@Sheikah Thanks for the clarification. As said before, it's just what I've heard from folks being in charge of the pools, who might not have the best understanding how the architecture looks like. How much effort would that be? Would it be somewhat feasible?

If I recall correct, you can do CTRL + ALT + Right Click to permanently mute a player for that session.

@gabrilend said in Wish-A-Mod Foundation: I think you'd be surprised about how much more interesting the game feels as each faction's playstyle becomes more distinct. I think you'll be surprised that I understand the idea itself. But I also support Nuggets' comment. Besides, I play a different mode and with mods.

sign up Futureman as a free agent

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.

@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.

v294 Made setting up a game much easier, by being able to assign spawns straight from lobby! No need to assign spawns in Map Options anymore! 3 Ways to Set Up a Game: Players can still specify who is HQ in Map Options, if they want a Human or different AI control the waves. Players can set up to 4 AI_WaveSurvival Bots in lobby, and they will be randomly assigned HQ's that spawn waves. No need to assign the spawns in Map Options. Players can specifically set where each HQ spawns in the lobby: AI_Main HQ will spawn the Main HQ Objective. AI_Alternate HQ will spawn the Main HQ's support HQ. AI_2nd HQ will spawn the secondary HQ. AI_Alternate 2nd HQ will spawn the secondary HQ's support HQ. Various fail safes have been tested, so if configured wrong, game will default back to random spawns being assigned to the bots, and you may get scolded by Brackman. Other Changes: Endgame air bosses given a bit of a boost in DPS, spawn additional air units after taking too much damage. Weapon Rebalances: Aeon T3PD range to 76 and fire rate to 3s -> 2.5s, same DPS. Abyss depth charge range increased to 60.

I see XACT error, please refer to the FAQs

@JoTape79 Hey Thanks for the Feedback and glad to hear you like it. Regarding to the Seraphim: I know this Faction currently doesn't has any new Units in Mechdivers and needs alot love. Currently I think about it what Kind of Units they should get. There are currently 4 Options in my Mind: Option 1 The Seraphim could get thier own Designs of the Helldivers 2 Illuminate Unit next to of the Aeon. Since the Aeon have learned from the Seraphim it would make alot of Sense If they have similar Versions of these Units but with different Abilities, Stats and an Design which fits the Seraphim more. Option 2 Since the Terminids are planned to appear in Mechdivers in the future as Well there is the Possibility to add them on the Side of the Seraphim but with an Redesign to fit them more. Alternative the Terminids could appear as an Playable Subfaction or as an spawned Civilian Enemy on the Map. If this is the Case Option 3 will be implemented below Option 3 Or the Seraphim get Custom Units only for example alot of Tripod Walkers, Hover Tanks and other Alien Stuff, which could be based on some popular Sci Fi Franchises or on new Concept Artworks created by an Member of my Development Team. Which of these 3 Options will be implemented in the future is still Not fully sure at the Moment. So I will probably going to do an Long Survey soon to See which Option gets the Most Votes by the Community here, on Moddb and on my Discord Server.