EssArrBee Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 Also, I drew my sword the other day, and found that evidently because of Animated Weapon Enchants in combination with AOS, I had the sound of a mighty rushing wind as if a dragon was landing beside me. Not sure though if that simply wasn't because I didn't have my patches active or not.That should be patched in the STEP Patches. I know there are a couple records that I made sure to forward. None of those have changed sounds from Animated Weapon Enchants, just some shader effects. Hey keithinhanoi, I sent you a PM on the nexus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithinhanoi Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 That should be patched in the STEP Patches. I know there are a couple records that I made sure to forward. None of those have changed sounds from Animated Weapon Enchants, just some shader effects. Hey keithinhanoi, I sent you a PM on the nexus.Got it, and replied - ball's in your court now. ;) So, do you reckon an Animated Weapon Enchants patch should be added to the AOS 2 installer for the general-non-STEP-population of mod users? I've not seen anybody mention it on the AOS comments thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssArrBee Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 Actually, I think I used MO 1.2 to install AOS 2.1 when it first came out and didn't know that MO's installer was messed. I reinstalled using 1.2.1 and the plugin is a bit different for AOS. I need to go through it again and see what all is different. Plus, I might have been wrong about the whole thing or thinking of a totally different mod interfering. I'm going through every record of the STEP mods right now to check everything out, so I'll let you know if I find anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oqhansoloqo Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 What do you mean MO 1.2's installer is messed - how does it mess things up? Are you saying that anything that was installed while using 1.2 has to be re-installed or does everything installed with 1.2 get fixed once you upgrade to 1.2.1? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoubleYou Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 Only the NCC installer of 1.2 was broken (same as 1.1.2). 1.2.1 fixes the issue. If you installed a mod with the broken 1.2 NCC installer, it is likely to be broken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoubleYou Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 Actually, I think I used MO 1.2 to install AOS 2.1 when it first came out and didn't know that MO's installer was messed. I reinstalled using 1.2.1 and the plugin is a bit different for AOS. I need to go through it again and see what all is different. Plus, I might have been wrong about the whole thing or thinking of a totally different mod interfering. I'm going through every record of the STEP mods right now to check everything out, so I'll let you know if I find anything.So that's why the STEP Patches seem to neglect some of the AOS conflict resolution in my checks in TES5Edit... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egocarib Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 Now I do have a question for you, since you're quite a bit deeper in your knowledge of LOOT: From what I understand, LOOT's algorithm will look at the listed masters for any plugin, to make sure that it gets placed after all listed masters, but it doesn't take the order of masters into consideration - is that right? This creates a bit a problem when creating compatibility patch plugins, because what records need to get forwarded to the patch can often depend completely on the load order of the two (or more) mods that the patch is built for. For example, one of the patches for AOS 2 provides compatibility with Realistic Water Two, but it's only needed if AOS loads before RWT, which is what BOSS will do (they're both in the masterlist,) but it's possible that LOOT may reverse that load order. In that case, the user doesn't need the patch at all. But then, when you're making a patch that has a mix of records that don't need to be forwarded in one load order, but do in the other, and vice-versa - I really have no idea how to properly handle that, if I'm trying to make a patch that will "work" for everyone out there. Are these the kinds of things that need to addressed in the global metadata masterlist (sorry if I'm using the wrong term there) that LOOT downloads and updates for everyone?Sorry to take a little while responding. I used to have this same problem with patches and users reporting strange stuff happening when they had the masters loaded in the wrong order (even before LOOT came along). As a result I started making my patches "comprehensively" I guess you could say -- I just forward every single record that conflicts between the two mods, using the version of each record that I want to win in any conflict. So even if I am assuming mod2 will come after mod1, and I want mod2's record to win, I will still forward that record into the patch just in case the two masters get reversed in order. This seems like it will probably be the best practice if LOOT becomes more widely used, since you cannot any longer be sure whether a specific user's load order will match the one you're using when making the patch. I think this might result in a few ITMs depending on the specific patch being made, but these should be harmless, and this may simply become necessary in the future. I guess that's just my best suggestion for the moment. I am not sure exactly how this will develop or what others' opinions will be, though this seems to be the best solution in my own mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssArrBee Posted May 7, 2014 Share Posted May 7, 2014 The biggest issues with ITMs is for users that install mods on top of step. Those ITMs then must be patched into the patch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssArrBee Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 Instead of mod that patches WAF and AOS, maybe a replacer version(s) is a better option. I see that the weapon section is really a big area for conflicts and an AOS.esp version with WAF changes built in would be nice. Eliminates the need for patching which is required no matter what order they are in, but I like AOS.esp last. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoYouEvenModBro Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 Does anyone know if BOSS sort all of the individual patches correctly yet? I don't use the STEP patch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithinhanoi Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 (edited) I used to have this same problem with patches and users reporting strange stuff happening when they had the masters loaded in the wrong order (even before LOOT came along). As a result I started making my patches "comprehensively" I guess you could say -- I just forward every single record that conflicts between the two mods, using the version of each record that I want to win in any conflict. So even if I am assuming mod2 will come after mod1, and I want mod2's record to win, I will still forward that record into the patch just in case the two masters get reversed in order. This seems like it will probably be the best practice if LOOT becomes more widely used, since you cannot any longer be sure whether a specific user's load order will match the one you're using when making the patch. I think this might result in a few ITMs depending on the specific patch being made, but these should be harmless, and this may simply become necessary in the future. I guess that's just my best suggestion for the moment. I am not sure exactly how this will develop or what others' opinions will be, though this seems to be the best solution in my own mind. This is exactly what I am considering doing for any patches I make for "public" consumption. So, I would like to coin a new term for this - "reversible compatibility patch." Like a reversible jacket that can be worn with either side out, this kind of patch will work regardless of the load order of it's explicit / implicit masters, and should in theory work for most people, regardless of whether they're using LOOT or BOSS. As mentioned in the newer thread on LOOT, though, some patches will need a note explaining they are actually not needed in one possible load order (example from AOS - the Realistic Water Two and Wet & Cold patches aren't required if the load order is in reverse of what BOSS will set.) ------- Instead of mod that patches WAF and AOS, maybe a replacer version(s) is a better option. I see that the weapon section is really a big area for conflicts and an AOS.esp version with WAF changes built in would be nice. Eliminates the need for patching which is required no matter what order they are in, but I like AOS.esp last. I would expect David to be amenable to such an idea - just for the purpose of STEP users. I am holding off on any more patching of AOS, though, as a user by the name of Shurah has identified what appears to be a genuine bug in TES5Edit with the way it handles floating point values for some sound-related sub-record data. (FYI to see the uninterrupted forum thread on this - ATM see page 2 of the AOS comments threads on nexusmods.com) Basically, TES5Edit is slightly changing the values when the sub-record is carried into another plugin or typed in manually, and the new changed values are invalid when checked in CK. He hasn't yet reported it in the TES5Edit Beth's Forum thread, though. Maybe I should do it, giving credit to him for noticing it. Edited May 10, 2014 by keithinhanoi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssArrBee Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 Man, I'm glad that is a bug. I thought I was going crazy when floats were off by .0001. I had thought it was the CK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simondererste Posted May 15, 2014 Share Posted May 15, 2014 As the AOS_2 Main File and the AOS_DLC_Compatibility_Patch optional file doesn't exist anymore and i would like to use the STEP Extended Patch which option should i check in the installer?(Also i didn't see an AOS_Unofficial_Skyrim_Patch for those who don't want to install the patches.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoubleYou Posted May 15, 2014 Share Posted May 15, 2014 The instructions were for 2.0. I'll try to update them. The fomod makes installation easier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithinhanoi Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 Man, I'm glad that is a bug. I thought I was going crazy when floats were off by .0001. I had thought it was the CK.I finally had a chance to ask about it on the TES5Edit WIPz thread on AFK Mods, and zilav replied. Basically zilav says that 0.01 change that sometimes happens in xEdit is due to floating point rounding and the way the program works. In the case of the Sound Descriptor values where this is happening is a non-issue. A 0.01 change doesn't really make any difference. So, you can continue making patch records for AOS worry-free! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now