BreakfastBurrito_007

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.

This would be awesome, I'd love to join even if I just have time to spec. @Player of 0AD I'd say that may not be the case in a27, there has been work to make many more maps playable, and specific gameplay focus on some new maps. Additionally placement options could allow variations on how even mainland plays.

It’s definitely worth keeping in mind that not all of these are similarly OP. A24 and A25 were far and above more OP than the others.

Diversifying and improving the gameplay experience is important, and people are working hard on that. Most players at the moment would consider cav champions in particular spear cav champions to be too strong. Especially troubling is the scenario where allies are sacrificed in order to make them. it is a bit confusing to me what you mean by “heavy”. The Gaul fanatics are champions, but they are anything but heavy. Its also worth mentioning that different maps have different resource availability. Having a purely champion army which you seem to idealize is not impossible, nor is it a weak army. It’s just not always a very efficient way to use resources.

Please don't. This kind of automation (autosnipe) doesn't belong in 0ad. Also what's the deal with Ptols being considered a cheat? I know I haven't played in a month but this wasn't the case then. Same with roman and macedonian spearcav rush. I know that ptols are OP in the base game and that the spearcav rush is strong in the comm mod, but no one considers these things cheating. To make a bulleted list with ptols and progui both included as "hotly debated" is misleading.

@ffm2 What advantage do you think this modified attack move provides? Just out of curiosity. It seems to me that whenever a modification is made to "reduce required apm" it always just gets used as a cheat.

That would be a lot of units though right?

I’m in favor of Philip’s suggestion maybe with 200->100 metal, instead of removing building requirements. I think players intending to attack in p2 will have a better idea of what to prioritize so the “stay in p1” encouragement might not be so bad. In addition it might make it harder for the player who stays in p1 to catch up with techs. There is also the option to go from 3 to 2 prereq buildings. This gives more flexibility especially in the event that these buildings get more expensive. Can I extraneously voice my support for unit specific upgrades?

Ah ok that’s way less impressive.

The funny thing is when I was 130 earlier like you saw I was sniping and my units were walking around the barracks to get to the individual targets I set. I failed this one bad lol. This was before Sniper got a new PC so the game was horrendously laggy. I can confirm all of these were manual clicks (my mouse costs 4 dollars and comes from grocery store)

I use alt+left click sniping with 100+ units. Can you see if I have an apm spike like this? You may have to look for an older game from base a26; since the comm mod came out sniping with skirmishers is not nearly as good as it was. I’ve definitely lost fights because of trying to snipe after the comm mod came out. The extra pathing and exposure for skirmishers is now more prohibitively expensive.

Another thing worth discussing is the effectiveness of palisades and walls vs cavalry. There are some things that can be done to make walling more playable: walls snapping to buildings, destroying trees upon completion, increase overlap tolerance for better sealing. In addition to this, wall rebalancing can be done to make palisades and walls more effective against cavalry. This would also give infantry a relative improvement. For example melee cav could be given a 0.3x vs palisades.

Decger is built different. The curious thing with persians is that they don't have strong eco bonuses for booming. Cheaper production buildings is great but they still cost stone, and after spending the first 300 you don't save enough to cleanly spend extra stone on another production building or a tech. All persians eco buffs usually after they already reach 200 pop (more prod buildings more savings, also res trickle from ice houses, hero building). The reason I think they are so fast in this data is less so because they are faster at booming (I would say gauls, brits and even rome are faster), but because players are very incentivized to boom with this civ.

I have a replay where things were different.

Using continuous cavalry production through p1, p2, p3 to overwhelm a clean player's multitasking abilities. This does not perform nearly as well without progui because both players are on an even field in terms of multitasking, and you even avoid doing it when progui is turned off. One thing you do better without progui is build houses in time. This is because you are actually aware of your production rate when you dont use progui. Isn't that remarkable.

I don’t think it can be stressed enough how important it is to eliminate the grey area of legality which is where all of the impact on clean players occurs. I think visibility mods could accomplish this depending on how they are executed, provided that players and especially hosts are aware of how progui is affecting them in games. @Atrik When people play against you they actually have a lot of commands to put in. I guess you can’t relate to that. This makes it so that they don’t have time to investigate your cheating. Players do notice the gameplay meta changes that result from your using progui, but they usually don’t understand why they can beat you in some cases but not in situations where your advantage is maximized. Once this happens a couple times, players watch the replay or spec the next match to see what’s up.