TheCJ

I agree with @BeTe that the tactical decisions you have in p2 are somewhat limited and could be expanded. I believe it might be worth considering to add more "half-champion" units like the naked fanatics, that serve the purpose of a trained soldier rather then a citizen soldier, but don't have the equipment requirements (and according metal cost) of an actual champion. Because at the moment, champions represent the pinnacle of soldiery a certain civilization was able to muster, while citizen soldiers are, the way they function in the game, just normal workers you gave a spear or a sword. I believe a unit type between those two makes a lot of sense and could positively impact the tactical elements of the game aswell, as it gives players an option to actually fight a booming player (without running your own gatherers/citizen soldiers across the map and thereby sacrificing your eco) and not just raid them. It would also somewhat negate the booming = turteling problem, as you would have access to stronger units in p2, that can pose a threat to a player that just booms, but can't gather resources themselves. It would also have the side effect that battles might happen sooner with smaller armies, which some people might enjoy An alternative would be to add normal workers, that can fight notably worse than citizen soldiers, which is basically the same concept of adding a third (or fourth if you count mercenaries) type of unit, but might be easier to implement. If one were to add workers, they could be produced as fast as citizen soldiers are at the moment, while citizen soldiers get increased build time. That way you wouldn't need to decrease the build time of champions to make them more useful and you would slow down the game overall... (I would welcome a change like that, but I understand that others like how fast 0ad plays)

Compared to you guys, Im just a humble newbie, but I'd like to add my thoughts as a fairly new player of 0ad. For someone like me, it is impossible to tell (during the game) whether someone is using ProGUI. That implies, that the advantage you get by using the mod is small in comparison to the advantages you get through random map generation, timing, fluctuation in player performance etc. According to @Mentula in this Thread, ProGUI averages out to a 24s advantage in booming. That's fairly irrelevant (and likely the standard deviation is larger ). I feel in no way discouraged from playing 0ad just because there are people using a mod that gives them a slight advantage (although I obviously can't speak for all new players and understand if someone feels differently). Honestly, I didn't even know @Atrik uses ProGUI before reading forum posts, but it doesn't matter, since I know how good he plays, and balance accordingly. It's actually a lot of fun to play with him, because there is always something happening and the games aren't just booming. That being said, hosts have every right to refuse to play with any player, for whatever reason. No host has to play with anyone if they don't want to. It'd be different if there were game-sided servers, but as long as I'm hosting, I decide who gets to connect to my pc and who doesn't. Maybe it would be helpful to add a way for the host to see if players use ProGUI? Then people that really dislike playing with others that use ProGUI, can just tell them and put them spec. And people like me, that don't see the game as competitive can just ignore that information? Anyway, no matter if you believe ProGUI is a cheat or not (it is ), you should never insult someone for using it (I'm not saying anyone here did insult someone, by the way :3). That obviously also applies to other people, you should never insult someone for how bad they play in your opinion. After all, we surely won't get any more players for this amazing game by fostering toxic behaviour towards newer players or players that want to try some of the great mods that exist for 0ad.

Well, Im neither a pro at this game, nor have I been around for long, but I still want to add my thoughts. 1. Is proGUI a "cheat"? According to wikipedia: "Cheating in video games involves a video game player using various methods to create an advantage beyond normal gameplay, usually in order to make the game easier." Now, I never played with proGUI, so all information I have is from @Atrik in this thread, but to summarize what he said the mod does: It gives players the ability to produce units from buildings without having to select those buildings. It gives players the ability to designate a desired ratio of certain units, which is automatically sustained (by re-training only unit types, of which the player lost some or only training them in said ratio while booming). The player can choose a certain amount of resources to be kept, which wont be used by the automatic queuing system. Did I get that right? If I did, that is certainly an advantage beyond "vanilla 0ad". Because any tool, how insignificant it may be, that only one player has, is an advantage. Now, I believe "vanilla 0ad" should be considered the "normal gameplay", which makes proGUI a cheat. 2. Does it matter? Well, there is a forum post about it, so it seems to matter to some people. I personally don't believe it matters, as the advantage is not big enough to be insurmountable through skill, and the advantage lessens the better you get at the game. 3. What could/should be done? Any tournament or competitive game should clearly state before, which mods (if any) are allowed and which aren't. Of course. But the same goes for 1v1s or teamgames. If you don't want to play with someone who uses proGUI, don't. Nobody forces you. But the same way, nobody can force another player to disable proGUI. The only real problem I can think of is, if somebody is being dishonest about whether or not they're using the mod? Is there a way to check for the host of a game, whether the players are using the mod? 4. Anecdotal thoughts. I don't use any mods that alter my gameplay (with the sole exception of the "delete no warning"-option from autoCiv), no Quickstart, no building hotkeys, no guis, I don't even use the default 0ad autoqueue (normally... Corrals are impossible to use without). Because I actually like to look for the idle barracks. It's part of the game for me. But since it's still very much possible to defeat an opponent who uses all of those things, I really don't care how other players play this game to have the most fun.

But 20 cavalry javelineers with just one (1) defensive upgrade (or 15 with all three upgrades) can capture up to 6 barracks right under a fortress without one of them dying... So the fortress is pretty much useless against unforeseen attacks, no? I don't mean to say that the fortress itself can't be utilized in a great way. But often times it seems like a waste of resources, since it doesn't provide enough value for the effort you have to put into building it... (Well, maybe I'm just bad at the game and still need to learn how to use it, idk)

Greetings, @user1. My lobby name: TheCJ Lobby name of the offender: Ronord Offense: Left a rated game without resigning. Thank you commands.txt