The current pre-release of the client ("pioneer" in the version) is only compatible to itself. So you can only play with other testers. Please be aware!

Subcategories

  • 386 Topics
    9k Posts
    LunyshkoL
    Please rethink your life choices, this is not what a real human would think of. This feels like it was written by AI.
  • 33 Topics
    603 Posts
    CrofisC
    @Deribus 3 years and still no implementation? Keep it up harder then! XD
  • Matchmaker Pool Feedback Thread

    Pinned
    250
    1 Votes
    250 Posts
    100k Views
    wilson_W
    It would be great if you guys would somehow mark the ones in the pool that are going to stay for longer than the current month. this would help with the decision which maps need more attention in training sessions. Something like a specific background color or an asterisk in the pool thread and/or the pool visible on the client.
  • List of banned exploits (updated 30/07/2025)

    Pinned Locked banned exploits moderation rules
    1
    4 Votes
    1 Posts
    11k Views
    No one has replied
  • New "Random Events" Mod!

    4
    3
    4 Votes
    4 Posts
    56 Views
    N
    Version 7 has now been uploaded to the vault. The bug that T3 HQs are not possible after the event "no t2" expired is fixed and 3 new events have been added that revive dead units (shoutout to Nomander for the idea). Additional changes: changed the "-75%" speed event to "-50%" as it was too brutal Added the lobby option "Random Events: Selection" where you can change how events are selected. Either "random" (default) or "no repeat" where it randomly picks an event that didnt happen yet. If a game happened to go long enough for all (currently) 114 events, then it shuffles them back and goes again. So @bayopello you should now no longer encounter that problem
  • Content Creators Updated

    5
    4 Votes
    5 Posts
    108 Views
    KnownSniperK
    [image: 7c26adfefa.png] i've never been this offended in my life
  • Anyway to see the build grid?

    7
    0 Votes
    7 Posts
    65 Views
    C
    Wow, that was quick. The first one seems to be closest to what I am thinking. I imagine a slight;y visible grid overlay over the entire map using the x,y snap coordinates, not something that moves with the cursor necessarily. I tried using Claude to build it but ran up my usage limits. :X
  • MapGen Selection Tool/Website

    15
    1
    12 Votes
    15 Posts
    309 Views
    Q
    Would be nice to be able to multiselect like this [image: 1782382980119-4b23d773-679e-4f54-be22-1bf84bc57aa5-image.jpeg]
  • Replays cutoff after the first disconnect/ejection?

    8
    0 Votes
    8 Posts
    97 Views
    N
    https://github.com/FAForever/fa/pull/7153
  • AI Wave Survival - Air Nightmare Slykar

    2
    1 Votes
    2 Posts
    43 Views
    S
    Current Record: Mods and Setting from above 6 Min Build time 33 Min Hold time Beat it with 9-10 Player, below 33 Min Hold time Setting, share your replay and tell how many tries
  • Attached user profile notes - how to view all of them?

    3
    1 Votes
    3 Posts
    61 Views
    C
    @magge thank you!
  • How will you know when your game will be unrated due to desync?

    3
    1 Votes
    3 Posts
    82 Views
    N
    In practical terms... If you see desync message once in a game nothing is over yet, but if you see 2 messages then it is unranked because too many desyncs happened.
  • 9 Votes
    3 Posts
    154 Views
    N
    Unfortunately I must report that dp consist of weakminded players and only 3 players (me included) can apparently play at a set time during the weekend. I guess we lost...
  • Share your worst FAF client memory usage in 2026!

    5
    5 Votes
    5 Posts
    161 Views
    N
    @c0rtex said: @Skrat Where do you find the Python client? Just google "faf python client" and its the first result. Alternatively here is the direct link: https://github.com/FAForever/client/releases
  • Carrier fix

    4
    2 Votes
    4 Posts
    107 Views
    AkirapwnzA
    thanks for the reply!
  • FA Companion / Training Tool

    15
    7
    10 Votes
    15 Posts
    276 Views
    SheppyS
    @Deribus yes it will be implemented in the next Update alongside the reclaim/income split and some more specific categories of units: + return { + "combat_units": 0, + "combat_unit_in_base": # idle combat units 30 of start location + "labs": # UnitName Mech Marine, Hunter, Flare or Selen + "tanks": # TECH1 & TANK + "arties": # TECH1 & INDIRECTFIRE + "buildpower": # via BuildRate + "buildpower_t1_engies": # via BuildRate + "t1": # TECH1 & mobileCombat + "t2": # TECH2 + "t3": # TECH3 + "t4": # EXPERIMENTAL + "t1_navy": # TECH1 & NAVAL + "t1_land": # TECH1 & LAND + "t1_air": # TECH1 & AIR + "radars_and_sonars": # RADAR & not SCOUT + "t2_navy": # TECH2 & NAVAL + "t2_land":# TECH2 & LAND + "t2_air":# TECH2 & AIR + "t3_navy": # TECH3 & NAVAL + "t3_land":# TECH3 & LAND + "t3_air":# TECH3 & AIR + "inties": # AIR & TECH1 & ANTIAIR + "swifties": # unit name Swift Wind + "asf": # category ASF + "frigs": # FRIGATE + "subs": # catetory T1SUBMARINE or T3SUBMARINE + "nuke": # NUKE + "tmd": # Description": "Tactical Missile Defense" + } I also wanted to review your games and think about if there are any data driven things aren't covered yet/open up the rule engine to custom rules.
  • 2 Votes
    18 Posts
    521 Views
    cychwa_klaymbergC
    New version SWLandWarTMRebalance (v35) is available. The new patch is built around 2 things. Firstly, the fleet, as well as land units, have been reworked for Survival modes and for naval warfare in versus. The fleet now has twice the health, but submarines have received a 50% damage boost. T2 pseudo-experimental ships have also been reworked and moved to T3. This UEF ship has also become a Seraphim faction ship. Secondly, the mod had a huge problem with scaling the economy, in my opinion. It was possible to achieve some crazy income figures, especially when a player left one team (either desync or something) and their economy was transferred to another player. Having received an economic boost, this player built matter fabricators much faster, and as a result, it was almost impossible to win due to the lack of artillery, air, or any other means (we are playing Land War mode). So Balthazar kindly helped me out and created a mod that adds limits on fabricators to the game. Now you can't spam them in large quantities. Currently, the limit is set at 25, but this may be changed later. I am very grateful to Balthazar, thank him very much. However, now that there are strict limits on fabricators, I've moved the T2 UEF matter fabricator as an intermediate mass extractor between T2 and T3. Now the T3 mass extractor produces more mass than before, and therefore costs more. However, I had to remove T3 mass extractors from other factions; they are only upgraded in the UEF. I hope this won't confuse players too much. Also, the AEON faction's Mass Fabricator has become a building that generates a very small income (0.25), but retains the same adjacency bonuses and provides a very significant discount to factories, especially when building expensive units. There is no limit on UEF and AEON Mass Fabricators, as they now have different functions. Also, T4 (T3 reworked) Mass Fabricators are now built only on HydroCarbon plant nodes. This makes these nodes additional areas of interest.
  • Replay Watching

    4
    2 Votes
    4 Posts
    115 Views
    D
    @BLITZ_Molloy said: Who is still active doing Youtube casts? Fair play to Gyle for sticking with it but I used enjoy watching the casters had more competitive insights. https://www.youtube.com/@StrategicLaunch is doing daily casts
  • 0 Votes
    2 Posts
    54 Views
    JipJ
    If I recall correct, you can do CTRL + ALT + Right Click to permanently mute a player for that session.
  • aeon t3 facs april fools too late?

    10
    6 Votes
    10 Posts
    353 Views
    SaverS
    This will be my final reply in this forum thread, and I'd like to take the opportunity to elaborate one last time. I revisited this redesign project because I was not entirely satisfied with the models at the time either—specifically, the models that existed before the last patch. Instead of simply complaining or criticizing, I asked for the topic to be given another chance and offered my help by contributing my own free time and effort, just as everyone else who works on FAF does. I also have the advantage of having spent time learning modding as a hobby since 2020. Through numerous tutorials, I taught myself how to use tools such as Blender, GIMP, and others, which allowed me to turn my ideas into something tangible. This was similar to the first project I had the opportunity to contribute to for FAF: the upgrade of the Aeon T2 Shield to a T3 Shield. Once my proposal was accepted, I communicated every change openly through the forum thread "Redesign of All HQ and Support Factories." In addition, anyone was free to test the models themselves through a dedicated mod (Savers Factory Rework – 06/2025). I was also happy to consider suggestions for improvements, especially when they were presented in a specific and constructive manner. After all, it is difficult to work with comments such as "bad" or "doesn't fit" when the models have not even been tested in-game. In particular, due to the discussions surrounding the Aeon Land Factory, I created an additional comparison mod that included several different design iterations and approaches (Savers Factory Rework + FAF – 09/2025). Furthermore, after the factory model adjustments were completed—but while they were still in the mod phase—a news post was published in the FAF client explicitly asking for community feedback (11.2025). This raises a genuine question: what additional forms of communication would you consider appropriate? Naturally, any approach should inform interested players without becoming intrusive or annoying to others. If this topic truly matters to you, then I can only encourage you to provide concrete and constructive suggestions—or, even better, become actively involved yourself. Finally, I would like to leave you with one thought: FAF exists because people are willing to invest their free time, whether through programming, balancing, organizing, modding, testing, or providing constructive feedback. Not every decision will satisfy everyone, and not every change will turn out perfectly. However, progress only happens when opinions become concrete proposals and criticism becomes actual participation. I have done my best to make this development process as transparent as possible and to provide everyone with opportunities to test the changes and share their feedback. What each individual chooses to do with those opportunities is ultimately up to them. With that said, I consider my participation in this forum thread concluded and will not be replying further here. I do, however, hope that the discussion continues in a constructive manner and that those who care deeply about this topic will continue to contribute their ideas, feedback, and efforts in the future.
  • Is this a cheat or not?

    36
    1 Votes
    36 Posts
    547 Views
    JipJ
    @FtXCommando said: it isn’t very difficult to give navy units collision like land units okay, enlighten us . There's a few myths here that do not align with my own understanding of the engine, let me add some info: Submarines behave like underwater air units. This is because of their motion type as far as I am aware, maybe Balthazar knows better. That is why they can stack, because technically you can do the same with air units. @maudlin27 already mentioned this, especially gunships. Nobody does that though, because the average anti air gun of any significance has splash damage. In Steam FA, some tech 3 AA guns do not have splash damage. In FAForever, all tech 3 AA guns have splash damage. This is why. The easiest solution to make stacking submarines less attractive is to give torpedo's splash damage too. Problem immediately solved, the micro would no longer be about stacking (which is hardly micro - it's just one hotkey) and more about keeping the submarines separated so that the splash damage (of torpedo's) doesn't hit multiple submarines. Keeping submarines separated feels like more interesting gameplay to me, both in terms of watching and in terms of playing. But who am I . Normal move command obeys the collision box, subs aren’t any different No move command obeys any collision box. Yes, while moving units can bump into each other for some motion types/layers. But that has to do with moving in general, not with the (type of) move command. Regular move commands expect the selection to end up in some form of formation. The formation itself has the collision box of a unit as one of its parameters, in a loosely manner. The distribute order feature just sends all units to the same location, it does not attempt to make a formation. If you give a single unit a move command, it is equivalent to move command of the distribute orders feature. When there's just 1 unit, no formation logic is run and therefore no formation is made. Do not confuse this with formation move. Formation move means the units also move in formation. There is, without using distribute orders, always a formation in play even with regular move commands: the formation where they end up at! The only thing the distribute orders feature does is automate the task of assigning a move command to all the units in your selection as if you separately selected each unit and gave it a move command with just that unit in your selection. Source: https://github.com/FAForever/fa/pull/5908, hours and hours of investigating how move commands and formations work and behave. Not mentioned in this topic, but a similar myth: a large selection of naval units taking forever to respond to a (new) move command. This is intentional, as the formation logic has a 'delay' parameter where each row is delayed longer than the row before it. I think this is there to not deplete the pathfinding budget when you quickly issue many (move) orders, but I'm not sure. This is especially painful for naval units, since there's usually more rows since naval units are, uuhh - preeeeetty wide in the formation. Therefore there are more rows. And the more rows, the longer it takes for all units to start moving.
  • Just be decent in the game...

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    105 Views
    DeribusD
    Please make a report through the client or Discord, we do not allow reports to be publicly posted.