Which HAKs do you already have?

[Legacy_henesua]

               

wyldhunt1 wrote...
I plan to get a lot of use out of your Light Shy Creatures AI, btw.
Thanks for posting it. '>

You are welcome, but I would be careful with those lightshy behavior scripts. I think it should be rewritten. That was my first AI, and it can tbe expensive when you have more than 20 lightshy creatures in an area and a couple light sources.

My goal was to achieve this image in game play:
a dark cavern filled with a sea of hostile spiderlings swirling around a character in pajamas holding a candle aloft.

It wasn't able to get enough active spiders in an area all running that AI without running into some lag. 20 worked, but I wanted many many more. I think to make it work you need to really streamline the creature's AI.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_wyldhunt1]

               Not intending to hijack my own thread(Is that even possible?)... or, maybe I am... Either way, I give myself permission...

I haven't looked at your scripts yet since I'm already in the middle of learning the fine art of mdl manipulation, but I plan to alter it to work with an existing system that I already have. Basically, items have certain variables on them. The OnEquip script checks for the variable and sets the var on the player. Then, I can check for that var in the OnPerception or HB very quickly and easily. I have spells hooked so I can add vars from casting spells also.
As long as our builder knows to keep NPC's with light sources away from the area, I can just do something like:

if (GetIsPC(oPercieved)&&GetLocalInt(oPercieved, "Bright")==1)
{
ExecuteLightShyAI;
}
 
That'll keep them from checking each other and should make it plenty fast.
Of course, I haven't seen the script yet. '> </OffTopic>
 
.... Back to the regular scheduled program... Nothing to see here...
 
Hak list, anyone?
               
               

               

                     Modifié par wyldhunt1, 27 novembre 2011 - 03:59 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Aleron]

               

Alex Warren wrote...

I have CEP 2.4, Project Q 1.3, PRC (~10 MB download, doh) and some PW specific haks.

- PRC 2.3? (I think that is the one)

You have PRC 3.4 on WSI ;p

My only excuse is that I'm on midnight shifts right now lol. What he said.

As for there always being different versions being used in different places, I think it has to do with preferences. In our case, We stayed at that version of CEP because we had already added in a great deal of what they did with our own haks (meaning it would be a collosal pain in the tuckus to try remove our haks and reintroduce the updated CEP). This is sort of the same for the PRC. We eventually had to pick a version to merge into the server and the time involved in the fixing it was so much it hasn't been worth updating to the next version.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_DMSelena]

               Ha! Look at all these people willing to download custom content. I remember when Wyld and I had our last PW. I'd gone and done a massive amount of repair and combinulating of CEP with other things, fixed a number of core Bioware models that were bugged, and added my own custom stuff... all told the download was in the gigs. Bear in mind, this was largely because I was including CEP's content in our own haks. But, still. The players were some committed people to download all that, I tell you. And, if I recall correctly, several of them mentioned the size.

But this time, we're using the regular CEP and PRC, and Wyld is just making them play well together so as to spare people having to store 2 versions of all that on their hard-drive. I'd like to say it was worth it back then because we fixed so many problems concerning content redundancy and fuxxed up 2das, but it's hard to convey the importance of that to players who don't want to wait an hour to log in.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Rolo Kipp]

               <wheedling in the mistaken belief...>

Well, if you get *really* ambitious, you might think about writing a MOptimizer so your core hak only contains resources actually used, with an update hak that carries any enhancements...

<...he's cajoling>
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_UrkOfGreyhawk]

               I have more haks than I could ever use. Often I'll download and test a hak just so I can vote on it. In terms of what I use...

CEP
D20 Modern
classic Dungeons

I don't use Q because it's too small to stand on it's own and it's not CEP compatible.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_DMSelena]

               

Rolo Kipp wrote...

<wheedling in the mistaken belief...>

Well, if you get *really* ambitious, you might think about writing a MOptimizer so your core hak only contains resources actually used, with an update hak that carries any enhancements...

<...he's cajoling>

That's kind of what we ended up doing. What we host on the server is a different thing entirely from what we have to distribute to players. Even now my builder's mod contains a mostly empty CEP hak (that is to say, most of the blueprints have been removed because I detest blueprints in builder haks) and I'm just creating any blueprints we intend to use in game in the toolset. We are going to require that DMs and builders use the same lightweight haks so that we don't end up with the problem of DM's dropping hak'd blueprints. I don't like to make DM's have to remember to only use stuff in Special  or Custom or whatever. It's better if they can just browse the palette and drop whatever they see, knowing it will work fine and is acceptable to spawn in the world.

On  our last PW we had an update hak that we updated to different versions, but it became a real mess trying to track who had what, since you could login even if you didn't have the current version on accounta how the hak has the same name. Wyld tells me there's a plugin that can check for file attributes in the hak to make sure that the player's matches the server's, but I'm not sure if that's reasonable to expect people to have since it's a third-party program and I know people get a little squirrely about having third party programs that do stuff like access files on their harddrive.

- S.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_henesua]

               

UrkOfGreyhawk wrote...
I don't use Q because it's too small to stand on it's own and it's not CEP compatible.

While the later point is true, the first point is debatable (as a matter of opinion). My opinion is that since version 1.4, Q stands well on its own, but shines as a solid base upon which to add custom haks. It is very well organized, and every asset is desirable to use.

That Q is not compatible with CEP is accurate, although it can be made to be so without too much work.

However I am tired of the Q versus CEP debate. Its silly and counter productive. Aside from assuring that the projects are accurately presented to those making a choice between them, I think we can live and let live.