Open General Forums

none

my 1 Gb Killer card, changing the priorities depending the type of data uploading, resulting that instead of my normal upload speed around 800-950 Mbs it was using only 50-60 Mbs for first 100 Kb of the file and going as low as 100-50 Bytes/sec for rest of the file Now you know why they call it a "...

none

LuisGuzman wrote: ↑
2024-05-20 14:42, Monday
The link I provided in the announce should work

It works! Thanks!

none

How do you do that in Open Suite ?... :huh I think I found it, it's the two icons without tooltip in the "Unit Settings View", isn't it? :huh - The "Unit's Medal and Casualties" window has only one line: "Unit's killed".*) - The "Campaign Dossier" has only a list of kills and losses for each player...

none

I download the new suite and at credits is Version 5.0.73.9 - 2 May 2024 Yes, mine too, but those aren't always updated from what I've seen: If you right-click on the .exe file and check Properties/Details, it says "File Version: 5.0.70.1"... :lol The most disconcerting is that the file size is abs...

none

LuisGuzman wrote: ↑
2024-05-20 11:28, Monday
Run any AAR

How do you do that in Open Suite?...

I get my AARs from Open General. Didn't even know Open Suite can do that too.

none

Obviously, files structs are changed and older executables cannot understand the new structs created by newer executables. That's the point, I updated both Open Suite and Open General (using the files you linked above). :huh Are you sure the Open Suite download is the right one? The new Open Suite ...

none

:huh Something is broken. I opened a OpenGen 0.93.5.RC4 savegame in Open Suite 5.0.73.11 , and it threw a fit. I got a little error message about a "names" problem, and then Notepad opened with this: Unit:001 P:1 .. has leader:6 with class-atribute:2 not matching leader table (0) Unit:001 P:1 .. has...

none

LuisGuzman wrote: ↑
2024-05-19 19:32, Sunday
New OpenGen 0.93.5.RC4 available at my site including:

none

randowe wrote: ↑
2024-05-19 12:36, Sunday
you wrote ALL German

It was related to the "WAR DEPARTMENT TECHNICAL MANUAL TM-E 30-451" I quoted. I agree they say "stress", not "are exclusively"...

none

Is there any reason you cannot set that TB with "recon" special attribute instead of asking to change torpedo rules ? The main reason (besides the fact that my recons can evade), is that the player will get terminally confused if some recons are in "FTR", some in "TB", others in "LB", others in "sD...

none

This is not true. There were high flying recon planes with only defensive armament or even no armament. Some were. Others were combat patrols. Especially maritime patrol planes were armed ( Fw 200 Condor ), not to mention the Ju 290 used by the "Fernaufklärungsgruppe 5" which were heavily armed (20...

none

No bug, torpedo special only works if class is 11,12, 13 or 14 (Fighter- ATP) that is: only for AIR class units, so recon class unit cannot use the torpedo special. :( Uh, thanks. Is there a technical reason they can't? Because in WWII all German (and not only!) recon was "reconnaissance in force" ...

none

Bug or feature? :huh The "Torpedo" special (bombing from adjacent hexes) does not work for recon planes : Recon planes can't bomb from neighboring hexes. :dunno I'm pretty sure it worked before. Test scenario : You get a recon torpedo bomber and a torpedo level bomber to compare (and some victims). ...

none

Duke Falcon wrote: ↑
2024-05-13 15:31, Monday
I totally missunderstood that since the beginning...

No problem, happens to us all (especially myself).

none

As I said - or tried to say - it doesn't matter if transport has or not ammo ... And as I said, or tried to say - it really doesn't matter, since the transport does have ammo... :lol This is a purely theoretical discussion anyway: The important thing is that it works! :cool Could you please resume ...

none

it is very common that transport don't use ammo nor fuel Huh? Depends on the time frame: This might be true for WWI, when it was mostly horse and wagon, but in WWII there were already lots of transports which had ammo (all the German "SdKfz"), and almost all had fuel. Check my E-File... :huh Why am...

none

Ok, I changed to take ammo from the unit not the transport (if required by $supply_e ) So if you set $supply_ex =4 and the sub_ex has ammo, it doesn't matter if the NTP has or not ammo Sorry but I don't see the problem: Check the "Milchkuh" assembly in my test scenario: The SUB part has no ammo, si...

none

And, to help with testing, a test scenario...

A composite submarine, low on fuel and ammo, and a composite supply submarine ("Milchkuh"). You'll have to set the relevant "supply" bits in Open Suite though.

(Beware, it's a whole E-File + scenario, not just a scenario.)

none

I added the last special (called: Supply Unit) to allow a transport (only transports can have it) to make the unit having that transport to be a "Depot" (same than if that main units were ticked in Units View ) :yeah :clap :gracias Of course $supply_ex must be set to 1,2,3 or any sum not multiple o...

none

LuisGuzman wrote: ↑
2024-05-13 09:33, Monday
But this is difficult, because some/many designers could complain if I do that.

Why would they? If it's an optional "Special Attribute" it doesn't change anything to the existing E-Files/campaigns, does it.
Nobody is forced to use it...

Anyway, thanks, I'll wait.

none

So -- It's impossible, huh?

none

As NTP is set as organic transport the sub can be supplied by a naval unit having "Can supply units on zoc" ticked Could you please elaborate? :hmm I think we might be talking about different things: I want the submarine to be the supplying unit. And as I said, the "supply" checkbox is grayed out. ...

none

Could it be possible to have something similar for ground and air units? That wouldn't make much sense, does it. What do you mean, buying an aircraft carrier along with your plane? :huh That submarine option exists to be able to buy/assemble composite submarines , and actually is a form of hidden o...

none

As for the appearing transport on unit buy... I may set transport units to "can't buy" may solve that. The "hangar/carrier" system is totally and completely independent from whatever appears as available transports inside the "unit buy" screen. If only because you don't buy carriers along with thei...

none

First thing I do not understand of your cmp-surface approach is why the true subs and their surface NTP has not a matching weight ! :huh I honestly don't remember. That's the old E-File, I've been working on Version 2 for three years now... :huh Anyway, the composite subs work just fine, at least i...

none

I need to review all code related to fuel/ammo. specially how a unit "mounted" spend/refit fuel and ammo. :huh Do you? Back then you had suggested this method to make supply submarines, since they use transports (which can have the "supply" perk), but it doesn't work because the "supply" checkbox i...

none

Do you have any more time now?...

Still wondering if/how I can make supply submarines using the composite submarines (submarine+naval transport) trick...

none

Illustrated maybe not, but the logic is simple. First of all, we need to make sure about what we're speaking, for there are several types of transport, completely different: is the "organic transport", permanently tied to a unit (like a truck for infantry, or a tractor for towed artillery) are the o...

none

So currently it is not posible to assign from Suite a leader to a specific slot; thus, what you want is not possible without opening the leaders' can of worms :lol A pity... That limits the possibility of giving leaders in a scenario: The campaign I'm currently working on is taking place in the des...

none

I have short hours... :lol Here you are, mini-test campaign . Now there is a problem I didn't remember (but it's probably my fault): Even when inside a scenario I have two units with identical leaders (I used the above example of "leader #1, 3/23"), giving the same leader to both units, on starting ...

none

I'll build a mini-campaign for the old E-File, you'll have it in a hour or two.

none

About the new "multiple instances of the same leader" feature, I think there might be an oversight (or I'm doing something wrong?): For scenario-defined leaders (as opposed to leaders gained on the battlefield), OG does not reassign the same leader slot when two leaders are identical. Example: Lets ...

none

I'd vote "yes" (abbreviations only), but then again I'm not using the AAR very much (just for campaign/E-File balancing, to see if any units are overpowered or pretty much useless).

none

LuisGuzman wrote: ↑
2024-05-06 16:32, Monday
As I wrote before, you need to load a save game made with RC3 to allow changing these two options (until I update the RC3 to RC3b).

As I wrote before, it isn't necessary: I can change these options even without loading an RC3 savegame, and after loading an RC2 savegame.

none

Very late to the party, but having quite some experience (15 years+) administering a phpBB forum, I'd thought I'd share some info on forum spam fighting. You maybe know all of this, maybe not, I'll just put it here in case it helps. What we had done in our forum back then was to make a totally impo...

none

Strange, for me the 'list of player's units" is "untickable" (is that even a word?) even after just starting OG and going into the AAR settings, but also after loading an old save game (from a month ago). Besides, strangely enough, the AAR panel gives me full stats for the whole campaign (which I st...

none

Puma wrote: ↑
2024-05-06 00:08, Monday
it displays much better than below when it is copied to the forum.

Put it in "code display" brackets ("</>" button), that will preserve whitespaces and tabs.

none

Is your default web explorer Bing perhaps ? No, of course not! :shock My browser is Firefox and my default search engine is DuckDuckGo. I do see the Google bot too, sometimes, but the Bing bot is a regular. IMHO this could have something to do with the hours I'm visiting here. And the time Bing bot...

none

Bing [Bot], none, and 65 guests.

The flood is receding, but still not gone.
As for the Bing Bot, it must have an apartment here, because I see it every time I visit...

none

Seems the flood is receding: When I last posted (above) there were only around 200 "guests" here, and now there are only 101 left. Good riddance!

none

Thanks to those bots hammering it...

none

EDIT: I celebrated too soon. The next minute there are 504 :lol :lol That does indeed confirm my suspicion that those are not individual humans but successive bot connections: There is no way you can organize 484 people to arrive all simultaneously on the forum and suddenly rise the number of conne...

none

Maybe there was information about a game somewhere in the media (even one related to the name "general")? I don't think so. If there really had been some major buzz around OG, big enough to attract all of a sudden a thousand potentially interested people (!), some (even only 1-2%) of those thousand...

none

There is no really easy way to "fix" this, the only solution phpBB offers is to ban a range of IP addresses (like "1.0.0.1" to "1.0.0.255"), if (and only if!) all those "guests" come from a specific homogeneous IP range, and aren't just hacked residential IPs from all over the world. Else you can on...

none

Indeed, there has been a discussion over there (BTW, could somebody with moderator powers separate those discussions into their own thread? I'm afraid this discussion isn't finished yet, and in the meanwhile it's polluting...). That been said, I'm wondering what those 500+ "guests" are looking for. ...

none

Possibly, but all the legitimate/official bots (like search engine crawlers etc.) have names (user agents), and show up as whatever they are. For instance right now there are me, "Bing [Bot]", and 502 guests on the forum...

none

I constantly see between 400 and 500 guests online Ah yes, I forgot to mention those 51 were specifically in this forum part... Right now it says 514 "guests" in the forum root, and that's very curious. Dare I say "suspicious"? I've (co-)run a hobbyist forum for over 10 years as admin, with a large...

none

Randowe had problems to post, I just type this for test If you're testing, it does work now, but earlier (around 12h UTC) the forum was down (SQL error: Too many connections) for a while. :dunno I don't know what's going on, but there are a huge lot of "guests" lurking around lately (51 right now),...

none

I see, thanks. That been said, my case was a little special, since the offending unit was an auxiliary unit and my equip.cfg has " noldr_auxunits=1 "... :huh No matter what that leader was, it shouldn't have happened at all, isn't it? When does the "noldr_auxunits" check happen? Before, or after the...

none

One of my fighters :huh got a leader, i think it was influence, and i declined it with the new option. After i closed the game i saw a message: - Err - U:12 is a fighter but got an improper Leader! - Check CombatTest log file Ok, so i got the aformentioned message when i closed the game. But since ...

Search found 294 matches