Atrik

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?

I understand where you are standing now, but I though I saw you calling me "autosniping" in game chat. Sorry if I've been mistaken at some point (You are right that your comments here are constructive attempts and It's me reacting stupidly). However I didn't do any mods for myself. I published anything I use in games. And I did my best for progui to be very customizable, implementing features I won't use if they make sens when suggestions came to me. Also did my best to make it available through the downloader. That's how now, all players could have their preferences fulfilled: you can play with or without this mod, with or without players using it. That's the best possible scenario where everybody can get what they want, so no I'm not a "rogue developer", "modding only for myself", and even less so someone trying to force anything on anyone. You probably have been trolled... Not sure autosniping would be an .ogg file, they are media files. So indeed, someone likely created this mod to spread the rumor. Some people are pretending to even hate most ideas that would relieve players from click-fast tasks. On the other hand, mods give the possibility to players to have choices, and might help to experiment things, for modders it also lower the constraints to contribute. So that's reasons I miss to understand what are you proposing here.

Yes but now if you make an attack move, the range at witch melee units consider attacking is surprisingly small. Add to this the fact it return to initial position sometimes and you have catastrophic outcome when fighting.

Since you think sniping will and should stay in 0ad, then you'll figure out one day or another that such click multipliers can make noticeable difference, far greater then any mods of auto-queue. And thinking I have any mods that take decisions for me is just you talking about something you built assumptions on. You can't know what a players is doing on it's gui by spectating it, even more so if the player have panels you don't have. Or maybe you consider restarting auto-queue a decisions? Anyway now it's obvious we won't make use of any matters in this topic so we should probably leave it here.

Why not you just avoid games with players you think are cheaters instead of attacking them in the chat? This solution seems more civilized if you have divergent opinions on what is cheating or not. Yes I noticed this is also what you wish for. I find it really funny so idc if you continue to justify behavior like your brother and yourself have in game chats.

Can't really picture the comparison since that's quite a lot of new buttons in progui for it to feel like a lose of control. And the vanilla game already has an autoqueue feature, I have more and faster control over my production then if I used autoqueue, this is the reason you call it a cheat remember.

Hope you can share with use some evidences, would be nicer to even don't start feed rumors before having any proofs. I think I tend to avoid sniping all together when possible. And if I do use exactly Alt and press 120 times like you'll imagine. So would be quite interesting if your accusations would be toward me. Regardless of if you really found a player that use autosniping or not, this is childish primitive reaction to what one find easily a threat. Sniping can be easily "cheated". Real cheats like revealing chat or enemy stats are already easy to do with a small modification, but sniping is even easier because you just have to install any software that can multiply your clicks. A lot of 'gaming mouses' are shipped with a driver already allowing you to have any button to do multiple clicks. People can hate me all they want, won't change the fact that sniping is a extremely weak mechanic of the meta/game, that you can have a "cheat" mouse before even learning about sniping. In my humble opinion, we should try to solve the problems of the games by making it better. Now about the allusions to progui, that is pretty unrelated excepted that I authored this topic, I will just remind that a lot of people took position about it, and never actually tried it. They built assumptions, and started to be very vocal about it still. @BreakfastBurrito_007 you admitted that you never tried it and still log-in regularly to spec game of whoever is online, use progui, and start making a dozens of remarks about it, very close to harassing. You don't even know who use it until they tell you...

Maybe also the siege towers would be usable to capture defensive buildings rather then being hit and run units. I guess wouldn't be a problem giving it some capture strength based on units garrisoned.

Indeed, don't think dogs have the class "Soldier" so they won't add arrows or gain experience in stable by default anyway. If ever allowed to garrison

Who won't? Your enemies can't capture a building guarded by twenty Britons dogs can't they?

Anybody can fork a mod and remove some features, I don't feel like making it myself because it doesn't add anything useful since you can already customize the features you want to show on screen in proGUI. If you don't like the reaction of peoples to the mod's name, because it's associated with a bunch of assumptions, you can rename it easily to something else in proGUI/mod.json.

You can use BoonGUI, or use the option in proGUI under "GUI customization" to totally disable and hide the panel with the trainer and autotribute.

Wow your doc is op! But I guess I'm not comfortable using more then my ~25 hotkeys , I'll mostly click on the gui like a noob.

Yes, and reminder you can also customize selections hotkeys so it's extra op! Example If you like dogs to be selected with cav, and healer with infantry (in your config file): hotkey.autociv.session.entity.by.class.select.(Soldier|Siege|Dog)&!Ship = "" hotkey.autociv.session.entity.by.class.select.(Soldier|Healer)&!(Ship|Cavalry|Dog) = "Alt+S" hotkey.autociv.session.entity.by.class.select.Cavalry = "" hotkey.autociv.session.entity.by.class.select.Cavalry|Dog = "Alt+E"