Cherry picking examples on repeat and presenting them as evidence of the icons being cluttered or not is the epitome of bad faith. It's very easy for someone like me to ignore your example and point out that in your first images, the cyan coloured player is building something using a swarm of engineering drones. On the defalut icon setup the building is visible whereas in the ASI image, the building is completely obscured. It's pretty typical of FAF users to engage in such boring talk that goes nowhere, but you didn't help it by framing your OP this way. Did you come here to learn something or only to argue about your point for 55 cringe ass posts?

Of course you're going to be able to see certain things easier if you abuse the 5 elements of design to blow something out of proportion. When two things are contrasted together, one is easier to see -> and the other is thus harder.

Luckily on this game, you are provided additional information while you play the game in order to help you parse what you need to know.

Let me draw attention to this quote.

Purple also has some battleships but without staring at it for a couple seconds I don't know if purple has 4 or 10.

This took less than a second for me (and others, apparently) to see. Why? Because a decent player can make reasonable assumptions about where or what a battleship would be doing. They're a similar distance away from the enemy fleet in a fragmented line due to their long range. They're definetly going to be behind the frigates but closer to the enemy than the cruisers. You might (read: 100%) have range rings on while you play that help you determine units even better. New (bad) players are fans of this mod because of these two things:

1. Good positioning won't happen in badkid lobbies and as such these assumptions cannot be made
2. They do not understand the basics well enough to make said assumption.

And instead need to use this overblown out contrast mod in order to see units "better". God forbid they're not using that dark blue and it's just universally harder to see.

Akin to ecomanager E throttle, It's a crutch that raises your rating a little - because you can see units better in badkid lobbies, but you won't ever learn the basics in order to see things like positioning -> making you a good player overall.

I'll also bring up mexes as an example, albeit one among many:
Theoretically you don't need to scout and see the hideous, blatantly overcontrasted ASI mass icon to know a mex is now t2 while you're playing. This is because the t1 mex "dies" when the upgrade is finished and appears as such until the location is rescouted and the t2 mex is seen. This isn't the case for mass storages, which are also counted as an eco step and should be watched closely in a ladder game or other tight competition.

It's very lucky that you can even see that there are structures next to the mex icon when they're that upscaled. But what about if the mexes are actually pgens? Plenty of players ring their mexes with pgens to gain a boost while upgrading. You probably do it in the build order you've abused for 500 games. The important information is obscured to you unless you zoom in now and look, because the irrelevant MEX icon is so important that it needs to grab your eye despite other factors making it visible,

Let me restate the point im trying to make here with this new information.

• While the default icons provide a mostly blank slate for you to exercise your fundamental game knowledge, ASI intentionally obfuscates important information to make important what a random modder has deemed important for you to know.

• You use this overblown and overly emphasised information to compensate for your lack of game knowledge and plateau yourself by using a crutch. This is why I believe that BH claims it is a detriment. Because you would have to then lose rating in order to learn the game properly and you're all too weak of mind to do that.

And before you ignore everything to claim that you can make the assumptions about battleship placement despite your eyes being dragged around by insane contrasting: Even as someone qualified in design, impact from stuff such as colours (You could make everything important ingame red, because your eye catches on faster on average) still affects me. You're not any better. These are innate issues that most people cannot articulate, and is why you didn't know why all the good players don't like the mod.

While i'm here:

katharsas said in Downsides of the Advanced Strategic Icons mod:

common logical fallacies

It's very cute to call out a fallacy and then totally ignore the appeal to expertise in the OP. Luckily this is FAF and i'm already used to seeing rat-like tactics used for personal gain.

cheeseberry said in Downsides of the Advanced Strategic Icons mod:

as a 1.8k global I imagine myself to have a decent understanding of the games fundamentals.

It's also very cute to claim you understand the game and thus ASI is made more valid by your claim, luckily someone pointed this out to me that in fact:

Grinding out a single map for a high rating leaves you with a warped understanding of the game. A understanding that in fact, might make ASI appear more valid to you.

When you plateau as a 1200 in ladder, please come back to this discussion and consider again why this might be a detriment to your understanding.

@FtXCommando Even top players will skip marginal improvements, if the benefit to implement them is too small or the cost too large. Take hotkey layouts as an example:

The hotkey setups that pro players use, and I mean all of them, are likely suboptimal. Why? Because you can't assign the hotkeys you would actually want due to hotkey overloading not being supported.

If I put e.g. the transport units command on the "T" hotkey I can't assign the launch tac missile command to also be on "T", even though the units that can shoot tac missiles can't transport and the units that can transport can't shoot tac missiles.

The result being that there are like a dozen premium hotkeys on the left side of the keyboard, but if I want to assign hotkeys to everything, as you should for optimal play, you have to use keys like I, K and L for the lesser used stuff. That's just bad.

Afaik, modding the game would actually allow hotkey overloading, but doing so is nontrivial so nobody has done it yet.

The result? Even though there is a small improvement to be gained here, no pro uses an 'optimal' hotkey layout as the cost for doing so would be sitting down for a couple weeks and coding it yourself. That's just not worth it.

The ASI mod could be in a similar spot: If you have thousands of hours in the game it will take you weeks or more to adjust to new icons. And you'd do that for an, at most, small gain, so why bother?

The difference to the target priorities mod is that the target priorities mod can be implemented into your gameplay gradually: If you have it installed, you can completely forget about it until you need it, and even then, none of the old gameplay is changed if you don't want to use it afterall.

An icon change on the other hand can't really be introduced gradually: You either change the icons or you don't, and every time you change a common icon it will be very jarring to players who have years of experience with the default icons.

So, in contrast to the target priorities mod, you can't just forget about ASI and as a pro it will probably have a negative impact on your gameplay for weeks until you get used to it.
(This is one possible explanation for why some pros use only the icons for nukes and so on, as they are probably where ASI is strongest, hence the highest gain, but they also appear very rarely, hence the lowest cost.)

((Also I'd argue that using the target priorities mod gains you more than the ASI mod does, as the former allows you to do things that were literally impossible before, which the latter doesn't))

Regarding a mod's performance in non-tournament games: Consider a mod that, through magic, gives you an extra 200 mass on Astro Crater at the start of the game. I think it's fairly obvious that using this mod would be straight up mandatory if you wanted to be the best Astro player there is, while benefiting you not at all in tournaments.

Also note that I said team games, not casual games. There have been team game tournament and hopefully there will be more in the future, but as of this moment there certainly haven't been enough of them to definitively say that literally every setup detail that's optimal for 1v1 tournaments is also optimal for team game tournaments. In fact, I'd be very surprised if that were the case.

Lastly, saying "time will tell" and "the better players will in the long run" is of course correct. I just don't want to wait until 2025 when a new generation of pros all use ASI 3.0 or something. I want to figure out what's optimal now.

@biass Hmmm. I don't actually know what to say to all this.

I said I don't get it, laid out my reasons why and I had a very constructive discussion with FTX and others about why I don't get it and where I might be wrong.
And it turns out I DID overlook stuff due to my limited experience. Exactly what I came here for!

So could you, instead of calling me shit a player that doesn't know what he is talking about, post some pictures or other evidence instead to prove that I'm a shit player that doesn't know what he is talking about?

Since you had the courtesy of quoting me, ill respond:

The quote from my UI mod guide is "Advanced Strategic Icons: Extremely strong NOT recommended. I would go as far as saying that this mod will completely destroy your ability to improve past a certain level."

In the intro to my guide I write the following: "my focus will be the importance and the impact of those mods on your improvement in 1v1".

Why does your post then keep going on and on about some senton lategame that my post is clearly not intended to care about? Frankly, I dont give a rats ass if there are senton mods that make you perform better on sentons, thats why I didnt got into details about certain eco sharing mods etc. (remember that sentons and 1v1 has basically 0 common ground) The "certain level" I mentioned is also not something low like 1500, 1900, whatever 1v1 rating, since the competition and level of play here is low enough for icon mod differences not to be the deciding factor for a long time. Why I wrote it so strongly is that if you get used to it early on, you wont want to switch to something else once it starts mattering. Choosing the right setup at the beginning has great advantage once you climb really high.

As some others have responded, and as I have myself in the UI mod guide thread, on high level 1v1 it matters exceedingly much to be able to quickly see, target, and analyze unit comps or base structure comps of your opponent. If a mod obfuscates that my opponents mixed army (any army at t3 stage will be mixed in a 1v1) has a t3 mobile arty in it and a t3 MML, its garbage. If a mod obfuscates that the firebase has a misplaced massfab next to a radar cause the radar icon for some reason suffers from obesity, it is garbage.

If a mod makes the simple situations even simpler to tell apart, but obfuscates the relevant situations with complex army comps in an unordered base, its absolutely useless. Its very easy to adapt to the simple situations, and not easy to adapt to the difficult ones. If you manage to make a mod that does both, everyone would gladly use it.

Thats the reason why for example myself & petric and some other top players use private mods. Personally I use a very subtle highlighting for SMD/SML/TML/TMD icons. Your assumption that we are afraid of useful UI layout choices is not correct, its just that the strategic icon mod isnt useful for a good 1v1 player.

Then to clear up some confusion or fear that I think I am seeing in your post: The small icon version of the icon mod wont stop you from being good at sentons, no worries. The things it damages are mostly not relevant to sentons, and probably the small benefits offset the damage on sentons. My UI mod post however was aimed at being good at 1v1 and being good at FA in general, neither of which senton has any correlation with. In general, if you are confident that its good for you, just keep using it. If you arent sure, just dont use it, not a complex decision.

Finally I'm waiting for the new generation of top players who are using the icon mod, just as im waiting (since 2013) for any new generation of top players at all. For some odd reason it has not happened yet, but I'm sure the next 8 years will be different.

cheeseberry said in Downsides of the Advanced Strategic Icons mod:

So could you, instead of calling me shit a player that doesn't know what he is talking about, post some pictures or other evidence instead to prove that I'm a shit player that doesn't know what he is talking about?

Yes, you'll notice that I posted a stats display of your game history and the rating gain on a per map basis. This should be reasonable proof if you're looking to dispute that.

The stuff that is actually relevant to the conversation, uses images from the OP. My examples reference both battleships and mexes, which can be seen in the first two images.

You would know this if you decided to read more than just the first paragraph.
Can't claim i'm surprised with you at this point. It is FAF after all.

@blackheart said in Downsides of the Advanced Strategic Icons mod:

(...) just as I'm waiting (since 2013) for any new generation of top players at all. For some odd reason it has not happened yet, but I'm sure the next 8 years will be different.

Feels bad man

@biass said in Downsides of the Advanced Strategic Icons mod:

When you plateau as a 1200 in ladder, please come back to this discussion and consider again why this might be a detriment to your understanding.

I use the ASI on medium and I'm 1400 ladder so, let me know when I'm going to plateau bb

Also, I don't believe the icon mods will make anyone better or worse. It's just a matter of perception to me since, the icons only change what we can or can't see. It won't make me change my BO, make my units move more effectively or spend my resources better.

Yes, I understand that maybe you might miss / not be able to gather information about that mixed army comp. However, I feel that the same can be said that the mod might make you not miss certain things/units/tech transitions.

At the end of the day, I hope I keep climbing so I can prove how far one can reach with ASI.

@blackheart said in Downsides of the Advanced Strategic Icons mod:

Since you had the courtesy of quoting me, ill respond:

The quote from my UI mod guide is "Advanced Strategic Icons: Extremely strong NOT recommended. I would go as far as saying that this mod will completely destroy your ability to improve past a certain level."

In the intro to my guide I write the following: "my focus will be the importance and the impact of those mods on your improvement in 1v1".

Why does your post then keep going on and on about some senton lategame that my post is clearly not intended to care about? Frankly, I dont give a rats ass if there are senton mods that make you perform better on sentons, thats why I didnt got into details about certain eco sharing mods etc. (remember that sentons and 1v1 has basically 0 common ground) The "certain level" I mentioned is also not something low like 1500, 1900, whatever 1v1 rating, since the competition and level of play here is low enough for icon mod differences not to be the deciding factor for a long time. Why I wrote it so strongly is that if you get used to it early on, you wont want to switch to something else once it starts mattering. Choosing the right setup at the beginning has great advantage once you climb really high.

As some others have responded, and as I have myself in the UI mod guide thread, on high level 1v1 it matters exceedingly much to be able to quickly see, target, and analyze unit comps or base structure comps of your opponent. If a mod obfuscates that my opponents mixed army (any army at t3 stage will be mixed in a 1v1) has a t3 mobile arty in it and a t3 MML, its garbage. If a mod obfuscates that the firebase has a misplaced massfab next to a radar cause the radar icon for some reason suffers from obesity, it is garbage.

Yeah that is the most common argument against the mod that I have read and, with the help of FTX above + some good reference pictures, I can now at least understand why it can make reading dense base layouts more difficult.

If you have the time, could you post a comparison picture of the same thing happening to armies? It would give future icon mod makers a great starting point off what to avoid.

If a mod makes the simple situations even simpler to tell apart, but obfuscates the relevant situations with complex army comps in an unordered base, its absolutely useless. Its very easy to adapt to the simple situations, and not easy to adapt to the difficult ones. If you manage to make a mod that does both, everyone would gladly use it.

Thats the reason why for example myself & petric and some other top players use private mods. Personally I use a very subtle highlighting for SMD/SML/TML/TMD icons. Your assumption that we are afraid of useful UI layout choices is not correct, its just that the strategic icon mod isnt useful for a good 1v1 player.

That you do use different SMD/SML/TML/TMD icons is very interesting though. That you do is of course neither a point for nor against ASI but if nothing else, thanks for sharing that!

Then to clear up some confusion or fear that I think I am seeing in your post: The small icon version of the icon mod wont stop you from being good at sentons, no worries. The things it damages are mostly not relevant to sentons, and probably the small benefits offset the damage on sentons. My UI mod post however was aimed at being good at 1v1 and being good at FA in general, neither of which senton has any correlation with. In general, if you are confident that its good for you, just keep using it. If you arent sure, just dont use it, not a complex decision.

My main motivation for this post was that I wanted to know if I could recommend the mod to any new players asking questions cause, even if it helped me to get a grip on the icons a lot quicker, I don't want to hamstring their growth in the long term.

Yet, now being semi-competent on Sentons I never really saw the downsides, only the upsides of the mod, while it was also being trashed with a fervor that I haven't seen for any other mod in the game.

Why did I choose seton pictures as a comparison then? Cause those were the games I had lying around and I assumed it would be reasonable test case. Seemingly that was one of the things that "I didn't get".

If you have the time to make some additional comparison pictures that show the downsides of using the mod, especially for armies, I would love to see them!

As mentioned above, I think it would be good to collect all that information here so that future icon mod makes can have something to build off on

Finally I'm waiting for the new generation of top players who are using the icon mod, just as im waiting (since 2013) for any new generation of top players at all. For some odd reason it has not happened yet, but I'm sure the next 8 years will be different.

I too want a larger FAF playerbase

While it's personal preference I don't think we should be nudging new players to use this mod. I think that after the next patch we should maybe look into upgrading the basic icons and maybe incorporating some of ASI ones (Nuke, SMD) and making the new icon set optional (toggleable in the options).

@tagada Yeah I haven't recommend the mod to any new players cause I was always under the suspicion that I might be wrong.
Also its an external .exe installer, which always seems very suspicuous..

Having a "more distinct strategic icons" settings in the menu would be great!

Maybe something to hire a designer for?

I would recommend the mod to every new player. The game is unreadable / very exhausting without easy to see icons. Does a new player need to know the difference between a comp with 1 pillar or moongoose? I think we should make the game as nice as possible for them.

Maybe something to hire a designer for?

This is the part where Brutus busts down the wall, chambers a round as the dust settles, and tells the shocked crowd that we should not pay for dev/design work.

We do need to make the game as nice as possible for new players that's why we bully any dude that posts a screenshot with the mod relentlessly.

don't forget the people with 700 games that are still not experienced enough to start asking questions about icons

Please don't recommend the icon mod to new players, whatever you do. If people have played for a while and they want to switch, whatever. If they are not even used to the default icons do not suggest they switch because you personally like them.

@archsimkat said in Downsides of the Advanced Strategic Icons mod:

Maybe something to hire a designer for?

This is the part where Brutus busts down the wall, chambers a round as the dust settles, and tells the shocked crowd that we should not pay for dev/design work.

Brutus as the Kool-Aid Man is a funny mental picture

But I do remember him having some good arguments for not paying for that stuff.

Maybe we want an icon tournament? The iconset voted for by the community gets a hundred bucks or so?

How about hiring an outside designer to collaborate with our FAF internal designers?

This is probably the wrong post to discuss that, and we are getting a bit off topic, but its worth keeping in mind nonetheless

I don't like either the defaults or the advanced icon to be honest.

I want an icon mod with:

Must haves:
differentiates between ACU's and SACU's
Prominently displays smd

Nice to haves:
Has some subtle difference between t1,t2 and t3 units
Differentiate between mobile arty and direct assault
Highlight tml and tmd

That's it actually?

None of Brutus arguments for paying for dev features hold for something like paying someone to entirely change icons except for the idea that everyone that devs/does literally anything for FAF will stop because they will want to be paid just as that dude was paid. In which case, how do we rationally explain any caster existing since Gyle is getting paid 1500 a month to dump like one cast a week. Or how do we explain anybody even working on FAF since you can easily go and get paid to dev at like, a job, or freelance work.

You need a reputable dude that has a solid basis in design that ideally cares about FAF, and the money is there to keep in involved in a long-term project which something like icon design is going to be. Not really hard to determine when the person has "fulfilled his job" nor does it involve knowing 6 billion different systems to accomplish.

@cheeseberry said in Downsides of the Advanced Strategic Icons mod:

Maybe we want an icon tournament? The iconset voted for by the community gets a hundred bucks or so?

Absolutely do not do this.

https://www.nospec.com/

@ftxcommando Its something to be discussed for sure, but probably not here.
Information always gets lost in those mega threads and that benefits no-one.

(Almost like with a bad icon set )