Agents List

Here let's finalize the list of agents that will be in the game. Use this thread for reference (most of the good discussion is on the last few pages). We can also use it to update current agents or discuss ideas for new ones.

Some ideas:
-Signal agents: Communication. Can either attract or repel your species or other species
-Tetracycline: Mitochondrial depressant
-Cytoskeletal-destabilizing kinase: Immobilizes a cell
-Ribosome-inactivating proteins: Prevents protein synthesis in a cell
-The immune complement (doesn't really sound like a name for an agent...): Bursts the membrane of a cell

I will update this post accordingly to include the agents we agree on.

FINAL LIST

I gave the other thread a browse and here are some of my thoughts:
My understanding is that you want to achieve potency and specificity with the different agents. I'll let you sort it out with the programmers on how you'll do that but it seemed like you had some pretty simple and practical ideas.
Here are few things to consider imo:

Realism I'm sure everyone already that achieving pure "realism" is impossible. But I know we want to achieve something that makes logical sense. One thing to just consider though is that in the current field of biochemistry a lot of unknowns exist especially among proteins and allosteric reactions, inhibition etc... So don't try to get too carried away with using specific examples (ex: Moopli used ricin as an example. sure its a protein synthase inhibitor, but you need to realize that its a protein that had to evolve to where it got as well.) But don't try to make "specific generalizations" (im not saying anybody has done it but just a warning), again using ricin, its a lectin which is very essential part of protein degradation especially in the ER. So you can't say "all lectin family proteins are bad". Anyways moving on.
A suggestion I'd have is to just perhaps generalize pathways in the cell and have toxins inhibit those. If you really wanted to mention a specific toxin upon the cells death or as an alert (or whatnot) you could have a whole database of premade messages for that pathway function. So if you had an error in the say chaperone system it would say "HSF1 proteins were inhibited and your cell died" or alternatively "SEC61 translocon SRP receptors were blocked by a foreign protein and your cell died" If you want I'd gladly list out a bunch of pretty basic pathways in the cell you can block.

Agents vs Proteins Make sure you factor in that inhibitors can be proteins or actual molecular compounds (simple ones). Molecular compounds you usually don't build a resistance too without a lot of DNA organization.  So like cyanide is insta kill no matter what. larger ones I guess some more resistance can be built up on the surface to inhibit it without an localization signal but still, just make sure you factor in the small molecules will always be linearly destructive. (if you havent already)

*Quick note on "Signal Agents"* Maybe I'm wrong but I dont know of any significant cell signalling via agents over long distances (more than a tissue of cells). Most cells with interact via phospholipid bonding oligosaccarides, or other things attached to the outside. I would steer clear of "signal agents" for now. (theyd just diffuse eitherways) Edit: I did read a few papers on signal diffused between bacteria but it's definitely that has evolved through time, since its a key role in antibiotic resistance, as hypothesized by some researchers

I hope that helped

The only ideas I can currently think of is some kind of neutralising agent that dissipates other agents and nucleic acid degrading toxins.

@ Psych0Ch3f
Microbes do use chemical signals to communicate so I don't really see what the problem is. I don't know other what distance but we can still use them over short distances.

@stealthstyle I'm not against using them it's just that there is a system used by cells that is much more effective for short distances. Chemical signals usually work best from colonies once they've developed, but for physical interactions you can use oligosaccarides as points of recognition between cells (sugars which essentially act as ID tags). In my opinion its silly to use chemical signals (which are weaker) and ignore physical cell recognition.
Also, im not sure if you know but a nucleic acid degrading toxin would essentially kill your cell in one blow. Unless you want a toxin to exist that kills all cells. And about "some kind of neutralizing agent that dissipates other agents": Super vague. If its a molecule you'd need a receptor that blocks it or a cell membrane that blocks it (depending on size). If it were a protein, then maybe but it would have to be very very specific. No "all purpose toxin repellent" exist.

Oops. Ah, um. Yes, I was just waiting for someone to spot that. Very good.

About the neutralising agent I was just going for simplicity but if you think that there should be specific neutralising agents for the agents, then that's fine by me.

Well, I appreciate trying to find a simple answer to the question of resistance in the form of an agent itself, but it's just too weird to have an all practical "killer" agent. Our own body has specialized antibody cells that do that, if it were just agents we'd be kinda invincible.
Anyways, I think for now the idea of plain resistance to combat against anything harmful should work. Perhaps in a future update specific neutralizing proteins can be secreted.
By the way could someone from the previous thread explain to me what they meant with: "The immune complement (doesn't really sound like a name for an agent...): Bursts the membrane of a cell" as nick mentioned above