TechAngel85

Yes, I agree. BSW has ENB compatible versions. We can simply update the instructions to include their installations and tick the ENB option on the mod page. We'd have to update the ENB Light instructions to hide conflicting meshes.

The Outer Worlds with all add-ons/DLC is free on Epic Games today!

So, not parallax, but Really Blended option has the stones popped out like a real stone. I don't think I was ever convinced they look 'real', as that is totally subjective. My logically mind can see two sides of a coin here. One side says that erosion could cause the dirt around the stones to look like that. So I can see the argument for it. The other side of that coin says that it wouldn't make a very good road. Such a road would likely constantly break the cart wheels that travel upon them, cause an extremely bumpy ride, and that no empire would keep such a road as it would affect travel. What affects travel affects commerce and trade. Along these lines I want to say I remember them being just that when testing...bumpy and terrible to run on. It's been far too long since testing, though, so I can not be certain. If that is still the case, a collision pane over the top would fix all that for gameplay purposes; however, a collision pane may also affect decals (aka blood splatters).

It's been far too long for me to remember, but I thought Really Blended Roads was more of a parallax type of thing? We don't have access to any of the Cathedral mods. @Soulmancer might as I thought he was one of the authors uploading the update file.

Sorry. That is not information that needs to be disseminated.

No ageism meant. We tend to have a younger crowd in the community is all. The majority seem to move on right around when their 30s hit. Greg and Z are closer to your age, I think. DY younger than I. I'm the middle child. DP = Donation Points (from Nexus)

For users/players, none. That's partly the point. They're not reporting their findings to USSEP so the fixes that USSEP can handle could be included. Over time they've started fixing the same things that USSEP fixes. That is scope creep. I've personally talked to WizKid about it and they agreed the mod developed far beyond the original intent and that the mod should have been renamed a while back....but too late for any of that now. SLaWF was originally added for a specific reason and over time the mod has developed beyond those reason enough to either completely reconsider it and retest it, or drop it. This isn't the first time we have run into this issue with a mod and had to reconsider it. It happens from time to time as that is part of the process with building a Guide within a limited scope (Step Mandates). Who said we were going to replace the mod with a ton of other mods? No one said that. I'll leave it at that since the rest of the post is antagonistic. Thank you! I seen the posts and I prepared to hand out some warnings if the personal stuff wasn't quenched. Precisely. Everyone forgets we're the ones building the Guide that everyone is obviously so passionate about, considering a single mod is sparking such discussion. Now, two of the three major reasons we're considering dropping this are scope creep and the fact that SLaWF is no longer a compliment to USSEP, but rather is doing the same thing. Those two bring us to the third which is back-end maintenance. What Step provides, we do so in our free time. The updates to this mod and the lack of documentation of all their changes lead to a hassle on the back-end for us. We don't have all the time you all seem to have to constantly check and verify changes from this mod for the Guide. We're all older gentlemen (I'm 38 myself with a partner and house to maintain). We all have our own lives, houses, kids, spouses, pets, jobs, etc. that come first. When SLaWF was young, it provided just want it said. Little by little it started doing things considered beyond the reasons it was added to the Guide and quite a few of those things aren't mentioned in their changelog; which means they're changing things users are completely unaware are being changed. In contrast, USSEP has fairly complete documentation over the years and hasn't made us go diving into their plugins to look for changes that often. It also behaves like a full mod project rather than a individual mod, meaning it's release schedule is far better for users since they tend to update in large chunks rather than smaller releases. That is better for us than a bunch of smaller releases. That's the main reason of preference to having the edits from SLaWF that can be in USSEP, be in USSEP. Some of what we do will always boil down to maintenance and time. Lastly, our plans are not always public. We have plenty of discussion behind the scenes. What we have discussed in regards to this is creating our own version of what SLaWF is doing, but be a true companion mod without any overlap in scope. This would mean a slimmer and more streamlined mod that does just want it says on the label and nothing more. All issues that can be fixed by USSEP (namely position adjustments, in which SLaWF has 100s of these) would be reported to USSEP for them to address vs being an a separate "companion" mod. Yes, this would take time to develop, but as was pointed out Skyrim isn't going anywhere and more options are always better. I do want to address the quiet part that Z said out loud. DP has created "DP chasers" in the community. I don't believe WizKid to be one of these authors as I have talked to them on occasion. (I will fully admit that I don't have any love for WizKid either. They are distributing a version of RWT on their discord without permission and has been asked to remove it, but has yet to do so. A DMCA has been considered, but no action is being taken as of yet.) Anyway, the reason Z likely mentioned DP is because we, as the Guide creators, have to be on the lookout for these types of mods to ensure they don't become a nuisance to the Guide. At present there is only one author we've considered that does this and who's mods are also in a Step Guide. I have spoken, personally, with this author and determined as such from those conversations; thus, their mods are more closely monitored and more harshly assessed than others.

Haha! They're proving my point. They started out as a mod that fixed things that USSEP couldn't due to USSEP's self-imposed scope, but nearly every single one of the items on v8.4 could be addressed and handled by USSEP. I feel they are truly trying to be a companion mod to USSEP, but a real companion mod would work with USSEP and scopes wouldn't overlap.

Whatever the reasons, it has gone far out of the scope from the initial reasons we added the mod. I agree with dropping it at this point. I'm all-in for creating our own mod that does something similar, but sticks to the basics of fixing issues USSEP can't. Since SLaWF has closed permissions, we would need to start from scratch by fixing things as we find them or as reported. The time I can dedicate towards working on such a mod would be the same amount of time I'm dedicating to the mods under Stewardship.

This mod is so out of scope compared to what it started out to be. It seems like it's trying to be a competitor with the USSEP. Half the edits it makes could have been reported to the UP Team and called it a day. The more the mod updates the more it conflicts, and the more I want to remove it.

Template updated Separated the values more distinctly on the parameter lists Added Starfield as the first game parameter Added small images to the Icon optional list Fixed the broken Including Lists example on the Alert template Updated some formatting for consistency between the two templates

You've left Cathedral Landscape's LOD file active. Once you've generated with it, it should be disabled.

Nice little immersive mod. I've added it to testing.

Discussion topic: The Eyes of Beauty by LogRaam Wiki Link

This template has been updated: Added support for Starfield

Discussion topic: Sidebox Template

Discussion topic: Quotation Template

There has been some significant reworking of this guide. A lot has been added over time and that lead to some disorganization, which isn't a bad thing. The guide simply needed some cleanup: The flow has been updated be more organized and make more sense Most of the sections have been updated with new formatting and a few have been renamed Most of the sections have had additional content added to them The 'Advanced Topics' have been moved to an ancillary page so they can be expanded upon with more detail at a later time

Ah, you're right. Now that I'm refreshed, the mod was included because the premise of the mod, as you pointed out, is good. Was it tested? Absolutely and as reported by DY no issues have been found during our playtime. That doesn't mean issues don't exist. Mods that are added are never tested for every scenario considering we are often a one man team when it comes to Guide Curation. Fact of the matter is I've stopped playing Skyrim. I'm a bit "over it" after 10+ years. Thus, when it comes to Skyrim, I have shifted to managing and updating mods. Z has been the main Curator for the SkyrimSE Guide so it would ultimately be his decision on what to do. If the author isn't supporting the mod any longer, then it would obviously be best to drop it or replace it. As staff, it always good for us to keep in mind such mods fit our criteria for Stewardship, which would allow us to fix any issues ourselves.

The reason we switched to this mod is that is was far less patching at the time vs the other mod we had that did this: NARC, be to specific, if I'm remembering correctly. I want to say there was one more mod that did similar things, but Faction Fixes was the least invasive of them all. If there is a single issue with a single faction we can report it to the author or even correct it ourselves. It's rather dramatic to drop a mod over a single issue with the vampire factions, which is all that has been brought up thus far. We would typically report to the author before making such moves over small issues.

Discussion topic: Simple Offence Suppression SFSE by powerofthree Wiki Link

Those are good, but only if you want to remove all of the filtered look. As mentioned, I use the 75% to simply tone the filter down without removing it. It's important for us staff to play as close to the vanilla content as possible; else, how are we to know what "enhanced vanilla" looks like? As such, I only have this single mod installed along with the water files I work on for Realistic Water.

Discussion topic: powerofthree's Tweaks SFSE by powerofthree Wiki Link

Discussion topic: Step Guide-Development Process by Step Modifications A high-level overview of Step Modifications' Modding Guide development process cycle, which includes on-going maintenance tasks, as well as, release and post-release procedures.

Agree. As I'm going through some of the miscellaneous wiki content that isn't updated very often, I'm finding quite a bit that needs addressing. A pint to the good ol'days when we had a lot more staff for upkeep!