Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Dark Dreams of Furiae - a new module for NWN:EE! Buy now
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

New versions of NearInfinity available

1242527293036

Comments

  • fluke13fluke13 Member Posts: 366
    Thanks for the replies. This came about when trying to bring an item from iwd2 into bg2ee. Currently, in NI in iwd2 you can use modifier type Increment (0) or Set (1), whereas in NI with bg2ee opened, there's no modifier type option.

    So if I set the value to say 20 - this will increment resistance by 20. Perhaps the iwd2 engine added a feature to both increment and set?

  • switswit Member, Translator (NDA) Posts: 494
    I think it may be a good idea to make splprot.2da description labels less confusing:

    0x103: match entries x or y - description is fine, to block/apply spell either x or y must return true (or both)
    0x104: Not match entries x or y - I'd suggest using "and" instead of "or" in this case. To block/apply spell both x and y must return false

  • Luke93Luke93 Member, Mobile Tester Posts: 1,390
    @swit

    Speaking of splprot.2da, do you know the correct value for AREATYPE != specified value ?

  • argent77argent77 Member Posts: 2,937
    swit said:

    I think it may be a good idea to make splprot.2da description labels less confusing:

    0x103: match entries x or y - description is fine, to block/apply spell either x or y must return true (or both)
    0x104: Not match entries x or y - I'd suggest using "and" instead of "or" in this case. To block/apply spell both x and y must return false

    Will be fixed.

    Luke93 said:

    Speaking of splprot.2da, do you know the correct value for AREATYPE != specified value ?

    AREATYPE is defined as a bitfield, so it's required to check for matching bits. This splprot.2da entry should return true only if none of the areatype flags specified by parameter1 of the opcode are set:
    NOTAREA   0x106   -1        9
    A detailed description of available pseudo-stats can be found here.

    Btw, AREATYPE does only work correctly in patch 2.5 or higher.

  • Luke93Luke93 Member, Mobile Tester Posts: 1,390
    edited October 2018
    argent77 said:

    Luke93 said:

    Speaking of splprot.2da, do you know the correct value for AREATYPE != specified value ?

    AREATYPE is defined as a bitfield, so it's required to check for matching bits. This splprot.2da entry should return true only if none of the areatype flags specified by parameter1 of the opcode are set:
    NOTAREA   0x106   -1        9
    So, it's basically like ALIGNMENT bit_uneq specified value, right?

    NOTALIGNMN 0x110 -1 9

    Still, I don't understand how to set up parameter2 of opcode 318/324 (for the record, I'm interested in AREATYPE != FOREST.....) For example, why ALIGNMENT bit_uneq specified value is 118 (decimal)?

  • argent77argent77 Member Posts: 2,937
    edited October 2018
    Param2 of opcode 318/324/326 refers to the row number of splprot.2da entries. So if you add a new definition to splprot.2da, you will also have to determine the row number of the new entry.

  • kjeronkjeron Member Posts: 2,185
    An issue with the script reader:
    These compile correctly:
    Spell("",WIZARD_SPOOK) Spell([ANYONE],WIZARD_SPOOK) SpellPoint([0.0],WIZARD_GREASE)But when reopening the file, NI incorrectly decompiles them as such:
    SpellRES("",[ANYONE]) SpellRES("",[ANYONE]) SpellPointRES("",[0.0])And will re-compile these actions instead of the original.
    It only appears to be an issue with actions that have a RES variant, switching an empty/zero target/object for an empty RES field.

  • argent77argent77 Member Posts: 2,937
    Thank you. I'll look into it.

    The first variant is indistinguishable from the second, since both will produce the same bytecode. However, they should be properly detected as non-RES variants by the decompiler.

  • Luke93Luke93 Member, Mobile Tester Posts: 1,390
    edited November 2018
    argent77 said:

    Param2 of opcode 318/324/326 refers to the row number of splprot.2da entries. So if you add a new definition to splprot.2da, you will also have to determine the row number of the new entry.

    Got it, thanks.

    However, what are the possibilities here? Is it possible to add the condition "No ongoing combat" ?

  • argent77argent77 Member Posts: 2,937
    Luke93 said:

    Is it possible to add the condition "No ongoing combat" ?

    Don't think it's possible with splprot. You could try your luck with SPL flags bit 16 (Non-combat ability) though.


  • agrisagris Member Posts: 571
    @argent77 Is the "Find References" function for .PVRZ working in the current build, and taking files in override into account?

    When looking at some PVRZ images that have corresponding v2 MOS files, find references has yet to find any of those MOS files.

    Also, if the references function could search the various .menu files as well, I think it would be helpful to modders.

  • argent77argent77 Member Posts: 2,937
    agris said:

    Is the "Find References" function for .PVRZ working in the current build, and taking files in override into account?

    When looking at some PVRZ images that have corresponding v2 MOS files, find references has yet to find any of those MOS files.

    It works for me, even with files in the override folder. Make sure "Options -> Ignore Overrides" isn't enabled.

    agris said:

    Also, if the references function could search the various .menu files as well, I think it would be helpful to modders.

    MENU files are not parsed by NI, so adding this file type to the reference searcher might lead to occasional false positives, and the results list wouldn't show exact position of a match. I'll add it to my todo list though.

    agris
  • agrisagris Member Posts: 571
    argent77 said:

    agris said:

    Is the "Find References" function for .PVRZ working in the current build, and taking files in override into account?

    When looking at some PVRZ images that have corresponding v2 MOS files, find references has yet to find any of those MOS files.

    It works for me, even with files in the override folder. Make sure "Options -> Ignore Overrides" isn't enabled.
    That's so strange. If you look at BOX5B.MOS, in my (modded w/ Lef's UI mod), it points to MOS4290.pvrz. If I run a reference search on MOS4290.pvrz, it doesn't find BOX5B.

  • argent77argent77 Member Posts: 2,937
    I've tested the same file with lefreut's UI and it worked correctly in both ways. Does the debug console (Tools > Show Debug Console) show something unusual after the reference search?

  • agrisagris Member Posts: 571
    argent77 said:

    I've tested the same file with lefreut's UI and it worked correctly in both ways. Does the debug console (Tools > Show Debug Console) show something unusual after the reference search?

    Ding ding ding! It didn't find any references for MOS4291, but it did find find references for MOS4009. Both searches generated these errors related to invalid bams. I wonder if this is related to my problem with some BAMs.

    There might not be a problem with the lack of hits on 4291, I realized I replaced BOX5B.MOS with a .PNG, so if that was the only file that used 4291 then the lack of hits is correct. Did you get more than one hit for it?

  • argent77argent77 Member Posts: 2,937
    Yeah, some of the BAM files appear to be corrupted on your side. It shouldn't influence the search process though. I did get only a single hit for MOS4291, so if you replaced the MOS by a PNG, then the lack of hits is correct.

    agris
  • BalquoBalquo Member, Developer Posts: 2,738
    .STO flag BIT8. This disables the donation screen. BIT4 "Can Donate" has no function in the EE's.

  • GwendolyneGwendolyne Member Posts: 399
    Don't know if it has been already reported, but the latest BAM converter appears to have a palette regression. When loading BAM v1 files, the shadow index is always moved to the last index (#255). Does not appear with v2-1-2018.05.31.

  • argent77argent77 Member Posts: 2,937
    @Balquo Thank you. Do you also know if bit 9 of ITM ability flags has any meaning? I've seen it set in a great number of spell scrolls.

    @Gwendolyne Can you give me a repro case? Does it help to make changes in the bam converter options?

  • GwendolyneGwendolyne Member Posts: 399
    Try to modify the shadow color from (0 0 0) to (128 128 128).

  • argent77argent77 Member Posts: 2,937
    Thanks. I'll try to fix it.

  • CamDawgCamDawg Member, Developer Posts: 3,420
    Feature request: when I go to an area file and select a container trap detection difficulty and then use the find > selected attribute feature, I can search for e.g. all values >0 and then sort the results. The problem is that these appear to be an alphabetical sort on a numerical field, e.g. the list will be sorted 1, 10, 100, 15, 19, 20, 30, 40, etc. Perhaps it's because the field itself is actually populated with 'Trap detection difficulty=1' but it would be nice to get a true ascending/descending sort.

  • argent77argent77 Member Posts: 2,937
  • BubbBubb Member Posts: 804
    @argent77: I think I just stumbled a cross a bug -

    Near Infinity, built from the latest master branch, is producing this error when attempting to "Find => references to this entry". It looks like attempting to find references to a string from anywhere in NI will throw this exception.
    Exception in thread "AWT-EventQueue-0" java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: 'query' must not be null
    at org.infinity.search.ReferenceHitFrame.(Unknown Source)
    at org.infinity.search.AbstractReferenceSearcher.(Unknown Source)
    at org.infinity.search.AbstractReferenceSearcher.(Unknown Source)
    at org.infinity.search.StringReferenceSearcher.(Unknown Source)
    at org.infinity.gui.StringEditor$Listeners.itemStateChanged(Unknown Source)
    at java.desktop/javax.swing.AbstractButton.fireItemStateChanged(AbstractButton.java:1995)
    at org.infinity.gui.ButtonPopupMenu.menuItemSelected(Unknown Source)
    at org.infinity.gui.ButtonPopupMenu.access$200(Unknown Source)
    at org.infinity.gui.ButtonPopupMenu$PopupItemListener.mouseReleased(Unknown Source)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.AWTEventMulticaster.mouseReleased(AWTEventMulticaster.java:298)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.Component.processMouseEvent(Component.java:6632)
    at java.desktop/javax.swing.JComponent.processMouseEvent(JComponent.java:3342)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.Component.processEvent(Component.java:6397)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.Container.processEvent(Container.java:2263)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.Component.dispatchEventImpl(Component.java:5008)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.Container.dispatchEventImpl(Container.java:2321)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.Component.dispatchEvent(Component.java:4840)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.LightweightDispatcher.retargetMouseEvent(Container.java:4918)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.LightweightDispatcher.processMouseEvent(Container.java:4547)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.LightweightDispatcher.dispatchEvent(Container.java:4488)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.Container.dispatchEventImpl(Container.java:2307)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.Window.dispatchEventImpl(Window.java:2772)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.Component.dispatchEvent(Component.java:4840)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.EventQueue.dispatchEventImpl(EventQueue.java:772)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.EventQueue$4.run(EventQueue.java:721)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.EventQueue$4.run(EventQueue.java:715)
    at java.base/java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
    at java.base/java.security.ProtectionDomain$JavaSecurityAccessImpl.doIntersectionPrivilege(ProtectionDomain.java:85)
    at java.base/java.security.ProtectionDomain$JavaSecurityAccessImpl.doIntersectionPrivilege(ProtectionDomain.java:95)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.EventQueue$5.run(EventQueue.java:745)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.EventQueue$5.run(EventQueue.java:743)
    at java.base/java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
    at java.base/java.security.ProtectionDomain$JavaSecurityAccessImpl.doIntersectionPrivilege(ProtectionDomain.java:85)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.EventQueue.dispatchEvent(EventQueue.java:742)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpOneEventForFilters(EventDispatchThread.java:203)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpEventsForFilter(EventDispatchThread.java:124)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpEventsForHierarchy(EventDispatchThread.java:113)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpEvents(EventDispatchThread.java:109)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.EventDispatchThread.pumpEvents(EventDispatchThread.java:101)
    at java.desktop/java.awt.EventDispatchThread.run(EventDispatchThread.java:90)

  • argent77argent77 Member Posts: 2,937
    @Bubb What exactly were you searching? Can you give me a repro?

  • BubbBubb Member Posts: 804
    @argent77: Sure.

    1. Open clean BG2EE with NI
    2. Edit -> String table.
    3. Strref: 14027.
    4. Find... -> references to this entry

    Nothing happens, and the exception is thrown. Here's a ss of the offending screen:

  • argent77argent77 Member Posts: 2,937
    edited December 2018
    I couldn't reproduce this error on my system. Does the error message occur reliably when you perform the search? Do you get any results?

    Edit: I can provoke this error with a binary compiled from the latest development branch code. There are currently lots of changes being made internally, and more are in the works. I would strongly recommend to stick with the latest official release, unless you really need any of the new features.

  • BubbBubb Member Posts: 804
    edited December 2018
    Yes, the error occurs 100% of the time. And actually, the error occurs before I can even attempt the search, (the following window doesn't appear for me on the affected versions):

    I tested a bunch of the recent commits, and it was this one that introduced the bug for me.

    Edit: Ah, I just saw your edit. Yeah, I'll stick to the official release until things iron out :) And DUH, I accidently said master branch when I meant devel. Sorry for wasting your time argent -

  • argent77argent77 Member Posts: 2,937
    No worries. Thanks for the bug report though. :)

Sign In or Register to comment.