Mortal Weapons & Armors

[Ruffled Pigeon]

You have gauged my interest.

Never stopped using MWA despite the wonkiness, so very much looking forward to 2.0 once it's Skyrim time again.

[Monoman1]

13 hours ago, Silvain said:

Is this from MWA?

So this looks like some 'objectification' component of MWA is trying to setup an object reference that has already been set up. It's harmless because the name is not changed and also it shouldn't occupy more than one alias because of how the alias function is set up. But it will get a new durability. It's a bit troubling because it's using resources unnecessarily and it shouldn't really be happening. 

 

I wonder is there some overlap in 2 or more of the objectification methods. Both feeding the same ref in to be set up. I'll have to add some extra traces to see where the calls for set up are coming from. Then when you get the message popup you'll have to alt tab to your log and check the traces to get more detail. 

 

Overall I'm not massively concerned about it though I need to look into it. 

 

The main thing is that slot list I mentioned (U -> list slots). As long as it accurately reflects what you've equipped and has ObjRefs for items that should be ObjRefs and Bases for uninitialized items then it's already better than old MWA. The rest is just bells and whistles really. This is the main thing old MWA struggled with in the medium/long term. So far, I've been cautiously encouraged by it's accuracy. I've not spotted it wrong once since 2.02+

12 hours ago, Silvain said:

Though the same message came up with a different item from a custom armor mod. And that Item was not part of the additionaly generated items from the Synthesis patcher. Sadly I didn't  take a screen.

Ah I don't think it matters what mod it's from. Where the object is (container/npc/magic'd into inv) is more important along with where the call for set up came from. And also when (timing). 

[Silvain]

8 hours ago, Monoman1 said:

I wonder is there some overlap in 2 or more of the objectification methods. Both feeding the same ref in to be set up. I'll have to add some extra traces to see where the calls for set up are coming from. Then when you get the message popup you'll have to alt tab to your log and check the traces to get more detail. 

 

Overall I'm not massively concerned about it though I need to look into it. 

 

Ah I don't think it matters what mod it's from. Where the object is (container/npc/magic'd into inv) is more important along with where the call for set up came from. And also when (timing). 

 

Later today I will have some time to do some testing again. The popups came up when I went from the "Camping in the Woods" LAL Spawn in the direction of Helgen shortly before arriving at the gates. Both poppuped within 3 minutes of each other if not less.

 

I have a save before that so will I try reproducing it. And maybe even find out where those items have spawned. My first time around I haven't found them in Helgen.

 

Edit: Sadly no luck. Wasn't reproducable. Next time it comes up I'll save that log.

 

 

Quote

The main thing is that slot list I mentioned (U -> list slots). As long as it accurately reflects what you've equipped and has ObjRefs for items that should be ObjRefs and Bases for uninitialized items then it's already better than old MWA.

 

Gonna use that some more than. My Load Orders have tradionally been very good at breaking things.  

 

Edit: So far so good. Did a quick run through Helgen again and (almost) everything matched up with what it should have been. All the dead people items were not initialized again and such were "base" type items. Everything initialized was a "ObjRef" type.

Well everything except one and that was a DD item (the cuffs somehow don't use regular armor slots I just learned). But that isn't supported yet anyway, right?

 

 

Edit Edit: On a different note... MWA does not do anything with Encumbrance/Item Weight, right? For some reason my actual encumbrance is doubled from what I'm currently carrying. That never has happened to me before so I'm bit stumped which mod causes this.

 

Edit Edit 2: Well it is MWA. For some reason weapons and armors count double for carrying capacity. After deactivating the mod my encumbrance dropped almost by half. It does not show in the inventory so my guess is that the mod adds a invisible duplicate item of every weapon/armor the player is carrying to the player.

 

There also may be an issue with "clearing" data on a reset/deactivation. On my first test run I had 2 items (one sword, one armor part) that I could not get to initialize regardless how I tried. Turning everything everything on/off again while the items were in a container, on the ground, on a person, nothing worked.

On the second run, same save just loaded from the LAL cell, everything suddenly worked flawlessly for those 2 items.

 

 

I can't do much more testing right now, it may be just equipped items, but I think it's everything.

 

 

 

Edited August 19, 2022 by Silvain

[Monoman1]

18 hours ago, Silvain said:

All the dead people items were not initialized again and such were "base" type items.

Yea, Have confirmed the dead npcs aren't being processed. Not sure what's going on there. 'Allow dead' is enabled on the alias flags...

Any other good areas with more dead npcs. And preferably no/few live npcs...

18 hours ago, Silvain said:

But that isn't supported yet anyway, right?

I'd imagine DDs will init into MWA as a normal armor right now. I haven't checked yet but it's not high priority right now and I know it's easily fixed. 

18 hours ago, Silvain said:

I have a save before that so will I try reproducing it. And maybe even find out where those items have spawned.

I squashed a bug (well it was more of an approach issue) today where, I suspect items trying to initialize into world aliases were being crammed into the alias assignment function and depending on how the papyrus vm time divided calls you'd end up getting items with no fit in their name. They'd be initialized in and then the next object would try to use the same alias and uninitialize the object that had just been initialized.... I'll just use this gif to explain:

 

Seems to be working ok now. 

 

18 hours ago, Silvain said:

Edit Edit: On a different note... MWA does not do anything with Encumbrance/Item Weight, right?

Yes. The ill fitting debuff includes armor weight modifier. Actually thought I removed that part of the debuff as it's not very obvious as you've discovered. 

18 hours ago, Silvain said:

There also may be an issue with "clearing" data on a reset/deactivation. On my first test run I had 2 items (one sword, one armor part) that I could not get to initialize regardless how I tried. Turning everything everything on/off again while the items were in a container, on the ground, on a person, nothing worked.

On the second run, same save just loaded from the LAL cell, everything suddenly worked flawlessly for those 2 items.

If you want to initialize something just go to a blacksmith and ask them to refit it. Black smiths do everything right now (cloths/armor) and do it for free. Obviously that'll change...

Actually, must see if I can get them to refuse service if you don't have the relevant SLS licence. 

Edited August 20, 2022 by Monoman1

[Monoman1]

 

 

 

 

Hmm...

Edited August 20, 2022 by Monoman1

[Koozie]

@Monoman1 

 

maybe this mod source code can help with developing MWA as it's have open permission for use. 

 

https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/51024

[Silvain]

10 hours ago, Monoman1 said:

Yea, Have confirmed the dead npcs aren't being processed. Not sure what's going on there. 'Allow dead' is enabled on the alias flags...

Any other good areas with more dead npcs. And preferably no/few live npcs...

 

Hmmm only one that comes to mind right now is Helgen keep after the LAL start... Maybe this - I think it was some kind of Lighthouse? - where the familily was killed by some chaurus from below? Don't remember where it was though and how many corpses there were if at all. I think it was this: https://elderscrolls.fandom.com/wiki/Frostflow_Lighthouse

 

Another note that may help or may something else entirely:

Enemy NPCs only get their items initialized after death. I.e. after a battle I open the inventory and can watch while the items get their values assigned.

So maybe the "Allow dead" option is somehow tied to the trigger of "dying"?

 

 

10 hours ago, Monoman1 said:

I'd imagine DDs will init into MWA as a normal armor right now. I haven't checked yet but it's not high priority right now and I know it's easily fixed. 

 

Kind of? Haven't done extensive testing - only with the cuffs as they got randomly equipped. They (the cuffs) don't show up because they don't work with normal slots. Somehow they don't occupy one and even listing the slot the item occupies via SkyUI returns just a "-".

 

Devices on the normal slots should work fine I guess. At least the Toys devices did.

 

10 hours ago, Monoman1 said:

I squashed a bug (well it was more of an approach issue) today where, I suspect items trying to initialize into world aliases were being crammed into the alias assignment function and depending on how the papyrus vm time divided calls you'd end up getting items with no fit in their name. They'd be initialized in and then the next object would try to use the same alias and uninitialize the object that had just been initialized.... I'll just use this gif to explain:

 

Seems to be working ok now. 

 

PUSH 'EM HARDER.

 

10 hours ago, Monoman1 said:

 

Yes. The ill fitting debuff includes armor weight modifier. Actually thought I removed that part of the debuff as it's not very obvious as you've discovered. 

 

Yeah, read the description of the debuff a few times because I thought it would be it, but you did remove it there.

 

10 hours ago, Monoman1 said:

If you want to initialize something just go to a blacksmith and ask them to refit it. Black smiths do everything right now (cloths/armor) and do it for free. Obviously that'll change...

Actually, must see if I can get them to refuse service if you don't have the relevant SLS licence. 

 

Right, Blacksmiths I haven't tested at all yet. And the SLS integration of course just fits. ;D
 

Spoiler

 

 

7 hours ago, Monoman1 said:

 

 

 

 

Hmm...

 

Vote for the third option. Personally I like seperating different kind of values with a visual seperator like () and []

[chaimhewast]

9 hours ago, Monoman1 said:

Hmm...

I'd be fine with any of the first three. Having the gender in the middle makes it a bit harder to read, I think.

[Monoman1]

9 hours ago, Koozie said:

@Monoman1 

 

maybe this mod source code can help with developing MWA as it's have open permission for use. 

 

https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/51024

I'm actually not too worried about the tempering part. It's more the courier part. You should need a courier to deliver your stuff back when repaired/tempered. Anytime I've looked at the vanilla courier I ended up scratching my head. But it's been a while since I looked at it. Maybe I'm wiser now...

 

And also how to handle delivery of items that are tempered at different times...

 

We'll see. 

 

 

1 hour ago, chaimhewast said:

I'd be fine with any of the first three. Having the gender in the middle makes it a bit harder to read, I think.

 

3 hours ago, Silvain said:

Vote for the third option.

I'd agree. I think 3 is the easist to read. But I think this is a bit better - Moving fit to the end. When scavenging for armor I'm mostly looking at the fit first. Having it at the end makes it a bit quicker to 'find' visually I think. 

 

Plus, durability 'flows' better when there's weapons/shields etc in the same container (items that don't have any fit). Otherwise your eyes are moving left and right when reading down along a list. 

 

I don't know if it's feasible right now but there's currently a 'coverage' value assign to certain slots. Currently this determines how much an item in that slot covers the entire body and thus how likely it is to be hit. I wonder, now that there's a min and max fit, could I modify fit further based on 'coverage'. Items with higher coverage have narrower fit. Meaning boots that currently have a coverage of 3 would have a wider fit range than say a body armor with a coverage of 6 etc. 

 

Then we can modify actual 'coverage' with keywords. Skimpy keyword = Coverage/2 = wider fit range...

 

I don't know though. Might add too much to the set up of each item... We'll see. 

 

 

  

3 hours ago, Silvain said:

So maybe the "Allow dead" option is somehow tied to the trigger of "dying"?

Ah turns out I'm a dope. Initialization occurs on death but of course... they're already dead... duh...

Amazing the things that catch you out sometimes. 

 

Edited August 20, 2022 by Monoman1

[Monoman1]

17 minutes ago, Monoman1 said:

Plus, durability 'flows' better

Mmmm, although when tempered it might look a bit odd having durability separated from temper quality...

Tempering always goes at the end. Can't win.

[Monoman1]

So here's poor Ramati, murdered in her own home (and finally initialized properly). 

 

And here's her underpants drawer.

 

Notice anything?

 

Now it's not going to be very intelligent. Especially when it comes to combined living quarters like say the companions basement (and the npc must be present in the cell at the time). You'll just have RP that Aela left her knickers in Skjor's wardrobe at some point for some reason. Or maybe he took them himself. Who knows...

[Silvain]

2 hours ago, Monoman1 said:

I'd agree. I think 3 is the easist to read. But I think this is a bit better - Moving fit to the end. When scavenging for armor I'm mostly looking at the fit first. Having it at the end makes it a bit quicker to 'find' visually I think. 

 

Plus, durability 'flows' better when there's weapons/shields etc in the same container (items that don't have any fit). Otherwise your eyes are moving left and right when reading down along a list. 

 

Also fine. I personally think the other way around is better. As you said I look for the more important thing first. And for me that is durability since it is the value that has more impact on gameplay. The fit is the prerequisite sure, but you only really look at it once and then it is more of means to differentiate between other items with the same name.

And that is also another (minor) thing. Sorting - dunno if the name change changes how the items are sorted in the inventory but if they do, having the rarely changing fit be in the first place it may reduce inventory management chaos a little bit.

 

3 hours ago, Monoman1 said:

Plus, durability 'flows' better when there's weapons/shields etc in the same container (items that don't have any fit). Otherwise your eyes are moving left and right when reading down along a list. 

 

Is a good point as well though... Can't say I dislike the (Durability) [Fit] version, but my vote is still for the original number 3.

 

 

2 hours ago, Monoman1 said:

I don't know if it's feasible right now but there's currently a 'coverage' value assign to certain slots. Currently this determines how much an item in that slot covers the entire body and thus how likely it is to be hit. I wonder, now that there's a min and max fit, could I modify fit further based on 'coverage'. Items with higher coverage have narrower fit. Meaning boots that currently have a coverage of 3 would have a wider fit range than say a body armor with a coverage of 6 etc. 

 

Then we can modify actual 'coverage' with keywords. Skimpy keyword = Coverage/2 = wider fit range...

 

I don't know though. Might add too much to the set up of each item... We'll see. 

 

 

Hmm in theory this sounds awesome. But in practice it should probably piggyback ride on already existing keyword systems because adding yet another set of keywords to items is something very few people would be willing to do.

Though... It could tie quite well into SLS Whore/Bikini license system. I.e. only items under a certain threshold qualify as "whore clothing". Though then skimpy armor replacer and such would need a ton of work for this. Maybe tie that to something like the milk addict armor classification system (with a pop up to determin the coverage) and then assigning keywords at runtime for SLS/Babo mods (or however that would work - but I'm thinking SLAX or the new OSLAroused which works as quite a nice replacement for the AE peeps).

 

And you could probably do quite a lot more with this. But... That sounds like a huuuuge amount of work for something that is not part of the core functionality I think.

 

2 hours ago, Monoman1 said:

  

Ah turns out I'm a dope. Initialization occurs on death but of course... they're already dead... duh...

Amazing the things that catch you out sometimes. 

 

 

Huh, so I kinda guessed half right

 

1 hour ago, Monoman1 said:

Notice anything?

 

Veeeery nice touch. And having messy people is not a Skyrim only thing, So no immersion loss for me. xD

 

 

[Monoman1]

Posted 2.03 test. It's getting closer to an actual mod now I think. Added a bunch of stuff. Particularly mcm options but don't remember the specifics. 

 

One thing I'm concerned about though is execution time of objectification of world items. It takes considerable time but it's sort of the cost of reliability. From the time you get 'Player changed cell' notification to "Donezo" is the length of time taken. Now obviously it's going to vary from cell to cell and I've been testing in some bad cells on a 10+ year old pc but:

1. Back tracking into the same cells is extremely fast. 

2. There aren't many world aliases right now so as to test recycling of aliases in and out. End mod will likely have many more world aliases and items already set up are fast. 

3. Might be able to shave some time off using some PO3 functions. 

4. There are an absolute obscene amount of log traces which also cost time. 

5. Once a cell is initialized then that's it. There's very little else going on. At least until ObjRefs are unloaded (see 2).

6. Best of all, because of the new approach you don't really need to turn on objectification. Uninitialized items are considered to be of terrible durability and fit which, let's face it, is the case with most items that get objectified anyway. 

 

Still to be done. 

1. Magic armor protection. 

2. Blacksmith/tailor options + courier (hopefully)

3. Degrading of tempering on uninitialized armor/weapons before breaking chance. 

 

Maybes:

4. Cursed items ala old MWA. Should hopefully be less unpredictable than old MWA (since item references were lost more)

5. I was thinking about some arousal (or kink) based enchantment magic. Higher arousal for longer = better enchantment. Use a spell to enchant your equipped weapon and the longer/higher your arousal the better then enchantment becomes. Something like that. Might encourage you to belt and plug yourself. Maybe vibration events while wearing soul gem plugs recharge your enchantments a little. 

Edited August 24, 2022 by Monoman1

[Silvain]

Sweet, I'll update the conversion. Though this time around the earliest I get to testing is the weekend, if at all. Life is a bit much right now, sadly. But the new approach sounds promising.

 

I have one question cause I don't really remember how MWA did it. How does it interact with tempered items again? Were the temper levels just durability boosts?

[Monoman1]

2 minutes ago, Silvain said:

have one question cause I don't really remember how MWA did it.

Tempering is degraded first and then durability. Tempering effectively protects durability. Tempering an item should also restore durability (if the item is currently equipped durability should update immediately. If not equipped then durability will be updated the next time its equipped. Dont think there's any good way around that little nuance)

[Silvain]

Alright, thanks. How does it do that? Because a mod I personally like quite a lot (https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/16190?tab=description) does it's job by modifying itemhealthpercent. It simulates the same principle you already have implemented in SLS with bikini armor experience. The longer you wear/use your armor/weapon the more proficient you become with them.

 

So in combination (if both do work together) the mod would probably "temper" the equipment, MWA would degrade it again and it comes into a loop with both mods not really doing their thing right.

 

So maybe, just maybe, a similiar functionality but with a different approach would be possible for MWA? It would fit I think, since MWA does make you care a lot about the things you can actually wear without penalty. MWA may even a better place for bikini experience than SLS. But then again I heard that removing features from a big mod like SLS is quite a headache.

 

 

Concerning cursed items: I liked them. With the new approach and maybe even certain keywords for the coverage you could guarantee a certain amount of skimpyness? Like only items with less than X coverage can letch onto you.

[Monoman1]

13 hours ago, Silvain said:

So in combination (if both do work together) the mod would probably "temper" the equipment, MWA would degrade it again and it comes into a loop with both mods not really doing their thing right.

Yea that'll probably be a problem alright. SetItemHealthPercent IS the vanilla mechanic for tempering and is also what MWA degrades for tempering degradation. 

 

I can think of a couple of things. 

 

1. I can add a toggle to only degrade durability and not tempering. And you can set durability degradation fairly low to make up for it (easy enough I think)

2. Or I could try to do something similar to signature weapons myself. Probably wouldn't 'look' as good though. If the tempering mechanic is taken by degradation then it leaves few (none probably) options to increase damage on specific items. And getting the engine to differentiate between two different weapons of the same type is probably impossible. So the only thing I could do is apply a perk whenever you equip an 'experienced' weapon. But this would change the damage for all weapons while it's equipped which would make the inventory view somewhat... untrustworthy.

 

What I'm currently using to test if an item is in MWA's systems is GetLockLevel(). Yes you can lock weapons and armors apparently. It's the only (I think) attribute you can set that actually works with the engine using built in conditions. Unfortunately it doesn't work for perk conditions so I currently don't know a better way. 

 

GetLockLevel == 2 = damage x2, would have been wayyy to easy for bethesda modding...

[Silvain]

43 minutes ago, Monoman1 said:

1. I can add a toggle to only degrade durability and not tempering. And you can set durability degradation fairly low to make up for it (easy enough I think)

2. Or I could try to do something similar to signature weapons myself. Probably wouldn't 'look' as good though. If the tempering mechanic is taken by degradation then it leaves few (none probably) options to increase damage on specific items. And getting the engine to differentiate between two different weapons of the same type is probably impossible. So the only thing I could do is apply a perk whenever you equip an 'experienced' weapon. But this would change the damage for all weapons while it's equipped which would make the inventory view somewhat... untrustworthy.

 

Hmm maybe this is possible and a variant on 1 (though I would be more than happy with option 1):

 

Make tempering a flat reduction for durability loss. Normal weapon loses let's say 10 durability per hit. A +1 Weapon only loses 9, +2 only 8 and so on, with legendary weapons being almost immun to wear and tear. Maybe the option to add a minimal durability loss for different kind of attacks (like power attacks) would work well with this. This would prevent the loop and would make MWA mesh nicely with all mods that use the vanilla tempering mechanic.

Dunno if that is worth the effort but it would probably be less than 2.

 

On 2. If you could manage that it would be awesome but I don't think it is worth all the work. Still... here is a thought: Isn't there an option for renaming weapons while enchanting? Or is the display name irrelevant for identifying the item on an engine level? If not maybe you could use that and make a milk addict pop up (though disabled to pop up during battles) to require a name change from the player.

 

57 minutes ago, Monoman1 said:

GetLockLevel == 2 = damage x2, would have been wayyy to easy for bethesda modding...

 

Typical Bethesda

Sadly I can't help with stuff like this.

[Monoman1]

On 8/24/2022 at 12:56 PM, Silvain said:

Hmm maybe

Can you briefly outline how signature weapons works to you as a user? 

I'm guessing. 

1. Kill stuff with weapon. 

2. Weapon become tempered slowly over time?

 

But how does this affect normal craft tempering? I mean doesn't it kind of make tempering obsolete?

 

It would probably (never say for sure with skyrim modding) be fairly easy for MWA to:

A) Count how many kills you have with a weapon. 

B) How many hits a piece of armor has taken. 

This part is actually very simple since things are already 'objectified'. 

 

This part is a bit trickier because anything I can do will affect the BASE items but I could probably:

For weapons:

Increase damage done while that weapon is equipped. The problem is that it would affect all weapons that share the same base while that weapon is equipped. This is mostly an information display problem but would also affect dual wielding (personally I never use dual wielding so...). I could also either allow you to rename the weapon yourself and/or add a +1/+2/+3 etc to it's name. 

 

For Armor:

Similar to weapons I could increase an armors 'level' on taking a certain number of hits. Increased level might mean increased armor rating. This is a bit of a tricky balance though, especially when it comes to bikini parts but I suppose if the bikini's armor rating is well balanced then it should probably balance itself out.

 

Again the problem is information display. Say you have 2x steel boots in your inventory and they both have a base armor rating of 10. One of them is +1 which gives +50% armor rating. So when neither are equipped both have an armor rating of 10. When the +1 boots are equipped both would have an armor rating of 15 and when the normal boots are equipped both would have an armor rating of 10. It's a little unintuitive which I don't like but if the name is changed to +1/+2 etc it might be acceptable. 

 

For both weapons and armors I could increase durability/degrade resistance too. 

 

  

On 8/24/2022 at 12:56 PM, Silvain said:

Or is the display name irrelevant for identifying the item on an engine level?

You guessed it. Functions to differentiate two items of the same base type are... limited to put it extremely mildly. 

 

This is the list; https://www.creationkit.com/index.php?title=Category:Condition_Functions

For it to work something on this list would have to qualify. 

 

Most of these work strictly on base items. And then some also behave differently (not at all) if said item is in a container. 

Edited August 26, 2022 by Monoman1

[Monoman1]

Something like this:

 

Basic armor:

 

Level 1 bikini bra & thong:

 

It's really a matter of getting the balance right. This plus SLS bikini experience could make for some very high armor ratings. 

Edited August 26, 2022 by Monoman1

[Silvain]

3 hours ago, Monoman1 said:

Can you briefly outline how signature weapons works to you as a user? 

I'm guessing. 

1. Kill stuff with weapon. 

2. Weapon become tempered slowly over time?

 

But how does this affect normal craft tempering? I mean doesn't it kind of make tempering obsolete?

 

 1 + 2 - yes, that is how it works.

 

Does it make tempering obsolete? In my experience no. I mean it does enable tempered weapons and armors for characters that don't take smithing but there is no real controll over the process. There is no easy power spike. It is more of a reward to tough out hard situations with suboptimal gear again and again.

 

The mod also also allows "weak" weapons to steadily grow in power satisfying my roleplay urge to have a "signature weapon" since it allows even iron weapons (up to a certain point) to scale high enough to be competitive with better material weapons.

 

I like this concept and I think it would mesh well with a mod that makes maintaining the equipment and preventing it from being destroyed even if it may mean you have to invest valuable ressources into tempering/repairing services. If you though it out you are rewarded at some point. But only if you didn't fuck up midway

 

 

3 hours ago, Monoman1 said:

It would probably (never say for sure with skyrim modding) be fairly easy for MWA to:

A) Count how many kills you have with a weapon. 

B) How many hits a piece of armor has taken. 

This part is actually very simple since things are already 'objectified'. 

 

This part is a bit trickier because anything I can do will affect the BASE items but I could probably:

For weapons:

Increase damage done while that weapon is equipped. The problem is that it would affect all weapons that share the same base while that weapon is equipped. This is mostly an information display problem but would also affect dual wielding (personally I never use dual wielding so...). I could also either allow you to rename the weapon yourself and/or add a +1/+2/+3 etc to it's name. 

 

I see... Damage values jumping up and down is confusing. For me personally no deal breaker but I can see them. The"bug" reports.

While dual wielding (always want to use it but the way skyrim does it somehow makes me stop always immediately) it would probably double the bonus right? Cause the game thinks both weapons are "better" and thus double dipping into the tempering buff, which affects all weapons of the same type, so both add - let's say - +3 to both weapons... instead of +3 to one weapon you would have +6 to both weapons. Which is kinda bonkers.

 

 

 

 

3 hours ago, Monoman1 said:

 

For Armor:

Similar to weapons I could increase an armors 'level' on taking a certain number of hits. Increased level might mean increased armor rating. This is a bit of a tricky balance though, especially when it comes to bikini parts but I suppose if the bikini's armor rating is well balanced then it should probably balance itself out.

 

Again the problem is information display. Say you have 2x steel boots in your inventory and they both have a base armor rating of 10. One of them is +1 which gives +50% armor rating. So when neither are equipped both have an armor rating of 10. When the +1 boots are equipped both would have an armor rating of 15 and when the normal boots are equipped both would have an armor rating of 10. It's a little unintuitive which I don't like but if the name is changed to +1/+2 etc it might be acceptable. 

 

Yeah if you do the progression by use thing the name needs to change as well. Then it's fine I think, but without it, it is pure chaos. Another thing though, is that it makes the name quite long.

 

Iron Armor +1 (24/34) [40/50] (Legendary)

 

That is a whole lot

 

3 hours ago, Monoman1 said:

 

For both weapons and armors I could increase durability/degrade resistance too. 

 

I think this is a sensible option. Though I wouldn't go with both approaches at the same time. Either a reduction to the durability loss or a buffer function before degrading.

 

3 hours ago, Monoman1 said:

 

  

You guessed it. Functions to differentiate two items of the same base type are... limited to put it extremely mildly. 

 

This is the list; https://www.creationkit.com/index.php?title=Category:Condition_Functions

For it to work something on this list would have to qualify. 

 

Most of these work strictly on base items. And then some also behave differently (not at all) if said item is in a container. 

 

Oh wow and some aren't even described at all. Fun.

 

 

2 hours ago, Monoman1 said:

It's really a matter of getting the balance right. This plus SLS bikini experience could make for some very high armor ratings. 

 

Yeah thought so as well. That's why I thought MWA would be a good place for a replacement for Bikini Experience since they share the same thought process. Making stuff better the more it is used. Dunno if double dipping into this mechanic is wise. Though I won't mind the bikini experience buff to be special. I mean wearing almost nothing does increase your agility.

[Monoman1]

On 8/26/2022 at 2:21 PM, Monoman1 said:

Something like this:

Funny how the mind changes. I went to bed thinking this method would be... acceptable

Then I woke up and thought fuck that. It'll be very confusing with values jumping all over the place and having to re-enter the inventory to update values would probably be necessary too. 

 

So I spent a few (horrible) days writing a TesEdit script to auto generate duplicates of every weapon/armor in your game and create a 1:1 'directory' of original items <-> duplicates. This duplicate set would be used as the 'signature items' and would allow me to seemingly (but not really) freely modify values without it affecting every item of the same type in the game...

 

 

Yes, it'll require more work on the users part (and an extra esp) but the results are objectively better. 

Edited August 29, 2022 by Monoman1

[Mez558]

Great to see you working on this again, I still use the last version.

 

Don't know this has been mentioned, I brought it up before but you didn't have Dragonborn DLC at that time.

Can you make the new version ignore the Bloodskal Blade?
When MWA "scans" this item it's no longer on the corpse but next to it and if the blade isn't looted from the corpse then the script to use its "beam" power attack doesn't work and you cannot open the door to progress any further, without the use of TLC at least. When MWA "scans" this item it's no longer on the corpse but next to it.

 

My fix for this was to add the blade to the immune list and then any game from then on will be fine.

[Silvain]

1 hour ago, Monoman1 said:

Funny how the mind changes. I went to bed thinking this method would be... acceptable

Then I woke up and thought fuck that. It'll be very confusing with values jumping all over the place and having to re-enter the inventory to update values would probably be necessary too. 

 

So I spent a few (horrible) days writing a TesEdit script to auto generate duplicates of every weapon/armor in your game and create a 1:1 'directory' of original items <-> duplicates. This duplicate set would be used as the 'signature items' and would allow me to seemingly (but not really) freely modify values without it affecting every item of the same type in the game...

 

 

Yes, it'll require more work on the users part (and an extra esp) but the results are objectively better. 

 

 

Oh wow. Things got wild.

 

I don't mind the extra .esp (on SE it's even less a problem because of esl flagging) so I'm on board. This sounds awesome.

 

On another note: Ever heard of Synthesis? It's a framework for Skyrim modding that can do pretty amazing stuff pretty darn fast. And it's quite modern in it's approach and language. If you wouldn't mind I would try to "port" the xEdit Script to Synthesis. Or I should say, I would like to try learning scripting while trying to port the functionality over. Never got around to learning any functional programming so I'm hoping having set goal and even a working version to have a logic blueprint will help.

No promises though. This may take a while and may never work out. ^^'

 

For SE users there is a special problem I run into with xEdit scripts quite frequently. On LE having a limit of 255 Plugins as masters is not problem. In SE because of esl flagged plugins it is. xEdit scripts tend to add every file as a master and then deleting those masters that are not needed. This won't work in big LOs on SE. Dunno how Synthesis does it's thing but I never had that problem with any synthesis patcher. And a few of those are quite encompassing.

 

[Monoman1]

11 hours ago, Mez558 said:

Great to see you working on this again, I still use the last version.

 

Don't know this has been mentioned, I brought it up before but you didn't have Dragonborn DLC at that time.

Can you make the new version ignore the Bloodskal Blade?
When MWA "scans" this item it's no longer on the corpse but next to it and if the blade isn't looted from the corpse then the script to use its "beam" power attack doesn't work and you cannot open the door to progress any further, without the use of TLC at least. When MWA "scans" this item it's no longer on the corpse but next to it.

 

My fix for this was to add the blade to the immune list and then any game from then on will be fine.

I'll try to remember to test that. 

10 hours ago, Silvain said:

 

 

Oh wow. Things got wild.

 

I don't mind the extra .esp (on SE it's even less a problem because of esl flagging) so I'm on board. This sounds awesome.

 

On another note: Ever heard of Synthesis? It's a framework for Skyrim modding that can do pretty amazing stuff pretty darn fast. And it's quite modern in it's approach and language. If you wouldn't mind I would try to "port" the xEdit Script to Synthesis. Or I should say, I would like to try learning scripting while trying to port the functionality over. Never got around to learning any functional programming so I'm hoping having set goal and even a working version to have a logic blueprint will help.

No promises though. This may take a while and may never work out. ^^'

 

For SE users there is a special problem I run into with xEdit scripts quite frequently. On LE having a limit of 255 Plugins as masters is not problem. In SE because of esl flagged plugins it is. xEdit scripts tend to add every file as a master and then deleting those masters that are not needed. This won't work in big LOs on SE. Dunno how Synthesis does it's thing but I never had that problem with any synthesis patcher. And a few of those are quite encompassing.

 

Yea thats probably still going to be a problem. Its much easier and faster to add all mods as master starting off and then clean up later. You can do whatever you want with the script. You could just only load weapon/armor mods either when running the script.