DSPiron

In response to post #72461793. Your very simple test is flawed. The load order is part of correctly installing it. Otherwise it will encounter issues if you install mods with 'plugins' that need to load before, or, after it. An installation with these issues shouldn't be considered correct. NMM and MO2 are capable of re-arranging 'plugins' in the load order without LOOT, and I have no idea why you think you can't. Vortex is barely capable of re-arranging 'plugins' in the load order. It can to some degree, but eventually you will need to "micromanage" your mods/'plugins'. People who are effectively experts at managing the load order, creators of shining examples of a well sorted load order, have stated that you need to "micromanage" your mods/'plugins'. EDIT: First, Vortex's "drag-and-drop" and "manual sorting" isn't what other's are referring to when they "drag-and-drop" and "manual sorting". The dragging and dropping isn't the important part, Vortex has it, but it's to create a rule. Vortex allows for manual rule creation, but at best it raises the question of having the LOOT integration when the user can still ignore it like the other programs What's being asked is the ability to place 'plugins' where they need to be, no questions. Not above where the user want it. Not below where the user want it. Exactly where the user wants it, where they know it works. If the user doesn't know: the user should've learned how to sort 'plugins', or they are seeing if it does work there. This has been said before.

Using your definition, no mod managers install mods correctly. At least, none that are for Bethesda games. No mod manager is able to put the mod into the correct spot in the load order. Vortex is the closest, but it will inevitably go wrong as sorting a load order can't be done automatically. Your definition for any Bethesda game mod manager should be "Does [mod manager in question] install a mod's files into a game I choose correctly, and allow me to correctly place it's 'plugins' in the load order" Vortex technically passes, but it's by forcing it to do something it's not intended. If you haven't seen the evidence then you must be blind. There are plenty of people whose load orders aren't sorted properly by Vortex, and can't be sorted. As someone with 30 years in IT, you should know that this quantity of issues signify a serious issue with the program. That's your evidence that no amount of modifications, no amount of rules, will ensure LOOT can sort properly.

In response to post #72457373. Both sides are rather dismissive about the other, think that their method is better while the other shouldn't be used, and share the same site. People who use Vortex to sort will eventually use mods from people who feel mods should be manually sorted, and vice versa. One side feels that LOOT's issues can be handled by a user making new rules there. Another feels that LOOT's issues are intrinsic, and need to be handled afterwards. One side feels manual sorting, and drag-and-drop sorting have been in Vortex awhile. Another feels manual sorting and drag-and-drop are not in Vortex and never will be. One side just wants to play the game, and not mess with the load order more than needed. Another just wants to play the game, and knows that a good load order isn't made by LOOT. And I could be completely wrong on all that. *shrug*

Nowhere. It's made up. Looks more like it's assumed, It seems pretty clear the Nexus is out to change the standard of how the user sorts mods (or, more specfically, the 'plugins'(.ESM/.ESP/.ESL files) of mods), and it just appears like there is no good reason. Because the reasons listed are either; Were already present without Vortex,Won't actually happen with VortexMake no sense at all no matter whatI got the impression that the goal is to use Vortex to encourage more people to think of load orders in terms of LOOT rules, rather than a set orders for 'plugins'. Then, hopefully more users will send LOOT rules to the masterlist, and LOOT will able to sort mods with fewer instances of needing to be corrected. That will never happen. Anybody who knows how to sort 'plugins' don't want to put up with explaining to LOOT how to sort 'plugins', assuming it is even mechanically capable of that (The fact that LOOT's load orders still don't match most competent load orders suggest that it's technically impossible. (Or they are also up their own ass and are insisting on a configuration that doesn't work. ...I feel it's more polite to assume the former.)) And anyone who isn't turned away probably doesn't know enough to be a good help with other users orders. Answer (emphasis mine, for those just tuning in.): The point of having LOOT integrated is for it to mess with your load order. Disabling LOOT's sorting makes it like other mod managers, but with a more cumbersome sorting mechanism: You are still setting rules. While setting a rule can be as easy as dragging a to another , you still have to confirm each one. and you have to remove rules if you decide they aren't neededAnd, probably most importantly, the rules don't guarantee the dragged mod will be after the one it was dropped on. Ideally this position is just as good, but in reality it hasn't been tested, or it's wrong, but there wasn't a rule against it ...Not even sure how you got it to arrange the 'plugins' without running the LOOT sort one way or another. (If you did run it, did the plugin go where they supposed to? Great, now try that with 150, then 240[/i'm being sarcastic, and while there have been reports of successes with more mods, there have been reports of NMM not falling apart on users. NMM will still encounter issues, and Vortex will still hit mod sets it can't sort.) In short, what they want is to "micromanage" the load order, as it's a quicker, simpler, and more intuitive way to get it right, rather than trying to figure out to get LOOT to do it right. If the user doesn't know how to get it right, then they need to learn how. If they are using Vortex and doesn't know, then they'd need to learn how to use Vortex\LOOT and how to sort their load order through Vortex\LOOT, as most info on sorting load orders require the user to "micromanage".

...erm, * Notices the 'Filter by plugin thing* ... ...Well. Dang, that would pretty much do part of the job I was thinking of. I was more thinking of a feature to showed the reasoning behind each 'plugin' being put where they are in relation to a queried plugin. The 'Manage Rules's 'Set Rules' list only shows the rules attached to a plugin. The 'Manage Groups's window only shows groups in relation to other groups, while sorting the 'plugins' table by groups doesn't show if another group is after because it is supposed to be, or it's just not part of the same chain And there is nothing in Vortex saying LOOT masterlist's rules But, in retrospect, the the first two can used collectively, and LOOT might just be a list of mods, rather than set of rules. While not completely superfluous, I'm less convinced that it's that necessary...

Manual sorting is just taking a 'plugin'(.ESM,.ESP,.ESL) and dragging it into its position on a list. This, of course, opens up issues if the user doesn't know where the mod belongs. Thus Vortex's automatic sorting method. However, this might not put the mod exactly where it needs to be, or the user is experienced, they might know a better spot. Changing a load order in Vortex/LOOT is less simple and less intuitive than manual sorting, as the user must add a new rule (or two), or a assign the 'plugin' to a group, so LOOT can correct the load order. This adds a layer of obfuscation, as the rule/group assign might not work. Perhaps LOOT overshot it and put after several others. Or its not moving the 'plugin' at all. Or there's some other rules/grouping that require 'plugin' to be before the other one, causing a cycle of rules. None of this is insurmountable, perhaps it all might be avoided if the user thinks less of a list, and more a network of positional relations between 'plugins'. But manual sorting still avoids all of the above, and so the user can focus on what comes after: •Testing, (•Maybe finding out that they were wrong, and •Moving the 'plugin' again), and •Moving on to the next 'plugin'. Granted, I'm not that big of a mod user, I just, try to follow this discussion.

Is there a feature that visually shows the rules the affect a 'plugin'(.ESM,.ESP,.ESL)? Like either showing a list of rules, a list of plugins that have rules/group assignments connecting them to the plugin in question and the rule/groups determining that position, Or, (I think this might be the best version?), a thing that you click, then click a plugin, and it updates a 'Relationship' column on the 'Plugins' table with whether it's a Rule or a Group, and whether it came from the user or LOOT Does such a feature exist? Should such a feature exist? Mostly want to get second opinion before I give this suggestion through the Send Feedback feature.

Erm, they did that. Or rather, they made a new group and set that to load after the 'Dynamic Patches' group, which should have same effect, right? --------- Except the times when they actually do... My plugin list is a good example. It contains several plugins that conflict with each other, but I have a compatibility fix plugin that absolutely needs to load after the other conflicting plugins to fix them. And I'm pretty sure Tannin's point is: Your compatibility plugin doesn't need to load after every mod. SpringCleaningCompatibilityPatch.esp only needs to load after the ones you've marked in red. However, this is weird; Putting it in a later loading group should've worked, at least, based on what little I know. I'd check to see if any of the plugins that load after it are in the 'User Interface', 'Items', or 'NPC & Faction Overhauls' groups, as those aren't set to load before your 'Late loader' group, and thus can be allowed to load after. In fact, if you know which mods disrupt it, you can just simply set rules for the patch to load after for each. A recent feature is the ability to batch add rules buy clicking the dependency icon, then edit, then check every mod you want it to load after. I hope this helps.

In response to post #72201748. #72201883, #72202448, #72202563, #72202773, #72203258 are all replies on the same post. You should probably specifcally mention that you got the community edition, that one on github, or else they will think that you are using the last official Nexus release, because plenty, plenty of people seem to miss that. I have doubts they will help directly if that's the case, as they are no longer supporting NMM, and have passed it off to the community to handle. If they do help, it will be by assisting the current NMM development community in fixing whatever issue is causing the community edition to not handle the API in cases like yours. EDIT: And I should read closer myself, as the above statement does kind of imply that that's what you did. Overall, the above was poorly thought-out way to say "Either you don't have a community version, or your issue might be with the community version (at most, there might actually be an issue with the site's API, which the staff doesn't know about) It seems more likely a bug than malicious action.

In response to post #72143393. #72144508, #72144708, #72144743, #72144783, #72144978, #72145133, #72145678, #72145908, #72146263, #72146413, #72146538, #72146543, #72147408, #72147963, #72149828, #72149938, #72150433, #72151803 are all replies on the same post. @soupdragon1234 I'm not 100% certain, but I think you can also put a 'Plugin'(.ESM/.ESP) last in your load order in Vortex by locking it's index to FD/FE... Also not sure if that helps much, or if you'll even see this

Just delete this whole block from the CSS of your personalized copy of the 'compact' theme. It's the part that changes how the main page header works // show only icons on the toolbars unless the mouse cursor is hovered on them .mainpage-header { height: 32px !important; transition: height 250ms ease 500ms; .menubar { height: 100%; } } .mainpage-header:hover { height: 64px !important; transition: height 250ms ease; } .mainpage-header:hover .button-text { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms ease 100ms; } .mainpage-header .button-text { opacity: 0; transition: opacity 250ms ease; } EDIT: @tesnexus8 What you are looking for is here: https://www.nexusmods.com/site/mods/categories/13/

Yeah, I'm 80% sure Vortex isn't about having the load order being... human-readable. Does the fact that Vortex can display your 'plugin'(ESM/ESP/ESL)s in any order you want, not just the load order, help?

I'm... pretty sure that shouldn't happen, the "Locked to index" radio button should be clickable, as far as I know. And, (late, but in case you missed it;) by "Drag-&-Drop", they mean dragging the icon under "Dependencies" () and dropping on another 'Plugin'(ESM/ESP/ESL) to start (and mostly complete) the load order rule-setting process, only needing an additional click to add a rule that states "the [dragged plugin or mod] must load after the [dropped-on one]. A bit disingenuous to say that, as most other drag-&-drop interfaces mean just grabbing an item in a list. EDIT: Wow, really late on that one.... I think it's safe to say that proper manual sorting is just not going to be a feature of Vortex, as it's not possible to have that, and still automatically sort new mods. (not without wrecking the manually sorted load order) The idea being that: If you have an example to the contrary, where you'd need, I don't know, fifty? rules to get your load order working, I think the people here would like to see it. and throw LOOT rule suggestions to fix it. At least, I think this is the case. Oh, also I am a bit confused. Most of that information is available on the table on the "Mods" tab. I was originally going to point out that additional fields for the "overview" are also available by clicking a kinda-easy-to-miss gear icon. But most things you listed were already present on my "Mods" "overview", although I'm not sure how many are on by default. Like, I know that what mod a 'plugin'(ESM/ESP/ESL) goes to isn't on by default...

As far as I can say, Vortex has been pretty solid, and I don't think any of my approx. 250 mods have failed to install. But I also haven't checked to see if this is so, and I'm not sure where to begin. They all appear to be there when I open F4Edit. I also haven't tried to install a truckload of mods all at once, and I don't think many people have. I have swapped profiles and games without any issues, at least as a far as I know.

I think it's as simple as going to the 'mods' tab and setting the 'status' filter to 'enabled'

'Fallout 4: The Capital Wasteland' and 'Skywind' are still going strong. (Road to Liberty didn't even get threatened by Bethesda, by which I mean they changed course before Bethesda even officially knew (A guy in RtL had asked a guy in Bethesda if porting audio is okay). As far as I understand, Bethesda's hands are tied as far a voices go, their contracts likely only allows for thier use in a specific game.) (and Skywind has posts on it's reddit showing things being worked on, if you were asking if they'd disappeared within the last three or four months.

Yes. It wouldn't even be automagical: By setting 'f4se_loader.exe' as primary, you are telling Vortex to use 'f4se_loader.exe' instead of 'Fallout4.exe' when you tell it to run Fallout 4.

This should probably be read before discussing ideas to get work on Road to Liberty's Fallout 4: Capital Wasteland mod resumed But in short: Even with a solution to this problem, it's too late to save Road to Liberty's iteration of the project. Everybody has moved on. End of story. Not that we can't continue to discuss this matter and try to come up with ideas for the next team that wishes to give it a shot, though. Also the issue with gibberish voice lines is that they probably would still be tedious, but I'm no expert, so I am not sure.

But the Bethesda isnt the one who decided to have the mod be behind the paywall. On the flipside, nothing is forcing anyone to get the mods behind the paywall.

<Yes.>

Everyone wants a job doing what they love. Also, if Bethesda had decided to do creation club on their own, no hiring people from the comunity, would you still call it paid mods?

I think what he's saying is "So modders are wrong to try and sell their hard work, but youtube personalities are allowed to monetize their videos and even turn it into a job in some rare cases? Why aren't they called greedy for allowing ads to plague their work for money?" Also, would Banksy be in the wrong if he sold reproductions and photos of his art, or even opened up a commission stall somewhere? (And Pepsi is never called out for selling their soda, as no one in their right mind would argue that any beverage beyond water should be free)

Are you sure it was $6.00 (480 MS Points) for a long time? This engadget article from April 6th, 2006 places it $2.50 (200 MS points), and Oblivion had only been out for a month at that point. (also, wow, I didn't realize it was that soon from launch.)

According to a handful sources I googled, Horse Armor was sold for $2.50 on the Xbox, and just $1.99 on PC. They were once $5. On April Fools Day, while the rest of the DLCs were half-price. Edited for clarity.

I think he answered that on the last page. From what I understand, he said that Creation Club will kill modding by turning public opinion against modding, as it will just be another form of microtransactions, making Fallout 4 (or 5) be a scam: Either you pay $60 for a gimped game, or you can pay hundreds of dollars to make it complete. Thus, nobody will want to download mods, or get into the modding scene because public will see the modding community as just a group of rip-off artists. And then Bethesda stop supporting modding, as the community dries up. I think that's what he said...