Facility naming

[mongoose]

For ome reason I have facilities with "-" and "_" but otherwise the same name. If there is or was a reason for that I forget it; and also wonder which is correct for inputting to a gsl.
examples
industrial_factory_small
industrial_factory-small

other odd ones I see probably aren't relevant to gsls but seem incorrect naming such as

delta-sector_D-Day+3_assault-group with "-" "_" and even "+" :dizzy:

[Daiwilletti]

For ome reason I have facilities with "-" and "_" but otherwise the same name. If there is or was a reason for that I forget it; and also wonder which is correct for inputting to a gsl.
examples
industrial_factory_small
industrial_factory-small

other odd ones I see probably aren't relevant to gsls but seem incorrect naming such as

delta-sector_D-Day+3_assault-group with "-" "_" and even "+" :dizzy:

Gidday,

you could check the small factory facility xmls with Winmerge to see if there are any differences between the two files. When putting industrial_factory-small into the global layer, that name would go into the first two naming columns - each underscore in a facility's name separates a column, and a hyphen doesn't count.

So for industrial_factory-small, the first two columns in the global layer would be used, the third would be blank.

[mongoose]

As the blurb says "Type1, Type2, Type3 specify the facility that is represented. "

If the "_" or "-" don't make any difference, my problem is elsewhere. I have entered a lot of things into my gsl before, but having issues with one item which won't show up in the mb or game although if I make a missions with the facility as a "facility" though mb, it shows up fine; so nothing wrong with my facility.:banghead:

(Actually I will use winmerge to see if there are any internal differences but that's not my real issue.)

[mongoose]

As I quite appreciate my normal go to guys are very preoccupied with more important CFS3 stuff; and I mean that seriously; I am hoping some other people may have ideas.

The problem is a facility which works by itself when added as a facility in the missions builder, but wont show up in the mission builder (and game) when placed in the gsl. I feel it is a nomenclature issue so I am showig the current names here.

facility called tk_flak_battery_1

<Facility Type="Flak Battery" Flags="isMilitary" OuterDistance="10000">

gsl entry example each part corresponds to

Type1 Type2 Type3 Lat Lon Angle Altitude Name ID Info1

tk flak_battery 1 N***** E****** 0 394 flakbatteries20 flak020 flak_battery


So the ? is, what might be incorrect?:banghead::dizzy:

[Daiwilletti]

As I quite appreciate my normal go to guys are very preoccupied with more important CFS3 stuff; and I mean that seriously; I am hoping some other people may have ideas.

The problem is a facility which works by itself when added as a facility in the missions builder, but wont show up in the mission builder (and game) when placed in the gsl. I feel it is a nomenclature issue so I am showig the current names here.

facility called tk_flak_battery_1

<Facility Type="Flak Battery" Flags="isMilitary" OuterDistance="10000">

gsl entry example each part corresponds to

Type1 Type2 Type3 Lat Lon Angle Altitude Name ID Info1

tk flak_battery 1 N***** E****** 0 394 f lakbatteries20 flak020 flak_battery


So the ? is, what might be incorrect?:banghead::dizzy:

Hi Mongoose, Try changing the second column entry to "flak" and the third entry to "battery_1". Don't forget to generate a new .lib file! Now don't get cross with me for stating the obvious - don't forget other people can refer to the thread as well :biggrin-new:!

Also check the your facility reference ID is unique.

HTH,

[mongoose]

No, that wasn't it. However I made a missions by taking the coordinates from the gsl and then flying a lanc over them. Definitely flak there as got the s*** shot out of me!:wiggle: They are still not actually visible in the mb. I also think facilities such as b-military_AAA-site_1 are not showing up on the mb. I thought it might be due to the Flags="isMilitary" but note others with the same flags show up.

[mongoose]

Belay that! problem solved from old 2011 copy of correspondence with NachtPiloten

Only the isFactory will show up in the mb. I checked in the ms version of cfs3 and the brit radars are called military_radar_1 and axis military_radar_2. Only the brits show up in mb. I looked inside and saw that the Flags was IsFactory.


Once I changed the flak to isFactory, they showed up!:applause:

[Daiwilletti]

Now that is a useful find! A bit head-scratching, but somehow the mb view simplifies the facilities that are displayed???

[mongoose]

Well some show up under "isMilitary", so there must be some CFS3 category for what shows up under what "is*****" name. I don't see any Microsoft blurb on it though.

[Daiwilletti]

Extract from the very useful copy of correspondence between Martin Wright and Richard Eikland, who created the Mission and Facility Editor:

"Name= typeType=text
Value=Airbase, Ammo Depot, Artillery, Bunker, Dug-in tanks, flaktower, Factory, Refinery, Invasion Fleet, Invasion Defense, Radar, V1 Site, V2 Site, Shipyard, Sub Base, Rail Yard, etc…


The Value=X defines the display name for the facility in the game. It can be anything you wish, these are some of the names used in the stock facilities.


Name=flags
Type=text
Value=isAirbase, isFactory, isMilitary, isPort, isRailyard,spawnsRailTraffic


The ‘flags=isX’ is used by the dynamic mission generator. When a railyard is needed, the game will place one of the facilities with the flags=isRailyard line in the .xml. ‘spawnsRailTraffic’ is an additional flag for railyards telling it to generate trains.


Upon export, this information should be in the top line of the .xml. It can always be added by hand, but will have to be readded after every export from Gmax."

[mongoose]

I'm obviously a little dense:dizzy:. Does any of that translate to why one should use certain "is****" for a facility to show in the missions builder?

[Daiwilletti]

I only included the text to provide a list of the "is**" options for facilities.

The answer to the problem of facilities not appearing may be something else?