To be honest, I have not done a manual install of a classic game for years but I used the tools and the BWP manual quite often in the past.

All those steps that you listed in the BWS extract are also done at one point or other in the manual when it describes some actions to be performed for a mod or in preparing a mod. The BWS does most of it at the beginning of the install automatically after it has unpacked the mods. Every now and then there are actions that can only be performed directly when installing the mod.

Provided the BWP manual has not changed its philosophy (I have not looked at more recent versions), then all of these operations will be individually be explained when it comes to a mod you want to install.

Since you mod the old game and this has not changed, you work on legacy stuff and you still need all those steps or you may have problems either during install or later in game. Only thing to consider are mods that have been updated between today and the release date of the manual, which may be some.

Roxanne - it's the Wings mod. https://forums.beamd...ersion-0-91b/p1

This is a modder who still works on his stuff, slowly but...

Maybe you can encourage him a bit?

tital says it,wnata post some code

Copy and paste into this section, then highlight and press button *code* as shown in picture

If you want to post much code, I suggest to rather put it into spoiler tags instead.

So the decision was to not being abl to unpack newly packed mods in rar because otherwise old (and probably abandoned) mods might not be automaticly unpackable? Alternative approach would be to support the new mod versions and let the players extract the older ones by hand. Sounds more reasonable to me.

*Decision* is not always the option when it comes to BWS nowadays. Without someone who even knows how to make the necessary changes, we are talking hypothetical choices here.

PS - I would be the first to agree that abandoned mods for outdated games should not be an argument...but we can only consider the options we have control of. Unless you know how to do it?

Just to show off my total ignorance of things sometimes, what would you use BWS for besides an EET Install?  Mind you, I'm just a goofy old school player who has to have his hand held by you wonderful people just to install Mods and play the worlds best RPG, but I only looked at using BWS for an EET install which I accomplished.  Would you use the BWS to maybe play the Tutu or BGT "brands" of mods to go with?  Again I'm sure my ignorance shines through as I only have very vague ideas of what BGT and T

BWS currently supports

- Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition (standalone game)
- Baldur's Gate II: Enhanced Edition (standalone game)
- Enhanced Edition Trilogy ( BG1:EE + SoD + BG2:EE ) (planned: IWD1:EE + partial IWD2-in-EET)
- Planescape: Torment Enhanced Edition
- Icewind Dale: Enhanced Edition

It also has supported the classic versions of those games in the past - but due to missing maintenance the older collections have become usable by dedicated experts only (or unusable for the average player, however you want to phrase it).

oook. it's not a problem to install a game in shared folder. i keep there BWS Downloads already. thank's - it's a good idea. i still couldn't believe, that biffing could be bad for a game. it was very comfortable to transfer a compressed game to another pc. for example, to my sons computer, so we could play it on network. now it would take more time to prepare for a game. 

The experience I made with biffing in BG2EE was with the new file formats that were added with EE. Especially with those graphic files that use the PVRZ format. It appeared that those files are associated with their *master* TIS, MOS, etc by file names. After biffing, those associations no longer worked. There were also issues with other new file formats.

I have to admit that I never again looked into this issue since the early days of the EE because the main advantage of biffing (the performance issue of large modded games) was never needed for EE-games. I have never considered the use of biffing for other use like file transfer. So sorry for my narrow minded view.

Ok, i need some help. My goal was to install as much big mods as possible to play and without Items and Spells revisions. By 3rd reinstall i got the possitive result (no install errors), BUT when creating character i've got bad spells for Shaman or Sorcerer (maybe others too, i didn't check).
 
Could someone take a look at weidu.log and do his/her magic to tell me, what mod did this?
 
Or it was a bad idea to not install revisions? I don't think i like changes it makes to vanilla game.
 

https://ibb.co/euMyzx

https://ibb.co/g4zkex

 
weidu.log

Apart from those weird spell names which come from wrong entries in dialog.tlk (wherever those come from), I noticed that you used general biffing at the end of the installation which is not required and not recommended for EET and leads to all types of anomalies. I cannot say if that is the reason for your issue but it will produce other effects you do not desire.

Also before I forget, IsraNPC got an update and BWS has an issue with archive extraction.

I noticed the same thing yesterday. I manually extracted it and then a crossmod component with IsraNPC and another failed. I just stopped the install, wiped and intend to try another install without IsraNPC in it.

It looks like -Trevalin- ran into the same issues.

I'm a long-time BG player getting drawn back in for yet another playthrough, and I'm trying to use BWS for the first time to help get me through the complicated mod install process. I've run into several errors, including issues with SCS installing (skipped installs with some regret), crossmod banters between Gavin/Isra and Valerie/Isra (skipped installs since I don't plan on using those npc's this time) and a parsing error with Garrick: Tales of a Troubadour (skipped install since he won't be in my party long this time through).
 
I am now stuck on this parsing error, and finally decided to ask for help:
 
ERROR: No translation provided for @438
ERROR: parsing [tb#_compile_eval_buffer/bg1re/necromancer/Dialogues/necromancer.d]: Not_found
ERROR: compiling [bg1re/necromancer/Dialogues/necromancer.d]!
ERROR: Not_found
Necromancer's Trouble, by jastey (WARNING - refer to the readme!) (Baldur's Gate Romantic Encounters) was not installed due to errors.
 
Should I be getting this many issues with popular mods? Am I better served going back to just trying to manually install mods the way that I used to? Any idea what might be causing this particular error?

Thanks for any assistance. I took today off to play some BG, and I'm hoping to get this sorted.

With SCS were you getting out of memory errors?

The Isra errors seem to because of an update that was just pushed to the Isra NPC mod.

 

It is best to report Isra errors directly to her thread in this forum. http://www.shsforums...be-corrupt-eet/

The mod author has returned from hiatus and is now active again.

I tried to reach out to the Creator of a mod via the links they said best. Looks like they have dropped off the scene. So does that mean the mod can never be accepted by an EET install? I ran that tool k4thos provided and tinkered with mods not allowed by eet to install. 

 

So if the version I'll be using(haven't reached BG2 yet) works, how do we get around the mod author being awol?

Which mod is it?

Further actions would depend on that.

3. If players are testing a mod it is usually advantageous if they actually know about it and are ready to give feedback at the appropriate place (i.e. where the modder can see it). I had no problem to find players who are ready to test my mods. All the other players have to wait until that is done before they get the new version as an official download. But then, what use does it make to rush the release if the mod is not fully tested?

We already have a lot of rumors going around - there being modders [plural] not wanting their mods being fixed or included into mega mod installs is one of them. I would like to spare more of these kind.

The way jastey does it for her own mods is probably the best example of how the author should decide on when and if they want their mods included in BWS.

 - she puts links with a stable beta version up and invites testers, but without submitting the mod to BWS. This way people using the beta version know exactly what they have to expect.

- when the mod is thoroughly tested this way, she declares it official and to be added to BWS.

Another example is modder Raduziel who wants his mods to be exposed by BWS to a larger audience to be tested and improved. The mods are marked as beta versions and continuously updated per github. This is an alternative approach and also supported by BWS.

In both examples, the decision is fully in the hands of the mod author.

Things have been handled different in the past and the aftertaste of this is still found in some discussions.

Fact is that no mod has been added to BWS and no patch has been introduced into BWFixpack within the last 12 month WITHOUT having the author involved. (This does not include editorial updates of download links or versions, if those have been notified in which ever way).

That's because WinRAR 5.21 can open new RAR5 format while 7zip 9.22 (which BWS use) cannot. No, we can't update 7zip because few old mod archives can't be opened via new 7zip due to unsolvable internal 7zip bug. And we can't repack those mods and publish them. Not forcing players to install additional software is much better imho.

Thank you for clarifying.

Folders on system partition are protected. My steam folder is not among them. I'll try the second option and let you know.

 

Edit: Ok it went through

 

Also before I forget, IsraNPC got an update and BWS has an issue with archive extraction.

The issue has been fixed. The modder uploaded the file as zip now to the download link and that should work.

How odd. I suppose I can upload it as a zip instead if the rar is acting up. Let me know if it's working properly now.

The zip works fine now, at least for manual download and extraction.

Is the problem on my side or BWS? I'm not having any trouble manually extracting it.

I did not use BWS but downloaded directly from the mod page and tried to open it with double click.I get the message that it is not a valid archive. I can open it with the 7-zip console. So it is not a BWS issue.

Of course, the EET reference in the title is also irrelevant, this is not related to EET in any way.

Yes it does have error for me too.

Here is another report

http://www.shsforums...am/#entry601478

Something went wrong with yesterday's new version upload.

Folders on system partition are protected. My steam folder is not among them. I'll try the second option and let you know.

 

Edit: Ok it went through

 

Also before I forget, IsraNPC got an update and BWS has an issue with archive extraction.

I have the same problem when I download it manually. It cannot be extracted. I can only open it with 7-zip file manager. Something introduced by the new version of the mod just uploaded yesterday.

@Roxanne

 

now I got an error with SandrahNPC

 

1.JPG

1. Using the game in the steam/steamapps folder nearly always leads into trouble - just read a couple of entries in this thread from the last week. It is best to make a copy of the clean unmodded game to a neutral unprotected folder and install the mods there.

2. Pause the BWS - uninstall the already installed Sandrah components manually (directly with setup-SandrahNPC.exe in the BG2EE directory). Install one component after the other manually. This works in most cases unless 1. above prevents it. Then continue BWS.

Hey @Roxanne

 

I got an error installing Expanded Mage Stronghold.

 

1.JPG

 

Looks like the error are typos parenthesis on line 3

 

2.JPG

 

BWS is from yesterday before your changes to expert selection.

Replace the

(( by //

in line 3

Experience based feed back required

 

I am currently attempting a clean up in BWS with respect to the *Expert* flag that makes some mods appear in red during selection.

Nearly all of them are now removed. All choices are given to the users

 

Here are some remaining candidates that I am unsure about, so any player's feedback on experience with those mods would be welcome (please comment only if you have used these mods yourself). Comments are those that I found in the BWS documentation

.......

BP Series Party AI

[marked expert] in EE games This mod is temporarily marked Expert because of installation errors due to missing WIZARD_REMOVE_MAGIC in Spell.IDS and missing STATE_DISEASED_FIX in Stats.IDS. General usability in EE games is not assured.

........

I had the BP Series installed (all modules), after aTweaks simple AI scripts may have screwed up my ingame script button(game freezes after trying to open the AI script menu). Then I replaced the aTweaks simply scripts with the BPseries scripts and I was finally able to open up the AI script menu.

 

Some scripts seem to be faulty and become therefor useless, meaning the NPC either stands around or does their basic attack*. I had trouble with certain mage scripts, but it is better then nothing. It doesn't override the existing ones, it just adds new ones. So I just used the AI scripts that work. What was also very interesting is the ingame lag when picking up items that can be worn/used by your characters from your inventory menu. Someone else at the Beamdog forum seem to have a similar issue. So...the mod can be installed. It won't really break anything, but It might cause some issues. I really cannot say that the BPseries causes the inventory lag 100%. I just think that it may be responsible for it. Right now I don't have any AI scripts installed and there is no inventory lag.

 

*I used some of them on custom NPCs, but I can't really think that it matters much if the NPC is a mod or not.

I am not sure that the inventory lag reported by different people over time and falsely allotted to various mods (my own NPCs included)  in the past can be assigned to BP.

Anyhow, thank you for your insight.

I did a bit of my own digging as well and found that horred (the BP creator) last provided a patch for the mod in 2014 for *rough* EE compatibility before he retired from modding. This is still used today, however, the EE game has been updated since that patch and that may have impact on compatibility.

meaning the NPC either stands around or does their basic attack*

In deed, the patch is *rough* as it replaces most actions in the scripts with NoAction()...

see http://www.shsforums...et/#entry601479

What you say makes sense.

 

If such a one-click system isn't sustainable or wanted anymore, it might be a good idea to promote user generated installation lists. I assume most "veterans" already work off their own evolving lists, so promoting them a bit might offer inexperienced users a good starting point to get a relatively conflict free installation running.

 

As for the expert flag, I think this is a separate issue.

 

The expert flag should in my opinion set aside mods that either have technical issues or provide content that is not up to a minimum standard.

Of course "minimum standard" is, again, a matter of opinion. (If it was up to me, mods that are not fully translated would definitely be flagged expert )

 

The minimum standard aside, mods that no longer have technical issues should of course be unflagged. Your post above just made it sound a bit like you're feeling compelled to just unflag everything regardless whether those issues are fully resolved or not..

To quote myself

The list of things that could be done is getting longer every day.

The list of those able or willing to do them is getting shorter.

Like with the red flags, they were there on some mods without information why when which version etc. Maintenance is the big issue. You have the flag, nobody tests it anymore because it is red and then it just stays on. This is why I made that list in the post above to find information where there is doubt.

I can't comment on the mods in question.

 

I just want to say that I hope this isn't "inspired" by all the recent talk about how terribly biased the BWS is.

Just because some people raise concerns doesn't mean they are right or that what they suggest is the best for the BWS. This is especially true if some of those people have made it abundantly clear in the past that they do not like the BWS in general and would rather have people not use it at all..

 

Whether the creators intended for it to be or not, the BWS has always been opinionated and it needs to be. If I am presented with multiple conflicting mods I want an experienced opinion as to which one provides the most stable experience, closest to vanilla content quality. The BWS doesn't prevent people from making a different choice, it instead provides them with easy access to the mods' hompages for a deeper inspection.

 

If an unexperienced user gets presented with 17 mod conflicts in their mega mod install and the BWS is like "Yeah, have fun figuring that out" then why would anyone even want to use the tool at all?

 

Nearly all of them are now removed. All choices are given to the users

 

I mean, if the mods removed from the expert list are indeed not causing any more issues then it is of course the right move to unflag them but somehow I can't believe that "nearly all of them" suddenly got updates overnight?

Maybe I should have provided more background but I did not want to write a whole novel about it.

This is mostly related to the EE part of the BG support of BWS.

I have already commented that the *recommended* and *tactical* etc selections in BG2EE and EET do no longer make sense. Most mods inherited their status from BGT - but quite a lot of them appear in new versions, especially the Big Mods are often quite different from their classic counterparts. And then we have a large number of new and dedicated EE mods that have not gained any status yet. The mistake made was to carry the old concept over from BGT to EET but it is not valid.

It gets even more complex with the tweak/rules/kit/item mods. Those often have been tuned/upgraded for the EE games and even new ones are created. BWS has suggested that they know about some *recommended* settings but it is simply not the case.

It is very much that we have opened a new chapter in the game's history and should look at it all anew. We have currently some basic ideas about the SCS and EET_Tweaks settings for EET if you are not looking at tactical or all-you-can-get installs. This is about all. Currently the BWS gives the impression as if there is some consolidated knowledge (like you expressed in your post) that should be shared. But honestly there is not.

Even if some people may have gone a bit overboard with their wording and mixing personal accusations and dislikes into the argument, there is some truth in the kernel statement that BWS for EE is better off with more freedom of choice than the false impression of giving you a nice game on a one-click.

I think it is also fair to all the new and inventive mods that are now available to be given the same chance as old established ones and not give them those the extra credit of *recommended*. Users know this by now anyway.

If we had still the possibility to remove all those pre-settings and pre-selections from EE-BWS, I am all for it.

Experience based feed back required

I am currently attempting a clean up in BWS with respect to the *Expert* flag that makes some mods appear in red during selection.

Nearly all of them are now removed. All choices are given to the users

Here are some remaining candidates that I am unsure about, so any player's feedback on experience with those mods would be welcome (please comment only if you have used these mods yourself). Comments are those that I found in the BWS documentation

38 Subraces for BG:EE

Warning! This mod needs to be downloaded manually. This mod is Expert because it prevents romances with NPCs.

Packmule

Only [marked expert] in BGEE due to animation issue and CtDs

BP Series Party AI

[marked expert] in EE games This mod is temporarily marked Expert because of installation errors due to missing WIZARD_REMOVE_MAGIC in Spell.IDS and missing STATE_DISEASED_FIX in Stats.IDS. General usability in EE games is not assured.

Saradas Magic

Overwrites area scripts. Makes chapter1 Candlekeep not playable without console intervention.

(PS - I can confirm the Packmule and Saradas issues from own experience some time ago. However I have not used those mods in my recent installs anymore due to these bugs. So maybe they are fixed meanwhile or gone with game version updates.)

Subtledoctor (for M%G) and myself already pointed out several times that the issue is in deed related but not in the way that our mods have a compatibility problem but because both mods choke on something done by an earlier mod to files we need later on. Leaving M&G out therefore does not help since it is not the source of the problem.
 

I suspect this is the case, but I'm not sure how to identify the culprit that left the file in a bad state.

Do this

open Setup-SandrahNPC.tp2 in the SandrahNPC folder with a text editor

Go to the very end of the file and delete this stuff

INCLUDE ~SandrahNPC/lib/qd_multiclass.tpa~

LAF qd_multiclass
STR_VAR
kit_name = CVMystra
kit_clab = CVMystra
base_class = ~P~
mc_dir = ~SandrahNPC/lib~
END

This is (one of) the dialogue file the joinable Tenya would use, not the original Tenya that is always in the game.

It is in my override folder. It looks like SETUP-EEE copied the file there and I can't see any other reference to the tenyj.dlg file in any mod I'm installing.

I have a complete install now that I removed that one snippet. I ran into one more small failure.
 

 

Copying and patching 1 file ...
[override/QD_MCP01.spl] loaded, 154 bytes
ERROR: cannot convert kit_code or %kit_code% to an integer
ERROR: [override/QD_MCP01.spl] -> [override] Patching Failed (COPY) (Not_found)
Stopping installation because of error.
Stopping installation because of error.
ERROR: [CVMystra.2da] -> [override] Patching Failed (COPY) (Not_found)
Stopping installation because of error.
Stopping installation because of error.

ERROR Installing [Sandrah EET additions], rolling back to previous state

 

Before when I was getting this error, I thought it might be related to Might & Guile failures I was also getting, but I stopped including Might & Guile in my install.

Subtledoctor (for M%G) and myself already pointed out several times that the issue is in deed related but not in the way that our mods have a compatibility problem but because both mods choke on something done by an earlier mod to files we need later on. Leaving M&G out therefore does not help since it is not the source of the problem.