Atrik

It's great that you underlined the importance of NOT fighting when you are attacked by superior forces (2v1). Too much games outcomes are defined by players refusing to be cowards.

Thanks @Grapjas, I missed the "semi release" too. I was looking to try out all the features, I'm glad @zozio32 came asking

Nothing in the mod is incompatible and therefore it is safe to ignore compatibility check.

I think this was a bug that I patched since. Solutions: 1. Get/Enable autociv (and maybe load it first) it might fix it. 2. Patch proGUI. I don't remember how much this bug was affecting but I think it was very low. If you still have the error with current patch 0.5.15 please tell me.

I revised this mod for better playability. Autoqueue won't consume the resources needed for a building you are currently placing. Fixed more limitations it had in previous versions, that was causing autoqueue to break by itself.

Another idea is to apply the bonus in own territory only. I don't know any bonuses that apply by territory, even in unreleased civs but maybe could be worth introducing this. Example: 'Roman Roads Cost 500 Stones, 300 Food Own and allied units +1.5 Walk and Run speed, when in own territory; but enemy units in own territory +1 Walk and Run speed.' Applying an absolute bonus value would in benefits slower units most (Siege, then Infantry, then Cavalry etc..), @zozio32.

In this last game, nearly a shame that the team who won was using weaker borders as meat-shield But in that game it seemed to be the only option our team to do. We did coordinate this plan a bit in team chat early into the game. @borg- had great map control, even better then I realized while in the game.

Maybe the food regeneration could buffed to be as fast as 1 fishing boat gathering speed, but you can still make the trade-off to fish intensively with more boats.

Ideally someone reliable/mature/impartial should take the role. But I'm not sure plenty of the current staff members have extra time to even desire to be project leader. @wowgetoffyourcellphone is active and invested. But maybe there are things planned by Stan or the team that he didn't wrote in his post.

This sounds pretty unfair. One would rapidly figure out how much Stan did for the project (I know only 1% of it, and still it's obvious). I guess next project leader would be honored to take on his legacy. I don't want to ask in the dedicated topic because it deserve to be a thread about thanking Stan but is there a ongoing discussion on who would take the role? @wowgetoffyourcellphone would be a great candidate, but would he accept? Is there other members interested to step in it?

If you play a little with newer or less experienced players, sniping is perceived as a hack, exploit, or might think it require a external tool to be executed, by seemingly, a majority (in my experience). I remember when learning it, that I thought it was clearly a weird unintended 'gameplay'. Now I got use to it, so it feels less weird, but still think it's unintended?

Thanks Stan, we'll remember forever the time you was leading this project and how much you did for the game and the community.

I think one of us have to stop replying so I'll do it. Seems you can endlessly throw accusations even when it's you wanting to do something, I'll be responsible. Cheat mods, Atrik cheater, Atrik responsible of whatever @real_tabasco_sauce will push for that will downgrade UX. And if you disagree with @real_tabasco_sauce's very smart opinion you are a flat earther. Feel free to make all the claims you want about progui, or even accusation about things I didn't do, I won't reply since it's probably annoying to people to have misleading thread title deviating onto debates about something else. Edit: I'm not playing the victim when saying you guys are dismissive. It's simply the accurate description of making expeditious assumptions, and making conclusions that are just based on stretching approximates facts. Perfect examples nearly every line in the post below by @chrstgtr.

Did you told me not to use it? I just though you'll know I was using it, and since I didn't saw you say anything, I thought it wasn't against your host rules. Accusing me from hiding the mod or lying would be something else.

I've explained how did the mod came up. I understand you probably don't like the concept of contributing with mods (or something else that would explain so much hate), you guys will continue to be dismissive, and I will continue to believe I'm did nothing special/outrageously wrong.

yeah... Anyway.... Everybody is free to propose different implementations of playability features. I suggested mines, and good players, and valuable members of the community, helped to shape this mod with in-game feedbacks. With no agreement in sight, one can always push for mods in general to painful to use online, but just like this threads reminds it, without mods, we would be missing some nice hotkeys. And it's not even the only single feature of autociv. What about some other mods like local rating, map mods etc? The removal of the ignore compatibility check option is even more more ridiculous when you take into account how ineffective it would be anyway against "less threatening"/actual cheats. Furthermore, one could easily enough transform a mod into a kind of cheat that won't show up as mod, so that starts to add up to how stupid the idea is. You can already decide not to play with players you consider cheating, no need to fck everything for everybody.

Yes, this is even the value proposition of the feature. I didn't forget since I describe, and it is, an overlay panel to control production of all buildings at once. With a bit of 'innovations' to make army composition easier to plan as an example. “decide which units to make, how many to make, and when to make them” => you say this to inaccurately state you're not in control it therefore "you lose decisions". Witch is why critics of the feature deem it outrageous, and the trainer is systematically related as, or at least compared to: an AI. I also remember seeing a post from you asking a feature to queue a tech before a building is finished among other ideas of yours that have an implementation in progui. I'm glad to be able to play with theses features on my gui that are obvious to competitive players and feel sorry you forbid yourself from doing so. In case some players dislikes some features while still having interest for some others I also put in the work to make the mod customizable. So of course, this can only be a bit disturbing to me to see a thread where members happily agree on the fact that my contributions are such treats, while suggesting features that I proposed through "the most hated" mod.

How you imagine it works, pointless form me to try to explain probably , but here would be how to compare it to auto-queue: Auto-queue which units to make: same as previous batch how many to make: same as previous batch, if can't, do nothing and when to make them: end of previous batch / when housing is available Trainer which units to make: read user input how many to make: read user input, scale down if needed and when to make them: end of previous batch / when housing is available

I meant customizing them, not assigning. You can change what they do and get more precise selection. hotkey.autociv.session.entity.by.health.nowounded.by.class.select.Cavalry

Dear @BreakfastBurrito_007, you seems to actually like the idea to have features helping with production. This topic should be interesting, I'm looking forward to see more features (or just talking about feature ideas is already entertaining) for this in the game. Since you again picked up progui (the trainer) as a counterexample, how did you find out it was reducing decisions? Is there any strategy you can't do using it? Is it nudging players toward a particular game-play? In my experience, it's easier to try out different booms/game-plans/strategy with progui in general. The mod is light years from perfect, but idk why a few people always criticize it for having features that players (and maybe even themselves judging by this post) seems to actually want. About autociv hotkeys, I guess, they where made too good (aka they can be nearly infinitely customized) that makes them more then hotkeys and deemable 'macros' by your standards: It also makes less sens to have them, as they are, in base game. Because you may not want to have features only accessible editing the config file or that require to understand logical operators. This is only speculation from me but it makes enough sens for it to probably be the case of why autociv hotkeys aren't in the game yet.

I think only 2 buildings have territory root now : CCs and Ministry (Hans). If a territory is directly connected to an allied territory (meaning your borders touch the allied one directly) with one of those building, the territory hold. This can be usefull to understand because your goal when attacking could be to "disconnect" and enemy territory to turn him Gaia. Most often, if 1-2 buildings are making the connection, you should capture or destroy them.

That's a lot of time the word cheating. I'm a cheater who cheats by cheating creating cheats. Now that's 100% sure everybody understand that I'm a cheater and the only form of cheating is me, therefore I AM cheat. You don't have to think, just think about how cheat is cheat.

Serious question? How can you bypass the mod check : you don't have the mod. You don't need to create a mod to make modifications. You can use other mods too to host your mods. Maybe then you planning to add new security features? I don't know maybe I'm missing something but right now if you want to cheat you have plenty of options.

This would make mod usage unnecessarily more painful. You'll punish the users that declare their mods and do nothing against those who hide them. More specifically this proposal is to prevent legitimate compatible mods, and by no mean can mitigate cheats or any mod a user would want to hide, and you know it.

How does current behavior of defensive differ from this description? I missed something here?