Exoclyps

I'm not arguing making it unreadable (at least not anymore, even if it might have sounded like it in one of my earlier posts), just that I think Bethesda might have done it so to reduce the image of it being repetitive. I actually like the improvement it gives making it readable. I probably wouldn't have noticed it being repeated in the first place had I not compared the textures in Photoshop.

Yeah, the repeating would be near impossible to fix in a good way, so not expecting that to actually happen. Even a 8k texture would probably look somewhat blurred out I'd imagine, and I can only fear the effect it'd have on the weaker rigs. The image I provided is from the diffuse loaded into photoshop, so the diffuse is indeed lighter in vanilla. I do believe the vanilla lighting fits better with the other textures on the mesh, at least on my right. The 2nd issue as with the repetitiveness I think Bethesda tried to solve with making the names much harder to read and as such made it harder to notice. I do think your approach looks better bar the fact that it makes it easier to notice that the texture is repetitive.

To be fair, the vanilla version is a lot brighter. That said, the vanilla texture is waaay to small to tell anything. But I'm in debate myself over this one. The problem I see is that since the texture is on repeat the names shouldn't be readable as you'd get the same names more than once, which I think is the main reason to why the names can't be read in the first place. Vanilla "HD" Textures on left and RUSTIC on the right.

Why does it not work with DynDOLOD though?

So I've been using this in my load order for quite some time. And noticed that you dropped it. As I understand it the main reason was due to the dirty edits and the world data not being forwarded? I've fixed both those on my rig. I was on the other hand curious as to why it got issues with SkyTEST? I was unable to confirm the reason tbh.

I suppose you're right. I'll personally keep using the individual mods though. Glad that you're keeping that documented as it gives me the option to download that instead.

So while I like the idea of the STEP Compilation as it makes it easier for users that does only wants to run STEP and no more, I've got a slight pet peeve with it. I was using an earlier version of STEP in my Mod Organizer when I setup the latest one and as such most of the stuffs inside the Compilation was already installed, which I think saved me from quite some pain when I decided not to initially install the STEP Compilation, because at the time I didn't understand the need for it. However I decided to look into it again today and realized why I'd never install it and why I must voice my concern about going with this method. The beauty of using Mod Organizer is that it lets you organize the mods in the order you want it content to be displayed. However with the STEP Compilation you kind of override that. As it would be almost impossible for personal configuration of a lot of things when you ask people to load it dead last. I use UNP Body as well as lot of Gamwich stuffs, the Compilation would override a lot of its content. Only way for me to actually get the things I want to load, would to essentially put the STEP Compilation at the "Conflicting Graphics" category. So what I do urge you is to keep this in mind when you setup the guide, either separate things or have the graphics load earlier in the list as I'd not be surprised if a few users would find mods installed on top of STEP getting overridden by the Compilation. Personally I'm going trough the Compilation page to make sure I've got all the stuffs I want in my game, but yeah, just thought I'd share my concern. tl;dr: STEP Compilation makes personal customization much harder.

Yeah, looks good overall. Personally I wasn't a big fan of the new leatherhide or deerskull ddss though. Hid those and use the rest.

That issue can be sorted by modifying the alphamap. I tried modifying the alpha slightly to see how it works out. Haven't tested it in game, but the black lines are smaller now in nifskope at least. https://www.dropbox.com/s/vhubzuz5vc7o6qs/Ironwood01.dds?dl=0

I'd recommend going down that naming idea. I read on the modpage that Vanilla meant default and understood, but would have probably otherwise mistaken it for Vanilla game values.

Well, I asked for future reference. Be it some other mod will be added in the future or some update might affect things. I've got a long going save that I intend to infuse it to, so to say, and just want to make sure it doesn't bog things for me down the road.

Would a clean save work? I'd imagine it doesn't, but I'm actually not sure how much leftover stuffs is left in a save when you uninstall something. That said, I've yet to use Hunterborn and just found out about it now when you bumped this thread. Will be using it in my next go I think.

Perhaps my analog was a bad one. But you did explain exactly what my impression of the process was, with some added details. Do not get me wrong though. I'm using Vivid Weathers, I've endorsed it and I've even given it my vote for the mod of the month. All I think is that it wasn't clear enough what and how he used parts of CoT. And perhaps a better dialogue should have been made with JJC, as he did use his mod as a base. Finally I believe that JJC deserves all the credit he can get for initially making the weathers, even if VW improves and utilizes them better. The credits have been improved since before this started, even if I think it could be a bit clearer on what is being credited. All in all, I think that it should be clear for the users of VW what comes from CoT so appreciation can be given where it's due.

Well. It's a rough one and near impossible to see in latest version of VW. But the weathers from CoT was merged together with the other mods that are included and then all the weathers where reimagined. To but it in a different way. Say Artist A made a sketch and then painted it, everyone loves it. But one day Artist B comes by and uses a copy of the Sketch and put it together some of his own sketches and makes a bigger painting that looks a bit different from Artist A. Artist B did use the sketch that Artist A made, even if the final painting looks different. This is also why the whole debate is in the gray zone and the moderation was lifted. The final painting looks different and you can hardly tell he used Artist A's sketch to begin with anymore. However this does not change the fact that he did use Artist A's sketch, not his vision, but a copy of his draft, of the product that he produced.

Never claimed it to be an unsolvable issue, nor a big one. All I said, or at least intended to say, was that I believe that it was the Weather ID's that caused your mod to go into moderation, and that I wasn't surprised that it happen. I am glad that has been solved as I really like what I seen so far with your mod.

The issue at hand is that the only way to get that small similarity is if he directly used the Weather IDs created by JJC in CoT. That is the only issue at hand, and for me as a user this way is the most convenient way. However, this does not take away the fact that those Weather IDs do come from CoT esp. I do feel it would be a shame if the mod would die due to this, but it is to me clear that the above mentioned issue is what's causing this whole thing.

Well, to be honest, comparing Vivid Weathers and CoT in TES5Edit it is quite clear he used more than the same outline to make his paper. He used another students old paper as a base, rewrote the whole thing while keeping the same base structure. I do believe it was a valid excuse to send him home. Kinda saw it happening the moment I heard of the same Weather IDs; even visited CoTs permission tab before this happened. That said, he've made such extensive changes to the paper it would be a great shame if he cannot publish it, as the current version is really really good and on the outside are quite different from CoT. It does not however take away the fact that the weather IDs do come from the CoT paper.

The biggest concern I had with his textures is that they are quite frankly to detailed. Having say five flowers with the same detailed defect feels kinda odd.

Well, he does use the exact same weather ID's as CoT. This gave me the impression he used CoT as a base to create his own mod. I suppose that's related to why it's under moderation review.

Figure I'll drop my two cents here in the discussion. I've yet to compare all his textures but I've noticed that some are just upscaled textures got a few photoshop edits while others are completely new textures. So both parts are kinda right on that one. Personally I wish they had a bit higher resolution as when I go near the buildings it does get quite blurry. I do also feel that some textures he's put a bit to much effort adding various decorations to the wood planks; this makes those textures stand out quite a bit when not perfectly aligned on the mesh, here I find the vanilla textures better. Another issue I found was that I feel that he made the pattern for some textures way to small, like the architects used really thin planks or minimal stones. This issue is one that doesn't stand out as much in the Whiterun mod as much as in some of the others though. Overall I think some are really well made, but there is better textures for some. So personally I'm debating if I should use them or not, and if I do I'll have to compare and choose what I like.

So this is why all my new enchanted weapons doesn't stack until after I reload my save.

Yeah, besides the fact that if you're still using 3.0.0 of USLEEP you're better of keeping with that one for now xD They've had quite the bad streak with fixes accidentally causing other issues lately xD

* Edit: rewrote my post from scratch to make it cleaner* Reinstalled WARF again following STEP to make sure I wasn't outdated. After comparing different version of the files provided by the installer it seems that the all-in-one esp provides the edits I mentioned while the other version does not. So the setup recommended by STEP does indeed not include that. Sorry about that. Regarding the The Even Better Quest and USLEEP edits I noticed when I checked again that they are very minor and something I should rather bother the BCS author about if anything, sorry about that. I do however still believe that forwarding the 4th book (3 out of 4 are already forwarded) edited in The Choice Is Yours into the Patch would be benefithical as you'd be able to remove the LOOT Meta Rule Instruction for Better Book Covers if you do.

Maybe I should try it out after all then. And since I'm not using iNeed I suppose I'll automatically be void of most issues.

While cleaning up my old REGS/STEP Extended merged patch for duplicates with the newest STEP Extended patch I found one weapon entry of interest. 000ECD54 POIMageBorvisDagger The Extended Patch forwards all edits but the weight and damage edits from WARF, these two are left at vanilla values. Are this done on purpose or an oversight? Furthermore: Going on with my patching I found a few more edits that I feel could be included in the extended patch as all mods touched here is in the STEP guide. This time it's compatibility issues with Books Covers Skyrim. Mostly a few USLEEP edits that I probably should bug the mod author of BCS about, but there is 3 "real" issues. Two entries that are also edited by BetterQuestObjectives. Patching these two also means you no longer have to worry about load order for these two mods and you can remove that note from the guide. The 3rd is an entry also edited by TheChoiceIsYours. Of course these things works without a patch, but I'd rather have it patched for best results and also not having to bother about load orders when possible is a nice bonus. Since I'm to lazy to write down all entries by hand I'll just provide a cropped screenshot.