Guest tomm434 Posted June 1, 2014 Posted June 1, 2014 UDF is less 'risky' than token. Token is less 'risky' than using variable04. No I meant if you do delete the token, this will screw up some savegames(I heard BuildRef can do that). And this will take time before contributers update their mods for UDFs since it's new thing. I, for instance, still don't use functions. I know Loogie does. That's why I'll have to upgrade too. So I'll just wait untill the release and consider what way to use then.
prideslayer Posted June 1, 2014 Author Posted June 1, 2014 UDF is less 'risky' than token. Token is less 'risky' than using variable04. No I meant if you do delete the token, this will screw up some savegames(I heard BuildRef can do that). And this will take time before contributers update their mods for UDFs since it's new thing. I, for instance, still don't use functions. I know Loogie does. That's why I'll have to upgrade too. So I'll just wait untill the release and consider what way to use then. You can begin using the UDF right now, it's in the current version and explained in the beta thread at least, and maybe the API thread and release thread. Search forums for fnSexoutActorInuse Savegames will not be screwed up by using the token. I will never delete it because too many scripts reference it. Even if I did, it would not screw up any save games -- but it would screw up mods by crashing scripts referencing it. - I will probably stop handing the token out eventually. - I will *definitely* stop setting variable04 eventually. This makes the token less risky. That said, just use the UDF.
prideslayer Posted June 1, 2014 Author Posted June 1, 2014 If he tried buildrefing a UDF and the call worked, then by all means, do that instead. Yeah, I can't underline this enough: you can buildref UDFs & call them just like that. I'll probably ask 3-5 more times before it sticks..
Halstrom Posted June 1, 2014 Posted June 1, 2014 I don't see the problem with the VAriable04 being depreciated, I'm not sure many people are using that, but I suspect there will always be a few newer modders that would never get to the level of UDF usage especially if they have never scripted before or are just doing simple dialogue mods where tokens are a lot simpler. Or they'll take a look at UDF usage and just get scared off completely from modding for Sexout.
prideslayer Posted June 2, 2014 Author Posted June 2, 2014 They don't have to write their own UDFs, just use the sexout ones like this. They can stick to normal non-nvse coding for everything. I don't think they'll have any harder time grasping "if eval(0 == call fnSexoutNGActorInuse ref)" vs "if (0 == ref.GetItemCount 00SexoutActor)" If they do.. maybe modding isn't for them.
nyaalich Posted June 2, 2014 Posted June 2, 2014 if eval(0 == call fnSexoutNGActorInuse ref) Is this legit? I ask since I'm so used to declare variable and set to whatever GECK function I'm trying to get a value from and THEN using the comparison w/ the variable's resulting value.
nyaalich Posted June 2, 2014 Posted June 2, 2014 Bogs down stuff hardcore? Are you using that call in your scanner just not in a conditional?
t3589 Posted June 2, 2014 Posted June 2, 2014 Bogs down stuff hardcore? Are you using that call in your scanner just not in a conditional? Well on its own it's not that big of a deal. But toss it in with a bunch of other heavy chunks and it will if it checks every frame.
DoctaSax Posted June 2, 2014 Posted June 2, 2014 I don't see the problem with the VAriable04 being depreciated, I'm not sure many people are using that, but I suspect there will always be a few newer modders that would never get to the level of UDF usage especially if they have never scripted before or are just doing simple dialogue mods where tokens are a lot simpler. Or they'll take a look at UDF usage and just get scared off completely from modding for Sexout. There's something there, but I don't think checking whether an actor's having sex is something that happens a lot in conditions, which is the only thing tokens are still somewhat useful for. UDFs becoming the interface is not unlike the change to NX we had before - people got used to it. Of all the nvse4 stuff, UDFs are pretty much the simplest, and they have a lot of versatility at that. We may need somewhat more dedicated documentation on how to use Sexout's than my own general tutorial though.
prideslayer Posted June 2, 2014 Author Posted June 2, 2014 When I update the API I'll add information on how heavy/light the sexout UDFs are. The inuse one is very lightweight, safe to call from anywhere. It should work exactly as presented nyaa, that's how I use it myself. I only put it in a temp var if I need the actual return code for something, since there are 4 possible values, not just true/false.
t3589 Posted June 3, 2014 Posted June 3, 2014 Just for the record. Are multiple callbacks of different types supposed able to share a single actor?
prideslayer Posted June 3, 2014 Author Posted June 3, 2014 Just for the record. Are multiple callbacks of different types supposed able to share a single actor? Sexout doesn't care... your actor or scripts might?
nyaalich Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 The Banned Actor formlists. Tell me about them. EDIT: Sounds too brusque. Tell me about them, please.
jaam Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 And what do you want to know ? Members will not start sex if requested, and as such should be excluded from all type of scanner finding actor or conversation starting sex. RestrictedActor will have sex if requested but they should be avoided by generic plugins. The idea if for a plugin targeting that actor to place it in the list so sex with that actor can be a reward of following the plugin scenario.
nyaalich Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 Just confused. Odessa mentioned checking those (or some of those) lists as part of the usual is dead, is disabled, is already engaged in sex, etc. checks. FWIW, she did italicize them.
nyaalich Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 So if I understand correctly, Doc Mitchell would be added to the RestrictedActor list in SOFO?
jaam Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 It should to avoid SexoutSex allowing to have sex with him, or SexoutHookups having him propositionning the Player.
Odessa Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 Just confused. Odessa mentioned checking those (or some of those) lists as part of the usual is dead, is disabled, is already engaged in sex, etc. checks. FWIW, she did italicize them. The italics were because it was a comment rather than actual GECK function, like GetDead/GetDisabled. In addition to the banned + reserved lists in Sexout, SCR has some other more specific ones. Cheyenne and Lily are in the banned list, I guess because they are female and creatures are otherwise assumed male.
nyaalich Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 Ah. I see. I was thinking it was "in very specific circumstances." I wondered why Cheyenne and Lily were banned. I understand now.
Halstrom Posted June 7, 2014 Posted June 7, 2014 Yeah, I think that was a temporary measure till Prideslayer did something in SexoutNG to have a female creatures list, but as there aren't any animations there's no priority in that, it was easier to ban them for now. I think there's also some female coyote's, may be some female critters in FO3 too.
Guest tomm434 Posted June 10, 2014 Posted June 10, 2014 Prideslayer, I have an idea. It's about checking if Sexout works. Sometimes it doesn't. For example in this stage playerREF.NX_SetEVFl "Sexout:Start::CallVer" 1 playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorA" aaMS01SM4Ref playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorB" playerREF playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::CBDialogA" aaMS01BGCB1 playerREF.CIOS SexoutBegin RedRef.NX_SetEVFl "Sexout:Start::CallVer" 1 RedRef.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorA" aaMS01SM3Ref RedRef.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorB" RedRef RedRef.CIOS SexoutBegin KimbaRef.NX_SetEVFl "Sexout:Start::CallVer" 1 KimbaRef.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorA" aaMS01SM2Ref KimbaRef.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorB" KimbaRef KimbaRef.CIOS SexoutBegin BittercupRef.NX_SetEVFl "Sexout:Start::CallVer" 1 BittercupRef.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorA" aaMS01SM1Ref BittercupRef.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorB" BittercupRef BittercupRef.CIOS SexoutBegin 3 scenes might works but 4rth may not. If BittercupRef animation won't work, I don't care. But sometimes it happens to player and the whole scene is doomed to stuck. Now one of the solutions is to check manually through quest\spell\object script. Here is the code. If StageCheck ==1 if timer >=3 if getstage aams01 ==70 && playerref.getactorvalue variable04 ==0 playerREF.NX_SetEVFl "Sexout:Start::CallVer" 1 playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorA" aaMS01SM4Ref playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorB" playerREF playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::CBDialogA" aaMS01BGCB1 playerREF.CIOS SexoutBegin set StageCheck to 0 set timer to 0 elseif getstage aams01 ==70 && playerref.getactorvalue variable04 !=0 set StageCheck to 0 return elseif getstage aams01 ==71 && playerref.getactorvalue variable04 ==0 playerREF.NX_SetEVFl "Sexout:Start::CallVer" 1 playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorA" aaMS01SM3Ref playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorB" playerREF playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::CBDialogA" aaMS01BGCB2 playerREF.CIOS SexoutBegin set StageCheck to 0 set timer to 0 elseif getstage aams01 ==71 && playerref.getactorvalue variable04 !=0 set StageCheck to 0 return elseif getstage aams01 ==72 && playerref.getactorvalue variable04 ==0 playerREF.NX_SetEVFl "Sexout:Start::CallVer" 1 playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorA" aaMS01SM2Ref playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorB" playerREF playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::CBDialogA" aaMS01BGCB3 playerREF.CIOS SexoutBegin set StageCheck to 0 set timer to 0 elseif getstage aams01 ==72 && playerref.getactorvalue variable04 !=0 set StageCheck to 0 return elseif getstage aams01 ==73 && playerref.getactorvalue variable04 ==0 playerREF.NX_SetEVFl "Sexout:Start::CallVer" 1 playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorA" aaMS01SM1Ref playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorB" playerREF playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::CBDialogA" aaMS01BGCB4 playerREF.CIOS SexoutBegin set StageCheck to 0 set timer to 0 elseif getstage aams01 ==73 && playerref.getactorvalue variable04 !=0 set StageCheck to 0 return endif else let timer+=GetSecondsPassed endif else it can be optimised but it' will stay ugly and takes additional scripting + creation of some object(spell+baseEffect+Script or Object+Script or Quest+Script). The thing is, I can't set the while stage there because it will affect all actors and variables so I have to choose player animation or the animation which has dialogue after it(for scene to progress). So, what do I propose? You can add additional option to Sexout. For example: playerREF.NX_SetEVFl "Sexout:Start::CallVer" 1playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorA" aaMS01SM1RefplayerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorB" playerREFplayerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::CBDialogA" aaMS01BGCB4 playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::IsCheck" 1playerREF.CIOS SexoutBegin And it will run a simple timer script. It could be quest (although I have no idea how it will work with multiple calls). 3 seconds should be enough. Even if script delay is set to 0.5 sec it will check if player is having sex 6 times which in my opinion is enough. if timer >=3 && ActorRef.GetActorValue variable 04 ==0 (or function result) playerREF.NX_SetEVFl "Sexout:Start::CallVer" 1 playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorA" ActorA playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorB" ActorB playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::CBDialogA" DIalogueTopic playerREF.CIOS SexoutBegin else let timer +=getSecondpassed So,what do you think? That's better but still ugly. If StageCheck ==1 if timer >=3 If playerref.getactorvalue variable04 set StageCheck to 0 return else playerREF.NX_SetEVFl "Sexout:Start::CallVer" 1 playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorB" playerREF if getstage aams01 ==70 playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorA" aaMS01SM4Ref playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::CBDialogA" aaMS01BGCB1 elseif getstage aams01 ==71 playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorA" aaMS01SM3Ref playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::CBDialogA" aaMS01BGCB2 elseif getstage aams01 ==72 playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorA" aaMS01SM2Ref playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::CBDialogA" aaMS01BGCB3 elseif getstage aams01 ==73 playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::ActorA" aaMS01SM1Ref playerREF.NX_SetEVFo "Sexout:Start::CBDialogA" aaMS01BGCB4 playerREF.CIOS SexoutBegin set StageCheck to 0 set timer to 0 endif endif else let timer+=GetSecondsPassed endif else return endif end
prideslayer Posted June 10, 2014 Author Posted June 10, 2014 What is causing the 4th scene not to play, any idea? Sexout (generally) either starts or sends an error, I don't know of any freezing outside of the current issues with the UDF interface that I'm working on..
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