keithinhanoi

No no no no!The rule for merged patches is the opposite for that explanation. Place it at the "lowest" position, so with the example above, at position #100.This is because of the basic rule that all compatibility patches must load after all mods they are providing compatibility for. This has been mentioned at least once or twice in the comments thread, with Matortheeternal's confirmation (not to mention it's simple logic!)

I have no idea - maybe from editing my post? It's driving me a bit crazy, though!It's fixed now, anyhow.

Actually - Tannin's last post on a proposed short term change to insure the Unofficial Patch BSA assets can load in the correct order along with the official DLC content did not involve treating the Unofficial Patches in a special way. Okay, since Tannin must be busy, let's just do a short review of what he last suggested (with emphasis added by me): So, let's look at TheBlokes original proposal, taken from this post: This "core" solution that TheBloke suggested is essentially what I've settled on simulating by making symbolic links of just the official DLC's BSA into the MO mod folders where I've installed the "cleaned" copies of their corresponding .esm plugins. My Unofficial Patches are installed into MO as normal, but because MO recognized the official DLC BSAs being in MO-based mods in the priority list, I immediately gained full control over their priority load order - and the extra added bonus of being able to view all MO virtual /data directory conflict overwrites for the assets of each official DLC and the Unofficial Patches. Let's take a look at what I see in the Conflicts tab in the Information window of Dragonborn with this setup: I think the advantages here to this fairly simple solution are huge: [*]Full control over the priority load order of the DLC assets [*]The ability to set the official DLC and UP BSA assets to load in the same order as their respective plugins, thus matching the native loading mechanism of Skyrim expected by the UPs [*]Complete reporting of all asset conflict overwrites involving each separate official DLC On that part of Tannin's suggestion, I can't find any fault whatsoever if he's able to implement it through changes to MO code that is used to generate the virtual /data directory (as TheBloke described.) Then in that same post, Tannin suggested a couple of other things: [*]An "essential mod" auto-installer built as an MO plugin [*]Extending the recognition of .esp+.bsa pairs found in the real <skyrim>/data beyond Update.esm/.bsa and the official DLCs, to any third party mods Of course #2 was actually a suggestion posed as a question, which is what I've been responding to when I have suggested including a warning, regardless of what Tannin ultimately decides to do there. However, this warning has nothing to do with the Unofficial Patches, because the assumption is they should be getting installed using MO's normal mechanism, and not directly into the real <skyrim>/data directory. If they were, then I think the same warning I've been talking about should apply. Personally, I've settled with the symbolic links of Official DLC BSA put into MO mods as the best workaround for now, and plan on keeping it that way until there's an update to MO which allows the setting or priority load order of the Official DLC's assets.

Well... almost all, as mentioned in the list of notes on the v1.7 update. Highlights: Skyrim "474 new map markers added""Everything is enabled except Faction Camps and Treasure Map Loot" (= 17 markers not activated)Blackreach"26 new map markers added""All locations are ready to discover, there is no setup guide"Dawnguard"134 new map markers added""Includes Forgotten Vale and Soul Cairn world maps with fast travel" (apparently activated by default)"Everything is enabled except Wilderness Caches" (= 9 markers not activated)The 14 "Primary locations are always enabled and can not be changed"Dragonborn"85 new map markers added""Everything is enabled except Gem Geodes and Hidden Peaks" (= 11 markers not activated)So that's a total of 682 new map markers added and activated by the mod by default which the STEP admins / users would want to agree should be added if you don't want to make a special preset.

I very much like this idea. z - I'll say it one last time: either way there should be a warning and a strong recommendation that the user uninstall all third party mods from the real <skyrim>/Data directory and install them using MO's mechanism.The main reason for this is because of what I explained about how loose files in /data would be handled.Currently, as far as I understand it, if MO is "managing" all BSA assets (in other words, all BSAs in the Assets tab are ticked/checked and don't have the little warning symbol), then the loose files in /Data are loaded with priority 0. The means that regardless of where in the mod priority/"install" order list that you place any third-party mods that MO would find, any loose files installed by those mods could potentially be overwritten by any other mod installed using MO normal mechanism.I imagine a bit of a scary situation in which a new MO user who has been using NMM sees all of their mods in <skyrim>/Data listed in MO (albeit without the metadata info,) and decides they don't need to remove those mods from the real /Data directory and install them into MO. That could lead to plenty of unpredictable and undesired results.So, a warning would be a very good idea, I believe.

I read your posts on his comments thread, and I think it would be nice to quote / link to his replies about these issues here. For me, although I haven't gotten "stuck" or experienced any glitched Death Alternative scenarios, I will continue to use the mod, because it's still for the greater part a much more interesting alternative to simply having to reload your last saved game. He does advise users of Death Alternative to save often, thus allowing the player to fall back to the age-old magically-resurrect-my-character-by-loading-the-previous-save method of gameplay if something in the mod doesn't work as expected.

Whoops - I see that my previous comment got posted without my last bit of text - the part that says... Thanks a bunch for your (krypto) offer to help with an MCM menu. Oh, and yes, if he's agreeable, some kind of global option to set presets would be really great.

With the books, I always set almost all of the markers up in groups, as enabled but undiscovered, which makes all of the added secondary / special work the same as in the vanilla game - you don't see it on the map until you've gone there. However, I don't use any of the markers designed to help you find things that would be considered a "cheat", such as the markers for the paper note treasure map locations. I should have remembered the Flagon door option - now that you mention it kryptopyr, I do recall seeing it.

I believe it means that somehow each of them has the other set as a master - which technically isn't possible. Did you possibly alter the metadata for either of those two plugins?

Alright, that settles it. I need to remember: when not 100% sure, always use cautious language. I've edited my earlier post - thanks for pointing out this response from Arthmoor. So, then is seems forwarding that MHDT data seems not to be necessary after all. Still, it makes me wonder why that data is even there in the first place...

Well, that's a shame - though it was really kind of you to offer that assistance!With the book setup, it does take a bit of time to set up the options, though it flashes messages so you don't start worrying something has stopped working.Perhaps another way to go would be to equip the player with a duplicate set of the books in their inventory from the start of the game? I imagine that's been suggested already, and there must be some reason it can't / shouldn't be done. So is that a graceful enough solution to make the STEP folks happy?

I've been using this since last year whenever playing as a sneak/archer character, for both the no-torch while sneaking and the don't rush to attack features. The design smartly only added one line to the top-level of the follow dialogue reply list, that enters into it's own dialog tree, so I don't mind that. I suppose it would be nice if there was an MCM setting for that instead, but it's not a deal breaker for me. There is the non-voiced aspect of the dialog options, which may be a turn-off for some people, but so many other mods handle things this way that I'm used to it myself. I have never seen any problems with the scripts not working, or any lag / delay. I have very good faith in kryptopyr's scripting abilities.

These screenshots remind me of two things I like more about Immersive Content - EDFaL as compared to LoS: 1. The lanterns are hung closer to the end of the horizontal piece of wood of the light posts, which looks correct to me, and 2. The already mentioned fact that the candles don't continue to glow when they've been extinguished during the daytime. Still thinking about the always-on bridge braziers idea, though...

Um, just don't wear it, maybe?

I just want to chip in here with a few things: Kronix has stated he hopes to move from the book configuration method to an MCM menu, but wanted to release the "big" recent update first, as a debut for his return to updating the mod. So fear not - that's coming. Also, I do believe it might be possible to place those books somewhere else, through a patch, that would allow a user to configure the map marker setup earlier in the game. I was even considering moving them into the starting room of Arthmoor's Live Another Life mod, since I prefer setting up MCM options of mods there, and making a save, before I've chosen the particular LAL starting quest (so I can always go back to that save to try a different quest without having to set everything up again.) Also, although he's made a small-icon version of the SkyUI map.swf file (with permission,) I think he's open to the idea of making a version of the SkyUI map which adds a few colors to key icons. I myself have already edited it successfully to do this, adding colors to the major hold city icons and the quest markers (making it easier to find around the edges of the map.) As for the entrance to the Ragged Flagon, the note about it for the new 1.7 update says "Keyed shortcut into the Ragged Flagon that bypasses one load screen" - I'm not clear what that means: adding a hot-key that can be pressed to change the entrance? I guess we'll hear back via kryptopyr.

It's not compressed at all. Skyrim - Misc.bsa size = 177,490,631 bytesUnpacked size of files = 176,843,788 bytesRe-packed w/BSAOpt, compression OFF = 167,956,480 bytesNote that the re-packed BSA is smaller because BSAOpt excluded 453 duplicates, in which case the packed file is referenced when the game looks for its duplicate's file name. (As a side note, I still don't understand how BSAOpt decides two files with different names are duplicates - does it use a CRC check?) Anyhow, the slightly smaller size of the unpacked files compared to the original Skyrim - Misc.bsa can probably be explained as the size of the file header, I imagine. Skyrim - Misc.bsa does include .gid files - maybe these are lzma compressed, and that's why you're getting the signature?

Understood & agreed, but that only addresses mods with all assets contained in a BSA. As soon as were talking about third party mods in the real /Data directory which provide loose file assets, then it becomes a mess. MO won't be able to discern which loose files came with which plugin, and so how would the user then have control over the load-priority order of those loose files? Should MO make a special "fake" mod with all of the non-Vanilla/DLC loose files? Can you see how this gets too complicated pretty quickly?This is why I think a stern warning message is needed advising the user to move those mods out of the real /Data and into their own mod folders in MO. Unfortunately, in absence of the original installers for those mods found in the real /Data, it would be difficult for MO to automate the process of moving them into the MO mod priority/"install" list due to the loose files issues I mention above.Either way, I think there should be a clear warning message about this, because when a user who has left third party mods in their real /Data directory complains that mod X isn't working for them, they can be reminded of that warning.

Um, maybe I didn't say it clear enough, but I actually agree with you.My suggestion though, is NOT to bring in third party mods from /Data, but give a clear warning message about their presence (in case the user wasn't aware.) see my #2 idea above - I edited it a bit to be crystal clear.

You don't need to do that because the issue at hand only reveals itself when ESPs are flagged as ESMs. Just read the first nine bytes of an ESP and check the last byte. If the last byte is 01, that's a false-flagged ESP. Actually, if a user has installed ESP+BSA paired mods in the "real" <skyrim>/Data directory, then MO will place their BSAs at the top (earlier) in the BSA priority list. If MO doesn't pull them in as "special" mods that show up in the left-hand (middle) mod priority/"install" list pane, then it's still possible to subvert the BSA load order as compared to plugin load order. If MO were changed so those mods were brought in as "special", allowing priority/"install" placement to set load order of BSA assets (but not loose files - which would be impossible,) then the user could move those mods in the priority/"install" list so that it matches load order, if they wish. Possible issues resolved by doing this are vanilla-origin scripts/meshes/textures that the mod expects to overwrite by virtue of the game's normal BSA-tied-to-plugin load order. It also becomes even more important when thinking of the UPs, because if a user has any mod in the real /Data directory now which has BSA assets of the same names as anything supplied by the UPs, the UPs version will overwrite the ones of the other mod. No - I think one of two things would be a very good idea here. Either: [*]Tannin's suggestion of bringing all plugins (and their BSAs, if they have them) into the MO priority/"install" list as "special" mods, or [*]a warning message that third party plugin-based mods were found directly installed in the real /Data directory, with a summary of the potential issues caused by that, but NOT bring those mods into MO. Personally, I like #2 more, because really the whole point of MO is not to install mods directly into the real /Data directory, and if any of those mods included loose files assets (not allowed by Steam Workshop, right?) then it leads to further potential problems (and general confusion.) Not everybody has a machine with a fast processor, RAM, bus, SATA III, an SSD with on-the-fly firmware-based write compression. So, please if any tests are done, include test systems with lower-end specs. Though I don't know for sure, it should also be noted that with the STEP lineup there's likely a mix of BSAs with compression and no compression - no compression being a choice by mod authors because BSA compression doesn't seem to work with audio (and other?) file assets.

LOL, Kulde, I knew that... I suppose I could take this chance to report back that the update to 4.5 went smoothly without any problem, though I followed the his "clean save" procedure and used the Save Tool script cleaner utility (first time!) It's now up to 4.51, but that update was just a replace-install and run affair.

Ditto! Where do I sign up???

So, you finally deleted Skyrim, then...? PS. Of all the things about Immersive Content EDFAL I miss most now that I'm playing with the REGS guide lineup, it's the bridge braziers, and I'm almost inspired to learn CK better and make a mod with just those (but always on, so Kuldebar can enjoy it! )

For me, this mod takes the Lanterns of Skyrim idea and expands on it quite beautifully to include on/off "switching" braziers at the ends of bridges (which look way better than the lamp posts IMO), and changes lights in various towns and cities to also be switched on/off in the morning/evening. Of note, the author of this mod was working on this before LoS was even a twinkle in MannyGT's eye (apologies to all the ESL STEP members for the American English idiom!) Also, unlike LoS, this mod can switch different types of light (blub) sources, instead of just one candle lantern light bulb. However, as far as I can tell, the mod does not do this through a ever-constantly looping script. After the initial set up, the main on/off switching script just fires at the two designated on/off times using the RegisterForSingleUpdateGameTimeAt function, as I understand. So it is really very "light" as far as the script goes, no more than Lanterns of Skyrim is. The script source code is provided, so if you're savvy, please by all means check into it. Anyhow, the main problems with the mod are in two areas - 1) personal opinion of the immersive (virtual) reality of Skyrim, and 2) the practicalities of conflicts with other mods. On #1, I don't care that sometimes I actually now and then happen to see all the lights affected by this mod in my immediate area turning on or off suddenly, but there are plenty of people who seem rather put off by this. Then #2 will probably be a deal breaker for many, because this mod was designed with vanilla Skyrim lighting in mind, and so it will conflict with the likes of ELE's / ELFX's / RLO's exterior lighting plugins, because to do it's magic it needs to make changes to vanilla light sources. Also, it won't work well or at all with any mods which move lights around in cities / towns, notably ETaC, or the Dawn of... series, which are all part of the REGS STEP pack. And that's a real shame, because I would love to use this mod along with all of those. I did start and attempt to make a patch, but game up when I realized the sheer immensity of the work, and that it would involve a lot of time in the CK due to light sources not being something you can click on in console in game to get a FormID. That said, if you don't use any mods which make major changes to exterior lighting, or ETaC, etc., then I highly recommend checking out this real gem.

That's what Tannin has been saying. You really really really really really should let people know this. I'm gonna guess that since noobzor's got a slow internet connection, he probably keeps backups of all his mod install .zip/.7z/.rar archives, and just re-installed​ everything. That's likely the safest method.

Tanin explained a variation of his suggestion in this post, exactly with these two sentences: So, if MO was implemented this way, then all mods without BSAs would have manual asset priority control by default. However, it would still allow you to place a mod with loose file assets between two mods that are priority auto-sorted based on plugin order. Now - that just leaves the problem of being able to present the STEP Guide in "tidy" categorized sections, right? This is of course in direct conflict with Tannin's suggestion that the mod priority order for auto-sorted mods would match plugin load order, and you've said that STEP would probably want to use the priority auto-sorting method for mods with BSAs: So, if all mods with BSAs have their priority ordered according to the plugin order as set by LOOT, then then it breaks the whole concept of having the STEP mods listed in sections. The key thing here is that STEP has been setting MO mod priority via the guide's list, and except for the conflict section that's actually quite arbitrary when compared to the load order that BOSS / LOOT would set them to. (Actually the BOSS Masterlist is in many ways arbitrary, but that's a discussion for another thread!) I think we're forgetting that there are multiple sortable columns in the MO Mod priority list (left- or middle- pane, whatever). If you want to keep STEP's mod list into tidy sections, then consider having the user set up custom STEP Categories in MO, and then setting that for mods as they're installed so that they can be listed in tidy sections, if the list is sorted by category. However, the bottom line is that with Tannin's suggested changes to MO, you would still want to produce a new list showing the correct (numerical) mod priority. Anyhow, there's really no way of getting around this if STEP would use the new suggested auto-sorting feature. You simply can't list the priority by section, alphabetically AND also set the priority of mods with BSA based on plugin load order.