from now on you can also start the FAF version directly wihtout using the FAF launcher.
Just make an desktop shortcut of the file C:\ProgramData\FAForever\bin\ForgedAlliance.exe
(ProgramData is a hidden folder!)
from now on you can also start the FAF version directly wihtout using the FAF launcher.
Just make an desktop shortcut of the file C:\ProgramData\FAForever\bin\ForgedAlliance.exe
(ProgramData is a hidden folder!)
thanks for reporting this.
https://github.com/Uveso/BlackOpsFAF-Unleashed/pull/27
(fixed in next version)
I find the idea of allowing smurf accounts under any circumstances problematic. Smurfing has always been a contentious issue in FAF, and the platform has consistently upheld a strict no-smurfing policy, even enforcing bans against such accounts. Introducing a system that permits smurf accounts, regardless of how controlled or pre-approved it may be, risks undermining this longstanding rule.
Allowing high-rated players to create temporary accounts—even for challenges—poses significant risks to the community. It could lead to negative experiences for low-rated opponents and erode confidence in the integrity of the rating system. Furthermore, even with strict pre-approval and monitoring, the line between an approved "challenge account" and unauthorized smurfing becomes blurred, potentially opening the door for misuse.
That said, this is just my personal opinion. Whatever decision is ultimately made, I will support it. I have a rating of 0, so from a personal standpoint, it doesn't matter to me either way.
The introduction of Challenge Accounts, as currently proposed, appears unnecessary, as most goals (content creation, fostering creative challenges) can be achieved without additional accounts. The administrative and moderation effort does not justify the benefits. Optimizing existing structures provides similar advantages with less risk and effort.
It should also be noted that there have always been discussions about smurf accounts, and FAF has consistently been against such accounts, even enforcing bans. Now, for FAF to allow smurf accounts under any circumstances is problematic in my view. This could lead to anyone justifying their smurfing by claiming they intended to create value for FAF.
Even though I am sure that the Uveso-AI itself does not cause any desyncs, it is still possible that not all players have the same version or that a file is corrupted. So please also test without the Uveso-AI mod.
Please also post your game.log. The replay generates a new game.log with our game environment and files, but we need to see your files and directories.
EXCEPTION_ACCESS_VIOLATION (0xc0000005) at address 0x0095854f
This is a memory error. The only solution is to reduce the number of (unit) mods.
https://github.com/FAForever/fa/issues/1445
The hitbox also applies to projectiles.
I encountered an issue in Black Ops where the hitbox was too small:
https://github.com/Uveso/BlackOpsFAF-ACUs/pull/7
Make the hitbox the same size for every ACU to avoid complaints. Also, ensure it's not too small; otherwise, the commander can only be hit with area damage.
Oh, and when you're in the game, press [F1] to open the key bindings. Under the 'Debug' section, you can see all functions and their assigned keys.
First of all, press [CTRL] + [SHIFT] + [ALT] + C to display the hitboxes in-game.
You have two options to change the hitboxes of a unit.
First of all, you can copy the entire blueprint into your mod and modify the relevant lines, such as SizeX, SizeY, and SizeZ.
However, this approach has the disadvantage that you will need to update the blueprints with every ACU patch.
A better option is to use a ModBlueprints function in Blueprints.lua.
Here’s an example of a ModBlueprints function:
https://github.com/Uveso/AI-Uveso/blob/master/hook/lua/system/Blueprints.lua
a function to change the hitbox could look like this:
-- save the actual ModBlueprints into OldModBlueprints
local OldModBlueprints = ModBlueprints
-- by creating a funktion with the same name we overwrite the original ModBlueprints
function ModBlueprints(all_blueprints)
-- execute the original function to not break other mods
OldModBlueprints(all_blueprints)
-- loop over all blueprints
for id,bp in all_blueprints.Unit do
check if we have an commander
if table.find(bp.Categories, 'COMMANDER') then
change the hitbox
bp.SizeX = 1
bp.SizeY = 1
bp.SizeZ = 1
end
end
end
i hope this helps a bit.
I’ve gone through the game log, and the errors visible there have nothing to do with the crash. Most of the time, it’s just variables that can’t be found.
For example, M28 tries to access a variable where a number is expected, but nothing is returned. Here, the 92,574 error messages could have flooded the log and caused an issue with memory management. (I don’t think so, though — we’ve had worse log spam before, and the log continued to write.)
Brewlan expects a variable named TDFShipGaussCannonProjectile, which doesn’t exist. However, this only causes a standard projectile to be used and shouldn’t crash the game.
My gut feeling tells me that a mod like Buildable Lower Tiers Experimentals in Factories for Total Mayhem, Kennel Engineering Stations for All, or Reclaim Turret Aggressive is responsible. Most likely, it’s a modified unit where the engine expects certain values that aren’t present. But as I said, this is just my gut feeling, so it’s more guessing than knowing.
The only recommendation here is to thoroughly test the mods one by one. Even if you’re 100% certain which mod is causing the issue, debugging it is still difficult (to actually fix the mod).
Update: 14.Dec.2024
AI-Uveso (v114)
Total Mayhem
mod.Update 14.Dec.2024(v114)
Total Mayhem
mod.Ze_PilOt released the first public version of FAF (0.4.2.25b) on 05 Jul, 2011
I'm happy to announce that the first public release is out !
0.4.2.25b : (the updater should update to the latest version from there)
Forged Alliance Forever - Lobby 0.4.2.23b
********************************
- Why using it ? Gpgnet is still alive !
- What is it doing better than GPGNet ?
Here is a few reasons :
- GPGNet is not alive. It's still up, but not maintained anymore.
- Live Replay Bot equivalent is working all the time.
- Chat is not limited to 100 peoples. And it's faster. You can also join with any IRC Client on Mibbit.
- Custom games : No bug when you create a new game with the same name as an old one. You stay in chat. Games are announced in the lobby.
- 1v1 Matchmaker : TrueSkill matchmaking. Better than Elo, take ANY custom game in account for your rank !
- Why TrueSkill is better ? See here : viewtopic.php?f=2&t=52273&p=908046#p908046
- All the games are using the most recent and debugged version of FA, ladder included !
- LeaderBoard : It works. It doesn't mix with vanilla or whatever.
- And hopefully an update will come this week with a working Live Replay announcer in chat, and an automatic replay vault !
- It's faster, more responsive, take less memory, and it's actively supported by his developpers !
Glad to hear it’s working well.
Quantum Maelstrom damage is now T1: 0.6, T2: 6, T3: 16.
The overcharge fix will take a bit longer. FAF has a new system for calculating overcharge damage, and I still need to look into it. However, it should be fixable.
Unleashed is also updated on github.
https://github.com/Uveso/BlackOpsFAF-ACUs/pull/7 (ACU hitbox fixed)
https://github.com/Uveso/BlackOpsFAF-ACUs/pull/8 (changed QuantumMaelstrom damage)
https://github.com/Uveso/BlackOpsFAF-ACUs/pull/9 (Seraphim tactical missile fix)
It's already merged on GitHub, but I’m holding off on the release in case we find any additional errors.
Also, I’m not sure if the damage adjustment to the Quantum Maelstrom is sufficient. I tested it with some tanks but haven’t played it in a real game yet.
Also, please retest the overcharge; I guess it’s not fixed yet.
Update: 19.Nov.2024
AI-Uveso (v113)
Update 19.Nov.2024 (v113)
Update: 18.Nov.2024
XtremWars (v1.7)
Update 18.Nov.2024 (v1.7)
The mod is also tested in multiplayer and shows no desyncs.
To check if the mod is in a good state, see the game.log.
Example:
info: * Extreme Wars: Mod "Extreme Wars" version (17) is active.
info: * Extreme Wars: [siminit.lua, line:595] Running from: @c:\programdata\faforever\repo\fa\lua\siminit.lua.
info: * Extreme Wars: [siminit.lua, line:596] Checking directory "/mods/XtremWars"...
info: * Extreme Wars: [siminit.lua, line:607] Found mod in correct directory: /mods/xtremwars/mod_info.lua.
info: * Extreme Wars: [siminit.lua, line:615] Check OK. Found 1 "XtremWars" directory.
info: * Extreme Wars: [siminit.lua, line:619] Checking files and filesize for "Extreme Wars"...
info: * Extreme Wars: [siminit.lua, line:647] Check OK! files: 923, bytecount: 97438472.
The major update has already been deployed to the vault. We are currently addressing a few remaining issues.
i guess i tuched the limit 4 years ago. Does that mean its now possible to upload Total Mayhem ~325MB ?
Nice, will try this in near future