AI-Uveso (v98) - AI mod for FAForever


please update Nomads, a patch for the error was already released in Nomads 6 days ago:

T1 AA mobile units:
I will reduce the amount of mobile AA in the next update.

Base planning:
My AI is meant to be played with unit mods like Total Mayhem. Thats why i have builder for pointdefenses.
Sadly you can't determine the cost of a unit before you build it.
The AI will assign a buildtask to an engineer and only the engineer will know how much the unit costs.

DPS calculation:
The game does not have any DPS calculation in LUA, it's all calculated hidden inside the c-engine.
we only try to mimic the c-eninge with LUA functions. (it is not always accurate)



if bp.Economy then
      if bp.Economy.BuildCostEnergy and bp.Economy.BuildCostMass 

if bp.Economy.BuildTime then
       bp.Economy.BuildTime = 


I am sorry i don't know what you want to tell me with this code snippet

Its not a part of the code we talked about, enhancements don't have a Economy sub table.

Also you don't need to ask for if bp.Economy then when you need to know if bp.Economy.BuildCostEnergy exists.
Just call directly if bp.Economy.BuildCostEnergy. it will return false if bp.Economy is missing.


I appreciate the response. I thought Nomads was always up to date through the patching mechanism? I am running the most recent version of FAF and it still produces the same result. Is there a way to check to make sure I am running the most recent version of nomads?



@ctrlaltdelete :

Good question; i always use the develop version of nomads downloaded from Git-Hub:

I thought it is the same version that you can play through the FAF client.
Its both printing version 98 to the log, but the client version has still this error.


Hi! Encountered the same problem as ctrlaltdelete, and as I am not that techsavy, wanted to ask how should I update nomads to fix this problem?
P.S. Really like your AI, it wrecked me and my friends good, was fun expirience! Thank you for providing that!


In case you missed it on discord @Uveso

Seraphim Experimental Bomber likes to gift itself as a mass donation. It does this via a ctrl+k. It does this before dropping any bombs. I have seen this multiple times.



Yes this bomber was driven by a suicide platoon. it was meant to just destoy itself.

This was the corresponding platoon former: Experimental-Air.lua#L431

Its driven by this function (AirSuicideAI):

The suicide platoon was searching for Economic buildings.
That's why he destroyed the first Tech3 energy building closest to the AI's base.

Maybe a bad decision to do it with a suicide attack, but not a bug 🙂


I'm not trying to be rude, but follow along here:

If my teammate got up an experimental and just suicided it into something like an energy building I would be.... most upset.

It's simply a mass donation. "Oh no! not my T3 reactor, that will inconvenience me for a whole minute!" Then I profit from all that mass dropped on my front door.

Suiciding into energy... is just silly. Suiciding into something that matters, like a SMD... that makes sense.


Hey Plasia,

i am a german, and i like direct and honest answers!

You are absolutly right, its a total waste of mass and fight power.

And its already fixed!
The new target priorities for suicide platoons are:

                categories.STRUCTURE * categories.EXPERIMENTAL * categories.ECONOMIC,
                categories.STRUCTURE * categories.EXPERIMENTAL * categories.SHIELD,
                categories.STRUCTURE * categories.EXPERIMENTAL * categories.ARTILLERY,
                categories.STRUCTURE * categories.TECH3 * categories.ARTILLERY,
                categories.STRUCTURE * categories.TECH3 * categories.NUKE,

Comming soon:

Advanced ACU attack function (5 minutes)

Amost 90% of the function is finished.
I guess i will be able to make an mod update in the next 14 days.



@uveso said in AI-Uveso (v92) - AI mod for FAForever:

Hey Plasia,

i am a german, and i like direct and honest answers!

You are absolutly right, its a total waste of mass and fight power.

And its already fixed!
The new target priorities for suicide platoons are:

                categories.STRUCTURE * categories.EXPERIMENTAL * categories.ECONOMIC,
                categories.STRUCTURE * categories.EXPERIMENTAL * categories.SHIELD,
                categories.STRUCTURE * categories.EXPERIMENTAL * categories.ARTILLERY,
                categories.STRUCTURE * categories.TECH3 * categories.ARTILLERY,
                categories.STRUCTURE * categories.TECH3 * categories.NUKE,


  • New: Added advanced ACU fight function. Microing, threat management, proper overcharge targets.
  • New: AI is now able to use gifted factories also after full share or player disconnect.
  • New: Adding "DoNotAllowMarkerGenerator = true," to the map scenario file will block autogenerating markers.
  • Opt: Added builder for an early energy storage to enable ACU overcharge
  • Fix: Hardcaped the amount of mobile AA that can be build per location
  • Fix: Fixed a bug inside the AI-Marker generator (thanks to chp2001)
  • Fix: Ecomanager will no longer pause the build of Tech1 factories.
  • Opt: Decreased the massextractor upgrade ratio for Sub AI Storm
  • Opt: 2nd factory now needs at least 2 mex and 4 energy buildings to be build.
  • Opt: Air Suicide Platoons no longer attack none game ender buildings.
  • Opt: Panic Builders are now also building tanks and bots, not only arties.
  • Opt: ACU will now assist engineers (energyproduction and factories)
  • Opt: Aeon ACU is now first enhancing with CrysalisBeam, not HeatSink.
  • Opt: Optimized AI marker generator. (fixed issue with Open Palms)
  • Opt: Added a value to the AI-Marker to identify related layer areas (.GraphArea)

The AI is not doing anything on some maps ex. Twin Rivers, can we get list of maps that AI should be working on?



My AI is working on almost every map.
It has a build in AI waipoint generator so you also can play maps without any AI markers.

I tested Twin Rivers right now, and its working like expected.

Can you post a full game.log ?


@uveso Contacted you on discord.


While I expect the AI has been designed for more conventional ladder 1v1 matches rather than the 1v1 map I chose, I've still noted various issues/flaws with what the AI did which I think would be applicable more generally. This was using the 1 June uveso mod:

Replay ID #14646432
Uveso adaptive Vs guncom:

  • 1st Land fac location - it picks somewhere that requires the com to move (losing a couple of seconds)

  • Power order - It has a hydrocarbon right by the starting location, yet focuses on building 3 T1 power gens first. It'd be more efficient to have the com assist the hydrocarbon once the first engi is done (e.g. have the com get t1 mexes while the engi is being built, then assist the hydrocarbon); on a map where the hydrocarbon is further away then I could see more merit in getting more t1 pgens first

  • Power stalling and lack of focus - the AI has a com building 1 T1 pgen, an engi building a 2nd T1 pgen, and a 2nd engi building a hydrocarbon, all while power stalling. Far better to focus on the most power efficient option (Hydro), and pause any construction while power stalling until the power generation is completed

  • Mass stalling/not claiming T1 mex - the AI mass stalled for a while (with far more spent mass then generated) all while 2 unclaimed mexes are in range of engineers. While mass stalling, more power is being started/built, and then a t1 factory; far better to focus on generating easy mass (t1 extractors), then the factory (assuming more build power is needed), and then more t1 power (assuming the planned strategy requires significantly more energy), than to try and do all at once

  • Too much power - Far more power is built than needed (12 T1 and hydro would be enough if going for a gun upgrade, but instead the power is wasted)

  • Engineers sent out dont start building at nearest t1 mexes

  • Strange order changing - The first t1 engi sent out of the main base passes 2 unclaimed mexes, then goes all the way back to base while other engis go to where it originally was; presumably some command given to that first engi, but it would've make sense to take one of the others nearer the base for the new command and use the far out engi to build t1 mex

  • Unused build power/factories - Lots of t1 land factories built, but some of these appear to sit idle.
    No need to construct more factories if the existing ones aren't going to be used. The factory also sat idle despite a big threat [guncom] being scouted

  • Feeding an enemy kills - Scouts come across guncom - instead of sending all defenceless units away from it, and building up something to try and counter it, the AI keeps sending engineers and unarmed scouts piecemeal (giving the guncom free kills)

  • Storage before T2 Mex - Engineers build mass storage between 2 t1 mex; better to first upgrade those mex to t2 before building the storage

  • Mass generation prioritisation - The mass storage is built at the same time as the T2 mex upgrade, all while mass stalling. Normally it's best to focus on 1 mass generation (i.e. the t2 mex upgrade) first, and once complete move on to the next (e.g. mass storage). The exception being if there's significant amount of mass built up that can be used (not the case here).

  • Unit mix - Preference for lots of engineers over any combat units, meaning vulnerable to just about any attack. Although lots of buildpower gives the option to try and respond quicker to threats (e.g. get quick PD up, or assist an air factory to rush bombers etc.), the AI didn't make use of the engineers and hence offered no resistance to the enemy commander.

  • Counterproductive COM micro - The AI sent its unupgraded com (with no support) to fight mine. The AI com then 'stutters' (about 6m5s in), getting about 1 shot to every 4-5 of my coms (I'd expect 1 shot for every 2 of mine given mine had a speed upgrade) - it keeps rotating as if it's thinking about doing something else before switching to attacking my com. In observer mode it looks like this might be due to move commands sent to the com - maybe they're being sent/changed too often?

  • Energy storage for combat - In the situation where you have lots of surplus power and build power, minimal ground units, but your com is about to get into battle, then getting 1 energy storage as a top priority might help sway the battle in your favour.
    In this scenario it wouldn't have been enough, but would still have been of a bit of use given the excess T1 pgens that had been built

  • Response to attack - similarly to the unit mix point above, despite scouting an enemy guncom advancing on the main base, no units or pd were built in response to this threat (lots of engineers, land facs and an air fac were available). Instead some factories are idle, others are producing engineers, and 2 new naval yards are being built, all while mass stalling



great feedback!

Well, my AI is a turle AI and normaly i would play on this map against the "rush" sub AI with a cheat and buildfactor of 1.7
The adaptive AI uses 40% of its overall income to upgrade mex etc. So it has no eco for combat units at the beginning.
Thats because turtle playes don't attack in the first 5 minutes with a Gun Com ^^ They use the ACU as engineer 😄

I am not sure if we could make an duel style AI.
There are some limits by the game engine and we can't make everything possible.

Its like the ACU torsotwist. its adjusting the torso on almost every movement command.
So its sometimes not firing at all when evading.

But build order and better timing can be done.
I will do a test AI with your recommendations and see how it works.

Thank you again for your much appreciated feedback!


Is it possible for the AI to be reactive (e.g. the moment a scout reveals a threat the AI changes strategy), or does it have to try and pre-empt potential enemy attacks by covering all bases (e.g. build AA, PD, TMD, T2 arti in anticipation of potential attacks regardless of whether the enemy has any of the units in question)?

Similarly, if a command is sent to start construction of something, and a critical event happens (power stall, or to a much lesser extent mass stall) can the AI be told to change what it's doing then, or would it have to wait until the next event (e.g. construction finishes)?

In terms of the eco side, if the intention is to eco and not build any defence then I'd do a 'hard eco' - i.e. there's no point building so many t1 factories, engineers and power initially; better to get more mass generation (so t1 engi's prioritise any near unclaimed mex first, then switch to upgrading a mex near the core base to t2), enough power to support an upgrade to T2, get T2 upgrade on com or factory, and hope to then make use of the tech and eco advantage to turtle up before the enemy catches on and tries to rush. That is, a couple of token t1 land units won't help unless the enemy sends their com with no upgrades and no support, or builds zero land units (meaning their mex can be killed), both of which are highly unlikely, but having the capability to build lots of land units (without using such capability) is using up alot of resource and delaying the point at which you can get t2 defence.


Technically - yes - it is possible. However, the real weakness is that there are no metrics or functions that can easily, or more importantly, performance-wise, address that kind of scenario. The AI, unlike the human, has little to no ability to 'remember' what he saw, even just seconds ago. This makes pro-active behaviors difficult to construct.

Eco management is another weak area, and one the AI has some difficulty adjusting to - part of the problem is one of scale, another is the game design itself. Due to the random nature of the unit designs, there is little commonality in building costs and times - as a result, a constructor's consumption can bounce erratically from item to item, a condition which afflicts factory builds as well. Many attempts have been made to have the AI 'pause' his construction, which is unfortunately a band-aid on the problem - the real problem being one of reasonably accurate prediction of consumption. The side effect of the original code designed to 'pause' building is a ping-pong of rather costly events which don't solve the economy issue, but tend to push it around, and at some considerable cost to the performance.

There have been many potential AI developers over the years that have had the best of intentions, only to throw their hands up at the inability to address that flaw.