Mad Mate

How about tweaks/changes from 1st post=?

Kreso, we did almost all of those fixes and also some that are not documented here.

 

You can find all of the changes in github:

https://github.com/Gibberlings3/SpellRevisions/commits/master

 

From Commits on Sep 12, 2018 (this is your beta 15) to Commits on Oct 25, 2018 are our fixes described.

 

Grammarsalad is continuing this work on his github here:

https://github.com/Grammarsalad/SpellRevisions

main_component.tpa doesn't use languages\(language)\spell_revisions.tra?

It is just insert of SR spell description if it is overwritten by IR. Irrelevant if SR goes after main IR.

 

EDIT: check it further, it just changes "Draw Upon Holy Might" to "Draw Upon Divine Might" in upgraded Purifier description.

I went through IR & SR (original, not Bartimaeus Revisions), and IR main component should be definitely installed before SR. Other IR components can be after SR.

 

Only IR component that checks for SR is 1030 Store Revisions, which in fact should be installed near end of everything, as it checks for Cursed Items, Rogue Rebalancing, SCS & aTweaks.

I don't know when install order changed in BWS, but BWP (from which BWS took first install order), still install main IR component near beginning.

 

Again, this is only for main, G3 IR & SR. For Bart's Revisions use his recommended order.

I don't know. I remembered just now something Kreso said about side-effect of installing IR after SR:

http://gibberlings3.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=28894&page=14&do=findComment&comment=263240

This could be it.

IR scrl15 also has same protections.

Incantatar, check yours scrl15 itm & spl in NI.

EDIT: Checked again, IR scrl15 does protect from spl604, not from spl604D, but it has immunity to petrification effect. So I think it should work, anyway, maybe...

EDIT2: I think you are right, kreso_petrification.tph code in SR adds spl604 & spl604D to basilisk weapon, so scrl15 should have protection from both.

Nice. Good jobs to SD and MM - it was a long time coming!

Thank you, Bartimaeus, for kick-starting this release and tireless bug-reporting and fixing.

Let's hope we can make it bug-free.

@Mad Mate

 

Please download CtBEE from my github https://github.com/weigo87/CtB-EE.git

Now the ids problems should be solved, because I changed the biffing routine. Only the tis and wav files will be biffed.

Great, thank you! Now it works fine.

 

Can you apply same fix to your other mods?

Now I made a small test.

 

The spell.ids file was biffed by RoT and CtB added some new lines and biffed it again at the end.

Shout.ids was Shoutids.ids was in it#s original bif file and was changed correctly by CtB.

Both files are working correctly.

@Mad Mate Can you post your weidu.log file, perhaps we can find the problem.

 

I think it's important for the game not to have too much different versions of mods. For example, if someone would make a mod with all big mods (BGT/EET DsotSC, NtotSC, SoS, TDD, CtB, RoT ...) it's much more easier to make it to all mods compatible, when we have only one version for the mods and not two different, with a lot of bugfixing during Big World setup.

 

I think one big point of success for Baldur's Gate modding community was passionate commitment and that we always kept the modding easy. We want to have the game in best case for 20 more years.

First, I want to thank you for updating these 3 big mods. It is huge task and I think those are last ones that wasn't updated to EE (maybe only Dritz Saga, don't know).

 

Second, I think that old engine has some problems with biffed files. It leads to, not only to failed installs, but to crashes ingame. That is why BGT ask you at beginning of install "do you want to biff all files or just some?".

This is last example of crash Chevalier had: http://www.shsforums.net/topic/58231-announcement-lets-play-baldurs-gate-trilogy-mega/page-2?do=findComment&comment=604734

I also like your idea to have all files from each mod nice and all in same-named biffs, but unfortunately that won't work with old engine. Maybe with EE it is solved. Camdawg had also problems with Sensible Entrances and biffs.

Why is that, maybe some veteran modder can explain. You can test it yourself. Install BG2 and then CtBEE, open NearInfinity and try to access shoutids.ids. It can't get file from biff.

To be certain everything works, just biff files that old CtB biffed.

 

Next, BGT should go after all those mods, because it was newer mod then those 3 and had checks for each one so they don't overwrite each other.

Also, there were some corrupted files after installing CtBEE and RoT, I can check what are they and send you list, if you want.

 

Thanks again for your work!

Well, if it doesn't work in the bases of a different game and fixes that need to be game specific, it doesn't work at all.

PS, the BWP's v18 has this in it: "Please note: The BiG WorldProjectis meant only for the classic version of BG1 and BG2 and not for the enhanced edition. Read more about this in the chapter BG classic vs EE." which means page 296 and forward...

Jarno, CTBEE is supposed to work on classic version and I (would like to) use it on classic version and use BWP to install my mods.

Well, how about being able to identify which mod it is ?

And lump in the CtB chores as a single component into the CtB, so you don't need to carry 20 thousand different .tp2 files references etc, remove the biffing immedietly !!! ... and the REQUIRE_PREDICATE MOD_IS_INSTALLED is old code, you would do better with: require component.

How about putting new version number or something like that, not changing all, name of mod, folder name. They are supposed to be same mods. If they like EEEEE's so much they can attach it by version number or put it in readme's or name a topic, but why change folder name?

And I agree about changes you propose, but they are not my mods. Weigo or Klatu or anybody else in last 20 years who made that check should change it.

For reference:

Tethyr Forest Patch (don't know if it is included in CTB):

was included into the Worldmap mod some 5 years ago. It might have slipped away from it in one point, but it's there today.

Are you sure? Didn't know that, thanks. One mod less. Even Leonardo always installs Tethyr Forest Patch with Worldmap.

It depends on the files and forward / backward compatibility. For areas, using the same graphic files (.tis) is not good and leads to these grids on the area graphics in the EEs, unfortunately. Strictly speaking it's the easiest way to make sure the files for the original game are not being altered, so for a mod that formerly was for classic engine, it's a way to leave the original mod files untouched which should minimize the kind of problems you encountered. NTotSC also works with different .are files for the three games (BGT, BG:EE, and EET) and two sets of area graphics (one for classic and one for the EE).

Thanks for explanation. It just seems that in this case, some files meant for EE slipped to original.

 

If you mean renaming tp2 files, it doesn't matter if it has "setup-' or not for MOD_IS_INSTALLED.

From quick glance at my mod files, most mods check for data\CTB-RULE.bif or data\ROT-RULE.bif, but some like:

Tethyr Forest Patch (don't know if it is included in CTB):

REQUIRE_PREDICATE (MOD_IS_INSTALLED ~SETUP-CTB.TP2~ 0)

Klatu Tweaks and Fixes:

REQUIRE_PREDICATE MOD_IS_INSTALLED ~SETUP-CTB-CHORES.TP2~ ~0~
REQUIRE_PREDICATE MOD_IS_INSTALLED ~CtB/SETUP-CtB.TP2~ ~0~

Didn't go through them all.

And changing names also breaks up BWP. It check for CTB and ROT in lot of places.

I see no benefits of changing old mod name. Nobody will install CTB if they install "CTBEE".

Hm, I was looking at the code, but did not install it. If you are sure it's CtB I'll tell weigo.

I'm sorry if I've been rude, didn't mean to. Should've contacted Weigo.

 

I did another testing now with CtB and SOS, clean BG2 (with or without fixpack), and then started NI and it doesn't even load SHOUTIDS.IDS. Problem is with biffing.

Both mods (probably same with RoT) biff ALL files from override. I think if IDS files are biffed, next mods can't pick it up, so they make new one.

I commented line in tp2 that biffs all files, and it worked, but after testing, NI found few corrupted files, anyway (WED, CRE, not IDS).

 

And I have a problem with changing name CtB to CtbEE and from setup-Rot To setup-RoTerror. Lots of years big mod (BGT, TS, CtB, RoT, SoS, TDD) detected each other with names of mods, if you change it, they don't detect each other.

I can do thorough search and change name in every tp2, but it is not helping others.

I agree it should stay true to original mod, but I am not sure what you mean by it. I hope NTotSC v2 and up stayed true to the original mod, and yet we changed quite a bit internally and also added quite a bit of content with respect to playability (journal system, no dead ends etc.).

To your question: removal of compatibility with classic BG is not necessary to make a mod EE-compatible, but then the mod has to offer two solutions to some instances to cover the changes (different formatted texts etc.).

In case you really mean NTotSC and are missing compatibility with classic BG1:TotSC, the version I was reworking was never compatible with BG1:TotSC, and making a mod compatible with that is a PITA^3.

What I meant, I know there are some differences between engines and I know that mods for EE don't work on original, but if something works fine on original, it should work also on EE (maybe with some minor changes).

I see that these weigo's mods have different ARE, WED, ITM files for old and for new engine. Is it really necessary?

It leads to this corrupted error that I get EE file and somebody on EE gets old file. And we all had working file to begin with.

 

I own EE's for PC and for Android, and play it mostly on tablet. But on my PC I still like old engine, main reason is that its mods are playtested to the bone. I'm too old to have crashes mid-game, again.

 

NTotSC you did, and DSotSC are great examples how it should be done. ToA and Fishing For Trouble are also nicely done. All like original.

 

Sorry again!

CtB does not erase SHOUTIDS.ids, it appends to it.

I tried 3-4 installs and it erased it everytime. Can try few more to make sure...

Did you let weigo know about your problems? I'm not so fond of players telling a mod is "not good" but giving no bug report whatsoever to the modder so he/she can improve it.

No, I didn't tell weigo, my fault, because I was too frustrated with lost time, just went back to old versions.

 

Main reason I said it here, is that these conversion, with or without approval of original modder (don't know) should stay true to original mod.

You participated in conversion of NTotSC, is it necessary to remove compatibility with old BG to make it compatible with EEs?

Mad Mate: weigo updated SoS and CtB:

SoS: http://www.shsforums.net/topic/59783-shadows-over-souber-v114/

CtB: http://www.shsforums.net/topic/59973-ctb-ee-v22-for-bg2eeeet-and-bg2tobbgt/

 

They should be added to the EET list, as well.

Those are the ones I tried. Lost a week to make them work and didn't. Appreciate effort but in current state they are not good.

As I said, some of these mods (CTB, I think), erases SHOUTIDS.IDS, so it breaks all mods that need it, compared with old version, some of the resources are missing, after installing (ROT, I think) lots of files gets corrupted (NI check).

It sure seems strange to not keep none-EET compatibility, I'll admit that (I haven't really looked into it, so I wasn't aware).

This is happening a lot and I don't like it. Why break old tested mod to make new buggy one?

I lost last week trying to install BWS recommended CTB, ROT & SOS from github, which is now in very bad shape, destroys some IDS so it breaks mods that go after, lots of missing resources, who knows what bugs I may encounter in the game...

Went back to old tested versions. Who needs broken mods at all cost? EEs are now mostly bugfixed, why introduce new bugs with breaking tested mods?

K4thos & jastey (Thanks!!) did a great job on DSotSC and NTotSC, fixing bugs, improving mod, keeping old compatibility, and made possibly for EE.

I wish somebody will do same with rest of big mods (CTB, ROT, SOS & TDD).

I don't know (and this sort of thing is one reason I'm keeping some distance from the maintenance release). My local version has evolved quite a long way from that version.

It doesn't work in v30, also. Yeah, you probably already fixed it new version. Can't wait for new release.

The one from the pinned "SR4b15" thread (which I take it is Kreso's). I'm already a bit uncomfortable working with something that isn't an "official" public release; I'm not going to work with anything more work-in-progress and non-public than that.

 

If the current state of SR is such that it's having lots of fixing and cleaning going on and some spells may change, it sounds like possibly I should postpone updating SCS compatibility until we get a stable official release?

Yeah, that is the one to use. Last year or so people were using it, and there wern't much complains. Some small buffing or nerfing are requested, but nothing major. Just, Demi vanished when it came to last level spells and left a bit unfinished.

I'm not certain, but I think 6th level Summon Nishruu should be in hidespl as it's scroll is taken by MS8 and there is new 7th level Summon Nishruu spell.

I'm going to use this thread to post silly questions about SR that are coming up in SCS v32.

 

Here's the first: why are there no scrolls of Summon Fiend and (wizard L9) Gate? Both spells have SR versions, neither is in HIDESPL, but both have their scrolls overwritten with Monster Summoning spells. Is this intentional?

Summon Fiend scroll should be there SCRL9B.ITM, and WIZARD_GATE is still there (SPWI905.SPL), but it's scroll is, like Subtledoctor said, temporary overwritten by MS9.

What version of SR4b15 are you using? Kreso's is here, and I transferred it to github comit by comit here, so you can download proofed and checked version of SR4b15 here. File by file same like Kreso's but made compatible with all BG versions (removed EE opcodes).

 

There is WiP branch of fixing and cleaning b15 here, so you can follow our progress. Almost all bugs are found by Bartimaeus and other forum members, and fixes are mostly by Subtledoctor & others which I checked before putting them in git.

 

As you can see by comits, there will be mostly bugfixing and cleaning stuff without making big changes. I'll probably, put back Gate scroll like Subtledoctor suggested, because nobody likes new MS9 spell anyway. Until someone come with better solution.

What are you saying exactly?

 

In BGEE Carbos and Shank are coded as Assassins.

 

In SCS v31 they're given ASSASSIN_POISON (correct). In SCS master branch they are not given ASSASSIN_POISON, so there is something wrong.....

Then, I misunderstood you, sorry. I thought that you don't want for them to be assassins and not to receive poison.

 

That will probably throw an error: FIGHTER isn't a kit (specifically, isn't in kit.ids), and the CRE_kit function that's being called in that patch does its lookup in kit.ids.

 

You want kit=>trueclass or kit=>none.

Yeah, you are right, I was in hurry to work and wrote that from my head, as example. In my game (BGT) Carbos & Shank kit is NONE. I'll edit previous post so it doesn't mislead anyone and break their game.

 

BTW, I have one question for you. Does 2da files in stratagems\genai\hla_choices\ work?

Ie, rock.cre from override_warrior.2da doesn't get any of hla's written there and kensai's don't have hlas from core or refinements 2da's. Is it arbitrary or they should get those spells?

BTW, thank you for SCS!

Well, in v31 Carbos and Shank (dunno about the other Assassins) have Poison Weapon memorized, so you may wanna check your latest commits.....

Something else messed your install. Just installed SCS v31 on BGT and Carbos & Shank are still fighters and don't have any spell memorized. And have DAGGSHIT on them.

Just remembered, maybe BGEE changed them to assassins and they get poison weapon. If it is a case, that is not SCS fault.

you can fix it by puting this line near end of initial\initial.tpa:

 

LAF edit_creature STR_VAR creature=~%tutu_var%carbos %tutu_var%shank~ editstring=~kit=>NONE~ allow_missing=1 END

I have the following error message trying to install SR Revised V1.00d :

 

ERROR : illegal 2-byte read from offset - 766488493 of 538-byte file SPIN920.SPL

ERROR : [sPIN920.SPL] -> [override/SPIN920.SPL] Patching Failed (COPY) (Failure("SPIN920.SPL : read out of bounds"))

 

my weidu.log :

 

~ASCENSION/SETUP-ASCENSION.TP2~ #2 #0 // Ascension Core (ToB requis): v1.51 BETA BWP 20170519

DS from Ascension corrupted your spell. Download latest fixed master from:

https://github.com/BigWorldProject/Ascension

or just copy ds.tph from SCS to Ascension.

It should work, there’s actually a fairly powerful parser built into SCS’s patch interface. If it doesn’t, try

 

If a then 1 else (if b then 2 else 3)

 

But I doubt you need to.

It worked, thanks. Ice golem animation was also problem and I fixed it.

That's interesting... SCS sets the animations for fiends using the entries in ANIMATE.ids - so (on a non-EE install) for instance Glabrezu's get whatever animation number corresponds to IC_GLAB. It sounds like Infinity Animations messes with the lookups in animate.ids, which is a bit annoying but fairly easily fixed.

If the nice people doing the v31 maintenance release are still doing new content

And fixed:

https://github.com/Gibberlings3/SwordCoastStratagems/pull/6/commits/f84bd60deac2298753ea13e4a55a10b198f966be

Only Bone Fiends animation is unfixed (didn't know how). I assume "IF a THEN 1 ELSE IF b THEN 2 ELSE 3" doesn't work.

Sorry to go off-topic, btu everyone who seems to know anything about Detectable Spells has been in this thread. Can anyone take a look at the version in SR v4b15 and let me know whether/how it needs updating? That SR version looks very very different from the DS.tph on Github, and I don't want to mess with it because I think I might break something. But I'm making an update to SR and I'd like to be sure it works well with EE v2.5.

 

If anyone can take a look, please feel free to post about it in the linked thread.

 

Thanks! I'll go now.

It is same DS, if you mean SCS one. SR4 was source of new DS and only changes are few compatibility lines in start that are useful for old mods (like SCS) that use old names for functions and macros. SR4 uses only new names, so those few lines wouldn't do anything. Of course, adding those lines wouldn't hurt.

@Mad Mate

 

That's interesting. I've seen that name pop up in my installs before with having some common files between it and the other mods that are having issues.

 

Yes, you have that mod installed. It's a same error.

 

Maybe somebody with knowledge about qd_multiclass (@subtledoctor?) should report bug to Lava in SHS forums. I don't have a clue what is wrong with that file.

Culprit is Foundling, and it's new multiclass feature.

I had same error, but I didn't investigate any further, because that feature doesn't work in classic BGT anyway.

I just disabled it ("// "before "INCLUDE ~Foundling/lib/qd_multiclass.tpa~") in install.tph of Foundling mod.

Don't know why it throws error in SCS, maybe something new from EE's that SCS doesn't recognize yet.