Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by DavidW

  1. I'm aware of this; I think I have a local fix, but given the persistence of the bug I need to test it more (and it might as well wait for v32 at this point, as it's reasonably imminent).
  2. Very much like that. AoE targeting, yes: I do that on any difficulty above Easiest. Enemy numbers, mostly no: I've mostly implemented difficulty sliding in the AI part of SCS, not the tactical-challenge part, and there's not much scope there. But it shows up in a couple of places: most importantly, random spawns are tied to the slider.
  3. - Click on the icon - Select "Remove the difficulty control from my Special Abilities." - Control the difficulty either by 'C:CreateCreature("dw#diffi")' or directly through the difficulty variables. (I find objects more immersion-breaking than special abilities.) You really think I could be bothered to have coded the dialog manually? Variables are all in stratagems/lib/difficulty_controls.2da, in basically-human-readable form. The dialog gets autogenerated from that file at install time. At the moment I don't support overriding via .ini but you can probably just put them in your CLUA default.
  4. Issue a pull request and we can release it as b16. By this stage, wouldn't it make sense to release it just as v4?
  5. By default, yes, but you can change the default if you want. On EE, reactivating the old difficulty system is just a matter of toggling a control. On vanilla, it's an install-time option controlled via stratagems.ini.
  6. SCS v32 is now feature-complete, and I'm hoping to get it out in the next few weeks. Mostly to fill time while I'm doing install checks, I thought I'd discuss a few of the new features. One of the big changes in v32 is that it makes really extensive use of the difficulty slider, which I pretty much ignored in earlier versions. This is something I've wanted to do for ages, but couldn't until both ToBEx and the EE allowed the hardcoded features of the slider (extra damage, saving throw modifiers, that sort of thing) to be turned off. SCS relabels the five difficulty modes as BASIC, IMPROVED, TACTICAL, HARDCORE and INSANE. They have in-game descriptions, but roughly speaking: - BASIC is roughly equal to the original game's AI, with a few rough corners smoothed off. - IMPROVED is SCS-lite: most of SCS's intelligence, but a lot of restraint as to what powers and spells get used - TACTICAL is SCS v30 towards the lower end of its difficulty settings: some but not too much prebuffing, no extra hit points for dragons, etc - HARDCORE is around what a full install of SCS v30 looks like (and is roughly my own preferred difficulty) - INSANE is pretty much a full-on no-holds-barred install of SCSv30, including options that I don't really use myself. Pretty much all the difficulty options that you could choose at install time on v30 are now controlled this way. Because you might want different settings on different components, there's an innate power (I call it a "difficulty widget") granted to your character that lets you override the difficulty slider on a component-by-component basis (so that you might want dragons on INSANE, mages on HARDCORE and mage buffing on IMPROVED, say). If you don't want to use the difficulty widget, you can do this override directly from the console too. (There are also some hidden difficulty settings that you can only access within the difficulty widget - if you want all archmages to get HLAs, for instance, that's difficulty 7.) There are various reasons for doing this: (i) it simplifies my install process very substantially, and lets me fine-tune the difficulty options for a creature without having too much install-option bloat. (ii) it makes decisions about difficulty level less irrevocable for players. I often read accounts of people's experience with SCS where they like some bits but find others too hard work. Now they can tweak this in a matter of monents during play, rather than needing to spend hours reinstalling. (iii) it makes it easier to support the wide range of difficulty preferences. Case in point: some people like to play SCS with every archmage getting HLAs, and so that's a valid install option in v30, but it's also a brutally difficult option, and it's easy for other players to install it without realising how difficult it is. By gating content like this behind a very high difficulty setting, I think I do a better job of communicating to players what to expect. (iv) it gives me the option to support players who are intimidated by SCS difficulty but who might still like some of the lighter-touch bits of SCS's AI - smarter calls for help, say, or willingness to use a different range of spells, or to use the Spell Revisions spell system.
  7. Perhaps "bug" isn't quite the right description. SCS mages will teleport to the party if they've previously seen a party member but now can't see any party members. Coding limitations meant that in v31 and earlier I don't keep track of *which* party member I've seen. In v32, I do - assuming it works correctly (always hit and miss with things this fiddly) then mages will divine, and teleport to, people they've already seen, but not players who are minding their own business in a corner somewhere.
  8. I'm sure that's right. But editing the UI would allow a player's spell selections to be made for them, and hidden from them. Then the CLAB applies afterwards, and reverses the selection.
  9. The UI modding is beyond my ken, but there are some smart people playing with it and I haven't seen anyone come up with a satisfactory solution for this kind of thing. I *suspect* you could probably - change the UI so that shamans auto-select some fixed spell(s) on levelling without the player noticing; - take those spells away again via CLAB.
  10. I suspect you could probably do it by editing menu.UI, but that gets hideous pretty quickly.
  11. "In range" as in, much closer? Or "in range", as in, currently hitting them with their axe? SCS uses Range=4 as its normal trigger to engage (i.e. all enemies within Range=4 are attacked before seeking out anyone further away). And gnolls use the same AI as anyone else (at least, those gnolls affected by SCS, which should be basically all the ones in vanilla BG but won't catch any added by Beamdog).
  12. That's a bug in the cleric melee scripting; I'll look at it. Just to be clear: he's using melee weapons, can't actually hit any mages, is in reach of fighters, but doesn't attack them? Is this uniform or only after he's cast some particular spell? (I can't immediately see from the script how this could happen, so I'm a bit puzzled.)
  13. I deprecated it years ago as not really in keeping with the flavor of SCS. Edit: five and a half years ago, according to the changelog.
  14. I vaguely recall Zargal specifically gets hard coded to have a couple of potions, in something that goes back to very early iterations of SCS1. I’ll have a look.
  15. SCS doesnt care about alignment- at least not in an automated way. I pay attention to alignment selections when choosing spells, but the code itself doesnt look at the alignment field.
  16. Actually, just as an addendum: the way you use a DD in SCS is about the same as in PnP D&D - just put them between the enemy and your casters, so the enemy has to kill you to get at them. SCS will basically respect that: if theres an enemy in attack range, they get attacked. What it wont do is attack the DD if theres someone else squishier in weapon range. Which of course is how a WoW - style system would handle it.
  17. Abstractly, I agree. But from the outset its been a core design goal of SCS to play enemies intelligently (mostly because I wrote SCS for me, and my own enjoyment is spoiled when enemies do silly things). At some level, if you dont want that then you dont use SCS. But in practice Ive had a monopoly on AI for ages, so I try to be ecumenical!
  18. My normal line is that SCS plays opponents as intelligently as they are or as intelligently as it is, whichever is lower- but I estimate it has about INT=4. As for orcs, I asked an orcish friend of mine to comment:
  19. I’m not sure renaming subspells is such a good idea (though it’s a judgement call). SR uses a lot of them, and while yes, Demi should have used his modder prefix, in practice that corner of namespace is not otherwise going to get much use, so you’re balancing a probably-not-too-large risk of namespace conflict against the quite high chance of introducing bugs - to say nothing of other mods that react to SR spells using the current names. (I think SCS does some of this.)
  20. DR 75% or higher with respect to the creature’s primary weapon, usually, DR 75% or higher in all four types when the script doesn’t know what that primary weapon is.
  21. In fantasy, the orcs aren't nessasarily that intellegent. so an Orc should just attack without even trying to look if the enemy can be hurt... well with the possible exception of resistance > 99%. Meaning all the creatures that have Int of 9 or less. Yes, that's a quite list. But don't worry, an Orc Archer has Int of 11. So they can actually try to be a little intellegent on their target selection. Lions are intelligent enough to prioritize the most vulnerable target; I imagine orcs can figure it out. That said, there are other reasons creatures might have to vary their strategies - honor, brute savagery, etc - and if I were writing AI for a game with a wider range of that sort of thing among humanoids - like IWD - I might do it differently. But the great majority of BG2 humanoids are fairly civilized and well trained, and coding for the exceptions isn’t really worth it in terms of in-game experience.
  22. Look at stratagems/ssl/library.slb if you want to edit this yourself. Having said that, Ive just had a look and the threshold is 75% in v31. Are you sure this is specifically about damage resistance, and not just SCS preferring squishier targets? This isnt World of Warcraft; intelligent opponents are not going to waste their attacks on heavily armored fighters when there are other targets in range with lower hit points and worse AC.
  23. 1 is a bug in SCS, not intended behavior. (Almateria is right that one could concoct an in game explanation, but I didn’t have it in mind. I think v32 will solve it. 2 I don’t know about. I have to say I’d never really considered how controlled lichens would play out. There’s probably something I can do about it.
  24. Thats certainly interesting to hear. And I wasnt particularly trying to argue that SRs system doesnt work, only that its got some important differences from vanilla + SCS tweaks.
  • Create New...