Forged Alliance Forever

Re: Sorian integration issue:

2012-03-13T07:31:46+02:00

Friends and I got beaten after a long, competative, fun 20x20 map versus a bunch of Sorian AIx Adaptives with their modifiers set to about half.. I suppose we should thank you for adding the modifiers and letting us at least have a *tiny* chance to win instead of the joke of playing against the old AIx.

Statistics: Posted by Doompants — 13 Mar 2012, 07:31

Re: Sorian integration issue:

2012-03-09T14:56:49+02:00

With sorian integrated, you won't produce any desync in "normal" games (a common problem in GPGNET).

Statistics: Posted by Ze_PilOt — 09 Mar 2012, 14:56

Re: Sorian integration issue:

2012-03-09T14:48:16+02:00

Great work guys.
Playing the AI on FAF is now sensational!

All the Sorian stuff works and the latest lobby changes have given full control of AIX strength.
As if there could be more …but there is… now Black-Ops mod builds custom units...lol what fun.
The auto-patching system is also excellent.

Thanks for persevering with these changes as they will bring many new players to FAF and ensure current players have an enhanced experience in AI skirmish/LAN and Co-Op TeamPlay.

roj

Statistics: Posted by AwarE — 09 Mar 2012, 14:48

Re: Sorian integration issue:

2012-03-06T00:02:56+02:00

You the man

[Btw, I know it looks like I sat here all day waiting for this, but I genuinely just logged on! ]

Statistics: Posted by Helcaraxe — 06 Mar 2012, 00:02

Re: Sorian integration issue:

2012-03-05T23:20:57+02:00

It's online.

Statistics: Posted by Ze_PilOt — 05 Mar 2012, 23:20

Re: Sorian integration issue:

2012-03-04T21:22:06+02:00

Ah, thought that might be it.

Excellent news - thanks, yarmond!

Statistics: Posted by Helcaraxe — 04 Mar 2012, 21:22

Re: Sorian integration issue:

2012-03-04T17:44:30+02:00

You don't do anything, it will be patched automatically in 3612.

Thanks for your contribution !

Statistics: Posted by Ze_PilOt — 04 Mar 2012, 17:44

Re: Sorian integration issue:

2012-03-04T17:19:17+02:00

That's great, Yarmond. I found your code at bitbucket but I don't have any experience with LUA files so what exactly are we supposed to do to get it working? And do all clients need it or only the person that's hosting?

Statistics: Posted by QuakeFX — 04 Mar 2012, 17:19

Re: Sorian integration issue:

2012-03-04T12:14:51+02:00

yarmond wrote:
I made a patch that adds the cheat options for the Sorian AI (build rate multiplier, etc.) to the FAF lobby, and submitted it as a pull request to the Bitbucket repository.

Wow, that's great - thank you

Forgive the nooby question - I've had a look at the repository, but can't work out how to install the patch?

Statistics: Posted by Helcaraxe — 04 Mar 2012, 12:14

Re: Sorian integration issue:

2012-03-04T04:43:24+02:00

I made a patch that adds the cheat options for the Sorian AI (build rate multiplier, etc.) to the FAF lobby, and submitted it as a pull request to the Bitbucket repository.

Statistics: Posted by yarmond — 04 Mar 2012, 04:43

Re: Sorian integration issue:

2012-03-01T20:58:06+02:00

So I really wondered what the progress is on the LEM. I just discovered FA Forever and really the only negative thing I found was the missing option to adjust the cheat modifiers and TML randomization. Me and my friends are sole skirmish players and where the non-cheating Sorian AI is a pushover, the AIX is too difficult for us. Instead of the 'all or nothing' AIs we could gradually adjust the multipliers and try to beat it then move it up a notch. This was more of an essential feature and prevents us from fully enjoying all that FAF has to offer. Not to mention that the AI TML accuracy is ridiculous and makes land experimentals not last long vs AIXs.

Right now we're switching back and forth between FAF (for our Steam companion) and GPGnet while we would love to deinstall GPGnet altogether.

Statistics: Posted by QuakeFX — 01 Mar 2012, 20:58

Re: Sorian integration issue:

2012-02-04T17:44:10+02:00

Thanks, Funk. Understand it could be tricky, but even just those two variables would make a big difference

Statistics: Posted by Helcaraxe — 04 Feb 2012, 17:44

Re: Sorian integration issue:

2012-02-04T17:22:22+02:00

Helcaraxe wrote:
I'd like to add my voice to those above - it would be awesome to be able to adjust the cheating AI's income and build speed in FAF, like with LEM. The other original features would be a nice to have.

No gripe - just a polite request.

Helcaraxe

Well, I haven't looked into it, but integrating LEM may be more difficult because we already use a different lobby mod that, in and of itself, adds tons of features and UI components. If we also added LEM's pieces to the mix, the lobby would start to look really cluttered, broken and may not even work properly.

I'll look into it, though.

Statistics: Posted by FunkOff — 04 Feb 2012, 17:22

Re: Sorian integration issue:

2012-02-04T16:53:19+02:00

I'd like to add my voice to those above - it would be awesome to be able to adjust the cheating AI's income and build speed in FAF, like with LEM. The other original features would be a nice to have.

No gripe - just a polite request.

Helcaraxe

Statistics: Posted by Helcaraxe — 04 Feb 2012, 16:53

Re: Sorian integration issue:

2011-12-29T14:53:21+02:00

I agree that extensive testing by the mapmaker is vital, and would add that I use a performance standard to ensure the FA marker layout is optimized for the AI.

It is easy to remember…refers to non-cheating AIs [no 2x resources]
3000@5min
12000@10min
20000@20min
400000@40min
2000000@1hr
… all my latest maps achieve this standard or better with TeamPlay conditions set.

I believe you will have a more enjoyable game without the 2x resource and the AIX cheating AI. The reason is that you will participate in a more strategic and interesting match. Please try one of my TeamPlay maps to get the feel of this type of game that would normally be played by two human players against two-teamed Sorian Turtle AI.
The Aeon Sorian Turtle AI has no need to cheat to be good on a water map.

Thanks for the info on ‘TML randomization 20%’… I had the wrong unit there… now you have cleared that up.

I would like to explain why I think ‘unit restrictions’ are important.
When I test some of my 20x10 naval maps, made for Internet play, with say 1000units set, I sometimes find slow game speed at 1hour [say-2]. One way for me to present the map for TeamPlay is to suggest “No Air” for maximum AI performance and fast game speed [say+1@1hr with say 875units set].
I also think that Air is the easy road to a win and less interesting than a ground/naval battle… why build ships when you could build bombers. LoS [sight] is more important and harder to gain when there is no air. Players are forced to build navy when they can’t throw gunships at every problem. I try to make maps that build strong naval bases and attack with a burly fleet.

roj

[edit:] I have uploaded another internet TeamPlay map to the FAF vault.
“GiveAdog Isle”
It is also available at GpG FA Vault.

Statistics: Posted by AwarE — 29 Dec 2011, 14:53