Difference between revisions of "Talk:CreateFullActorCopy"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→CreateFullActorCopy /= PlaceAtMe Discussion
imported>Antares (→CreateFullActorCopy /= PlaceAtMe Discussion: I was confusing the issue but what you said about PlaceAtMe...... Uh huh, yep.....) |
imported>QQuix |
||
| Line 109: | Line 109: | ||
Ah, thanks for that, I was confusing the issue, I just realised that I don't have to worry about new base records for their inventories ''(and in part, I was already doing that in fact)'' as I can add them to the FullActorCopy as I see fit when I summon them. You'd think that complications such as these would warrant a patch from Bethesda. PlaceAtMe does not create new base records? So CreateFullActorCopy is in fact a much more malicious function?<BR> | Ah, thanks for that, I was confusing the issue, I just realised that I don't have to worry about new base records for their inventories ''(and in part, I was already doing that in fact)'' as I can add them to the FullActorCopy as I see fit when I summon them. You'd think that complications such as these would warrant a patch from Bethesda. PlaceAtMe does not create new base records? So CreateFullActorCopy is in fact a much more malicious function?<BR> | ||
--[[User:Antares|Antares]] 21:58, 16 October 2008 (EDT) | --[[User:Antares|Antares]] 21:58, 16 October 2008 (EDT) | ||
:I understand you clone an NPC that has an empty inventory. That reduces the bloating potential. But if you devise a way to reuse the same NPC over and over, it would be much better. Or maybe a single CreateFullActorCopy to create ONE new Base Record, followed by PlaceAtMe to create new instances of it. | |||
:PlaceAtMe does not create new Base Records. It creates a new Reference to the given Base Record, e.g. , “PlaceAtMe Apple 1 0 0” just creates a new apple in the gameworld, not a new kind of fruit. And yes, in this sense, CreateFullActorCopy is worse: it does use more memory, as it creates both a new Base Record and a Reference to it. | |||
:But, actually, this is not the point. The point is whether you will do (or have the potential to do) a create-discard cycle repeatedly, so the bloating adds up to noticeable sizes. I suppose that’s why PlaceAtMe got so much attention: it seems that modders where using it indiscriminately in summon spells. | |||
:In other words: repeatedly creating useless data in the savegame is bad! It is bad if you add 150 bytes per cycle! It is also bad if you add 60 bytes per cycle! - [[User:QQuix|QQuix]] 00:03, 17 October 2008 (EDT) | |||