Hero Lab Editor is horrible and Tutorial*2 bad

[ShadowChemosh]

Originally Posted by KiwiChris

OK. Didn't think of that :-)
I have skimmed your videos and got some useful stuff, however will try looking closer.
EDIT: AWESOME!!!! New (Copy) is exactly what I wanted as I kind find a similar object and then edit to what I wanted :-) :-)
I had thought you could only copy a visible item (ie ones you had in the main list).

No problem. I cover allot of stuff in those videos and its easy to miss something like that. It takes time and some patience at first.

Originally Posted by KiwiChris

Also have you ever heard of anyone getting a error when trying to launch Tools/ Launch HLExport.
Only thing I can think of is that I an on Windows 7 64bit. Have had some other programs that have had a problem with this
Is there an error log somewhere?
Thanks!

I run Win7-64 and have no issues. My first idea would be to reboot (cause its windows). Then I would ask that you are running under "Administrator" account right? Maybe you setup HL to start under Admin you would need to setup HLExport.exe to do that also I think.

If all that fails then contact LW support. The actual HL program is above my pay grade.

[KiwiChris]

Thanks. will do.
Have tried the reboot several times.
Really appreciate the effort you put into supporting this.
Gives us newbies a chance to appreciate the possibilities of this awesome tool
Have a great week!

[risner]

Originally Posted by djc664

1) answer reads SO elitist / snobbish

2) Making a consumer-purposed and super-low learning curve version of the editor, with documentation to match.

3) Well that's a bit presumptuous for most users, don't you think?

1) Not my intent, sorry.

2) This simply isn't possible. The fact the editor provides so many options this simply is not possible to do. In fact the editor as is, is probably too far on the consumer-purposed super-low learning curve than I'd prefer. There are many low level things I'd like to be able to do that can't be done in the editor currently (for example Wild Shape in an automated way.)

3) I didn't have any experience in HL when I started, and frankly everything available at the time was pretty much useless (to me but not to others.) The only way I managed to do anything was to find .user files to download or Copy (new) items to learn. I learn by doing and all the excellent docs available didn't help me at all, as I can't understand it until I did it.

[djc664]

Originally Posted by ShadowChemosh

Wow I had to delete what I first wanted to say a few times. I actually got into a rant about the education system in America and humans... Really it was breath taking to read.

<snip>

...That is just AWESOME!!!!!

I can appreciate the sentiment; please go back and note my first sentence - I totally have done all of those things and continue to approach the editor as you all recommend. And you are all correct there; that's the way to handle the editor today. I also love figuring things out and work in the field, so it's up my alley.

What I'm talking about here is not really my case, so much as what I understand the OP is trying to communicate.

There are users, and I believe it may be more than we suspect, who don't care to spend the time to become good at the editor. Maybe they want to add one class, ever, and that's it - but they want that class to work fully.

The answer today is exactly what everyone has put out there, and it does work after all the time is put in.

What I'm saying is that it doesn't have to be that way and I would challenge Lone Wolf to consider a fresh approach (probably a separate program that hooks into the editor API) that greatly simplifies the process, along with documentation that is updated along with that.

I'm not saying that this product would need to handle every possible scenario, either. There is probably a top ten list of moderately difficult things users who don't use the editor due to the steep learning curve would want that would yield a fantastic result.

[risner]

Originally Posted by djc664

challenge Lone Wolf to consider a fresh approach (probably a separate program that hooks into the editor API) that greatly simplifies the process, along with documentation that is updated along with that.

Without artificial intelligence (and not something trivial like Watson that played Jeopardy), this isn't going to happen.

There is no reasonable way to code all the possible paths to allow a more point/click way to do typical things without HL considering every possibility and coding for all existing feats/classes/etc in existence now and all code for any ones that are created in the future.

I don't think you appreciate how hard this would be to do. If it was as easy as you suggest, they would have done it long ago if for no other reason than to speed up books being developed.

But hey, this is just my opinion.

[wurzel]

Originally Posted by risner

Without artificial intelligence (and not something trivial like Watson that played Jeopardy), this isn't going to happen.

There is no reasonable way to code all the possible paths to allow a more point/click way to do typical things without HL considering every possibility and coding for all existing feats/classes/etc in existence now and all code for any ones that are created in the future.

I don't think you appreciate how hard this would be to do. If it was as easy as you suggest, they would have done it long ago if for no other reason than to speed up books being developed.

But hey, this is just my opinion.

After more than 30 years in software development I don't think that it can't be done. I've seen early assembler programming as well as modern-day graphical point and click development, and that was really a long way to go. The main obstacle seems to be, however, the required manpower to get it done. I don't know how many people there are at LWD but I'm rather sure they are less than half of my standard team size. And for that number they are doing a tremendous job.

It is true, the editor is neither simple nor well documented, and a lot of improvement potential waits to be utilized. But then, most people simply want to play existing games, and whoever plans to "improve" these games or build something new can be expected to put some work in it. I've found the LWD staff and other users of these forums to be really helpful, understanding and friendly, and you can't get anything better than that.

[bodrin]

Disclaimer : I'm a hobby coder, not a software developer. I have no spare time but I contribute occasionally to the community.

The editor is a beast, no arguments from me here, however I find that just collecting my thoughts, scribbling out a flow of what I'm trying to achieve and looking at existing scripts that do something similar; 99% of the time I manage to create a working script.

The other 1% I ask and receive an answer upon the forum.

Having a set goal written down usually organises the mind and enables a focus rather than holding ones head in sorrow.

Comparing and copying examples is the best way of experimenting IMO.

[chiefweasel]

Here here bodrin. I also do all my work in my spare time. And a handful of us have reallt devoted a lot of time and effort to bring new materials to the community and to provide example of how to do things within Hero Lab.

I admit that HL is a rough editor, sometimes its difficult to find what you need, but that is also half the fun of it. The discovery and excitement of figuring something out. I learn far more from my mistakes.

[djc664]

Originally Posted by risner

Without artificial intelligence (and not something trivial like Watson that played Jeopardy), this isn't going to happen.

There is no reasonable way to code all the possible paths to allow a more point/click way to do typical things without HL considering every possibility and coding for all existing feats/classes/etc in existence now and all code for any ones that are created in the future.

I don't think you appreciate how hard this would be to do. If it was as easy as you suggest, they would have done it long ago if for no other reason than to speed up books being developed.

But hey, this is just my opinion.

I don't think you're reading all of my response before deciding "it" can't be done... which I'm pretty sure is a different "it" than I'm talking about.

I'd ask that you to please continue past what you quoted to this:

"I'm not saying that this product would need to handle every possible scenario, either. There is probably a top ten list of moderately difficult things users who don't use the editor due to the steep learning curve would want that would yield a fantastic result."

You're getting caught up on this all or nothing concept. I'm of the opinion that there's a sweet spot in the number of tasks that you CAN simplify and include in this proposed solution that would satisfy probably 80% of the need for user-base that is not using the editor or stopped using the editor due to the reasons described in this thread.

As an aside, I find it ironic that you mention Watson. I actually work in ECM and primarily work with the software behind Watson (the version seen on Jeopardy is actually fairly behind compared to recent builds). That's not meant to be AI at all, in the sense of replacing a human in thinking; it's meant to compliment and augment trained personnel in decision making and troubleshooting fields by rapidly analyzing available data and weighting possible responses. Essentially what are really good guesses from a vast memory of related topics.

In that way, actually, it would be very helpful in recommending feats or abilities to base your copies off of. Would need a heck of a kickstarter goal to cover the software fees from IBM, though!

[risner]

Originally Posted by djc664

"I'm not saying that this product would need to handle every possible scenario, either. There is probably a top ten list of moderately difficult things users who don't use the editor due to the steep learning curve would want that would yield a fantastic result."

mention Watson ... not meant to be AI at all

I read that line, chalk it up to we differ in opinion.
There isn't any AI better than Watson and Watson isn't and by creators can't be call AI. So if the closest to AI isn't AI. Hmm.

If we go on your theory, then you need to be able to create a Class. Everyone will want a class and if it can't create a class 80% will consider it not worth using. Creating a class is probably the hardest thing to automate in the form of a question/answer point/click thing. At least anything better than the current class creation mechanism inside HL.

I'll grant you that I'm no expert on programming complex things. I've done 28 years of C code maintenance but most original programming has been Perl, PHP, and Python. My expertise is in FreeBSD/Linux admin and Cisco router/firewall support. So you are welcome to assume I don't know anything and I can't exactly appeal to authority and claim extensive knowledge of programming to reject that view.