Let me raise up two more bugs with beetles: When told to attack a moving target, beetles don't track it. Instead they repeatedly move to where the unit last was, stop, then start moving again. When told to groundfire, beetles don't move to the groundfire location, instead they explode the moment they reach the edge of shown AoE radius. That makes groundfire almost unusable.

highly variable with a middle-ground in the ballpark of what is commonly found on mapgen maps atm both highly variable but mostly undefended or on the easier-to-take end of the spectrum (any type that doesn't prevent the player from reasonably playing is fine in theory though (ie: I'd probably avoid having a hostile mavor on the map at game start : P) - variety is the spice of life though : ))

If it's in the mod vault, it's considered legal. For custom mods, anything that does inputs for you or gives you information you would not currently have is considered cheating.

@swkoll Time for the petric yudi collab.

now they op, pls fix

@fremy_speeddraw got my vote ez

imagine blocking nuke like that :<)

Your image actually visualizes the problem exactly. If the target and shooter are at the same height, the shot is pinpoint accurate. That image is not taken with orthographic projection and your drawing is made as if it is made on a perfect X / Y plane. I can come up with another angle that would proof the opposite. The observation of BlackYps is solid and counteracts your observation: if what you say is true, then the projectile should hit the ground in front of an extractor when the extractor is at a higher altitude. It doesn't - it still tries to hit it somewhere behind it. There is no such thing as a "partial" hit. Either the shot connects or it doesn't. There is such a thing as a partial hit if your projectiles split up into 4 separate projectiles and two hit the target while the other two don't. You mentioned this behavior in your post. This is an interesting pattern I hadn't noticed. I wonder if the problem can be worked around by increasing the minimum muzzle velocity of the shot, or by changing the projectile's behavior. (Increase speed OnCreate if target is higher, reduce of target is lower.) Do you want me to share the small mod I made for testing this? Then you can tweak around

I can only hope the next PC puts more effort into his job than you do in your posts.

@ftxcommando said in Stats from $10000+ of high level 1v1 FAF tournaments: It shows a higher competitive drive back then as even lower rated players were trying to join into events they had 0 chance of getting beyond 2 games in. I think this should be main the take away ftx. More people were interested in the competitive scene. More competitive people = more ladder matches/tournies = more competitive discussions = generally much more lively competitive scene for everyone. Maybe the very top players could beat any sub top 10 player without losing a match but who cares. FAF shouldn't be focused around top 10 players, it should be focused around the entire community.

To whoever is interested in applying (Ftx, Suzuki, Fancias, Morax, others), go over to this thread and apply! https://forum.faforever.com/topic/1589/player-councilor-election-2021

@valki said in Invitation to comment and speculate on the Energy resource in this game: @ftxcommando said in Invitation to comment and speculate on the Energy resource in this game: Mass is intended to give value to map control, it is the bottleneck that determines “scale” in macro. Energy is what decides the “type” of usage of mass. Certain things are high energy per mass, certain things aren’t. It’s what stops you from simply being able to transition from one thing into another haphazardly in the game. There’s certainly a lot more to it and the game decisions are much more complicated than this, but that’s the impulse 30 second analysis for me. A UEF interceptor costs 50 mass and 2250 energy, a UEF Tank costs 56 mass and 266 energy. That is a difference of roughly 2000 energy. The same transition dynamic could be accomplished if the UEF interceptor simply cost 2000 energy, and the tank 0 energy. You still need just as many additional power plants to build interceptors then. So why does the tank cost energy at all? I just thought this up, no dev input or lore. Since we are 3d printer we can look at what we have in today's world. I can 3d print you something for a little bit of plastic (mass) and a couple hundred watts to power the printer (energy) But let's take this deeper, we are not extracting plastic with a mex or printing with it, and you can't take the trees that have been reclaimed straight into a tank. So what we are really doing it extracting some resource and splitting it down to atoms and recreating it into a different material. Steel is a rather 'cheap' material since Fe is lower down the periodic table so it takes less atoms and less power to create steel, further the t1 tank is just amour, cpu, gun, and tracks, all simple components to create and print. Now a aircraft has to be light and also built correctly. Just take a look at the cost and materials on our current jets. So the engies are making a lot of aluminum and titanium, which requires more energy to split and reform, also more mass than a tank since Al and Ti are father down the chart (I think) even though the intie will weigh less than the tank. The build quality on aircraft has to be top notch, so just energy consumed from just moving the printer will be more. Makes me wonder if you would make stands then break them off later like 3d printing now. Every unit built has a power generator and a printer on board to produce propulsion and ammo, aircraft has tons more power required. Ww2 I think the tanks were 1000hp and the fighter plans around 5,000. We can already see the costs of power in supcom. T2 tanks have more special amour, with different alloys and layers, just like today, to increase the cost of the unit.

Hello kalambda, what version of Xtreme wars are you playing ? Do you use my updated version from here: ? https://forum.faforever.com/topic/363/xtremwars-1-4-for-all-game-versions

thank you !

Sorry, that was an open-ended question to people in general, not you specifically.

I dont know what ur talking about all my maps are definitely top tier