The integrated ban feature is nice. And the auto kick for shit CPU's. Just don't make typo's.

I once gave it the command to kick everyone with CPU above 20, because the 2nd 0 didn't register on my keyboard and promptly 9 players were kicked xD

@Jip said in Show CPU model ID in lobbies:

I'd like to add to this topic that the benchmark being used and throttling are two different problems that would require to be solved separately.

And, next to that, I'd love to add in that:

• You can fake the benchmark score and therefore probably the CPU model too.
• Considering we are 'power users' according to you, overclocking OR underclocking a CPU wouldn't be taken into account if you show the CPU model. Especially underclocking is a powerful technique for laptops to prevent the throttling you mention. Therefore your new technique is also unreliable, as I believe Pearl is trying to show to you

I thought of a version of 'benchmarking' that would be a lot better: every minute throughout the sim you compare the sim rates of all the players in the game. You get a number between -1 and 1, depending if you are below, on or above average.

At the end of the game this number can be merged with previous games - allowing you to show some form of pattern that is more reliable than the current test. If your CPU does perform on average well then this number would be positive. If your CPU performs averagely poor then this number would be negative.

This is all done locally and stored similarly to how the benchmark is stored. As of writing I am not sure how that is stored - there may be a flaw there.

I think it would help best in combination with the current benchmark, which needs to be retrofitted slightly to check for memory speed because that is in fact the major bottleneck for CPU's if no throttling is happening:

• https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/The-Gap-between-Processor-and-Memory-Speeds-Carvalho/6ebec8701893a6770eb0e19a0d4a732852c86256?p2df

From a practical point of view, @speed2 Do you know if there is a way to retrieve the information shown in the console command ren_ShowNetworkStats? It contains all the information this would require.

That would be nice. Effectively you don't only get a 'skill' rating, but also a cpu rating.

However, the only real thing that counts is people being the slowest below 0.

Thermal paste degraded? The dedicated GPU is not used?

@zsombi said in Everything lags and stutters:

the only thing I'm not compromising on is running full screen

Try windowed mode.

And a way to see if what is import and what you produce yourself. In half the cases where I make tele SCU's from air or eco slot, the naval player goes empty on E...

but if, if, but and what about the 1%? And ....

Stop the bs pls. Ppl that want to play with lag can just ignore it.

I suggested this earlier (to display CPU model) and just as now, the excuses not to do it are ridiculous.

Very simple example; ALL the Intel -U CPU's will throttle. That's simply a given because at full boost (that they use for the benchmark) can only be sustained a very short time before power delivery and heat become a problem. For ppl using laptops where the biggest task is opening a 100 page PDF this is excellent and manufacturers can skimp down on power circuits, cooling and the consumer gets a cheaper, lighter and thinner laptop. Not suited for FAF though.

Bigger games in FAF are ruined by ppl with shitty throttling systems. There should be something in place that would override the shown cpu score for these players. That includes the ppl that turn on their software streaming after running the bench, like lilSidlil.

@Pearl12 said in Show CPU model ID in lobbies:

Only if you have all the CPU models memorized. And even then, are you sure every laptop CPU is a distinct model from a tower? And even then, who is to say that every laptop CPU can't play every game?

Your argument boils down to "perfection is not easily achieved, so we should not improve".

@Uveso said in Show CPU model ID in lobbies:

This was the last issue on github about cpu benchmark:
https://github.com/FAForever/fa/issues/2434

Please read my comment:
https://github.com/FAForever/fa/issues/2434#issuecomment-385811821

This could explain why a CPU benchmark is useless in any cases
We should test memory speed.

The first link; hilarious. A Q6600 user still living in about 2006...

The second link; false. CPU speed is still an issue. Thermal throttling is all over the place. Also ppl load up their CPU with things like VLC, Youtube, streaming. The existence of "fast i7's" does not mean everyone has one.

Also; the older i7's are simply too slow anyway. The cheapest current-gen Celeron (the G5900) is faster than the i7-920 for example. 2nd gen i5 is already faster than 1st gen i7.

Add; you also can't give HARMS to a teammate.

@cyborg16 said in Cybran stealthing:

What often confused me was a stealthed ACU under water. It turns out that the scout/spy planes all have sonar (equal to vision radius, I think), therefore can "see" underwater and spot the ACU.

Nope. Only Cybran and Sera Spyplanes have Sonar, with range being equal to the radar range of the spyplane.

UEF and Aeon Spyplanes DO NOT have sonar, although they will still spot underwater stuff in their much smaller omni ring.

See attached; above vision is from the player with the subs; two near each "enemy" spyplane. Bottom is the view from the player with the spyplanes. The most left and right spyplane are the sera and cybran one; they each see two subs. The UEF and Aeon spyplanes only see the sub that is in their red (omni) ring.

So if you are out to hunt ACU's hidden in the water outside sonar range... you better use cybran or sera spyplane or you need to fly right over them and even then their blip will appear only shortly.

Note that in both omni and sonar ring, there is still no unterwater vision.

@jip said in Shift-loading units into transports:

We could create a new command to make loading of transports easier, would there be interest for that?

Anything that improves transport behavior and predictability would be awesome.

Cloak = invisible to radar, invisible to vision ( ). Under omni it becomes an unidentified radar signature. Note you will be able to see footprints from cloaked ACU, so if it's walking, you can still groundattack it.

Stealth = no radar signature. Still visible with vision and produces radar signature if you have omni cover on it.

Note that land vision and water vision are two different things.

Also see here for detecting subs with T3 spyplanes;
https://forum.faforever.com/topic/3926/cybran-stealthing/7?_=1657994859851

I recommend using the rings to see.

@jip said in Game version 3741: Sneak peaks:

@jcvjcvjcvjcv said in Game version 3741: Sneak peaks:

On the other hand, doesn't this open a can of worms? What about AA overkilling their targets? (Draining all SAMs on a few spyplanes and letting the bombers behind pass, etc.)

The 'can of worms' argument is also considered the 'slippery slope fallacy' - just because we fix one issue and similar issues exist, it doesn't mean that we shouldn't fix this one issue.

As Nex describes - the reason this works is because the amount of damage that TMDs do is uniform. That doesn't apply to other weaponry. Hence even if we'd want to fix this, we couldn't reliably put a 'count' on it. Let alone that it is a property of projectiles that we're using here, not a property of a weapon or unit.

I see my wording of it was poor.

But not letting 15 SAMS fire at a spyplane kinda makes sense too

@jip said in Delay between unit contruction for air factories..?:

There has been a change to this, but as far as I am aware air factories were not affected.

I noted the delay too. Used to be able to spam a solid line of Torp Bombers from my build. Now they are spread apart way more and I am way way more mass when using the same amount of BP on the factory.

@fichom said in Delay between unit contruction for air factories..?:

What worries me though, is the delay between a factory finishing it's upgrade and starting working on new units. I sometimes feel like it somehow gets stuck, and you have to wait for an extended period of time before it starts making units from the queue. And sometimes, though rarely, and I'm not 100% but pretty sure, if you queue a unit in that post-upgrade blackout, the unit gets immediately de-queued and you have to press for it again (assuming the queue after the upgrade was empty).

Only with units in queue. Not when the upgrade finishes and you THEN order the first unit.

Yeah, don't use full screen, use windowed mode. There is supposedly a mod that removes the top bar of the window too.

If you have two identical resultion monitors, you can 'split' the view and just stretch the monitor across two screens.

I have used fullscreen dual monitor, with the actual set-up in the game for a while, but it's just not stable making you loose all epic long-lasting games because the stuff freezes. I now just use one 30" 2560x1600 monitor with the game in windowed mode.

The other monitors have my discord, FAF client, Outlook... anything really.

Vet already got nerfed long ago. It also got based on mass value killed instead of # of units killed.

You can see what the max hp of enemy unit is and you can see what it kills.

Play single player if you want no chat.

@ftxcommando said in Ban less and more:

Great, problem is as Gieb said the moderation manpower is two sticks and a rock.

So what does your good intention policy intended to guess whether people are actually upset lead to? Dudes combing through replays to find something to ban people they already have a problem with due to other circumstances. Is that more or less toxic than the current situation?

More

I just noticed my 170 benchscore equals the 171 i5-8250U one... but where my PC took 98 seconds, he i5-8250U took almost double with 171 seconds.

UPC? You on coax internet? That stuff is known for inconsistent ping.

Veterancy also fails on the HARMS. Even with 5 stars it still shows only 11000 + 0/s

@rowey said in Upcoming developers patch:

@nooby Part 1/2 for the new CPU Benchmark is already in progress. in the last game update in your prefs file it has been gathering data on how well the cpu performance and once enough data is gathered this will replace the current cpu benchmark to give a more realised cpu score. the more you play the more the result will be realistic and the cpu benchmark button will be removed as it is done automatically.

Nice. But how will it work exactly? I tend to keep some Youtube (example) on the side as long as MY simspeed is >0. So you might see it going down toward 0 very fast, but when the game drags on... I kill any background use and still remain >0.