legraf: Sigh, again. I shouldn't rise to the bait, which is why I deleted my last reply.
Sorry, i had no chance to know if that message of your been longer initially. In its short form it looked weird tbh.
legraf: {Location of Build.cfg in Manual part}
I fully agree with you here, real help would be rewrite this part of manual more clear way. Its indeed written very obscure and puzzling way, if you bother my opinion. Just i personally really cant be too much critical to the Manual. Well, the way devs runs a project now, with them merely become a bitches to a VDC; badly written manual is just a peanuts. Yet the all the info about stuff mentioned is there. If you just checked the manual prior providing wrong info hidden behind "I believe", and instead wrote something like "...there is manual with solution, but i think you will not manage though it, so my advice is..." (tho it, in turn, will be pretty offensive to the
user asking), ofc i wouldnt comment it then.
Problem is that you pretty much missed the whole point with that searching for Build lists management in the Manual. Say, most easy way to manage them is via Launcher, as it, well, know where they are located. But, inability of find a needed Build.cfg its
not a problem, described by user. Its only your own
guess about it, not confirmed at all. Yet you spent all the time defending his right to not been able to get it (you understand what its about first ever complain about Build list location ever, and that feature is, err, quite some years old? if it so unbearable explained, how all the other users manage to, err, use them?). The way user wrote about his problem, he even didnt seemd to know about a need to press a button to apply the changes. Or could had some broken installation. Or that build list changes by him shouldnt create any change in the game state he was. Or he could editing the wrong Build.cfg in wrong location, and so on. We cannot know without asking. And he started to lie at a "did you read manual" step already (i still did more than one try, despite it).
But the really silly thing that shine there was idea of providing
incomplete list of actions performed and then ask "is there anything else I need to do to make the changes actually work?" Yes. Everything that wasnt included to that list. For example reading of the manual, as after doing so, user cannot anymore ask "is there anything else i need to do?", as it would been obviously not, already, assuming user did the stuff described there. The question could be "i did the stuff as it written there, but it doesnt work still; either manual is wrong, or i went some unusual circumstances about it". But it already cannot be "what else to do" after that. As his incomplete list even didnt included reading manual as performed, the answer to cover all the possible issues is obviously RTFM. As the way it was written he didnt even pressed any Q while awaiting for the changes to come.
And ofc, it turned what steps the incomplete list is lacks are not necessary not performed, some of them just
skipped from mention, so ones, willing to help supposedly should just name skipped steps one-by-one and waiting for confirmation if this certain step is indeed wasnt performed or user just decided to not mention it. Its a pure waste of forum space, and actually it would be simply a good thing, if such users felt bored fast and gone for good to some other place. And in case user is able to perform the needed work (being pointed to) on his own capacities - it will make it even more win-win scenario. Thats about winning in this context. Being helpful is a collective work usually.