Atrik

I was wondering how geniuses would solve the issue at hand. Tell us more please @Grapjas. The machine learning suggestion from @Seleucids sounds very promising, thoughts? We could also think of a partnership with this very reputable solution : https://www.easy.ac/

I only have a snap install for a26 and seems like it makes using the profiler more complicated.

One can only agree. Is there a screnario or build that you think the autotrainer feature doesn't allow you to adapt your production too? In my experience you have much better control, and feeling of control of your production and army composition with the suggested autotrainer overlay. You probably make very informed judgement, and you seems to have stake in mp. What's your lobby account name if I might ask? Anyway you might also be one that will start replying with quick claims and insults, I might be guilty of doing it too but better I stop replying to this thread.

I think what @Acero meant is that the performance issue isn't affecting everybody the same, not even at the same moment in the simulation. The best example would be, moving the camera, dezooming etc, can have a lot of impact of your performances, and subsequently very likely slow the game for all players. Making a headless profiling of a multiplayer replay might or might not hint to what performances felt like for this game.

I've checked and for-now, I think only the Persian palace miss that territory root labeling. So short therm it could be just added. For mods and future alphas it would be ideal to have more infos automatically added to the descriptions. I think a lot of datas could be nice to have into the descriptions, like pack / unpack times for relevant units would be a example... Maybe with a list with bunch of datas that would be nice to have, that could facilitate the work to whoever would tackle this.

What attracted me in the first place to games of this genre is strategy, macro, teamwork... @Grapjas if you get satisfaction out of making repetitive tasks that's ok. The mechanical skill of clicky stuff for me just gets in the way of game enjoyment, I prefer having time to think when playing rather then just only learning to queue up brain tasks. I don't know exactly what proportion of players would actually prefer game with less clicky UI, but it's surely not 0%. Also once again with remarks on skill and leagues and whatnot, I'm considered the same when balancing a game with me disallowed to use "automation", I let you conclude what you want of that, eventually stooping to make stupid remarks on this being related to """"""""skill"""""""".

The description isn't generated, it's written so for some buildings it's inaccurate. Example the Persian palace does provide territory root but it's not noted in desc.

Fortress don't provide territory root and it wasn't the case in a26 neither. Only CC's and Palaces do. In a26 all units regenerated a fixed amount of capture points for the building they were garrisoned in. This amount was dependent on phase. Basically all units regenerated 1, 5, 10 capture points in phase I , II, III respectively IIRC. In a27 units regenerate capture points for the building they are garrisoned the amount of their "capture attack" strength. Which is 0 for females, 2.5 for CS rank 1, 5 for inf champ.... To compare imagine a CC in a26 in phase III: 20 Females garrisoned = 200 capture point regeneration 20 CS garrisoned = 200 capture point regeneration 20 Champ Inf garrisoned = 200 capture point regeneration Now same CC in a27 in any phase: 20 Females garrisoned = 0 capture point regeneration 20 CS garrisoned = 50 capture point regeneration 20 Champ Inf garrisoned = 100 capture point regeneration As you can see, capturing garrisoned buildings is much easier in a27 (at the exception of in phase I where it was very easy in a26, but now it's harder instead).

I've just discovered that you add ignored user on forum, that's great. I can add @BreakfastBurrito_007 so I don't feel the need to explain/debunk every bs claim he repeat in circles, after I already debunked them multiple times.

I don't think I am being dishonest... Some of the issues you list, I just don't have them, even when turning off auto-train, because of the passive features of the mod. I often forget that others compare with vanilla UI, but it's true that I made the simplification of comparing with me playing with ModernGUI. The best example is that I never have stacked production in a barrack with none in others because I'll use idle barrack button. As well it notify me of the idle buildings so I'm less likely to forget too. But even then what I say would still hold true, once you have training units as a automatism, which isn't that hard to get if you brain has still a bit of plasticity, exact batch sizes aren't very important on any scale, bigger batch aren't even always optimal because you are freezing more resources for long time, with a more distant return on investment. To avoid situations where overwhelm prevents you from training units, you need to turn on auto-queue. Now, ModernGUI isn't just my work, it's bundling a lot of code and features that were brought by community members for years. Yet, I'm very happy with what I brought to it, a tones of details, options, improvements suggested by players, and it makes it the mod it is. So of course, I can't deny that there would always be something a bit personal when I'll defend this mod, and I have an attachment to it because it also because it sincerely improve the game experience.

I played a lot of games where @BreakfastBurrito_007 was spec and had it off. That's also why he is obviously blatantly lying to fit his narration. My game-play is exactly the same, early 2 cav scouts, often followed by cav or inf rush, high female count in late game etc, often successfully. He will just recall the fails I have even it's a minority of games and that I fail big time all the time with autotrainer at a similar rate ~35%. Basically I know that I need only very short adaptation time to get my brain to make the very interesting part of training units manually then the difference with or without is imperceptible. The limiting factor of economic development is resource balancing and build order. Units can be autoqueued (vanilla) and the efficiency of batching doesn't matter that much (There was even some posts that argued that smaller batch are more efficient, theses posts are simplifying calculation too much but that's another topic). So in any cases, the important parts of what make you successful in a game will be tactics/micro (and build order) and strategy. The small tasks of having to scroll to optimal batch size and re-click production buildings every once in a while are just unimportant frustrations of a limiting UI. It's just my opinion ofc and I respect others as long as you're not dishonest like @BreakfastBurrito_007.

Y I just had a game with climax lag and 3fps using no hash. Camera and gui were still responsive thoughts. It's clearly bad to play without the oos hash check but i guess most players are desperate for improvements rn

From a few games tested without hash check, both I and @Seleucids seems to have a VERY noticeable difference in performance. I was extremely skeptical that it would but it seems like it does somehow. The stuttering is just... gone. And in late game I don't get insane fps drops like 7 - 3 fps.... Would it be possible to return the other players hash by default every 20 turn but once in a while, maybe every minute, actually calculate the hash? This way we could have fully compatible version with the fix even if it's hacky? How could i do this?

Alright, well I never saw that for myself. I only already saw wrong accusations about Matias using it while he never did but that doesn't count.

Sorry @strat0spheric, I guess i confused you someone else. For the "hidding" accusations I just never heard of anyone smurfing using auto-train, maybe someone did? This despite @BreakfastBurrito_007 constantly spectating game and making comments to discredit any users. Anyways, this is one more reason, I, at least don't believe you are right about saying that any users is attempting to hide it.

It's a very small community and everybody knows everybody. At least in the games i play, players selectively seek other competitive players, and that's a even smaller circle. Not everything is perfected in the trainer panel I made (and that is a small part of ModernGUI tbh.....) but It's so much better/fun to have a centralized production panel that's it's very likely that some future RTS would have a system alike. In other words, the trainer panel is a UX improvements idea, and I think it's successfully superior as to have individual panel for each production building. Again, not saying it's 100% mature but it's kinda sad that a lot of people made their opinion on it based solely on impressions and on what @BreakfastBurrito_007 will make sure you hear about at first.

@strat0spheric you are the one creating smurfS to hide, and bs again attributing to mod user "hide" the mod because it fit very well with the narrative that it's shadowy. Hosts are aware when someone join and use the mod. @BreakfastBurrito_007 is mad because his drama has often little effect, and he wish more people would make as much drama as he does. Some host like @chrstgtr and @roscany enforce rule "no auto-trainer". This topic has a tone of attention, you can check the views of this one, it's through the roof even if it's uninteresting and have been discussed 10+ times before. Basically every thing you say is a lie. Possibly, you think that you are in the right, just like @BreakfastBurrito_007 for "the game's integrity and dignity" but you are clearly flat out lying and hiding.

Which at this time would tell you that all features are desired in base game (by majority voting).

I guess divide all categories by numbers of voters.

Bullshit asymmetry principle (Brandolini's Law) is again what @BreakfastBurrito_007 and alike use when the argument goes on. So I'll make this last reply and then let them post whatever. @seeh made a feature in autocivP to display mod usage. You have also statements on this very thread that I'm all for features that would display mod usage. It's not. It's actually within the game licenses that anybody can mod the game. You can make a circular reasoning with the tos stating that cheating isn't allowed in ranked games. But you can absolutely use mods in ranked, compatible or not (you can make a ranked game with ponies ascendant mod afaik). As long as all parties are in the know there aren't any problems. That would be true for any game modification. You don't do it for autociv. Some very old players like Dundean consider it as cheat. So why don't you? You shadowy cheater! (It was even the first mod to introduce auto production lol ) lol. I'm done with this thread.

Almost all hosts, I play with, I'm 100% certain they know it exist and that i use. Absolutely nothing is made in attempt to hide it's existence, even the contrary. So that point is totally made up. As for the game-play impacts, sure it have a impact. It's negligible on the scale of a game as there is much more important stuff, especially in complex games like 4v4, so the priority, as i see it, would actually be user experience, and prize players decision making over them being good clicky clickers. I have this thoughts because you mention the autociv active pause that is the perfect example of wanting to @#$% on great UX improvement feature for some imaginary competitive standards rules. It's a free game, goal is fun, nobody have stake on game outcomes. There will never be 0AD Esports in the foreseeable future. But if you feel you cannot bear that someone is using any feature, then you should host with rules that prevent its use, or any other rule you want. Basically same conclusion then the billions debates before this one. And it's a great way to have a middle ground for disagreeing people.

Adding some features that are in autociv to vanilla can only be a good thing.

We miss you nubs.

I've got frustrated of not being able to find 16 colors well distinct of each others, so I added an option to force only 8 colors to be used. So with this option you could only define the 8 first colors, and they will also always appear in order. customcolors.zip@Seleucids For the mod above, there are no default config, boolean options are bugged, check and uncheck to actually set to false Or here is the configuration I'll set as default for ModernGUI with a good color palette that is nice for any game size from 1v1 to 4v4. (That config can be used for Mentula's original version as well ofc, I kept them cross-compatible).

In option, you define what color you want to steal, then every game you aren't this color, yours will be swaped with the player who has the one you want (As well as you customizing this color in the first place ofc) Example: Set color 1 to your favorite red, then set "Replace Own Color" to 1.