kryptopyr

Actually the band mesh and texture is from SMIM (used with permission from Brumbek).

Saerileth released a preview of her new ring meshes: She's also working on some brand new circlets for inclusion in CCO: I'm really impressed with the quality of her work. I definitely feel that her circlets and dragon claws belong in STEP.

I feel that this mod is better suited for Extended, particularly if you don't wish to make any MCM changes. By deactivating many of the added features, you can approach something that is mostly an improved (more consistent) vanilla crafting system. However, if you leave the default settings as they are, this mod does add a lot beyond simple tweaks to the vanilla crafting recipes. If you want to include recommended MCM settings, this is fine and won't cause any compatibility problems. The reason for the defaults is that I wanted other mod authors to be able to integrate CCO compatibility into their mods without making CCO a requirement. This means that many of the settings (at least those that have any bearing on other mods) are activated by default. Breakdown recipes are an example of this. I assume that any mod author that takes the time to include breakdown recipes will want those recipes activated in their mods. If, by default, CCO deactivated this feature, then the breakdown recipes added by other mods (at least those with CCO support) would be made unavailable to any players who aren't also using CCO (since CCO's menu options would be needed to activate that feature). However, this is really only a matter of allowing other mods to work equally well with or without CCO. If you have CCO installed, the settings you choose won't have any effect on compatibility. Animations: By default, the animations WILL play in 3rd person for smelter and tanning rack. It's only if you turn on the smithing experience for these activities that the animation won't play. If you leave the settings off, then the animations will work just as then do in the vanilla game.

I think the potential for conflict with other mods was another reason that Chimneys for Skyrim was placed in Extended rather than Core. Even if it doesn't conflict with other mods in STEP Core, there's a pretty good chance that it could conflict with mods added by certain Packs. This makes it more difficult for Packs to be built as direct extensions of Core. I do agree, though, that this mod is a fix.

Thanks! :) However, MatortheEternal is largely to thank for those changes in the breakdown recipes. He developed a script for TES5Edit that automatically creates breakdown recipes. His script greatly decreased the time and effort necessary to add those conditions, which I probably wouldn't have had time to do otherwise. I've been testing and helping him polish up the final version of the script, and I suspect he'll release it soon for other modders as well. https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/49373/?

A patch is needed if GDO is loaded after WAF.

The reason GDO makes edits to some of the weapon records is because of the guard comments relating to what type of weapon the player is carrying. GDO adds keywords to some of the weapons to trigger weapon appropriate comments. I've carried these keywords over into WAF, so loading GDO before WAF should resolve the compatibility issues between the two.

Elven and Orcish should not have the same stats. If you're using the normal version, the stats you mention should belong to the Elven sword, while the Orcish sword will have 11 weight, 75 value, and base damage of 9. If you have the True Weapons or Complete Plus version, then the Orcish sword will have the stats you listed, and the Elven sword should have a weight of 12, value of 135, and base damage of 10.

Sorry, but I have no knowledge on how to edit the UI screens.

Yes, it's possible to prevent equipped items from showing up in the smelter menu. I may add these conditions eventually, but it requires a fair bit of time and tedious work. I'm not sure I understand the second question. Can't you just look at the armor stats? I don't think the stats you see are the base armor rating; I think they are already adjusted for your skill and perks.

I've come across a few similar comments about Ars Metallica offering more breakdown recipes. I was curious what CCO was missing, so I went through and compared them. Since there may be others who are wondering about the difference between these two mods, I figured I'd post my comparison here. For the record, this is what I found: Breakdown recipes in Ars Metallica that are not included in CCO: -4 Falmer Helmet/Armor/Boots/Gauntlets -15 DwarvenBowl02/03, DwarvenPot01, DwarvenUrn01, Dwarven Panx2/Plate/Dish/Cupx3/Fork/Spoon/Knife/bowl -2 Flagon, diabella statue -2 SilverPlatterIdle (with Cups & with Food) -4 Crossbows & Enhanced Crossbows ------- TOTAL 27 Breakdown recipes in CCO that are not included in Ars Metallica: -8 Imperial Shield, Imperial Armor, Imperial Light Shield/Boots/Armor/Bracers/Helmet, Studded Imperial Armor -5 Hide Boots, Cuirass, Gauntlets, Helmet, Shield -3 Leather Boots, Bracers, Helmet -1 Banded Iron Shield -10 Circlets -4 gold/silver ring/necklace -6 Scaled Boots/Bracers/Helmet/Armor, Scaled Armor, Scaled Horn Armor -2 Wolf Helmet/Armor/Boots/Gauntlets -3 Ancient Nord Boots/Helmet/Gauntlets -4 Fur Armor pieces -10 Lockpicks, gold coins, torture tools, lantern, embalming toolx4/clothes iron/saw -4 Empty Wine Bottles -4 Woodcutter's Axe, Dragon Priest Dagger, Scimitar, pickaxe -10 Ancient Nord weapons & Honed Ancient Nord Weapons -2 Imperial Bow & Sword -5 Nord Hero Weapons -5 Skyforge Steel Weapons -10 Dawnguard Axe/Boots/Cuirassx4/Gauntlets/Helmet/Hammer/Shield ------- TOTAL 96 CCO also includes breakdown recipes for Worn Shrouded armor, Thieves Guild armors, and Summerset Shadows armor. I didn't count these in the comparison list since the versions CCO uses aren't playable in the vanilla game. There are about 20 other misc wooden clutter items that CCO also allows you to "smelt" into charcoal. I don't think Ars Metallica uses charcoal for anything, so I felt it only fair to leave these recipes off of the list as well. CCO also has 13 additional recipes for dwarven scrap that allows different types of items to be smelted together into ingots; this greatly increases the chances that grabbing a random selection of dwarven scrap will still yield plenty of ingots. A few other differences that I noted between CCO and Ars Metallica: - Ars requires smithing perks in order to smelt both items and ores - Ars adds recipes for the enchanted versions of Dark Brotherhood and Thieves Guild armors; CCO adds recipes to craft unenchanted versions of these armors - Ars uses feathers in its arrow recipes - Ars requires 4 plugin files to support vanilla + DLCs - Ars changes the Hearthfire Carpenter's Workbenches to provide smithing experience - Ars changes the Smelter & Tanning Rack to provide smithing experience (CCO provides an option for this, but since the change is made via script and not a direct edit, the animations for these objects don't work when the experience option is activated. Therefore, if you like using this feature Ars Metallic's implementation is slightly better). Most of the other differences are in the changes to the recipes themselves (which I didn't take the time to compare) and in the additional features provided by CCO that aren't present in Ars Metallica. NOTE: It appears that the only function of the Ars Metallica - Hearthfire.esp is to add the smithing experience to the Carpenter Workbenches, so if anyone wants this feature, you can use the Ars Metallica - Hearthfire plugin alongside CCO and it will work just as well as it does for Ars Metallica.

I want to give you a heads up before you spend a lot of time adding breakdown recipes and CCO conditions. I think Mator (https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/49373/?) is just about ready to release several TES5Edit scripts that will automatically create breakdown recipes and add CCO conditions (as well as a few of the WAF keywords) to recipes added by other mods. He's developed the scripts to be consistent with CCO formulas. From what I've seen in the test versions, the scripts should really help to make adding CCO compatibility to other mods quick and easy.

CCO does not dynamically change recipes for items added by other mods, so if you feel those recipes aren't balanced correctly, then you would need to adjust each recipe manually.

I just want to add my support for this idea. My original intention was to add in dialogue options like this to The Choice is Yours, but due to time constraints and other mod projects, I never got around to implementing it. I still think it would be an amazing mod if done properly. I like the idea of being able to customize the dialogue based on your character's type or personality. I think this might even be possible within a single mod by duplicating the dialogue responses and adding certain conditions, then creating options via MCM. I don't know if it would be possible using a .txt or .ini file. I would be willing to help out with some of the CK stuff if someone else wants to come up with a list of appropriate dialogue changes.

I would like to continue integrating mods into CCO. This will depend though on several factors. 1) how much time I have available and how much time it would take to include the mod (which means that a large and complex mod with lots of items and leveled list additions will be less likely to be integrated into CCO than a mod that adds only one or two craftable items). 2) permission from the original author of course 3) outside compatibility issues. One of the reasons that I didn't request permission to integrate WIC and Cloaks is that they are referenced by other mods like Frostfall and Wet & Cold, so including these items in CCO would have made them incompatible with those mods (unless the mods were updated to also include compatibility for CCO). It seemed easier to just avoid that sort of conflict. 4) new items must be well done and lore-friendly. However, I'm avoiding including anything that has already been integrated into Immersive Armors and/or Weapons. Those are incredibly popular compilations, so I feel there is little benefit in duplicating their work. Right now, I have a lot of work to do in updating my other mods and streamlining compatibility among all of them, so CCO V2 may be a ways off yet. However, the major features I have planned for the update are the expanded jewelry options, a working lunar forge, expanded cooking recipes, and integration of a popular weapons mod that I recently received permission for (don't ask which one, it's a surprise). ;)

No, unfortunately, it's not possible to make the game distinguish between different items created at the same crafting station. The only way to do this would be to create a new tanning rack with unique keywords, then change ALL of the recipes for either pelts or leather equipment so one set would use the new tanning rack and the other set would use the vanilla tanning rack. This method would also rely on individual mod authors implementing the same practice in their mods, so consistency between items added by different mods would be spotty at best. Personally, I don't feel that this additional complication is worth doing for the pelts and leather, but it's something I've been considering for jewelry crafting. One of my plans for CCO is to expand the range of jewelry combinations that are available. I also want the particular combination of metal and gemstone to have more significance in the game (enchanting being the obvious cross-over). However, jewelry also tends to level smithing skill relatively quickly compared to other items, so for mages or other non-smith characters to really benefit from a more intricate jewelry enchanting system, there needs to be a way to craft jewelry without also rapidly leveling the smithing skill. This is one of the features I'm working on for CCO v2.

I think the question, though, is why a change to a game setting would only apply to followers. Follower mods look for NPCs in the CurrentFollowerFaction or alter the quest or scripts related to followers. They are specifically designed to look for followers and have to somehow designate this. Game Settings are generally used universally by the game without such selectivity. I also find it curious that the changes from this mod apply only to followers. It may just be the way that particular setting works, but it would be a bit unusual.

I agree that by itself it's not worth an esp, but I suspect it's just a few edits to the spells so that they reference different textures. I'll probably download it and copy the esp changes into my personal patch file. :) Small change, but I like it. Little things like this that add flavor and more diversity to the game are a nice touch.

It's possible you're only suppose to get one. I don't remember off-hand; I was just thinking that they used the same number as the regular ore veins. Generally, with the ore veins, you'll get 2 "Ore added" messages, even when you receive 3 ore, so it's also possible you're only getting one message but are receiving more than one soul gem.

So what you're saying is that when you mine a geode vein in vanilla, you get 2-3 random soul gems of any size, whereas with CCO you still receive the same number of soul gems, but they are always exactly the same type (3 common or 3 grand, etc)? I've made a note to look at it. Thanks.

Noted. I'll take a look when I have a chance. Most likely the new properties that I added to the mining script need to be set on the ore activators added by Wyrmstooth.

If it would save you considerable time and work, then I would ask permission from the other authors to include their work (with credit, of course). They are perfectly within their rights to say 'no', in which case you can just go back to your original plan to compile the material yourself. In my experience, many authors really don't mind having their work used in other mods, and they might actually appreciate that their work is valued enough to be used elsewhere. I know how you feel though. I've also hesitated to ask permission to include another modder's work when the mod I was making would completely replace theirs. But look at it this way, when you finish your mod, it will make their mods redundant regardless of whether you use their work or redo the work yourself from scratch. If they do end up giving you permission, then at least they can get credit and recognition for their work, and they can have the satisfaction of knowing their work is appreciated and being used in another mod. Not to mention that you get to save yourself some time and headache. Personally, I see this as a win-win. Not all modders will agree, of course, but in general, I think it's at least worth asking. I'm looking forward to the expansion. :)

Forgive me if this is inappropriate, but since I posted shots of these textures in my own comparison photo, I figured I would at least make the files available to anyone who was interested. They aren't available on Nexus yet, but they will be soon I think. You guys may want to wait to decide if they are worthy of inclusion in the comparison testing until after they are released, but since STEP is currently testing the different gem mods, I figured I'd at least provide the option. Moonstone #5: https://s3.amazonaws.com/kryptopyr/Moonstone5.zip Moonstone #7: https://s3.amazonaws.com/kryptopyr/Moonstone7.zip These do include retextures of the gems as well as the moonstone and onyx. The moonstone is the only difference between the two files; the other gemstones are the same. Five is probably the closer of the two to a straight forward vanilla replacement (with the blue moonstone). I can upload #6 as well, but it's pretty similar to #7 (and my bias is towards 7).

Here are my choices from the latest comparisons: - Moonstone: Vanilla (best detail and nicest color) BC looks like an unpolished lump of rock, NJ looks nice when viewing the texture in the CK or photoshop, but the detail ends up getting completely washed out in game. - Onyx: New Jewels is easily the best (though it bothers me a bit that the highlights are upside down) - Ruby: True Gems (followed by vanilla actually) I don't care for the 'fractured' look of the gems from BC. To me, this texture does not look like facets reflecting lights as much as it looks like the gem has been chewed up. The ruby from NJ looks even more opaque. - Sapphire: True Gems, I think. For some reason, though, the color bothers me. I'm not sure why, as the color is certainly a better sapphire blue than any of the others. In game, though, the blue comes off a bit too bright and too uniform. - Emerald: New Jewels, based on the screenshots. I did like True Gems in game, but New Jewels also looked pretty good in game. Overall my preference is: True Gems combined with New Jewels (for the onyx). I'd probably just lean towards vanilla otherwise, though New Jewels on it's own does have some improvements (namely the emerald and onyx), but also things I don't care for (flat ruby, sapphire appears to have a divot for the center facet, and too-bright moonstone). The only stone from BC that actually seems like an improvement over vanilla is the sapphire (the emerald looks decent in the screenshots, but imo not so good in game).

I also feel that some of the DeLARP weapons are too thin. I've been overwriting DeLARP with BSW for awhile now, and I much prefer the look of the swords in BSW.