Question: Any more countries at any point possible?

[MarkSheppard]

Originally Posted by Mobhack

The only other way would be to make all the flag button pages have 2 pages and a swap page button, which is clunky and would entail a heck of a lot of code.

What if you made it so that you could swap a flag/name out?

Essentially, you would click on:

SET PLAYER 1 NATIONALITY or SET PLAYER 2 NATIONALITY

you'd hit the COMMA key "," and it would act like the Map Generator in the map editor; only it would say:

"ENTER NATIONALITY (0...250)"

75 might swap the flag and name out with Ireland
85 might swap it out with Burma.

etc.

There would be NO OOBs or any of that. The user would be responsible for all that.

Would that be feasible?

[Mobhack]

No, not as the way the game is coded.

An OOB full name ("United Kingdom") is hard coded, as is the short name ("UK"). In #define statements in the global data. Not stored as variables at all. The leader names and rank names once were, but we exported those to text files a long time ago.

The flag data is hard-coded, and OOBs whose flag changes with the time of the week, have that set in a special bit of flag-swapping code. So if you decide to use OOB X for "new country" - if the original OOB swaps flag after the glorious revolution, you will have the new flag turning up.

The OOB ID also determines where the national flag turns up on the pick a nation type screens - so the South Americans are grouped together, Arab-Israeli war ones etc. Changing Israel to Ruritania would have Ruritania showing as a Middle Eastern country when you wanted it to be in Central Europe. And then again, OOB slot ids get re-used occasionally, or like Georgia replace a nation that fell off the list, leaving a blank slot on the nation picker screen. All hard-coded, and a total nightmare to try to make "data driven" in e.g. some Byzantine mix of XML the game's own programmer could hardly make sense of - let alone some end-user OOB designer.

The Battle locations are hard coded in a large lump of code tat determines who fights where, if say UK plays Argentina and dates are important there too (1982 may produce Falkland Islands forex..). Also, things like "is it winter if X plays Y in this batloc and this month" - please tell me some sane way to just tack that onto some sort of OOB data file!

The leader and unit experience and morale tables are hard-coded in global data. As are the air strike probabilities, counter battery etc. - any stuff that behaves differently for nation X in year Y. As are things like fanatic no-surrender behaviour for e.g. WW2 Japan.

In MBT, we have data-driven pick lists, so that is less of a problem. Actually, it turned out to be more of a problem. WW2 has the pick lists in code, and if I were to rewrite MBT then they would go back to being buried in the code as well, since data-driven lists are in actual fact more of a ***g pain to change than simply wrangling a few if statements in code!.

In fact - looking at the experience with pick lists, the chances of doing some form of "data-driven" OOB type game is probably close to the square root of Sweet Fanny Adams.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

This next seems like it might fall into this category. I had PM's with a couple of folks out here about five years ago concerning the possibility that the AI of the WARSAW PACT (WP) countries being able to use Soviet units for instance East Germany being able to have available say a platoon of T-80 tanks (East Germany was the only WP country the Soviets had them in as the East Germans were highly motivated to unite Germany under their banner.), T-72, and support infantry and assorted air assets. I have already made a list of Russian units from that OOB that fit both the actual availability of the units and historic timelines. The only issue brought up by my "co-horts" at the time would be in the difficulty of getting the AI to use them from the East German pick list along with its own organic units. Is this a feasible option at least from MOD stand point to attempt this or is this a "fools errand"? The brief history is simple as is the math of it that the Soviet presence was usually more dominate in regards to total assets then the countries they were "protecting from Western Aggression" bottom-line whoever crossed the line first the Soviets would have to be dealt with one way or another.

This is the "stuff" that's beyond my abilities.

Regards,
Pat

[Mobhack]

Nobody buys allied units in MBT - there is no way to do so in the pick lists. bad enough doing data structures for one nations formations - now you want to make it pick from 90 odds others too?.

WW2 uses hardwired code, not data, so it is (relatively) easy for (say) the ANZAC to use UK tanks if so desired.

[Suhiir]

For a scenario you can always set units to "captured".

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

I was just thinking more along the lines to "pinning down" those units without having to do an allied search in this case from the Russian OOB. But again I was talking about this for the AI and not the player.

And for the record, I've on multiple occasions have used the allied option with MBT as I play it the most. My "host" country depending on mission type might not have the piece of equipment I foresee I'll need for the coming battle. For instance on one of my two current campaigns, France vs Russia 07/2015 nearly half of my attack force for an "advance" is made up of German forces to include the LEO 2A6, PUMA/PUMA+, M113 and PzGrenadiers. And I really like using the Italian CENTAURO's they're fast, well protected, can "see", and can pack a punch and I love to use them behind enemy lines especially. And I don't understand and agree with you why this function isn't used more myself. After all to me it "changes things up" or if you will, "spice is the variety of life"!
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/centauro/

I'll need to verify Italy is now also using the "T" version with the 120mm low recoil MG. I thought I saw they ordered them anyway...

But to the point again, I was thinking more along the lines of "packaging it up in a neat bundle" again for the AI, which apparently can't easily be done. Now I can data dump the idea out of my head it seems and move on.

Regards,
Pat