But the trees, the berries, the hunt... Can't see unless I replace their meshes and skins with some GUI mod Too much messy grass on the ground... Need GUI mod to clean it up! thats what GUI mods are for.  Idk why automation is a part of this. Automation mechanisms will touch simulation so it's not a pure GUI mod anymore 

Do they? I could just not use them (like the current vanilla autoqueue). So its just as easy to pick up and play. We all agree on that one. But that will always be the case as long as its a strategy game. Because the better strategy thats being executed well will always beat a poor strategy. Or find some likeminded individuals and play with them, that's always fun! Especially if you can speak with them in voicechat while playing.  I agree, but not everyone will and not everyone has to. I mean, the problem this thread is trying to discuss is whether the "reflex-oriented" part of the gameplay is so essential that we should try to inhibit modifications that reduce the amount of necessary inputs in any way, is it not? And when two people (or more) have a different opinion on what this game should "focus" on, we need to either talk with each other until we find common ground or decide in one way and risk losing some members of the community. @WiseKind (for example) believes we should not have any "reflex-oriented" gameplay, being able to "click fast" should not matter. @real_tabasco_sauce and I (for example) disagree. But this thread is for discussing why we disagree and bringing forth arguments for our "sides".   @WiseKind argues that the challenge should never be a mechanical one, the game should be purely won by strategic decisions (or did I get that wrong?). But my question is... why? The importance of APM has been an aspect of all rts games (I know of) so far, so much so that it has become a core trait of the genre itself. I think most rts players enjoy this aspect of the game. Of course, 0ad does not have to "do the same" as any other rts, it could become the first rts where APM truly doesnt matter. But if you argue for such a strong deviation from the norm (which works very well for other titles of this genre), you have to make a sufficiently strong argument.

The articule is in spanish: https://www.muyinteresante.com/historia/excavacion-arqueologica-contactos-mundo-rural-germano-imperio-romano.html

Merci Seleucids À chaque fois vous me surprenez de voir à quelle point vous êtes une communauté forte Thank you. Yall impress me when I see the strengh of the community

Exactly @real_tabasco_sauce. OP, I think you are missing the point on several issues. First and foremost, a game should be easy to pick up and play. Automation tools introduce unnecessary complexity. Second, the game should be hard to master. Skilled and experienced players should be able to play better than new players. That rewards effort put into the game. Third, any game can be played casually. It's up to you how seriously you want to play. If you just want to relax, hop on a team game with all Easy AIs, for example. But, RTS game should be a game, not a job. If you want a job instead of a game, try playing Supreme Commander: Forged Alliance (in addition to StarCraft 1 that I've already recommended )

This is a false dichotomy. We can and should have both these aspects of gameplay. The skill curve comes from strategy and multitasking ability, it has never been and nor should it be exclusively be one or the other. Skill curves/learning curves are important for a game's long term enjoyability. The vision also states this: This should disqualify macros and large-scale automation scripts from being compatible with the vision since these are very unintuitive. One of these automation mods has an added GUI panel and additional settings slots for configurations. Compare this to simply clicking a building and then clicking a unit.

I think you'd love StarCraft. The original one, I mean. No, really. Try it. The best RTS ever, for a reason.