XP Cap Problem

Remove all ads!

Hi, I have SoA + ToB and the .98 patch installed and when I extract the BG2 Level 50 XP cap into my override folder it will not allow me to go past 8 million XP. I have windows vista installed if thats any help.

 

Use the XP-cap remover from BG2Tweakpack. That's the newest one.

 

Thanks, but I heard the BG2Tweakpack is incompatible with Weimer's ease of use mod, or is that not true?

 

Ease-of_Use has its own XP cap remover component which works perfectly. If you intend to use Ease-of_Use, you don't need to extract anything manually into your override folder (as you wrote that you did in your initial post).

In comparison between Ease-of-Use and BG2 Tweakpack, BG2 Tweakpack has all of the features of Ease-of_use plus several more components. However, it's not as stable and reliable as Ease-of_Use. I don't recommend BG2 Tweakpack.

 

Well, I've been using Tweak Pack at all for years with no issues.

Can we drop the feud between users of IA and users of Fixpack/TweakPack? Its getting rather old.

 

Alright I have tried the Tweak Pack and it seems to be working fine now even with the ease of use mod

Thank you guys for your comments.

 

You'll be happy with the tweakpack, no reason to turn back in time.

 

You shouldn't judge something you don't know. Did you read this:

http://www.sorcerers.net/forums/showthread.php?t=47022

It's a useful read, with many points, here is just one:

(How many bugs -- apparently non-TweakPack-bugs -- did you encounter while having Tweak Pack in your installation? The real question should actually be how many bugs you didn't...)

Well, Sikret was "lucky" enough to get the chance to experience such things several times. G3 "BG2 Fixpack" and "Tweak Pack" had very many (smaller, bigger) bugs in the past. If you were a skilled mod developer like Sikret, you also wouldn't recommend something that you would know as a source of problems; problems that may not necessarily be serious for the player, but serious for other mods (and thus may even mislead the player). (For example, the "Tweak Pack" managed to destroy a store even in my BGTutu mod (Grey Clan Episode One) with its buggy WeiDU code. Funny that I had to fix their buggy WeiDU code while they apparently work with WeiDU all the time, unlike me who uses it a few times per year.)

It's nice that you share your experience ("no issues for years"), but Sikret's opinion is also based on experience, just like yours. (Additionally, his words are based on research and technical facts as well.) So I think both your and Sikret's words equally have the right to be in this topic, and unfortunately, it's indeed an "old" issue as you've said, because certain developers are blind and don't accept (or even consider!) any advice.

So no, the "feud" isn't fostered arbitrarily (if that is what you believed), it has to do with well-estabilished technical facts. I don't call it "feud", Sikret and myself just tell our opinion in the same way as anyone else. Yes, if someone asks why, I explain it -- this is what I've done in your case, and wouldn't have done if you hadn't brought it up by referring to this as "feud".

So, to get strictly back to the topic: (although it's nearly not as faulty as G3 Fixpack), I also don't recommend G3 Tweak Pack.

 

Ohh this endless flaming. Don't you have better things to do? Whenever there's a Sikret there's a Baronious with a rant.

 

That you haven't realized or experienced issues doesn't mean that no issue existed.

It has nothing to do with IA. My recommendation was general and even based on the assumption that the player is not using IA.

In fact, if he was using IA, he couldn't install BG2 Tweakpack at all (because of serious incompatibilities with IA). In that case, instead of "I don't recommend BG2 Tweakpack", I would have said "You can't use BG2 Tweakpack".

Baronius' post is informative; read it carefully more than once.

 

go with the tweakpack and ignore baronius & sikret, they are extremely biased no matter what they say to the contrary.

 

Many, many people use both Tweakpack and Fixpack, some mods even require Fixpack in order to work. So I dont think they are as buggy as you say.

Also, as I said, its getting old. Every time someone brings on of them, you feel the need to drag them down. We know what you think about them. We heard you the first 200000 times. When you spout on about how Baldurdash/Tactics/IA is so much better than the other camp, it just gets very tiresome. IA and Baldurdash obviously have bugs now and then (every complex piece of software does), I dont see people dragging it down everytime its mentioned. I dont see people complaining about IA whenever its brought up.

 

We say what we say for the new people who ask. We don't say them again for those who have already heard them. And we speak based on reason and evidence. If you want to install and use heavily bugged mods, it's your call; but other (new) people have also the right to hear the facts and choose for themselves.

You can also compare IA's forum with those mods' forums regarding the number of bug reports to see the difference.

However, in this case, I was not even talking about IA (and its advantages). I was just giving some general information to a new player and I actualy based my comments on the assumption that the player is not an IA-player. I don't know why you started to talk about IA.

 

Because, as I see it, there are two mod camps in BG2 - those that like Fixpack, and those that like Baldurdash. IA is a Baldurdash mod, and you are an IA developer. Correct? By extension, you are in the Baldurdash camp, and so is IA. Although, I see you are right, IA doesnt really have anything to do with it.

I've heard criticism levelled at Fixpack by the Baldurdash camp that goes along the lines of, "Its not what Bioware would have done", and to me, thats what this sounds like. Lots of people use Fixpack, yes there are bug reports, there are also fixes to those bug reports, and happy users. As for mod compatibility, why do you think SCS II requires it? You seem to say the mod would be better off without it.

Also, bug reports alone doesnt signify anything as far as the quality of a mod, or its lack of bugs. Perhaps there are bugs in IA/Baldurdash which no one reports?

I realize you have an opinion and want to express it to new players. But I hope you understand that it paints you in a negative light, when you repeat the same thing over and over again. It reminds me of fanboyism.

 

This wasn't even a discussion about fixpacks. I suggest that you read posts before replying.

And there will always be new bugs and new bug-reports; their mods will remain bugged as long as they don't change they modding methods and philosophy. But this is offtopic and a too general point to be discussed here. I see that you have a tendency to add offtopic stuff to this thread and I'm trying hard not to fall in your trap.

Even more offtopic stuff.

You can say so, but only if it helps you rest more easily at night!

Yes, it is theoretically possible that after two years, there are still bugs in IA that noone has discovered to report, but how many bugs are neglected not only in IA's most thorough testing process but also by all those players who play the mod? Why is it that players of those mods find new bugs almost everyday, but players of IA don't find any!

I'm talking about facts and I talk based on evidence.

As I said, I don't repeat them over and over again for the same audience. I say them for those who have not heard them and *ask* for advice.

 

It's always the same this I'm right you're wrong. If you start being sensible ie contributing in a constuctive manner, perhaps people would be listening to you and Baronious. I guess many are tired of this we are right, listen to us and ye shall all be saved.

 

What's the difference between repeating "I recommend TweakPack/Fixpack instead of EaseOfUse/Baldurdash because they are newer/better" and "I recommend EaseofUse/Baldurdash instead of TweakPack/Fixpack because they are more stable and reliable"?
As far as I see, each time someone asks for advice, everyone who feels he/she can help tells his or her advice; if the question appears again, the answer is usually repeated (it makes no sense to search and link to an earlier topic for 1-2 sentences).

So as BTA said (more precisely, it follows from his words), the problem is when someone doesn't address the OP, but instead attacks the view of the other poster because he/she doesn't like what the other one is saying. If you don't like what I'm saying, let's discuss it in PM. Both Sikret's and my initial posts were addressed to the OP. Unlike this:

Those who are interested in further opinions, I can recommend these posts (none of them are authored by Sikret or myself): post1, post2, post3. Those who are interested in reading information of (possibly difficult) technical nature, I can recommend this and this.

 

This is the last time I'll post about this, in this topic, because I want to respect BTA's wish that we address the OP (which I think is fair).

Why not just say, "I recommend Baldurdash"? Do you have to add anything negative about it every time? Can you not give a recommendation for your mod, or preferred mod, without dragging down a mod released by another author? Whether it be reliability, or whether you consider the fixes to be tweaks, or whether you dont like the author (and from having read some of the past topics on the subject I suspect that might be the case).

Thats all I'm saying - recommending your own mod doesnt mean you need to drag down any G3 mod.

 

I consider it natural that people reason their statements. I don't do otherwise.