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

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

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

No they didn't

Screenshot from Vanilla FA (no mods)

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

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

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

@hoschmosch said in Connection issues never been this bad:

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

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

@hoschmosch said in Connection issues never been this bad:

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

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

@hoschmosch said in Connection issues never been this bad:

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

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

@hoschmosch said in Connection issues never been this bad:

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

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

@hoschmosch said in Connection issues never been this bad:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Dragging a long Attack Move through rocks works fine

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

These change some icons and make higher tech icons larger

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I'd rather like to see e cost to fire on all Pds instead of removing it from the ravager.
If the mass/e costs get reduced to compensate it wouldn't even make a difference for the one building it, but it would give you another option of breaking firebases.

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

@arma473 said in Can we fix harbingers?:

Could we add a toggle button with two states:
on: "while this unit is on patrol/attack move, it will consider reclaim/assist/repair"
off: "while this unit is on patrol/attack move, it will not reclaim/assist/repair"

Is something like this not possible? @Jip
like the reclaim ability / buildpower being toggleable like salems amphibious?

@ftxcommando looking through the history it seems that I was misremembering them being trainer, but to a new guy the difference between the real advice from a trainer and the nonsene some other people spout is not very obvious and I wouldn't expect new players to distrust others advice just because they don't have the trainer role.
So my apologies to all personal trainers offended by my statement, but my (or rather zappazapper's) point regarding such advice being given and thus creating the image of people trying to force new people to become 2k pro players ASAP still stands.

@funkoff said in Pending Balance Changes Feedback Thread:

Also, importantly, the nerf doesnt even do that much to stop it there is a lake or sea near an enemy base or acu which could be used as a safe intermediary jump point before and after the kill jump

That is the intention probably?
It's not so that you simply can't get a useful telemazor off (which your changes would do), but so that the enemy has more time to react to it.
so if you need 2-3 hops to get to the enemy base, then your opponent will have more time to react to the teleport and will also possibly be alerted by the sudden appearance of a radar signature.

@clyf with the proposed changes a 100% increase in damage and 40% decrease in rof and a 100% increase in costs will lead to 60% dps/mass, so aside from alpha damage it'll perform worse against air. You'll also have half the amount of sams thus half the amount of hp, so against air-to-ground units your sams will perform at about 30% efficiency compared to current sams and perform even worse against low hp units. (aside from the range increase)

@clyf said in Cybran t2 mobile bomb AI:

Do you have a video of it continuing to chase with the tailchase script?

(How do you post videos on the forum? does this work for you?)
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1169425511932498051/1169425853256581191/chase.webm?ex=65555bb2&is=6542e6b2&hm=b27bbd012283c1277c42dfbd053fd1109e0771d30588bf4321ecb8c3ed0f2995&

I checked out your PR and in the script it says something about improved tailchasing, still the beetle(speed 5) chasing the flare(speed 3.8) never catches up and stutter steps the whole way.

It works however if you attack move the beetle close enough to the enemy so it aquires the target itself.

Looks pretty good (though i'd use the e and time icons )
Also I think log time scales too slowly, if you want the current 25 seconds for long 600 unit teleports (approximately ln(x)*4) then a 300 unit teleport still takes 23 seconds. maybe sqrt would be nicer? then it'd be ~17 seconds for 300 units or maybe even make it linear, so teleporting is basically just walking really fast . Though that's all just balance adjustments.
At least the UX seems to be good, so that part should be cleared up.

Showing the radar range of your team instead of only your own radar would also be quite helpful