Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TechAngel85

  1. I seen this and it's using Base Object Swapper to achieve it. I'm more curious as to how it will play with our lantern setup. We have lanterns with and without ENB lights. Some vanilla references, some unique references. Like our Post-processing Patch swaps these out already via plugin. Add this would seem like there is a lot going on around lanterns.
  2. I updated the mod page for clarification. It added a new version without FISS support.
  3. I've been using this and it works as advertised. Not much else to say.
  4. It's a bit of a deviation from vanilla, however, I personally prefer this one. All the others are a hot mess, which may be more an issue with vertex colors on the mesh than the textures themselves. I'm actually quite fond of it after running around a bit and seeing it in action. I tried the vanilla size option and got to say I'm keeping this one in my load order regardless of the outcome of the voting for Step. I went right up to one as if harvest to grab a compare: Step > The Mod It's not as thick, and that is my only complaint! Beside that, I quite like it. It's just enough pop to grab your attention and looks absolutely beautiful! I understand the author wanted to keep the polys as low as possible while still making it 3D. However, I wouldn't hesitate to install a higher poly version that was fuller, if the author ever made one! The trade-off of the 3D it's a bit less full when looking at it from the side vs Step/vanilla. However it's only any issue if it's placed on bare ground. When combined with any grass it blends very naturally, imo. I vote, yes, for this one despite the bit of deviation.
  5. After looking in-game, I don't think this one quite stands up to the task as proper replacer for vanilla for Step. I look for things beyond just the visual these days. For a plant of this size, it's not just for looks and harvesting, but to also fill in some spaces. At first glace, it's doesn't look so bad: Step > This Mod However, when looking at if it fulfills it's job at filling spaces, it falls a bit short. It also looks more out of place in this shot: Step > This Mod I would have to give this one a "No" vote for the time being, but I'm definitely tracking it.
  6. It's most likely not needed. I've been running without it. It's not been updated for all the newest textures and was meant to be retired. I guess SP left it up when he updated. We've never fully tested the ENB Rain option. I know it works with ENB and shouldn't be installed when ENB isn't present, but that's about it.
  7. Discussion topic: Cathedral - 3D Lavender by DrJacopo Wiki Link We tested some lavender a while back and nothing looked particularly good. This might be worth a look. The 2D to 3D is probably worth it, but haven't tried in-game.
  8. Mod has updated on AFK, for anyone not tracking it.
  9. Not that I'm aware it. It could possibly be the mesh. I think I remember seeing this before and determined it was just another Skyrim oddity. I never really messed with the mesh much, though.
  10. You should be able to simply add an exception or two to your antivirus. Disabling it completely is overkill and shouldn't be required. As for removing BCS from the patches, there are a couple threads around describing how to remove plugins from the patches. You should find them when searching. I don't think the patches alters any locations so most of the changes should be restricted to the Book tree in xEdit for object bounds, text and model/texture records. You may find a script or two forwarded.
  11. We've tested all of Mari's stuff individually and none of them were accepted due to simply not fitting in well with the lighting and coloring not fitting into the landscape very well. Many were far darker than they should have been. Mari's stuff seem to be geared toward a specific style, which doesn't match well with the SE Guide. As for the deviation, there are too many types of RL thistle to completely narrow it down (vanilla looks most like the Cali thistle, imo). It's probably just going to be another case of deviation along with the other things we have that deviate. Usually these are things that are terrible enough in vanilla that some deviation is acceptable, assuming the votes are there to override such deviation.
  12. Oh, those are neither here nor there to me, don't really matter. Just the way the user worded things, it seems they're saying it is a master.
  13. WACCF shouldn't be a master of the CR Patch. That's why we have a separate WACCF Patch, now. We'll have to check.
  14. You left the Landscape for LOD from Cathedral Landscapes enabled. That mod should be disabled after running xLODGen.
  15. Yes, I just seen two admin jumping on board with the feature so I wanted to be sure mention the Mandate, personal games aside.
  16. If he doesn't want someone updating mods he's released under licenses that allow them to do so, then maybe he should get it together and stop procrastinating. I understand being busy in real-life, but you can't tell me you couldn't find the time in the past 5 months. At that point it's become a choice to not update due to whatever reason. I'm speaking from personal experience. People are only going to wait so long before they take matters into their own hands, and we're already past that point.
  17. Turning off the disarming feature doesn't fit Mandate. Just putting that out there. It's meant to be a part of the game and we shouldn't make it null just because we don't like it and it causes us to lose weapons. Of course, the losing weapon through structures is an issue, but not the fault of the disarming shout. It's more likely an issue with poor collision.
  18. I'm using it until Ryan updates, though I'm just testing in Skyrim right now and not playing. It's been 7 months since release and 5-6 months since everything has been in place for authors to get things updated. Four of those months since the last SKSE was released. I think that's been enough time waiting for me. I don't blame others for moving on.
  19. Yep. I got a notice about it. That's fine by me. Iron it out some more to give us a more stable game than all previous game! ...... And 11/11 belongs to Skyrim; they needed to pick a new one!
  20. I saw this and thought it looked great. Much more realistic! These grew along the roads where I used to work and they look much more like this than what vanilla is.
  21. I agree with all the arguments for Ambiance. It sticks closer to vanilla, which aligns better to the Mandates. I think we'll have do so some tweaking here and there, as Z has already done. However from the compares and what I've seen in my own game, I prefer Ambiance. Especially as it doesn't cause any issues with any other gameplay mechanics.
  22. Yes, it would if changed for the exterior image spaces too. Those lower saturation shots look much better.
  23. You are right on the money about Luminosity strictly going for looks. They didn't really consider the gameplay mechanics when developing. What Luminosity does is compensate for the lack of realistic light bounce/casting from the sources by using the lighting templates to mimic a dimly lit room. This way even if there is not light actually hitting an area it will still be slight lit. This is a bit of a cheap (albeit clever) way to mimic what ray-casting would do with the light bounce. Therefore, if you remove all the lights from an interior with Luminosity, it will still be dimly lit from the Lighting Template alone. This just so happens to be the very thing that causes it be behave so badly with AI detection. As for the fires...that is probably something in the image spaces, but honestly, I am not really sure. I would check out the brightness and bloom. Both are higher in Ambience.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.