The campaign also serves as a tutorial (especially the original SupCom one), but on FAF it gets a little buried. On the play screen, there are usually games custom-marked for noobs, but even those are beyond the skills of someone who is just starting and may be offputting. Also, there is no obvious button on the starting News screen to play a game. Some people might arrive and immediately get lost. If there is a way to detect when someone opens FAF for the first time, it might be useful to provide some custom links, much more obvious than usual, to a tutorial level or at least a how-to-navigate-FAF video.

@Vindex брысь отсюдава свиндекс, у тебя не спрашивали

@Brutus5000 Thank you for your great work. I hope the path you have chosen brings a solution for you and everyone involved.

No, it's a bug where to my understanding: The game ends before the server receives a game result. It's been reported on the Discord with a tentative fix by Nomander ready. It just needs to be patched in.

In custom games the host can change the default from assassination to full share. A possible solution might be to change the "default" to full share in all team games (custom or automatch). This way a rage quitter can still leave without ruining the game for everyone else. This is the case in many RTS games actually (Starcraft, Warcraft, etc.) where the base stays intact if a player leaves and the controle of these units and the base are being shared among the other players. In FAF I think the guy with the highest score gets the base, which is also fine I guess. And if the leaves decides to activelly destroy his base or harass others before quitting, then it's a very clear case of someone who needs to be reported and possibly banned. This should also apply to people just "pulling the plug" on their connection or force quit the game which makes everyone wait for them to time out and sometimes cause desync.

@jcvjcvjcvjcv I am not sure what you mean. My post is in reference to attempting to bypass fullshare using base ctrl k

A new beta version has been released that fixes the issue of the ice adapter not starting at https://github.com/FAForever/downlords-faf-client/releases/tag/v2025.6.0-pioneer-beta-2

@Sturmgewehr @Legendz There will be an update on the FAF develop game type in 8 hours that reverts the change that possibly caused this desync, can you give FAF develop a try when it updates and see if you don't get desyncs? Since it's not a consistent problem it would also help if you also reached out to people who experienced desyncs, so that we can have a larger sample size.

Great analysis, I agree. The purpose of the hotkey was to provide a nudge that players can use to micro the build range of the engineers. That way you don't need to do a move order before each build order. You just have to time hotkey at the right moment. There are more, alternative and unforeseen side effects to this hotkey. Some are mentioned by @Nomander . There's been earlier discussions to just remove it. And I think I'm in favor of that because of these side effects. I'm not sure about integrating it to automate it - that was not the purpose, and it changes the game in a similar way that area commands do too in my opinion. Which some players were very negative about.

@Defiant wow that is cool, its a shame how many things in the faf ecosystem are broken because of security issues

I like the idea of having a "you have been banned, now what" page. It's true that most of the information is already accessible, but the discussion shows that it's clearly not as well-known as it needs to be. Currently, when you try to log in you see your ban duration and the reason for the ban. It's not immediately obvious how to proceed from there. If we link to a dedicated page we can compile all relevant information there. This should give people a clear path what their options for actions are now and should increase the trust that the system is well thought-out and working. Information on that page should include: link to rule page link to explanation of the appeal process explain that appealing can still make sense even if the ban is very short, because your moderation history is taken into account in future reports explain that if people think there is an issue with the process, even after appealing, they can contact Giebmasse as the team lead or the board. explain why individual decisions should not be discussed in public and clarify that discussing rules in general and proposing changes is still possible in public, preferably the forum. @Nuggets said in Proposal: Establishment of an Oversight and Review Committee to Support Fair Moderation and Governance: To put it in clearer words: We, at least the people I know / interact with, feel like there is a huge lack of understanding as to how our "high" rated games go. I'm not trying to be elitist here, its just that (what we feel like) context is ignored or not understood. It makes sense to me that the moderation team does not completely revert decisions if they correctly apply the existing rules. It seems that part of this problem is that maybe the rules are not suitable for some high rated games, or maybe these people would like to have different rules? In this case it makes the most sense to have a discussion about these rules.

I'd change engine game is on...

It got removed because the shader that this biome uses got changed with the latest game release. It will be readded once the necessary changes in the map generator have been completed.

T3 metal maker in vanilla?

@BerserKK It is in the Victory Conditions under Assassination. If it's not you need to update your client

grid system from WC3, where you just build units, and they go on their happy little adventure automatically. So an autobattler? It's definitely possible, down to placing units on a grid like they're buildings (we already have that in the form of cheat spawning units).

Based on the discussion here but mostly on discord I think for ACU sharing it will be two options: Recall ACU: avoids the explosion killing all BP/army in mid/late game. Permanent share: for people who don't mind ACU share due to balance (including mods) and lobby wait time reasons. No long-term temporary sharing as it is too complicated for players. This means early game is unsalvageable after a disconnect. For the share condition on disconnect, there will be no lobby option: Recalling ACU fullshares the units unless the ACU dies during recall, in which case the normal share rule is used. How should this "recall" be done? Some have said teleport it for a long time (30s) so it can get killed. I prefer the idea of sharing it for 30s and then it quickly teleports away because it creates a more natural situation for how the ACU can be killed or saved (avoids TMLs or snipes, doesn't stand in important locations). If the permanently shared ACU is killed then the normal share rule is applied at the time of death. It's simply as if they gave you all their units and then died. Originally I had a hidden timer turning the death into fullshare after some time, this idea is now removed to simplify the rules. Should the permanently shared ACU count for keeping your own army alive?