@Eternal thanks! It works. I hope it will be more stable on my computer than FAF. Thanks again.

@unknow I solved this problem using HotKey Tech Tabs, thank you!

i know that one too just didnt look that they were over mountains well nice to know all working , just hope it will be that way cos that 1st bug i mentioned was real for me, come to think now mayby there were cyb drones and i couldnt target building cos was target drones or something, just bad luck i guess

@casternumerouno said in will this harm my pc: No it wont. As for the reason why it shows up is that we are simply to broke to pay few thousands each year to Microsoft for proper certification of our installer software. @uveso said in will this harm my pc: @Rune1993 Just google "FAForever Virus" and you will get multiple results from many years. Almost every result shows the same; Its a false positive. So no, this will not harm your PC. Insider note: The filehoster where we store all FAF files scans each file for viruses and would delete any malicious file immediately. So even if we would mess this up, you can not download a infected file from this hoster. (Hetzner.de) @magge said in will this harm my pc: No, it is not malicious or a virus. Stick with the official source for any downloads: https://www.faforever.com/client Or if you are a developer or a more tech-savvy type, you can check the source code: https://github.com/FAForever/downlords-faf-client ok good to know thanks for the info and help

I will try this. Thank you.

I have the physical box set for Supreme Commander still on my shelf, bought at launch. FA I didn't get until years later (digital edition including SC).

if T2 walls can protect T2 pd, they can protect just about anything, probably even an acu lol. sounds a bit OP

Brutus has a half-finished tournament software that was supposed to automate exactly that iirc

How about we give Aeon T1 bombers half a second longer EMP and its radius increased without changing damage radius? They already have almost 2 times less damage than UEF bombers.

It can catch players off guard, but after that your ACU is extremely vulnerable. A risky play, doesn't sound that bad to me.

@nex said in 86% mass discount: @black_wriggler I'm not saying you are wrong or that it's a remotely smart idea to make units just to reclaim them. I'm just saying, that your statement @nex said in 86% mass discount: it is not true that assisting the factory will reduce the adjacency depends on your view on the gains of adjacency (per unit/per time) and is misleading in the context of this thread. Actually it is clarifying, since the headline number number "86% discount" is misleading itself - 86% of what? If the percentage discount is reduced, but it is a smaller percentage of a bigger production number, then overall mass balance is the same Edit - in this particular case i forgot again about the mass loss from the wreck, because of this any additional mass you put in from assistance will not be reclaimed in full, so the efficiency will be less

Are the tools for Supcom/FAF so hard to use? With all of these neat unused features, I'm surprised that there is only 1 fan-made faction.

@ftxcommando said in Ban less and more: Great, problem is as Gieb said the moderation manpower is two sticks and a rock. So what does your good intention policy intended to guess whether people are actually upset lead to? Dudes combing through replays to find something to ban people they already have a problem with due to other circumstances. Is that more or less toxic than the current situation? More

Test

@eternal that sounds pretty awful. Imagine opening the client and seeing "can't open FAF" or "I had error" as news xdxd. You need some sort of manual filtering or the bad stuff will come up

@ovenman said in why scathis fire and then stop and again fire and stop: I personally think it looks dumb for the canon to spin so fast. If they shot cluster projectiles instead, like how their bomber shoots 6 bombs, then it would look way less stupid and not like a modded unit. This change would even keep it's shot per volley the same. Also, it would split early unlike the aoen rapid fire. This is my biggest (only?) gripe. I don't actually mind the functional change but it does look... well, yes, dumb would be one word for it. I would rather change the way it fires so the ROF is the same over time but it fires at a constant rate instead of charging up. Keep the range, accuracy, aoe, etc., everything else the same. Just... don't make it so... dumb? Goofy? I was going to type "unrealistic" when I first asked, but it's a sci-fi game so... outlandish? I thought the way it fired before was cool and classic and satisfying, regardless of range/accuracy/aoe. I just liked watching it. Now... it looks like a circus ride, not a weapon.

This is merged and available on deploy/fafdevelop