Forums

Full Version: Structure of .OOB files?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
I want to create as generic as possible organizations so few questions about the more generic features within oob files and how oob editor interprets them:

- Unnamed organisations use $ sign instead of their name. I want to create a unit structure where oob editor would ask for the name of the each unit when moving it to right side. So I'd put a dollar sign for a name at each level right, from say corps to div to bde to regt to bn to coy. Why do some names have hash sign # instead?

$ asks for the number, # uses the number of org it belongs to?

- What are the lines about percentages about. For example some of the Finnish arty regts and bns have like (12) nnnnnaa (40) nnnnnbb (48) nnnnncc so what is that about. Is it a random ratio roll when selecting the unit for what you get, or what?

- I guess there is no way to indicate optional units to be selected when deploying, like an early war regt might have a 25mm or 37mm or 45mm atg coy? It would be nice to have that, ie when selecting a say generic regt you'd get a choice like what was the type of atg coy it had or what type of mortar coy it had etc.

I am not sure I made sense, but what I'd like to be able to do is to create a say generic div, which in Oob Editor would ask for div no, regt nos for each 3 regts, arty regt no, heavy arty regt no, engineer bn no, etc etc.

In a perfect world there'd be a selection for various type of arty regts, engineer bns, ... But I guess that is not possible.

Or is it, see the atg coy (always the 13.coy in Finnish oobs):

42 03 44 09 R0522007 6 $. Infantry Regiment (Inf Div)
42 03 44 09 P05303 #. Infantry Regiment HQ
42 03 44 09 B0512014 I Battalion
42 03 44 09 B0512031 II Battalion
42 03 44 09 B0512032 III Battalion
42 03 42 05 (12) C0503010 (41) C0503011 (47) C0503012 13. Company
42 06 42 12 (36) C0503011 (61) C0503012 (3) C0503029 13. Company
43 01 43 06 (91) C0503012 (3) C0503029 (6) C0503030 13. Company
43 07 43 12 (67) C0503012 (3) C0503029 (6) C0503030 (24) C0503031 13. Company
44 01 44 05 (77) C0503012 (3) C0503029 (20) C0503031 13. Company


=> And so, once again, by writing down my question I was able to answer it. The percentage thing does what I was looking for: it prompts the oob editor to ask for which unit type you want to deploy into target organization, hinting at how common they were. Yay! Helmet Smile

Now, my Winter War scenario may never complete, as I am now writing up this perfect generic division structure with the plethora of optional equipment into the oob file...

Playing games is over rated anyway, when you can just marvel at the cohesity of its unit TO&Es Helmet Wink
Hey Petri,

I'll bite!

- Unnamed organisations use $ sign instead of their name. I want to create a unit structure where Oob Editor would ask for the name of the each unit when moving it to right side. So I'd put a dollar sign for a name at each level right, from say corps to div to bde to regt to bn to coy. Why do some names have hash sign # instead?

$ asks for the number, # uses the number of org it belongs to?

Exactly, the hash sign unit gets the parent name assigned by the $.

- What are the lines about percentages about. For example some of the Finnish Arty regts and bns have like (12) nnnnnaa (40) nnnnnbb (48) nnnnncc so what is that about. Is it a random ratio roll when selecting the unit for what you get, or what?

Those are percentages of chance, that formation will be chosen, I use this a lot in my formations to pick from types of different units.

Looks like you answered your own question!!
Yes, these are pretty cool features... I am in the process of writing a theoretical TO&E Division for early mid and late war periods, using the new toned down EFFB infantry untis and including the new equipment put in in the mod.

So far I've managed to keep it down to one generic infantry division and and one generic infantry regiment represantation. Of course, below that it gets quite complex.

But so far so good!