causing it. So i asked for a track showing the issue happening to do that. To give you the right answer of what the issue is and what do do about it. 

None of that has anything to do with me playing the mission (which does not guarantee that i get the failure case in the same exact way you did), none of that has to do with confirming does or does not exist. Do you understand that? 

[LastRifleRound]

Do you understand that I am telling you that following the instructions in the JDAM training mission DOES, in fact, guarantee the same failure case every time? If you fly that mission and follow it as intended, you WILL get dud bombs. 

Do you understand that I DID describe the failure. It is a dud bomb. Do you know what that is? I think you do, so I'm not sure what other detail I could provide. It's rather elementary already, isn't it? It's not a CBU and has no tail fuse. It's an air start training mission, so no ME access, and rearming isn't possible. Either setting the e-fuze to INST makes it go boom or it does not.

Why won't you fly the mission? Why leave it for customers to waste their time wondering if they did something wrong? Why is it ok for you to ask me to fly the 15 minute thing AGAIN just to record what I already explained here, but it's NOT ok for me to ask you to fly it? You're on the testing team, are you not? Do you only test things users bring to you, or do you do proactive testing? If you do proactive testing, what is the difference between you testing this mission sans track with no one asking and you flying it now? Do you just assume after major changes all the training missions work without actually checking them?

I did nothing but follow the instructions (some bombs get e-fuze to instant, others get delay 1). That 100% leads to a dud bomb. I'll pay you $200 if you go in that mission (public release, not your test build), fly that mission as instructed, and DON'T get a dud.

That's $200 for 15 minutes of work. If you're so sure I'm wrong without a track that's a great deal. But I think we both know I'm right and you'll probably just be wasting your 15 minutes, just like I would be.

[Muchocracker]

There are a million different causes for any issue. You did not provide sufficient detail of your failure case to give an answer of what is causing it. So i asked for a track showing the issue happening to do that. To give you the right answer of what the issue is and what do do about it. 

None of that has anything to do with me playing the mission (which does not guarantee that i get the failure case in the same exact way you did), none of that has to do with confirming does or does not exist. Do you understand that? 

[LastRifleRound]

Well my replies keep getting deleted, so I guess you win? Your testing is flawless, and no one should use the forums to critique the handling of anything from ED. You absolutely can and should ask for tracks as many times as you want for the smallest and easiest explained items, and you absolutely should not under any circumstance worry about anything in your software unless some random paying customer has jumped through at least 4 hoops for it. I concur completely and yield the floor to you.

[NineLine]

On 7/29/2024 at 8:31 PM, LastRifleRound said:

Well my replies keep getting deleted, so I guess you win? Your testing is flawless, and no one should use the forums to critique the handling of anything from ED. You absolutely can and should ask for tracks as many times as you want for the smallest and easiest explained items, and you absolutely should not under any circumstance worry about anything in your software unless some random paying customer has jumped through at least 4 hoops for it. I concur completely and yield the floor to you.

Our test team are volunteers so they are customers the same as you. They deserve to be treated with respect as do you. If they ask for a track it's because they are required to. 90% of the time it's better to get a track from the person experiencing the issue. The other 10% of the time it's still better to get a track from the person with the issue. At the end of the day, our team is instructing and requiring them to get the track from you. 

I am aware there are issues with some training missions and we are looking into it, regardless, please give constructive and mature feedback, if you are feeling frustrated step back from the computer for a break, as well see my signature below for a link on how to properly report bugs. Thanks. 

Posts are hidden by ED Team, they are hidden based on the forum rules clearly shared at the top of the forums. If you have questions about how a post was removed, please send a DM to me or BIGNEWY. 

Last thing, this is not a bug thread, if you have a bug you need to create a thread in the appropriate section with the appropriate info. I am closing this thread now. If you have an issue please post a new thread.