Messages

1

Programming / Add hotkeys for moving unit up/down

« on: September 17, 2024, 11:14:58 am »

Almost every battlescape button in OXC has hotkey. But somehow moving unit up/down buttons do not. Seems strange as this actions are very useful.
So I set them up.
PageUp and PageDown are used for moving view up/down; also I couldn't use W and S because S is set for Stats. So I decided default values to be W and X.
Tests proof that X for "Move unit below" and X for "Clear inventory" do not interfere, both work just ok.

P. S. Now there is only one button without hotkey -- "Multilevel view". I just see no use in that one, so I ignored it.

Here's my pull request: https://github.com/OpenXcom/OpenXcom/pull/1446

2

Programming / Re: Problem in Compile

« on: May 02, 2020, 04:45:27 pm »

I've got just the same problem as Marselleza did: I try to build OXC commit 3d092c227fbd4d4ef0a7a58ff31dcca399b693ef on

Windows 7 x64
MinGW 9.2.0 (x86)
CMake 3.17.2

Using instructions at https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Compiling_with_MinGW_(OpenXcom) I downloaded

SDL_gfx-2.0.26
SDL_image-1.2.12
SDL_mixer-1.2.12
SDL-1.2.15
yaml-cpp-0.6.3

and successfully compiled SDL_gfx.dll & libyaml-cpp.a not using boost.

But running cmake produces the same error as Marselleza's one:

Code: [Select]

d:\Constantine\Code\OpenXcom\OpenXcom-master>cmake -G "MinGW Makefiles" .
-- The C compiler identification is GNU 9.2.0
-- The CXX compiler identification is GNU 9.2.0
-- Check for working C compiler: D:/Constantine/Programs/MinGW/bin/gcc.exe
-- Check for working C compiler: D:/Constantine/Programs/MinGW/bin/gcc.exe - works
-- Detecting C compiler ABI info
-- Detecting C compiler ABI info - done
-- Detecting C compile features
-- Detecting C compile features - done
-- Check for working CXX compiler: D:/Constantine/Programs/MinGW/bin/g++.exe
-- Check for working CXX compiler: D:/Constantine/Programs/MinGW/bin/g++.exe - works
-- Detecting CXX compiler ABI info
-- Detecting CXX compiler ABI info - done
-- Detecting CXX compile features
-- Detecting CXX compile features - done
-- Looking for pthread.h
-- Looking for pthread.h - found
-- Performing Test CMAKE_HAVE_LIBC_PTHREAD
-- Performing Test CMAKE_HAVE_LIBC_PTHREAD - Failed
-- Looking for pthread_create in pthreads
-- Looking for pthread_create in pthreads - not found
-- Looking for pthread_create in pthread
-- Looking for pthread_create in pthread - found
-- Found Threads: TRUE
CMake Error at cmake/modules/FindSDL2.cmake:187 (file):
  file failed to open for reading (No such file or directory):

    D:/Constantine/Code/OpenXcom/OpenXcom-master/SDL_INCLUDE_DIR-NOTFOUND/SDL_version.h
Call Stack (most recent call first):
  cmake/modules/FindSDL2.cmake:278 (find_sdl_version)
  CMakeLists.txt:64 (find_package)

-- Could NOT find PkgConfig (missing: PKG_CONFIG_EXECUTABLE)
CMake Error at CMakeLists.txt:69 (message):
  Can't find SDL which is required
I tried Yankes makefile. It didn't worked out also. I think it is irrelevant here: it is intended for OXCE (not for OXC) and there are even no links to SDL_mixer, SDL_image etc.
   
Ok, I took makefile from the guide, set up my libs versions, removed AppDep call, because 'make depends' worked fine. But 'make all' compiled a lot of sources and then failed:

Code: [Select]

D:/Constantine/Programs/MinGW/bin/g++ -DWINVER=0x0400 -I..\SDL-1.2.15\include\SD
L -I..\SDL_mixer-1.2.12 -I..\SDL_image-1.2.12 -I..\SDL_gfx-2.0.26 -I..\yaml-cpp-
0.6.3\include -Wall -Wextra -Wno-unused-function -O2 -o src/Engine/CrossPlatform
.o -c src/Engine/CrossPlatform.cpp src/Engine/CrossPlatform.cpp:44:10: fatal err
or: dbghelp.h: No such file or directory
   44 | #include <dbghelp.h>
      |          ^~~~~~~~~~~
compilation terminated.
Makefile:41: recipe for target 'src/Engine/CrossPlatform.o' failed
make: *** [src/Engine/CrossPlatform.o] Error 1
I cannot find that header in OXC, dependencies or MinGW directories. It can be found in MinGW-x64.

Ok, let's go to src/Engine/CrossPlatform.cpp:

Code: [Select]

43 #ifndef __NO_DBGHELP
44 #include <dbghelp.h>
45 #endif
I added -D__NO_DBGHELP to CXXFLAGS and get new error on the same file:

Code: [Select]

d:\Constantine\Code\OpenXcom\OpenXcom-master>make all
D:/Constantine/Programs/MinGW/bin/g++ -DWINVER=0x0400 -I..\SDL-1.2.15\include\SD
L -I..\SDL_mixer-1.2.12 -I..\SDL_image-1.2.12 -I..\SDL_gfx-2.0.26 -I..\yaml-cpp-
0.6.3\include -Wall -Wextra -Wno-unused-function -O2 -D__NO_DBGHELP -o src/Engin
e/Sound.o -c src/Engine/Sound.cpp
D:/Constantine/Programs/MinGW/bin/g++ -DWINVER=0x0400 -I..\SDL-1.2.15\include\SD
L -I..\SDL_mixer-1.2.12 -I..\SDL_image-1.2.12 -I..\SDL_gfx-2.0.26 -I..\yaml-cpp-
0.6.3\include -Wall -Wextra -Wno-unused-function -O2 -D__NO_DBGHELP -o src/Engin
e/CrossPlatform.o -c src/Engine/CrossPlatform.cpp
src/Engine/CrossPlatform.cpp: In function 'std::string OpenXcom::CrossPlatform::
now()':
src/Engine/CrossPlatform.cpp:1095:21: error: 'LOCALE_INVARIANT' was not declared
 in this scope; did you mean 'LANG_INVARIANT'?
 1095 |  if (GetDateFormatA(LOCALE_INVARIANT, 0, 0, "dd'-'MM'-'yyyy", date, MAX_
LEN) == 0)
      |                     ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      |                     LANG_INVARIANT
src/Engine/CrossPlatform.cpp:1097:21: error: 'LOCALE_INVARIANT' was not declared
 in this scope; did you mean 'LANG_INVARIANT'?
 1097 |  if (GetTimeFormatA(LOCALE_INVARIANT, TIME_FORCE24HOURFORMAT, 0, "HH'-'m
m'-'ss", time, MAX_LEN) == 0)
      |                     ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      |                     LANG_INVARIANT
Makefile:41: recipe for target 'src/Engine/CrossPlatform.o' failed
make: *** [src/Engine/CrossPlatform.o] Error 1


LOCALE_INVARIANT can be found in winnt.h again in MinGW-x64. winnt.h in MinGW doesn't have
LOCALE_INVARIANT macro.

How do you guys compile OpenXcom under x86? ))


P. S. I would highly appreciate if smb updated mentioned compiling manual. Its very old: 'Copy original game directories in <project>\OpenXcom-master\bin\data directory'. OG is supposed to be copied into TFTD and UFO directories for a long time.

3

Hardmode Expansion / Re: Hardmode Expansion - Bugreports

« on: January 23, 2018, 08:16:29 pm »

What about releasing new version? As we see, many bugs were fixed   

4

Hardmode Expansion / Re: Hardmode Expansion - Bugreports

« on: June 19, 2017, 01:30:44 pm »

Probably, i just use the same string for each of them as the normal medikit, because it explains on how to use the medikit and what each of the three options does. So far i was undecided what to do with this.
Any ideas?

Maybe specify number characteristics? I mean user should understand what exactly differs these three objects.

4. Yes, I know. Grav shield just is now depicted in the tree.

5. Hovertank dependency is not graphically shown in the tree.

5

Hardmode Expansion / Re: Hardmode Expansion - Bugreports

« on: June 18, 2017, 04:49:21 pm »

Hi, Hellrazor.

A new bunch of bugs )

1. There are 3 different medic packs in game. They probably should have different Ufopaedia descriptions.
2. When I played mod first time, ufopaedia entry "NONE" confused me a little bit. Maybe rename it to "No armor" or "Coverall"?
3. A lot of misprints in Ufopaedia articles: Sibiria -> Siberia, australia -> Australia, religous -> religious, africa -> Africa, europe -> Europe, collusion -> collision, earth -> Earth (4 or 5 times), waering -> wearing, posses -> possess, posseses -> possesses, Astonishly -> Astonishingly, obidience -> obedience, obidient -> obedient, impenetreble -> impenetrable, representativs -> representatives.
4. Research tree: Grav shield is missing.
5. Research tree: some error with Elerium Bomb Launcher. I forgot what is exactly wrong there. Just check dependencies please.
6. In main menu go: Load game -> Original X-COM, see text on the left button.

BTW, cannot understand what is Alien data slate & Alien data core. They're kind hard to translate to Russian (my native). Could you explain what is it?

And what about translations? I could help with translation to Russian if you learn me how to do it.

6

Hardmode Expansion / Re: Hardmode Expansion - Bugreports

« on: December 04, 2016, 11:55:17 am »

Constantine, I can understand your frustrating with this game mechanic, but it might help to look at the logic another way. Don't think of it as the skyranger "falling" from the sky. If the aliens catch you by surprise with their base attack (and if you didn't detect it beforehand, then they did), then no one is able to send a message to warn the skyranger about the attack. So after you lose the base defense mission, the skyranger remains unaware and returns, right into an alien trap and that is why everyone is lost.

Nice point, Countdown. But as we see from gameplay, base and craft have two-way communication (base can direct craft, craft can show its properties for base). So when the base is destroyed it stops responding to craft. And by the way to other bases. From now on craft can understand the base is lost.

No, they don't break anything, all these features are optional, by default disabled and could be considered mods.

The feature you are proposing has problems (as you have pointed out yourself) with fuel and free hangars and thus cannot be implemented.

OK, that feature might also be optional. The problems arise, yes, and I stated them to elaborate solutions together. Countdown already pointed partial solution for second problem -- to sell a craft. Good one, but still not general.

I just want to say that if there is a little chance for user to save his craft and soldiers (in my savegame it definitely is) it should be used.

7

Hardmode Expansion / Re: Hardmode Expansion - Bugreports

« on: December 04, 2016, 11:04:12 am »

Not a bug, it is a reproduction of behaviour of the original game, like it or not, but thats what it is.

If reproduction of behaviour of the original game was so much firm goal, then game would still have many bugs and discomforts. On the contrary, we can see that developers fix bugs and add really cool stuff like mentioned Airborne transfers, custom initial base layout, live alien sale, anytime psi-training, instant grenades, psi-strenght improvement, force craft launch -- all this new features explicitly break original game behavior, don't they?

8

Hardmode Expansion / Re: Hardmode Expansion - Bugreports

« on: December 03, 2016, 11:52:16 pm »

I know about Airborne transfers option. It is totally unrelated here.

If you do not guard your base

I do. Same situation would arise if base guard will die in the defense mission. In that save I intentionnally sold tanks and moved craft to a mission just before base attack to demonstrate strange game behavior.

All you guys say is that my game style is wrong and that I should avoid such situation by any means. Thanks for advices  , but actually it never happened to me. Its I just thought "what would happen if..." and spent a fair amount of time to reproduce these circumstances. And then I saw its a bug because there is no reason for craft just to fall. In reality it would not fall, it would go to another base.

And when I said I can walk over Alien Reproduction, hellrazor didn't say "do not walk over it" So why nobody sees obvious bug here and everybody says not to do so?

Or maybe that should be posted to openXcom bugtracker?

9

Hardmode Expansion / Re: Hardmode Expansion - Bugreports

« on: December 03, 2016, 04:49:15 pm »

Skyranger is sent to a mission. At that time an Alien Ship destroys Skyranger's base. Skyranger (with all soldiers and HWPs) just dies. As if aliens after taking over the base sent self-annihilation signal to the Skyranger craft.

I think there must be possiblity to let user decide which base should Skyranger be reassigned to. And if there is only one base left, there should be just message like "Skyranger-1 is reassigned to base <OnlyBaseLeftName>". And the same situation for every craft currently in flight.

There might be two problems.
1. Craft can have too little fuel to reach any base.
2. No base have free hangar, and this is veeery likely to happen.

I don't know what to do in these cases. But there must be solutions.

10

Hardmode Expansion / Re: Hardmode Expansion - Bugreports

« on: December 03, 2016, 04:35:28 pm »

Can walk over Alien Reproduction on the Alien Base.

11

Hardmode Expansion / Re: Hardmode Expansion - Bugreports

« on: November 30, 2016, 08:10:51 am »

That'll would help a little, thank you.

But yes, there is no guarantee that you never face the situation when a cowardly muton is sitting inside UFO and never pokes his nose out of it, so you'll have to accept defeat and escape.

There should be some graph-testing algorithm like Dijkstra's which would test if path graph is connected. Or at least if UFO and craft are located in the same connected component.

12

Hardmode Expansion / Re: Hardmode Expansion - Bugreports

« on: November 29, 2016, 09:57:54 pm »

Ruleset\extraStrings-en.rul has a misprint. In STR_NEWS_5_UFOPEDIA there is a word "russia" which must be capitalized.

13

Hardmode Expansion / Re: Hardmode Expansion - Bugreports

« on: November 29, 2016, 09:55:11 pm »

Maybe MALE_CIVILIAN should be more user-readable?
What is improvisation?

14

Hardmode Expansion / Re: Hardmode Expansion - Bugreports

« on: November 29, 2016, 09:53:39 pm »

No terrestrial path from Skyranger to UFO. I finished that mission already, but that was really hard.

15

Hardmode Expansion / Re: Hardmode Expansion - Bugreports

« on: November 29, 2016, 07:40:17 am »

The issue is not that you should not report it. It's WHERE you report it. The bug tracker that you used is for the core OpenXCom engine, which is not at fault here. What you are reporting are problems with the hardmode mod, so it should be reported here, not on the bug tracker.

Yes, and I did reported that here after your first clarification.

It is just often hard to distinguish what causes the error: openxcom engine or mod. And which mod exactly if you have many ones.