(1-VT) Integrate UI Mods Into VP

[CppMaster]

UI mods:

• Improved City View
• UI - Filters in Trade Route Overview
• UI - Religion Spread
• UI - Show XP in Military Overview

improve the experience and there is no reason to play without them. They don't affect the balance, they just make the UI better. Newcomers would have them installed by default, improving their experience, so there is higher chance they will like VP and keep playing. When a new VP version would break any of these mods, the developers would know it immediately and could fix them before release.

 

[azum4roll]

Promotion Overhaul modifies the database though.

I'd add Promotion Flags EUI for VP. People keep saying it increases memory usage by a lot, but they never provided proof and might have confused this with the old promotion flags mod which was bad for memory. Without this mod you'll never know what enemy promotions do without scrolling through Civilopedia to try to find the promotion that matches the icon.

 

[CppMaster]

Promotion Overhaul modifies the database though.

I'd add Promotion Flags EUI for VP. People keep saying it increases memory usage by a lot, but they never provided proof and might have confused this with the old promotion flags mod which was bad for memory. Without this mod you'll never know what enemy promotions do without scrolling through Civilopedia to try to find the promotion that matches the icon.

Ok, I stand corrected then. I've edited the proposal.

 

[balparmak]

I love ICV but it's a bit different, since it's a redesign while others just add more features. ICV also had issues with specialist slots occasionally glitching as long as I remember, and doesn't have the "lock specialists" feature from the newer VP versions.
Still, I agree with the main premise. Good UI/QoL modmods should be integrated as long as they are bug free & don't impact the performance, otherwise they eventually get outdated.
I've done the groundwork on Promotion Flags, so it should be easy to merge but it was vetoed back then. I still think we can add it as a toggleable option (default off). Archeology Aesthetic Adjustments and Commander Influence Borders would also be nice to have. The latter comes from WH and he's very generous with permissions, I couldn't reach the author of the former though. That said, it should be very simple to remake with blender I guess.

 

[Stalker0]

As much as I love ICV I can understand its not for everyone, as it is quite a bit different.

Religion Spread and Trade Route overviews are rock solid though, they do nothing but improve the experience.

 

[CppMaster]

So I guess the same list except ICV could be posted as a counterproposal

 

[pineappledan]

I have tried ICV and I went back. I don't like using it and prefer the existing city view

Packaging Promotion Flags as a mainline option like unique promotions would be a huge QoL boost while still being optional, and it would reinforce the need for modmodders to keep that up to date, so I would support that. My Manchu mod is heavily dependent on Promotions flags, and after trying it I can't go back

 

[Recursive]

I think there's a significant number of people who would not want to play with ICV and am tempted to veto this as out of scope since people who enjoy ICV can easily install it separately.

 

[CppMaster]

Ok, understood. Balparmak counterproposal is good too

 

[Recursive]

Would be open to adding it as an optional feature though, à la (4a) and (4b), if the community wants it. Including it like that will make people think they "should" turn it on to get the full experience, however.

 

[CppMaster]

Can it have "(optional)" in the name if that's the worry?

 

[Recursive]

Can it have "(optional)" in the name if that's the worry?

The title being Improved City View would likely negate any benefit from that. Note that (4a) and (4b) do not assert that they are better. EUI does, but well...there's no removing it at this point.

 

[CppMaster]

It's because it probably is improved. It's just some people that prefer to play without it.

 

[Recursive]

I'm going to veto the inclusion of Improved City View, because it's a dramatic UI change that should remain optional since not everyone will want to play with it. The others are more or less objectively improvements, but I'd still like to have a vote on them.

 

[pineappledan]

These should each be separate proposals

 

[Recursive]

These should each be separate proposals

That's up to the community.

 

[Stalker0]

That's up to the community.

I do think that's a reasonable consideration. When we have proposals that are effectively multi-part, and no single part affects the other, I do think it makes sense to create separate votes and then vote on them individually, or you could consider them multiple options within a single vote (similar to how counterproposals work).

 

[CppMaster]

It is a reasonable consideration, yeah. If it doesn't pass this proposal, I'll divide it for the next session. I just didn't want to clutter current session with multiple similar proposals.

 

[balparmak]

I think they can be separated in voting without needing separate proposals: A single poll with yes&no option for each mod listed, including the ones I proposed. The mods aren't connected, so there's no reason to vote on all together.

 

[CppMaster]

I think they can be separated in voting without needing separate proposals: A single poll with yes&no option for each mod listed, including the ones I proposed. The mods aren't connected, so there's no reason to vote on all together.

Good idea!