ozoak

True. At least that keeps the file tab there.

I came here looking for discussion on this page navigation change. I found one thread that appeared quite toxic, so I wont wade in to that one, but this looks to have been civil, if just the one reply :smile: No problem with the additional prompting etc, but was or could there be a page design played with that kept the 'premium reminder' content big and front and centre without requiring page navigation each time? I'm glad it's worked to increase revenue available to pay mod authors, but particularly on mods that have multiple file components to download it is frustrating (and painfully slow* if your internet is crappy as well). * the page transitions, not the file download

My curiosity is piqued. After all these years I'm not sure I've come across any that include their own plugins/dll's, certainly none I still use. Now I've got a mission: find these mods, see if I'm missing out :smile:

I would have thought the mods themselves would mostly be ok? [i'm going to massively oversimplify, even if I hit the mark, but...] For the most part aren't the SKSE64 updates just adjusting the pointer values, and the actual scripts/functionality of SKSE64 would be the same so mods relying on SKSE don't need to call scripts any differently? (I'm sure there are some exceptions)

You may come across mods that don't work, I guess. I've been using it for many months now and it's very stable. There may be some that don't - I'd suggest checking each mod for any red-flag discussion talking about it not working correctly (I *think* one I can recall is Wet And Cold, had some issues? but might not have necessarily been SKSE related).

Got it. So people aren't allowed to want things, only need them. And they don't get to determine what they need? And if they want things they are being unreasonable or dense? FWIW the need equation can be viewed from the two perspectives. When developing software there comes a point where a developer needs to address wants of users, regardless of how the developer views those wants. The fact that many people keep requesting drag and drop load ordering should be all we really need to see. I'm with Ghatto - the current (yes yes, alpha release, lets beat that drum again) iteration of Vortex just...doesn't appeal. I get it, the Rules allow you to achieve the same end result as drag and drop might, and it's not a bad thing to rely on LOOT, and you can break a mod loadout by messing with an order, but as far as usability the Rules implementation doesn't look as user friendly as drag and drop. It feels archaic, ie retrograde development. The Rules on load order seems like a decent concept, but could not a drag and drop mechanism be used to create those rules? Like Ghatto I haven't installed it yet to even try, because it's uninspiring, but from what I can determine from looking at usage videos, if in say a simple scenario where I have 21 armour mods and I need to make sure 1 loads after the preceding 20th, I am supposed to open that 1 mod and set 20 'load after' rules? If true, then that is demonstrably more work than dragging 1 file after 20 in a list. If not true then it only highlights something else: Nexus should do a 'how things work in Vortex' video explaining it, because other videos are not doing it justice?

I was covering 1 reason given that I disagreed with, and I acknowledged there are some valid and reasonable arguments against them [modpacks]. I don't remember telling anyone that they were naive. Nor implying anyone wasn't worth hearing an opinion from. Certainly not derisively laughing at anyone, having a go at anyone personally, commenting on their traits or sarcastically denigrating their worth. Of course this attracts the typical dismissive and derogatory responses. These are the reasons that 'regular' people don't bother with this "community" very much, the reason the place grabs monikers like "Noxiousmods". I'm unfollowing the topic, so go ahead and claim whatever victory you want and continue to ignore rational debate with people of a different mind. p.s. @Thandal in case you take that as referring to your post, it was not. You disagree, state a point and do it respectfully. Others seem incapable of such things.

Well, this is quite the circular argument isn't it. As has also been pointed out before, not all mods requiring updates will make a set of mods, be that a 'pack', 'collection' or just all the mods currently in use invalid or cause wailing. Will some collections of mods be broken by a single mod within the pack being updated? Yeah, probably. Will all collections of mods be broken by a single mod within the pack being updated? No, not likely. And here's the thing. If someone installs a 'collection' and it's got some awful bug in it due to one mod, they can identify which mod it is causing the problem (and individually update it), or they'll lack the skills to identify which mod it is (in which case they'll wail at the 'collection' maker, not the individual mod maker), or they'll simply remove the 'collection' and either try to build their own (based on the mods they saw in the collection) or try a new 'collection'. All of which will be exactly the same as it is with individual mods. I can accept a few arguments against mod packs/collections as being 100% valid, but the whole "A user who uses one is going to come across a mod that gets updated and breaks their pack, and then they'll b&@*$ at the individual mod author" argument is not amongst them.

I can't provide much help, because I don't know anything about how the other user installed it (aside from a Gopher vid ref). What I can do is assert it should be possible to correct, by demonstrating it working with the same build #. I can provide info about my install, in case it helps provide clues as to what the difference could be. My install I have Steam installed to C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\ but I have steam data on E:\Games\Steam\. My first two thoughts are: 1\ Make sure your Skyrim build is 1.5.23 (this is the ver you can see in File Properties through Windows, 1.5.23.08 is the full build # visible inside Skyrim SE itself) 2\ Make sure you've only got the Alpha build of SKSE64 2.0.6 and didn't accidentally leave the 2.0.4 launcher exe in the Skyrim SE folder ^ if the build #'s aren't aligned then it wont work. 3\ Try without any mod manager 'handling' SKSE for you ^ Honestly I almost never run Beth games without using a manager, but the entirety of SKSE (of F4SE, or any other script extender) is always installed, so even if I'm running vanilla Skyrim SE the SKSE is there. When I started using SKSE64 I installed everything manually, then checked it ran with vanilla Skyrim SE, no mods or anything but just to demonstrate it had hooked in and the 'GetSKSEVersion' command would run from console. And, to be fair, the first time I tried - it did not work. The game didn't crash, or anything, it just didn't load SKSE (I'd had version mismatch between Skyrim SE and SKSE64). 4\ If possible move Steam data out of C:\Program Files (x86)\. ^ If you've got Steam still storing all games in that folder then there's a chance that Windows UAC or antimalware might be interfering I suppose. disclaimer: I actually do software support as my day job, but I don't support SKSE64. I can provide some guidance based on things I can see that could go wrong, but honestly I've never had too much trouble personally getting SKSE working so exposure to actual issues beyond theoretical is limited.

Should be OK. I'm not exactly playing it safe; Skyrim SE is running through SKSE64 which in turn is being launched by a recent build of Mod Organiser 2. But it definitely works.

Your hypothetical scenario above is predicated on someone (lets call them the curator) putting together a mod pack which contains a bug bad enough to require patching, it requires the modpack being downloaded and used by someone who presents the combined attributes of not understanding about having to clean save files, of not understanding the risks of modpacks, of blaming the wrong person. Essentially the two individuals who you use as the example represent the worst least involved modders out there, at which point if they've broken their game it wont matter (to them) whether they got the mods from a pack or from someone recommending a list of mods because in either case they will b&@*$ and moan and not take responsibility. ipso facto: whether a modpack was involved at all will not change the resulting annoyance you predict them raining down on the original/individual mod authors.

I know this may be unpopular, but...deal with the vitriol? I don't mean 'suck it up' I mean, that's what rules are for right? User breaks them, user get a temp or perm ban. I understand that issue, because people can be thoughtless navel-gazing stupid ungrateful jerks, but if rules exist that say 'play nice' and then they don't, the rules should take care of them. However despite thinking that 'modpacks' or whatever they would be termed have a place, I can understand how "no modpacks!" as a stance deals with one cause of a symptom.

And the response by Arthmoor below that succinctly summarises why they're not the end of the world either. May not work in the current NMM, may not be on the radar for Nexus at all, but that doesn't mean they're not something with merit and minimal risk. And in any system that does do them, they're not forced on any user, which means those who like to pick and choose still can, whilst those who download a 'pack' assume the risk.

It is tagged as for [mod] Developers only but it *is* out. 2.06 of SKSE64 works with 1.5.23 of Skyrim SE. Do not expect 'user' support, as it's still WIPz but a number of mods requiring SKSE have made their way over to Skyrim SE. I'm perhaps living on the edge, willing for my game to have issues and not caring if I have to start a save over again, but it's working a treat. (I'm super curious about the last post on the previous page saying that Skyrim LE Wet & Cold works with Skyrim SE + SKSE64.) Perhaps we need a User-to-User SKSE64 Beta thread to discuss this and leave more WIP discussion alone? Just thoughts :)

Hey, I don't want it :) Just reasonably sure that there's a demand for it. The wisdom of such packs is an entirely separate consideration to "can it be done?" though, I think. Personally I wouldn't use a full list of mods suggested by someone else in a one-click-and-play model because I like to check out, thoroughly, each mod I'm using in a play through. As I was sitting back thinking about it, I came up with a scenario, a really common one, that could easily make such lists virtually worthless (certainly very unpredictable): mods with domod/bain installers. It'd be easy enough to throw together a list of simple mods, including their associated patch files, and a load order for them, but once we consider mods that are configure during install, it gets hairy. I mean you could do a quick list (for instance) of a UNP bodmod, and some basic armours that are UNP ready, but what if you then added some texture pack that has dozens of options, or an armour pack that includes half a dozen different body types. Just wouldn't work. I've no doubt someone will give this a go once they're got an API to work with, but for my thinking it'll be scripted mod installers that bring it undone as a concept.