Simple manual load ordering plz

[HadToRegister]

 

I fought with Vortex the other night for 2 hours, because a mod was supposed to go AFTER another Mod,

When I first installed the mod, it went BELOW the other mod, then I installed another mod, and for some reason, the mod I first installed now moved ABOVE the mod it was supposed to be BELOW.

I opened up the mods in FO4Edit, and there were no "Master Dependencies", so I kept making a rule for the mod to load AFTER the mod it initially installed BELOW, and I kept getting that CYCLIC error message whenever I tried moving the mod below the other mod.

 

If I could've dragged and dropped the thing back to where it initially was, the problem would've been solved within 2 minutes, instead of 2 hours.

The only thing that worked was to uninstall the mod, and reinstall it, THEN and ONLY THEN did Vortex put it BELOW the MOD, WITHOUT COMPLAINING ABOUT CYCLIC REFERENCES.

 

WHY it moved the mod ABOVE the other mod after I installed a new mod is beyond me, but it's instances like there, where there are no Master Dependencies, yet Vortex complains about a CYCLIC reference that didn't exist.

THAT MANUAL DRAG AND DROP ON THE PLUGINS TAB IS NECESSARY.

 

Not as in VISUAL Order, but actual LOAD Order.

The reason it takes you 2 hours instead of 2 minutes isn't because of something vortex does but because you're fighting Vortex instead of just accepting how it works.

You try to enforce things that you don't need to enforce.

 

Vortex (or rather LOOT) complains about cyclic dependencies because you have cyclic dependencies, there hasn't been a single confirmed case where this message was

actually prompted incorrecly, people just forget (or intentionally ignore) that there is a masterlist as well as group rules to consider.

 

Now the other point: When you assign a rule to a plugin that says "plugin a after plugin b" that rule determines only the relative ordering between those two plugins

because it only intended to resolve the conflict between those two plugins and nothing else. The remaining order is entirely under LOOT and can change in whichever way

it chooses. There is no promise (explicit or implied) and no need to keep the remaining order unchanged.

This means that the rule "plugin a after plugin b" only means that a will be after b, but whether b will then be at mod index 5 or 50 or 200 and how many plugins will

be put between them is up to LOOT and it shouldn't matter to you because if you also cared how plugin c is placed relative to plugin b then you'd have set a rule for

"plugin c before/after plugin b".

 

 

 

If it happens again I'll take a screenshot of it, because it was telling me that it didn't bother to sort because of a cyclic dependency that didn't exist between the two mods.

[Grestorn]

Sometimes, a cyclic dependency is hard to see, if different issues are conflicting. Like a group setting on one hand and a manual rule on the other. It happened to me.

 

The problem here is the less than optimal error message generated by LOOT.

[Arthmoor]

And tell people who've been in this community for 8+ years how mod authors work and what they need.

Old post, I know, but has it occurred to you that newbie or not, he's actually right and the demographic you're citing (8+ years etc) are ALSO asking for the same thing? When enough people keep asking for it maybe you should consider that it's worth adding and that it is in fact how those of us at this for 8+ years have been working the whole time.

[Tannin42]

 

And tell people who've been in this community for 8+ years how mod authors work and what they need.

Old post, I know, but has it occurred to you that newbie or not, he's actually right and the demographic you're citing (8+ years etc) are ALSO asking for the same thing? When enough people keep asking for it maybe you should consider that it's worth adding and that it is in fact how those of us at this for 8+ years have been working the whole time.

 

I did consider it. And then I decided against it. But have you considered that maybe I'm right? Because unless something changed since the last time you posted about this you never even tried Vortex.

There is plenty of people who like the way Vortex works, so are they all wrong?

The problem here isn't that I'm not considering alternatives, the problem is that some people, a very small minority of users I might add, stubbornly refuse to accept decisions we made for our mod manager.

 

Are you implementing everything anyone has ever requested from one of your mods btw? How much does one have to annoy you to get you to implement something in - say - Alternate Start against your ewn better judgement? Is that how you work?

 

And btw.: Horses have been working fine a very long time, doesn't mean cars aren't better to get from A to B. Just because something works doesn't mean it's the best solution forever.

[Arthmoor]

Yes, but in this case you gave people a horse to replace the cars they had been using prior to that. Which is what you haven't taken into consideration.

[HadToRegister]

 

 

And tell people who've been in this community for 8+ years how mod authors work and what they need.

Old post, I know, but has it occurred to you that newbie or not, he's actually right and the demographic you're citing (8+ years etc) are ALSO asking for the same thing? When enough people keep asking for it maybe you should consider that it's worth adding and that it is in fact how those of us at this for 8+ years have been working the whole time.

 

I did consider it. And then I decided against it. But have you considered that maybe I'm right? Because unless something changed since the last time you posted about this you never even tried Vortex.

There is plenty of people who like the way Vortex works, so are they all wrong?

The problem here isn't that I'm not considering alternatives, the problem is that some people, a very small minority of users I might add, stubbornly refuse to accept decisions we made for our mod manager.

 

Are you implementing everything anyone has ever requested from one of your mods btw? How much does one have to annoy you to get you to implement something in - say - Alternate Start against your ewn better judgement? Is that how you work?

 

And btw.: Horses have been working fine a very long time, doesn't mean cars aren't better to get from A to B. Just because something works doesn't mean it's the best solution forever.

 

 

I've been modding, AND using mods and using several different mod managers over the years such as Mlox, WryeMash, FOMM, WryeBash, Morrowind Mod Manager, OBMM, NMM etc since 2003

All of the mod managers have provided some form of manual drag and drop, or a "Highlight the Mod" and click an up or down arrow to move it in the load order.

I keep asking for a manual load order option as a UTILITY/OPTION, for those quick times when manually moving a mod FOR EDITING/MODDING PURPOSES is necessary.

 

I'm quite happy with the way Vortex handles my load order, I'm actually ecstatic that it works so well, but all I'm asking for is a switch to toggle that allows A TEMPORARY MANUAL MOVEMENT of a mod.

 

Every time I ask, I get hostile responses.

 

I'm just looking for a QOL update for modding.

 

All I'm asking for is the ability to manually move a mod for quick editing/modding purposes on a temporary basis.

I'm only asking for MODDING/EDITING purposes.

 

If I was able to code it myself, as I was suggested earlier, I would've done it already, but I can't, which is why I ask.

 

Start a Straw Poll if you want to get actual numbers.

[HadToRegister]

Sometimes, a cyclic dependency is hard to see, if different issues are conflicting. Like a group setting on one hand and a manual rule on the other. It happened to me.

 

The problem here is the less than optimal error message generated by LOOT.

 

Yea, unfortunately the only message I was getting told me that the cyclic thing was happening between the two mods I was trying to arrange.

If it's not going to arrange the mods properly, the least it can do is go into detail as to why "MOD A" for whatever mysterious/hidden reason that I can't see, cannot go AFTER "MOD B".

 

Which, is exactly WHY I spent 2 hours trying to figure it out, because that was the only info I had to go on.

 

Thanks for proving my point :)

[Jebbalon]

Tannin wrote...

 

 

 

The problem here isn't that I'm not considering alternatives, the problem is that some people, a very small minority of users I might add, stubbornly refuse to accept decisions we made for our mod manager.

 

I'm in the 7+ year range so my input isn't as weighted I guess - but, the above attitude is the #1 reason I will avoid some mods and mod authors. "very small minority" may be larger than you think. Those who have spoken about the issue get shut down and those who read about it don't want to waste their time. If it never came up in focus groups or pre-alpha - then you chose the wrong people to ask. It is coming up in current Alpha versions - which to me means you should consider it.

I have stubbornly accepted the decisions made and am learning to work around the much easier drag and drop method. That doesn't mean I don't want the drag and drop included. It means I'm working with what's available.

 

If you are set on Not having drag and drop - then you should consider working with Dark0ne and Gopher maybe to put out a comprehensive explanation as to why. Include the 'old' way of doing things and why the 'new' way is better or just as good.

 

And please spare me the putting down of someone that took 2 hours to do something when it could have taken 2 min. I am not a fast reader, I like to take my time and read everything and understand what I'm doing and I get distracted, and life gets in the way and none of that is your damned business! There have been plenty of times where a task has taken my days simply because I enjoyed learning how it was doing what it was doing and figuring out the quicker way of doing something can be enjoyable or frustrating as hell when it is not intuitive.

 

Okay I'm done now.....

It's still alpha :)

[Grestorn]

Yes, but in this case you gave people a horse to replace the cars they had been using prior to that. Which is what you haven't taken into consideration.

 

The thing is that "manual sort order" and "automatic sorting" is mutual exclusive. You cannot have both. And I understand Tannin's point of view much better than yours. Even though I get reasons why someone would want to influence the sorting, I see plenty of ways to do that already.

 

A problem is, which this thread proofed again, that the mechanisms are not transparent enough and the messages are more confusing than helping. But that's something that will improve hopefully, even if that means that the guys from LOOT (not Vortex!) have to work on that.

 

Sometime you don't listen to your users, either, Arthmoor, and you think you're right. Sometimes I disagree with you, like with your decision to not support VR, even though there are PLENTY of users (like me) willing to help you with that, so you don't need to buy a setup yourself. I thought that was extremely short-sighted and stubborn. But, well, your mods, your decision. Now I'm no longer using your mods (at least those you can live without). I still think it's a shame, but I cannot change your opinion on that. You're not alone with this, the guys from SkyUI have the same attitude and it really pisses me off.

 

Talking about "horse" and "car". ... THERE you have an example of rejecting a new modern technology out of pure stubbornness!

[Tannin42]

I keep asking for a manual load order option as a UTILITY/OPTION, for those quick times when manually moving a mod FOR EDITING/MODDING PURPOSES is necessary.

 

I'm quite happy with the way Vortex handles my load order, I'm actually ecstatic that it works so well, but all I'm asking for is a switch to toggle that allows A TEMPORARY MANUAL MOVEMENT of a mod.

 

Every time I ask, I get hostile responses.

Well, do you think that the fact you keep asking the same question even though you already got an answer may be part of why the response is increasingly frustrated?

Tbh. you should be grateful you're getting a response at all.

Also, the fact that your own tone is always aggressive is playing into this as well. I've been digging into the MO feedback a bit and all your posts there were negative as well. You open your mouth only to complain, always in an aggressive tone and then, when you get a response in kind you complain about how your feedback is responded to.

 

Now more to the point: I can't remember anyone ever suggesting that they were asking for a "temporary" manual move, but it doesn't really make sense anyway. Either we have the feature or not, if we did implement manual ordering, would you actually want us to enforce (with a timer or something) that it's only temporary? Of course not, so from our perspecitve it doesn't make a difference whether you only want to do it temporarily or not, we'd still have all the drawbacks.

 

One reason I'm refusing to build in the option is, as Greston said: The moment you start moving plugins manually you have to keep controlling them manually.

I think this is part of the same misconception that makes it a surprise that a "load plugin a after plugin b" rule can move plugin b instead of plugin a: LOOT orders the entire list concerning itself only with the rules, not the original position of the plugin. Hence you can't do some changes manually and still use LOOT, it's one or the other.

 

The other thing I keep repeating: you say you're just asking for an option, suggesting that there is no reason to not do it because it's optional. But

a) Every feature has a cost. We have to invest the time implementing it, maintain it, document it, anyone doing video tutorials has to mention it making the videos more complex. The development time means other features get delayed or not implemented at all because we have practically infinite possible features we could do but limited time.

b) A lot of users have stated that they were confused by the auto sorting but after getting used to it they now prefer it. Those people would have never tried getting used to the rule-based way if there had been a toggle to go back to the tried old way.

 

All I'm asking for is the ability to manually move a mod for quick editing/modding purposes on a temporary basis.

I'm only asking for MODDING/EDITING purposes.

 

Is this not already solved by the locked mod index? If you actually only care about the mod you're editing or a limited number of plugins, you can just lock there index to some value.