Pitbull vs AG_UF - Page 2

marty · 09/04/07, 1:36 AM

This is a bit off topic but is a question regarding AG_UF. Is it possible to have it display combo points as a numeric value? Along with that, can the counter be moved from the right of the frame to the left of it?

I used to use the Nurfed unit frames and recently switched back to AG_UF after not being able to customize the frame.

nilme · 09/04/07, 8:05 AM

Originally Posted by Duilliath

Back when there was a bug that Blizzard later fixed, I switched to Pitbull from AG_UF as the latter kept bugging out and freezing the game whenever I entered raids. AV weekend was the proverbial straw (guess why) and I got Pitbull.

After some initial annoyance with that (not saving settings etc etc), it's now fairly smooth. It has a boatload of nifty features and all sorts of other goodies...

However... as you might've read in the Pitbull thread, it glitches when there's a change in the raid. A layer/frame goes from opaque to 50% grey or even 100%, effectively ruining your view. (Gotta love when that happens in a BG.)
I haven't found the cause of this bug yet, and throughout the various updates this bug has remained.

This bug is causing me to rethink on Pitbull and considering going back to AG_UF.

I'd like to hear a bit from other people if they feel going back to AG_UF would be worthwhile, or if they feel I'd better stick it out with Pitbull.
(Note, I didn't post this in the Pitbull thread as I'm interested at least as much in AG_UF and am hoping for a direct comparison.)

The bug is annoying indeed. I usually fix it by unloading and loading the aura module at pitbull options. You can't do this in combat so if you get a group change on a bg while you are fighting someone you are going to need to trust the force, luke.

Originally Posted by marty

This is a bit off topic but is a question regarding AG_UF. Is it possible to have it display combo points as a numeric value? Along with that, can the counter be moved from the right of the frame to the left of it?

I used to use the Nurfed unit frames and recently switched back to AG_UF after not being able to customize the frame.

That's one of the reasons I had to switch from ag_UF to pitbull. With pitbull you can customize your combo points in any way you want. I have the classic dots + a numeric value at max size in the middle of target frame

If AddonUsage CPU time value is an accurate value, Pitbull is not a heavy load addon. It takes a lot of memory but it looks like it's light on cpu time(which I believe, and correct me if I'm wrong, is the "important" value when looking for performance)
Now if only I could discover why a non-visible bongos actionbar and Fubar in general are taking 60% of my addon cpu time... :S

Bag · 09/04/07, 2:04 PM

The easiest way to fix the aura bug where an opaque frame pops up on the screen is to hide the UI then restore it via alt+z.

Duilliath · 09/05/07, 5:30 AM

Originally Posted by Bag

The easiest way to fix the aura bug where an opaque frame pops up on the screen is to hide the UI then restore it via alt+z.

Thanks for that one - didn't know it, but it's a fair bit faster than a /reloadui.

Easar · 09/27/07, 8:11 PM

I'm also looking for some unit frames, been using standard with CT Mod since the release of WoW now, but I finally need something more than that for arenas.

I've tried AG-UF, but I miss the "countdown" on buffs that I have casts that I see when I target someone.
I've also tried X Perl, and I really like all the options, but I absolutely their layout, I want something that looks more like AG (name in the healthbar etc.). Is it possible to change the layout? Because they would be perfect if not for the layout.

The I've tried PitBull, but all the settings are just too much, I want something that's a little easier to configure as I don't need al those options and then have it bug out on me (bugs when you change buff/debuff sizes or change locations of target's buffs/debuffs).

Is there anything else I should try if there's no way to cahge the X Perl layout?

Scav · 09/28/07, 4:54 AM

I tried to switch to Pitbull from AG to have "AG like" Unitframes with Partytargets.
So i disabled AG and enabled Pitbull (I was in a Raid at this Time).
So I wanted to start the Configuration... Player and Targetframe were no Problem, simple drag and drop.
I do not want the Raidframes since I am using Grid, so i tried to disable it. In the Configuration (why is it named Rock? o.O) there was an Option when i clicked on 'Raid', named 'Disable'. Oh, very simple i thought... so i selected it... nothing happend.
I tried for like half an hour to only have a Partyframe with Partytargets (and the Playerframe, Target etc.), no Raidframe, no fading, but no success :-/. If i knew how to configer Pitbull to show me only the Partyframe with Partytargets i'd probably use it... but as long as i don't understand how the Configuration works it's not really an option

Batory · 09/28/07, 5:03 AM

Did you try reloadui? I'm using Pitbull for quite a while already and I like it much more than any other Unitframes I tried before (incl. AG and XPerl). Pitbull have a problem tho (at least at my machine and configuration) that sometimes it requires reloadui to see the changes. Rarely, but still.

funkydude · 09/30/07, 8:47 PM

For the people saying aguf isn't powerful enough, heres a screenshot of what I made tonight with it, I decided to take the most common PitBull format from the UI screenshots thread and make it with aguf.

How to do it? 1. Lots of time 2. Lots of patience 3. Lots of UI reloading

Edit your ABF.lua file

flyingtoastr · 09/30/07, 9:20 PM

I used to use Xpearl way back in the day, and I still love it, but the memory usage was absolutely killing me. I switched to aguf by a recommendation from a friend and have been very pleased with it since!

I did try out Pitbull as well a while ago. The customization possible with is is beyond amazing. But for someone looking for a non intrusive and easy to use set of unit frames, I would recommend aguf over Pitbull hands down. Pitbull does take a lot of memory (at least the way I had it set up) and takes a while to configure compared to aguf. Thats not to say its in any way bad, if you need the uber-customization then I would go for Pitbull. But I personally love aguf, and I find it has plenty of options to mess with to keep me happy.

Bohemienne · 10/01/07, 1:51 AM

I have tried both aguf and Pitbull, and always ended up going back to X-Perl. I like its look far far better and it keeps things nice and compact*--screen real estate is very important to me--while still providing me with all the information I need. However, it isn't as customizable as I'd like. For instance, I want to be able to target someone and, out of combat, see all their buffs, but in combat, only see buffs that I have given them--renews, PoM, shields, etc. without all the superfluousness of their other nonsense. I'd like to be able to shuffle around the directions of the frames, and other silly things like that. Until I can find something flexible like that but with out the je ne sais quois-ishnessof aguf and Pitbull, I'll stick with X-Perl.

*Biggest example: both aguf and Pitbull insist on making the cast bar its own entity or putting it somewhere that it obscures important information I need, such as a player's healthbar, while X-Perl's cast bar is in the unit's name--information that's nice to see but not as important sometimes as what they're casting