The Ethics Of Mods In Competitive Play

I finally feel like we are more on the same frequency I am glad to see that. Ive never stated that I personally think all mod should be banned, cuz I think they are important to evolve the game. I guess was a lot of misunderstandings and ****. Many UI mods is mostly personal prefs and I think every individual should think trough them morally and decide for them self (hotbuild is extremely important to many players and should not be banned). The reason Ive opened my mouth recently is because of (mostly) this two modds that probably should, but aren't a part of the game, creates unfair advantages that I personally think does not belong in a competitive scene.

But isn't it contradictory to yourself that you seem to not want mods to advance the UI in any really meaningful way at the same time?

I guess it can be interpreted that way yes, but it was not meant that way. When you make a mod that exploit weak spots in the UI or adds something in addition that gives an advantage, you show the community and developers that it is a functionality that should be in the game/ they should consider to add. Then it is up to the developer to decide wether they want the energy (for instance) to work that way. Until that is done/not done it is simply not fair. Feel free to use it in your casual games. As long as they are not a part of the game though they will not be fair simply because everyone won't have it. I therefor think they have no place in the competitive scene. Feel free to disagree with me, it is fine. This is anyways how I think about it
You won't hear me say a single neggative word if any of your mods are added to the base game.

Talked about this with my brother who was a rust admin for a while, the solution is simple. The game is intended as presented in vanilla. The mods that change toofar from vanilla are becoming '''hacky'' first and the benifits make them full on hacks with practise. Like mousemacros and stuff like that. Not blocked by the game but allows things that are impossible in vanilla.

But they are not impossible in Vanilla. You just need to open the UI debugger (part of vanilla) and enter the right magic words that use vanilla Uber provided APIs.
Mods aren't hacks really, there is a dedicated system in PA to make them a reality.

For a quick hack (maybe 5-10 hours of dev time?) like free energy I'd agree, but since apparently some people extend the discussion onto the ubermap I think that's actually a problematic view. I am not very active anymore in playing (code is just more fun lol), but when I play I will certainly use the mods I build. I'd estimate the time I put into developing UberMap is probably hundreds of hours. Maybe even 1k. It has been a project I started nearly a year ago and advanced in multiple steps as the API (or my understanding of PA's memory layout) grew more and more.
You can't expect modders to dedicate a lot of time into making mods and then go "yeah but nobody should play with that, it's just a suggestion for Uber."
That way you won't get anybody advance the UI in any way.
If this whole discussion should end up resulting in "rules" that disallow the usage of complex mods I'll probably just stop even trying to make mods. Maybe for the lulz somebody would make some mods like free energy and simply not share them. You'd create an environment were real progress is basically destroyed while people who are just looking for a quick advantage will just ignore the rules and nobody can stop them really. Since they won't share the mods they use anymore you'd also have people use maphacks and stuff, since then it's all the "same" in terms of the rules anyway.

which how is that ever gonna make it's way into the game?

it's not like Uber have a habbit of digging up mods nobody other than them has access to and finding the hidden value in them.

what where the mods that Uber implemented into the base game again? ...Oh yeah! THE POPULAR ONES. The ones that everybody played with!

The very reason the mods excists is because they do things for you that are impossible in vanilla.

you said that as a generality, making the statement false.

I almost feel like helping you out then I remember I"m not on your side of the debate.

@tunsel11 see, perfect fit

Burn fourm BURRRRRN!

All players of future tournaments be prepared for a drug test to check for performance enhancing substances.

I knew it you are all on adderall or other drugs! No fair.

Will there be a dress code as well? Because I'm not sure I'm OK with that...

Fucck!! I Knew weed was gonna get in the way of my carrier one day!

You can manage mods in PA without killing off modding.

You can manage mods within PA's competitive scene even easier. Nobody's suggesting anything about non-competitive games.

I assume by 'managing' mods you really mean 'banning' in competitive games.

I've already said, you ban ui mods in competitive games, you effectively prevent competitive players using them at all as you cannot base your game play around something you can't use in competitive games.

This will seriously hamper ui modding in PA.

I never said anything about banning; that's simply one of the options.

Even if that went ahead, nothing would prevent them using mods in non-competitive games.

However, I was more exploring the arguments the article raises and why I feel they're incorrect. I don't have any easy answers. But it needs to be accepted that mods do give an advantage and that this advantage is by definition in a competitive game unfair. Beyond that, there's a huge amount of potential discussion of what to do about it.

But we'd have to agree on those points first. Which is why I tried to say what I did.

I'm a longtime modder of other games. I'm a software developer. I love mods. But if people are serious about a competitive scene that doesn't end with the same 20 folks going round in circles, you need a sustainable, fair environment where people aren't bound by specific mods that you have to research to know what benefit you, to compete on an equal footing.

I agree, I hope they don't ban plain white T's or I will have no clothing to wear!! ;-;

I don't see your problem

I'd argue that as with *all things in life* there are is always some degree of 'unfairness'. My point is that the argument many (not specifically you) are taking culminates in a ban on all UI mods in competitive games. That in my opinion is going waaaaay to far for what is in reality a minor problem that is only sensibly applicable to a small sub set of mods.

I'm not saying all UI mods are inherently fair- what I am saying though is that as with all things, there is a level of unfairness which is acceptable. To hark back to an earlier argument (please don't flame me too hard for this), hardware is a difference between players. I know Elodea says 'if you meet minimum requirements all is good' but in reality, my ancient laptop meets minimum requirements and runs the game (on minimum settings) at around 30 fps at game start dropping to 15 - 20 fps late game. My higher performance desktop machine runs the game on maximum settings at 80 fps game start and levels out around 40. The latter allows me to play significantly better against a good opponent as I can issue orders faster, yet both set-ups meet the official requirements for PA. Now, most people would say if I decide to play on my laptop for whatever reason, that's my choice- and you know what, I fully agree. That is a level of unfairness I am happy to accept- and one that doesn't prevent me winning games (even against well matched opponents). I believe that whilst it's a measurable influence on my performance, it's still insignificant enough that I can live with it.

That brings me onto UI mods. I think we really need to accept that there is a certain level of unfairness that is acceptable*. Exactly where that level lies is rather subjective, and I guess it's something that the wider community needs to come to a compromise on. I personally firmly believe that there is definitely room for UI mods on the ladder *within limits*. Are we really going to argue over mods that:
- Change the colour scheme
- Improve visual FX
- Change specific FX (e.g. Hello Kitty commanders)
- Set specific player preferences (e.g. I like all my factories on repeat, or Hotbuild for those who don't like the default hotkey system).

Again I want to firmly reiterate- if we push Uber hard enough for a solution to this 'problem' the only outcome is they will disable mods of any kind for ladder games. I do not believe any other solution would be cost efficient enough for them to consider. As I've also explained a few times- in the event this is the case, no competitive player would risk using UI mods at all. You cannot base your play style on something you cannot use. This would make a serious impact onto the uptake of UI mods, which in turn would dissuade people considering modding these things from bothering (why put the effort into something no one will use).

I'd also point out, I know pretty much all the participants in this discussion and most of you date back to Alpha / Beta PA. I also recall almost all of you playing on @cola_colin's and @Illmaren's excellent PA:Stats based ladder system before Uber implemented their own ladder. Frankly I think it's pretty immoral to turn UI mods into the 'bad guy' now it's convenient due to Uber creating a base ladder- there would be no ladder if it wasn't for UI mods in the first place. To add to that, there would be no TA:Spring engine if it was't for mods done to TA, there would be no SupCom FAF for that matter either. Without modding, this *entire genre* would have died a decade ago, so why try and strangle the life blood out this genre now in the name of fair play?!?!

Any comments about 'forgetting the past' are very misguided- let's think for a minute *why PA was a success whilst Human Resources failed*?! HR was arguably the more impressive of the two, but the fact remains that where PA had a large loyal fanbase to support HR was new IP and didn't have the following. PA is primarily a game for the TA / SupCom franchise games and a huge underlying part of those games was good mod support (thanks to @neutrino in both cases). We shouldn't just forget that history because now it appears to be convenient.

If you want a balanced, mod free and UI fighting RTS experience there are lots of games that serve you already. If you want a large scale RTS with a powerful UI and mod support, play PA. Lets not turn this into a StarCraft clone to suit ex StarCraft grand masters who like the UI to be as intrusive as possible as it lends itself to their high APM. I mean god forbid a strategic player could beat a button masher at an RTS game?!

That's as silly as saying murdering people with knives is ok to do, because the alternative is to ban all knives and then people wouldn't be able to cook. Don't try and mix the bad with the good in order to save the bad.

Many games are succesfully able to allow a certain degree of ui modding without disruption of the competitive framework. What are your reasons for thinking this is impossible also for PA?

Who decides what is acceptably unfair? Is it the modder? Is it you? Why do they have this right instead of the two actual players involved in the competitive matchup? And how will those two players even know that 'acceptably unfair has not been breached by either one of them?

I would like to see your well thought out and convincing answers to these core questions, otherwise i suggest you stop belittling people don't hold the same ideas as you as whiners.

You need to let this arguement die the painful death it deserved weeks ago. What does modding have to do with hardware and software and internet? Are you telling us the purpose and use of ui mods is to solve your fps problems?

Frankly, you need better understand what people are actually saying. It's already been told to you so many times again and again with patience that this is not a witch hunt, nor is it about turning ui mods into bad guys. So I ask you again to please stop with the strawmans and mud smears. Let's talk like adults. Can we manage that?

Again for your benefit, not all UI mods are questionable. Those that are feature additive, and those that add significant competitive advantage however are. They are not questionable because they are inherently evil, but because they are by nature unofficial modifications which suffer from all the fairness and accessibility problems that mods always do in contrast to official implementation.

And now we get to the heart of the matter. You see this as a threat - as the evil hands of SC2 "apm spam" slowly creeping into your home when it is anything but. If anything, mods like ubermap have turned PA more and more into SC2.

This has coloured your judgement and made you think irrationally. You have not understood the issues raised, nor the arguements made.