kylhwch

I've tried this. I like how stable it is. The only major thing missing from the CH features is the ability to harvest herbs and such. You can still talk to npcs while mounted and loot corpses. It seems to play nicely with Aeonbarr. The mod author and I exchanged harsh words at one point but I have to admit this is a quality mod. Oh - multitap is missing too. It does have a range of hotkeys, however, bound according to user's preference.

The Internet has its own, unique, way of expressing its displeasure. The Golden Potato is just such an expression. From a sociological point of view - interesting times.

It's too soon to tell if it's a good or a bad thing. But I think it's probably an inevitable thing. It's easy to forget how new all this internet distribution/user content/micro-payment stuff is. Those of us who follow the Elder Scrolls have been following this community's development for ten years, which seems like a long time but is just peanuts compared to space. There's all sorts of legal and social issues that need to be worked through surrounding game mods. It was inevitable that this approach would be tried. As unpleasant as the current situation is, there's no where to go here but forward. There are solutions to all the very real problems that have been raised so far. We have to go forward in order to find them. I keep thinking about something that Chesko said in his open letter - that this was going to happen and there was nothing he could do about it. It took him a week to make his peace with it. We've only had a day. I guess we'll see where this goes. For the moment, I've dropped the few Steam mods I was interested in, partly because Steam is such a crappy mod delivery system, but mostly because this is all going to be a colossal ass-ache for the next few months. I'm going to go play my game and then see where things stand next fall. I know I'm not well known in these parts, but I wanted to clarify my thoughts about this. Also, I want to say thank you to all the fine people who have created the mods which bring me so much happiness and the guide authors who spend hours testing and analyzing them.

How can anyone resist a mod called, "Rugnarok"? Quality stuff.

Yeah, "elk" come in many different shapes. It's not much more descriptive than the word "deer". The Skyrim Elk is visually a small Irish Elk, but of course, there is no Ireland in Nirn, so calling it an Irish Elk is right out. It's a Skyrim Elk. It doesn't look like a modern Earth elk and there's no reason why it needs to. (Not that the True Elk mod is bad, or anything, just not, imo, necessary.) If we could get a proper megaloceros mesh, though, that would be brilliant.

Thanks. Modding is giving me brain rot.

So I guess this was dropped? It doesn't seem to be listed in the current STEP (2.2.9 interim #3). Is it just too out of date or something?

Thanks - somehow I didn't catch that the original was deprecated. I appreciate the detail you bring to your guide and its many instructions!

Nozzer66, that's what I thought at first, too, but the Skyrim Revisted page lists all three dlc and the HD files from Beth as prereqs - https://wiki.step-project.com/User:Neovalen/Skyrim_Revisited#Prerequisites In fact the prerequisite section for both versions is the same except that Legendary has a better gpu. That said, I'm sure it will turn out to be something obvious that I'm missing. :)

I'm curious about Dillard's question, too. What is the difference between Skyrim Revisited and Skyrim Revisited - Legendary? Why might one choose one or the other?

The current mod author, ShimoOkami, posted the following sticky in the comments at Nexus: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/59174/?tab=4&&navtag=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nexusmods.com%2Fskyrim%2Fajax%2Fcomments%2F%3Fmod_id%3D59174%26page%3D1%26sort%3DDESC%26pid%3D0%26thread_id%3D2203194&pUp=1 So maybe in a couple weeks, we'll see. I'll stick with Bellyache's wolves until then.

There's a sticky post in the comments at Nexus that Gamwich is working on an esp version with some other people in the thread. It's short, so I'll just c&p it.

Oh, ok. Wasn't sure if it was the same guy or what.

So there's a new Realistic Mushrooms HD on Nexus. I don't know if this is the same Realistic Mushrooms modder who made the original version. Here's a link - https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/61289/? It seems like this is not the same mod but a remake, and still a wip. It's by the guy who did HD realistic ore & ingots - ore - https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/60340/? ingot - https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/60438/? The modder is going by the name HalkHogan - https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/users/6948840/?

If you're only using ENBoost, and not an actual ENB, then you should probably edit your enblocal.ini slightly differently. Here is the step instructions for using ENBoost - note the configuration recommendations. https://wiki.step-project.com/ENBoost#Recommendations In particular, you'll want to have this in your enblocal.ini: And here is a recent thread I made asking some questions about the appropriate number for VideoMemorySizeMb - it's got some useful posts for determining the amount you'll want to set this at. https://forum.step-project.com/topic/2613-ctd-and-performance-patch-enboost-by-boris-vorontsov/page-27?do=findComment&comment=116227

Sorry, sorry - typo. I meant my video card, not my sound card. I have 8gb system RAM. My video card is this: EVGA GeForce GTX 750Ti SC 2GB GDDR5 I've been really pleased with it, too. Everything runs smoothly and looks great. So 2gb VRAM. Anyway, I'll try the 6144 number that Harpalus suggests. I think leaving a little breathing room is a good idea. Thanks for explaining that the amount subtracted is only coincidentally the same as my vram, in my case.

Thanks - I just tried it out and it works great.

This is what it currently says in the Step guild to ENBoost : I'm baffled by that line about the VideoMemorySizeMB. I have a 64bit system and a sound card with 2gb of vram. So the number I want is (VRAM)+(RAM)-(VRAM)? Did you really mean to put that minus sign in there? So I guess the numeral I need is 8192? What number do most people use?

Hmmm. Both ENB & ULO contain d3d9.dll. So you're saying I should put the ENBoost files in the Skyrim directory - including the ENBoost version of d3d9.dll - but leave the ULO files in their own directory and then changing the Proxy section to point to the path of ULO's copy of d3d9.dll? I mean, the name of the dll from ULO is d3d9.dll, exactly the same as the name of the version from ENB. So I can't have both copies in the same folder, right. Or should I rename one of them? Or do you mean some other ULO file?

I'm interested in using ULO - the version that is just sweetfx and not an enb. It's located here - https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/37846/? Now I read in STEP that I should be using ENBoost. I've never used either of these mods before. ULO appears to have ENBoost already installed? So if I just install all the necessary ULO files, I won't need to do anything else for ENBoost, right? The nexus comments for ULO suggest using the wrapper version of ENBoost ... Or maybe I still need to install the ENBoost files? but then I don't know if I should use the d3d9.dll from the ENB archive or the one from ULO? OR maybe just skip this step and use the files from ULO+ which is an ENB version ... I'm confused.

Thanks for your thoughts! It sounds like the best plan is to just skip having TES5Edit make backups and instead reinstall if anything goes sideways. For the time being though I'll just follow the STEP instructions.

I want to start by complimenting the people creating the documentation on the current 2.2.8 version of Step. You've added a lot of useful information and I know writing documentation can be a thankless job - so, thank you very much! I have a question about the instructions for cleaning the Update.esm as detailed here: It says: I find this a little confusing. I don't need to enable that TES5Edit Backups mod which I create, right? It's just a working folder to hold files that get cleaned? Wouldn't be better to create that folder in Explorer rather than have it be a fake "mod". Or even just delete the contents of Overwrite, if we're not going to use them? I'm also confused about the consequences of putting the backups in the Overwrite file to begin with. If TES5Edit changes a file, doesn't the original mod get changed? I mean, if there's a folder structure like so: ../myMod/modA.esp ../myMod/modA.bsa ../myMod/modB.esp And I use TES5Edit to clean modA.esp, the original file gets changed. But your instructions say to 1. make a copy of modA.esp 2. clean modA.esp 3. put the clean modA.esp into its own separate mod called something like ../clean_myMod/ 4. copy the original unclean modA.esp back into its original folder 5. Make sure that both myMod and clean_myMod are enabled, with clean_myMod overwriting 6. Cleaning out the Overwrite file, even though you do in fact have a new mod overwriting the original myMod. This all just seems like a convolution that will result in double the number of mods that MO would need to juggle files for. I get that it creates a backup of the unclean file, in case you want to undo a cleaning, but wouldn't it just be simpler to reinstall the original mod, in that case? At any rate, firstly, may I suggest editing the bolded portion to read "Do not enable the TES5Edit Backups mod. Each subsequent time TES5Edit is used to clean a file, it will create a new entry in Overwrite containing the pre-cleaned back up of the file. Open Overwrite and move the newly created entry to the TES5Edit Backups mod. This will keep the pre-cleaned back up files in an organzied and safe location. The files have no impact on the game." Second, may I suggest just skipping it?

Thanks very much! I appreciate your spelling this all out for me in detail. At first I thought I'd wait, but after playing around with 1.2.6, I don't want to go back to the older model. Tannin's made some great improvements here.

FWIW, I've always just clicked the Archive Invalidation checkbox when I make a new profile. It seems to work fine. I figured it was better safe than sorry. I've never bothered with the back date button because I swap my mods around too much and it's a hassle. Just another data point.

Ok so I've been thinking about this for a bit. 1. Is it necessary to put all bsa-using mods, (like Falskaar, for example,) at the top of the load order? (assuming you left the bsa packed). What about Steam mods? 2. Or is it just necessary to put the official dlc and unofficial patches there? 2. What if Falskaar's at Priority 200? All this time I've been assuming the Priority column was the last word on what got loaded over other mods. Is that not the case, now?