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

So it's not out of any reasonable project scope, you just think we shouldn't prioritize it. That is something different to be discussed then.

Yes, and I think it’s out of any reasonable scope because it is so low priority. Stupid comment.

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

which is demonstrably untrue, as shown by some of the people here in this thread.

I know you’re new, but I shouldn’t need to explain to any veteran that people will say they want to do something and then won’t do it - including me. This is very extensive free work with a long iterative design phase and large amounts of tedious menial gruntwork. Claims to work on it amount to nothing.

You would be very brave to want to buck the trend but I would hesitate to call it smart - most people need to do jobs that allow them to eat.

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.