@manimal_ said in SACUs and Factories Upgrades seem to be bugged:

Historicaly , the buildings gain 1 "Tower" per Tech level :

1 "Tower" = T1 (the initial look of a factory)
2 "Towers" = T2
3 "Towers" = T3

No they didn't

Screenshot from Vanilla FA (no mods)

They look exactly like the support factories (aside from my chosen color)

@techniki You are not supposed to close the game, just press the reconnect button in the lower right of the faf client

once you close the game or someone ejects you, then you can't rejoin anymore.

@hoschmosch said in Connection issues never been this bad:

Then do me a favor and just take a look at any random forum thread discussing criticism of FAF . Afterward, reconsider your statement.

I literally read all forum posts every day, so I don't need to reconsider, thanks.
If someone states things aren't working and are understanding and don't flame the mods/admins for not doing anything about it, then they have been met with respect, though it is sometimes hard to keep that up, when people are unable to read the message right above their own question in discord, which would have answered their question. But it is also disrespectful to not want to put in any amount of effort and then expect to get 5 pages of answers.

@hoschmosch said in Connection issues never been this bad:

the admins claim to know what to do, but their precious time prevents them from investing that time in their own project and the community

They know what to do and they are investing time, you probably just underestimate of how much time it takes to fix these issues. Also people that want to help out for just this issue aren't such a great help either, since learning how the system works will take a good amount of time (also from the existing admins), so quickly helping out is also not a feasible option. (when you start out as a sysadmin and you only intend to keep the job for ~6 month, nobody will bother with telling you anything and will just tell you to sort some cables)

@hoschmosch said in Connection issues never been this bad:

an admin who invests more time in constantly giving us long-winded statements

However everyone is damanding long winded statements from the admins themselves. Everyone is asking what's going on, why it's not working and how long it takes and when a moderator without the technical know-how answers they are unsatisfied.

@hoschmosch said in Connection issues never been this bad:

Considering that the quality has been in the gutter for about a year

How do you come to this view?
I see people play every day and aside from the ddos attacks it was pretty stable
ofc there are disconnection problems (as brutus mentioned above), but those take time to fix, since it requires completely rewriting the ice adapter.

@hoschmosch said in Connection issues never been this bad:

In the first place, it is evidence that I don't care as little as those who could solve it.

You do realize that brutus (the guy with the skills) is not participating in this discussion?
He cares and is working on it, while you are trying to make his work look bad and useless in some random effort to get him to give up on the project, since apparently you don't give a single fuck about FAF and want it to close down for good. (at least it seems that way from how you tell every admin to quit, since they are doing a terrible job).
How you can believe that you care more than him is beyond me.

@immortal-d said in Visible Attack-Move Reclaim Range:

If not, then I suggest adding a ring around the target point of Attack Move, showing the reclaim range.

You can do that with advanced camera stuff (ui mod) and it is already part of the next version.
https://forum.faforever.com/topic/4705/upcoming-developers-patch/2

You have to hold ctrl (or maybe shift? can't remember) for it to show the rings.

@immortal-d said in Visible Attack-Move Reclaim Range:

For example, dragging the Order through tree groups will often result in moving through those trees en route to the final target point

I believe this is only for attack move out of factory, which only reclaims things at the end of the attack move, not on the way.

@immortal-d said in Visible Attack-Move Reclaim Range:

dditionally, the reclaim range of Attack Move is many times greater than Patrol or manual reclaim, almost ridiculously so.

That is also only the case with factory attack move which has double the range, due to an engine bug (so also hard to fix).

@immortal-d said in Visible Attack-Move Reclaim Range:

Dragging a long Attack Move through rocks works fine

That's how the normal attack move works. It should walk to the target point and reclaim anything that gets in range (and sometimes some more).

@monstratus said in Why would you have left FAF?:

It still seems to me that if those who did not survive the match did not receive points, it would be fair...

You fail to notice that the rating system isn't a one-way route to judge how people play. It also influences the way people play, since ultimately the goal of the game is not to win, but to gain as much rating as possible compared to everyone else.

So your suggestion would encourage turtle play, with minimal chances of your com to die, optimally winning after all your teammates are dead, encourage teamkilling, discourage literally any play that could put your com in danger. Nobody would tele snipe or com drop in a hope to win the game, because they wouldn't get rating anyway, so they would still "loose".

The rating system should properly encourage any playstyle that increases your teams chances of winning and the only reliable way to do that is to only rate wins/losses and play enough games with diverse teams, for noise (like stronger teammates that carry you) to average out.

Is there a reason to actually link both steam and GOG?
Or could that be disabled? So you could only link one of those to your FAF account.

@manimal_ said in SACUs and Factories Upgrades seem to be bugged:

it is hard to my old eyes... tiny icons with even tinyer Tech marks... d'oh !
And It's getting worse by zoom out

If your having trouble distinguishing icons/tech levels i recommend an icon mod.

These change some icons and make higher tech icons larger

These make icons somewhat larger (50%/100% size increase)

This is probably intentional, as you need the old versions to watch older replays
So once a player watches an older replay, the client keeps that version around in case the player wants to watch another one of those replays

@clyf said in How exactly do we expect low rated players to play the game?:

A. introducing additional metrics into the score calculation a la TrueSkill 2

I think that's off the table (ftx also often rants about how this would be a bad idea), because players play the rating system and whichever metric you use to calculate their rating, the players will try to maximize that and any metric aside from win/loss will inevitably warp the game and might even cause toxicity within the team. (kills/eco/quick win/score, all of these will lead to certain kinds of abuse)

@clyf said in How exactly do we expect low rated players to play the game?:

B. modifying the score calculation function to something other than a linear sum

While good in theory (as I already mentioned in my response to sylph_), I don't believe there is a mathematically sound solution to this, as it is very opinion based.

I think the problem is also that in custom games the your contribution-rating ratio is very "random" since there is no control how/where you got that rating and how it compares to what you are playing now.
And in ladder the sample sizes are quite low, since there aren't that many games played and almost no high level players queue ladder/tmm.

Sidenote:
@clyf said in How exactly do we expect low rated players to play the game?:

A metric is a quantifiable measure of the system, but in practice does not (and cannot) account for every element of a system. Win/lose, kills:deaths, the number given by the TrueSkill system--none of these account for everything that can happen, yet all are metrics.

I guess me calling these metrics is wrong
Mathematically the metric we want is the players ability to play the game and cooperate with their team well, because that directly influences the games outcome.
But we can't measure that directly so we approximate this by using other "metrics" and any "metric" where A > B (in the skill metric) and A <= B (in the the approximation metric) is just a wrong metric to me.
For win/loss you could probably argue that this is also the case for certain games, but it will average out given enough games. So a player that consistently wins more games than he looses is better than his opponents were, while a player that consistenly has a high kda is not necessarily better than his opponents were.
(Just so you understand where I'm coming from. We should probably cut this discussion here and accept we have different definitions/assumptions)

Adding Jamming to more UEF units would be nice to increase faction diversity, but the stats should be adjusted, because just adding jamming would make those units kinda op. All Cybran units have less hp for a reason and the cybran strat even deals 250 damage less than the others (UEF strat also deals 100 damage more than others)

@yew There is no server. At least not in the ideal scenario
The game runs peer to peer so the players will connect directly to each other. Only when such a connection can not be made (due to ISP shenanigans or other networking issues) a coturn server comes into play that acts as a proxy between the two players that can't make a connection.
These coturn servers have for the past month been the focus of some intense ddos attacks, so connections that have to use the coturns have been pretty bad since then.
People are working on fixes for that and are also trying to improve the network adapter in general to improve connectivity but as people are caught up in IRL stuff that just takes time.

can the client notice the game crashed and check the crash log?
or is the client unable to tell whether the game crashed or closed normally?

You could maybe add something like if someone disconnects at 90%+ HP he won't explode
that way if you randomly dc in your base you won't blow anything up, but if you're in a fight you can also just walk away with 90% hp and once you're lower you still explode. I don't think there's much that can bring your com down from 100% quickly and then struggle against some units that didn't blow up because he preemptively dc'd.

@phong I think what he wants is when your press the scroll wheel invert mouse movement, so when you press the wheel to move the camera it moves the other way around.
That may also be doable with autohotkey

you can always make your own hotkeys in your game.prefs file
https://forums.faforever.com/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=8230

@heavenly After you downloaded the steam version once, you won't need steam to play FAF more than you need now.
You just use steam to download the newest version and verify that you own the game to FAF.
Once that's done FAF launches the game completely bypassing steam.

@mazornoob said in Satellite overperforming.:

If we're talking so late in the game that e costs no longer matter then the opposing team should afford tele def anywhere they have antinuke anyway.

People just naturally overbuild E late in the game, if you naturally hoard 50k mass then this will be true.
It's also not that E costs don't matter, but they are less relevant than mass costs, since if you at some point needed E for something you invested the mass already but the E production will continue for the rest of the game.

@mazornoob said in Satellite overperforming.:

Yes I am. Nukes are yet another "target anywhere on the map, has a specific per-area cost counter that you need ahead of time" weapon that has yet another counter with different numbers. Doesn't make the underlying mechanics much different.

A GC can also walk anywhere on the map and shoot things down so where's the difference?
The difference between a GC and a Novax is similar to the difference between a Novax and Telemazor. You can see and defend against a GC on it's way to its target, while you can only see the Novax and have to prepare defenses at it's target position + it's faster.
Telemazer you cannot intercept or even detect on it's way and it's also way faster than a sattelite.

@mazornoob said in Satellite overperforming.:

How is paying 20k mass and 2 million e for a telemazer not an opportunity cost?

That's just cost, the Novax needs to travel to places and the enemy can just concentrate on building defenses where it's going. against telemazer you need your defenses up everywhere at all times.

@mazornoob said in Satellite overperforming.:

Fighter-bombers obviously won't protect the telemazer target in the first place sure, that's the job for T2 PDs. Their purpose is to ensure the first tele is the last one, and this they can do no problem.

As soon as you build your t2 pd you lost to the telemazer because making it is more expensive than the telemazer was. So while you think you just countered the tele, in fact you just lost some mass to the enemy.
Also because Telemazer is hard to scout and arrives very fast you need to start preparing such defenses even before a telemazer is out, so you need to invest in useless PDs in your core base just because your enemy is Cybran.

@mazornoob said in Satellite overperforming.:

Conceding the Novax DPS analysis, except again, you have to factor in the cost of shielding all the mexes where otherwise you wouldn't bother because SAMs stop strats and no one will nuke/arty/Asswasher random lone T3 mexes.

The math presented doesn't factor in shields because it assumes you don't build any. Making shields would be more effective, but even if you just rebuild the mexes destroyed by the Novax it's not that expensive, because it has such low dps.

@waffelznoob
UEF units have more hp (generally)
Aeon has more specialised units / their units are missing weapons/features that comparable units of other factions have.
Seraphim have more multi-purpose units

There are things your can attribute to the factions, but the impact they have on how the faction plays differently from the others is questionable

But having repair too good is bad anyway, since it'll only be worth it to repair buildings since you probably won't have the amount of engies in place to repair your front line units and they can't do anything useful while being repaired.

So repair is mostly a defensive tool and promoting turtling too much is bad if you want something to happen in your game instead of two sim city games next to each other.

Vet is bascially like repair, but promotes aggression and sudden vets also lead to more interesting moments.

@deribus isn't repair only 25% discount now?
So it costs 75%