DROPPED Immersive Citizens - AI Overhaul (by Shurah)

[Shadriss]

In reference to my previous comments concerning Rorikstead - I just completed a quick run over to the area to check out my concerns. Shurah's additions to the area (if any, I honestly couldn't see what they were specifically) blend in phenomenally well with ETaC's, so it would appear I do NOT have to choose between them... at least for the moment. I post this to close the loop on that concern, and also to re-iterate to Shurah (should he still be checking in here) that so long as nothing breaks in-game between this and any other mod I use, I will continue to use it. Just because I can't see the changes to the AI (as I previously mentioned) doesn't mean they aren't there, and if all I'm missing out on is a few of the many AI packages included by this because of object placement, it still makes it worth the download and usage.

 

EDIT: On the Rorikstead observation - this of course assumes that his changes were not fully encapsulated by a building placed by ETaC... something that only just occurred to me. Regardless, my other observations stand.

Edited January 9, 2016 by Shadriss

[shurah]

I get that its hard to explain, but right now the small amount of info you have provided just doesn't line up in any way with what everyone else's experience and knowledge had been for the entire length the CK has been out.

I have no clue about what knowledge and experience you're talking about. I don't know as well who is included when you say everyone.

ICAIO is the proof that I know much more about AI and navmesh that most of the mod author. Therefore, most of the time, I don't feel the need to justify my decisions.

 

At least make an attempt and go from there?

Because this is not attempt?

From my article about compatibility:

 

He is the problem:

- First, you'll have to edit my mod in order to make it work with ETaC, which is possible, it requires to reposition several of my extra markers and to redesign some AI. If you're not the author, It's not easy to do it properly because you need to figure out the purpose of all markers.

- Then you'll have to solve all the navmeshes conflict between ETaC and ICAIO, which is not possible without editing ETaC, because the mod author of ETaC depleted vanilla navmeshes to substitute them with extra navmeshes.

- Then for each optional plugins from ETaC (Whiterun Exterior for example), you'll have to create an alternative version of my mod designed to work with ETaC and with one of those optional plugins from ETaC.

- Then you'll have to make additional compatibility patches to solve all the navmesh conflicts between ETaC and the compatibility patches that I provide for OCS, CRF and PCS.

- Then you'll have to create additional compatibility patches to solve all the navmesh conflicts between the compatibility patch provided by ETaC and the compatibility patches that I provide for OCS, CRF and PCS.

- Then you'll have to make compatibility patch for the newly created compatibility patches, because the newly created compatibility patches will conflict between each other as well with other plugins which are tagged as being compatible with my plugin.

 

Right now a lot of the issue is that you never try to explain which leaves people with nothing.

My plugin is available publicly and for free. Therefore, contrary to me, if some people try to understand how AI works in Skyrim or in FO4 (or in video games), they won't start from scratch.

It means also that I have no obligation to provide a professional support or a professional communication. Anyway, I can't be everywhere and can't do everything, especially when I have more important problems in the real life.

When I can dedicate some time to modding, my priority is to improve my mod.

 

No one is blackmailing you. Perhaps the wrong use of wording you have there?

No, my interpretation is just different than yours.

 

 

I also have a question about this statement:

To come for the next updates:

- Plugin activation/desactivation through an MCM Menu

 

Will this be script based? I'm assuming that to deactivate the mod the game would have to re-build the aliases in order to restore all vanilla settings. If that is true, one can also assume that when reactivated, the game would have to re-build the aliases again. If this is the case, would this solve the issue of NPCs added after the game start not being accounted for by your mod (not receiving the benefits of your mod). In other words, if I started a game and then added in a mod that adds more NPCs, all I would have to do is deactivate your mod in the MCM and then reactivate it so that the new NPCs are registered by ICAIO. If this is how this feature is going to work, that would be great as that is one issue solved.

Yes to all questions.

 

 

Though I'm not sure how building and re-building aliases would affect the game. All this knowledge is fairly new to me.

Not really. For example, Wet & Cold from Isoku adds and removes aliases permanently. RFYL and WVA from Arthmoor does the same thing but only when a dragon or a vampire attacks.

 

I noticed that a bunch of the aforementioned conflicts from shurah are with markers and STAT object references.  I could fairly easily make an xEdit script that could detect these kinds of conflicts, and optionally fix them.

 

Would that be something that would be valuable to the community?

I can't speak for the community, but thank you for proposing your help.

 

I'll state straight away that my skill level with the CK is 0, zero, nada, nil. Having said that I think I have a firm enough grasp on the workings of this issue to say that ICAO does exactly what it is intended to do and does so rather well. I might actually say it is an inspired piece of work.

From what I can see the "issue" with the average modder trying to make a compatibility patch for this mod comes from the fact that you can't just load up xEdit and look for conflicting records since the real art to this mod comes from the navmesh placement. Since this means examining every single mod against ICAO I reckon a lot of modders just see too much work and look for an easier fix. Sadly it comes down to the fact that the only real success comes from hard work and until all the "so called incompatible" mods are checked against this, there will always be concerns and questioning.

The real art of my mod comes from the navmesh design and from my custom AI packages. Both are important and have to be modified to solve compatibility issues with some towns overhaul. Apart that, I'm agree with your analysis.

It's more fast and much more easy to create a town overhaul compatible with my plugin by default. Example: Dark water crossing from Arthmoor. For the next version, I cover DWC and NPCs living in DWC will act differently if you use DWC from Arthmoor. For example, they will go sleep to their new home instead to use the tents. No compatibility patch will be required.

Edited January 11, 2016 by shurah

[TechAngel85]

The real art of my mod comes from the navmesh design and from my custom AI packages. Both are important and have to be modified to solve compatibility issues with some towns overhaul. Apart that, I'm agree with your analysis.

The highlighted part above is really the only question left that both authors and users have. I'll ask again,

 

Is there more to the navmeshes than just allowing for the NPCs to be able to navigate the terrain? Does it interact with AI in any other way than that? If so, would you be willing to explain so that I may understand more clearly the interaction between AI and Navmeshes? I'm planning on doing a house mod of my very own making (not just fixing someone else's work as I have been doing) and would very much like to know if there is more interaction other than just allowing the NPCs to navigate around correctly.

[Rebel47]

@Shurah:

Do you plan to add anything in the way of custom factions or groups, something along the lines of the "Shadow Or Mordor" game where they fight internally for power and constantly shift and change, That to me is way more important than simply altering how an already existing npc is activated.

 

Is there any chance of that happening ?

[hishutup]

The highlighted part above is really the only question left that both authors and users have. I'll ask again,

 

Is there more to the navmeshes than just allowing for the NPCs to be able to navigate the terrain? Does it interact with AI in any other way than that? If so, would you be willing to explain so that I may understand more clearly the interaction between AI and Navmeshes? I'm planning on doing a house mod of my very own making (not just fixing someone else's work as I have been doing) and would very much like to know if there is more interaction other than just allowing the NPCs to navigate around correctly.

A CK example of Do's and Don'ts would be helpful.

When I was messing with stuff in the CK a majority of navms were created using the generator which always creates the most horrific navms. 

I did a few by hand and it does take a considerable amount of time ~1-5hr per cell but the result is always worthwhile but most of what I have done was just for playing around.

[TechAngel85]

A CK example of Do's and Don'ts would be helpful.

When I was messing with stuff in the CK a majority of navms were created using the generator which always creates the most horrific navms. 

I did a few by hand and it does take a considerable amount of time ~1-5hr per cell but the result is always worthwhile but most of what I have done was just for playing around.

I can tell you one thing to never do and that is generate navmeshes for all worlds. I did this once while still learning and it filled my plugin with navmeshes for all of Skyrim! Do. Not. Do!

[hishutup]

I clicked that button to, I will never do that again...

What, I was curious OK?

[Nazenn]

Yeah, I generally tend to stay away from the automatic navmeshing tools as I find them very unreliable and usually they generate some really bad island issues etc as well.

 

However you still haven't answered the main question Shurah: Do navmeshes have a bigger impact on AI other then just allowing them to get places? Does it actually directly affect their behavior?

Answering that one question will help a lot with understanding what you seem to be implying about the compatibility issues with your mod and will clear up a lot of confusion.

Also I addressed the cylindrical patches issue you seem to be suggesting would occur with ETaC and I still don't understand why a single patch cant be made that includes all fixes for the mod and its patches which is what a lot of people do, rather then having to patch the patches?

[hishutup]

Yeah, I generally tend to stay away from the automatic navmeshing tools as I find them very unreliable and usually they generate some really bad island issues etc as well.

 

eww, I hate that, I've seen various mods have a ton of islands that are not cliffs or w/e its called and they think that its fine and Im here slowly dying inside.

[Sarcasm]

Not sure if it is proper to post directly in this thread itself, but after searching through all 17 pages and finding nothing, I simply have to comment on this. Am I the only person who receives an infinite loading screen every time I try to console coc somewhere from the Main Menu with this mod loaded ?

 

I see on the mod's Nexus page, this issue is directly recognized and acknowledged. I'm extremely apprehensive about a mod being admitted to STEP Core which prevents me from quickly testing for stability by coc'ing from the main menu to an area I need to test. Even with Safety Load, SKSE.ini, 6gb of VRAM - infinite loading screen every single time. Is there any recognized fix for this? Any mention of this issue is absent from the STEP notes for the mod, which seems an oversight. I would be grateful for a proposed fix for this, or any word on whether it can be left out entirely without disqualifying the Core patch. Thanks.

[Nazenn]

Time your loading screen and let us know what it is. It may not be infinite, it may just be extremely long. If its longer then say fifteen minutes then yes id say infinite, but a lot of people have ten minute plus loading screens with the mod, especially the very first time they run that save/character with it installed.

[Sarcasm]

Oh wow, you are right, it is not infinite but rather extremely long. It took 6 or 7 minutes to finally load a coc character from the Main Menu to qasmoke. Not infinite, but it may as well be since coc'ing from the main menu is unusable on that kind of time table. By comparison it took 40 seconds to load a New Game, much longer than normal but not overly long. I saw that New Games worked before posting, it's coc'ing from the main menu that concerns me most. What is it about coc specifically that causes it to be so drastically longer?

 

The problem is that this greatly slows down testing for bugs and crashes; I'll have to start a new game each time and load another save to coc to the area I want to test. Not to mention having to temporarily install Alternate Start just to get a character into a usable state without having to run through the intro. Is this what everyone who installs STEP does now to test their game? That seems cumbersome and uncharacteristic of STEP Core. Were it Extended it wouldn't bother me so much, but now installing even basic STEP involves tanking all my load times with new characters. This is uncomfortable to me, particularly due to the lack of any mention of this during STEP installation. Is there some way to stop this?

Edited January 15, 2016 by Sarcasm

[Nazenn]

Coc-ing, to the best of my knowledge, bypasses all start up scripts and sequences and literally just dumps you right into the middle of the active worldspace, with a few things broken like Helgen and Whiterun gates etc. It shouldn't really be too much different to using Alternate Start which also dumps you in the worldspace, but also allows all the normal start up sequence scripts to run and active properly to make the game functional etc. The reason the first load, even with LAL or using COC takes so long is because its populating all the NPCs with the aliases etc which is a lot of data to process.

[TechAngel85]

STEP current support testing in such a manner. It's buggy and misses things due to not loading up the game properly. You should avoid this.

[Sarcasm]

That sounds about right, I'm aware that coc'ing skips startup scripts but it is a quick way to test for FPS, stuttering, and general graphical stability in specific areas. What concerns me is having to install a non-Step mod, Alternate Start, to test a Step install. Is this an endorsed method of stability testing? If so, then I suppose it's not a big deal, even if it does add time to each startup.