Leaderboard

seeh, stop beating feldfeld

Agree on many arguments. In the attempt to find a compromise, I formulate a concrete proposal which, to make it clear, I am neither supporting nor opposing: Proposal [codename: "automatic batch size"] The batch size value can drop below 1 when scrolling with the mouse wheel. When it's 0, the batch count displays "A" instead. "A" stands for "Automatic". See picture below: When the batch size is set to "A", that building produces the meaningful maximum amount of units that available resources allow. I'm not doing the math here to define what meaningful means. This is an attempt to formulate the concept, and details can be adjusted later. The propose is, needless to say, to include the automatic batch size feature in vanilla. Benefit #1: The feature is not exactly what the criticized queuing feature provided by proGUI does, but somehow similar, when combined with auto-queue. The main point of criticism would be addressed by making a similar feature available to all players. With the advantage that the player itself (and not an artificial intelligent trainer) chooses the type of units to train by clicking on icons (or associated hotkeys), which is consistent with the rest of the game design. Benefit #2: (and I very much support this) Currently, to train the maximum amount of units, we set the batch size to 1 and repeatedly click on the icon (or the associated hotkey) of the unit to train. This is against Fastest click wins. With automatic batch size, one single click is enough. Feel free to say it's a horrible idea.

(my) TLDR: you can choose to use or not use the mod. Anybody is also free to forbid using the mod from their game (very lame, but whatever). In this topic, a few players and myself have expressed that this queuing system can improve their game experience, and objections seems to always come from players that observed but didn't gave any try to the mod. It's very reasonable to have playing habits, I myself can't get used to some mods. I always appreciated the availability of all mods, including yours @Mentula and it felt good to be able to pick the ones working for me, dropping the ones that wasn't... Never felt any urge to forbid the ones I don't use even if they could provide an edge if used correctly. They are all reasonable because they are clearly not intended cheats, but expression of a players creativity to have a better game. I can only conclude that the availability of the mod to players, is positive.

Thank you for the feedbacks, I'll try make the changes upload the same..

It's now a few months proGUI has been around and we have had the time to form an opinion and evaluate the consequences on the gameplay and the game experience. Although I have never used the mod myself, I played in several games and watched replays with players using it and here is my evaluation on the matter. Most of what I am writing here is personal opinion, so please take it with a grain of salt. 1. Non-negligible advantage proGUI gives a non-negligible advantage to players. We can observe (in the sense of measure, more that just notice) that players using proGUI have a significantly better economy compared to other players of the same level, and even of higher levels. We regularly observe less experienced players having an economy aligned to that of experienced players. We also observe good players making the difference in games against players far beyond their reach. I don't want to dive into discussions on levels and skills, which can easily go out of track, I'm just appealing to the reader's experience, which might match mine. See this post for an actual experiment supporting this claim. 2. Unfair advantage This is 100% personal opinion, as the definition of what is fair and what is not depends on each individual's sensibility. From my point of view, the use of proGUI oversteps the threshold of what is fair. In a game like 0 A.D. the combination of economic growth and military strategy are skills that players value and seek. One of the two aspects is not fully, but greatly automatized by proGUI, making the whole game assuming a different flavor. Sure, there are configurations (f.e. deathmatch) and mods focusing exclusively on the military side, and I am not against all-proGUI-games. But I think it's unfair to mix proGUI players and non-proGUI players in the same game, due of the artificial advantage introduced by proGUI. It's a bit like mixing bikes and electric bikes in a race. 3. Against the game spirit Again, personal opinion. The concept of 0 A.D. (and games alike) revolves around dominating the opponent on two main levels, intrinsically combined: economy and military. proGUI artificially forges one of the two. proGUI is not an eco-bot that plays for you, but it's not even far from that. The game vision expresses clear positions on certain pitfalls that should be avoided, and I don't see proGUI giving a contribute in that direction; rather the opposite, I would say. So, what? Well, I don't know! Personally, I would kindly invite those who use proGUI (or similar) to refrain from using it in regular games, but of course it's up to their sensibility to keep the game "fair". Far from me pushing towards enforcement of rules or other robocop solutions that, in my opinion, don't help making this community more cohesive. It would be nice to behave in accordance to common sense, but I can see that common sense varies a lot depending on who you ask. That being said, I know the developer of proGUI is a good guy, with a genuine curiosity and the best intentions. As an open project as 0 A.D. is, it is desirable that satellite projects (such as mods) are likewise open. It's on us -as a community- to find the solution to this problem, if we evaluate it as such.

A few players asked me to make a mod that would allow for the auto-queue (native) feature to be able to resize itself. And I now I've done it. https://gitlab.com/4trik/resizequeue It's a light mod, for players that can't play with heavier mods. But you still have a bunch of settings to customize its behavior. Features: - Resize batch training every time to adapt to resource and pop available. - Stop / Resume auto-queue after no resource or pop-limit reached. - Prevent autoqueue from using the resources you'll need when placing a building. If anything doesn't work as expected, please tell me. Enjoy!

I'm against all macros, so the "solution" I am most in favor of is no solution at all.

or maybe we should drop batch training completely but I don't quite dare proposing that.

well progui is a bit like that (but not too intelligent) because it works on a logic that makes it choose which unit to train based on army composition specifications. I would actually like mentula's solution better because I would enjoy retaining control on which barracks trains which unit. at that point a gui mod that makes you keep track on production (exactly like boongui always did) would be a nice option for those who want to improve their game without any automation.

I like the sound of your idea a lot more than the progui solution. However, you are free to use the mouse wheel to decide a batch size. Also, you can train a batch before the previous one is complete, so the fastest click does not necessarily win. Other decisions and clicks massively outweigh this. I agree that the auto queue cancellation issue is problematic, but there should be a more elegant solution. I think freezing the queue would be ideal, no? Maybe freezing vs cancelling the queue could then just be a settings option.

Here is my TLDR, sorry it is a mess. I pretty much agree with @Atrik here but add a couple thoughts. I tried it to get a cleared picture. I can already tell that the level of automation (autostart, choosing a unit composition for autoqueue) is consistent with macros, if not doing even more tasks for the player. I won't judge anyone for using it in casual games, and I have already played a few with @Atrik and others and it was fine. But in a competitive setting it should be considered cheating. I think the reason to consider it cheating is what @Feldfeld described, where a p2 attack to distract the enemy while you flawlessly boom is pretty much a guaranteed win. On top of that, it is bulky (4 options tabs, lots of screen space) and complicated on its own. It takes time to learn, just like the game underneath. So based on that I would say it is unwise to add to vanilla as some have suggested. overall, I think its a great tool, especially for new players who might just want to have fun with the AI as well as casual players that don't like the number of clicks needed to manage eco. However, it shouldn't be allowed in competitive games.

How to install it? yet it only have installed / build 0ad or mods. its probably not much difficult but may helpfully for some others and me got it. is this the recommended whey to enanbe it? enable the mod mymaps put it into ....mods/mymaps/maps/scenarios/ ? tested now: https://youtu.be/apUUnx2mMT8srpriced it has no rissing water effec. that was what i was searching for.

It'll take "a while". It may be more representative to make a community mod based on the latest RC. We can refrain from including balancing changes in SVN and merge (all/most of) the patches from the community mod just before releasing a new RC.

Do we have a timeline on when a27 comes out? Thoughts on doing another community mod update for a26?

Having used both, I slightly prefer ChatGPT Plus over Bing Chat despite it being the more limited system (and Bing having a better UI). I find Bing Chat is too easily swayed, or one could even say distracted, by whatever information it digs up with its web search. As you can imagine, that can easily go very wrong. With ChatGPT Plus you have more control over what information gets introduced into its logic stream. I've also found it to be more deliberative in its though process and more open to changing its mind than Bing Chat when prompted with contradictory evidence or the opportunity to critique its own work. It seems like Microsoft tuned some of the model parameters to make it more concise and decisive at the expense of "intelligence". Of course if you are dealing with a task where up to date information is critical I would probably still go for Bing Chat, rather than spend hours writing in briefings to bring ChatGPT up to date. I've also experimented with letting ChatGPT write queries to Bing Chat. In theory that would give you the best of both worlds, but so far my results have been mixed. ChatGPT can easily grasp the idea of being able to pass searches to Bing Chat, but has trouble sticking to a workable syntax while also interacting with the user. ChatGPT tends to just want to converse directly with Bing Chat in natural language, and I've had the most success just allowing them to do that. However, without human direction they tend to forget the parameters of their assignment. For example: https://chat.openai.com/share/c01f8d07-779e-4c93-9862-d7bade5b58ce Here's the problem, how can ShadowOfHassen know if you are telling the truth? GPT-4 when it is properly supervised and firing on all cylinders produces text that is (in my experience) completely indistinguishable from what a human would write.

parameter send help to all (when /help all or /helpp all) fixed error sendMessageGlHfWpU2Gg is not defined when you not host of the game timeNow message so all see what time you have at the moment momentmodsImCurrentlyUsing so all see what mods you have at the moment prevent some errors if using a26 and a27 at the same time https://github.com/sl5net/autocivP/releases

There's now two AppImages available for 0.0.27-rc1-27645-alpha , one built on focal and another on jammy. If you tried a previously released AppImage for this version and the Vulkan backend was automatically disabled, try the "jammy" image (note the "jammy" image is less likely to run on older distros).

I agree with Mentula that ProGUI gives a serious advantage over a player of the same level, if used well. However he didn't say what is in my opinion the biggest reason why this is the case (at my level that is). The biggest advantage is in the case of continuous fights or harrassments, preferably in p1 or p2, where there are 3 or 4 production buildings per player. In that case, the attacking player can focus near all his actions in microing the fights, making threats, forcing his opponent to react accordingly, and he will still have near perfect production at home. Meanwhile, the other player forced to micro his fights as well will not be able to queue units at the right time and will fall behind because of it. The population deficit will grow until the game is definitely over. I think that it is quite a big advantage. For comparison if used correctly by a good player it would be kind of as if a player is with a game speed of 0.7 while his opponent is at 1.0, normal speed. While both players have the same skills and would make a good decision at a good time, having your game slow down allows you to make more actions that are valuable at a critical time of the game. However, if both players are booming, it makes almost no difference as both players will have the time to do all meaningful actions, and the boom will be the same. It may still boost some players' booming ability, so it may also be unfair for that reason, but i don't really know about that personally. I am saying this based on (maybe a bit limited) experience. There's a certain player that has a similar skill level as me. If I recall correctly I have a slightly higher win ratio against him when he is not using ProGUI. However when he used ProGUI I had 0-3, and it was not even close. He simply made what I think is a perfect use of the mod, forcing fights mid-game and getting a pop advantage I could not recover from. I will give a little more intuition on how this can affect competitive games by giving the example on how macros are viewed in Age of Empires 2. Basically, any kind of macro is banned, and you can see in this video how even the simplest macros are problematic: 0 A.D. is not AoE2 of course but still that shows macros can escalate into a huge advantage. So if powerful macros are found with @Mentula's mod then that gives what i think could be an unfair competitive advantage as well. The same can be said with autociv where building hotkeys give a huge advantage (when used properly, of course). The difference for me is that it is a feature that should so obviously be in the game, that it makes it fine. But anything further than that, I am not so sure. AoE2 also had some grey areas with the building range indicator, and some mods like small trees or age of cubes. I hope you see my point. I personally wouldn't mind too much in team games which are less serious and where we try to balance it before game start, however if I expect the game to be competitive when I really want my level to clash with the opponent, that's gonna be a problem for me. Of course I know that neither @Atrik and @Mentula intend to do any wrong and I respect the openness of your programs, but still that can cause a problem when a powerful feature is released. Personally I would like very much for the AI to have an enhanced training algorithm. Personally a long time ago I modified their queuing algorithm to grow population faster, however it is not worth much as I didn't touch the other parts of the AI to go with it. We can see that in the following screenshot where my AI (red) grew population much faster in the early game than Petra (green), where they both had the same gather rate at a medium difficulty each:

Thanks! I've tested it and the AI was very passive, as it didn't try to attack at all. Otherwise, it works very well.

Cool!

Understandably, a queue resizing itself can't be in native game tho, since either you have settings like in this mod to "not consume resource under a limit" either the auto-queue become a nightmare, always taking out all resource and leaving nothing for buildings and stuff.

These ideas are quite practical.

Have you ever found that you are floating a lot of resources in the game, or some of your production buildings are idle because you are lacking one type of resource? This is because your economy isn't optimized to support the production of units. It is not trivial to know how many production buildings you should build, and how to accurately distribute your workers on each resource to support non-stop production of these buildings, so that little resources are floating and no production building is idle. If you are interested in building the most efficient economy, my study may be able to help you. I have analyzed the economic structure of 0 AD Alpha 25 and searched for the most efficient economic models to continuously produce units in different scenarios (see the attached file). By considering the gathering rate of workers, the cost and production time of different units, I derive a simple formula to calculate how many workers are needed on each resource to sustain the production of units at different batch sizes, with and without the economy upgrades. From the calculation results, I make a number of exemplary economic models to illustrate how to distribute your workers accurately on each resource in different scenarios. The results may be adapted to design other economic models for different strategies, and shall be particularly useful when combining with the auto-queue function of the game. You are welcome to give comments to make improvements. Designing economy in 0 AD.pdf

interesting. if i disable proGui then i see autoCiv again. and enable proGui then autoCiv-options not anymore. is this only at my PC? all good. was my fault. ty