EE/EET Mod Setup Tool

[Mirandel]

The new BWS from official download links (like here, for example http://www.shsforums.net/topic/56670-big-world-setup-an-attempt-to-update-the-program/ ) fixed the problem. Just re-download it.

[jastey]

Roxanne: you integrated the new bgqe components but didn't give them any category (Recommended, Standard, Tactical, Expert). I believe it would make sense to give them the same category as the other components, especially if players don't notice the new components are not preselected.

 

Further: my Ajantis NPC BGII mod was in the category R,S,T,E. In your tool version it is set to 0000 (no preselection whatsoever). I request that the preselection is restored for all games to what it was in BGT.

 

On the other hand, I see that (for EET) you set your Sandrah Saga to be preselected for "Recommended" category. How was this status decided and who decided this? Seeing how Sandrah Saga is a very huge mods that interfers with almost every point in the game, I would say people who want to have a normal EET experience shouldn't have it preselected, especially not as "recommended".

[Icezera]

The new BWS from official download links (like here, for example http://www.shsforums.net/topic/56670-big-world-setup-an-attempt-to-update-the-program/ ) fixed the problem. Just re-download it.

Has the eet tool been updated too? I would like to stick with the EET tool

[Mirandel]

Or it can be called

 

 

The new BWS from official download links (like here, for example http://www.shsforums.net/topic/56670-big-world-setup-an-attempt-to-update-the-program/ ) fixed the problem. Just re-download it.

Has the eet tool been updated too? I would like to stick with the EET tool

 

 

Roxanne, I presume? Considering other topics here and on and forums? Never mind, it's not important. Just a suggestion - why not call your (Roxanne's) EET tool what it is - Sandrah(-EET)-install tool? Just to avoid confusion and cut unnecessary requests?

 

For someone truly curious - as of now BWS allows you to install all the mods, including different mega-mods and EET. Would be wise to stick to it.

[Hack'n'Slash]

If this is a fork of BWS, what stops BWS from forking it back?

[lynx]

Calm down everyone. The code and data of both projects is still open and public, so anyone can make direct change suggestions there.

[enderandrew]

If this is a fork of BWS, what stops BWS from forking it back?

 

Nothing. It just requires someone willing to put in the time to do so.

[Roxanne]

The fixpack issue has been fixed in BWS and BWS-EE, there was a short-term mix up because both use different fixpacks (EE just needs like 10 percent of them but also the EET patches for some mods).

 

With respect to mod selection etc...there seem to be some misunderstanding - maybe the tutorial posts at the topic beginning are not clear enough?

In this post I tried to clarify it further http://gibberlings3.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=29337&page=2&do=findComment&comment=260068.

 

So,

BWS-EE does not use ANY pre-selections and does not classify mods as recommended etc. It marks some pure tactical mods in the selection menu with orange colour for easier identification, that is all.

Instead BWS-EE offers you either Free Choice OR Compilations (see above explanations).

The only *pre-selected* mods are those fixed for the game you want to install, e.g. some fix/text patches or the EET-Core and EET_end if you want to do an EET installation. Everything else is free choice and un-biased.

 

This is the result of many discussions we had here on the forum, where the old concept of pre-selection and recommandations (by whom? based on which criteria?) were found to be not applicable for the dynamic environment of EE/EET.

 

@ jastey

The R,S,T,E flags and 0000 vs 1111 markings in the install files serve a COMPLETELY different purpose now compared to old BWS. The tool needs them so I tried to give them a more meaningful purpose without breaking the code.

They now serve a *One-click* function for the mod selection screen. This means that for mods with many components you can select all *safe* components of the mod by just clicking on the mod name. So forget all you know about old BWS in this context. This is best explained by the examples you gave:

- SandrahNPC has 16 components which are all needed if you want to install the mod. Selecting the mod adds all of them to the installation

- AjantisBG2 has a main component, a couple of configuration choices and 2 optional components - One click here activates just the main component because the others still depend on player's decision. Also, the crossmod banter component depends on the *partner mods* to be selected as well and this step can only be validated after the choices are made but not before.

- BGQE has the *one-click* currently defined for the original components, the new ones added just two days ago require individual selection from the player. They are marked as (N)ew in the menu. This was done to bring the new stuff to the player's attention and for a more conscious selection, i.e. you should be aware that you added something new even if you played the mod before.

- In the far more complex case of SCS, there is a *one-click* function that activates a minimum set of components suited for the average player and known to work conflict free in a game with all other mods. It avoids tactical components and overlaps.

 

In all three examples, the mods are not pre-selected in any way.

Using *one-click* for a mod should lead to a selection that requires minimum further actions like solving conflicts or creating dependencies.

 

Another change made is that in conflict presentation there is not any more an indication about a *preferred*. i.e. biased solution.

 

Neither *my mods* nor any other mods will appear as preferred over others when using BWS-EE.

Such preferences should be reserved for the *Compilations* where an author makes personal choices and shares them with players that identify with his/her taste and want to share the experience.

 

Hopefully this clarifies some misunderstandings.

 

 

 

Edited May 8, 2018 by Roxanne

[Caserius Tendook]

Thanks again for the clarification. The use of compilations for new(er) BWS users is actually a very helpful and useful thing. Other than being confused about how to find them (the compilations) and then where to put new ones I make, this method helped me to understand the Tool much better than before.

 

I originally installed EET thru BWS and it was a massive process that consumed more time and energy than was really necessary. A Big part of that though was my learning how to use the tool and not understanding how to choose between all of the Tactical, recommended choices, and how to understand conflict resolution.

 

BWS-EE has been an improvement for folks like me that aren't necessarily Mod operators, and being able to better understand it has helped me to be wiser about my mod and component selection and be able to ask better questions in Mod Forums when I'm trying to make sure I understand components.

 

Major props, especially to Roxanne and Alien, for their work on this, and an even bigger props to all those Modders that have worked so hard to make this such a massively diverse universe.

[jastey]

Hopefully this clarifies some misunderstandings.

It did. Thank you.

 

 

- BGQE has the *one-click* currently defined for the original components, the new ones added just two days ago require individual selection from the player. They are marked as (N)ew in the menu. This was done to bring the new stuff to the player's attention and for a more conscious selection, i.e. you should be aware that you added something new even if you played the mod before.

 

But I don't see any (N)ew mark on the bgqe components. Instead, bgqe as a whole is marked green, and if I click on the overall box without letting the component tree show and don't pay attention, I don't even realize not all components are ticked. It's the same with the other green marked mods. If the component tree is not opened, components are left out but the player thinks he selected all of them because the mod is green. Maybe making the mod's name green if there are non-autoselected components is disadvantageous.

 

Also, who defines which components are "safe to install"? E.g. for NTotSC, why is the last component, the NPC Will O'Hara, not included? It's a safe NPC, no conflicts as far as I know. Or for RE "Bjornin's Desire": inserts a custom NPC and plays in a custom area, so why is it not green?

 

Whereas:

 

- SandrahNPC has 16 components which are all needed if you want to install the mod. Selecting the mod adds all of them to the installation

Sandrah Saga is more or less a crossmod mod. It has so much dependencies and conflicts the warning window has to be scrolled down two times. Making this green, i.e. "safe to install" is an interesting choice and doesn't match anything else you wrote about the used color code.

 

In short: I think the choices of color code are biased, and since it does influence players' choices, this is disadvantageous for the proclaimed tool's impartiality.

 

 

Some things I noticed:

-For Lure of Sirine's Call, the optional second component (the changed tis) should work as of v15 and doesn't need to be flagged red any more

-both components "Svlast the Fallen Paladin" from bg1ub and "Svlast's Torment" from NTotSC are flagged green although they are clearly in conflict

 

EDIT: And since you integrated Ajantis BGII beta v15.5, it is EET compatible.

Edited May 8, 2018 by jastey

[enderandrew]

If someone just wants to play EET without many mods, they can do a direct EET install without a tool. I would think the purpose of using a tool like this is to make it easier to install several mods at once. Sandrah is meant to compliment the entire EET experience perhaps more so than any mod out there. Roxanne is also doing the lion's share of updating old mods that have been abandoned, maintaining their own mega-mod and maintaining this tool.

Sandrah Saga seems like something that should inherently appeal to most anyone who wants to use the tool, and I think Roxanne is entitled to a little self promotion for all the work they do.

It isn't installed by default. I really don't think anyone should begrudge it being recommended.

Edited May 8, 2018 by enderandrew

[jastey]

Well, if Roxanne wants to turn this EE Setup Tool into Sandrah Saga EET Big World there is nothing I can do to prevent it (although I wished it would be named as such, then).

 

I can still express my dislike of it.

 

Roxanne is entitled to a little self promotion for all the work they do.

That is a really hillarious typo.

 

I don't mind "a little" self promotion. I don't mind a lot of self-promotion, either. As long as it's done in an open, honest way.

Putting all own mods into the "green = safe to install" category just because you are the one maintaining the tool and then talking as if it's the natural choice (it isn't) sheds a bad light onto the tool, and maybe also on the person doing so.

 

My 2c.

[Roxanne]

 

Hopefully this clarifies some misunderstandings.

It did. Thank you.

 

 

- BGQE has the *one-click* currently defined for the original components, the new ones added just two days ago require individual selection from the player. They are marked as (N)ew in the menu. This was done to bring the new stuff to the player's attention and for a more conscious selection, i.e. you should be aware that you added something new even if you played the mod before.

 

But I don't see any (N)ew mark on the bgqe components. Instead, bgqe as a whole is marked green, and if I click on the overall box without letting the component tree show and don't pay attention, I don't even realize not all components are ticked. It's the same with the other green marked mods. If the component tree is not opened, components are left out but the player thinks he selected all of them because the mod is green. Maybe making the mod's name green if there are non-autoselected components is disadvantageous.

 

Also, who defines which components are "safe to install"? E.g. for NTotSC, why is the last component, the NPC Will O'Hara, not included? It's a safe NPC, no conflicts as far as I know. Or for RE "Bjornin's Desire": inserts a custom NPC and plays in a custom area, so why is it not green?

 

Whereas:

 

- SandrahNPC has 16 components which are all needed if you want to install the mod. Selecting the mod adds all of them to the installation

Sandrah Saga is more or less a crossmod mod. It has so much dependencies and conflicts the warning window has to be scrolled down two times. Making this green, i.e. "safe to install" is an interesting choice and doesn't match anything else you wrote about the used color code.

 

In short: I think the choices of color code are biased, and since it does influence players' choices, this is disadvantageous for the proclaimed tool's impartiality.

 

 

Some things I noticed:

-For Lure of Sirine's Call, the optional second component (the changed tis) should work as of v15 and doesn't need to be flagged red any more

-both components "Svlast the Fallen Paladin" from bg1ub and "Svlast's Torment" from NTotSC are flagged green although they are clearly in conflict

 

EDIT: And since you integrated Ajantis BGII beta v15.5, it is EET compatible.

 

Thank you - this is very useful feedback.

 

Even if it may mean that the one-click idea is not so good because the green colour code leads to misinterpretation. Maybe I can find a way to make all colours neutral, but it may mean to change some code deeper inside, Until now I tried to stay on the less complex levels.

The problem is that the one-clicks do not work consistently across mods. The Sylast example shows that, because if you select both mods you WILL get the conflict in the next step, same with Sandrah, the missing dependencies WILL show in the next step.

 

You are right to say that there is not a good definition what *safe* means. It was intended as a help to avoid all the conflict resolution steps. It may just not be intuitive enough and still require too much background information in the user,

 

The basic idea behind it all was to make some use of existing functionality, without keeping the rigid former concept of the R,S,T,E categories. T and E only appear as colours and as such may still be useful. R and S - even if not used as such anymore - should have the same colour, i.e. appear equal (provided the code allows for that).

 

Alternative 1) would be to remove the one-click and just do free choice. If more compilations may be added, those will take most possible issues into account...the more we would have of those, the less guidance the tool needs to provide. Of course, this would be impartial as could be unless we also question the conflict aid (which you can click away easily by using expert click behaviour).

 

Alternative 2) apply the one-click with more restraint. Do not use it in content/quest/NPC mods at all - just use it for the big tweak mods to give a default setting for the less obvious components. My argument would be that with content mods it is easy to decide what you want or not want, and in addition you can make many decisions in the game itself by group management or accepting a quest or not...This is far more difficult for tweaks that have effect throughout the game. Users ask for some guidance here frequently.

 

Alternative3)

 

What you currently see is not the end of the line yet, it is a proposal to start from. It is not perfect even if I (personally) think that it is already better than what was in old BWS but not working well for EE.

 

Other things:

I fixed the Sirenecall issue, it was correct in one place but needed a change in a second file too.

I added AjantisBG2 to EET, I was not aware that your beta tests for him were already done.

 

 

EDIT

I found a bit of code that could be safely modified to make all mods now appear equal (except tactical and expert). I also refined the description in the first posts,

It is not yet perfect but hopefully appears less suggestive.

Edited May 8, 2018 by Roxanne

[enderandrew]

 

Roxanne is entitled to a little self promotion for all the work they do.

That is a really hillarious typo.

 

I've seen Roxanne referred to as male despite a female name and avatar. I was unsure. They can be used to be a gender non-specific singular. It isn't a typo.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they#Trend_to_gender-neutral_language

[Jarno Mikkola]

 

 

Roxanne is entitled to a little self promotion for all the work they do.

That is a really hillarious typo.

I've seen Roxanne referred to as male despite a female name and avatar. I was unsure. They can be used to be a gender non-specific singular. It isn't a typo.

Right... but generally still, the not so fun part is that the word is generally not used as a singular, but a plural form of people, and as Roxanne has given herself the Gender identity on her profile.