The following warnings occurred:
Warning [2] Undefined property: MyLanguage::$archive_pages - Line: 2 - File: printthread.php(287) : eval()'d code PHP 8.2.24 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/class_error.php 153 errorHandler->error
/printthread.php(287) : eval()'d code 2 errorHandler->error_callback
/printthread.php 287 eval
/printthread.php 117 printthread_multipage



Renegade Projects Network Forums
tlb's not used? - Printable Version

+- Renegade Projects Network Forums (https://forums.renegadeprojects.com)
+-- Forum: Modding (https://forums.renegadeprojects.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Red Alert 2 & Yuri's Revenge Editing (https://forums.renegadeprojects.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: tlb's not used? (/showthread.php?tid=760)

Pages: 1 2

tlb's not used? - Bachsau - 11.05.2007

Hi there,

everyone says, that that tlb-files should be soooooooo migthy and the ini Guide says I would need the ai.tlb from ts to use ai generals. But when I open the gamemd.exe in a hex editor, I'm unable to find any reference to that tlb files, so how should the game find and use them? I also didn't realise any reaction of the game on just deleting ra2.tlb from the game directory.

Any Idea? I'm very confused about that...

Greez,
Bachsau

RE: tlb's not used? - Renegade - 11.05.2007

Did you just ignore bob's post at DZ or could you not be arsed to acknowledge it?

RE: tlb's not used? - VK - 12.05.2007

Hey, D or King Ren, please move it to RA2/YR Editing forum.
Not RP-related.

RE: tlb's not used? - DCoder - 12.05.2007

You *are* currently the only one who can explain this stuff, but it is indeed not RP-specific.

Administrative Notice:

Moved.

Btw, another tlb discussion got lost in the bowels of the soap opera thread, it would help if newbies read the existing stuff before posting.

RE: tlb's not used? - Bachsau - 12.05.2007

Renegade Wrote:Did you just ignore bob's post at DZ or could you not be arsed to acknowledge it?

Nothing of that. Wink
I just found that on Deezire's there seemed not to be much people anymore, that're active in Modding YR. So I decided to move to renegadeprojects and decided to copy my first post, cause it would be good to have more than just one opinion for things that people "have observed" or that "seem to be" like something... as long as no one exactly knows the facts.

@DCoder: Could you please link that or send pm? Can't find that thread... and the system doesn't allow me to search for "tlb", sorry.

RE: tlb's not used? - VK - 12.05.2007

Quote:You *are* currently the only one who can explain this stuff, but it is indeed not RP-specific.
I don't want to try to explain it to dozen of n00bs in COM Tongue

Quote:I'm unable to find any reference to that tlb files,
try unicode.

RE: tlb's not used? - DCoder - 12.05.2007

The "soap opera thread" is the RockPatch 1.10 Development thread, the tlb comes up near the very end.

RE: tlb's not used? - Renegade - 12.05.2007

Bachsau Wrote:Nothing of that. Wink
I just found that on Deezire's there seemed not to be much people anymore, that're active in Modding YR. So I decided to move to renegadeprojects and decided to copy my first post, cause it would be good to have more than just one opinion for things that people "have observed" or that "seem to be" like something... as long as no one exactly knows the facts.
But that's all you're gonna get. Multiple opinions from people who know no facts. VK is the only one who looked into it in the code, and VK claims AI Generals and ai.tlb are a myth. But VK is also the only one claiming it is a myth. DeeZire dedicates several paragraphs to AI Generals, and multiple people (including myself) are sure they saw changes in behavior.

So it goes down like this: The only one who could prove TLBs make a difference says they don't, while we're all sure they do make a difference, but can't prove it.

Mind you, while I don't doubt VK's skills in assembler, the fact of the matter is: Just because he hasn't found anything yet doesn't mean it's not there. He says there is nothing. We do not have the technical skills to prove the opposite. But that does not mean the opposite is not true.

So at best, you go and take a fresh rules, play five games on a specific map with a specific setup, enable only AI Generals afterwards, and then play another five games on the same map with the same setup.

Then decide for yourself whether there is a difference in AI behavior or not.

RE: tlb's not used? - Bobingabout - 13.05.2007

i'm also certain i've seen effects caused by a tag that according to VK isn't parsed.
Code:
GDIPowerTurbine=GAPOWRUP
results in my AI building a power turbine at the point they would normally build a second powerplant rather than later on when they've completed their pre-defined build pattern. even though according to VK GDIPowerTurbine= isn't a parsed tag.

RE: tlb's not used? - Bachsau - 13.05.2007

CnCVK Wrote:I don't want to try to explain it to dozen of n00bs in COM Tongue
lol, I think trying it would be pointless at all, as most people (including me) wouldn't realy understand it, without having background knowledge. Wink

CnCVK Wrote:try unicode.
Omg, thanks. I should have come to this on my own. Arf Anyway, with that I would say ra2.tlb is the ONLY tlb that is parsed, and that still doesn't say it's also used.

DCoder Wrote:The "soap opera thread" is the RockPatch 1.10 Development thread, the tlb comes up near the very end.
Ok... Well, reading that thread makes me feel like I'm back in preschool.

Renegade Wrote:But that's all you're gonna get. Multiple opinions from people who know no facts.
Well, if it's multiple it's okay. Wink
However, like you said i'll try that ai-thing on my own. Even I can't imagine how it's able work, without being referenced anywhere. There comes nothing from nothing...

Bobingabout Wrote:i'm also certain i've seen effects caused by a tag that according to VK isn't parsed.
Code:
GDIPowerTurbine=GAPOWRUP
Humm, like VK, I also wasn't able to find any reference to that, even in unicode. And ini-tags usually aren't used to be in unicode on ra2.

Greez
Bachsau

RE: tlb's not used? - VK - 19.05.2007

Quote:nd that still doesn't say it's also used.
it's simple use LoadTypeLib and do nothing again.

Quote:results in my AI building a power turbine at the point they would normally build a second powerplant rather than later on when they've completed their pre-defined build pattern. even though according to VK GDIPowerTurbine= isn't a parsed tag.
possible this is automatic upgrade place feature.

RE: tlb's not used? - Renegade - 19.05.2007

CnCVK Wrote:[...]

Quote:results in my AI building a power turbine at the point they would normally build a second powerplant rather than later on when they've completed their pre-defined build pattern. even though according to VK GDIPowerTurbine= isn't a parsed tag.
possible this is automatic upgrade place feature.
Whatever it is, it illustrates the point quite well: You don't know everything.

I'm not saying you lie, and I'm not even saying you're definitely wrong - I'm just saying that you should take into account that you don't know the entire code. If one flag slipped through, and you can immediately think of a reason how else it could be parsed, why can't you think of the same for AI Generals?

RE: tlb's not used? - Bobingabout - 19.05.2007

there is a clear effect
with tag, it places it instead of the second powerplant.
without: const, power, baracks, refinary, power defence, other shit
With: const, power, barracks, refinary, turbine, defence, other shit.

RE: tlb's not used? - VK - 20.05.2007

Quote:Whatever it is, it illustrates the point quite well: You don't know everything.
I have never look in it, but sometimes I saw the code which deal with upgrades.

Quote:without: const, power, baracks, refinary, power defence, other shit
With: const, power, barracks, refinary, turbine, defence, other shit.
You tested it in ROTC?

RE: tlb's not used? - Bobingabout - 21.05.2007

CnCVK Wrote:
Quote:without: const, power, baracks, refinary, power defence, other shit
With: const, power, barracks, refinary, turbine, defence, other shit.
You tested it in ROTC?
yes, but i will test again to be doubly sure.