TechAngel85

It's vanilla issue. Everyone is going to have it. You'll have to edit the landscape to fix it.

No disagreement, but how are you "turning these on and off"? MO actually counts them as original content so there aren't any toggles for unticking these files in MO. You must be going beyond the scope of the Guide and setting them up as individual mods in MO or not downloading them all, which has lead to the confusion. We instruct to download all the CC content in the Setup Guide, which is a prerequisite to completing any of our Guides (granted it's only mentioned on that one instruction line so it could be easy to miss). It's also mentioned at the top of the Guide that the AE DLC is required. Nothing about those two instructions say any about them being piecemeal. I think it was your own assumptions that were messing you up. I do see that Z updated the notice at the top of the Guide, though, so hopefully that is crystal clear now. Why am I pointing this out and asking about how these are being "turned off"? Well, we typically recommend the Guides to be installed all the way through (we also mention this in the Guide...or did in the past). This is so any user's own deviations won't cause support issues. Once the Guides are confirmed running and set up properly, users can customize them as desired. This "standardizes" the Guide installs across all users so the Staff will know, 100%, what to expect and what should be happening when support does come up. If anyone deviates from that, then it's far harder for us to know what is going on. This is why our responses were what they were, above. With that said, it's perfectly okay to deviate as much as you like (even if it's just putting that AE content within mod listings)! Just be aware that we may come back at you rather confused unless the entire situation and your own deviations are explained to us. As for mods, if any mods are installed or switched out during the Guide install (or after), then you may not get any support for those mods since staff may not be familiar with them.

That patch was never meant to be used. We had moved it into the Archives (as Nexus wouldn't let us delete it). It could possibly cause issues so it should be removed from any load order.

It was probably a miss, but RWT should be a master for the Patch, regardless if it's needed or not, just so it sorts correctly.

If you haven't, install Creation Kit Fixes.

I understand where there may be some passive aggressiveness coming from my side. If I think about it, the reason for it would be the continued asking for Collections or Wabbajack after the fact that we've stated we're not interested in those for Step. DY is the only one that really said he's interested in at least testing it out and that will be entirely on him if he wants to do that; but he's also stated he's got a lot on his agenda right now. Z has stated his stance that is more middle ground but leaning towards not wanting to mess with the stuff. I am on the far end of not caring about it at all and will not be messing with it at all. Greg is neutral as far as I can tell. This stuff can be discussed all day, but with the knowledge that Step will not likely have any of it anytime soon, if ever. Most of the discussion seemed to be trying to convince us why we should include it. We get that and those reasons, but we've stated our stances. That stances may change in the future with further discussion, who knows.

You're not going to be able to avoid that. The landscape would have to be shaped perfectly to the object and that is rather hard to do. Bethesda certainly didn't take the time to do this. Most authors don't either. In fact the mass majority of objects on the ground that are statics will clip into the ground. Most are extended at the bottom and designed to be placed into the ground, not rest on top of it.

I was thinking this very thing as I was reading these posts and was wondering how much of this was actually needed. Guess that explains that. lol You really want to avoid landscape edits, when possible.

Here's the problem I have with these requests/suggestions. What this is asking of us is for us to spend all or most of our free time maintaining something that others are not willing to do themselves, and regarding something that we've stated we don't have much interest in. In other words, you don't want to spend your time doing it so you're asking someone else to spend their time to do it for you. How is this fair, as that is the tradeoff with such a request? Consider all the time and effort it would take to initially set up a Collection or Wabbajack and then the continued maintenance of all that every time a mod updates (along with our Guide so now we'd be doubling the work on our end). You know how often mods update... So you see, those asking this are simply pushing something they're not willing to do themselves onto others and asking others to spend their time to make someone else's life easier...because they don't have enough time. Why is your time more precious than mine? Than Z's? Than DY's? Than Greg's? Than anyone else's? We're not paid for this. We don't earn a dime from Step. It's all done in our free time. Rarely is much or any thought put in for the consequences of any request, and this particular request is not a small one. Perhaps with that one can see why we would push back after spending much of our free time creating and maintaining the Guides, as they are now. The point I'm trying to make is to stop and think about what you're asking before you ask it. EDIT: "You" is not directed at anyone. I've used it in a general sense for anyone asking for this.

Yeah, it's been reported. I always copy and paste the RWT FOMOD as a simple starter template and often forget to change the ID. lol

Yes, it is a bit different. We hardly ever moderate over here and we like it that way. It's also why we haven't given any warnings on this topic for anyone and why we're still conversing. We don't like to go into moderator mode. Unless it's on spammers or trolls...they receive our full wrath. Honestly the d y n d o l o d forums receive the most moderation simply because most Nexus users are basically coming hear for support. EDIT: lol...just noticed what the voice dictation on my phone did with 'DynDOLOD'.

I thought that was implied because it's on the same subject, but yes, of course. The only thing I wish to add for clarity is that moderation will sometimes include assumptions. There's just simply no way around that regardless of how unbiased the moderation is. Moderation does not include going to the user and asking "what do you mean by this?". Moderation happens from the context of what the user posts, uploads, etc. since the user has already agreed to their guidelines by using the platform. For example, does Facebook come and ask you if you were being nice when they're moderating your post? No, they just removed it and hand you your consequences. Moderation is really no different for that no matter where you are, Step included. My evidence for those moderation statements is my job. I really can't say more than that, but with that and my previous comment one could probably piece a few things together.

I fully agree with your statement here. With that in mind, I ask is what about your assumptions and my defense that my opinions were just opinions and not facts that needed to be backed up by hard data? You actually told me that I was hiding behind calling it in opinion, hence my defense of such since. It's been frustrating and unfair to have to consistently refute your false assumptions. This is all I was asking of you, as well. The problem is, at least some, not all, of your responses seem to be inflaming toward a person and not an idea or topic. My comments were never toward any specific individuals. I referred to a category of users, a user base, without putting any specific individuals into that category. That is no different than talking about "men" or "women" in a general context. In contrast, at least part of your replies have been directly towards me, an individual, and not the topic. That's what we are referring to. Another example besides the one above, which initialize the moderation... When I provided you with more of the information that you were requesting, instead of replying to that information and carrying on the conversation, you opted to post about how you perceived that I was violating the Citizenship Guide (what you referred to are suggestions, not policy. we don't moderate on those things, but they're to help prevent topics like this). Someone coming in objectively and reading all this would have to ask themselves why this was done? I, personally, would conclude this appears like inflammatory behavior and would respond appropriately (which Z opted for a written verbal rather than the warning system with 0 points). The purpose of this post is to hopefully provide understanding about what z and I are referring to when we're talking about any type of inflammatory content within these posts. I fully admit Z and I took a couple of our own little jabs, but it was only because we perceived jabs in the first place. We were okay trying to continue as small things like this usually resolve themselves with redirected conversation. However it has not in this instance so very, very light moderation is stepping in, of which I have removed myself from so any moderation will be coming directly from other staff.

I've updated the mod today. Likewise, I updated the wiki page for FOMOD changes.

Hmmm... I am reading your posts as coming in hot, to be honest. You seem a bit upset or angry from your sharp retorts as if you've been attacked on a personal level, but perhaps it's just passion coming through as such. In any case, that is how your posts read to me. Even though, you seem to want to get into this so lets it do. I also get the feeling you either work more in black and white or, at the least, that is more of what you're asking for so I will try to adjust in my responses. Why does a personal opinion need to be supported by outwardly evidence? I'd never tied to sell my opinions as absolutes, yet you seem to have taken them as such. That's on you, not me. They're just opinions based from my own experiences, not facts based on a pool of 1000 queried users and the data analyzed and placed into nice charts. I don't understand why you feel the need for an opinion, anyone's opinion, to be validated because opinions aren't also validate-able to everyone simply because opinion based on experience will differ from person to person. That is science for you, and can and has been proved. The best you can do it try to understand it because your experience will be different from other's. Perhaps with more information you'd understand better my stance on automating mod installs and know that decisions aren't arbitrary. You actually can't possibly know anything about my decisions without an account of why I've come to my conclusions. You're making a lot a assumptions. Please expand beyond you so elegantly saying that my opinion is based on own bias confirmations, or is that all you're saying? Don't get me started on bias. My RL job requires unbiased consciousness. It's literally a job requirement and I'm tested on it monthly. Still employed so... Every single thing you've stated has been bias toward your own personal unconscious bias that was learned through your own life experience. Look it up. The most I can say is I work for one of the top social media platforms...dumb NDAs. "Proper modding" to me means to install mods manually rather than relying on automation for that task; specially talking only about mod installations. You seems to want to be on one end of the extreme or the other, which is why it seems you're working with black and white. But I work in the grey here. Automation is great and fine for some things that tools have been created for and either create standardization or complete tasks that hardly anyone would be able to do on their own. These are thing like what xLODGen, DynDOLOD, etc. do for us. What else would you like me to defined? I don't believe that mod installs or patching should be automated. They may get you to a point, but I've never used any of them without running into some sort of issue (outdated mods, removed mods, bugged mods in the mix, incomplete or outright wrong conflict resolution, etc.). Z put it very well that there is too much inconsistency in these areas to have a consistent outcome. Not to mention the amount of shear maintenance! Have to keep track of and update for insignificant mod updates because something tiny updated and you now have to rebuilt your automation back-end and reupload it for users. Then there is the loss of experience because once an issue arises, the users is just left dumbfaced as to what to do to fix there problem. Why? Because they've not learned how. They skipped all that and then want to complain and wine about it on support forums and to authors; fully expecting a hand-holding experience because that's all they've been taught by automation. No one talks about the costs, the fallout, of automation and who has to deal with it. It's those of the community managing support forums and authors who've already spent a ton of their time to provide users all the information they need, yet are being bombarded by these "privileged" and often (not always) self-entitled users. Then they have users, such as yourself, how what to praise automation to the roof top, which is all good and fine, but condemn the opposing side when they want to speak out about their experience. Is it a wonder there are those of us out there (and there will be more in time), who want nothing to do with some of the automation being offered as it's creating nothing but issues that are being offloaded to authors and others? Broad and sweeping generalization based on my experiences with this group of users, yes. What better teacher is there than time and experience? Again you are asking for data analysis for which there is none (for either side of the debate here). Please, do explain what 'unacceptable behavior' you are referring to. I didn't dismiss. I redirected because I felt you were unnecessarily coming in hot, cocked and loaded to do battle when I was simply stating my opinion and stance on the subject. You're not going to see any mod list automation from me. Period. The end. However, I seemed to have struck a nerve and should reconsider the entirety of my worldview based on the fact that I don't think mod installation should be automated. Do you hear yourself? You are the only one trying to turn my opinion into a thesis. Please ensure you credit me in the footnotes (joke). I'm gathering up a lot of titles (deficient, evasive, wrong-headed...)! Yet here I am. Still engaging. Add glutton to the list. Glutton for punishment! Haha! Did you notice you still appear to come in hot and load. I'm not battling this out, but I will discuss the subject and why I believe the way I do. I prefer a more open discussion format without all the jabs. As, I am surprise at you, sir. If you truly understand my point of view and I've told you that I understand yours, then what is all this about? Why is this hitting so hard for you? We understand one another and neither us is wrong. We simply have different experiences and different opinions/views from that. To keep pushing like this would be to just keep any drama rolling or is there no middle ground for you? Lets discuss the why and how of our views without the need to try to "win" anyone to one side or the other. That shouldn't be the purpose of any of this discussion. If that result from the discussion, then so be it, but shouldn't be considered the goal, which you seem to be trying to make it. If we can readjust to this middle ground, I thing we can all discuss the subject much more progressively. Who knows, you might just present something I hadn't thought of yet. There's really no reply to this other than you have completely missed the mark due to far too many assumptions. What you call BS, may be a reality for others. It's very presumptuous of you to think you know me anything beyond the words on this screen to be able to make such a bold assessments of me and my actions. We haven't connect like that on any projects or level of interaction. Again, your 'challenges' assume what I said were facts when they were opinions. Most of this back and forth is due to that, it seems. At this point, you are the one twisting things, sir, not me. I have been trying to correct you without outright correcting you within two large posts now, but if that's not clear, it should be now. Not fact. Opinion. So I'm very plainly stating the parts of that post you have issues with were opinions. Nothing more. Let us move on and really discuss. Admin Mode I will start reporting your personal jabs and let the other staff determine if there is enough to pass out a warning on them. This removes any of my own bias from the moderation and this is what we do when any staff is evolve. That staff is not involved in the moderation. I've only been taking the comments because it's me and it's you, but please don't push it. Now that is me being bias towards you and I've made it public that I was okay with the cleverly worded jabs. However, I wish to move past it at this point and simply discuss the topic. I do not want to shut down any replies you may have to this post so feel free to do so, even if it's a bit personal and not really on the subject. Say your peace, in other words.

Yeah, I was prepared to toggle the markers on, if I wasn't able to select it. I just happen to know those fires and embers are elongated so I took a shot at that angle and it worked. Else I would have toggled the markers on or just hoped in the CK.

You're tearing apart what was an opinion post, and seem to be offended by it? My opinions and views are my own. If you don't like them, that's okay. Not everyone is going to agree on everything. Diversity makes the world a better and more interesting place. I'm not sure why you're so bent on getting me to change my views to match that of your own rather than accept me as I am. We don't have to agree to get along. Now if you want to debate, lets debate the subject (Collections and the like), but don't come hot attacking personal opinions. I agree with you, but would change your wording to, "For most 'end users', modding one's game is merely a means to an to an end." I've already mention that most 'power users' wouldn't likely be interested in such automation simply due to the fact these types of users are typically 'tinkers' who like to control most aspects of the software/hardware as they can. The difference in our views here is a difference in perspective. Your perspective being closer to an everyday 'user' vs mine being closer to a 'power user' or author. "Modding done properly" is just an opinion and viewpoint, which you seem to be passive aggressively calling out. If it upsets you, I apologize for the feelings it's caused. Any such phrase is going to have a wide range of views for what it means based on personal experience, opinions and views. Specially, this phrase was in reference to automation vs manual and I'll not address it further than discussing that comparison. The "use one's time most effectively" is another phrase that is going to have a wide range of views for what that is, and that is going to vary from person to person based on what they believe is the best use of their time. Not arbitrary, simply not expanded upon. Ask nicely. Are expecting for everyone to agree with you and align to your views? At present and to be perfectly clear, I see and understand your viewpoint. I get your and most user's perspectives on automation. Most users want it and we hear that view all the time. However, we don't hear the other side and view near as often and that is what I've voicing. It's not a popular thing, if that isn't obvious; to go against the grain. However, just because it's the majority view doesn't mean I have to agree with it or am going to align myself with that view and perspective. I'm allowed my own opinion just as you are allowed to disagree with them all you like. It doesn't bother me that you do. What I am seeing right now is that you're not able to see it from my perspective. At the very least, your reply hasn't led me to conclude that. If you do, then that is great! That means we understand one another and can simply agree to disagree. That is simply respecting one's opinion and their right to have that opinion without any negative aspect to it. There is no need for personal jabs and I apologize if any of my opinion came off in such a way to upset you. Honestly this would warrant you a warning toward any other user, but since it was toward me I'm going to take it you just need to step away for a moment. I'll say it again, we don't have to agree to get along. We can respect opposing opinions and still be able to debate them.

@CorneliusC, @z929669, @DoubleYou Looks like a light conflict or double light to me. One thing I noted that was mentioned was the mods that have been accepted for v2.1 are installed. Is that correct? If so what are your lighting mods? I assume you have only removed Luminosity and installed Ambiance? My next question would be, if that is all true, did you patch things on your own? We have dev patches, but those aren't public. I ask because that looks like the really white light from LoS and Ambiance combination, without it being patched. I'll walk you all through what I do for something like this. First, I want to look at the cells in xEdit to know what is all adding stuff to the cell. I find that by manually expanding the plugin (hstead) to the worldspace cell and click on it. The column headers list all the mods editing that cell. LoS was the only thing I noticed that would be adding a light. Indeed, after checking, it was (right-click on LoS column header and select 'Jump to' and expand the LoS cell to look what it's adding). However, I know those lights are already handled in our dev patches. These are installed on my end so that shouldn't have been the issue. No clues here. Next I jump in-game to see if I can determine just what the issue is. Using More Informative Console, showed it's a vanilla glow reference. I confirm this by typing 'disable', which removes the issue when closing the console. I reopen the console and type 'enable' and the issue comes back. This confirmed the issue is this grow reference. My guess before I look in xEdit is that it's got the wrong emittance (or maybe lack of thereof). Back over in xEdit, I load the entire mod list and look at the reference by searching for the FormID. Looking at the reference, it's missing emittance so I create a new patch for just that reference by copying it as override into a new plugin. I set the emittance to WeatherTundra and test it in-game. This has improved the issue, but not corrected it. Only about a 50% improvement. Next I looked for another reference that might work better ('brt'=bright so I knew there was likely a 'dim' version). I looked, and there was so I replaced it (I did this in the CK just to looks at a few other things, but this can be done in xEdit). I jumped back in the game to test again, and this seems to have resolved the issue without having to outright remove it. Foggy tested out good, as well. Honestly, I'd likely just remove it in RS. RS removes most of these glows because, as you can see, they can be gimmicky and cause issues, if not done properly. Not to mention most of the fire replacers include their own glows now. I think RS only uses these for interior windows and some sparse interior effects, but an emittance always has to be set or they're just white. In exterior or near exterior lighting (windows, cave holes, etc) use the weather for the area. Else they're usually near candles or fires and you can set them to default candle or fire lights. So in conclusion, this is a vanilla issue that can be reported to USSEP and/or the Unofficial CC Patch mod. They like it when you report with a solution so tell them of the possible fix or just point them to this post. In the meantime, it can be patched out in the Step patch. Users can do so before the next release following the instructions here (knowledgeable use of the tools required).

Yeah, I play almost exclusively with a bow. I did so up to lvl 20 with v2 of the Guide and didn't have this issue so it's not likely anything in Step unless you've changed something that is out of the Guide's scope. First-person mod perhaps or camera mod...

Honestly, I'm not surprised. Modding has always been a journey into learning a new hobby and automation takes all that away. Many of us see it as a scape goat and, yes, it has it's purposes but those are done for specific tasks (xLODGen, DynDOLOD, etc), are niche, or due to unwillingness. Even for those that only have a few hours a night, modding can still be done properly rather than relying on shortcuts. Shortcuts in modding always have consequences or restrictions. Those of us on staff can attest to the limited free time because the entirely of Step has been ran during our free time for years. The actual problem is never really time, but the willingness to spend that time modding the game to get to the point of playing it. Modding is the journey and playing the game is the reward of completing that journey. Automation takes you straight to the reward part. The consequences for that is the users haven't learned anything and still don't know anything about actual modding. They've learned to push buttons, that's it. I'm of the stance that is not modding and, yes, I'll admit I hold back an eyeroll when someone says they are a modder but all they have done is clicked a couple "install" buttons and everything was done for them. The point of all that is to say, the Devs are mostly on that side of the fence. I doubt any of them have any interest in Collections. No "power user" would be and I certainly don't. If Step has a Collection, it will be provided by other staff because I'm not adding that kind of maintenance to my belt when I've gone out of my way to reduce maintenance tasks over the last couple years.

https://dyndolod.info/FAQ

Thanks, I've corrected this. For the longest time the LUA in the files was more updated than the one on the page. Looks they the author has changed gears a bit and finally took it out of the PAK.

Digging into the plugin, Dark Leather is a new miscellaneous item added by CCOR that must be crafted. It's not found in the game world. It takes 1 Iron Ore and 1 Leather to create 1 Dark Leather. This is accomplished at the tanning rack.

I agree. Marked for testing.

Yes, it's not required by anything so you can move it to Optional Plugins, if you want.