Let's Talk about Mods in Competitive Games

This brings me to the only real question I have left. I would personally not use a mod that I created and then didn't share, but is that even wrong? I have to say that it probably is not, but only because it isn't enforceable anyway and I don't want us to have to go down that rabbit hole just yet.

Looks like you're right, which is a good thing.

However, I still strongly remember this wasn't the case at some point in time during PA classic around the same time dom released his disco comm mod. You can't confuse what is possible with what is legit. Sometimes these two spheres do not converge, and PAMM is not necessarily a whitelist when this is the case. For example scripting automated actions is obvious cheating because it bypasses intended implementations. There is a point at which the excuse of 'oh i was going to do it anyway' is no longer valid.

Take infinite build vs autofactory. Infinite build simply changes the default setting of an already implemented behaviour. For autofactory to be comparable, there would already need to an implemented default setting for automatic production of units, which there isn't. As is the same case with automatic walls around turrets. It cheapens PA's third resource (attention) and how you spend it. There is no way to argue that having guaranteed 100% factory uptime is something you would otherwise be able to do.

There is a line that is crossed, regardless of whether or not that information is available for modding. For example the functionality for remembering last known position of units, or moving camera via a minimap. Do you think this is fair to use over someone who has just bought the game and presses 1v1 ranked? I don't think it's a good image, and neither is it conducive for a healthy competitive scene.

In the recent quitch interview with the devs, it was mentioned that wreckage was partly meant to fulfill this role of informing the player of where units have been. Nothing about ghosts.

It's absolutely wrong irregardless of enforceability. If autofactory wasn't made available, or minimap mod etc. and only one person had access to these, don't tell me that person would not have an unfair advantage over others with guaranteed 100% factory uptime, unparalleled camera control, and 100% instant map awareness.

Just because something isn't enforceable doesn't make it any less wrong. If a competitive FPS game didn't implement sufficient controls to prevent wallhacking, does that make wallhacking any less wrong? The rules of the game are created by the rulemakers (devs or tournament mods), not the system of imperfect code which intends to enforce and control these higher level rules.

If a modder is able to create a gold farming bot in World of Warcraft, does that mean this is acceptable behaviour? "Oh, i was going to do those actions anyway, and everyone has access to the gold farming bot" - yea goodluck telling that to the GM when making your ban appeal. A modder having access to certain information, or the ability to gain access to certain information, does not necessarily mean it should be fair game to use in ways not intended by the developers as evidenced in their vanilla implementation and use.

--
Disclaimer: I'm not saying that certain mods are inherently evil or bad. Only that they have the potential to be so depending on the context and situation in which they are used. If a tournament host says you can use certain mods, then there's nothing really wrong unless that rule is not widely known to participants. Official 1v1 ranked ladder however is a different thing entirely.

Ugh this again. I think you guys are blowing this up way to much.
As long as it's not all played on the same pc with same hardware / software there will always be differences.
Oh and make sure all players have taken the same substances as well.
PAMM is out there, get to know it. And let's be honest if you have all those "unfair mods" and you suck at the game and you are playing @cola_colin that is using no mods at all well you'd lose anyway.

I can stick in restrictions to players from using hotbuild2 if you want

Could you explain what clear advantages players gain from hotbuild 2 or hardware and software?

This also has nothing to do with some noob playing against cola and losing. I'm really sad that you seem to view this issue in that light.

Well you'll be able to click or do things faster.

And I feel the discussion always boils down to pettiness of "I lost cause my opponent is using mods".
Which is silly I think.
Suddenly the fact that the winner 'trained more, is more intelligent , ...' is reduced to nothing cause "unfair mods".

Yeah mods can give you a little edge but it's so very small compared to a lot of other factors, that it isn't a big issue I feel.

Ok, have fun vs ai, I'll enjoy the tourney (even though I barely use any mods somehow I manage to win way more games than I lose).

Your questioning how hardware and internet speed can be an effect?!

Trust me, playing at 15 fps (my laptop late game) vs someone at 60 due to hardware makes a difference. As does high latency due to slow internet.

Even this doesn't guarantee the outcome but trust me you have to adapt your play style to the slower machine.

I view ui mods in the same way. If we were hosting a physical event (ie all players in same room on same hardware) then I think specifying ui mods would be worth it.

That said, as we cannot enforce any kind of parity between hardware configurations, internet connections and so on, I don't think it's necessary to do so with ui mods either. I mean I think these are essentially 'amateur' level tournaments compared to the big games. It's nice we can be a little more relaxed about things.

Also I think cola makes an excellent point that PA was built to support mods from the ground up. It's a fundamental part of the game and forcibly preventing it in competitions strikes me as not in the spirit of PA.

Yes I except that at a theoretical level someone could create a mod so powerful that it created a real problem, however nothing we currently have does so imo. Maybe we could arrange some kind of event to test how much impact mods make? I honestly don't think they change much (for me at least).

So its ok for people to use bright pink models in competitive cs:go lan events because someone out there in the world is playing at 1 fps. Yea, that makes alot of sense to me.

Now assume that everyone who plays the game meets the minimum requirements. Tell me what the difference is between someone with 100 fps and someone with 60. What is the difference between someone with buttons on their mouse and someone without? Virtually nothing.

Also, do not tell me that having instant 100% awareness of the entire map, every single other planet in the system, and instant camera movement anywhere without 9 bazillion camera hotkeys is not 'powerful'. I'm sorry but anyone who thinks it isn't powerful enough to matter doesn't play PA at even a semi-competitive level.

@proeleert
So basically the arguement boils down to 'stop whining like baby'. In that case, i should demand all my opponents blindfold themselves while playing me, because it isn't really a big issue for them obviously. After all, if they lose, they are just cry babies who would have lost anyway.

Dude, way to attack me rather than my argument :/

Simple fact- hardware *does* make a difference, and for people like myself who *have bills to pay* getting top notch gaming hardware isn't always an option. Do I complain that you shouldn't be allowed to play due to your better gaming rig? No of course not. Should I be barred from tournaments because my system is a bit slow? No- it's what I've got and I have to work with it.

I mean mods as part of competitive games in this genre are the norm. TA relied heavily on mods such as the excellent Clay-Sy's demo recorder (which also added line / area building options and a whole host of innovative at the time UI tweaks). It was a prerequisite for all TA tourneys back in the day.

Heck SupCom FA- the oft held epitome of this genre, only exists at all due to mods.

PA was built from the ground up around modding support and as such it's quite reasonable for mods to form a part of the competitive scene.

UI mods in particular are a tool kit. You can use whichever tools you feel useful. The map mod is good (although you *grossly* overstate it's utility in 1 v 1 games, as they are single planets and as I mention you can achieve similar coverage of 1 planet using a PIP, on a mutli planet map its more powerful I agree). My point is, the toolbox (PAMM) is available to all players, and they have to be aware of it as they cannot enter any Exodus event without installing a mod. It's the players responsibility to investigate the tools available and choose which suits them. I would no sooner be forced to use a mod I don't like, as be told I can't use any. If anything we should maybe put a restriction that all mods used have to be publicly available on PAMM.

At the end of the day, the rules are down to exodus as they're the ones running the tournament. You are of course free to impose whatever restrictions you see fit on events you run yourself. You also have the option to *not enter* exodus events if you feel uncomfortable with the rules, however as far as I'm concerned that's your issue.

Edit: removed last line (sorry @elodea).

You've very much misunderstood me and gone on a defensive tangent. I think this is because you thought i attacked you which i did not.

It's an objective truth that if someone runs the minimap mod but cannot make use of it, then they arn't playing competitively (by making use of the potential power of the tools at your disposal). There is no need to attach ego to this word - i didn't even aim that statement at you in particular.

I've stated the minimap mod's tremendous benefits too many times in this thread, so if people still want to hold onto their belief that it's inconsequential, then whatever really.

I havn't said anything about banning low fps players (what?), exodus being evil, or starcraft so i don't know why you brought those up.

If anything, the only thing i have brought up is the ranked 1v1 ladder in which new players who have bought the game may be matched against players using these UI mods. If anyone can give me a strong arguement of how this is in any way fair, then i'll shut up. Until then, people can go on and on about the 'modding culture' of this franchise, rationalising the use of handicap mods as the norms and expectations, and i will simply just skip over it.

Really I don't get this argument. So yeah the new player will lose vs somebody who is invested into PA 1v1 and has learned to use some UI mods. Why? Probably the main reason the new player will loose is that the player who is invested enough to have UI mods will also have a better build order, better strategic thinking, know more about the game in general, etc.
The UI mod may look fancy, but it really is the smallest reason why the new player lost and one of many things that the new player needs to learn to be a better player.
So yeah a new player who just bought the game will loose to most people on the ladder due to a long list of advantages the more experienced player has. Unfair? I say not. Isn't that the whole point of a competitive game?

If a player is constantly not expanding they are at a disadvantage, just like a player who is not using any UI mods. Both are things the player can fix about their play. The UI mods are really the much smaller part compared to playing the game correctly in terms of gameplay even.

Exactly.

I agree ubermap can be a big help. But if you don't know how to play the game you'll lose everytime.

Anyway we even if we wanted to restrict some ui-mods it won't be easy, and people will circumvent it anyway. I rather not go that way.

My problem with all this is simple.

lets take your argument to it's conclusion shall we?

So- we agree, UI mods (especially the Uber Map) give players that use it an unfair advantage. This isn't acceptable for ladder or tournament play.

We cannot see who has what mod installed, and lets face it we've in the past established that 'gentleman's agreements' don't work- especially with the more competitive players who 'use what works' and 'if it's in the game it's fair game'.

So there is only one conclusion- we have to forcibly find a way to disable all UI mods to avoid abuse.

Definitely true. Something like that is clearly an exploit, and shouldn't be possible. I guess the issue is which features are fair and which could be considered exploiting, although that example clearly was never intended to be possible.

I guess I agree with you on that, although my reasons might be different. In my opinion the only command modes that should be allowed are ones that operate on a command-by-command basis / changing individual default settings, like starting factories with infinite build, certain units starting with hold position, changing area builds from circle to line, commands for build templates, etc.
Basically, I think that a client mod should not be able to take data from the game / your economy and make decisions for you based on that data, like when to turn radars and factories on or off when energy or metal fluctuates.

Not sure if I agree with that one. I see intel in a different way to automated controls. Moving a camera via a minimap is just a control scheme difference; seeing unit ghosts is something I'm a little wary of, but it's still information you have access to anyway. You could go back and look at it with chronocam, the main advantage of the Ubermap is that it is better for performance and displays the information in a far more accessible way.

I believe that UI information display modifications (short of exploits, again) are fair game. Would you say having multiple PiP windows is fair? Because some people will have a clear advantage based on their display setup and their computer performance with PiP as the only option too.

I agree with this too. In my opinion, even requiring people to look up PAMM is a little much. For forum users PAMM is well known and commonly used, but outside of that I'm not sure. I think the base game should have a mod manager builtin, as well as a browser for popular mods, with allowed mods restricted to those publicly available.

That would be an exploit, since it would clearly go against what is meant to be possible. As for Ubermap, I would not consider it an exploit, because I don't think the 'rulemakers' intend to limit how information is displayed in-game.

I don't think this is a fair analogy. Changing how you view the information isn't the same as using a bot.

So I really wish to see to following mods on PAMM asap because they will be made and I want them public.

1. Scout plane on world patrol always staying out of range of AA.
2. Preset buildings with 1 button macro's.
3. Predeterment factory builds
4. Auto kiting units.
5. Auto splitting army when in range of commander
6. A better version of Free Energy

And all the crazy stuff people come up with.

I might come from a complete different direction here .. but I don´t think PA is currently big enough or will ever be big enough tournament wise to warrant "sharp" mod controls so to speak.

I can´t remember when we had a PA tournament with 100k on the line...

That being said it is and should be clear that some mods give you a advantage to a certain point
-no reason to deny that.

I've created & use a number of little mods that are not public.

But they are not advantageous like the ones mentioned in this thread. I don't think anyone has ever noticed any of them when I stream.

Such a rule would motivate me to document and publish more mods. Which would be good. But PAMM would also end up with some duplication as modifications to mods are not always accepted by their original author(s). I also don't have time (or want) to check other mods the same functionality.

I'm just going to randomly chime in to say it is important to remember that now matter how 'objective' a sport may appear, there is always some subjectivity inherent in deciding what rules of play make for the most fun and sportsmanlike atmosphere (the definition of which is, of course, subjective). So I think it's a bit fruitless to debate about what combination or lack thereof mods equals the most fair gameplay. Of course the fairness of rules is not subjective, if one mod gives a player an advantage then there needs to be a decision to make this mod required or not. Any competitive sport will have a list of approved and disapproved equipment. Olympic runners can make use of various high tech skin tight clothing and shoes, but they can't use a spring loaded mechanical foot apparatus (like what people with out legs run with) because it alters the nature of the game beyond what the organizers and community considers to be in their best interests. Bear in mind that this is a subjective judgement - the consumer could also decide they really want to see cyborg running (I do!) and we could create a new augmented-leg league where everyone would expect to have this equipment. The key point is that the decision of what is fair is objective - all players must have access to the same equipment, whether they choose to use it or not - but the decision of what makes the game fun and defines the sport, is of course totally subjective. There is a clear decision in this community that competitive PA involves the use of UI mods. As someone who wants to see the genre thrive from a viewing perspective, I applaud this.

Personally the main limitation to interesting gameplay is primarily the APM/attention overhead (i.e. the zaphod limit). Any UI mods or tools that free up the player to make more strategic decisions, and fewer micro-managements should be welcomed, minimaps included. It's not the responsibility of the organization to enforce that people use them- it's only up to Exodus to make a list of what mods are and are not allowed as agreed on by the community. I believe this will result in a more interesting to spectate game, and a healthier all around community. Wallhacks and similar are in an obviously separate category. So I think it will be most fruitful to discuss what kind of sport we want PA to be, and then agree that all players will be made aware of those rules, rather than debate which specific mods are fair or not. It's all fair if all players have access to the same rule set. It really doesn't matter if a player elects not to use an allowed tool. To me - as a causal player and spectator - the real fun of PA is in watching epic macroscopic decisions pay off in nail biting tactical engagements. I enjoy watching how a player responds to a particular feint or strategy, or how they recover from a botched assault. I could basically care less about the details of how they manage their economy or the mechanics of microing, as long as the result is interesting to watch. Micro is definitely a part of what I consider making a skillful, fun to watch player, but frankly I'd be bored as heck if the best players were defined only by this. I have absolutely no problem letting lots of aspects of economic and micro-management be done by mods; there will always be some skill based trade-off between deciding to do this and doing it yourself. If a mod emerges that clearly changes the landscape of the strategic playing field, then we'll need to discuss whether the result is a more or less interesting sport.

At the moment realm is a big part of the PA community and we get a lot of new players. Does this mean that we should ask people like custard to constandly make newer and better mods that do more things for you so you got time to do the important things or just have better vision, better managed eco, easier control or just more units? Mods that we dont share or tell anyone about, because a good player will do everything to win and its all fair game right? You guys probably know by now that we also are playing to win and we practise aswell, but i really don't want to find myself in a place where i am trying to install 10 different mods that we need in order to be able compete any of the other realmies that got this secret godtier modpack. Also, i don't want to have to make choices about wich players to trust with the secret godtier mod pack and wich ones not because this game shouldn't be about that ****. This aint Rust or something where u have to think about who you give the key to a certain door. But if this is the direction the rules are going to i wouldn't be suprised if it was like that in a year or so. A good experience wouldn't force us to go and abuse the lack of rules. We just practise our skills, we play fair, we win or lose on equal terms and are happy to get as far as we get. We are not too stupid to install mods or too stupid to think it wont help us win more games. Its just good sportsmanship that sometimes even on teamspeak with only us needs to be defended. Does anyone remember the roll-off remover mod that custard made? That was possible too. You could use it in tournaments and in 1v1 ranked. I argued against that too because it was unfair and gues what, i was right because was removed, but not before a long time where you could use it without any consequence .

1 More thing. I am using the more PEWPEW mod because it looks freaking awesome. But after reading this i got to agree that its better if i uninstall this incredible mod....

The quote is from the Clash Of The TITANS thred. I stil stand by my words.

Just a genuine question in the end to all you who are deffending the usage of mods like free energy and minimap. Do you think it is fair that two players play and one of them has a lot of mods to help him, and the other one dont?