Atrik

If it's an option, it can be nice. But (obviously) it's nothing as good as just making every player mods visible in the game room. The latter also being probably simpler to make, and more useful as some host could maybe want to ban some signed mods. Using unsigned mods isn't uncommon and a lot of them don't even make the slightest debate. As for solving cheating, I still don't understand why you think this would prevent it. I think I can affirm that we are indeed talking about a single mod. Even in your cited example you might point out to instructions on how to modify a (signed) mod to reveal some infos. That is actually an example of cheat/modifications that would not be impacted by the option. Even if you consider adding some stuff like checksums I don't think cheats wouldn't find their way through it, easily since it's an even an open source game. So again, this feature would be to disallow (a) mod, not prevent cheats. Because we love so much to throw cheat every sentence to look very smart, the debate will hardly evolve around more useful matters. I think there never was a single threat about this mod saying something relatable beside "cheat cheat". Even when talking about introducing features, it's about preventing cheats, and the suggestions are totally biased toward preventing mods, not cheats.

So you want some new checksums on each mod to be performed upon login or something? I've just tested and modified signed incompatible mods are joinable by players with the original one as I was expecting. So I don't understand what you mean, I'm probably missing something. Wanting the game to introduce a features that clearly will downgrade user experience, just to attempt to enforce a ban on a single mod is totally out of measure, add to it that (what I would consider) the ultimate cheat is available from command prompt; some hacks a widely spread, and now it's just ridiculous, yes. Sorry if that sounds like mocking but clearly I can't even have a clue of wtf is that hysteria about progui. Players that already can't bear such unfair advantage provided by the mod are already successful in enforcing players not to use them in there host....

This idea is clearly not to make cheating harder as it has been seems so many times that real cheats are just undisplayed mods (hidden in other mods, or are direct modifications of the game...). As well, you can cheat in 100% freshly downloaded vanilla just using the command prompt to reveal the map for example. Some other ideas were also: get rid of compatibility check all together, forced on by default. If we want to prevent cheating, atomizing user experience with mods to 'make progui usage a little harder' is top priority and obviously worth it in my opinion. We should go ahead and do this. Let's not make something that actually improve usability like tooltips/lists of mods for all players in a room, let's just ban instead. Too scary to rely on individuals opinions, so we need to enforce things globally like commies.

Skipping replying to degenerate accusations of dishonor and what not... Not even sure some actually play MP... The version on mod.io is technically compatible. It has however the compatibility check turned on. If it wasn't, it would have been better to measure the popularity of the features in the mod. And why not consider adding some to the game. Some are pretty obvious like idle building notifications, list of all units... I already pointed this out multiple times elsewhere. Boongui top panel is also much more modern looking then the vanilla one, same for fgod panels... Now about the famous auto-trainer, it's also making the game much nicer to play for some players. You get increased control over production and it works seemingly compared to vanilla auto-queue. It's quite a bit unforeseen to have a single panel to control all buildings in AOE type rts but this too isn't that stretched off to think of an adaptation for vanilla ui. This would probably not be the case at least for the foreseeable future in 0ad, but, despite a few people pretending the opposite, auto-trainer doesn't provide any substantial advantages. If you turn on vanilla auto-queue in all buildings you will have the same APM required then having to manage auto-trainer. Sure, the batchs resize themselves and you don't have to panic when the game throw you the "Insufficient resources" error message yet it's not going to impact your game performance noticeably. Theoretically the dynamic batch would be optimized, but in practice left-over resources just get consumed seconds later by another building, and overall it's not that much harder to consume resources with any of theses systems.

For context @BreakfastBurrito_007 routine is to: login spectate a game comment on my game-play with "cheat" every sentence He've been doing this tirelessly for 2 years. He's also totally lying as he already saw me play without autotrainer and have the EXACT same tactics with success but goes on to spam comments like "rush is how he exploit cheat" in game chat and lobby. I would challenge anyone to remain calm toward someone after spreading lies and dismissive comments for a extended period. The fact is: use vanilla autoqueue, and you'll already have a "automated training system". The difference is that you have to pay attention to error messages telling you "Not enough resources, deactivating"; and when you get it, just restart autoqueue again. As for @ffm2 argumentation, it's the same that was argued over and over in others topic so i won't reply. You believe it's a cheat and "imagine if we automate everything". You are however the first I witness taking it as far as wanting to regulate contrast or graphics settings like fog, clearly positioning yourself like willing to prepare all 0ad player to some e-sport major event. Although only the most mainstreams e-sport event actually even dare to regulate hardware/settings to that point.

Weird but reassuring to read you explain that. Thanks @Norse_Harold.

Pretty sure most people know this. But preventing this from happening will pretty much be worse. In case that's not obvious, if a unit reset or re-target when foe gets out of range, chasing will become very buggy and depending on how often you check for range you also impact performance. Maybe some other games have this figured it out but from what I know it's often either chasing get too weird or overshooting is allowed.

Sieges engine shouldn't be usable as main units in army, instead they should be tactical units to add to a combo. In vanilla a26, bolts fulfill this role, also because of it's limitations (pack time, min range), but with good stats (good damage and range). Instead of seeking to make bolts spamable superchamps, sieges towers could have been balanced to reach this status too, with for example a capture aura buff or something instead of hit and run op arrows. The more tactical units you can use for combos, the more micro that isn't the classical 'snipe and dance' will add and make battles more interesting. If the issues is that microing too much unit type is too hard, then maybe adding features to ease base micro can improve players experience. Well I already know the trend will go exactly against what I say above as it have been explained to me enough times.

That one sounds fun.

Hi @norjay. I love the idea of having random maps with 'challenging topography'. It seems the generation here mostly make cliffs in circles pattern around the map center. I believe it could be funnier to have them have theses patterns form outwards from the players starting positions instead. This would make fun to try to plan defenses and also be less cumbersome to travel (often mostly empty in early phases) center of the map.

They are impossible to capture if they are garrisoned in p3 and full hp. I'm sure most will agree that defenses buildings are balanced (in a26). It is very easy to extend the "Alert" Panel to have more options to help this. Actually my first ever mod was adding the following "Alerts" buttons: [Hide icon] Females garrison to houses only [Tower up icon] Soldiers garrison to defenses buildings (Soldiers go in towers, cc and forts) [Sally out icon] Ungarrison all soldiers from defenses buildings.

The mod seems to have been updated on mod.io, but doesn't show in the in game downloader @Grapjas

O.P. concept

You created this thread and got a lot of support. I don't know if anyone will be able to help you at this point.

If things I say irritate you, you shouldn't have solicited me in your thread. Now if you think people are trying to offend you even when they call you "respectable", then the problem might just be you. I'm very less surprised of what happened with Geriatrix, now that It appear you are kinda trying to provoke conflicts. Thoughts I had enough conflicts on this forum I should stop replying to non-sens hatred.

Not a very good way to deescalate your issue to accuse random peeps to be on his side. I remember leaving Geriatrix's rooms for banning players. I also never hesitated to criticize Norse_Harold moderation. I never noticed they held grudge because they know better then that I'm "picking a side".

Alright Geriatrix doesn't care about my opinion, doesn't act based on others advises but let's try to be helpful. Please, Geriatrix, kindly let @leopard enjoy the game, as he is a respectable member of the community. As for Geriatrix actions, I understand you consider them an offense in games you host @Norse_Harold, and punish it by banning (your games are a nice place to be in btw, because of your oversights) but in that case you weren't host. And as said, threats of pausing/leaving a game unless a specific spec is banned is common behavior. So If you think you need to take action against Geriatrix, you should also pursue all offenders (they are too much).

I haven't brought the topic myself once. Every single instance of it being debated here was @BreakfastBurrito_007 or @real_tabasco_sauce starting to talk about it. (As always when it pops as a off topic). AND I haven't replied this thread once, unless tagged or quoted. Please check by yourself. About your divide with Geriatrix I didn't pick his side against you, nor yours against him. I've expressed that Geriatrix have no reasons to be moderated and that his behavior is far from unforeseen. I'm not unaware that he criticized me or my doings for a very long time, yet I still had fun learning from him. Better sort out how you guys can live together as the community of this game is already tiny, and Geriatrix is one of the players that holds some experience that others can learn from. "I usually never see @BreakfastBurrito_007 or @real_tabasco_sauce too aggressive against your mod" is this a joke?

Like? The very last chat when I decided to leave the game you called me retard (although probably it happened that I also made use of insults towards you, as you deserve them clearly). This just after, again arguing I needed the mod to play well just AFTER a game I had turned my mod off and proved again that it wasn't the mod defining my level. You twist reality all the time not the opposite pal. "Atrix is no touching the keyboard" => I was one of the players knowing the most hotkeys "Is an AI playing" => No definitions of AI can describe auto-trainer's panel "Private mod" => Progui isn't private or hidden "Is a cheater" => I could reveal map in 100% vanilla 0ad just using a command line, If I wanted to cheat they would be more effective ways then to rework the gui. You made sure that players who didn't heard about the mod were exposed to your lies that it was a ai, bot, playing for you. Whereas a better production system is a feature often desired by newcomers, yet I got targeted by your team for coming up with something that feels better then vanilla system. You also admitted never trying it so you also made all your critics on assumptions.

Players threatening to keep a game paused or leaving it unless a spec gets banned happened every day I was active, including against Geriatrix. Do every incident feel like needing moderation? I don't criticize @leopard nor @Norse_Harold for getting pissed off Geriatrix behavior or posting opinion on forum. I just don't see how or why this would be moderated. I'm not holding grudge against you @leopard, can't see why you come to state this. Of course it's funny to me to see @BreakfastBurrito_007 calling on moderation after being an actor in a defamation campaign against me for over a year. Reminder that he spread lies and rumors every time I saw him logged in, at the point it felt he was only logging in, not to play a single game, but just to talk about me. He would literally: log in, spectate a coupe of games I'm in, make his comments as spectator in global channel, log out. Repeating this multiple times a week. Same for his brother. Sad but hilarious in the same time.

Breakfastburrito continuously spread lies and he also motivated some players to exert similar "hostage situation" that you describe above but against me. I didn't felt that he was breaking any therms of uses doing so, and even probably that this was a freedom he should have to express his opinion (even if he had admittedly had 0.000 knowledge about what he was talking about). Therefor I wouldn't even got the idea to call on moderation. Now he calls on moderation against Geriatrix... @Norse_Harold you are likely to take his side on this, but Geriatrix not doing anything that seems to deserve a moderator's attention, and breakfastburrito is only getting a taste of what he was so keen to get me to live anyway... In my opinion @Norse_Harold you shouldn't get too much into the weeds of moderating everything in random game hosts because it's simply impossible and you can't format every behaviors under rules. Well, I already know we disagree on this point but still wanted to write it again in defense of Geriatrix's freedoms.

I made a mod that fix this problem called "Resize Queue", it will: resume production if it get interrupted by lack of resources resize batch to adapt to resource availability You can get it on the mod downloader or on gitlab if you want to play with friends: https://gitlab.com/4trik/resizequeue/-/archive/master/resizequeue-master.zip Another mod for smoother production is progui (https://gitlab.com/4trik/proGUI) that allow managing all production buildings from a single panel.

https://github.com/0ad/0ad/blob/master/binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/templates/template_unit_infantry_ranged.xml Can't adding it here just work?

You really just can make up stuff to try prove your points. Since now talk about my gamplay specifically with females I'll explain the principle with witch I play: You don't need to aim for a specific army strength, as to win your opponent, you need a stronger army relative to him, not absolute (seems obvious right?, well it's not for most that will always fight maxed out). Therefor if you can send your forces early with upgrades but you are keeping a high female count to keep up eco, you can win over a opponent aiming for a later 'ready' timing. Instead of taking off the pressure your opponent when you need wood (by recalling CS to gather it). It's better to just make more females, even in late game. CS gathering wood are just a loss of efficiency since they are just costlier units that gather at about the same rate. When booming, if you have some hunt, making cavs instead of inf makes food even 'cheaper' then wood (gathering food is very efficient with cavs), and cavs can be used harrass your opponent. Since food is now so cheap, making females is even more worth it. This is how you can storm your opponent with cav harrassment and chain up with some rams early enough. You might have 100-120 females min 13-14 but you got rams AND harassed your opponent all game AND you have a bunch of cavs that are a bit stronger then inf. Sometimes if your ally isn't going to help you until himself is maxed out, you have no choice then you make the exact same strategy. Likewise, you are likely you meet opponent with the "classical" army size, so if you don't know when to retreat, just copying the "classical" army strength is also a good choice. Theses are the reasons why players locked in the local optimum of 60/200 in my opinion, as myself have experienced the need to going for this for the reasons above. Females ARE more cost efficient then CS in theory, so ofc that the reasons they aren't used more comes from other reasons then 'it's the better play to make only 60'.

85 females booms aren't uncommon afaik. Even if it was, wouldn't prove anything. Better meta could very well be discovered and unoptimal metas in a community with very few players wouldn't be surprising. Well that's one con on insisting to be silly right? You won't try to understand what Stockfish does exactly like all 1v1 you spectate with him against borg and the only commentary you can make are about mod usage, because that's accessible to your current game understanding. Stockfish was queuing females with vanilla autoqueue 1 per 1 btw.