z929669

It has somthing to do with the way s4n is loading the site CSS. The background-image custom assignment voids all css, regardless of whether '!important' is used to prioritize. I put in the question to to s4n, but he has not been around for a few days. Lots to do, but I unfortunately cannot do it since he is the only person that knows the config well enough to address many current issues :/ PS: I edited the custom css page for clarity, so please leave the body element alone until s4n responds.

Unless I drop everything and finally learn to patch myself (and take the time to actually do it right), I must depend upon SRB or someone else .... I feel like a bird ... just waiting

I am 95% certain that it is because you are using a URL to an external site. Try uploading the image and use the path to the image, like: '../images/path/blah.jpg'I added the correct body declaration at the top of your css, so just edit that. Use a png with transparency for the best effect.

Aren't we going to need an updated patch for AOS v2.0?

This (the new 2.0 updated version) will need a close look in STEP

Can you point me to the page you are using it on and how you are implementing it? You should use the #css extension, and as CJ says, it strangely does not use the very first css declaration does not get applied for some reason, so just use something like: h1 {}... before your other style references (that is how i had to do it for the STEP GUide)call it like so from the page you want to style: {{#css:STEP:StepGuide.css}}See the Extension page for use-case examples

If you notice any themes in the kinds of posts you are getting, it is far better to create topics relating to those. One thread for all misc posting is just bad practice and makes it near impossible to find information. One big misc thread or many smaller ones is the same. This is what has happened with Neovalen's thread, and I dare anyone to look for info in that thing, and I would wager that there is redundant info in that thread that also exists in other topic threads. Ultimately, it is up to you guys though, since you will be answering the questions (and re-answering them for lack of any coherent pointer). PS: and the thread move with redirect 'feature' does not work on this forum. Pretty inconvenient.

Perhaps, but again, the intent is for posters to ask questions and await answers to their questions, then they subjectively mark the "best answer" to their original question. This is a nice way to isolate the "OP solution" to a single post and call out that post above the OP. Using another term could be better in many cases but not all. It depends on the OP.

I support allowing extensionless links (did it work on the MyBB forums? If so, then we weren't limiting file typefor image links); however, s4n does not, and he has final word regarding security (because he is primarily the one who would troubleshoot related issues resulting from the site being compromized)

All readers see this post!

I went ahead and began implementation of some pre-defined tags for mods and packs forums to include other Bethesda games. Let's see how it goes. I did not create the tags as prefixes, since I think that woudl just add a lot of noise. I also added SRB's new guide thread to its own subforum with support thread just like we are doing for SR:LE (anyone that puts work into a big guide should get this I think). Unfortunately, I indicated that I wanted a redirect place into the source forum pointing to the new thread location, but it did not work for some reason :| I'll see if I can add this after the fact though. This may evolve differently that it exists now in the end, but let's see how this goes ...

the rin may lie the issue

Uninstall everything and start from a fresh game with a new MO profile ... follow the guide through section 1.C. only ... do you still crash?

This is a great idea. I just may implement in my own game (I like taking an arrow in the back without expecting that as a possibility).

I have tested AF extensively by running from ENB or from CCC. The latter gives a frame rate gain over the former, and the quality is no different. By what wisdom do you (or anyone for that matter) determine that forcing AF through CCC is in any way problematic? I'll add to the guide that other methods can be used, but forcing AF through CCC is the performance 'friendliest' method (so doing otherwise would seem not so smart). sooooo ... FOLLOW THE GUIDE! (now I have removed your excuse not to)

Probably not if you are not seeing that behavior. It is Java I think, so you might want to check the page source.

First, let's not let this thread go onto any tangents that blame mods or anything else other than user error, OK? Second, all I can say is follow the STEP guide to the letter starting with a fresh Skyrim install. Leave nothing to chance and follow the guide EXACTLY. That includes all settings and NOT setting anything that is explicitly not instructed for the reasons stated in the guide. Install STEP:Core to start and NOT the full mod list. You will have no issues if you do this, and if you do, then you have a hardware or software issue that does not relate directly to Skyrim or associated mods. We can address that then. What we don't want is to troubleshoot your problem to later find out that you had some deviant setting or config that you 'assumed' should be OK for whatever reason. Baby STEPs

Did you try searching by topic title only?

Marking OP as best answer is not an option, and it makes sense too if you think about it and read the functionality and look at the behavior Only moderators/staff and the OPer can mark as best answer. Using new topics to provide answers in a single post doesn't really follow the natural expectations of the system I don't think.

All readers see this post.

Added: MO VFS SkyUI

Point me to such a situation where you want to mark OP as 'Best Answer' and i will have a look.

There is a tag-specific search under the advanced search where you can use a tag list separated by commas; however, it is an implicit 'OR' search with no 'AND' functionality. Better than nothing, but still lacking, IMO. I have a request for better functionality out on the IPB forums.

Good to know! What about tags enhancements? (we can start another thread for that if necessary).

Yep, I agree with your assertions and your conclusions. Philosophy tells us to "consider the tough questions" for which the scientific method can help to narrow the possibilities. All I am pointing out is that many of the world's 'greatest' philosophers (today and historically) often mince words using semantic arguments and forms of circular logic or even convoluted logic (my term) to arrive at 'logical' conclusions that make no sense to the onlookers, who often get so confused that they defer to said philosopher as being "probably correct" because he/she is just so damn smart that nobody else besides another philosopher can understand him/her O_o Scientific philosophy can be used to rein in all of that gobbledy-**** and arrive at truly logical conclusions whose clear hypotheses are tested using relatively simple methods. I am glad that neuroscience is nudging its way into traditional philosophy to clean things up a bit Such methods should maybe be applied to this thread topic and all of its components ...