(1-VT) Integrate UI Mods

Status
Not open for further replies.

balparmak

Prince
Joined
Sep 20, 2015
Messages
572
Counterproposal to CppMaster's: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/38-proposal-integrate-ui-mods-to-vp.679606/

The original proposal also includes Improved City View in the list, which I and some others do not think is a candidate for integration. I propose integrating the following mods:

Filters in Trade Route Overview,
Religion Spread,
Promotions Flags for VP-EUI (only for VP-EUI, will be off by default, can be enabled in-game under interface settings)
Archeology Aesthetic Adjustments (permission received!)

Commander Influence Borders, (VP version here)
Show XP in Military Overview,


I sponsor this

edit: I'm taking out Commander Borders from the proposal, while I love it, it doesn't share files VP so there isn't a case for integration. AAA also has no shared files, but it's such a great tweak and follows the work I've been doing on the UI/QoL, so I'll keep it. The others share lua files with VP, and integrating them will ensure they'll never get lost or outdated.
edit2: Show XP in Military Overview is also taken out. I now noticed Infixo's VP version does a lot more than showing XP, and I don't feel comfortable taking that up since I haven't used that mod myself. Doesn't mean it cannot be integrated in the future, it looks great and Infixo's work is top-notch, just that I won't be the one to do it.
 
Last edited:
Counterproposal to CppMaster's: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/38-proposal-integrate-ui-mods-to-vp.679606/

The original proposal also includes Improved City View in the list, which I and some others do not think is a candidate for integration. I propose integrating the following mods:

Commander Influence Borders,
Filters in Trade Route Overview,
Religion Spread,
Show XP in Military Overview,
Promotions Flags for VP-EUI (only for VP-EUI, will be off by default)
Archeology Aesthetic Adjustments (if the author can be reached for permission)

I sponsor this
I like both your and mine proposals. Both just improve the game :)
 
I'm not acquainted with all the mods listed, but I'm going to have to oppose the proposal(s) on "UI - Religion Spread" and "Promotions Flags for VP-EUI" specifically. Note that I'm coming in with a minimalist perspective because I already have enough issues trying to run the game, especially in the late game.

Religion Spread is pretty expensive for what it does, IIRC, and is basically in the same category of mods like InfoAddict, which might be nice to have, but definitely not something I want bundled in by default.

Promotion Flag is again a concern for me due to the increased memory usage. And I'm not sure why it should be integrated if it's going to be off by default anyway. Personally, I've never seen a great need for it, and its most important feature (in my opinion), the promotion stacking on the UI, is already integrated into VP.

Also, I'd like to ask that people try to post link the mods they're referring to in proposals like this as not everyone might recognise them.
 
Yeah I should've included the links, will do tonight. I never heard religious spread being an expensive mod, afaik it doesn't store anything and shouldn't affect the game unless you open it's tab. Maybe I missed it, are there any posts about it?

The reason for integrating Promotion Flags (and others) is maintenance & longevity. PF edits a lua file also edited by VP. While I made a lot of future-proofing on PF, it's still likely to get outdated as VP gets developed and PF isn't maintained by original authors. When no-one takes over the maintenance, this causes the players to either drop a massively popular mod, or worse, keep using it not knowing it's outdated, face issues. By having it optional we have our cake and eat it too, it ensures PF will never require additional maintenance and remain compatible, while the minority who have issues with it aren't affected.

I do realize there are different opinions about what VP should be, and it's perfectly fine to disagree. For me, it's basically an expansion pack, so anything that polishes the experience, whether it's new UI features, immersion&flavor additions like GP names, or parts of popular submods like ENW is a candidate for integration, as long as they are bug-free, not costly, and do not diverge from VP's overall design. Like I love my gameplay modmods, but won't ever propose the integration for the many because they are going for something simply different.
 
Last edited:
For Religion Spread, I'm pretty sure I read about it somewhere, but I can't seem to find it. I'll actually try to take a few days to try playing with it to see how it goes.

On Promotion Flags, I'm sympathetic to the arguments used, although not convinced- there are just too many potential things you could use the same argument for. That being said, I suppose this is largely a matter of trust, and I'd be willing to trust your judgment on it.

By the way, how do you intend to go about making it optional? Will we be seeing a new (5) mod for VP? Doing this for all the mods being integrated would obviously be infeasible, but it sounds like Promotion Flags is a special case here.
 
Counterproposal to CppMaster's: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/38-proposal-integrate-ui-mods-to-vp.679606/

The original proposal also includes Improved City View in the list, which I and some others do not think is a candidate for integration. I propose integrating the following mods:

Commander Influence Borders, (VP version here)
Filters in Trade Route Overview,
Religion Spread,
Show XP in Military Overview,
Promotions Flags for VP-EUI (only for VP-EUI, will be off by default, can be enabled in-game under interface settings)
Archeology Aesthetic Adjustments (if the author can be reached for permission)

I sponsor this
I'm concerned about the potential memory impact of Religion Spread and Promotion Flags. Promotion Flags shouldn't consume memory when turned off, though.

Regarding triple A, it's generally considered ok to use abandoned mods if the author can't be reached, unless they had a request not to.
 
Proposal Sponsors: balparmak.

(Sponsors have indicated that they are able and willing to perform the code changes required for this proposal if the community votes Aye on it. Other coders are free to sponsor this as well. A proposal without a sponsor will not advance to the Voting Phase.)
 
Timestamp post to arrange all the threads in a neat order.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom