Soldier.txt index limit

[Moss Orleni]

Previously for CC5, the soldiers.adb file was limited to 110 entries (at least, 110 soldiers was tested and known to work in a mod).
I notice that in the WaR Data Workbook, the soldiers index number has a range of 0-127.

What is the maximum number of entries that will work in the WaR soldier.txt file?

Cheers,
Moss

[Neil N]

I believe it can handle 256 entries

[Moss Orleni]

Hi Neil, thanks again!
I suppose with 'believe' you mean that it hasn't been tested, but it should be the case...

Is the 196 teams limit tested as being the maximum, or could it possibly work for up to 256 as well?

Cheers,
Moss

[Moss Orleni]

Just did some quick testing myself, and the results are surprising to say the least...

The number of teams in axteams.txt can be as high as 395! The 396th team crashes the game. I tested for single battle, and only the axteams.txt file.
This is wonderful news, as it opens up possibilities for creating a wide variety of units, playing with morale/experience etc.

So for all modders out there that want to go nuts on the teams... here is your chance [:D]

Now that I know this, I'm certainly going to test some other limits as well (vehicles, soldiers, weapons).
For now, it still leaves me with one burning issue: I'm almost certain that this means the real limit of slots per forcepool is still 46, and not the 20 visible ones. But the question is: how can we reach those additional slots?

Cheers,
Moss

[Moss Orleni]

And it gets even better...

I just tested a campaign where both sides have around 1,200 teams in their teams.txt files: everything seems to be working fine...
So either I did something wrong yesterday with the 396 limit, or else the maximum number is determined by a variable system parameter (available RAM fi).

But if the possible number of entries is in that range, most data limitations for modding have effectively disappeared, which would be good news!
The main constraints remaining are the 15 team limit, the 64 BG limit and the 20 forcepool slot limit. The last two seem to be linked more to graphics/interface limitations; for the 15 team limit I always wondered whether this is a real system constraint or just a designer's choice (that could be changed easily)...

Since the apparent team limit is higher than what is stated in the game manual:
the data limits mentioned in the manual's modding section (p.83), are those absolute system constraints, or is it just that those values have been tested and are known to be working?

Cheers,
Roel

[Moss Orleni]

Further testing results:

This worked on my system in a test campaign (I only checked the data part, I don't know if the related graphics impose additional limits):

Weapons: over 1,100 entries
Soldiers: 127 (index 0-126)
Vehicles: 127 (index 0-126)
axsTeams: over 1,100
alsTeams: over 1,200

All of the above was tested on the same campaign file, to see if there are dependencies (ie increasing one file reduces the limit for another). Everything worked fine together...

On a side note: it seems that forcepool items beyond the 20th slot are not taken into account for filling the team roster. Pity...[:(]

Cheers,
Moss

[Neil N]

I remember Steve said that he was going to remove or increase the limits for almost everything.  I think the biggest factor might be the gadgets in the gadgets file.

[Nomada_Firefox]

These limits were post on close combat series by strategy 3 members.

Battlegroups = 64
Weapons = 256
Soldiers = 128
teams = 196

[Neil N]

ORIGINAL: Nomada_Firefox

These limits were post on close combat series by strategy 3 members.

Battlegroups = 64
Weapons = 256
Soldiers = 128
teams = 196

Those limits are mentioned because they correspond to the number of placeholder gadget images in the gadget files.

[Moss Orleni]

ORIGINAL: Neil N

I remember Steve said that he was going to remove or increase the limits for almost everything. I think the biggest factor might be the gadgets in the gadgets file.

Removing unnecessary limits is always a good thing [:)] Strange then that soldiers file is still at the 127 limit, since this also impacts the number of teams; I mean, you can only create so much different teams out of 64 soldiers (each side).

To me, the biggest 'unjustice' left is the fact that you can only have the 20 forcepool slots (yes, it's my fetisj [:D]). Introducing a scroll bar for the force pool roster and using at least the 45 or so slots currently present in the forcepools.txt would IMO open up the way for complete historical TO&Es, or for playing with a larger morale/experience mix...

ORIGINAL: Nomada_Firefox

These limits were post on close combat series by strategy 3 members.

Battlegroups = 64
Weapons = 256
Soldiers = 128
teams = 196

Like I said, Nomada, I tested out the datasets this morning, they work fine.
But as Neil points out, the limit may be at the level of the linked gadget. For the teams and weapons files, I don't see this as an issue, since gadget files may be shared amongst multiple teams/weapons. Vehicles are more unique, but it's still possible to combine different versions of the same vehicle in one gadget.

Cheers,
Moss

[Nigelthehun]

wow! sounds like they have huge things planned for the next versions

[Senior Drill]

ORIGINAL: Moss Orleni

.... Strange then that soldiers file is still at the 127 limit, since this also impacts the number of teams; I mean, you can only create so much different teams out of 64 soldiers (each side). ...

Personally, I have always felt that this file was badly mis-named. A soldier is a soldier is a soldier and those are created in the *Teams .txt files. The Soldiers.txt file should be renamed to "Arms and Ammo", or Arms and Armor", or "Loadout" or simply "Kit".

None of the stock CC games came close to using all of the 128 lines and most mods didn't require more, but that is not to say that they would not be used if more lines were available. It would get way down in the weeds, though, if it comes to a point of having seventeen choices for a particular weapon and the only variable is how many rounds a sprite equipped with it will have. A nice touch, to be sure, but a database guaranteed to produce a "1000 cell stare" in a modder.

I am for increasing it, but I suggest a practical limit to not overload a modder with minuscule or minute differences. Say 400. Or maybe 300. Or 500. What do you think? Should there be a practical limit? If not, why? If so, why and how much?

To me, the biggest 'unjustice' left is the fact that you can only have the 20 forcepool slots (yes, it's my fetisj [:D]). Introducing a scroll bar for the force pool roster and using at least the 45 or so slots currently present in the forcepools.txt would IMO open up the way for complete historical TO&Es, or for playing with a larger morale/experience mix...

I hear ya, but even with the CC5 capabilities, WaR is still in essence a CC4 re-release. I believe some things that could have been possible to add to WaR may be being sandbagged for the CC5 re-release. Such as enabling those other 26 Force Pool slots and providing a slider! Who knows, but it certainly doesn't hurt to lobby heavily for it!

[Neil N]

Drill kind of stole my thunder...64 different ways of arming an individual is really a very large number.  Now if there were 100 different primary weapons available to the individual soldier, it might be a big point.  Probably 15-20 for each side, after that it is just mixing up of the secondary weapons....which again, there really weren't that many of them

[Moss Orleni]

Hi Senior Drill,

I was not really questioning the 127 limit in itself, more wondering why restrictions on teams/weapons were lifted while those on vehicles/soldiers stayed.

For vehicles, I agree that 127 entries is probably enough to accomodate all vehicles (except maybe if you absolutely want to include all SdKfz 250/251 versions).
But it's my experience that the 127 soldier limit is not really difficult to reach. Assume that for the MP40, Kar-98k, Kar-43, StuG44, and two exotics (say PPSh-41 and Beretta), you want to have a 'light' (recce-style) and a 'heavy' (multi-grenade, assault-style) version. Then you want to combine this with the secondary AT/Melee weapons PF60, PF100, HHL, Molotov, Grenade Bundle. That's already 60 units without even including the crewed/support weapons.
Of course, I'm not saying that all these versions are absolutely necessary, but they certainly add flavor to the game and introduce a certain 'randomization' into the teams layout.
Or another way to quickly reach the limit: I'm currently working on a soldiers file to include ammo carriers for the crewed weapons (it's sad to see how the others always leave that poor HMG/mortar guy behind [:)]). For this, I divided the total weight of the crewed weapon and its ammo amongst the number of carriers. I'm using 10 and 20 lbs 'packages' (added to the soldier's base weight) to put all team members at approximately the same weight and to increase the speed of the team as a whole. So far, it works out fine, but... different base weights for the same weapon again increase the combinations.

And for the lobbying part: to whom should we direct our bribes over there? Who's the most vulnerable to drugs/alcohol? [:D] Oh I forgot, it's the gaming industry: poverty comes with the job [;)]

Cheers,
Moss

[Moss Orleni]

On the practicality of limits: to me, as far as there is no hard (ie system/HW/SW) constraint, I don't see any reason to set a limit at all.
Modding to me is essentially choosing. I'd say supporting the modding circuit is providing the widest possible range of choices (of course taking into account development effort from your side as well).
And then it's up to the modder to decide...
If somebody wants to model the weight distribution of the 1944-1945 Volkssturm (ranging from skinny young boys to fat elderly men)?
It would be rather funny and maybe silly, but hey, it's a free world [:)]

Cheers,
Moss

[Andrew Williams]

That has been our aim up until now... to move all constraints where possible and if the amount of work involved isn't too prohibitative.

[Moss Orleni]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Williams

That has been our aim up until now... to move all constraints where possible and if the amount of work involved isn't too prohibitative.

It's really great to see that modding possibilities have indeed expanded enourmeously. And apparently the limits listed in the manual aren't even the real ones...
Congrats to the whole team for that!

Moss

[CSO_Talorgan]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Williams

That has been our aim up until now... to move all constraints where possible and if the amount of work involved isn't too prohibitative.

I'll drink to that.