Weapon errors data

[Imp]

There are 14,936 weapons in the MBT OOB database so expect to find a few that might not agree but we are fixing problems like this as they are found and these have been noted on the to-do list to look into. Once we know where a problem might be I can track them all down in a few seconds once I set up the search query( we have our own database checker )

Well love me or hate me probably both first install of database check to about 6000
Cut out for you with similar weapons beside for comparison.
Its an open office spreadsheet if you do not have its a free download or might open in excel. If open in excel & lose colouring will have to download as errors are marked in red. Not to bad considering amount of data but having a beer handy might not be a bad idea, of course that might have caused the problem in the first place

The errors are just what was thrown out so presented as is did comment as cut out if noticed something name changes not that important but stops throwing up as errors & or catches more as think set to check against weapon name & class & highlight diffrences. Also ignore my comment at start about 120mm MTRs once I got to realised what was going on several diffrent models called 120mm MTR so chucked out a lot of range issues. As said United Nations & R&D not included but all others are covered.

As a matter of intrest I assume diffrent ammo loadouts for basicly the same vehicle are due to that nation having a lack of high end ammo rather than errors, could be both but looked about right to me from what I saw with likes of South America etc lacking in APCR or getting late to extend the life of the tank to arcaic levels.

[DRG]

This will not open in Excel and I'm not the least bit interested in DLing a "free" program that forces me to "Get 3 Years Unlimited Software Download & Support ONLY $11.98/year"

So the only two alternatives are post any hard data inconsistencies you find on the forum( variations on HEK or accuracy etc etc for one weapon ) or find some way to convert this to something that can be read by Excel.

Don

[Mobhack]

Originally Posted by DRG

This will not open in Excel and I'm not the least bit interested in DLing a "free" program that forces me to "Get 3 Years Unlimited Software Download & Support ONLY $11.98/year"

So the only two alternatives are post any hard data inconsistencies you find on the forum( variations on HEK or accuracy etc etc for one weapon ) or find some way to convert this to something that can be read by Excel.

Don

The Open Office suite can save to Word format, so probably can handle XLS. It may even be a form of .xls Don's Microsoft Excel might be able to read !

It can definitely read .xls files - I have the thing on my netbook, which is languishing since its touch-pad went wonky.

The Original Poster should really explore the File->Save As dialogue of the thing. Save as the oldest version of Microsoft Orifice file you can get away with, and you are more likely to have end users able to read your files. (Excel 95 say), or .csv as that is universally portable (and Excel reads it too !

Meanwhile I'l continue with the paradox database and SQL like

Select U.NationID,N.NationName,U.name,U.slot,u.SteelHullf ront,
u.steelhullside,u.steelhullrear,u.steelturretfront ,u.steelturretside,u.steelturretrear,u.steeltop
FROM Units U, NationNames N
WHERE( LOWER(U.name) LIKE "%zsu%%23%")
AND U.nationID=n.nationID
ORDER BY U.Name

Which lets you compare the armour suite of the zsu-24s in the game - but like all checking, the cases where some nation has it renamed to a "zing ping 4A2M234" won't get picked up by such a query...

so you end up with carp like:

Select U.NationID,N.NationName,U.name,U.slot,U.unitclass, u.graphic
from Units U, NationNames N
where
( ( LOWER(U.name) like "%152%")
OR (LOWER(U.name) like "%2s%%3%")
OR (LOWER(U.name) like "%Ak%")
OR (LOWER(U.name) like "%sau%")
OR (LOWER(U.name) like "%1973%")
OR (u.graphic=37) )
AND U.nationID=n.nationID
AND ( u.unitclass=21 or u.unitclass=130)

which zeros in on some variations of the SO-152 SPH (and gives some noise as well.. While still having the initial simple query's problem that if you did not know there was a variant called a "Ping Pong 66" then it wont be detected .)

With SQL queries we can check a lot of things - but first we need to know the problem is there and what prcisely to look at.

Andy

[DRG]

Exactly.

Lot's of times things have been missed because the original OOB designer decided to go with some "national" flavour so a T-55 is a T55 because that's what they call it at the Uzdreckistanian defence ministry. Or a half dozen variations on a .30 cal MG.

Yes, ultimately this is our database and we are responsible for what's in it and that's what we are attempting to do because at the time the OOB's were first created we couldn't look over everyone's shoulder . As Andy says, once we know that , for example, there are variations in Breda HMG's we can search for them but sometimes it's impossible to guess every variation of that name someone could have thought it should be known as especially when there may be one set as "Breda M.30 LMG" and another as M.30 Breda LMG. When we find things like this I try to standardize the names but it's not always possible to imagine every possible variation and something may be missed so yes, if anyone finds anything odd please let us know and we'll fix it


Don

[Skirmisher]

Originally Posted by DRG

Exactly.

Lot's of times things have been missed because the original OOB designer decided to go with some "national" flavour so a T-55 is a T55 because that's what they call it at the Uzdreckistanian defence ministry. Or a half dozen variations on a .30 cal MG.

Who created the original OOB's ? Is that listed somewhere?

Cheers

[_Tim_]

Don, Andy, for info.

I have resumed the data checking that I was doing previously, now with the v4.5 OOBs. Instead of writing up results in separate posts I will comply all results into an Excel file and add it to this post. This will be one file for all weapon classes so it is a few weeks away from completion.

Clearly this will duplicate the efforts of others, but the more eyes we get on this the greater the likelihood of ferreting out all the inconsistent data for the next version.

If you intend to incorporate user generated OOBs in future there is a role for a data checker/ beta tester for new OOBs. I don't mind volunteering, on the grounds that it is right to put something in to get something back. No reason for you guys to do all the work, I believe that the user community has a part to play in improving the game, and with contributions that are genuinely beneficial.

cheers,

Tim

[Imp]

Try 2 saved as excel if does not work will post as word & CSV file

Tis a rare breed genuine free program.

[DRG]

Originally Posted by Skirmisher

Who created the original OOB's ? Is that listed somewhere?

Cheers

The info tab in MOBHack lists OOB contributors and it shows up at the bottom of the encyclopeadia screen. If one name is listed it was originally done mainly by that person, two or more names indicates the work was split evenly. If it was real collaborative effort then it might just report "The Camo Workshop" with no specific name but all now report "The Camo Workshop" along with the original designer because of all the upgrades and changes made since the OOB's were released. An example of "T55" still exists in the Uganda and Nigerian OOB's. We generally search for something like that as t%55 and the % allows the program to list T-55 or T55 ( which also picks up things like a Type 55 AA gun unless I specify it should be a tank or exclude those other classes. It can get tricky sometimes trying to get what we want.

I thought all the "T55's" were gone by now........something else for the to - do list.

Don

[DRG]

Originally Posted by Imp

Try 2 saved as excel if does not work will post as word & CSV file

This works.


Don

[Imp]

Final part for you to get round to