Jump to content


Photo

Compatibility with EET


28 replies to this topic

#1 Grunker

Grunker
  • Members
  • 228 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 03 January 2017 - 01:01 AM

Since I'm not getting a response in the EET-thread, I'm trying here.

 

On January 22, K4thos claimed IR compatability with EET:

 

Anyway the first post has been updated with following entries:
  • Alternatives
  • Edwin Romance
  • Generalized Biffing
  • Haer'Dalis Romance v2.1
  • Imoen Friendship (SoA & ToB)
  • Item Randomiser v7 dev release dated 160110
  • IWDification vBeta3
  • Kivan and Deheriana Companions for BG2
  • Mazzy Friendship (SoA & ToB)
  • Sarevok Romance
  • Song and Silence
  • The Gibberlings Three Anniversary Mod
  • Tyris Flare
  • Viconia Friendship (SoA & ToB)
  • W_PackMule
  • Wheels of Prophecy

Patches for those new mods that need them are now available on GitHub. Unless I missed something every single BG2:EE Gibberlings 3 mod should now work with EET. We will focus on contacting authors now to try to get as many of them internalized as possible.

 

However - every single on of those mods is in the compatability list, except Randomiser, which appears to have been removed. Is the randomiser compatible?
 



#2 agb1

agb1
  • Modders
  • 410 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 January 2017 - 08:21 AM

It is not compatible.


BiG World Fixpack (community collection of mod fixes and compatibility patches, with user-friendly cross-platform script)

 

BiG World Setup (tool to automate best-practice installation of Infinity Engine mods on Windows, with conflict analysis)

Latest version:    https://bitbucket.or.../get/master.zip


#3 Grunker

Grunker
  • Members
  • 228 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 04 January 2017 - 01:10 AM

Damn. What are the issues? And is there any prospect of compatibility down the line?


Edited by Grunker, 04 January 2017 - 01:10 AM.


#4 agb1

agb1
  • Modders
  • 410 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 04 January 2017 - 06:39 AM

Haven't looked in detail, but- nothing unsolvable, just needs work. GAME_IS checks need EET added where appropriate. References to BG1 items (eg in sections with GAME_IS bgt) need to use EET converted item file names. Maybe chapter checks (didn't check if it uses any).

BiG World Fixpack (community collection of mod fixes and compatibility patches, with user-friendly cross-platform script)

 

BiG World Setup (tool to automate best-practice installation of Infinity Engine mods on Windows, with conflict analysis)

Latest version:    https://bitbucket.or.../get/master.zip


#5 Grunker

Grunker
  • Members
  • 228 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 04 January 2017 - 07:08 AM

Wish I could help/code. I have the time to put in the work in theory, but if it requires any sort of knowledge beyond document editing, I'm shit out of luck.



#6 bob_veng

bob_veng
  • Members
  • 97 posts

Posted 07 January 2017 - 04:45 PM

There are some big picture considerations with item randomization and EET i think because there's IWD-in-EET and IWD already has it's own form of this mechanic (it has loot tables where containers are like a lottery, so the possibilities are restricted to a fixed pool which is different for each container), even if it's not true randomization, since item locations are not switched around randomly...



#7 Grunker

Grunker
  • Members
  • 228 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 08 January 2017 - 12:49 AM

Well, you could begin with just basic EET functionality, and maybe even keep it like that, since even playing with IWD I'm not sure people would want loot randomized across games. I know I would prefer for BG1 loot to be randomised only within BG1 and BG2 loot only within BG2 etc



#8 bob_veng

bob_veng
  • Members
  • 97 posts

Posted 09 January 2017 - 01:18 PM

this loot table system is just so good...it creates a lot of unpredictability but doesn't create nonsensical placements and keeps everything under control. i think it should be extended to bg1&2. i'd just divide most iwd random containers across bg areas and move context-independent bg items to the tables as well (for example stupefier and a ton of sod items...sod is so loot heavy). this would make for a coherent system.

then on top of this item randomizer could work too of course, as an additional layer of randomness. but it would be unnecessary, basically.

#9 Ulb

Ulb
  • Members
  • 146 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 January 2017 - 04:27 PM

this loot table system is just so good...it creates a lot of unpredictability but doesn't create nonsensical placements and keeps everything under control. i think it should be extended to bg1&2. i'd just divide most iwd random containers across bg areas and move context-independent bg items to the tables as well (for example stupefier and a ton of sod items...sod is so loot heavy). this would make for a coherent system.

then on top of this item randomizer could work too of course, as an additional layer of randomness. but it would be unnecessary, basically.

 

That sounds very intriguing.

Are items from those loot tables shared and if that's the case, does the game ensure that an item does not drop multiple times?

 

E.g.: Would stupefier be able to drop from a number of different chests and would the game still keep track and prevent it from dropping again once it dropped from one chest?



#10 bob_veng

bob_veng
  • Members
  • 97 posts

Posted 10 January 2017 - 04:50 PM

i don't have a definitive answer to that (many people surely do) but here's what i believe as a long time player:

 

- it would not be able to drop from a number of different chests, just one (so if you don't get it in that container you miss it for the whole game; btw this is excellent for me, personally)

- the game does not keep track of anything regarding this (no need to, logically), what you get is what you get and that's it :)

- some items repeat, but they're not unique (even though they're semi-unique, so they might be enchanted weapons with a special ability and not just a generic +2 weapon, but they're not described as being unique in the lore)...this means you can get duplicates of those (in iwd, personally, i haven't considered this to be a problem. this repetition is quite rare and doesn't create imbalances; also in bg there are already duplicate items with special abilities)



#11 Blash2

Blash2
  • Members
  • 93 posts

Posted 26 January 2017 - 05:54 AM

Any news about making it compatible with EET?



#12 qwerty1234567

qwerty1234567
  • Members
  • 188 posts

Posted 28 January 2017 - 02:27 AM

this loot table system is just so good...it creates a lot of unpredictability but doesn't create nonsensical placements and keeps everything under control. i think it should be extended to bg1&2. i'd just divide most iwd random containers across bg areas and move context-independent bg items to the tables as well (for example stupefier and a ton of sod items...sod is so loot heavy). this would make for a coherent system.

This leads to "oh, didn't drop that item, let's reload" mindset. I prefer Randomiser's approach, where everything's set in stone at the start of the game, but you don't know what and where.


bad jarno, go away!


#13 bob_veng

bob_veng
  • Members
  • 97 posts

Posted 28 January 2017 - 02:44 AM

the items that are randomized in iwd range from mediocre to great, but none are essential. what you describe doesn't happen in reality because you would have to reload, reenter the area for the first time, fight to get to the chest and then see that you may have got something even worse. colossal waste of time. people don't do that.

#14 qwerty1234567

qwerty1234567
  • Members
  • 188 posts

Posted 28 January 2017 - 03:17 AM

you would have to reload, reenter the area for the first time, fight to get to the chest and then see that you may have got something even worse. colossal waste of time. people don't do that.

They do.


bad jarno, go away!


#15 Grunker

Grunker
  • Members
  • 228 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 28 January 2017 - 09:11 AM

I, too, think Randomiser's "set in stone" approach is vastly preferable





Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users