FAF does not own the FA game or its IP. We're essentially just hosting maps, mods, different balance changes, and allowing players to create lobbies. That is not a game.

You have yet to actually justify why aeon shields need to be bigger. They’re in contention for the best t3 shield in the game, they really don’t need to be changed. If you don’t see them being used to defend arty in your games it’s because you’re playing with people who don’t know what they’re doing, especially if they’re choosing cybran over aeon.

The second image is not about LOD of a unit. It is problem with how engine optimizes map terrain mesh.

He's pointing out that T1 submarines include the category T1SUBMARINE, T2 submarines have the category T2SUBMARINE, but the T3 submarine doesnt have a category T3SUBMARINE.

Depending on the reason for wanting it, you could still achieve something similar by looking for units that contain both the TECH3 category and the SUBMERSIBLE category, while if you wanted to then exclude the t3 nuke subs you could exclude the category NUKE.

LMFAO I got to this post by following OP's profile from a random link when I was googling something random. What a notorious troll.

Good topic,
I can help with some UX/UI design if needed.

@Sainse Technically - the game can use up to 4GB of memory - but - due to the way that lua handles memory, the limit is about half of that. At some point, the number of units becomes the main reason that memory usage grows to that point (around 2GB) - and it will then simply crash to desktop.

The size of the map, and the number of units in the game, and to a lesser degree, the number of wrecks and props, contribute to the overall memory usage, for the main part. After that, the AI (and the number of them involved) plays the largest role in how memory is used up.

Since there are some unfrequent changes to the gpgnet protocol, old versions would not work with the current FAF lobby server.
Thus you will not find official support for running old versions.

In theory, if you start an older replay, all the files of that replays patch level get installed. But you cannot play online via FAF, but would have to play via LAN or some other solutions. I don't know to which extent this is currently possible.

Assembly patch is required.

@Nuggets What's that capslock nuggets? I thought you were relaxed...

Maybe @Sheikah and/or @BlackYps has an idea on how to tackle this.

The exact reclaim numbers are not really doable because the map generator doesn't know the reclaim values of the props

Thank you a lot! It looks great!

@Jip said in Engies Clean/Reclaim Mod:

@arma473 This particular value is in the engine. I do not think the solution here is to change the behavior for all players.

Instead, if you just want to reclaim and share it with allies - just write/request a UI mod that you can toggle on/off to start sharing resources automatically (via gifting it programmatically) at a click of a button when your mass reached say 70% of storage. I do not think such a mod is against the rules that only mention auto clickers and reclaim macros. But you can always ask the moderators before trying to implement it.

Wouldnt that ruin the gameplay for other players though? For example early gameplay, if you have that toggle on and your teammate is reclaiming as well but can't spend the mass due to not having power? I know in setons if you get too much mass as an air player, it will ruin your build (quite literally).

@blade_walker

That I have no issues with. Not sure how hard it would be to implement though. Probably pretty hard. And doesnt seem likely to get used a lot by players tbh.

Eco Compendium by Cheeseberry

I don't think T2 fabs are far more efficient:

For eco efficiency: T2 mass fabs have the same efficiency as T3 fab grids unless they're placed without shields adjacent to T3 pgens, a template which is very vulnerable to random bombers/arty/novax/tele and not dense at all. For space efficiency, T3 fabs win by a long shot (1.77x denser, and cleaner templates with pgen adjacency). This also means they are way easier to shield, with high HP on top of that. For adjacency efficiency, T3 fabs are great next to 2xT3 factories and T2 fabs are great on mex, with roughly equal payback time efficiency. T2 fabs on mex are more common because it's a lower investment cost and factories fit for t3 fab adjacency are rarer than mex with storage.

The differences in payback time are in a matter of seconds so I don't think there is a clear winner for which is better to eco with since the remaining differences are about T3 fab durability vs T2 fab low cost/unit (easier to build a small amount of and start paying back a little quicker).

For the other non-eco points:

I don't think there is a big "consistency" issue with T2 fabs being T2. Lower tech units/structures are often cheaper and more efficient but less dense, and that doesn't mean they become completely obsolete when higher tech appears. Some examples: T1/T2 PD, T2 shields, T1 arty, T1 air scouts, T1 engineers, navy, T1 bombers, T2 gunships, mex upgrades, T3 units (compared to T4s), flak. T2 fabs fit into this pattern just fine. Making T2 fabs obsolete would be lame and taking out a dimension in how people can eco. Plain downgrade in gameplay.