Well Brian, I understand your frustration, but damm... No wonder GPG stops communicating with you. Were you really that rude? I know I can be a sarcastic soab sometimes about GPG and SupCom's problems, but you spit them in the face when they try to help you out. And that was THQ, too.

thats just it they try but are no help yet it what they get paid too do , I really hate getting a lemon product when i Pay good money...If it don't work don't sell it !and if you you make a mistake fix it!

I understand their defense that they simply cannot comply to all hardware/software configurations. But that doesn't mean they should ignore the many posts about the networking problems. Users have post many good suggestions about how some problems could be solved. The only thing we get is silence in return. Are they looking into it? Are they ignoring it? Are they fully focussing on unit tweaks and ForAli? I cannot say that they don't give their best, but being dead silent about problems from the start is not helping anybody. I'm curious if they have some sort of monitoring mechanism for lost or failed connections. I'm curious how big this thing really is. It may not be big in America, but symnat routers are a lot more common in Europe...

you know with all problems that you see posted and all money collected you have wounder is this something a class action suit of all people that been burnt could get a refund and put a hurt on THQ and GPGnet?
Is that what go to take too get issues fixed or a refund?see I bought mine at walmart so if i would do something like that and name walmart too thier law reps will piont finger to THQ and GPGNet and help prove the case.

I agree 100% with nielsvk; It would be nice to know that someone, somewhere, with more technical knowledge than myself is working on this problem. I would say, however, that I have tried connecting directly to the 'net through my modem (skipping the router alltogether) with no change in results. I have been trying to correct this for nearly 2 months now, to no avail. I *can* play some games online, but they are few and far-between, as I cannot connect to most players. (still)

However, I would say that I have all due respect for the programmers and techs who have worked on this, THQ and GPG alike. I have no interest in suing anyone, merely in resolving this connectivity issue.

I am an American using a Seimens Speedstream 4100.

Not sure if anyone will read this, but I FAILED every single test. How do I make it work?

If you failed *every* test, I would assume that you're using a router which, in turn, is using a NAT protocol. Depending on the specifics (model of router or modem in question) you need to log into it (generally 192.168.0.1 in a web browser, by default) and then change whatever settings or options that it has to allow the 4 ports specific to Supreme Commander to be forwarded directly instead of getting NAT-ed. I know that's terribly vague, but I don't know your system.

If you have symmetric NAT, you're screwed, unless you do no have any troubles running in DMZ mode. If you are lucky, there is a firmware upgrade which allow you to use other types of NAT.

If you don't understand anything mentioned above, happy Wikipedia'ing.

I have a DLink DI624S wireless router and I have three ports that are getting Nat'ed and I can not seem to keep the router from messing this up. Here is a copy of the Nat trace. I am set up as a DMZ host and it still has issue. I checked at DLink website and can not find any firmware updates. Any help with this would be greatly appreciated.

NATTrace report (v1.01)

Generated: 8/5/2007 9:07:18 AM (8/5/2007 1:07:18 PM UTC)
Hostname: brutal
adapter: D-Link AirPlus Xtreme G DWL-G132 Wireless USB Adapter(rev.A) - Packet Scheduler Miniport
addresses: 192.168.0.100
gateway: 192.168.0.2
adapter: NVIDIA nForce Networking Controller - Packet Scheduler Miniport
adapter: MS TCP Loopback interface

Tests:
Test 1: SUCCESS - Connect to fixed IP
success
Test 2: SUCCESS - Check NATTrace version
success
Test 3: SUCCESS - Perform DNS lookup
success
Test 4: SUCCESS - Connect to named host
success
Test 5: SUCCESS - Direct TCP to fixed IP
success
Test 6: SUCCESS - Direct TCP (web) to named host
success
Test 7: SUCCESS - Direct TCP (6112) to named host
success
Test 8: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (6112) to fixed IP
success
Test 9: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (6112) to named host
success
Test 10: SUCCESS - NAT check, port 6112
success
Test 11: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (port 9103)
success
Test 12: FAILED - NAT check, port 9103
NAT detected, direct OK (NAT was detected, but direct communication to the port passes)
Test 13: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (port 30350)
success
Test 14: FAILED - NAT check, port 30350
NAT detected, direct OK (NAT was detected, but direct communication to the port passes)
Test 15: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (port 30351)
success
Test 16: FAILED - NAT check, port 30351
NAT detected, direct OK (NAT was detected, but direct communication to the port passes)

3 tests failed

I have a SpeedTouch modem and the last firmware upgrade is very old, but still was not on my modem. This actually gave the option to run in something different than symnat. Earlier, when asking SpeedTouch helpdesk directly, they tried to help me out with other suggestions. When asking about switching to another nat type, they couldn't help me out further... They didn't even know their latest firmware upgrade opened this possibility. Only by monitoring these forums like I hawk I stumbled upon the solution.

Lucky? Perhaps. But it's not said you can't do the same. I had to do all kinds of command line sjit to get it working (so options NOT available through the common web interface). Try to look on tech forums of your modem, and search for symmetric nat.

I succeed at every test except 5 and 6. Here's the report:

--------------------

NATTrace report (v1.01)

Generated: 8/5/2007 6:21:38 PM (8/5/2007 10:21:38 PM UTC)
Hostname: LEELAPTOP-1
adapter: Linksys Wireless-G Portable USB Adapter - Packet Scheduler Miniport
addresses: 192.168.2.5
gateway: 192.168.2.1
adapter: Intel(R) PRO/Wireless 2200BG Network Connection - Packet Scheduler Miniport
adapter: Marvell Yukon 88E8036 PCI-E Fast Ethernet Controller - Packet Scheduler Miniport
addresses: 192.168.2.4
gateway: 192.168.2.1
adapter: MS TCP Loopback interface

Tests:
Test 1: SUCCESS - Connect to fixed IP
success
Test 2: SUCCESS - Check NATTrace version
success
Test 3: SUCCESS - Perform DNS lookup
success
Test 4: SUCCESS - Connect to named host
success
Test 5: FAILED - Direct TCP to fixed IP
failed - exception caught (Unable to read data from the transport connection: A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond.)
Test 6: FAILED - Direct TCP (web) to named host
failed - exception caught (Unable to read data from the transport connection: A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond.)
Test 7: SUCCESS - Direct TCP (6112) to named host
success
Test 8: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (6112) to fixed IP
success
Test 9: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (6112) to named host
success
Test 10: SUCCESS - NAT check, port 6112
success
Test 11: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (port 9103)
success
Test 12: SUCCESS - NAT check, port 9103
success
Test 13: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (port 30350)
success
Test 14: SUCCESS - NAT check, port 30350
success
Test 15: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (port 30351)
success
Test 16: SUCCESS - NAT check, port 30351
success

2 tests failed

--------------------

Since I can post, my connection to the Internet as a whole is obviously working fine. I have checked in Windows Firewall and it is allowing GPGNet and Supreme Commander to do their thing. I have additionally set up specific exceptions for the 4 ports used by GPGNet.
Attempting to log on to GPGNet does not exactly fail, but it sure doesn't succeed: I enter the username and password and click login, and the text "Logging In" appears in yellow at the top of the screen. It is shortly thereafter followed by a number of periods, which appear at a rate of about one per second. When the text with periods completely fills one line of text, it is replaced by the word "Logging", which does not create periods and instead just sit there.
Testing out what exactly the client is doing, entering a fake username sometimes gives me an error (something about the account not existing); otherwise, I have the same behavior as described above. This implies that I may have an issue with authenticating the password I enter.
Anyone?

i did te NATtrace test aswell and everything passed except all NAT checks, please help!


Tests:
Test 1: SUCCESS - Connect to fixed IP
success
Test 2: SUCCESS - Check NATTrace version
success
Test 3: SUCCESS - Perform DNS lookup
success
Test 4: SUCCESS - Connect to named host
success
Test 5: SUCCESS - Direct TCP to fixed IP
success
Test 6: SUCCESS - Direct TCP (web) to named host
success
Test 7: SUCCESS - Direct TCP (6112) to named host
success
Test 8: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (6112) to fixed IP
success
Test 9: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (6112) to named host
success
Test 10: FAILED - NAT check, port 6112
NAT detected (Expected send on port 6112, went on port 51510 instead)
Test 11: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (port 9103)
success
Test 12: FAILED - NAT check, port 9103
NAT detected (Expected send on port 9103, went on port 51512 instead)
Test 13: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (port 30350)
success
Test 14: FAILED - NAT check, port 30350
NAT detected (Expected send on port 30350, went on port 51515 instead)
Test 15: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (port 30351)
success
Test 16: FAILED - NAT check, port 30351
NAT detected (Expected send on port 30351, went on port 51518 instead)

4 tests failed

I had the same problem with a DLink Di-604 that I got from Verizon when I got fios internet. Verizon would not allow me to update the firmware on the router. I called them and told them that I was having issues witht he router but not related to playing the game. I replace the router with a Linksys and everything worked. I replace the Linksys with the router that Verizon gave me and things work. I think the problem with the Dlink routers is that they are using an old linux kernal that is using ipchains. I believe that ipchains had this issue. So, I would replace the router and see if that helps.

Matt

lol that NATtrace thing doent work for me as you can see in a comment below.

but i added the ports 6112, 9013, 30350, 30351 on my firewall naming them sucom1-4

and then saw on the thq website you needports 30340 and 30341 open as well i labelled them supcom5-6 on my firewall

you can label them what u like btw lol

hope this helps people out, private message me if you want and ill try to help

Slicedham,
where did you see that you have to have ports 30340 & 30341 open? Can you post a link?

Difference between the beta and the retail version, if I remember correctly.

Great Tool MadAndy,

I'd like to request the ability to change the supcom port tested. I've got several computers on a LAN and need to set unique ports for each computer in order for them to connect properly. Being able to test with ports besides 6112 would be awesome.

I have to just pull the router out of the loop if I want everything to run well. I have tried all kinds of settings and nothing will work with this router. The wireless adapter as well was not working well either as my ping was spiking up and down. Back to the good old ball and chain cat 5 cable and modem connection and it works well. Now if I can get my wife to spend less time on the internet so I don't have to keep plugging that router back in. LoL

I don't know what you are referring to with "this issue", so perhaps this post is redundant.

Anyway, the old Linux kernels from the ipchains days had an issue which may affect GPGnet: They changed the source port on outbound connections when doing NAT (or IP Masquerading as it was called). Standard behaviour in kernel 2.2 was to change the source port to somewhere between 61000 og 65096, and I don't even think it was configurable without recompiling the kernel.

I can see in the posting you responded to, that source ports were changed to 51510-51518. Seems like the kernel 2.2 behaviour, though the port range is a little different.

So yes, I think it will be a very good idea to stay away from routers based on these old kernel versions.

I know that it was changed in kernel 2.4, but I don't know the new behaviour. However, the kernel 2.6 which I have currently installed will preserve source ports on outbound connections, and I have no problems making it work with GPGnet/SupCom.

I have this test result, but I have no problem connecting to games, at least not so far in the last 2 months.

NATTrace report (v1.01)

Generated: 9-11-2007 21:20:10 (9-11-2007 20:20:10 UTC)
Hostname: amd4800
adapter: NVIDIA nForce Networking Controller - Pakketplanner-minipoort
addresses: 10.0.0.1
gateway: 10.0.0.138
adapter: MS TCP Loopback interface

Tests:
Test 1: SUCCESS - Connect to fixed IP
success
Test 2: SUCCESS - Check NATTrace version
success
Test 3: SUCCESS - Perform DNS lookup
success
Test 4: SUCCESS - Connect to named host
success
Test 5: SUCCESS - Direct TCP to fixed IP
success
Test 6: SUCCESS - Direct TCP (web) to named host
success
Test 7: SUCCESS - Direct TCP (6112) to named host
success
Test 8: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (6112) to fixed IP
success
Test 9: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (6112) to named host
success
Test 10: FAILED - NAT check, port 6112
NAT detected (Expected send on port 6112, went on port 30697 instead)
Test 11: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (port 9103)
success
Test 12: FAILED - NAT check, port 9103
NAT detected (Expected send on port 9103, went on port 30698 instead)
Test 13: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (port 30350)
success
Test 14: FAILED - NAT check, port 30350
NAT detected (Expected send on port 30350, went on port 30699 instead)
Test 15: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (port 30351)
success
Test 16: FAILED - NAT check, port 30351
NAT detected (Expected send on port 30351, went on port 30703 instead)

4 tests failed

Any ideas on this one- I can connect to games via GPG net with no issues, but I am unable to connect to a LAN/P game. My router is a DLink WBR-2310, I've gone through the whole manual, have forwarded the ports SupCom needs, but still no luck. Windows firewall is disabled, and tried with Norton's disabled as well. As far as I have been able to discover, there is no setting on this router to enable/disable NAT....setting the 'puter up in the DMZ changed nothing.
Here is my Nattrace report:

NATTrace report (v1.01)

Generated: 11/17/2007 1:58:55 PM (11/17/2007 7:58:55 PM UTC)
Hostname: grw-flightsim
adapter: Broadcom NetXtreme Gigabit Ethernet #2 - Packet Scheduler Miniport
adapter: Broadcom NetXtreme Gigabit Ethernet - Packet Scheduler Miniport
addresses: 192.168.0.105
gateway: 192.168.0.1
adapter: MS TCP Loopback interface

Tests:
Test 1: SUCCESS - Connect to fixed IP
success
Test 2: SUCCESS - Check NATTrace version
success
Test 3: SUCCESS - Perform DNS lookup
success
Test 4: SUCCESS - Connect to named host
success
Test 5: SUCCESS - Direct TCP to fixed IP
success
Test 6: SUCCESS - Direct TCP (web) to named host
success
Test 7: SUCCESS - Direct TCP (6112) to named host
success
Test 8: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (6112) to fixed IP
success
Test 9: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (6112) to named host
success
Test 10: FAILED - NAT check, port 6112
NAT detected, direct OK (NAT was detected, but direct communication to the port passes)
Test 11: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (port 9103)
success
Test 12: FAILED - NAT check, port 9103
NAT detected, direct OK (NAT was detected, but direct communication to the port passes)
Test 13: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (port 30350)
success
Test 14: FAILED - NAT check, port 30350
NAT detected, direct OK (NAT was detected, but direct communication to the port passes)
Test 15: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (port 30351)
success
Test 16: FAILED - NAT check, port 30351
NAT detected, direct OK (NAT was detected, but direct communication to the port passes)

4 tests failed

Any ideas on how to get this working? I'd really like to play some IP games as an alternative to GPGnet.
Thanks in advance,

-George

I've sometimes had LAN connection problems when I used custom IP adresses on my computers on my LAN network (it sometimes worked, and then stopped working); if you've assigned manual IP addresses, then try letting windows (XP) assign IP addresses to you computers automatically.

I also failed the two direct TCP tests (5&6): Direct TCP to fixed IP and Direct TCP (web) to named host. Passed all others.

Would be great if someone could explain what this means and if it may cause my lag.

Okay here's the result of my test. Apparently something's up with Port 9103. I've got a pound of wings to the first person who can help me fix this problem as I really want to play multiplayer.

ATTrace report (v1.01)

Generated: 21/05/2008 8:45:46 PM (22/05/2008 12:45:46 AM UTC)
Hostname: Craig-PC
adapter: Intel(R) 82566DC-2 Gigabit Network Connection
addresses: fe80::b538:b20e:d303:18a%9, 192.168.15.3
gateway: 192.168.15.1
adapter: Software Loopback Interface 1
adapter: Teredo Tunneling Pseudo-Interface
adapter: isatap.{D52908CE-DAC1-4D24-A30B-E6E393ED9EF5}
adapter: isatap.{D52908CE-DAC1-4D24-A30B-E6E393ED9EF5}
adapter: isatap.{D52908CE-DAC1-4D24-A30B-E6E393ED9EF5}
adapter: isatap.{D52908CE-DAC1-4D24-A30B-E6E393ED9EF5}
adapter: isatap.{D52908CE-DAC1-4D24-A30B-E6E393ED9EF5}
adapter: isatap.{D52908CE-DAC1-4D24-A30B-E6E393ED9EF5}
adapter: isatap.{D52908CE-DAC1-4D24-A30B-E6E393ED9EF5}

Tests:
Test 1: SUCCESS - Connect to fixed IP
success
Test 2: SUCCESS - Check NATTrace version
success
Test 3: SUCCESS - Perform DNS lookup
success
Test 4: SUCCESS - Connect to named host
success
Test 5: SUCCESS - Direct TCP to fixed IP
success
Test 6: SUCCESS - Direct TCP (web) to named host
success
Test 7: SUCCESS - Direct TCP (6112) to named host
success
Test 8: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (6112) to fixed IP
success
Test 9: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (6112) to named host
success
Test 10: SUCCESS - NAT check, port 6112
success
Test 11: FAILED - Direct UDP (port 9103)
failed - exception caught (Array cannot be null.
Parameter name: bytes)
Test 12: SUCCESS - NAT check, port 9103
success
Test 13: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (port 30350)
success
Test 14: SUCCESS - NAT check, port 30350
success
Test 15: SUCCESS - Direct UDP (port 30351)
success
Test 16: SUCCESS - NAT check, port 30351
success

1 test failed

I just ran the test again and it failed the first test about IP connection? Any thoughts anyone?