TechAngel85

I will simply clarify a few things about my postings here on this topic.... Anytime you post in public view, you open that posting up to public review, regardless of those reviews being positive or negative. Hence why I said this should have been a PM. Especially if you didn't want any other postings from our 12,000+ members. Food for thought? Which is why I mentioned this just comes with the territory and no amount of posting notices is going to make a difference. I've been with STEP for years now and you will always always always have users who don't read, don't search, don't care...they just go straight to posting. That's never going to change. What you currently have in place is most likely fending off a lot more users than you realize. What you have left are just those users that don't read, don't search, and don't care. No defense here. Just opinions/statements from my personal experience. As for there rest, you have to know some of the history to know the reasons for its mention....and again, this is from the outside looking in as an observer. To make this short, MO/2 has always made exceptions for WB and has made specific changes to its development so that some of WB's functionality can still be of use to some users. However, on the flip side, WB has always been bluntly against pretty much all of MO/2 and has made few to no exceptions for it and how users are using WB via MO/2 (mainly the Bashed Patching feature). I've seen this going on for years now and it's not changed. Seeing your post and the wording of it just said more of the same to me. And again, is why I said I wish the teams would cooperate. As for why they should be familiar with MO/2, it's because of how users are using their product (WB) via MO/2. Knowing how MO/2 works and how to use it makes all sorts of sense. they can get an idea of how to better develop WB so it stays useful for all users (MO/2 or WB users)they can get new and fresh ideas for features to incorporate into WBthey can better support users by understanding what is going on when issues to arisethey can help MO/2 devs via information to develop MO/2 to better utilize WB featuresthey can help give MO/2 devs a "heads up" when changes to WB might break somethingcooperation very well could bring in more devs to WB if both team could work together on issues...that's just from the top of my head without thinking. Impartial doesn't mean without opinion. It simply means treating all parties fairly. With the information I have from over the years being on the outside looking in, which I've very briefly summarized here, I believe I've presented my opinion fairly and honestly....though this was not from an "Administrator", but rather was from "TechAngel85". Also, I don't want my statements misunderstood. I'm not against WB. I've used it heavily and successfully for some time before MO2 was up to speed and stable. Nor do I have anything against anyone on the WB dev team, several of whom I've reached out to in the past. Arthmoor has been particularly helpful with some issues I've had in the past. The only thing I don't agree with is the lack of cooperation I see. I don't think it's going to change anytime soon, but one can hope.

I split these post out from the other thread as it was completely off topic and really should have been a PM.

Personally, I always allow Kryptopyr's mods to win the conflicts with the Unofficial Patches. I'm fairly sure she checks her mods against the UPs so I assume any changes she makes or anything not forwarded is done intentionally for various reasons.

There's really very little wrong with WB itself. I actually used it for quite some time while I was waiting on MO2 to get up to speed for SSE. It has a higher learning curve and that's why a lot of users don't like it. Currently, I only use it for the bashed patch functionality and it works fine. Personally, I would prefer the team pull the bashed patch functionality out into a standalone program to be a competitor against Mator Smash...competition is good....but I digress. The main reason I don't want to involve myself with the WB team, is because there seems to be a lot of tension amongst them and I don't need that drama. They also seem to be against anything that isn't done in traditional methods, which I'm a nonconformist. Tradition has its place but it's never the "rule of thumb" for me. I will often be absent from their forums for a while only to come back to read a lot of arguing amongst the team with the majority of the time it ending with Arthmoor putting his foot down on the matter. Now this type of thing is nothing new, not even for the STEP community staff, however putting such things out in public forum isn't the best way to handle such situations. Our community here rarely gets to experience such things because we keep it out of public view. Then there's the seemingly negative view of anything that breaks traditional methods. This, as I understand it, was the main reason the WB team disliked MO. However, MO2 restores the BSA/ESP relationship which seemed to be one of the big issues that team had with MO. The only other issue I've read that team had with it is the virtual file system that MO/MO2 uses. Yes, it's had its issues in the past, but it's far more stable now. Both managers are perfectly capable of doing what users need, I just wish the two teams work together instead of being divided. My disclaimer on all of this is this is only the impression I've only gotten from reading their forums and not being involved with their actual work. From the outside, looking in...so to say. EDIT: Correction to post... Arthmoor is not actually that involved with the WB Team. His actions are no different from ours on this forum when things get heated, he steps in to keep things civil. I wanted to correct this misinformation after talking with him. He's a good, fair, and honest guy. None of these postings were meant to be aimed at anyone particular.

Yep, just drag and fields over to Bashed Patch column.

Since this was posted publicly, you've opened it up to public review... I'm just going to be the one to say that this request is ridiculous, imo. The MO2 team bares no responsibility for user actions or the WB team's unwillingness to provide support to specific use cases. It's the WB team's responsibly to make it clear these use cases will be provided no support. If they've done this, then that's all they can really do. And if they have and it's still not working because users are still submitting help requests of the WB team, then posting the same info elsewhere (MO2 page) is simply going to provide the same results...users that don't read and still ask for help. The result isn't going to change, if the solution isn't working. It's time to find a different solution. I also understand such a request is an attempt to avoid annoyances that come with user support, but that just comes with the territory. Instead of this is mine, that is yours type of attitude, which this portrays (and if it did to me it will to others too), it would be much better for the community to actually be a community, look beyond differences, and help each other. It would be ideal for the WB team to report MO2 issues to the MO2 team and vice versa. This way the entire community benefits rather than there being an unnecessary divide because of difference in opinions and nothing more. STEP will always hold and uphold this type of community relationship, and garner the people who are of the same "unified community" mindset.

That is a similar guide as STEP for Special Edition. Be aware that it is old and there are probably several areas that you'll have to figure out on your own because I've not updated it in a while.

Thanks for the background and prospective around that.

NAVI records are merged at runtime. So, no, the data isn't overwritten as other records are. They are merged together. https://www.afkmods.com/index.php?/topic/3940-skyrim-tes5edit-records-that-merge-at-runtime/

I understand its purpose, but didn't Zilav say something along the lines that some plugins created in xEdit for SSE really have nothing wrong with them, which WB is tossing that error out for? I think it was on a bug report on GitHub, but I'd have to go back and read it again.

I was planning an update with some new meshes for this mod. Been waiting on Sparrow to send me the files, but may go ahead and take care of this patch for everyone. I've grown to seriously hate that new check in WB. >_

The new mage clothing is the same textures from Rustic Clothing so there's no need to worry about that. Mage Overhaul should still overwrite everything since we chose those textures over Rustic for their uniqueness. Shouldn't have to worry about Gemling either, but I'd have to look to be certain. The STEP patches are likely overdue for an update. I may or may not get them updated before STEP v3.0 release.

Nope, won't be included. It's not needed for STEP and can be used too easily to cheat through the game by overpowering yourself...which is against the Mandates in my book. True that doing so would be user choice, but so is it to include this mod on top of a STEP installation or within a Pack.

I won't be included for compatibility sake. Those users wanting it can add it in and patch it up with their personal mod lists.

This was already planned for in STEP v3.0.0. There are currently no LOOT rules for the upcoming release. It'll be as simple as sorting and done. The STEP Patches handle the rest.

I didn't say those mods and patches were being dropped. Just the compilation. The mods, that are still available for download, have been put back into the main Guide. The patches have been simplified, but are still available as well.

Users can roll their own, but we'll no longer be providing one. This is mainly due to maintenance. I'm, currently, doing ALL the Guide work. Alone with no help. This is fine in the short term, but it means reducing maintenance wherever I can. Eliminating the Compilation files eliminates a chuck of maintenance. This also has the effect of making the Guides more modular and compatible again, since users don't have to hack away at the compilation file to get the results they desire. I've made a few changes in this regard; making maintenance easier and making the Guides more compatible.

Thanks, but the Compilation Patch is being dropped for STEP v3.0.

Adding player home mods is outside the scope of STEP. Additional changes like that, by the user, need to be resolved by the user making said changes. There are case scenarios like this for nearly all mods in the Guide. Accounting for all of them would be a nightmare in maintenance! Therefore, users making changes outside of the Guide's scope are on their own. Of course posting for help in the support forums is an option, but changing the Guide for situations like this is not feasible.

I've completely reworked the patch for 3.0. So you may continue your analysis, however, it might all be for not since the 3.0 patch is 100% rebuilt from scratch.

Could you provide your current install locations for your apps (mo2 and loot, specially)? Are you running MO2 as portable or in instances?

Yep, you'll have to use xEdit to make some changes to the Bashed Patch.

I would also suggest Skyrim Realistic Overhaul, if it's not installed. It's textures are very vanilla friendly in their appearance. Install it early and let the majority of mods overwrite it. Also, make sure you haven't disabled the shaders in the INIs. The gopher image looks very much like the default shaders are still enabled. Some mods, like Majestic Mountains, will suggest users to turn them off.

Thanks. I fixed the title and link in the OP.

Launch the game, open the console and type in: getskseversion This should tell you if SKSE is installed correctly. Second, make sure you have the SKSE folder installed to MO.