Sexlab Adventures

[Teutonic]

12 minutes ago, worik said:

Some other thoughts on those NPC:

• disable instead of delete ?
• and setting them as essential, to avoid unforseen problems.

If we take proper care of them in the early design, we might have a rather useful tool for future ideas

Spawning NPCs left and right is not a good idea. After a while Skyrim is filled with disabled dudes (that have to be loaded every time you enter the area). Deleting them does not seem to cause any problems (The Sleep Rape feature does it too.) 

[karlpaws]

3 hours ago, worik said:

Some other thoughts on those NPC:

• disable instead of delete ?
• and setting them as essential, to avoid unforseen problems.

If we take proper care of them in the early design, we might have a rather useful tool for future ideas

 

3 hours ago, Teutonic said:

Spawning NPCs left and right is not a good idea. After a while Skyrim is filled with disabled dudes (that have to be loaded every time you enter the area). Deleting them does not seem to cause any problems (The Sleep Rape feature does it too.) 

I suspect what Worik meant was having an NPC defined but not placed in a cell, enabled by script, action performed and then disabled, reusing the same actor (or randomly 8 others) instead of deleting, as you would a killed random spawn.

 

There are a number of a quest NPCs that are disabled when the quest is done. They don't have any AI overrides either so often if you prid and moveto player, they just start walking back to wherever the quest ended. I wouldn't suggest using these though, as the player might have other mods changing them.

 

On the other hand, since they exist with a ref id, you could use a variety of out of the way NPCs as your "father" tagged id.  Or just pick a bunch of quest based essential NPCs and use those IDs instead.  Unless there is an actual paternity system, in which case using Ulfric or Tullius would probably not be a great idea.

[Rogue_Kitsune]

 

On 4/28/2018 at 7:59 AM, Slorm said:

 

EDIT: Also noticed that if rape is untoggled (off) but sleep rape is toggled on the sleep rape doesn't seem to fire so looks like it's dependant on the rape toggle to work. Not sure it that was intended or not or if it's supposed to be independant part

 

On 4/28/2018 at 11:27 AM, Teutonic said:

That is intentional. I figured if you disable rape, you would expect sleep rape to no longer happen as well.

 

I suppose I'm an odd case, here... I was trying to run the mod with only sleep rape enabled, and was wondering why it wasn't working! So, if I may make a suggestion: I know some mods have MCM menus where options that are dependent upon other features being enabled will be grayed out if the feature they require is not enabled (for example, Dynamic Timescale does this with its autosave options; if you set the "After combat time" to 0 to disable it, the options below it are grayed out) - this could be an easy way to make dependencies easier to understand at a glance.

 

...and, as for why I was trying to run it with the normal rape options disabled? Well, if you're willing to humor feature requests... I've been trying to set my game up to be at least semi-plausibly "realistic", so I don't want random sex happening everywhere all the time; I'd thought I had the trigger conditions set up well until I found out the hard way that interiors are treated the same as being outside of a city, when I went into an inn late at night to rent a room and didn't get more than 10 steps inside the door!

 

That said, like some others have said, I'd love to see options for morality and relationship rank with the player (maybe include options to invert it, too! I personally want to set it so characters who are "moral" or are friends with my character won't force themselves her, but hey, others might want NPCs who consider the player their "lover" to be able to demonstrate it at any time!)

 

Also, while I won't pretend to have any idea what would be necessary to implement this, and I dunno how many people would use it, but would there be any way to block rape attacks from happening if there is a character nearby who would not be eligible to participate (suggesting that they might try to stop it)? To give an example, like I said above, I really didn't like that my character got attacked in the middle of an inn, surrounded by a bunch of people, including a few guards, who just watched. If, however, there had been a random NPC with looser morals, who followed my character up to her room, alone and out of sight, and decided to attack her there, well... that's more the kind of "realism" I'm trying for!

[Vithiss]

Spoiler

 

Just a couple of things (and if you already know this, or tried it and found it wasn't satisfactory, I apologize) that might help accomplish some of what you're trying for:

 

-if you use followers the "followers prevent rape" option can serve as your portable intervention

-guards can be excluded a good bit (depending on your playthrough) by requiring that you have a high bounty before they'll get involved

-the single best way I've found to limit the likelihood of rape is to raise the "minimum arousal" (I usually set it to 50 but experimented with 80 and that made attacks so infrequent I found I kept checking the debug page to make sure the quest wasn't stuck); above and beyond the conditions, though I have had some luck in this direction by also setting the 'base chance" really low (10-20).

 

Hope that helps, at least on an interim basis.

[karlpaws]

I thought there was an option in the Debug to mark an area as city/interior, but I don't see it.

 

Fort Dawnguard spawned 5 wolves on me when I went to sleep, so it must not be tagged correctly.  I am not sure all 5 were supposed to be there, as Aroused Creatures also kicked in and had one trying to engage while another scene was already playing. I've had that happen before so that wasn't really an issue.

[Teutonic]

12 hours ago, karlpaws said:

I thought there was an option in the Debug to mark an area as city/interior, but I don't see it.

 

Fort Dawnguard spawned 5 wolves on me when I went to sleep, so it must not be tagged correctly.  I am not sure all 5 were supposed to be there, as Aroused Creatures also kicked in and had one trying to engage while another scene was already playing. I've had that happen before so that wasn't really an issue.

Such an option does not exist indeed. I assume Fort Dawnguard is neither considered a city nor a dungeon, so it is treated as wilderness and as such, wolves can spawn in it. 

[worik]

1 hour ago, Teutonic said:

Fort Dawnguard is neither considered a city nor a dungeon,

The uesp wiki puts it in the military fort category. Now I am wondering how  forts in general are considered in SLAdv? ?

 

Edit:

If they have no special treatment yet, I guess it will be a little tricky to catch them correctly.

• If they are not occupied by any army my feeling suggests: Dungeon
• if any army occupies it, it might be either city or dungeon? Depending if civil war has started and if the player has comitted to one side.
  • city as default
  • dungeon if the player is hostile to the occupants
• It might work the same way with Ft. Dawnguard and Castle Volkihar
•  

Some places would still fit not into that logic, e.g. High Hrothgar

[Corsayr]

1 hour ago, worik said:

The uesp wiki puts it in the military fort category. Now I am wondering how  forts in general are considered in SLAdv? ?

 

Edit:

If they have no special treatment yet, I guess it will be a little tricky to catch them correctly.

• If they are not occupied by any army my feeling suggests: Dungeon
• if any army occupies it, it might be either city or dungeon? Depending if civil war has started and if the player has comitted to one side.
  • city as default
  • dungeon if the player is hostile to the occupants
• It might work the same way with Ft. Dawnguard and Castle Volkihar
•  

Some places would still fit not into that logic, e.g. High Hrothgar

2 hours ago, Teutonic said:

Such an option does not exist indeed. I assume Fort Dawnguard is neither considered a city nor a dungeon, so it is treated as wilderness and as such, wolves can spawn in it

 

Would it be possible to do a separate check to see what kind of NPCs were in the area? If the area has friendly NPC and no hostile NPC always treat as a city. That way a garrisoned fort would act like a city instead of a wilderness or dungeon. 

 

Or maybe even create another condition on top of the city, wilderness, dungeon. Basically, a "surrounded by friendlies" location that could be assigned a separate % change for assault in the MCM and either pull attackers like a city or maybe even create a new formula for the kind of attackers that are pulled in that condition. 

 

Just a thought.

 

 

BTW loving the mod, I am so broke lately that the risk of getting fined for sex acts would instantly mean jail time (as I can not pay the fines.) as a result I have resorted to locking myself in a slave collar so I do not get fined for sex acts. But because I also use aroused creatures being collared has lowered the threshold for an attack. So it is a trade-off. I spend a lot of my time in cities running from horny dogs, horses, and chickens. 

[Rogue_Kitsune]

3 hours ago, Teutonic said:

Such an option does not exist indeed. I assume Fort Dawnguard is neither considered a city nor a dungeon, so it is treated as wilderness and as such, wolves can spawn in it. 

I decided to take a quick look at this myself, since I was curious; would I be right in assuming you determine how to classify an area by looking at the Keywords attached to the Location data (eg, LocTypeCity, LocTypeDungeon)? If so... it looks like this might actually be Bethesda's fault - I'm not seeing any keywords attached to the Fort Dawnguard location entry (DLC1HunterHQLocationInterior). Castle Volkihar is the same way, and while High Hrothgar does have keywords, it doesn't use any of the LocType keywords.

 

That...might not be very helpful, though. Because it seems to me like the "best" option to make sure areas are recognized correctly would be to add a debug option like was mentioned above ("best", because while it probably would work, and would not require and additional upkeep once it was working correctly, I'm hesitant to recommend it because I don't know how much work it would take to set up in the first place). Of course, the other options aren't much better - probably either going through and manually adding the proper Keywords to every Location that's missing them (time-consuming, and also risky due to potential conflicts with other mods), or adding more FormID Lists and manually adding all these locations to them.

 

...unless... I wonder if that third approach might be better? Since you wouldn't have to do it all by yourself, after all - any time someone would find a location that isn't tagged correctly, they could just post on here, say where it is, and, if a FormID List was already set up to handle them, it'd only take a minute or two to find the Location entry and add it to the list.

[Teutonic]

42 minutes ago, Rogue_Kitsune said:

I decided to take a quick look at this myself, since I was curious; would I be right in assuming you determine how to classify an area by looking at the Keywords attached to the Location data (eg, LocTypeCity, LocTypeDungeon)? If so... it looks like this might actually be Bethesda's fault - I'm not seeing any keywords attached to the Fort Dawnguard location entry (DLC1HunterHQLocationInterior). Castle Volkihar is the same way, and while High Hrothgar does have keywords, it doesn't use any of the LocType keywords.

I was about to check it myself when I read your post and you are absolutely correct. It is interesting to note that all the regular forts all over Skyrim seem to have a LocTypeMilitaryFort keyword though. But what could be done is check if the Location is Fort Dawnguard or Castle Volihar. Adding Locations to Formlists is also little work, but what can't be done afaik is adding keywords on the fly. Papyrus simply does not have a function for that. So the only way to add those would be to do it hard in the esp file, which has several drawbacks:

• Not customizable
• It will create a dependency for Dawnguard (granted, most people have it, but there still seem to be some people who don't)
• It will override potential fixes from the unofficial patches unless these are included as well (not sure if there are any)
• It might create conflicts with mods

So Location and FormList is the way to go. The question is how many Locations should receive special treatment. I doubt 2 of them has any noticable effect on performance, 50 might be different. And Sleep Rape is already slow.

 

1 hour ago, Corsayr said:

 

Would it be possible to do a separate check to see what kind of NPCs were in the area? If the area has friendly NPC and no hostile NPC always treat as a city. That way a garrisoned fort would act like a city instead of a wilderness or dungeon. 

 

Or maybe even create another condition on top of the city, wilderness, dungeon. Basically, a "surrounded by friendlies" location that could be assigned a separate % change for assault in the MCM and either pull attackers like a city or maybe even create a new formula for the kind of attackers that are pulled in that condition. 

 

Just a thought.

An interesting thought. I don't know if there is a performant solution though.

 

2 hours ago, worik said:

The uesp wiki puts it in the military fort category. Now I am wondering how  forts in general are considered in SLAdv? ?

 

Edit:

If they have no special treatment yet, I guess it will be a little tricky to catch them correctly.

• If they are not occupied by any army my feeling suggests: Dungeon
• if any army occupies it, it might be either city or dungeon? Depending if civil war has started and if the player has comitted to one side.
  • city as default
  • dungeon if the player is hostile to the occupants
• It might work the same way with Ft. Dawnguard and Castle Volkihar
•  

Some places would still fit not into that logic, e.g. High Hrothgar

They have no special treatment yet. Like I said above, there is a keyword for them (but not for Dawnguard and Volkihar), but I don't know if there is a way to check who occupies them. There probably is. But it might be buried in some quests and hard to find. 

[Corsayr]

42 minutes ago, Teutonic said:

I don't know if there is a performant solution though.

This is frequently the boot that steps on the ant of my immersive dreams. ?

[karlpaws]

4 hours ago, Teutonic said:

So Location and FormList is the way to go. The question is how many Locations should receive special treatment. I doubt 2 of them has any noticable effect on performance, 50 might be different. And Sleep Rape is already slow.

 

They have no special treatment yet. Like I said above, there is a keyword for them (but not for Dawnguard and Volkihar), but I don't know if there is a way to check who occupies them. There probably is. But it might be buried in some quests and hard to find. 

Would using a "tag this place" type spell or looking at what other My Home or player ownership making mods might use be viable?

 

There are no child beds so the common "Bless Home" spell for Hearthfire won't work, afaik, but The Manipulator can set an unowned (or owned for that matter) cell to player owned. At least for the DLC and potentially other mod added player homes that do not have correct keywords a multi-mod generic approach might work.

 

Scanning for local friendlies could screw up sleeping in inns? or would that be excluded because you've already determined the location is an inn and skip anything else.

 

Lastly, is there a console command batch-able we could use in a pinch? There are some things papyrus can't do on the fly that are console options. Should only be needed once a game... right?

[worik]

5 hours ago, karlpaws said:

Would using a "tag this place" type spell or looking at what other My Home or player ownership making mods might use be viable?

That could be a useful Out-of-character-helper. Many mods use this, e.g. Hunterborn allows to categorize modded creatures with a lesser power (that way it doesn't meddle with magic).

5 hours ago, karlpaws said:

Scanning for local friendlies could screw up sleeping in inns? or would that be excluded because you've already determined the location is an inn and skip anything else.

Let's do it the other way: We don't need to scan for the good guys, but for the bad guys. And that check wouldn't even be needed in every case. Only if we can't determine anything else.

In the end, I feel the logic in the location check could be sequentially

 

IF LOCATION

1. known type A -> branch here
2. known type B -> branch here
3. ..
4. named location (Ft.Dawnguard etc..) -> branch here
5. ..
6. player-spell custom location -> branch here
7. military fort -> special treatment due to changing ownership during the game (maybe expensive in papyrus time)
8. OR instead of 7: location owned by hostile faction -> branch here
9. low moral/hostiles around? -> branch here ( <-- I guess this is the most papyrus time expensive check? So better to check it only if nothing else matches? )
10. ELSE : default to wilderness

 

Not sure how this pays out in term of performance and script delay? Sorting the most probable to the top? The most time-critical where the player is hurrying to the top? The fastest ones to the top? ?

[Teutonic]

13 hours ago, karlpaws said:

Would using a "tag this place" type spell or looking at what other My Home or player ownership making mods might use be viable?

I'd rather use an MCM method, like how you can mark clothing as naked in Sexlab Aroused. But either way, this would work fine.

 

13 hours ago, karlpaws said:

Scanning for local friendlies could screw up sleeping in inns? or would that be excluded because you've already determined the location is an inn and skip anything else.

Inns are considered cities, so it would be excluded. Now that I think about it, the option should probably be "in Inn" instead of "in City" (because that is what it means anyway) and "in Wilderness" should be "outside". This way there is no fallback to wilderness if the location is neither an inn nor a dungeon. 

 

8 hours ago, worik said:

Let's do it the other way: We don't need to scan for the good guys, but for the bad guys. And that check wouldn't even be needed in every case. Only if we can't determine anything else.

In the end, I feel the logic in the location check could be sequentially

 

IF LOCATION

1. known type A -> branch here
2. known type B -> branch here
3. ..
4. named location (Ft.Dawnguard etc..) -> branch here
5. ..
6. player-spell custom location -> branch here
7. military fort -> special treatment due to changing ownership during the game (maybe expensive in papyrus time)
8. OR instead of 7: location owned by hostile faction -> branch here
9. low moral/hostiles around? -> branch here ( <-- I guess this is the most papyrus time expensive check? So better to check it only if nothing else matches? )
10. ELSE : default to wilderness

 

Not sure how this pays out in term of performance and script delay? Sorting the most probable to the top? The most time-critical where the player is hurrying to the top? The fastest ones to the top? ?

It could be 

 

if Location is a Military Fort

-> if occupied by Enemy: Treat as Dungeon

-> else: Treat as Inn

 

And then

1. Inn
2. Dungeon
3. Outside
4. Custom Location in List
5. Specific Location 

I am not sure if 8 is even possible and most of the time, it is going to be a dungeon anyway. I am also not sure if checking for hostiles is even necessary since if there are any, it is also most likely a dungeon.

[karlpaws]

If you've killed all of the bandits or Stormcloaks/Imperials in a fort, does it still register as occupied by enemies? Would "the bandits that hid in closets and weren't killed" still come out to rape you when you take a break before heading back to town or would you get wolves sneaking in now that all of the people are gone?

 

 

[worik]

36 minutes ago, karlpaws said:

If you've killed all of the bandits or Stormcloaks/Imperials in a fort

That's what I had in mind, ... they are really tricky .. ?

 

So it's either

• evil scum if civil war has not yet started   -> ok, dungeon
• army, if you eliminated the evil scum and the civil war has not yet started  -> inn
• army of hostile or friendly side if civil war has started
  • hostile -> dungeon
  • friendly -> inn

But I have no idea how to check in a fast way between the two possibilities before the war. A "cleared" fort is not marked as "cleared". Ownership doesn't change at this stage as well, if I got it right

 

Edit: are there keywords, that change when you "clear" it and that we could check for? Somehow the game MUST know if it should spawn bandits or soldiers the next time you enter that cell.

[Teutonic]

1 hour ago, karlpaws said:

If you've killed all of the bandits or Stormcloaks/Imperials in a fort, does it still register as occupied by enemies? Would "the bandits that hid in closets and weren't killed" still come out to rape you when you take a break before heading back to town or would you get wolves sneaking in now that all of the people are gone?

I am pretty sure it will still be owned by whoever owned it before you cleared it. 

 

1 hour ago, worik said:

That's what I had in mind, ... they are really tricky .. ?

 

So it's either

• evil scum if civil war has not yet started   -> ok, dungeon
• army, if you eliminated the evil scum and the civil war has not yet started  -> inn
• army of hostile or friendly side if civil war has started
  • hostile -> dungeon
  • friendly -> inn

But I have no idea how to check in a fast way between the two possibilities before the war. A "cleared" fort is not marked as "cleared". Ownership doesn't change at this stage as well, if I got it right

 

Edit: are there keywords, that change when you "clear" it and that we could check for? Somehow the game MUST know if it should spawn bandits or soldiers the next time you enter that cell.

Afaik the war quests are already running before you actually pick a side, so the war should never be "not yet started" (and it is actually already going strong when the game starts) and someone should always be owning the forts (I suppose).

 

I am not entirely sure how the game tracks the cleared status, but it is tied to the boss of the location. So being cleared for Skyrim does not actually mean there are no enemies left. So relying on it in a script might lead to unexpected results.

[worik]

45 minutes ago, Teutonic said:

someone should always be owning the forts (I suppose).

Yes, they belong to someone. The starting ownership can be checked with the commanders of each army. They have a map table nearby and it shows flags with the ownership. E.g. Ft. Greymoor is owned by the Legion at day 1, no matter if there are in fact bandits inside or not.

 

The next thing to being tricky is that if you leave one single bandit alive, they will still be respawned with bandits in the next respawn cycle. Only if you kill all of them, the army moves in.

My last one was Ft. Greenwall in the morning and the Stormcloaks moved in on the same day.

 

By the way, it's not always bandits. E.g. Ft. Amol has evil mages.

 

If this "who owns it" grows too complex .. I feel we could at least start with MilitaryFort=Dungeon until we find a proper solution how to figure out if the inmates are "not so terribly bad"?

[karlpaws]

6 hours ago, Teutonic said:

I am pretty sure it will still be owned by whoever owned it before you cleared it. 

 

Afaik the war quests are already running before you actually pick a side, so the war should never be "not yet started" (and it is actually already going strong when the game starts) and someone should always be owning the forts (I suppose).

 

I am not entirely sure how the game tracks the cleared status, but it is tied to the boss of the location. So being cleared for Skyrim does not actually mean there are no enemies left. So relying on it in a script might lead to unexpected results.

 

5 hours ago, worik said:

Yes, they belong to someone. The starting ownership can be checked with the commanders of each army. They have a map table nearby and it shows flags with the ownership. E.g. Ft. Greymoor is owned by the Legion at day 1, no matter if there are in fact bandits inside or not.

 

The next thing to being tricky is that if you leave one single bandit alive, they will still be respawned with bandits in the next respawn cycle. Only if you kill all of them, the army moves in.

My last one was Ft. Greenwall in the morning and the Stormcloaks moved in on the same day.

 

By the way, it's not always bandits. E.g. Ft. Amol has evil mages.

 

If this "who owns it" grows too complex .. I feel we could at least start with MilitaryFort=Dungeon until we find a proper solution how to figure out if the inmates are "not so terribly bad"?

Forts might be owned by the Imperials or Stormcloaks, but I think that's more hold based than population, as the Imperials never take up residence in Greymoor until the battle of Whiterun happens, iirc. They might not even take over until the battle is done, and it can be populated with the winner depending on the side you pick. Whiterun is just a mess anyway, so that might be a really bad example but if you can get it to work correctly there, it would work anywhere.

 

I think Riften/Markarth are the first normal CW forts dealt with, so that would be a better place to check in game, possibly. There might be documentation someplace as well, but it would just take someone doing the battle of Whiterun, checking those two forts at minimum when leaving for "the other city" with the quest giving jarl's axe and returning with the message to see if the holds change over before the battle. Another potential linch pin would be returning with the Jagged Crown (since you could leave Korvunjund and head to the "other" city, switching sides. Since that's the last time that a choice is possible that would be another potential "set up" quest trigger.)

 

Another potentially unrelated quest trigger would be the meeting at High Hrothgar, since that can happen prior to choosing sides or even kicking anything off. You change the ownership of several holds and would flip forts as well... but I don't know if population of said forts would do anything without the actual war quests advancing.

 

Another suggestion would be to have "Deserters" do the raping if you're in a CW controlled fort, as long as you can determine that. Picking Bandits vs Renegade Wizards though ... well Fort Amol could go on that "Special Location" formlist I guess, along with Fort Sungard (forsworn) and Fort Snowhawk (more wizards, well, necromancers technically).

 

http://en.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Military_Forts  in case we need it handy

 

I suspect that CW wise, the fort does not actually change hands until you report back and complete the quest. Theoretically if you clear ... say Fort Kastav with Hadvar and the imperials, a Stormcloak should rape you (although you really could make an argument that the Imperials are present and might be horny after a big fight.. eh).

 

I'd really have less of an issue with bandits doing the raping in a cleared but unpopulated military fort but I'd think a fort owned by your side of the CW should probably fall on the Inn category as Worik suggested.

 

[worik]

4 hours ago, karlpaws said:

Forts might be owned by the Imperials or Stormcloaks, but I think that's more hold based than population, as the Imperials never take up residence in Greymoor until the battle of Whiterun happens, iirc.

No, kill the bandits (all bandits!) and they move in an hour later .... cowards.

 

As I do the armies' job in my game now, if have the soldiers back in

• Ft Greymoor
• Ft Greenwall
• Ft Amol

I must have missed some hidden bandits in Ft. Sungard, it's still respawning bandits.

Next one will probably be Dunstad. I will watch out how quick the soldiers take over. MIght even reload and experiment a bit to tell you more by live practise 

[Corsayr]

Question: I have noticed that when I am assaulted via the conditional rape feature the list of animations that it randomizes from is very limited compared to other types of rape. Is it possible that the feature is calling out a specific keyword tag, and if so can that tag be changed?  

[karlpaws]

11 hours ago, worik said:

No, kill the bandits (all bandits!) and they move in an hour later .... cowards.

 

As I do the armies' job in my game now, if have the soldiers back in

• Ft Greymoor
• Ft Greenwall
• Ft Amol

I must have missed some hidden bandits in Ft. Sungard, it's still respawning bandits.

Next one will probably be Dunstad. I will watch out how quick the soldiers take over. MIght even reload and experiment a bit to tell you more by live practise 

The forsworn in Sungard are replaced by Imperials if you take the Stormcloak side.  At least I think so. I don't take the gullible traitor's side that often so it has been a while since I had to assault that fort.

[worik]

12 hours ago, worik said:

Next one will probably be Dunstad. I will watch out how quick the soldiers take over. MIght even reload and experiment a bit to tell you more by live practise 

I cleared Fort Dunstad from bandits in the morning and left the area.

A coc at 10pm shows Stormcloaks everywhere.  I havn't  joined any side in the CW. Quests CW01A and CW01B are both unstarted yet.

 

I conclude that

• all bandits need to be killed
• the default army for that moves in as soon as you leave/reenter that cell

I still have no clue how the game decided that all bandits were kill. It must have a scanner of some sort ?

 

>help dunstad

revealed to actvators F085B and F0865 ... no clue what they do.... could the have some meaning for the change of occupants?

Each Fort that I checked seems to have 2 activators

Edit: dead end ... it's just for the flags on the maptables, it seems

 

 

EditEdit

It's USKP!!!

USKP make the forts being occupied by armies after you kill the bandits! Don't know yet, how it detects their elimination.. but it's a step forward.

Vanilla skyrim (what was that? Never have played that )  respawns bandits after bandits until the CW questline gets on it's way.

[worik]

Before I edit a 3rd time:

 

USKP USLEEP uses a vanilla quest and a script to check who owns a fort and if the evil has been cleared

• QST D5F08 CWFortObserver is used and changed by USKP
• The quest calls a script CWFortObserverScript
• USKP and vanilla differ in what they do with the outcome

 

We might use the same thing to find out if it's bandits/necromancer or army who occupies the location.

 

I checked in Tes5Edit. CK might be revealing more, but I am less then inapt for that toy

 

EDIT: I meant USLEEP, but USKP introduced it ..once upon the time

[Teutonic]

5 hours ago, Corsayr said:

Question: I have noticed that when I am assaulted via the conditional rape feature the list of animations that it randomizes from is very limited compared to other types of rape. Is it possible that the feature is calling out a specific keyword tag, and if so can that tag be changed?  

All types of rape use the same mechanism to determine animation tags. It picks one of Vaginal, Anal or Oral at random (all with the same probability). It also excludes the Lesbian tag in non-lesbian scenes and forces it in lesbian scenes. Lastly it includes or excludes the Aggressive tag depending on MCM options.