FAF Association Board

I am suspecting this map uses custom textures right? The red and black is the image used when the intended texture is missing. So that means that either the texture is missing from the zip file that is on the vault, or this particular user had an error when unzipping the map folder and the texture got corrupted on their system.

you need to host or join a game first to download all the faf related changes

...and if you are bad at micro, just aim a bit front of where enemy group is going to be, place move order close to your ASF so they slow down, once a third-half of them are in contact with enemy ASF, press stop, ???, profit

@nuggets said in Firey Explosions mod FAF:

@resin_smoker said in Firey Explosions mod FAF:

@nuggets Cause explosions are all sim side mate.

Was it always like this? I remember playing rks explosions years ago and that was ranked. So maybe there was just an exception for that mod

That is a sim mod too. And it was flagged as ranked in the vault.

@resin_smoker said in Advanced Intel (Work in Progress):

So no feed back... Glad I didn't start the 2nd half of this mod.

FAForever is slow, unrelated whether you (eventually) receive feedback or not.

I was also interested to see how you do this. And it's nice to see you use the IntelComponent. It appears you overwrite the definition however, what type of places did you hook / would you like to have access to in a mod?

Ran a game. Spawned in 150 scouts. Apparently scouts with the adjusted intel are fairly expensive. For example the memory usage jump when spawning in the 150 scouts:

DEBUG: Session time: 00:01:01	Game time: 00:00:29	Heap: 288.0M / 250.3M
DEBUG: Session time: 00:01:11	Game time: 00:00:39	Heap: 320.0M / 292.4M

And the sim time is between 6 to 8 ms (on a 7950x3d cpu), where as usually that is below 1ms for this number of scouts. Visually there's also this issue:

The fractured black lines. It's because of how the engine works - vision is additive and the little black lines represent the places where it switches from 255 instances back to 0 since they are bytes on the GPU. This can always happen, but with additional vision entities it will happen much more often.

You can of course reduce the number of entities to reduce these problems. In general I think it is interesting. But if you like games that do not slow down then I'd be very careful - it adds a lot of overhead regardless of what you do. Personally I also think that it adds complexity to the game that it doesn't need to. Or, as Evildrew phrases it:

@evildrew said in Advanced Intel (Work in Progress):

I am just thinking people will say it’s great because your implementation is flawless but then they will complain that their unit’s vision was off while their opponent's vision was on their unit at a key point and that would be contrary to the skill expression dogma…

Having your units rotated properly to manage your vision is, in my humble opinion, not what Supreme Commander was made for. Its complexity lies in the number of units. Not in individual units (except for maybe experimental units) being complicated to manage.

That people then complain because their Snoop got bumped in by another (allied) unit and therefore starts to rotate is not the players fault , the engine should instead try to preserve the rotation. But it does not do that at the moment. The same applies to units that walk in formation, there's is no guarantee that the unit ends up at the intended location. And there's no guarantee that it has a specific orientation. The game was simply not designed for it. And with this type of setup you force the player to fight the engine. That is fine, but it's natural that players can like the concept but not the implementation.

And feature wise: air-based scouts should probably lose the cone when they land and re-gain the cone when they taking off. Just like they now have reduced vision when landed.

No

The behavior of engineers on patrol depends on how much mass you have in storage. As long as you're under 80% full they will go reclaim. If your storage crosses 80% they'll shift over to assisting any factories nearby, since you don't need the reclaim anyway.

Yeah some third party software is shutting down the game because from those logs the client launched everything just fine.

Thank you for the constructive feedback and discussion.

We are proceeding with a three month rename interval for now.
We will monitor the situation for its impact and adjust if necessary.

If a technical solution is implemented widely in FAF communication mediums (e.g. similar like discord unique handle), that allows better identification of players, we see no issue with going back to shorter rename periods.

Regarding the rule on similar names, the wording of the rule is as following:

• Usernames that impersonate others or are visually identical to other usernames, for example by exploiting visually similar characters, are not allowed.

We're looking into this, it may be related to #6279 and some previously unknown interaction in the engine.