As the topic says...
I'm a bit confused. Some mods,like WMK,mention in there readme (hell yeah! i read it) to build a merged patch (the FO3Edit method).
Now my question,became that obsolete with the rising of Garybash or did i missunderstood something with the bashed patch?
Or is it best,to make use of both ...?

Enlight me please..

The merged patch itself should mergable into the Bashed Patch on its own, so I can't see any harm in using both.

And this will not become a unnecessary blow for the bashed patch?
I mean,the're already mods merged into bashed patch and this way there'll be double entries or not?
Just want to make sure that i dont break my game .. have already to fight with that stupid random ctd's.

I used to use a merged patch because at least we had something. But as I know of Wrye Bash from Oblivion quickly switched to that and only use that. IMO you use one or the other as they do pretty much the same thing, though GaryBash has more features now. Not that I really use them.
When I re-build my patch it suggests including my other character's bashed and old merged patches, but I just unselect them and don't include them at all.

I don't know the inner workings of either program or if there'd be any issues using both, or merging one inside the other, but I've always assumed it was one or the other. A merged patch or a bashed patch. I guess pick whatever is easier for you to do.

Double post <_<

FWE, MMM, WMK and most other mods were designed with the simplicity of using a merged patch because for a long time the merged patch was all that was available. Many modders have not gone onto to embrace Gary Bash as it has 'risen' kind of late in the game life cycle thingy.

So doubtful they are going to run and change their readme's - those that know Bash is superior are just that much further in the know and life is better. I only use a bashed patch but have made merged patches when testing crashes and such.

It's not that cut and dry. We all know that there have been several problems in the past with Bashed patches that did not occur with Merged Patches.

Also as often enough stated, WMK, FWE, the FOIPs, etc were all created so Merged Patches give optimal results.

In the end both methods are viable. If you use a large number of mods a bashed patch might give you better results. If you use typical FOIP setups a Merged Patch will do absolutly what you need.

Well every time I hear someone say that bashed patches caused problems (as in serious problems not cosmetics) I've asked follow up questions and either the person does not respond (very typical on a forum) or the issue turns out to be due to some other mod conflict or other extraneous issue and not due to the bashed patch. If you know of any directly observed and replicable issue with using a bashed patch with any specific mod configuration then please let people know.

I'm sure Valda would like to know. I would. I'd sure like to test it.

I've yet to see anything other than a few cosmetic quirks come up with the use of bashed patch and that indeed is not unusual even with Oblivion.

Another reason to embrace bash is that it is being updated and maintained - that cannot be said for the edit program.

If we can agree that at its core a merged patch and a bashed patch serve the function of merging leveled lists except that a bashed patch does more then all you are saying is validating what I wrote. How is the merged patch more optimal? Are there any quantifiable means of validating that claim? Or, is it that you mean that said mod makers only used the edit program in the creation process and that the bashed patch has not been tested and therefore one cannot say it is fully supported?

Most people who know and like Wrye Bash from oblivion are just not going to be happy with edit when and if they make the move to F3. Bash has already proven itself. In Morrowind, In Oblivion, and now Fallout3.

Psymon you remember the problem GaryBash had awhile ago with merging some of FWEs lists? You reported that yourself.
And the statement stands that a FOIP load order will work perfectly fine with a Merged Patch. A Bashed Patch cannot be better for a standard FOIP LO than a Merged Patch, no matter how much you try to argue that, simply because all files are designed in a way to a Merged Patch is the absolut optimal result. It's not about merging more or less, it needs to merge EXACTLY the same as a FO3Edit Merged Patch in order to be optimal.

I'm not implying at all that Garybash is bad or anything. I'm just saying that FOIP mods are specifically designed in a way so you can simply open FO3Edit, hit create merged patch and you get 100% exactly what you need, not more or less.

Garybash can be fine for bigger load orders, I'm just saying that it's neither required nor better in several cases.

And I really don't care if Oblivion players aren't happy about using FO3Edit. This is Fallout3, not Oblivion.

I've personally found Bashed Patches to work quite well. On the upside, they remove the tedious work of resolving conflicts in a Merged Patch, but you need to make sure you tag them properly - unlike Oblivion, the BOSS-F3 masterlist hasn't evolved sufficiently enough to make it a simple case of drop-in and re-build.

I'm a bit foggy on it - What I do recall was that many issues brought up to Valda about merging issues he worked to resolve.

I'm not saying and have never said that FO3edit was not adequate for the basic big 3 of FWE/WMK/MMM - never have said that. What I'm saying is that one is basic the other advanced and those who know can enjoy the advanced bonus.

All I wrote above is a that bash is a more powerful tool for this single purpose. And unless I'm mistaken when you say these mods were "all created so Merged Patches give optimal results" it does not give the impression that Gary Bash was also open and results were compared and edit was decided was the better route. As best as I can tell no one on team FWE wants to even look at bash and so it remains an unknown quantity where results are measured by user feedback alone.

I suppose a rock solid way to test would be to have the mod authors (the one's who know the mods and results of any list merging better than anyone) compare a merged patch made from the same load order as a bashed patch was made from.

But I've not seen that happen and until it does it will always be this dialogue.

You can create a Merged Patch by hand that does the same what a Bashed Patch would.
Though, the Bashed Patch can't do everything you could do with a hand made Merged Patch.

I'm creating my Merged Patch myself and don't need any Bashed Patch, it's more work of course but I actually know what it does.

It is clear that your a Wyre Bash fan, but these facts you tout are not correct. Fo3Edit has also proven itself 1,000 times over. Fo3Edit handles the process of de-confliction very well, handles merged patches very well and Elminster has was quite keen to add as many features as possible.

I think what your perception of Fo3edit not being updated is without merit, the program is Complete as it stands now. Unlike alot of developers, Elminster works at/for a major software company and understands the concept of Releases and finishing a project. Fo3Edit was patched a bunch of times until we had it 100%, and since then I have not seen any Major missing elements get reported or show up as major problems. As a matter of fact Elminster just updated TES/Fo3Edit to use the latest version of Delphi in preparation for New Vegas, and I'm starting work with JustinOther on the tutorial/documentation updates. I also don't see Wyre getting the kind of documentation, tutorials and support as Fo3Edit has with Fallout 3, and New Vegas will be no different in this respect.

Wyre Bash was awesome in Oblivion days, but IMHO Fo3Edit is far superior in the Fallout days. Its cool that you like Wyre so much, but please keep your Fo3Edit facts straight when celebrating the virtues of Wyre Bash.

Miax

incredible ...

Did I ever say that Fo3edit did not work? NO. Point me to where I said that. please. I use it and TES4edit all the time.

Why is it that it has to be Wrye that updates Wrye Bash or Gary Bash? With Oblivion Wrye Bash has been updated by a team of people (Raziel23x, Warrudar, Pacific Morrowind, etc) and then Valda has taken their updates and applied them to FO3edit. All publicly visible. Is it public knowledge that Elminster is preparing for NV? NO. 50 some threads for Wrye Bash and to this day new features are being requested and implemented. That is quaint or charming to you?

It is a silly argument about the merging process - of course you could with a fine tooth comb make sure the merge happens just as you like with edit. But most are not going to do that and for the simple merge process bash does more if used correctly. So how are my facts not straight? I use both liberally and don't have to rely only on one. I've never once stated that people should not use it or that it creates problems - can you point to where I've said that? I've not said that but it has been asserted time and again that Bash does have problems - and asserted by people who as far as I can tell have not even opened the program.

What I have done is help people adapt to bash and its use as an installer. Is it not true that Gary Bash has never been picked up or researched by this team that is indeed stated there are issues with bash? But I better get my facts straight. just silly.

But wait there in the horizon - http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1102449-relz-garybash-thread-2/page__view__findpost__p__16410182 - that can be tested.

I'll try and do that later tonight - have to get some work done first.

And so what if it is found in this instance that bash did not work? Are people then going to wholesale disregard bash, or are they going to take the problem as a request to Valda so that it could be addressed?

Uhm,quite a lively conversation here,i suppose..

Thanks for the answers so far.

So the result is,if i understood right,with Bashed Patch it's more or less an automatic proccess with some features and easier to handle.
The Merged Patch via FO3Edit as an advanced method which lets you take more control about what to implement.For more or less advanced Users with knowledge what there doing..

And no need to use both,cause they would overwrite each other .. right?

I've repeatedly heard Kai and others state that Gary Bash is needlessly complicated while Fo3edit is simpler.

Having used both I'd say it is about equal.

But then they always seem to bring out arguments that with edit you can super fine tune the patch - well the thing is you can super fine tune a bashed patch with edit just as easily as you can a merged patch.\

Bash offers more tools to use.

For testing tonight I just made a simpler bashed patch and a merged patch with only the FWE/WMK/EVE/MMM mods and it took me about 10 minutes to do both. Tonight I will scan both with edit then go in game and test the modifying .44 magnum issue.

In fact it shouldn't even harm game play to play with one for awhile then test the other one. Shouldn't being the key word - I guarantee nothing. So I'd start with a merged and later test Bashed patch. Just keep in mind that real testing should happen after character generation.

I do believe it depends entirely on whether your mods are tagged correctly, which is essential to the bashed patch picking up records (if that's the right term) that you want in your game. I can't stress this enough if your mods are not tagged correctly you will have problems.

You should use both only if your prepared to check the merged patch and bashed patch. Also from what I have seen with my countless number of merged patches there are always entries in it which should not be there, specifically if you have broken steel dlc along with any of the major overhauls. This will not terribly affect your game as they are mostly leveled list related. Yes I agree with Psymon you can fine tune the bashed patch just as easily as the merged patch. I also hope both Garybash and F03edit are both going to be available in the upcoming games.

I would even say that bashed patch is actually easier and more intuitive to use. Only problem with bash+FA3 combo is the fact that most mods have crappy/incomplete tagging and BOSS masterlist is not updated nor properly tagged either.

I honestly can't comment on the merits of FO3Edit vs. Gary Bash. I've used WyreBash with Oblivion, but never had a need to use it for Fallout3, and as a consequence never have used it. It may be better, it may be worse. I don't know. I also don't know how involved tagging the files are so that the bash patch method works as fully as it is supposed to. I do know that FO3Edit's merged patch works quite well, and that a lot of people typically have FO3Edit on hand anyway since they use it for it's MasterUpdate feature.

I'm curious to see how your comparrison of merged vs. bashed turns out though. I do know that the merged patch does what we want it to 95% of the time (good enough for Science!). I also gather that gary bash relies on having some other infrastructure in place (i.e. tagging, updated load order templates, etc...) to get the most out of it. Unfortunetly, the Fallout mod community is considerably smaller than Oblivion's, and there don't seem to be as many willing participants to help develop the tools and infrastructure more. I don't really know where that leaves us, but these are my thoughts.

Cheers

I don't think there is a requirement that Elminster publically post that he is making ready for NV. I don't see how that invalidates Fo3Edit or makes it somehow less-Good than the Wyre Bash. On the contrary both are viable tools, both are heavily used and supported. As for coding and development style, Elminster has a number of trusted beta-testers that he works with to resolve issues. For support, anyone who asks questions on how to use Fo3Edit on the forums gets a thorough answer - usually by JustinOther, myself and a host of folks that know the tool and have been more than willing to provide support since the tool came out. A new tutorial update is on the way for Fo3Edit to correspond with the FNV release, and JustinOther has offered to help on this revision so I would argue that Fo3Edit has a heck of alot going into it right now - even if you don't know about all the details.

So while I think it's great that Gary Bash has come that far, and wish them all of the success in the future, your statements regarding Fo3Edit viability are dubious and I felt it important to point that out. Most especially considering that active work is being done at the code-level and the documentation-level leading up to the release of NV so that NVEdit (I presume he will call it that) will be ready to go soon after the launch of New Vegas. I have even asked him for a specific new feature to help the community out, and he was more than open to new ideas.



I don't have problems with Bash as I don't use it, and nor do you need to defend it so vigorously against some un-seen foe that doesn't exist. As Mezmorelda and others in this thread have stated, many use both and everyone respects both. If we can at least agree on that, and leave out the negativity and un-helpful statements and information about either tool, then the community will be better off for it in the end.

Cheers,

Miax

Unfortunately, ths seems to be true. Oblivion mod installing is easy; drop the plugins in the data folder, run BOSS, create bashed patch. For Fallout 3 it's a bit more complicateddue to the above issues. Personally i use load order recommended by the FWE team, tags suggested by F-BOSS, merged patch to merge lists, and Bahsed patch for importing the other stuff. Has worked fine so far

However, after inspecting the final Bashed patch with FO3Edit, i often need to adjust tags of some mods.

What exactly are the unhelpful statements I made again?

Let me see - I stated that Bash was superior in the merging process. Why? Because it can do more at the moment of merging due to the use of bash tags and allowing for the complete importing of esp into it. Not to mention the ability to import records without even having the esp active. Plus it is capable of merging more. Not to mention the valuable save game management, ini tweaking, a very complete and mature installer component, and the presence of all around install management tools.

Of course edit can fine tune endlessly (as well as have many other useful and powerful functions), but that does not make the initial merging process more than what bash does. Edit is more rudimentary with regard to merged patches. Calling it optimal is a bit misleading - more like the basics needed. I'd like to know which of these statements are wrong or about the statement that 'Fo3Edit viability' is dubious or something. What does that even mean? I recommend people use both and give each a try. Do you?

I said that edit was not being updated - and why wouldn't one think that when all development is happening behind closed doors. My mentioning the behind closed doors was not to point out that or suggest that edit or Elminster should be public record it was in reply to http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1117083-merged-patch-or-bashed-patch-or-both/page__view__findpost__p__16410307. You say that Wrye does not act directly when he made it open source so that others could. Then you completely ignore the team of those currently supporting and developing it. The readme is updated with every release not to mention that, like you, people have written and are writing manuals for it. People like http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1084204-bain-mod-installation-projects/ and http://tesivpositive.animolious.com/?page=wrye_bash. So characterizing it as a quaint relic or holdover from an older game is a miss-characterization. Especially considering that Oblivion modding is still more active than Fallout modding.

So I'm sorry if I didn't psychically know about the closed door development - which is good news. Most if not all the Wrye Bash development has occurred more openly with users able to make feature requests. I'd read that Valda also planned to port Gary Bash and if he does then there will be none of this 'late in the development cycle' stuff - if not adopted it is only because of preference and possibly bias. And yes people do use both. I use both - do you?

The above supposed issue about bash not merging correctly was simply a misunderstanding about how mods functioned (as explained in the Gary Bash and FWE threads) - adding a tag resolved the issue.

Psymon,

My statements were clear, I was not ambiguous. My intent was to clear up mis-information and I have done so. I am simply not interested in debating/arguing this with you as there is no point, both tools are good. I offered you an olive branch and I shall do so again;



I will leave it at that, and bid you a good day.

Miax

Dude you come on here all huffin and puffin and make claims that I misrepresent FO3edit and that my facts are incorrect and then when I answer you pointing out your misconception you then offer a somewhat condescending olive branch as to imply that I have issues. nice. You bring attitude and argument then as it is met you then bow out - how very large of you. Thanks for the snub - I'll remember it.

All the misinformation was self created by ya'll and other than the news that Elminster is working on a new version - there was nothing new added. You seem to have no problem framing Wrye Bash the way you did and yet it is super OK for you to come flying in defending edit, but if I defend Wrye Bash then ... well things have gone to far. Dubious statements indeed.

I was the one who pointed out that until people actually pick up and use Bash and have working knowledge of it that this conversation is silly. Why would a new user listen to any advice about whether to use a tool or its validity when the person espousing their views admits that they do not even use it?

And as I said in the first reply - those who know bash and are familiar with it get the benefit of the superior merging program. Still it is best to use both. Edit can do so much more than bash in other areas - this just happens to the specialty of bash.

This is what bothers me (small little rant if I may):

People are downloading the WRONG version of http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=637 that is located on Nexus. Why hasn't the correct version been uploaded? What the heck am I talking about, you ask? I remember a post waaay back that mentioned the updated version. I just searched on these forums (27 pages to be exact) for "FO3Edit" to find the post I was looking for. Read http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1047128-is-masterupdate-still-necessary/page__view__findpost__p__15191175 and to only read the reason why people are downloading the wrong version, read http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1047128-is-masterupdate-still-necessary/page__view__findpost__p__15191264 specifically.

Why wasn't it updated correctly?

I have downloaded both downloads, and the dates are even different, one month apart from each other.

P.S. Yes, I use FO3Edit faithfully, but it is getting old telling people where to download the right version, so sorry to rant here