thread: Help Needed to Debug Existing EA with proven egy

Hi Swingman,

Thank you so much for your openness to implement the suggestions above.

Regarding the problem raised by Yalgaar, here's your answer:

Non-Hybrid mode is when the Buying and the Selling legs operates independently from each other - namely, when the EA calculates the Universal Take Profit level, it does so for its individual buying and selling legs separately and independently - for example, we've got pres-set the Universal TP degree at $100.00 - and let's say the Buying leg'd hit that target of $100 but the Selling leg was at -$50, the EA will instantly close up all the buy orders (as it has hit on the pre-set $100 TP) INDEPENDENTLY from all the started Sell orders (which stay opened as they haven't reached the pre-set $100 TP).

Swingman, the EA you coded for us ie v.2.0 operates in NON-HYBRID MODE (when both Buyer_enabled and Seller_enabled are switched into true).

Now, for HYBRID-MODE - the EA takes into account BOTH the buying and the selling legs TOGETHER when calculating the Universal TP - for example, the buying legs had reached $150 and the selling leg at -$50, the EA will instantly close up ALL the opened orders - both buy and sell orders are closed up as the pres-set $100 had been reached (ie $150 - $50).

Swingman, it would be good if you could code in the next parameters:

Buyer_enabled - true/false
Seller_enabled - true/false
Hybrid_enabled - authentic false

So, if we only want to use the Buyer, we'd only turn Buyer_enabled to authentic and the other two to untrue.

Should we only want to employ the Seller, we'd only turn Seller_enabled to authentic and the other two to untrue.

If we want to trade in Non-Hybrid Mode, We'd flip BOTH Buyer_enable and Seller_enabled to authentic and Hybrid_enabled to untrue.

And lastly, if we want to trade in HYBRID mode, we'd flip ALL of them (Buyer, Seller, Hybrid) to authentic.

I hope you get what I am trying to say.

Once again, thank you so much for your generosity Swingman!

Cheers!

I Have A Great Idea Its Nothing Like This Ea But More Like A Grid system along with a tool to ch a tendency with minimal risk when ur wrong but hugee if you won
Im not sure if anyone have come up with this but it is quire easy

Its a grid with break even function but if it touched split even line you put a new buy/ sell order

Grid space 10pips
Buy at 100
BE in 10 pips
Price goes 110 back to 100
New buy order produced in 110
So we put the buy/sell at SR par

I mean is there some flaws in this? Can the og's provide some insights? Or a link where someone have made This Kind of ea

The nearest I can find is flexygrid but need coders to put the setting a new order after BE degree is hit

I Believe this would be the best trend ching method

I've seen a video with expert advisors where you simply insert the programming cubes. What are the benefits and disadvantage's of expert advisors?

quote Hi Nihilist, Would you please discuss your setfile, I 'm certain it will help a lot of us, confident it'll help me Thanks !

Its your collection file just return at post and you'll be able to see I simply changed trading occasions.

Hi Swingman. I am really grateful of your time together with the programming and need to disagree with Philip about the matter that the ea is becoming to complex. It has been on a journey through the variations but the journey has given rise to a great ideas and has helped the ea evolve into a potential gold mine in my eyes. The features that haven't worked can be eliminated,but we'd not have found out if they were no good unless they were programmed for testing at the 1st place. Thank you. Version 5.1 is a great ea and just...

Hi Nihilist,

Can you please discuss your setfile, I 'm sure it will help a lot people, sure it'll help me

Thanks !

.. .Version 5.1 is an excellent ea and just needs a few refinements ...

that I am a very old guy, and can not always follow Philip's ingenious ideas ...
The last changes (MovingAverage, SwitchMode, StrongPendings) were tryings to reduce the DrawDown. I have just tested for a brief time and understand that they work in a few mixes and not in others.

But I don't spend time to plan something like this if Phlip has found that they are basically ineffective and that he does not accept and pursue something like this.
He is 100% right with his ideas and I hope that other developers will be interested to execute his ideas and to learn the DrawDown.
(I don't have any interest in a new/different ribbon to make any further developments.)

As for your model 5.1, I try in another time to learn why there's a difference to 6.1. If I find that, I'll post a new version 6.x.

Hi Swingman.
I am very grateful of your time with all the programming and have to disagree with Philip on the matter that the ea is becoming to complex.
It's been on a trip through the variations but the travel has given rise to some fantastic ideas and has helped the ea evolve into a potential gold mine in my mind.
The features that have not worked can be removed,but we'd not have found out if they had been no good unless they had been programmed for testing at the 1st place.
Thank you.

Version 5.1 is a fantastic ea and just needs a few refinements and I really do hope you don't abandon it entirely as I believe it's serious potential.
5.1 can delivery 34k yield on a 10k account over 11 months,therefore although down the draw is high by reducing the lot size we can get to double account with an acceptable exposure level.
I havent even begun to maximize yet as my personal computer power is limited.

Perhaps a new thread ?
Look forward to hearing back from you.

.. .Honestly, if for whatever reasons that my thought under can't be implemented, I personally would not like to pursue this thread any further as I do not see any chances in resolving the deadlock circumstances. Furthermore, the real intention of starting this thread had already been fulfilled - we already have a perfectly working EA (Tic-tac-nur's EA, versions 2.2 2.4) trading at the Non-Hybrid manner - I could use in my live trading for a tool to assist me in my live trading. . However, you guys can continue to create the hybrid mode here in this thread...

Philip, thank you for your support so far.

The thread has been started to receive a little assistance and fix existing EAs. I am glad that with the Tic-Tac-Nur models until 2.4 the goal was fulfilled.
Another suggestions are indeed extremely important to execute, but this is a new project, almost from scratch where I would need to think and appliion step by step.

Unfortunately, this doesn't work for me from 1 day to another as in the previous time, so I will stop this method of working.
If I will get free programming period later on, I will attempt to take the new tips and post them.

The additional flexible parameters for my thought above will look something like this:

Assess Weekly TF - true/false
Assess Daily TF - true/false
Assess 4H TF - true/false
Assess 1H TF - true/false

Initial Pro-Trend Orders to be opened - 3

Max No. Of Pro-Trend Orders - 40
Max No. Of Counter-Trend Orders - 10

Start Fresh Cycle following Maxed-out - true/false

I am sure most of you will agree with me when the above can be implemented, we'd have exploited the potency of BOTH the Non-Hybrid and Hybrid modes and would have certainly removed the dead lock situation.

The single disadvantage is that some cycles will strike the SL and we must accept declines once every so often. But I am sure most of you'd agree with me if we had begun the cycle together with all 3 time frames agreeing on the overall tendency, it would most probably than not that the cycle could end-up/close in profit.

The benefits are as follows:

1. Since we are trading with the trend, we can set a much much greater profit goal than we can in a standard hybrid mode - for 1.0 full lot dimensions, we can easily place TP of $300 to $1,000 as opposed to a typical $50 TP at a standard Hybrid Mode;

2. Together with the orders biased/skewed towards the overall tendency, the cycle will most probably closed in profit way before the maximum number is reached.

3. We'd have traded over the safety of Hybrid Mode all the time;

4. No precious time could be wasted as the EA would immediately starts an original cycle when the max orders are attained - as compared to existing EA which will be stucked at a deadlock situation for 3 weeks just to squeeze out $50 profit;

5. VERY VERY reduced draw down and in view of how the EA wouldn't trade that frequently while it waits for all the time frames to concur together, we can definitely trade on multiple pairs concurrently;

6. We can trade on any pairs whatsoever as volitility wouldn't be required since we are trading with the trend;

7. We don't need to do much analysis in Non-Hybrid mode as the 3 time frames necessary to concur with one another is already a very strong filter in itself - in other words, even if the STOCH one-cycle mode can also be implemented, we can trade at Non-Hybrid mode literally 'blindly' ie allow the EA perform the analysis to us.

There are a number of other benefits but the aforementioned are enough to demone the benefits of implementing the above. I am certain that you all can see appreciate the above.

SWINGMAN, CAN THE ABOVE BE CODED??? I SINCERELY HOPE SO AND I SINCERELY HOPE YOU ARE WILLING TO GIVE IT A TRY!!!