v248 Update
10 changes based on a 1v1 replay I did against M28 on a 5km, including:

• 3 land combat changes, so shorter ranged units should support ACUs and adjacent zone skirmishers
• 2 factory changes to factor in underconstruction indirectfire units for the IF:DF ratio, and build more inties in proportion to gunships to deal with nearby threats
• 4 engineer/factory changes, including improving logic for where to place a T2 PD, and fixing a bug where multiple T1 factories would upgrade to T2 HQs at once.

Roll a D3. Manually select your faction in the game lobby (/TMM queue) based on the following:
1 = Cybran
2 = Aeon
3 = Seraphim

v247 Update
18 changes, including:

• strategic bombers running from nearby asfs when lacking air control
• 2 ACU related changes to make them more aggressive in 1v1s, and to delay getting T2/nano if the enemy's ACU lacks an upgrade
• 3 land combat adjustments to make selens a bit more aggressive and tweaking 'all-in' land pushes on enemy ACUs
• 10 engineer/building changes, including making M28 more likely to get 3-4 air factories before it has t3 air, reducing its tendency to get mex upgrades when it cant find a factory to upgrade, and not building pre-emptive TMD if the enemy lacks MMLs
• 2 factory changes - A small number of tanks should be built to support sniperbots if the enemy has t1 spam nearby, and fewer T3 mobile arti should be built in proportion to tanks once a certain number have been built.

Acknowledgements

• Radde - 9 replays on Xander and mapgen
• WaffelzNoob - Replay beaing M28 on mapgen

Trophy award

• WaffelzNoob claims the Radde trophy by beating 1.4/1.0 M28 (v246) on a 15km mapgen

@Razana Thanks, I'm 1002 1v1

Forcing people to play 1v1 games they might hate before they can play games they might like is a great way to make people give up on FAF, decreasing the playerbase, and in the long term resulting in fewer people playing 1v1.

Rating already helps address your proposed benefits. Someone never scouts, has a terrible build order, and is a liability as a teammate? They'll have a low rating. 1v1 also requires a very different playstyle to TMM or gap or astro so it's not like forcing someone to play 1v1 would automatically make them better at the gamemode they want to play. In 1v1 (at the lower ratings you're discussing) the game's almost always decided by who can spam the most t1 tanks. In teamgames focusing on this risks being left far behind in eco if the enemy team combines forces to repel your t1 spam, as well as there being few mexes to contest on maps like astro.

Signing up for if ultimately there are 8 or fewer participants (unsigning up if there are more than 8 and it's BO2+)

@waffelzNoob Yes, if you've got the replay ID (assuming it was against a later version than the one Radde beat)

If you can send me the replay I can see if there's anything obvious in the log; also if you play through the FAF client for future games then it allows use of the FAF debugger which can sometimes give more information on what's causing a crash:

v246 Update
19 changes:

• 2 Air changes (more combat drops, 1st bomber aborts vs MAA earlier)
• 3 land combat changes (including kiting units attacking if enemy is at the edge of their range and not approaching)
• 4 ACU changes (including stealth ACUs being less aggressive if theyre the last ACU)
• 5 engineer/building changes (including a workaround for a rare issue where the game engine says it's possible to build PD and mass storage on the edge of a factory, causing the factory to stop building anything again)
• 5 other changes, including making guncoms more likely to have a land scout near them.

Acknowledgements

• Radde - 3 replays against v238 M28 on Xander

v245 Update
15 changes, including:

• 11 late-game related changes, improving the ability of mobile hsields to protect from a tele-SACU, and being less likely to start multiple high cost experimental type units at once
• 3 air changes, including fixing a bug where asfs wouldn't protect strat bombers
• 1 naval change (making engineers assist the first naval fac until it's built a couple of units so it's less likely the opponent can rush with a frigate to naval-lock M28)

Acknowledgements

• Radde - 2 Xander replays and a naval mapgen against v237

@Skrat said in New account in FAF:

@snoog I didn't ask questions that required endless discussion. But for some reason, no one can answer them.

Questions you've asked from another skim through them:

1. What could be the moderators' reasons for giving a player permission to create a new account?
2. The more secrecy there is, the more questions there are. Is not it so?
3. Should moderators delete my nickname history upon my request?
4. Can you ask to have your account deleted and come back on a new one a few years down the line?

Most have been answered already.

1. See Jip's first post for potential reasons (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.)
2. We've had seemingly near-endless threads and questions about moderation in spite of there being far more public information about how moderation is undertaken than a couple of years ago.
3. You can ask to have your account deleted.
4. As Jip already said, there's no guarantee but you're free to try.

I doubt you're going to be satisfied with these answers though since you seemed to think no-one had answered your questions.

As for "I'm not asking for more or less bureaucracy. I ask the moderators to be consistent and logical"
Actually you're asking for more bureaucracy, asking the moderators to be inconsistent, and dismissing logic given to you for why they might not want to do what you want (Jip and Giebmasse's posts). You seem to be asking that in the event that the moderators decide to allow someone who deleted their account to use a new account, the moderators make this information public (that's asking for more buraeucracy). It'd also mean an exception is made by the moderators against the normal approach of not making their decisions public and/or discussing specific cases (i.e. for them to be inconsistent).

v244 Update

• Introduced new logic to shield game-enders - if M28 is building a game-ender in a UEF base, it should consider using shield SACUs to supplement its normal fixed shielding. Although very expensive, it allows it to withstanding a greater level of arti fire.
• Removed the debugging options I forgot to disable after testing v243

Acknowledgements

• Relent0r - highlighting M28's debugging options were still enabled in the release version

If that was the only barrier then I’m guessing it could be resolved by having users consent to the data being shared with Epic

v243 Update
Smaller update with 7 changes:

• 2 refinements to land combat, with skirmishers now considering the direction an enemy is moving in instead of the direction they are facing
• 2 changes to ACUs, including that ACUs should no longer try and get reclaim when being fired on by ravagers
• 3 changes to buildings and engineers, with engineers not self destructing in the very early game, and large T2 arti firebases getting at least 1 T2 PD to counter t1 arti spam attacks

Acknowledgements

• Radde - various Xander replays against v236 and v237 M28

v242 Update
26 changes, including:

• 8 improvements/fixes to M28's early strat mex rush logic (including an issue causing the strat to get stuck and not move)
• 10 improvements to land combat, including having skirmishers retreat for less time if not faced with a dangerous enemy (meaning their effective dps is increased in such scenarios), increasing the scenarios where units consider attacking a nearby enemy mex, and improving some issues that were preventing units retreating from a nearby enemy fatboy
• 7 changes to engineers and buildings, including having T2 arti ignore enemies if their shots are firing into a cliff

Acknowledgements

• Radde - 3 Xander replays against v236 M28AI

v241 Update
25 changes, the most notable being new monkeylord kiting micro:

• 12 land combat changes, including monkeylord kiting (instead of retreating it should use its bolter attack to kite the enemy if it is currently attacking the enemy with it or outranges the enemy with it), skirmisher units being more aggressive against enemies with no attack, and fixing some issues with megalith's retreaitng micro (that could lead to them retreating backwards when the enemy wasn't at the right angle to shoot)
• 7 changes to engineers and ecoing, including limiting the number of t3 mexes to be getting
• 2 ACU changes, including having ACUs run from enemy experimentals even if full share is enabled
• 1 Air change (transports shouldnt keep dropping a water zone with idle engineers)
• 3 other changes, including 1 QUIET specific change to reflect that t3.5 mexes are no longer more mass efficient than t3 mexes, and building more pre-emptive PD on smaller maps

Acknowledgements

• Radde - v235 2v2 replay against 1.4 resource M28 on Xander
• Nomander - For mentioning how the monkeylord can kite with its bolter attack

@Nuggets No - while it might be possible to have M28 read chat messages (I'm not sure if it is or isn't possible), having it understand them would be difficult outside of basic keyword searches, and it wouldn't be possible to incorporate a large language model to make it actually understand and respond appropriately.

v240 Update

19 changes, including:

• 8 naval adjustments including making engineers more likely to assist naval factories
• 7 air adjustments, including building more asfs, having asfs shadow torpedo bombers more often, and having ahwassas synchronise their attacks to be less likely to simultaneously fire 2 bombs at the same unshielded target
• Delayed ACU upgrades on naval maps
• Fixed a bug recently introduced where M28 builds a paragon

Acknowledgements

• Radde - naval mapgen replay 4v4 against v235 M28

Trophy awards

• Radde and Microplastic - beating 1.4 resource v239 on a 15km land based mapgen

@sinhosie M28 is already compatible with the All Faction FAF BlackOps Nomads mod by Uveso - checked just now to make sure and it still spawns in all faction ACUs for M28 when the mod is enabled

@xieq Enable the FAF debugger as if the game crashes when playing on FAF it can give a bit more information on the cause (e.g. it'll say if it's due to a lack of memory):

If memory goes about 2GB on taskmanager then it's likely a crash due to memory, but doesn't appear to be the case running the replay

The replay (25093572) runs for me through to the end so means it's less likely to be an infinite loop.

Possible it's some sort of mod incompatibility, in which case you could try disabling other mods and seeing if it still crashes. I'll also see if I can resolve the error message M28 recorded relating to nukes when 10 were fired at once (as it's only meant to give that message when 30 are fired at once)