BreakfastBurrito_007

Ah yes this I agree with. Sniping is quite undesirable, I'm not in defense of it I'm just against the game working entirely through buttons using optimized automatic behavior. In my personal opinion automated things are ok so long as they are outperformed by manual human control, and unit behavior falls into this category.

How much faster compared to infantry do cavalry need to be to have a significant mobility advantage? Do they still have a mobility advantage if they are say 1.5x faster instead of 2x? would that result in less cavalry balance problems? Also about the automatic targeting preferences, do we want to control the game entirely through menu systems and functions? or should we accept some imperfection of automated systems (like basic unit behavior) so that players can develop skills to outmicro others and win battles?

It doesn't take any multiplayer or even 0ad experience to understand that automating a signification portion of the game provides an unfair advantage. I wouldn't go hounding grapjas to "verify" if his level is high enough to critique your mod, anyone of any level can do so just like anyone can see through your self-serving argumentation and your dishonest downplaying of the advantages you get from progui.

That is not true. There is a reason you added the autoscaling batches, otherwise you would have left it at 1 by 1. About batch sizes: 1 by 1: highest ROI per unit resource expenditure as is correctly calculated (but largely mischaracterized) by the thread you mentioned. ROI is not everything ofc. batch training: faster population growth, less unspent resources. Progui makes an optimization between these two. Its the same optimization that players try to make in game with their own production, only without even looking at the barracks. Its hard to estimate the net advantage in a pure boom with autotrainer, but it is objectively not 0. There are statistics that could be measured that can help show how big the advantage is, some of them were worked on by @ffm2, and others were deemed to be performance heavy. As others have said recently and as I have said before, the advantage is maximized when a user is able to rush or at least harass clean players so that a clean player is overwhelmed all while a progui user has the minimum possible production building idle time. This manifests itself in gameplay and balance patterns that I've had the misfortune to observe for 2+ years. @Seleucids balancing the game does not automatically make it fair, so balancing atrik including his unwarranted advantage does not solve any problems. Additionally your visibility mod(s) can't be considered cheats as they don't provide an advantage over players who can already see everything fine enough to suit themselves.

balanced does not mean fair. If I play a 1v1 against a better player, its fair but imbalanced. If I use progui to "balance" the game, then its balanced but unfair. Progui also offers strong enough advantages for particular playstyles that it actually alters the unit/strategy/civ balance. @strat0spheric do u know about autostart? thats also in progui, the units path to the nearest resource automatically teleporting thru the cc when necessary. Join a host with me later today and I can show you live.

How else is anyone to learn that you're using this cheat? you certainly don't discuss it during game setup. Also, if a policy is made for tagging hosts that allow progui, I support that. For hosts that don't allow progui no tag should be required as in games its implied that cheating is not allowed, and that also prevents hosts who don't know about progui from being preyed upon.

@TheCJ I'm not sure if you've closely watched progui in effect, but the key difference is that autociv building selections still require a 1:1 action ratio for the each task. In progui 0 cumulative production building idle time can be achieved without so much as a thought let alone an action. Progui basically manages all of the unit production for you, so that your economy automatically grows at the optimal rate while you focus on rushing someone. In this situation the rushed player is overwhelmed with required actions, having to manage economy and micro at the same time while his opponent can simply focus on the fight. To compare autociv and progui as equals is nonsense. Fortunately its very easy to detect. But if you know someone who uses it and would like them to stop, you'll find it very hard to even get a response out of them. Meanwhile hosts simply don't want to deal with drama and would rather start the next game. When I bring attention to cheating its not me that is making the drama its people getting away with cheating.

"Active pause" should not ever be a feature for multiplayer, I'd like to see that fixed when its merged. Perhaps single player users would want it to try to win super challenging scenarios akin to a 1-sided chess match, so I assume that is the demographic where we get those votes from.

Your suggestion is good, I think visibility is great especially when mod users are not forthcoming about the mods they use. At the same time we need to stand up for ourselves and not sugar-coat the effect of this mod. Its not my fault the mod provides an unfair advantage, I call it what it is: a cheat.

Yea please be done peddling your cheats. I'm trying to get the 0ad playerbase to stand up for themselves as well as the game's integrity and dignity. Its very clear to everyone that you don't adequately or honestly inform other players about your mod (ie asking to use it) when you have people like Dakara or RangerK show up here upset after more than two years of playing against this cheat without knowing.

The reason this discussion was created was because players were frustrated that there is no "official" status for the mod, even though it is very clearly against tos. The problem with "letting hosts decide" is that there is no discussion required to clear a player to use the mod. If I wanted to use a handicap for example, I would ask the host first and the host would allow me or disallow me. In the case of progui, users simply enter a host and don't mention a thing since they don't care whether everyone agrees that they use it. This is primarily how progui users get away with it, in ~75% or more cases most of the players in the TG are unaware of the cheats. If I was able to give myself a 1.1x handicap without anyone in the host knowing then surely it would be cheating; since progui provides an unfair advantage it should be treated the same.

well for people who know what to look for its extremely obvious in game, but none of this is visible before game start. My main concern is not detection but wanting to play a clean game. Somehow its the duty of 7 players in a tg host to agree that progui is banned and no responsibility falls on the person using the cheat, naturally it is very rare to get 7 players who are even aware of the advantage that progui provides so most people would rather just start the game.

There are a couple hosts than ban it, most players are unaware of it and users do not mention that they have it. Just because progui users are getting away with it doesn't mean that its fair. I don't use progui because I enjoy the game and have dignity.

If you read the above discussion you will see that there is indeed a way to cheat, and that this is what Dakara was talking about.

The active pause isn't a feature so much as a bug right? It absolutely shouldn't be added either way. For units there is an idle selector that is in vanilla, it would be nice to have that for production buildings too.