Jump to content

Qwinn´s Ultimate DAO Fixpack v3 (no longer beta!)


Katzapult

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Glad you're looking forward! I'm very much looking forward to release and hopefully getting to hear which new bits you guys liked best. So far every area from Ostagar on has had at least a few really cool restorations, not just bug fixes, so I'm hopeful you'll all be pleased. EDIT: Actually, I take that back. No real restorations in the Circle Tower (if you don't count getting Godwin arrested, but that's really an Orzammar quest), just bugfixes. I do know there's two major things that *can* be restored at the end of Circle Tower: Wynne turning on a blood mage player, and the player turning Morrigan in as an apostate. The first one I'm holding off to see how much the later game code is set up to handle having *neither* the Templars OR the mages on your side, because that would be the end result of that restoration, and I don't know how much that would break in the endgame and how much it would take to make the game be able to handle it if it does, As for turning in Morrigan, I think it would take more cutscene work than I know how to do yet (per the scripting, she shapechanges and escapes), but if I pick it up along the way of doing the rest of the game, I might take a crack at it before release.

 

Just realized something... when I said "The underlying code is already all there for the militia and Lloyd too", I didn't mean it was Bioware's code, no, just that I implemented the underlying code for Lloyd and the militia when I put it in for the knights. Most if it is handled in a new plot and script I called qwinn_siege, beyond that surprisingly few actual changes needed to the original scripting. Most of the hooks are in the creature scripts and dialogues. The main thing I needed to modify the original scripts for was getting them to not drop loot and to implement the morale amulets.

 

Oh, and I did finish all the combat bark code for the militia and Lloyd too tonight. Tested and working nicely. So I can put it on the list now. In fact, here's all the Siege-related fixes again (since the descriptions have changed a bit):

 

10. (v3.0) "The Attack at Nightfall": The high morale bonuses to the militia and knights, and the penalties to the militia for low morale (per scripting comments knights cannot have low morale) based on your actions during "A Village Under Siege" were all non functional. They should now work, with the bonuses and penalties applied made to match as closely as possible to the non-functional morale traits in the game's abilities file.

 

11. (v3.0) "The Attack at Nightfall": The script code that was explicitly supposed to make the militia non-lootable during the siege was bugged and not working. As a result, they each drop each and every piece of equipment they were given for the fight, making letting them all die way too lucrative an option. The militia are no longer lootable. (This is also necessary to properly implement the above fix for morale bonuses and penalties).

 

12. (v3.0) "The Attack at Nightfall": Restored various stringhead shouts and combat barks by the militia and knights during the siege. Of particular interest is that those who are low on health will now alert you that they're in trouble and ask for help (shouts such as "There's too many of them!" are a cry for help, for the record). Combat barks will also vary greatly depending on their morale and, for three of the militia, if you bought them all free drinks before the battle. Note that if you try this fight with low morale, it will be hard to distinguish genuine cries for help due to low health from their general grousing and pessimism. Also note that while everyone in the battle will have random combat barks, there are three participants who will not have a discernible plea for help: Murdock, Tomas and Ser Perth. They'd rather go down than discourage their men, it seems.

Edited by Qwinn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Managed to extend the "Help me!" calls to Dwyn (though his isn't very obvious, if he complains about incompetent humans, he needs a heal), his 2 thugs and Berwick. Be aware though, as far as getting the "saved everyone" ending, the thugs and Berwick can die, no one cares about them, heh. Doesn't mean they won't *want* heals, though, so they will ask. The only ones in the combat who don't have a discernible plea for help are Murdock, Tomas and Ser Perth - they'll say something when they're wounded, but it'll just be one of their normal random barks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Let us honor the loss of the loot that is no longer with us, and pray that the Modder will take care of them in their next life."

*sniff* dead-rotting-guards-that-i-absolutely-didn't-let-die-because-your-gear-was-far-better-than-the-reward, I'll miss you.

 

My only guess Qwinn why they might not have had their help me barks enabled, aside from obvious reasons, is that there isn't anbody TO help them. They have no healers, no mages, no health potions... nothing. They are the LAST defenders of a town whittled down to nothing. When they die, that's it. If you leave, they die. Everybody they've known and loved is dead, night after night, and now it's their turn. There's nobody left to help them, and some of them may welcome death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, YOU'RE there.... and they don't ask for heals specifically, it's more "help me fight, I'm surrounded" types of yells. Remember, though, you can help them have high morale. If they have *low* morale, then yeah, listening to their combat barks, welcoming death is pretty much what they're doing at that point. It's actually hard to get low morale though. If you get Owen working making gear, it's impossible. If you kill Owen and deny giving his stash to Murdock, though, then it's easy... but then they're going to be practically naked in the battle and, yeah, they're all gonna die. Horrible morale warranted.

 

I'm not sure why they didn't enable these barks. They were all shoved to the bottom of each dialogue file, inaccessible. It can actually be tough to implement these in a way that works cleanly and doesn't do things like having a guy give two barks in a row so that one overwrites the other, for instance. There really isn't any way in the scripting language of this engine to say "Initiate dialogue but only if you didn't already initiate in the last 5 seconds". I think I've nailed it though, I've run through MANY tests and haven't had that happen yet. A combatant would have to land a kill, then land *another* kill within a second or two to make that happen, and even then there's a 30% chance each of those attacks won't trigger a talk, so, yeah, it's *possible*, but at this point so rare (I haven't seen it yet - heck, I didn't see it when a kill always triggered a talk) that I'm not terribly worried about it. It's a heck of a lot of content to not implement for the sake of preventing such a small chance of a possible oddity, and even if it happens, it's not like nobody in a battle ever interrupted themselves to say something new, heh.

 

Another possibility is that 6 years ago all these barks firing during an already heavy combat might've taxed the computers available at the time and made the combat laggy. If that was the case, I'm not worried about it, any computer bought in the last 4 years should be able to handle it with no problem. I will admit this, though - if anything I'm doing in this fixpack causes an excessive strain that might tax a normal system, I probably won't be able to tell. I'm running this 7 year old game on a $6,000 computer with two 980Ti video cards, the second best processor available a year ago, and an Intel NVME Solid State Drive that is 5 times faster than your normal SSD drive, which is itself 5 times faster than a regular hard drive. My loading the game or a save is pretty much instantaneous, and I have yet to run into even the most insignificant lag. But I don't think I've added anything that should overly tax a system unless it's so old it would've had trouble running DAO when it first came out. In fact, this is the only fix I've done that I think could possibly lead to anything like that.

Edited by Qwinn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14. (v3.0) "A Missing Child": Due to a bug, if you gave Kaitlyn the maximum amount of money allowed after the siege instead of before the siege, the game would forget that you gave her any money at all, which had a major impact on her fate in the epilogue.

 

15. (v3.0) Restored bugged response and approval change from a romanced Leliana if, before the battle, you ask Bella for a kiss in exchange for helping her leave after the battle.

 

16. (v3.0) Removed option to offer Bella a raise if you aren't her boss yet.

 

17. (v3.0) If you became the owner of the tavern, then either killed Lloyd or made Lloyd join the militia before getting free drinks for the militia from him, the subquest would update saying "Since Lloyd is no longer manning the bar, perhaps you could arrange for the militia to get their free drinks from Bella." Only - you couldn't, nor could you put her in charge of the bar. Now you can.

 

18. (v3.0) Prior to the siege, if the militia are getting their drinks for free, you can no longer ask Bella "How has business been?" as her responses indicate they are still being charged.

 

19. (v3.0) When Ser Perth sends his knights to collect the barrels or the amulets, they will no longer return with them instantly (if you asked Ser Perth "What is your status?" in the very same conversation where he sent his men to get the amulets, he'd say he'd already distributed them, similar situation with the oil). Some time must pass after the knights are sent (i.e. you must enter and exit a building, or tell a leader you're ready to wait for nightfall) for the knights to actually have the amulets or oil in their possession.

 

 

Also added the Tavern Drinks subquest to the list of subquests that weren't closing properly if you didn't complete them before the siege begins.

Edited by Qwinn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, found good evidence that the Helm of the Red *was*, in fact, intended to be scaled. The helm has "ITEM_RUNE_ENABLED"... which is pointless if the highest material it can have is Steel. None of the other unique heavy helms have ITEM_RUNE_ENABLED, so it's not like that was a default value, someone deliberately turned that flag on, and why do that if the intent was that it never be a high enough material to actually have runes. That moves it from correcting an indefensible balance decision to actual bugfix in my book.

 

And I think I'm going to fix Owen's Remasterwork (grey iron - which itself seems a bug as light helmets are generally not made of metal) to scale as well.. It also has rune slots enabled. Tier 2 with rune slots FTW!

 

EDIT: Never mind, armor doesn't have rune slots in base Origins (though chest pieces can get slots in Awakening) even if that is enabled - maybe they initially intended to have slots on armor but changed that later on? Who knows. Still, yeah, the two helms in this post will become scalable. It seems a no-brainer that Owen's Remasterwork in particular coming out as only Gray Iron (when in fact Owen's store if you rescue his daughter is one of the best stores in game for upgrading the material of its items, so he obviously has the skill!) is clearly bugged.

 

EDIT 2: Huh... it looks like Owen's Remasterwork may actually have been intended to be metal instead of leather? Here's the description: "Re-forged with remnants found on a battlefield, this helm shows traces of a strange enchantment. The original smith worked metal as it flowed through bone fingers, and likely would not be amused.". Whatever that means. But it says metal! I guess I'll leave that part be, though I will see how that actually turns out in game before making a final decision.

Edited by Qwinn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway, the fix works, so adding it to the list:

 

20. (v3.0) The Helm of the Red, Bann Teagan's reward for saving everyone in the village, was always Tier 3 Steel. This does not appear to have been intentional, especially considering that saving everyone is one of the hardest challenges in the game. The material will now scale to the player's level.

 

(I'll add any other items such as Owen's Remasterwork that fall under this category to this fix once I've tested that it works.)

 

21. (v3.0) "A Missing Child": When returning The Green Blade to Kaitlyn after the siege, no attempt at all was made in the scripts to actually remove the sword from your inventory. Internet claims that you needed to equip it on a follower or stash it in a chest in order to keep it were incorrect. Note that you only get one chance to talk to Kaitlyn after the siege, after which she will leave. Because of this, I am allowing the option (present in the unmodded game) to return the sword even if you do not have it on you - for example, equipped to a follower in the party camp or in the party chest. However, having it in those places will not allow you to keep the sword - it will be removed regardless of where you have hidden it in the game. So don't waste time trying to have your sword and give it away too. You know who you are. Cheater.

 

22. (v3.0) It was possible to acquire up to 3 copies of Berwick's letter (one acquired in the tavern, one stolen from him in the village after he's agreed to fight, and one stolen from or dropped by him if killed during the fight). No longer.

Edited by Qwinn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...