Ismelda
-
Posts
33 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Ismelda
-
-
The ability to create OMOD's from archives and folders would be helpful. I have discovered that most of my mods are simple textures and meshes!
You can. Rather, you don't need to. NMM will add archives quite happily, without needing to convert them.
Well it seems that NMM doesn't take in account the omod or bain scripts from 7z archives so my mods which are OBMM and BAIN (you know, thousand of folders for each option) compliant won't install properly with NMM.
V0.11.7 thanks for adding the copied link directly when you press the button for the manual install. One less paste to do.
-
Thanks Ismelda,
Can you C+P this in to the bug tracker for Kaburke to take a look at please? :)
done
-
It shouldn't be doing that. Try again and let us know if it still does it.
Just did and same results. It is only when you use the "Add Mod from URL" button though. This open a second window with the download progress which is the one blocking access to the NMM.
(Seems the bug report I did earlier was a false alarm as the link is properly added to the Download Manager section now. It may have required a restart.. If the file is downloading from there I can navigate in the NMM normally.)
-
2. When you are downloading a file, you should be able to read the description of the other files you already downloaded (ie make the download a background task so that you can still use the NMM while downloading).
I'm not sure what you mean on this one. Downloads get put in the "Download Manager" tab while downloading. You can browse around the other tabs (Plugins and Mods) while your files are being downloaded in the background, in the Download Manager tab.
Well while I was downloading, clicking on the NMM window was only doing a ding suggesting that I couldn't do anything in the Manager while the download was in progress.
-
1. If you have a link copied with the correct format for NMM, the download button from NMM (Add Mod from URL) should automatically use that link (having it in the Choose URL message box).
2. When you are downloading a file, you should be able to read the description of the other files you already downloaded (ie make the download a background task so that you can still use the NMM while downloading).
3. Add the short description of the file at the start of the file/mod description because it can explain what the file is in mods with several files to download and why they are not at the latest version.
EDIT by LHammonds: Changed title to be more clear regarding the request.
-
One remaining thing - could the options menu actually indicate the CURRENT status of things like wine barrels and openness of cities? It's easy to lose track, and the prompt on the screen about what has altered is, obviously, rather lagged from when you make the change.
No more barrels command in 4.9.1 so that is fixed.
About he openness of the cities, once we get to the merged cities only I'll be able (probably) to show a current state of the cities (Open or Closed) and there will be merged options (toggle on/off all city walls guards and so on). For that this is just too much a hassle to handle.
-
P.S. What are your thoughts about the wall archers for IC?
The walls of the IC are too high. You can't see anything up there from the ground. Hence useless FPS hit.
-
I suppose you are aware that we offer a patch for CUO Bruma so that you don't have to choose between the 2 but just use the 2 together.
About the rest, we know how to make a quest only refers to existing part of the mod but it is less enticing to mod like that than for the whole thing at once.
-
How can no one use the separate esp in the first and second questions (which is coherent) but yet answer they prefer to keep them as they prefer to use them in the last one? (where the logic get kicked in the nuts).
Onra there will always be one full version without B&M and one with B&M. About the time, it requires far less time to make OBC version as Vorians already worked on those and now has a tremendous skill on how to properly do that and it also started the question about the modularity which is the major problem we have to face when doing quests. Though Better Cities is (maybe was) not a quest mod, it seems more and more people are asking for more quest content. Are you for hire for new quests?
Anyway the Open Cities is only one option which we hope will make people happy to have. About the patches, we have a long habit of it and don't mind doing them. It sure would be better to do them only for BC and OBC instead of having to consider Vanilla too though.
-
We are at a crossroads for Better Cities. At this point we are forced to consider the viability of the modularity as it is. So this poll is to gather information on how most players use Better Cities so that we can decide which way to go.
We are starting to add Open Better Cities as an option within Better Cities, but this makes compatibility patches for conflicting mods which edit multiple cities difficult, as these patches need to work for vanilla cities, Better Cities, and Open Better Cities. By abandoning the modularity, we can stop worrying about keeping the patches working in vanilla cities, and just concentrate on closed or open Better Cities.
Also, we have this year been slowly adding quests into Better Cities. But this has been limited by the modularity. We cannot offer a quest which requires visiting multiple cities to be completed, in case someone isn't using one of the cities required - they'd be unable to complete that quest. Removing modularity would save us from having to worry about this.
Finally, it is easier for us to work with a smaller number of files, as there's less chance of accidentally missing an update when one of us uploads a changed file because there would be less files to keep track of. The OMOD, BAIN and manual installation would become much simpler, allowing for shorter installation instructions, and less people coming to us with problems because they didn't read or didn't understand the clear step by step instructions presently provided.
We may decide to only abandon modularity with the separate cities, and keep modularity with the Imperial City. The introduction of Open Better Cities causing complicated patching is the primary reason we are considering this, and since we don't open the Imperial City, we can keep it modular.
-
Hello,
I would like to ask for a new features in the the discussion tab (or something similar) where only the authorized persons (those allowed to modify the mod in the first place) would be allowed to post.
I recently started a FAQ discussion and each post should be a different answer to a different FAQ. While the first post remind the user to not post there but on the main comment section, some just do not read...
I see some other uses of this features, like technical insights on the mod but it should not be drown into other comments.
Thanks for considering this.
-
I would suggest 1 day of duration before you can rate a mod you downloaded. 3 hours is really not enough and for some mod it is the amount of time you spend downloading them. 24 hours allow you to test it, see the bugs if any, report, get an answer eventually and not just see something wrong and rate based on this while you are just frustrated because it doesn't work as your expected it to.
Your list of downloaded mods is still there to remind you all the mods you didn't rate so there is no problem in that I think.
And also 3 days before a new comer can start to rate. This would make it a better deterrent to those who create accounts only to badmouth or promote some mods.
-
Some mods will be cast out of the Top 100 if the conversion to of 7-10 to thumbs up is done. Notably the mods with not so much ratings but only high ones which managed to get to the top 100. Well no system is perfect anyway.
Windom Earle's Crash Prevention System (a must have mod) for instance at rank 45 with only 94 ratings is sure to fall out because there are lot of mods not in the top 100 actually with more than 94 ratings at 7 or above... In addition to the fact that asking for rating will be forbidden is quite sure to make some of the good mod to fall into... Oblivion because most people just don't vote/rate if you do not ask them.
-
Don't be silly. There were no rules about this so there's no issues. Simply put I want every mod to have a fair chance to get to the top of the the file of the month section without the author soliciting votes. Perhaps the author has moved on, perhaps the author doesn't mind too much, but I'd still like it to have a chance.
It's absolutely no reflection on the people who have done it in the past, trust me.
Well I'm sorry if I misunderstood but there was never any mention of the FotM to be changed but only the rating system. For where I'm standing, after 2 successful campaigns to get votes on 2 of my mods, it is all my fault if the rules are being changed because I somehow abused the system by asking people to vote for my mods.
Like Vorians said, FotM is a one time thing only, so all mods get their chances and it is the users who decide to vote, no one force them to anything. If they didn't get in this month they can still do the next one.
And to answer a poster here, I was not whoring my mods.
-
Isn't that great? Now I feel I'm the one to blame because I asked people to vote for 2 of my mods as file of the month and met some success in doing so. I didn't know I shouldn't ask for it. After all I only asked and provided an easy way to do it: the link. It is like advertisement. Why putting advertisement if you don't want people to click it?
I feel really bad now that this new rules have been set. Not that I have more mods to ask people to vote for or that I want to try a kudo campaign or something. Just I don't see what is bad in asking people (who have the final decision as they are clicking or not the link and voting or not after that).
As the bad sheep I wonder if I have now to go on other pastures so that the others will find their peace without my bad influence.
-
Thanks a lot for this! Most awaited, most wanted, most acclaimed (at least by me)!!!
-
Blank file names in updates today
Fixed an issue in the code that meant users who uploaded images for files that they don't have editing access to but where the author has allowed all users to upload would mean the file name would show as blank in the "Updates Today" section.
Nice catch on this and thanks for fixing this :)
-
Just tested the new Texas Premium server and I get the same speed or so as the London Server so all it perfect. I still get a wonderful 2Mb/s which is a nice download speed :D
-
Top 100 formulae fix
Fixed an issue where the top 100 files forumulae was using "m" as a hardcoded value of 10 when it should be using the min variable (currently 50). Thanks to Ismelda Lasombra at the official forums for pointing this out.
Nice :) and NP. The top 100 looks better now (even if my little demon race lost many ranks :P).
I must admit that the formula was not right was bugging me. I spent some time to figure what I was doing wrong until i discovered that m was set at 10 instead of 50.
The Baron Von Zarov Files
in Discussion
Posted