FAForever Forums
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Login
    1. Home
    2. Jip
    The current pre-release of the client ("pioneer" in the version) is only compatible to itself. So you can only play with other testers. Please be aware!
    Offline
    • Profile
    • Following 0
    • Followers 11
    • Topics 81
    • Posts 2,776
    • Groups 5

    Jip

    @Jip

    2.9k
    Reputation
    958
    Profile views
    2.8k
    Posts
    11
    Followers
    0
    Following
    Joined
    Last Online
    Age 30
    Website github.com/Garanas
    Location Netherlands

    Jip Unfollow Follow
    Promotions team FAF Association Board FAF Association Members Team Lead Admin

    Best posts made by Jip

    • Game Councilor

      Game councilor: part 1 / 3

      Recently Keyser resigned as Game Councilor and last week I was approved by the board to take over. Some of you may know me as a map maker, for making trailers, for trying to improve the performance of the game or adjusting or adding in new features. I will focus my attention on the last two - and I hope we can do this together.

      About us: the community

      We're a self sustaining community with various contributors as our backbone. There are numerous ways one can contribute: By creating graphics for the news team, by being a personal trainer to help players out, by being a moderator to protect the community from itself - this list continues on and on. I want to take this opportunity to highlight two of them: taking part in productive discussions and testing the game or client.

      Discussions

      Discussions are a corner point of a thriving community. The development of the game should be no exception for these discussions. A recent example is the adjustment to the mass extractor capping feature that started with a discussion on the forums. This is the type of interaction that we should have with the community. In order to facilitate this further we're expanding our use of our Discord channel:

      • A new channel '#game-updates' under 'Technical' where all updates to the develop branch / release branch are posted
      • A new channel '#game-features' under 'Technical' where where all updates that can benefit from discussions are posted, including sub threads for each update to discuss the update with the community
      • A new channel '#game-general' under 'Technical' where you can talk about (technical) game improvements in general

      You will require the @Tester role that you can select in the #role-selection channel in order to respond to and discuss features. The same role will be used to ping when new features arise. The role is shared with client testers and announcements.

      I hope with this change we can accommodate a more community-engaged game development, in particular the idea is that:

      • The forums can be used to initiate a discussion on features / improvements
      • Discord can be used to discuss features / improvements on an informal level with fellow community members and the game developers
      • Github can be used to discuss features / improvements on a technical level with fellow game developers
      • Zulip can be used to discuss features / improvements on a technical level with fellow developers of other branches, such as the client or server developers

      We're going to use next week to set up the Discord channels.

      These discussions should involve bug fixes, feature suggestions and performance improvements. Balance discussions have their own councilor and their own forum sections.

      Testers

      People that test the client or game have a direct impact to the overall experience of the community. Their work is appreciated - I'd like to use this section to highlight @WhenDayBreaks, @Emperor_Penguin, @GenevaConvention , @Tagada, @Snagglefox and everyone else who has discussed issues with me in the past that they experienced with the game.

      There is a new patch coming set to release on the 26th of November. You can find the changelog on Github. Meanwhile we're trying to create a stable version of the client with various changes including an auto debugger and improvements to team matchmaking. I am asking everyone reading this to contribute - not by writing code, not by creating graphics and not by making content or managing content.

      Instead contribute by giving yourself to the @Tester role on Discord, by installing the pre release / alpha client and by hosting games on the game type FAF Develop. Then report back your findings - even when they are positive and stable. You can do so in #testing-faf and #game-general on Discord respectively.

      Final note

      The intention was to write more about my ideas as a councilor - but time is short. I'll be writing about other changes that I intent to make in the near future including a mentorship for community members that are willing to learn about and work with the game repository for an extended time. But for now - let us enjoy this game together and report back the bugs.

      posted in General Discussion
      JipJ
      Jip
    • Game version 3741

      Upcoming features

      Some of the upcoming features, in a new format. The changelog can be difficult to read, over the next few days we'll be posting new features of the game in a friendly format.

      1. Tractor beams of the Galactic Colossus

      These never really did function! But soon, they will! We're working on it on Github where you can preview the working behavior via the attached video.

      4b109c5c-7378-47d6-b2a3-ba5ec03fa4f8-image.png

      2. Tactical missile defenses

      They've always felt a bit underwhelming - and that is because they were. They typically overkill their targets, causing them to be unreliable at best. We're working on fixing this on Github, where you can preview the working behavior via the attached video. Finally A tactical missile defense can properly counter a tactical missile launcher that fires at the same rate and takes only one strike to take down.

      fd9f5733-a423-4d29-a027-a2d3f22f3f8f-image.png

      3. Game results

      A brand new implementation on how the game results are being tracked is available on FAF Develop! Now that we have all the files in the repository we can finally properly investigate what is going on. And with that investigation an alternative system of determining the game results has been implemented. This system has already been live for about a week - as the date of merge on the pull request suggests!

      I'm quite confident that this:

      • Gets rid of the 'draw bug' once and for all
      • Reduces the amount of 'unknown results' to practically 0

      The previous implementation was a fix over a fix, over a fix, over a ... bug. While they didn't manage to tackle the core issue that showed up all over the base code, and apparently also in the game results computation. As a result, one army was sometimes not considered defeated until the next tick - the source of the draw bug. It is quite technical, I won't dive further and keep it brief.

      Note that when you draw you can still lose or gain rating: the idea is that if you draw you should be of equal rating, and therefore the players 'move towards each other' rating-wise.

      4. Projectiles that hit but miss

      There are a lot of situations where projectiles hit (read: collide) with a unit, but they do not deal damage to that unit. This is a consequence to how the engine works: the collisions are computed at tick n, the consequences of the collisions are computed at tick n + 1. One tick later, the unit may have moved so far away that it can miss area damage, especially when the radius of the area damage is low. The full fix, along with videos can be found on Github.

      To describe it visually:

      00ec191d-91d6-4b74-8188-3d3889e5e2fc-image.png
      A scout at maximum velocity, red marks the old damage location where as blue marks the new damage location. The collision boxes are also rendered (in blue), clearly showing that the old damage location is no longer in reach of the spy plane

      Note that this primary impacts two type of situations:

      • Very fast units (> 15 maximum movement speed, usually planes)
      • Projectiles with a very small damage radius (< 0.5, the average land units moves at a speed of 5)

      5. Range rings and performance

      With thanks to @RutreD and @Kionx (who's not on the forums) another engine patch has been made and is available on FAF Develop! This patch improves the performance of range rings, with up to 20% to 50% more frame rate than before when rendering plain vision and range rings!

      As an example, while having used the following console commands:

      • ShowStats
      • sc_VerticalSync 0
      • sc_FrameTimeClamp 0

      You can reproduce these results yourself - I highly encourage you to do so and report back 🙂 !

      66cc0e35-abf2-4b86-b254-02447cd45acd-image.png
      Current FAF game type, looking at 500 asf: ~150 fps

      cf98f9a0-ce41-45c6-ba67-bcb10e1afd54-image.png
      Current FAF Game type, 500 selected asf: ~100 fps

      92bd0a25-9d1a-4cb8-8a3f-147ea58be17d-image.png
      Current FAF Develop game type, looking at 500 asf: ~250 fps

      69882a09-9e45-4abf-b52e-0fc9e829a867-image.png
      Current FAF Develop game type, selected 500 asf: ~150 fps

      6. And a lot more - see the patch notes below!

      posted in General Discussion
      JipJ
      Jip
    • Patch 3732 - 3735

      On April the 22nd the next game patch is coming - and it is an exciting one. There are various significant improvements on the base game and critical bug fixes. You'll be able to stomp again and the game will have proper mod options support. There is improved AI tooling and a quick check for map makers to confirm everything is buildable. On top of that some of the small suggestions have been implemented and more are coming. And above all: on average the game appears to be 10% to 15% more efficient in comparison to the FAF branch. When interacting with shields the game is 600% to 700% more efficient - I dare you to compare the interaction of 5 Janus with 30 Aeon hover shields on the FAF and on the FAF Develop branch ☀ . And to finish it all up the aesthetics of the game has been improved in various areas, such as how trees interact with the game.

      I'll extent this post with more information in the near future. For now, you can find the changes here on the commit log or read them up in the changelog. The latter has not been updated for two weeks.

      I am asking you all to contribute by playing on FAF Develop and reporting back the stability of the branch in this topic. A positive result (in other words: it is stable) is important to report too. Attach the game log (via pastebin.com), the enabled (sim) mods and the replay id of your game when you report back.

      Up to this point all my tests with AIs show that it is stable. And they show that the game is significantly faster in general. But they do not have sufficient coverage to confirm that the game type is stable for release. We got roughly a month to confirm that, and I need your help to do that 🙂 .

      5145aaee-2e05-4bb9-887c-8245c4b8e2f1-image.png
      An infographic to help you host a game using FAF Develop. Instead of using the FAF game type, select the FAF Develop game type. Note that FAF Beta is for balance changes and is the same as the FAF game type at the moment.

      posted in General Discussion
      JipJ
      Jip
    • RE: Developers Iteration I of 2023

      Improved structure terrain interactions (#4584 on Github)

      Combined with the knowledge of Balthazar we managed to significantly reduce a common source of confusion and disappointment: bad terrain deformations. As you build structures the terrain was flattened underneath, with a bit of (bad) luck this could create sharp edges in the terrain that end up blocking pathing or projectiles all together.

      As a few examples:

      Seton's Clutch

      f3787cae-d488-4666-bd87-d3b226c59470-image.png

      Long John Silver

      4f5ab8ef-e4dd-47b8-94e3-cd28554a266d-image.png

      b1fd76bc-7812-49fe-ac45-98bab33276ef-image.png

      We're all too familiar with them, to the degree that it would even limit the creativity of map authors. Terrain has to be flat, or it will cause bad deformations that result in significantly worse gameplay.

      But - no more! With the changes we're making to how structures interact with terrain we no longer create a flat plane that needs to be completely horizontal. Instead, we create a gradient between the four points of the build skirt and slightly orient the structure to match the gradient as required. As a result the number of bad deformations is reduced significantly, to the degree that it is really difficult to create a bad deformation.

      As a few examples:

      Seton's clutch

      ba35b039-cd3b-43c5-8f7f-1394cb7ca57b-image.png

      Long John Silver

      60aa05b9-0a24-4d27-a37d-88c6967e0c0f-image.png

      bcd20260-3fec-4aea-b0ed-a02fc3f3788a-image.png

      This change is significant - not only does it help you as a player to just enjoy the game. It will also increase the creative possibilities for map authors as terrain no longer necessarily needs to be flat.

      Significant performance improvements (#4584 on Github)

      We've found one more large performance hiccup and managed to resolve it. The problem and solution is rather technical. Tthroughout the entire game you can expect 10% to 30% more performance on average, depending on what is happening.

      I'll try and explain it - I've not found a way to keep it simple. Therefore I'll just write it out and make comparisons where possible.

      Table trashing

      The first issue was during instantiation of a table with a C reference. Instantiation means the creation (allocation) of something. And the table can reference quite literally anything:

      • A damage instance: any damage in general, regardless whether it hits a unit or prop
      • A decal: tread marks or the small decals we generate when projectiles hit the ground
      • An effect: terrain effects, projectile trail effects, projectile impact effects, build effects - the list goes on
      • A blip: the radar blips that are created for units
      • A manipulator: these are applied to units for animations, and the sliding of barrels as they fire
      • An entity: units, weapons, projectiles, bare entities, props, beams, trails, ...
      • ..., the list goes on but we'll stick with these examples

      When we create an instance they inherit functionality and data from a Class. This was done via a table called a ClassFactory, which was defined as:

      ClassFactory = {
          __call = function(self, ...)
              -- create the new entity with us as its meta table
              local instance = {&1 &0}
              setmetatable(instance, self)
      
              -- call class initialisation functions, if they exist
              local initfn = self.__init
              if initfn then
                  initfn(instance, unpack(arg))
              end
              local postinitfn = self.__post_init
              if postinitfn then
                  postinitfn(instance, unpack(arg))
              end
      
              return instance
          end
      }
      

      The problem is at the very start:

          __call = function(self, ...) <-- note the '...'
      

      The argument ... is called a varargs, and the idea is that it allows a function to be more flexible: you can pass any amount of data to the function and the function can then iterate over that data, as the data is stored in a table. The table is created regardless of whether there is any data to pass along. And that is exactly what the issue was: every example we just described does not use this approach to pass data to the instance. Therefore every example described has an overhead of creating a 80 byte table, just to trash it out again!

      And the overhead is significant: 80 bytes sounds like nothing. But let us take a single event as an example: when a weapon fires a projectile. At this event the game creates:

      • 1x manipulator: A slider to mimic recoil
      • 6x effects: two effects for firing the weapon (a flash and smoke for example), two effects for the projectile itself and two impact effects
      • 1x projectile
      • 1x damage
      • 1x decal
      • 1x other things

      In total, on average:

      • 11x varargs table created just to trash it again

      For this single event we've trashed up to 880 bytes worth of memory. The average unit fires about 1 projectile per second. That means during a battle a single unit can trash up to almost a kilobyte of memory per second! Multiply that by 200 units for the average battle and we're talking about hundreds of kilobytes of data being generated per second, just to trash it again. To put that into perspective:

      • This post is about 5 kilobytes of text, at the moment of writing this sentence. We'd trash the same amount of memory when a Hoplite fires one salvo
      • The average JPEG image is about 50 to 500 kilobytes. It is not unreasonable to trash as much memory as the average JPEG image per second during a relatively small battle

      We can continue on - but the impact is quite significant when you take into account the garbage collector and how the CPU cache works. For example, we drastically reduce trashing the caches and increase the chance of a cache hit.

      For those that like a puzzle: there are a lot of other very common events that no longer create this dummy table. Can you find some based on this information? I'll add them to a list in this post as they are found 🙂

      Pre allocate tables

      The second issue is about how tables grow in memory as more elements as attached to it. We'll take the example of the creation of a projectile again. When a projectile is created, we at least add the following fields to it:

      OnCreate = function(self, inWater)
          -- store information to prevent engine calls
          self.Blueprint = EntityGetBlueprint(self)
          self.Army = EntityGetArmy(self)
          self.Launcher = ProjectileGetLauncher(self)
          self.Trash = TrashBag()
      end,
      

      Just like lists in C# do, a table in Lua starts with no allocated memory by default. As we add elements to the table (the self instance, in other words: the projectile) the table grows accordingly. This is done by logic similar to the following:

      static void resize (lua_State *L, Table *t, int nasize, int nhsize) {
        int i;
        int oldasize = t->sizearray;
        int oldhsize = t->lsizenode;
        Node *nold;
        Node temp[1];
        if (oldhsize)
          nold = t->node;  /* save old hash ... */
        else {  /* old hash is `dummynode' */
          lua_assert(t->node == G(L)->dummynode);
          temp[0] = t->node[0];  /* copy it to `temp' */
          nold = temp;
          setnilvalue(gkey(G(L)->dummynode));  /* restate invariant */
          setnilvalue(gval(G(L)->dummynode));
          lua_assert(G(L)->dummynode->next == NULL);
        }
        if (nasize > oldasize)  /* array part must grow? */
          setarrayvector(L, t, nasize);
        /* create new hash part with appropriate size */
        setnodevector(L, t, nhsize);  
        /* re-insert elements */
        if (nasize < oldasize) {  /* array part must shrink? */
          t->sizearray = nasize;
          /* re-insert elements from vanishing slice */
          for (i=nasize; i<oldasize; i++) {
            if (!ttisnil(&t->array[i]))
              setobjt2t(luaH_setnum(L, t, i+1), &t->array[i]);
          }
          /* shrink array */
          luaM_reallocvector(L, t->array, oldasize, nasize, TObject);
        }
        /* re-insert elements in hash part */
        for (i = twoto(oldhsize) - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
          Node *old = nold+i;
          if (!ttisnil(gval(old)))
            setobjt2t(luaH_set(L, t, gkey(old)), gval(old));
        }
        if (oldhsize)
          luaM_freearray(L, nold, twoto(oldhsize), Node);  /* free old array */
      }
      

      That is a lot of code, but more importantly: it allocates new memory, re-inserts the existing elements into the new memory and prepares the old memory for deallocation! That is a relatively expensive operation, but it all depends on how often it is run. To understand that, these are the resize thresholds for the hash-based array:

      Resize threshold Resizes to Bytes hash part occupies Total bytes
      0 or 1 2 40 80
      2 4 80 120
      4 8 160 200
      8 16 320 360
      16 32 640 680
      ... ... ... ...
      n 2 * n n * 20 n * 20 + 40

      That means when we create a projectile we have to resize at least three times! And in practice it is four times, where as the average projectile can take up to 8 hash entries. That causes it to just resize to 16. This is something we can try and optimize in the future too.

      Usually in Lua you can not pre-allocate a table. That is not normal syntax. But the GPG devs introduced that syntax in the Moho engine. And using that syntax, we can size the table as it is created. As an example, this is a special class instantiation factory for projectiles:

      ProjectileFactory = {
          ---@param self any
          ---@return table
          __call = function (self)
              -- LOG(string.format("%s -> %s", "ProjectileFactory", tostring(self.__name)))
              -- needs a hash part of one for the _c_object field
              local instance = {&15 &0}
              return setmetatable(instance, self)
          end
      }
      

      Where the important line is this:

              local instance = {&15 &0}
      

      Which states that we want to pre-allocate the hash part of the table so that it can at least hold up to 15 elements.

      This same principle applies to any instance mentioned earlier, where we properly pre-allocate the table for units, shields, weapons, projectiles, damage instances, effects, decals and all the other parts of this game. We now properly pre-allocate them all, drastically reducing the frequency at which the engine ends up calling the resize function.

      Control ... (#4587 on Github)

      A Discord user asked in the general chat if there is an easy way to split up your selection. The answer is no - but the question is why? Why are there no tools to manage your current selection?

      With this patch we're introducing a first batch of hotkeys that you can use to create subgroups of your selection, through which you can navigate. You can find them in the hotkeys menu:

      f8605648-3467-4938-9b38-e4a3e9a444cc-image.png

      All these hotkeys divide your selection over a series of subgroups. You can then use an additional hotkey (in the screenshot it is Tab) to navigate through your subgroups. We'll take two examples:

      Divides a selection by the line through your mouse position and the center of the selection
      bdcf1864-79e4-4011-9dbc-1da63a65096c-image.png

      Divides a selection orthogonally to the line from your mouse position to the center of the selection
      be226567-5f0a-4d0e-a689-c633a831d31b-image.png

      These two hotkeys allows you to divide your selection into two subgroups, which you can then quickly navigate between. The command mode (when the cursor changes to issue orders, for example reclaim, ground attack, launch orders ...) are not reset as you navigate between subgroups.

      With this patch we at least introduce the following divisions:

      • Divide over mouse axis
      • Divide over orthogonal mouse axis
      • Divide over major axis
      • Divide over minor axis
      • Divide over tech
      • Divide over layer
      • Divide over tech, but only include engineers
      • Divide over subgroups of size 1
      • Divide over subgroups of size 2
      • Divide over subgroups of size 4
      • Divide over subgroups of size 8
      • Divide over subgroups of size 16

      We hope this provides you with more control over your selection, and therefore with more control over your army. If you have ideas of other divisions or selection manipulation: feel free to jump into the suggestions channel in Discord and we can discuss them accordingly!

      ... and Command! (#4577 on Github)

      On top of that we are introducing various quality of life features. The first two features we'll reveal are about adding optional side effects when you issue an assist order. Specifically we're talking about these options:

      ad1c2ce5-8b55-44c4-9936-d4c9f542e4ab-image.png

      The option Assist to upgrade allows you to immediately queue up the upgrade of a tech 1 mass extractor as you issue the assist order. The option Assist to Unpause allows allows you to unpause extractors and radars as your units start assisting them. The former is useful for quickly queue up (assisted) extractor upgrades. The second makes it easier to focus your build power.

      posted in Contribution
      JipJ
      Jip
    • Fix is live for the excessive CPU usage of the ICE adapter

      As mentioned by @Brutus5000 on Discord we managed to find one cause of the excessive CPU usage by the ICE adapter when a player leaves. For more technical details:

      • https://github.com/FAForever/java-ice-adapter/releases/tag/3.3.9

      We do not know why this behavior suddenly started to show. But what I do know is that with thanks to @Ravandel , @Rowey , @Tagada , @Strydxr, @IndexLibrorum and Babel (Discord user) after a few hours across a few days of iterations with Brutus making changes and us testing we managed to find a solution.

      We enforced the client to update to 2024.6.1. If you still experience high CPU usage of the ICE adapter then please take the time to do the following steps:

      • (0) Make sure that you are indeed running version 2024.6.1 of the client.

      • (1) Enable the debug window of the ICE adapter:

      66a5f5bb-b9b0-4062-b02a-a11fee764bff-image.png

      • (2) When the problem occurs again:

        • Take a screenshot of what is on the debug window.
        • Take a screenshot of the CPU usage in the task manager.
        • Mention your system specs, specifically the CPU.
      • (3) Find the ICE adapter logs:

      5e9ffe65-fd48-4564-bbcf-f1427ed8b31b-image.png

      And then share all of that information in a new forum or Discord topic. That way we have the information we need to better understand the problem.

      posted in Announcements
      JipJ
      Jip
    • Game patch 3728

      On the 20th December, the day after the finals of LoTS, the developers patch is due. You can find the most recent patch notes on Github. With thanks to all the people that helped with the patch in some fashion. Whether that is by developing, reviewing or testing by playing on the FAF Develop branch and reporting back.

      The milestone on Github is essentially empty. Note that it says 3726 because of two additional hotfixes required for the beta patch. With that over 86 pull requests and / or issues have been tackled - and hopefully with many more to come with future patches.

      At this point the FAF Develop branch is stable. Stable means that games play as expected - no crashes that alter gameplay significantly. With one more week to go I am asking you all to help test the developers branch by playing on it. In general there are only benefits: improved features, less bugs and better performance. By hosting on FAF Develop and reporting back either in this topic or in #game-testing on the official discord you can help guarantee it is as stable as possible when we release the patch. For once I'd like to release a patch with no hotfixes after the fact.

      For quick-access I copied the patch notes into this post. They are not final - as an example I still need to read through them and fix typo's 🙂 . You can find the most recent patch notes on Github.

      Patch 3730 (23th of December, 2021)
      ===================================
      
      Games using the featured mod Nomads will break when playing the Aeon 
      faction until Nomads has been updated by its maintainer.
      
      ### Features
       - (#3627) Whitelist Kyro's lobby
          The file `kyros.nxt` is now white listed. If you intent to
          work on this lobby, please consider working on the lobby
          of the repository instead.
      
      ### Bug fixes
       - (#3628) Fix inconsistency with hover queue
       - (#3626) Fix issue with insignificant units and campaign levels
       - (#3625) Force recompilation of shaders due to Nomads shaders
       - (#3624) Fix highlight of selected units to drop in transport
       - (#3624) Fix template menu that allows you to rename / delete templates
      
      ### Contributors
       - 4z0t (#3624)
       - Jip (#3627, #3628, #3626, #3625)
      
      Patch 3729 (20th of December, 2021)
      ===================================
      
      ### Features
       - (#3615) Happy Christmas (in advance) ^_^
      
      ### Bug fixes
       - (#3618) Fix scale of Seraphim build effects
       - (#3618) Fix issue with disconnection window for auto lobbies (ladder / tmm)
       - (#3618) Revert removed effect template for backwards compatibility with mods
       - (#3620) Add delay to ringing feature to prevent malicious intent
       - (#3621) Fix backwards compatibility with mods
      
      ### Contributors
       - 4z0t (#3615)
       - Jip (#3618, #3620, #3621)
      
      Patch 3728 (20th of December, 2021)
      ============================
      
      ### Features
       - (#3484, #3500, #3535, #3600, #3604, #3610, #3611) 
          Allow more structures to be cap-able using a similar mechanic to storages for extractors.
          This changes the ringing behavior to:
          - 2 clicks + shift to mass storage an upgrading t1 extractor
          - 1 click to mass storage a t2 / t3 extractor
          - 3 clicks to shift + mass fab cap an upgrading t2 extractor
          - 2 clicks to shift + mass fab cap a t3 extractor
      
          - 1 clicks to mass storage a t3 fabricator
          - 1 clicks to pgen an t2 artillery
          - 2 clicks + shift to pgen an upgrading t1 radar
          - 1 clicks to pgen an t2 radar or t3 radar
          - 1 click to wall a t1 pd
         
          General rule of thumb:
          - Typical: click
          - Upgrading: shift + 2 click
          - Dangerous: shift + (regular click count + 1)
      
          Shift was already part of the feature and is extended to prevent unintended ringing.
          
          Assisting behavior
          - When all engineers are of the same faction, they can all build the same storage. No assisting happening.
          - When you have engineers of two or more factions, one must assist the other as they can't build the same storages.
          - When you have engineers of one faction and units that can't build the storage (kennel drones, ACU) then they must assist an engineer as they can't build the storages themselves.
      
          This option can be adjusted in options -> gameplay. Search for
          the field 'Automated Structure Encircling'. Options are:
          - Off
          - Only mass storages and extractors
          - Full suite
      
       - (#3597, #3604, #3605, #3607) Add factory queue on hover
          This allows you to get a quick overview of the factory queue by
          just hovering over the unit. Especially useful for casters as
          you can now view the factory queue without switching to the army
          in question.
      
          Can be adjusted in the options -> interface. Search for the 
          field 'Show Factory Queue on Hover'. Options are:
          - Off
          - Only on when observing
          - Always
      
       - (#3531) Add an option to scale down the UI (to 80%) for low resolution monitors
          This doesn't appear to be an issue at first due to the infinite 
          zoom but when the score board takes up 50% of your screen due to a
          1024x720 resolution then it suddenly is.
      
          Not all of the UI can manage this - please report issues in #game-general
          in the FAF discord when you find them.
      
       - (#3554) Add quick-swap feature to lobby for the host
          As a host you can quickly swap two players by
          left-clicking on the slot numbers of two players. It
          highlights to teal (light / bright blue color) when
          in swap modus. Click the highlighted slot number to
          cancel.
      
       - (#3616) Expands the disconnection dialog
          A host can now set a lobby option to change the
          delay required during a disconnection dialog. This defaults
          to the current behavior but can be set to 10 and 
          30 seconds.
      
          The exit dialog is now on top of the disconnection dialog, 
          instead of the other way around.
      
       - (#3602) Overhaul of the cheat spawn menu
          Adds a basic prop spawn mode. Units are spawned using the 
          command feedback on the spawn location. If spawning 
          multiple units they spawn in a box formation. Multi column 
          support and customizable in the game options. Dynamic 
          support for custom factions. Adds in a toggle for 
          revealing hidden-from-spawn-menu units
      
      ### Stability
       - (#3477) Prevent clearing critical state in AI functions
       - (#3490, #3551) Refactor the init files of the game
          This is an involved change but one that was due. 
          
          The init files can no longer load in content that clash between
          the base game files or between older versions of the same mod.
          This could also occur when the mod was not activated for sound
          and / or movie files.
      
          The client supports loading content from a separate vault
          location, the init files need to support this functionality
          accordingly. The init files of the game types FAF, FAF Beta
          and FAF Develop support this functionality. Other game types 
          need to be updated accordingly.
      
          The vault location determined by the client is used to load in
          content (maps / mods). Any other location is no longer read and
          therefore any map / mod in the other locations are not found
          by the game. If after this patch you 'lost' a few of your
          maps and / or mods it means that they were in an old vault 
          location - you'd need to move those manually.
      
          Adds icon support to FAF Beta.
      
          Adds the ability to more easily block content that is integrated.
      
       - (#3527) Integrate the Nvidia Fix mod and block the mod from loading
       - (#3543) Prevent applying bugs to insignificant units, like the Cybran build drone
       - (#3550) Attempt to fix Rhino from missing its target 
      
      ### Bug
       - (#3522) Fix upvalue issue of patch 3721
       - (#3486) Fix (mod) units being unbuildable due to error in UI
       - (#3432) Fix overcharge occasionally basing its damage on the previous unit it hit
       - (#3316) Fix experimentals doing death damage upon death during construction
          Monkeylord: only when fully complete as it sits
          Megalith: only when fully complete as it sits
          Colossus: when complete 50% or more
          Ythotha: when complete 50% or more
      
       - (#3440, #3604) Removes the dummy drone from the unit restriction list
          This drone was often misintepreted as an easy way to unrate a game. In
          contrast to what the name suggests it does have a function: to help gift
          units when a player dies and full share is on. The drone can no longer be
          restricted and instead there is a dedicated lobby option to unrate the
          game.
      
       - (#3525) Fix the unpathable skirts of the Seraphim Quantum Gateway
       - (#3582) Fix Aeon aim bones being underground when building
          This fixes the famous issue where an unfinished t1 pd 
          attracts a lot of fire, but because its aim bones are still
          underground all the attacking units shoot at the ground. No
          more!
      
       - (#3581) Fire Beetle properly applies EMP / stun buffs
       - (#3601) Fix Seraphim t3 MAA from zapping through shields
       - (#3599) Fix consumption bug introduced by #3447
       - (#3598) Fix Rhino overshooting its target.
       - (#3598, #3614) Fix errors on gifting when full share is enabled
       - (#3596, #3617) Fix typo that prevents cybran build beams from spawning
       - (#3609) Fix inconsistency with SACU presets that prevent them from having custom strategic icons
       - (#3612) Fix kennels not spawning their drone when you immediately queue up an upgrade
      
      ### Other
       - (#3480) Update visuals for the UEF T2 PD and Destroyer
       - (#3523) Switch off debug utilities by default
          This is only useful for developers, but it did cause
          a (slight) drain on resources when it was turned on
          even though you're not looking at the logs. It turns it
          off by default during each startup, you can prevent 
          this as a developer by adding
          `debug = { enable_debug_facilities = true }`
          to your preference file
      
       - (#3417) Add unit tests for generic utility functions
       - (#3420) Fix small issues for units of the Cybran faction.
       - (#3492) Remove greyness when deviation is high
          In combination with other work, such as combining the number of
          games people played across the board (ladder / tmm / globals)
          it should become easier for people to 'get into' custom games
          without being called a noob beforehand or a smurf afterwards (never
          played custom games, but played a lot of ladder).
      
       - (#3475) Fix capitalisation consistency
       - (#3443) Allow trashbag to be re-used for effects
       - (#3489) Fix UI description of teleport
       - (#3491) Fix the attack animation of the Monkeylord
       - (#3349) Updates the readme with the most recent dependencies
       - (#3461) Remove game quality computations for games with more than two teams
          The Trueskill system is not designed to compute the quality of a game 
          when more than (or less than) two teams are involved. Hence, the 
          computation is gibberish anyhow.
      
       - (#3526) Remove the curated maps button until an alternative is available
       - (#3528) Fix T2 seraphim sonar being restricted when t3 base spam is selected
       - (#3533) Change default settings of auto lobby to 1.5K unit cap and full share (used by ladder / team match making)
       - (#3441, #3614) Introduction of insignificant or dummy units
          This introduces a new unit class that can be used to fix
          various bugs and glitches with the game. One such issues
          is the long standing bug with the Aeon build animation where
          the aim bones are underground at the start of construction.
          
          Sadly, this change is quite involved because a lot of the
          functionality expects a full-fledged unit. We've tried to
          catch some of these but there will be more issues that will
          show up, especially with scripted maps.
      
       - (#3552) Update regular expression of mod version removal
       - (#3558) Restrict t2 artillery orientation to 90 degree angles
       - (#3582) Fixed various issues with the Aeon build animation
          As an example, hover units no longer jump to their hover
          elevation when they're finished. All experimentals have
          unique build animations that fit the style of the faction.
      
       - (#3586) Force shader re-compilation on development branches
       - (#3583) Update URLs to https instead of http
       - (#3567) Fix graphics of Summit and Fatboy
       - (#3606) Fix (build) icon of Seraphim T3 MAA
       - (#3607) Fix Cybran ACU not having the right amount of build bots when enhanced
       - (#3613) Add a hotkey to select all idle scouts
      
      ### Performance
       - (#3417) Add minor performance improvements for generic utility functions
       - (#3447) Removed old AI related code that was being run regardless of whether AIs were in-game
          This change is involved performance-wise but does not impact gameplay.
      
          As a practical example: chain ten engineers assisting one another and make the
          first engineer assist a factory. With these changes they'll start assisting the
          factory one by one as it takes one tick (simulation tick) to detect the unit
          it is assisting has started working on something.
      
          The previous behavior would be that all engineers get updated immediately. This
          required it to search for engineers in its surrounding and all those it found
          would need to look up its surroundings too. This can quickly get out of hand.
      
       - (#3502) Optimize the import function that is used by all files.
       - (#3512) Removes AI threat computations and fixes AI detection
          AI code was being run during every game even when no AI was present in
          said game. After discussing it with the AI devs this pull requests
          completely removes the threat computations.
      
       - (#3419) Reduce impact on sim of common hover emitter effects
          Effects have an impact on the sim, in particular when they create a 
          particle. Once the particles exist they appear to be free of charge. 
          With this PR we reduced the number of particles created for various 
          units such as the Aeon T1 engineer to bring them into the same cost
          range (sim wise) as the other engineers, without impacting their
          visual appearance too much. Disables the hover effects of these units
          all together when playing on low fidelity.
      
       - (#3557, #3617) Fix and improve performance on Seraphim build animations
          The old version had complicated logic and various
          computations that were not required. The new version is 
          better for performance and a lot more smooth with regards
          to the build animation.
      
       - (#3582) Prevent unneccessary allocations during the Aeon build animation
       - (#3587, #3589) Optimize most common called unit functions
       - (#3595, #3590, #3588, #3617) Optimize weapons
      
      ### Contributors
       - Askaholic (#3417, #3440)
       - Madmax (#3420, #3419, #3582)
       - Uveso (#3477)
       - Rowey (#3475, #3528, #3533, #3583, #3606)
       - Jip (#3443, #3316, #3491, #3447, #3484, #3492, #3500, 
              #3522, #3512, #3440, #3419, #3525, #3526, #3490,
              #3527, #3531, #3543, #3411, #3551, #3550, #3557
              #3558, #3582, #3581, #3587, #3589, #3601, #3600
              #3599, #3598, #3595, #3590, #3588, #3586, #3567
              #3604, #3607, #3610, #3609, #3611, #3612, #3613
              #3614, #3616, #3617)
       - KionX (#3486, #3489, #3523, #3349)
       - Crotalus (#3432)
       - Benzi-Junior (#3461)
       - Balthazar (#3552, #3602)
       - 4z0t (#3554, #3597, #3605, #3607)
       - Marlo (#3582)
       - Eternal (#3597)
       - Tagada (#3480)
      
      ### Reviewers
       - Balthazar (#3484, #3587)
       - Relent0r (#3512)
      
      ### Translators
       - Lenkin (#3440)
       - 4z0t (#3597)
      
      posted in General Discussion
      JipJ
      Jip
    • Developers Iteration I of 2023

      Find out about the last bits and twigs for the first development iteration of the game in 2023. Everything in this topic is merged - you can experiment with these changes yourself by playing the FAF Develop game type. You can choose this game type as you host your game:

      a724abb1-a5db-4d84-8734-4fddcbb638ec-image.png

      With that said, let us dive right in the latest developments!

      References to all development iterations:

      • Development Iteration I (this article)
      • Development Iteration II
      • Development Iteration III
      • Development iteration IV
      posted in Contribution
      JipJ
      Jip
    • RE: Game Councilor

      Game councilor: part 2 / 3

      With the patches 3728 / 3729 / 3730 / 3731 behind us I think it is an ideal moment to look back and evaluate. I can't do this alone - I hope to receive your feedback in order to finalize the evaluation. Feel free to add anything in a separate post down below. Remind yourself to be constructive before posting.

      Evaluation

      A few things I've noted during the first few months of being game councilor.

      Communication

      Releasing two large updates at once is always a mistake.

      As an example, the developers patch was supposed to release on the 26th of November. This was known in advance by two months as I've communicated this on the news, through the introduced dev Discord channels, through the milestones on Github* and anyone that asked me about it.

      I found out one week in advance by asking the balance team that they intended to launch on the same day - even though I have been asking for weeks in advance (as early as October) what their launch date was going to be. Petric and I discussed it and they had to release now in order to make it valid for LoTS and I decided to postpone the developers patch to the 20th of December, right after LoTS. Reasoning: launching two major events at once is a mistake because they have not interacted together yet and if something goes wrong you do not know its source. And surely something did go wrong where the adjacency bug allowed for quite novel gameplay.

      As another example, the developers patch was supposed to release on the 20th of December. This was known in advance by one month as I've communicated this on the forums, on the news, through the introduced dev Discord channels, through the milestones on Github* and anyone that asked me about it.

      Out of nowhere 4v4 TMM was launched the Sunday evening before the patch and here I was thinking: should I launch the developers patch the day after, as I said I would? I decided to go through with it because there are new tournaments taking place early next year such as the Rainbow Cup. I need to make sure that the patch is stable for AIs and if it is not that AI devs would have sufficient time to communicate with us what was going wrong. Alas - things did go wrong as the disconnection window received an update but the default settings of the auto lobby (read: ladder) didn't get the same update. This issue wouldn't be critical as for the 1v1 and 2v2 queue the amount of connectivity issues are limited. But for the novel 4v4 queue connectivity issues are a lot more present and therefore people playing on Monday were experiencing a whole new type of ever-present disconnection window in the left top corner of their screen.

      Long story short: communicating what is going to happen is key. It is frustrating for everyone involved when that doesn't happen. I've kept this to the impact on me - but the same applies to the News Team that got flanked by the last news on Sunday evening while the news set to release on Monday was essentially already finished and they were supposed to go on holiday-mode.

      • Note that I'm talking about milestone 3726 that was set to the 26th of November, got moved back (to the 20th of december). The name of the milestone didn't change as 3728 (the actual patch) was already taken by another milestone.

      Stability of releases

      In my opinion there are three type of releases:

      • (1) A stable release, no issues and no consecutive hotfixes required
      • (2) A release with minor issues, a consecutive hotfix is not immediately required but it is coming
      • (3) A release that is clearly broken

      For all obvious reasons I aim for (1), but in practice I typically end up like (2). Even big budget companies like Ubisoft with their Game patch 13 for Anno 1800 introduces quite an amount of bugs and end up like (2) instead of (1). In my personal opinion a release like (2) is decent. However, we've also had releases like (3) in the past where the game is immediate and clearly broken - even though the issue may have been reported by a user.

      Community interaction

      One thing I am happy about is the amount of community interaction with the game repository. In particular having a separate channels and threads in Discord has helped a lot. There has also been more interest for the community in general. As an example, @GAS introduced the hover queue feature useful for casting and @Eternal made the UI for it.

      Approach based on evaluation

      A few things to change during the last few months as game councilor.

      Playtest before release

      To prevent a release like (3) I will refuse to release any large code base change that has not at least been played five times by the members of the team responsible. These play tests should be on various (popular) maps, including Dual Gap, Setons, the map generator and two of their own choice. The reason is simple: if something is at odds then players that often play those maps will notice. And since the people responsible for the patch are in-game playing they can immediate ponder on what changes may have done this.

      I've been doing this myself for the large 3728 developers patch. As some of you can confirm - some nasty game breaking bugs were found and the wider population never got to know about them. All in all I think the 3728 developers patch was a (2) - one with only minor issues.

      Better communication

      In the near future I hope to finish the new readme for the game repository that is a bit more up to date. The current readme has not aged properly. As a few examples:

      • I'd like to update the content of the current readme with more relevant information
      • I'd like to introduce a Russian translation of the readme

      I've been informing modders for the past few months to always test on the FAF Develop game type. I am going to re-iterate this in a more wider notion: if you want your mods to remain compatible with FAF then you ought to play them on the FAF Develop game type when we're asking you to do so in the news. There is a role in this for both the maintainers and users of a mod:

      • As a maintainer I recommend you to always test on FAF Develop and report back the stability
      • As a user, especially when the mod is unmaintained, I recommend you to play on FAF Develop when we ask you through the news and report back the stability

      Informing us of the stability is not only relevant when things break. It is also relevant when things appear to be fine. That makes it easier for us to find the cause when things do break one week later. You can inform us on the official Discord server in the #game-bug-reporting channel.

      As a quick example, this issue could've been prevented if someone would play BlackOps on FAF Develop when it was in the news. It was an easy fix - just a few lines.

      Note that this doesn't mean that I'll suddenly fix your (ui) mods. Things that are broken right now will likely remain broken until the maintainer takes action.

      Focus

      With all of that said I'd like to look at what we have coming for next year.

      Graphics


      A 5x5 Evergreen / Tropical themed map


      A 10x10 Desert themed map

      Together with @CaptainKlutz we're looking into upgrading the graphics of (future) maps. I've been able to adjust the shader and embed additional information. With that we can use more advanced software such as a light mapper and have actual shadows, indirect lighting and direct lighting on our terrain. The results so far as astonishing in my opinion - and we have barely touched the surface. We could introduce biome-specific shaders with biome-specific properties.

      I am actively looking for more people to participate on this journey. In particular:

      • If you have an interest in PBR
      • If you have an interest writing shaders
      • If you have an interest in graphics in general

      then you are most welcome to help tinker on or implement what the possibilities are.

      The current process on this can be found in this pull request.

      Documentation and accessibility

      As I mentioned before - I hope to improve the documentation about the repository and the game in general (for modders). I hope to revive the climate for modders / contributors to the game repository one step at a time.

      Performance

      And of course - the sole reason I became Game Councilor: I hope to be able to improve the performance of the game. There are still significant opportunities - it just takes time to implement them all.

      I am actively looking for more people to participate on this journey. In particular:

      • If you have an interest in coding
      • If you have an interest in understanding how code ticks
      • If you want to make players feel bad because they have less APM during the late game

      then you are most welcome to help tinker on orimplement these type of issues.

      Overview

      With all of that said - there are exciting times ahead of us. And I hope to share these with you - whether that is through playing the game, discussion issues and / or implementing features or fixes - we'll be doing it together.

      posted in General Discussion
      JipJ
      Jip
    • Questions about performance

      Hi everyone. Recently I've taken on the task to optimize the FAF base game repository. Since LOUD shows it is possible - why shouldn't we do that too.

      As it stands I've made a profiler to help figure out what functions are called often and how to write code that is more efficient. One approach to this is through benchmarks. See also this folder:

      • https://github.com/Garanas/fa/tree/optimize-effects/lua/profiler/benchmarks

      All benchmarks (with a similar name) perform the same operations, some faster than others. To give a few examples:

      synthetic benchmarks

      • table-insert.lua / AddInsertGlobal = 0.046 seconds
      • table-insert.lua / AddCountAlt= 0.00219 seconds (the regular approach is 500% - 2000% slower (!))
      • table-hash.lua / Hash01 = 0.00488
      • table-hash.lua / HashCached01 = 0.00341 (the regular approach is about 10% - 30% slower)
      • table-loops.lua / ForGetn = 0.2136
      • table-loops.lua / ForPairs = 0.3704 (the regular approach is about 40% - 50% slower)

      rewriting of existing functions

      • table-hash.lua / HashCross1 = 0.08498
      • table-hash.lua / HashCrossCached1 = 0.05175 (the regular approach is 30% - 40% slower)

      This shows that it is possible from a theoretical perspective. I've been doing work on optimizing projectiles that you can find here:

      • https://github.com/Garanas/fa/commit/2cc658ed293097ac09a3af5a0a8250e63b268d5f

      When 400 Zthuee are firing at one location it takes 12 - 15 ms on the base branch, assuming you are completely zoomed out. On the optimized branch it takes 8 - 9 ms. That is a significant difference on its own - and this is just on projectiles. @CheeseBerry can confirm this - on his computer it runs about 18 - 20 ms on the base branch, where as it runs 14 - 15 ms on the optimized branch.

      Up to this point I've only optimized while trying to keep the original logic alive. However, there are some things that I feel are not required for the overall game, are expensive, and can not be made cheaper. I'll use this topic to discuss these issues to get a bearing as to whether people think it is worth changing or taking out of the game.

      In order to facilitate discussion each problem will have its own topic on the forum. Please remain on topic, whatever you are writing for. As it is easier for me to identify how people feel about certain changes.

      posted in General Discussion
      JipJ
      Jip
    • Patch 3721 / hotfix 3722 / hotfix 3723 / Patch 3724

      And here we are - the patch is live!

      The development branch has been tested thoroughly - however, as with any patch - things may leak through. Please post your findings when things break in this topic. Make sure that you include:

      • The client log
      • The game log
      • Exception code (if available)

      The changelog as described in this commit

      Patch 3721 (19 September, 2021)

      Lobby

      • Improved visibility of balance patchnotes
      • Improved CPU benchmark to take into account RAM
      • Removed large map preview when map preview is hidden (map generator)
      • Prevented kyros lobby from displaying spawn location when map preview is hidden (map generator)
      • Fixed ACU display in large map preview
      • Fixed the link for curated map button

      Gameplay

      • Removed reclaim rate from scoreboard mass income
      • Added decals on a lot of projectiles impact and tree falling effect for aesthetics
      • Added feature : preselection of mex when selection engineer and hovering the cursor over a mass spot
      • Allowed battleship/battlecruiser to render their weapon reload bar
      • Speed up Aeon static shields death animation to match other faction
      • Added a hotkey for dock
      • Made sonars more reliable to hit

      Bugs

      • Fixed game resulting in draw when it should not
      • Fixed units doing some friendlyfire and inaccurate damage
      • Fixed Cybran ACU sonar that was working without the torpedo upgrade
      • Fixed unit cap display in coop
      • Fixed some UI scaling issues
      • Fixed game ID displayed in the scoreboard
      • Fixed a warning with shield overspill function
      • Fixed a bug happening when engies were not able to build
      • Fixed some warnings due to lava trees missing textures
      • Fixed aoe damage not working properly on build drones
      • Fixed hotkey not working with Seraphim SACU in buildmode

      Performance

      • Optimized Cybran build effects and reduced the number of drones spawned by hives
      • Code optimization related to weapons
      • Call to faster function
      • Improved UEF build beam logic
      • Simplified Seraphim flash effect at finished structure
      • Simplified UEF static shield build effect
      • Optimized math calculations
      • Optimized function to generate random numbers
      • Optimized logic for structure rotation toward enemies (for point defenses, artillery)
      • Optimized HQ logic
      • Prefetch data in the lobby to speed up loading screen
      • Removed unused code which aimed to rock boats
      • Optimized the access to the current layer of a unit
      • Optimized trashbag
      • Benchmark tool for developers allowing to evaluate code impact on performances

      AI

      • Fixed a bug preventing AI from firing nukes from Aeon SML
      • Fixed AI's ACU upgrade in coop
      • Fixed arty range issues with AI
      • Removed unused code for AI
      • Improved description of AI code
      • Fixed AI platoon function
      • Fixed AI game result

      Other

      • Improved and more visible weather
      • Added new props for maps
      • Display beetle as cloaked for the owner
      • Removed duplicates of adjacency visual effects
      • Added field engineer icon to Cybran/Seraphim/Aeon, so it display in case they possess one.
      • Updated loading tips
      • Prevented observers from pinging
      • Prevented sending resources to enemies
      • Fixed tooltip to support experimental transporter
      • Improved code style consistency
      • Fixed chrono dampener and RAS description
      • Removed Aquatic tag from T3 UEF Mobile Anti Air (MAA)
      • Fixed the visual of several Cybran unit's weapon
      • Added old patch notes changes until the version 3636
      • Test code with FAF Lua language
      • Better naming of T3 Mobile Anti Air (MAA) unit folders
      • Small refactoring with regard to taunts
      • Add textures for map generator

      Contributors

      • Jip
      • Keyser
      • Uveso
      • speed2
      • KionX
      • Sheikah
      • KeyBlue
      • Relent0r
      • Dragun
      • Askaholic (added after the fact)
      • Madmax (added after the fact)
      • Tagada
      • FemtoZetta
      • Azraeelian Angel (added after the fact)
      • Rowey
      • Azraeelian Angel (added after the fact)
      • Divran
      • Timocov
      • Melanol
      • Benzi-Junior
      • slinkingant
      • WhenDayBreaks (added after the fact)
      • Snagglefox (added after the fact)

      Patch 3722 (19 September, 2021)

      Lobby

      • Updated balance patchnotes link

      Bugs

      • Fixed featured mod not working

      Performances

      • Optimize default explosion (on accident)

      Other

      • Support for custom UI icons (see this post)
      • Allowed custom vault path

      Contributors

      • Jip
      • KionX
      • keyser

      Patch 3723 (19 September, 2021)

      Bugs

      • Fixed some wrecks (colossus / ythotha) not spawning due to a typo

      Contributors

      • Jip
      • keyser

      Patch 3724 (04th October, 2021)

      Gameplay

      • (#3450) An alternative approach to loading in custom strategic icons (see this post)
      • (#3458) Fix UEF Triad and UEF Destroyer projectile on impact animation

      Bugs

      • (#3442) Fix scathis packing animation time
      • (#3439) Fix Cybran drone visibility for other players than the owner
      • (#3450) Fix UI textures being overridden by mods that are not enabled
      • (#3457) Fix Cybran drone being interactable and other small issues (with thanks to Archsimkat)
      • (#3453) Fix units being gifted to the same player causing a soft-crash for the shared army mod (co-op campaign)
      • (#3468) Revert changes to sending the results of games
      • (#3471) Fix overcharge mouse indicator to use the right damage calculations

      Stability

      • (#3436) Prevent fetching blueprints for potential entities with no blueprints
      • (#3449) Fix significant hard-crash potential that patch 3721 introduced (with thanks to all the debugger reports)
      • (#3460) Fix potential soft-crash when gifting units upon death (with thanks to FemtoZetta)
      • (#3467) Add SCD support for large icon sets (with thanks to Deribus)
      • (#3472) Revert changes to some projectiles that caused them to crash for mods (with thanks to DDDX)

      Other

      • (#3385) Add support for custom game options being set by the server (for 3v3 / 4v4 TMM)

      Contributors

      • Jip (#3442, #3439, #3449, #3458, #3457, #3460, #3450, #3467, #3468, #3471)
      • KionX (#3449)
      • Crotalus (#3436)
      • Balthazar (#3450)
      • speed2 (#3453)
      • Askaholic (#3385)
      • BlackYps (#3385)
      • keyser (#3472)
      posted in General Discussion
      JipJ
      Jip

    Latest posts made by Jip

    • RE: Redesign of all HQ and support factories

      @Saver from my point of view some of these units can definitely still use a touch. But it was such a sensitive topic (out of the blue) a few years ago that it's been untouched since. Could you share what you have made so far?

      posted in Suggestions
      JipJ
      Jip
    • RE: New account in FAF

      You're (both) being unreasonable here. This conversation is leaving a sour taste for me. You ask for more bureaucracy. And at the same time (in other topics) you ask for less. There's no way to satisfy you people. It's getting a little bit silly. I won't respond further. If you feel this wronged then I suggest you try to join the moderation team. Then perhaps you can 'do it right' when you're on the other side of the equation.

      I guess it's my miss interpretation that it's a nice change* for once that the competitive scene grew a little bit 🙂 . Just take the win and appreciate it. It can be that simple.

      posted in General Discussion
      JipJ
      Jip
    • RE: New account in FAF

      Making players anonymous is the definition of complexity. It is technically not a trivial feat. A huge rework of how FAF operates (in a technical fashion, 'under the hood'). And it's a very unusual feature too. There's no other game that I am aware of that has this feature.

      There was nothing obscure about this. The situation was exceptional. A decision was made that is in favor of the competitive scene. Why is it that you can't appreciate that?

      posted in General Discussion
      JipJ
      Jip
    • RE: New account in FAF

      @Skrat I don't see the need for such measures. Nicknames are meaningless (to me) to identify people since they get changed too often. And being anonymous just means casters (and their viewers) no longer know whether they're watching their favorite player. What does it achieve, except for more bureaucracy and complexity that isn't even related to the game itself?

      posted in General Discussion
      JipJ
      Jip
    • RE: New account in FAF

      @waffelzNoob said in New account in FAF:

      So I could request to have my account deleted and come back on a new one a few years down the line?

      There's no guarantee, but you're free to try 🙂 !

      posted in General Discussion
      JipJ
      Jip
    • RE: New account in FAF

      @Skrat There are no hidden rules. Rules exist for a specific purpose. Since there can be exceptional cases, there can also be exceptions. These are at the courtesy of the moderation team.

      There's a rule to prevent additional accounts of the same player. One purpose of this rule is to enable and improve competitive play, especially in the lower brackets.

      If I understood correct then in this situation a player returned who requested to have his account deleted a few years ago. That means he can't restore the old account. The only way to play again would be to create a new account. What weighs more in this situation: should we allow a high rated player return to improve the overall competitive scene at the cost of temporarily scuffing the lower brackets?

      This decision is at the courtesy of the moderation team. At the time of writing I think the rating already corrected itself. It seems to me that the right decision was made here. And I hope to see the player in question in upcoming tournaments.

      posted in General Discussion
      JipJ
      Jip
    • RE: Change the handling of Reports - When is a report valid?

      @HOSCHMOSCH said in Change the handling of Reports - When is a report valid?:

      are the perfect example of what everyone here is fed up with

      'everyone' as in - a few individuals of the total player base. There's no data that backup your claims that a significant chunk of the player base is frustrated by the current moderation policies/rules.

      @HOSCHMOSCH said in Change the handling of Reports - When is a report valid?:

      They don’t seem to realize this is not YouTube or Instagram, but a small, isolated platform where more freedom of expression should be allowed.

      There's no such thing as 'freedom of expression' on any platform. You have freedom of expression in your private digital or physical life. For example, you're free to talk whatever on your own Discord server. And you're free to talk about whatever in your own living room. But the moment you enter a public place you're expected to behave within the boundaries set by that public place. Being online on digital platforms may feel different because it's anonymous. But it's really not that different. There are still boundaries, and for good reason.

      Our boundaries are described by the moderation policies/rules. And to some extend by the contributing guidelines. These state that (as an example) casual jokes relying on hate of jews, racism, swearing that is totally out of proportion or really anything else that resembles harassment as depicted by the rules.

      It's a small number of vocal players that choose to walk on the line of the current moderation policies/rules intentionally. Or to cross it casually. Either is unnecessary, but what matters is that it is a choice. A choice made by an individual. You don't have to walk or cross the line. In my opinion, choosing to walk on or cross the line says more about the individual then about moderation policies/rules. And it's even less about the moderators themselves, as they're just applying the policies/rules as agreed upon.

      To quote myself:

      said in Change the handling of Reports - When is a report valid?:

      Let me be quite clear: if it were up to me I would have banned some individuals of this community a long time ago. No appeal process possible. Just get out, do whatever you're doing somewhere else.

      So yes, be constructive or do me a favor and just go and do something else. Anywhere really but to be here.

      And once you're ready to be constructive - fight the rules. Not the people enforcing them. And certainly not the server administrators that enable us to play FAForever despite of the conscious choices of some individuals out there to disrupt the infrastructure of some niche, fan-made project out of spite.

      posted in General Discussion
      JipJ
      Jip
    • RE: Change the handling of Reports - When is a report valid?

      @Nuggets said in Change the handling of Reports - When is a report valid?:

      I didn't know these kind of changes had to go through the association, and was expecting to get more done here. I will be looking to make a proposal, but have to think about it myself first how exactly to form this idea into words

      They don't have to go through the association. It's only encouraged that you do so. As an example, this is a discussion about when one is considered leaving a game too early, and these are the corresponding votes on Discord. It's one of the best ways to have a meaningful and transparent discussion with people that are all sympathetic to the objectives of the association, as described by the statutes paragraph 2.2.

      Note that if you want to discuss this with the association, it's encouraged to use the association section of the forums. It may also be interesting to collaborate with @Tagada, as what he's writing up is also a suggestion on adjustments for this rule.

      @Nuggets said in Change the handling of Reports - When is a report valid?:

      The ctrl-k rule is just one part of a bigger problem. Its the enforcement of rules in games where no participant asked them to be enforced. I'm not trying to say you should just exploit or whatever in your average teamgame. But what I am trying to say is that anything that happens (lets take my example) in a 1v1 game should not be held accountable to some rule where BOTH / ALL players in that game know about it AND are fine with it.

      I think it's already been explained. If the breach of rules is minor (like a CTRL + K), and nobody of the game makes a report about that then you're 'fine'. If you are still moderated because of a minor infraction then it clearly means that someone in your game was not actually fine with it. Or you gave them the perfect way to troll you. Think about that.

      Meanwhile we specifically introduced the recall feature to allow you to end a game gracefully. We even took the effort to refine it. This was often also based on feedback. The request for such a feature originates from the same group of people that are now again complaining about CTRL + K. Now, the recall feature is not perfect. But it is transparent. The intentions of everyone is recorded in the replay. It's clear what is going on.

      Which brings me to you @Nuggets . Let's say that the entire team wants to concede in a full share game. This is the assumption you make throughout this thread. Then why do you insist to use the one method that's not transparent about everyone's intentions? The one method that is against the current rules? If you CTRL + K in a full share game you, as an individual, force the game to end. It doesn't say anything about the intentions of your allies. Why not just recall and make it transparent that it's the whole team (minus 1) that wants the game to end? Or just leave on your own, and let full share run its course?

      @Nuggets said in Change the handling of Reports - When is a report valid?:

      I'm not trying to say you should just exploit or whatever in your average teamgame. But what I am trying to say is that anything that happens (lets take my example) in a 1v1 game should not be held accountable to some rule where BOTH / ALL players in that game know about it AND are fine with it.

      I personally would strongly be against allowing exploits to only be moderated when there's a report. Or rating manipulation for that matter. Or other issues that may have long term implications to the community. And above all - I would definitely not approve to streaming how it is done to a wider audience.

      Because we can't fix the majority of the exploits they rely on what is called 'security through obscurity'. It's a common term used by security engineers stating that we're not really protected against it, but because nobody knows it is 'okay'. This is the only defense we have against these exploits because - as I started this paragraph with - we are unable to fix them. That makes obscurity our first line and often only line of defense that involves no labor to prevent a wider adoption of exploits. Our second line of defense is moderation, which is very labor intensive for exploits. You have to start the replay to analyze whether the exploit was used, which can be 45 minutes in a slow running game. And before you know it you'll miss it, having to start the replay all over again. Great.

      I hope that now we can both agree that it's not in the best interest of the community to create more exposure to exploits. Regardless whether everyone in the game is 'fine' with it. And that we should take moderation action against such exposure.


      It feels to me that there's a shared miss conception in this thread by some participants. As if there's a 'good way' of enforcing rules. To make it very clear: there is no good answer to enforcing rules. And when enforcing rules, there's always the risk that one party feels wronged. I don't know who of you got in touch with the police in real life - I can tell you based on experience that the feeling of being wronged is (initially) unavoidable.

      One of the objectives of the association is to 'maintain a healthy community environment'. For contributors this responsibility is managed by the board through the contributing guidelines. The responsibility of the wider community is delegated to the moderation team, and is managed by the rules. This is why we have rules: we want to create a healthy community environment.

      Late 2024 the moderation team spent their time on reworking the rules. Early 2025 @Giebmasse made an announcement about this. You can read about it in this announcement. These changes originate from feedback from the wider community over the years.

      One goal of the changes was to make rules less ambiguous. Less ambiguous means more objective. Objective here should be interpret as 'context free'. This makes the system a lot easier to reason about:

      • A user does X.
      • A user is reported for X.
      • Based on (replay) data, user did indeed do X. If relevant, and reporter was part of the game.
      • Moderation keeps track of the infringement, based on the history of the user it takes action accordingly.

      The rules depict that doing X does not contribute to maintaining a healthy community environment. And because X is objective, any additional context of the situation is ignored. If you do not want to get moderated again, then don't do X again. The simplicity makes it transparent. It being transparent makes it harder to feel wronged. Everyone can understand it. And, when necessary in an appeal for example, everyone can confirm it.

      In practice these rules are the best type of rules. They're easy to understand for the user. They're easy to process for the moderator. It's a win-win for everyone.

      @Nuggets said in Change the handling of Reports - When is a report valid?:

      This is a previous statement from the moderation team:
      “Sharing resources — Resources such as reclaim and mass extractors do not have to be shared evenly, but be open to sharing them fairly with your team.
      There are no reserved mass extractor slots or reclaim. Teammates taking available resources does not constitute as griefing”

      As @Deribus points out - this is as objective as we can make it. Objective as in, context free. It's easy to understand for all players. It's natural to new players. And for more veteran-like players such as yourself, I'm sure that you're in the position to talk to your peers about it. After all - as is often used as an argument for 2k+ players - you're playing with the same group of people all the time. You know one another. Why should this be an issue at all? Why do you bring it up?

      And yes - the reclaiming of allied structures is against the rules. Because if your ally wants to give you something, then they can do that! Just like recall, there's an in-game feature to share units. By sharing the unit you clearly communicate your intentions. By reclaiming your allied units you're making the whole situation vague again.


      Last, but not least I want to have people understand a few things. This is in particular relevant for association members or those that contribute in general.

      Moderation is by far the most thankless job there is. As a moderator you get to deal with things that are absolutely ridiculous. With people that are trying to manipulate the moderator. With people that want to do you, or your loved ones harm. With people that are outright gaslighting you. They take the worst of the worst of the community, and filter it out for us. They are the 'maintaining' part of the 'healthy community environment' that we are talking about.

      Maintaining it is not trivial. Moderators are humans too. Not only does this mean that they have feelings, it also means that yes - they too can make a mistake. They process over 400 reports each month. This is time that they spent on sustaining the 'healthy community environment' instead of literally anything else they could be doing right now.

      They also process over 40 appeals each month. The process to appeal can be found on the website. Based on what I've seen as owner of both Forums and the Discord - if you are truly on the 'right side' of the argument then you will win the appeal. But often that is just not the case. It's not the case because a lot of the rules are objective. They are context free. You did X. You got reported for X, usually by someone playing with you in the same game. If all boxes are checked, moderation action is taken. It's not difficult, as I tried to ask @Nuggets in this topic: to me it feels you make it difficult for yourself. Just don't do X. Nobody can report you. Nobody can troll you. Problem solved. Why are you so hung up still wanting to do it?

      When the rules are discussed it's often not really about the rules. It's about the decisions of the moderation team. Those are done by the moderators. And therefore it is often about the moderators themselves. About how much wrong they do. And about how awful they are. About how unfit they are to make such decisions. About how they don't understand the game. 'Complaints' that are written in such a way that they're at the edge of the rules, but definitely long past the spirit of them.

      Let me be quite clear: if it were up to me I would have banned some individuals of this community a long time ago. No appeal process possible. Just get out, do whatever you're doing somewhere else.

      Spreading miss information, (practically) harassment of moderators and/or other contributors, miss representing facts, attacking the board, creating conspiracy theories, making 'silly' lobby titles - it was fun the first time. Especially being the target of a conspiracy theory that is about one self. Now, as president of the association that represents the community I have access to all the data. I am owner of the forums. I am the owner of Discord server. I see everything. With all this data reality hits. And it hits hard. Some of the people that I would like to outright ban are not just being silly, they are being ridiculous. Downright damaging the community in the long term, and the 'trust factor' between the players, various teams and the association. Outrageous in my opinion.

      Sadly, it is not entirely up to me. According to the statutes 3.3 expelling a member of the association requires 3/4 of the board to agree. And I assume that dismissing team members based on the Governance structure would be similar, al though the procedure is not described there. I do not (yet) want to go through this.

      Time and time again, the greater majority of interactions by* the moderation team abide to not just the letter, but also the spirit of the contributing guidelines. I want to thank them for that. Not only do they filter out the worst of the worst for the rest of us. For some reason, they are still decent enough to respond to these topics in a civil manner. Topics that I feel are less about the rules themselves, and more about moderators enforcing them.

      In response to @Deli, @Giebmasse described the 'normal' approach to discuss rules. See also his response here. If you truly want to discuss rules, then please read the contributing guidelines and make sure that you understand it. Then proceed to actually discuss the rules - not the decisions. Not the moderators. But the rules and its implications. Why does it (not) contribute to a more healthy environment, according to you? I hope you'll soon find out that it's actually really hard, if not impossible to make (a set of) rules that 'just work' all the time, for everyone involved.

      With all of that said - I look forward to the suggestions by @Tagada and @Nuggets to try and help make the rules better.


      If you want to show a token of appreciation of the moderation team, then please take the time to upvote the response of @Giebmasse about how to actually discuss the rules. Or just any civil response from a moderator in this topic, or the topic of Deli. It's a small gesture. But sometimes it can be really meaningful to show some appreciation - even if it is just an up vote.

      posted in General Discussion
      JipJ
      Jip
    • RE: Constant crashes of late

      @magge said in Constant crashes of late:

      I noticed you have:

      warning: SND: XACT3DApply failed.
      

      which usually cause "random crashes."

      All known solution are in this thread.

      Totally missed that 🙂 !

      posted in FAF support (client and account issues)
      JipJ
      Jip
    • RE: Constant crashes of late

      There's nothing unusual in your log. If you experience crashes more often, please enable the debugger. I think @magge has a post about that somewhere. I can't find it right now, maybe it's on Discord.

      posted in FAF support (client and account issues)
      JipJ
      Jip