einherjrar

Perfect! It works brilliantly, thanks very much. -ein

I'm having trouble creating (partially) transparent magazines for some weapons; How can I give a mesh a partial transparency? I remember being able to do it once, but I seem to have forgotten how... -ein

I'm not sure if this is the right forum to ask this question, or even if I should have posted a thread on this as opposed to PM'ing a mod (but I hate to waste their time); I have tried using in the file management section for the description tab the same command to change the color of text of forum posts and it doesn't seem to be working... I use /color XXXXXXXX where 'XXXXXXXX' is the appropriate color. I am constantly plagued by requests for information that is already available in the description tab, but there can be a lot of text to wade through to find the vital information to a particular topic, and there are some very basic things I *reaaaaalllllyyyy* want to draw attention to. Can anyone tell me what I am doing wrong? FYI - It is NOT the same command to change text in forum posts, and I've looked in several places for the info. I feel retarded =( -ein EDIT by LHammonds: Tutorial = Formating and BBCode in Descriptions

Okay, Thanks to this info I've managed to solve the mystery of my reverse lighting problems; I haven't been able to test if this is the case on all the models I've used, but at least on a few of the models I've tested I've been able to fix the problem; I had applied the diffuse map on the first AND second texture file slot in NifSkope for any model that didn't have a normal map included; which I guess is a big no-no. The models that came with an actual normal map light correctly; but if there wasn't a normal map, and the diffuse map was applied to the normal map (2nd slot), the lighting displays reversed. Since I assumed the problem was that the normal map had somehow become reversed when I created a mirror image of the model, it appears the problem was actually the opposite of what I thought and can be solved by simply leaving the 2nd texture slot blank. Easy solution, but I couldn't have done it without the information provided here, Thanks again! -ein

I'll give one more shot at explaining before I'll try and produce screenshots of the problem. In nifskope, under: BSFadeNode > NiTriShapes (or strips) > BSShaderPPLightingProperty > BSShaderTextureSet; Under block details (expand textures branch with '+' sign) I see: 6 entry fields for textures. If I understand right, the Diffuse Texture Map will occupy the top-most entry field, and the Normal Texture Map will occupy the second top-most entry field. I have no real idea what the other entry fields are for, but the last two slots seem to be for 'shiny' effects. The diffuse map (top field of entry) displays the correct facing straight from directly from export, and any text that will be displayed on the model is oriented correctly. So, if I am having trouble with reverse lighting, maybe I should leave the second field of entry blank and just let the game attempt to render the shadows? ...That may actually explain why the game renders some of the flipped models with correct shading, and some without. I never really payed attention to which had the normal maps and which didn't. The second field of entry graphic files I'm referring to are usually marked with a '_n', '_norm', or '_normal' tacked onto the end of their texture file, and tend to either be a psychedelic or very dark greyscale image of the diffuse map. So, if I'm understanding this correct, the light blue/green maps are normal, the greyscale are specular, and full textured images are diffuse. If removing the normal maps from the model doesn't seem to do anything for the lighting situation, I'll take some screenshots of each side facing the light and facing away from the light and post them here sometime tomorrow (I'm not near my actual PC ATM). I really appreciate the help. =) -ein

I doubt this is the problem, I haven't identified anything being 'dented in'. I'm not sure if this is exactly what I am experiencing, but it sounds very much like something similar to what the problem is. Whichever side is facing a light source will be shaded, and the opposite side of the model will be lighted as though it is facing the light source. As I mentioned in the above message(s), the model comes built with the parts facing the wrong direction (ie; shell ejection port is facing the left, when it should be facing the right side of the model from the shooters point of view). To correct this, I select the entire model (or model faces) and in MilkShape go to 'Vertex > Flip front/back' or 'Vertex > Flip left/right' depending on which direction it has to be flipped to be anatomically correct to a real world version of the weapon. This method effectively creates a mirror image of the model, with all the components being flipped in the direction that is needed, but I think is the main reason that I am experiencing this lighting issue. I have experienced transparency of the model when I first tried to flip the models in my first attempts at modding, but I got past this long ago. I was selecting vertices and not faces when I was flipping the model (which caused this); Transparency was solved by selecting faces instead of vertices and using milkshapes 'flip front>back' or 'flip left>right'. Transparency is definitely not the problem. Not that I can see. I was under the impression (mistakenly it seems) that normal maps were just texture files, I was unaware that they are built into the mesh; but if they are part of the mesh that makes sense too. If I understand this correctly, there is no quick fix and I would have to correct each model face by face? That gives me a headache just thinking about doing face by face corrections to even a single model; most of these models have hundreds of faces, and at least 40 of the models I've included in the mod are experiencing this. Have I understood this right? Is there a quick and dirty method that might not be perfect, but will be expedient? -ein

Thanks for the info; I haven't had a chance to try it out yet, but hopefully I can get it done in Nifskope with the Mesh > Face normals command. As to 3ds, I wouldn't have any idea how to get it done without flipping the entire model back to the anatomically incorrect configuration or having the faces create a transparent window effect on the model, since only one side of the faces apply any texture. -ein

I've been having some trouble with some of the weapon models I've included in 20thCenturyWeapons mod. I've had to mirror some of the models from left to right to make them anatomically correct (ie; shell ejection port on right hand side, safety switches on left hand side, ect); The trouble is, the lighting maps ('normal' maps?) remain oriented for the un-mirrored model, so some of the models will now display reverse lighting, which can look pretty ugly. Does anyone know how I can fix this? I'm fairly competent with Milkshape, Nifskope, and the GECK, and I think I may have seen a setting or option to reverse lighting, but I can't remember where the option was and have begun to wonder if I imagined seeing this setting/option at all. I also have Autodesk3ds, and Adobe Elements (but I'm not that great at using them). Can anyone help me out? It's been a long time problem but is really starting to bother me. Thanks in advance, -ein

I've been in a 'cooling off' period of modding through most of July, so I haven't been paying as close enough attention to the announcements as I might have last month. In the time I've been gone there have been some changes! Many thanks to the NEXUS Admin and Staff for their work updating/overhauling the rating system, expanding the 'Top 50' to 'Top 100', adding categories to the 'top' section, ect. ~Special thanks for the File Rating to File Endorsement change, I have already begun noticing a difference. I'm sure I'll get a better chance to test out the new endorsement system in the next few weeks. -ein

If the recent file management improvements are any indication, I think I can shelve some of my concerns over the impacts of the incoming changes to the rate/vote system. -It remains to be seen exactly how these incoming changes will affect FotM and Top50, but I'm really happy about the recent file management improvement at least. Big thanks to the NEXUS Admin and Staff; You've just made my life that much easier. -ein

@Andragorn; Providing a link to site functions that many people seem to be missing is different than issuing demands or requests; I fail to see how honest criticism toward policy changes is a way of 'justifying it'. If merely providing a link to something is solicitation, then any form of notification or advertisement is as well. No one recognizes the difference? @The Band Wagon (@Everyone I guess now) -When someone knocks on your door to ask if you'd like to support a worthy charity with a donation; that is solicitation. -When someone calls you on the phone with an incredible credit card offer in your area, this is solicitation. -When you walk into a fast food restaurant and look at the menu, that's not solicitation; that's a notification of the services that can be provided or selected (there may even be notifications on various surfaces). -Now, if there were a sign next to an item on the menu that says 'eat me' or 'buy me' that is still only advertisement (which I can live without, though god forbid anyone should advertise or draw attention to their work). Great artists throughout history have toiled in solitude to produce something Beautiful , Enriching, or Awe-Inspiring to share with those around them; Why would anyone expect FO3 Mod authors to be any different? What is the point in producing something if no one sees it? If that were the case I'd reconsider uploading anything for a game community that has classically had an overabundance of leeches, trolls, flamers and some really incredible snobs that have taken my breath away a time or two. My humble wish is to produce something that will benefit others, but it won't enrich anyone's experience if no one ever happens to find it. BTW- I admit that I really do get tickled when I'm checking out new or updated FO3 mods and I see that someone's screenshots are using any of the stuff I've brought into the game. Take that tiny, insignificant little thrill away and I've all but gone over to the other side that's producing more leeches and snobs than anything else; because it's a lot easier to criticize other peoples work (or just leech) than contribute to a project or try and construct something individually that others will be interested in giving feedback (comment/PM/vote/rate). I didn't want to express my opinions this strongly before because there was still some trolling a few pages back that I didn't want to get sucked into. For the record I'd like to see an end to 'actual' Solicitation, I don't mind Advertising (I expect it actually), and I think there should be no problems with Notifications. -=I wonder how many of you think that nothing I've said here has any kind of merit and this is just sour grapes (whining)?=- -ein P.S. - I've met, spoken to, and had dealings with many thoughtful, kind, and decent people here on NEXUS, but their presence always seems to be overshadowed by a large mass of... petulant children. Here's hoping (whoever you are) you are the former, not the latter. EDIT: P.P.S. - I should mention that I've had solid dealings with at least some of the NEXUS staff, and there is no animosity between myself and the NEXUS staff; These are merely personal opinions regarding the recent changes, -This is not an attempt at dissent or resistance to policy changes. In case there is any doubt; of the staff I have dealt with; Without LHammonds or Buddah, 20th Century Weapons (among a few others) would not be available to the community (content of which is also a significant content contributor to the much vaulted FOOK). -LHammonds has my eternal support and gratitude for providing some of the most basic (yet most essential) links to modeling resources, utilities, and other info on the NEXUS forums (and others) in early 2009. I would not have been able to launch my first mod (let alone the 20th Century Weapon Pack). Without his initial help and some few other members of the FO3 NEXUS community (VashTS comes to mind). -Truly, LHammonds has been an inspiration to all active community forums members. -Buddah has long ago gained my upmost respect and admiration for his reasonable approach and willingness to compromise (within certain boundaries), as well as act on information provided from sources other than NEXUS. -(Specifically; the GSC Gameworld S.T.A.L.K.E.R. port controversy; which I can post a link to it's resolution, peacefully arbitrated by Buddah.) -I have had no direct contact with the Administration, though I imagine TheDarkOne to be a reasonable and approachable person from his online statements, actions, and stated site policies. I do not stand against policy, only against some opinions concerning that policy.

@alexandersig; I think you are confusing Requests with Reminders; All the mods you listed (and many you did not) were actively soliciting votes. -That these mods included a hyperlink to Vote or Rate should not be much of a problem; It is the language that was attached to those Hyperlinks that should be the problem. -If I say "Vote or I will remove this mod forever", this demand is certainly solicitation (especially if accompanied by false claims or bribery). -If I say "Please Vote, blah" and provide a hyperlink, this request is probably solicitation. -If I provide a hyperlink that states very plainly "This is a Vote Button", accompanied by NO attempts to bribe, beguile, bedazzle, or otherwise siphon votes; What is the real harm in providing a link in the description to a site function that a number of people seem to be overlooking? Nearly every mod I have seen containing rate/vote hyperlinks has been accompanied by demands or requests. Certainly most of the previous FotM have it (or had it). If I thought that it wouldn't be considered solicitation by any of the moderator staff I'd add a hyperlink vote button unaccompanied by any language resembling advertisement or solicitation and merely provide a link to vote or rate. Example: This is a Vote Button This is a Rate Button There is a difference here; I hope someone can recognize it. -ein P.S. - also, I have seen a couple files posted on other sites redirecting user traffic to their page and providing solicitation on other sites (which also provide link or beg for rates or votes).

I think most people have seen demands (or 'Strong Encouragement') and/or strong requests ('General Encouragement') from one author or another; I wouldn't wish to question that. I would not lump reminders or notifications ('Gentle Encouragement') together with the above. I have been wondering lately of any real impact that merely providing a link in the description tab with a reminder that someone *can* rate or vote (in addition to any constructive criticism they may have to offer) could have. I personally wouldn't consider a mere link in the description tab to be solicitation unless it attempted to extort or manipulate ratings or votes from an audience with demands, threats, bribery, strong requests, or false claims. I recant my position of "I have no real opinion"; as I seem to have formed one since my last message and reading the back comments. I don't personally think a mere hyper-link to vote or rate in the description should be considered solicitation or require punitive action unless it is accompanied by threats, extortion, demands, requests, or use of language that would indicate active solicitation. EDIT:...I hope I haven't worded this too stongly; This is just an opinion, not an attempt to influence events... -ein P.S. - As long as we're being forthright about mod incentives: -I admit to awarding Kudos' for posting bug reports since my very earliest mods (if I can reproduce the bug); It has really helped me support the mods and I intend to continue this practice. -I *do* advertise this feedback incentive in the Description Tab, and I actively solicit Bug Reports from my 'Beta Teste...'err, I mean 'End Users' (not that any of this is related to the Issue of Top50 or F.o.t.M.). FYI - Did you notice: all my paragraphs begin with "I". My Engrish teacher would be so proud, especially of my speling.

Hehe, No need to repost the frontpage; I did read the entire news post (a couple times actually), I merely thought that the subject was still being discussed, or the date of enforcement was still being decided. I have no problem with the changes to the voting system or solicitation, and I have no real opinion about any other changes to the system; I had noticed in January or February that many if not all F.o.t.M. were asking for votes, so I took it as an acceptable (if not standard) practice. This has apparently changed, and I can't say I'm sorry to see it go; I'm not about to voice opposition to it. I can hope that whatever new system of 'gentle encouragement' towards feedback (rating/voting) will perhaps stand out a bit more than it does currently; -I didn't notice the vote system for well over a month after uploading my first mod. -I still occasionally see messages in the comment box of people typing out 'I rate 10', and as often as not it seems they simply didn't see the rate function; I think it's kind of sad that those well intentioned ratings are wasted because the first feedback button they could find wasn't the correct button. My $0.02 USD -ein out.

So, Should I understand that a decision has been reached on soliciting Votes for File of the Month in the Description Tab? 20th Century Weapons received a moderator edit to it's description entry which removed the vote solicitation, but I've noticed many other file entries still have it. Is the new system being implemented now? -ein