Kubik

Any + Starter = Any + First orb on card (For example Shadow + Starter + Banditos = 2x Shadow) Starter + Starter = 2x First orb on card (For example Starter + Starter + Banditos = 2x Shadow) But the orb i chosen based on first orb on the card, not what card was actually played. How is that easier solution? It would require change to mechanic no one have a clue about how it works (internally). Such faction to be usable should have similar amount of cards as existing factions, which is about 90, and from converting mixed factions you would get only about 40 cards. (not counting affinities, just using numbers from filters on wiki https://skylords-reborn.fandom.com/wiki/Cards)

🤔 so you would want to replace existing mixed faction with pure factions and limit deck possibilities this way. You can try applying for designer role, but I doubt there is any chance to redesign few thousand cards, with so few people to actually implement these changes, so I recommend checking out

it seems kind of over-complicated compared to how few cards are there.

🤔 @BoltyGER have you already checked https://forum.skylords.eu/index.php?/forum/89-contribute-to-the-project/

So do I get it right that Sand orb would be 7th type of orb and it would allow you to play any color? And you would be able to select it when creating second orb (and later). So at T4 you could play Abomination, Wasteland Terror, Lost Dragon, Grinder, Transcendence, Ravenheart, ... with just 4 Sand orbs? Would you want Amii Monument to get this overpowered option too? I can not imagine designers agreeing to something so powerful.

Sorry I did not get it, what will the sand orb allow you to play? If it would allow you to play any pure card, it sounds quite overpowered. And what spell(s) the Sand orb would have? Spells require effects to be created, and that is work.

@Dutchy that is only sorting. This is filtering:

No, sorry, no one asked for it before 😞 you will need to wait for such feature. (But it is already implemented, was just few minutes 🙂 but it will be waiting now 😢)

There is not big enough sample size to see any pattern with these issues 😞 and the only companies that would have know how and resources to investigate (AMD / Intel / NVidia) will just does not see such small game as good enough reason to spend their resources on it 😞 I would recommend first trying to limit the frame rate, or change your GPU core frequency slightly, these are the only two frequencies that you can easily control on most GPUs, if neither help, and BF is important enough for you to return your GPU you can try same model with different cooler (ideally different PCB layout). As I said before there is no way for us to investigate, building 100 or 1000 computers and testing each of them with 100s of settings combinations, would still cover only a very tiny fraction of all possible combinations, and is impossible for us to do anyway. Did you fore removed the NVidia drivers? It is know to cause some issues, but never heard about it causing this exact one 😞

To be clear I did not say that on your configuration anything is emulated, AMD and especially NVidia are not so open about how they implement Direct X. For the NVidia side, there is strong evidence to suggest that, from 8XX to 10XX that something was changed, to a level of performance degradation, but with limited resources, no clue what architectural changes NVidia did. RDNA is quite different from GCN, and no clue how that is hurting performance in older games. In that regard BattleForge is in kind of weird spot, it is kind of old to have HW features removed, but at the same time still kind of new to be relatively demanding. It was between the first games to use at least some DX 11 features. Consistency is the key to finding a pattern, but if Alt+Tab help I would suspect it might also have something to do with Windows. If you run your GPU with the manufacturer recommended settings (no overclocking, etc.) then it should be build to survive any load. These days it is quite unlikely to kill HW with just load, no matter how hard. And as far as I can tell the issue is always on both sides, bad game behavior, and HW issue. You can try capping the frame rate at 165 in the drivers.

Yes it is definitely badly optimized, but that is not the only issue. Over years features disappear from HW, once they are replaced by superior technology, but problem with that is that the old feature still needs to be supported, so at the point it is removed from HW drivers need to emulate that using CPU, or other feature on the GPU. The game contains remnants of Direct X 8, and I am no expert on Direct X internals, or GPU architecture, so I can not say which of the features are no longer present and are emulated. Another issue that makes it practically impossible to pinpoint demanding settings, is the fact that not a single setting in UI is tight to only one thing, but all of them set many things, and what is worse many things depends on combinations of settings. For an recent example new Intel Arc GPUs support only DX 12 (and Vulcan), and the driver is doing translation from DX 9, DX 10, and DX 11 to DX 12 internally, so any game using these older, but still popular APIs is hit or miss on those cards. I guess 165 is maximum your monitors allow, and I guess it can be trusted for how much frames the monitor is showing. I am using Geforce Experience from Nvidia to show rendered frames count (FPS), and I think AMD have such option too, or you can try Windows Game Bar. Well that is the weird thing about, there is no good reason for the CPU to be that busy. You said 10+ seconds, some have issues of 3+ minutes, and very similar HW configuration is fine. Well CPU usage, or GPU usage are more and more meaningless numbers over last decade or two. When I create a load that will cause 100% CPU usage depending on the load that CPU can easily do 10 times more. Simple example CPU can compute sum of 2 numbers, if you give it a lot of numbers it can compute the total sum (so far EASY), but if you tell it to do more things it easily can, because each CPU core have much more HW, that just addition (by the way any Intel or AMD CPU from last 5 years can do at least 4 addition per CPU core). So 100% means all cores doing something, but usually they can easily do much more. And there is even bigger issue with CPU usage, I guess you are talking about total CPU usage percentage, and your CPU have a lot of cores. BF have some small load offloaded to other cores, but everything is limited by single core (as in most modern games, they just often hide it). With 32 cores, 1 active 100% of the time, and rest doing nothing the total number will be just 3.125% and windows do not show decimal places so it will show just 3% so if I want to have any idea if BF is actually doing something, I need to look at detailed charts of CPU usage and hope to spot a core, that happens to have some significant load, while total percentage is practically unchanged. Finding bottlenecks in systems is getting harder and harder with every generation of HW, because it is less and less transparent what it is actually doing. 😞 As I said next step is finding someone who can reproduce the issue on his PC, and have some performance debugging tools and knowledge to figure out why the game is hold down by a CPU in some unknown circumstances. As for what you can do, nothing specific really 😞 you can try randomly changing options, until you find combination, which works for you. If you pick a community map, and find a way to reproduce it quickly, you will have replay, and these are usually (should be 100% but they are not 😢) repeatable.

About the noise, this game can easily be more demanding that modern benchmarks, can you check your FPS if it is trying to push some insane amount of frames for no good reason (can happen even with VSync on 😞 ). Also trying benchmarks from 10-20 years ago might be more representative. About lags, there are multiple issues that being described like this 😞 TLDR is that your CPU is too busy, and not able to keep up with the game, unfortunately it is not that simple and two PCs with same CPU and (hopefully same settings) can have totally different results. It is fine on my PC, and so far did not find anyone who can reproduce it and profile the CPU usage to provide any insight into what the hell is this game doing. 😞

But I think it looks relatively nice with forum's bright colors 😄 and some lines come with comments 😄 even though, I guess most of them is not really helpful 😛

You wanted it 😛

🤔 should I post some disasembly? 😇🤭

You misread my post I guess, because I listed 4 options, and even mention that is is a scale that. 🤔 was it too long so you forget first sentence by the end? I can list them in short here: Have another job, and make games in free time. (job does not need to be full time if game(s) is(are) successful enough) Do games for a big company. Prioritize mobile scam games with gambling addictions. (pay well, but not everyone can be doing scam) Make new technological advancement. (I hope you know that Minecraft did more than one https://youtu.be/fjZAgoxFKiQ ) I really have no clue why people suggest this one, it almost eliminate the option to make an new technical advancement. Unreal Engine is also free until 1 000 000 $ / year, and isn't as locking as Unity, but still best way to make an advancement in technology is to create a new game without using game engine. Because if there would be a feature that you can just enable in the engine by flipping a switch someone would already done it. Picking a game engine is usually easy if you know what you want to make. That is inaccurate at best. Most languages are used for legacy reasons combined with cost of change. You can compare languages in this way: Fast: Rust, C++, ... Garbage Collected, but relatively fast: .NET (C#, ...), JVM (Java, ...), GO, ... That require one of the above to help them: LUA, ... So bad, that you should not compare by any performance metric: JavaScript But most importantly how fast language you need depends on what game you want to make. If the game is doing nothing until player do some action, then do one change, and wait again, then language does not really matters, and even the bad JavaScript can do it. If you want to deliver complex updates more than 33 times per second (that why Minecraft have 20 ticks per second) you should go for the first category.

Hello @Riviute, Creating an indie game, and having a job that have nothing to do with development is pretty common. If you would want to make games for a big company it would be also very different from making an indie game, and might also be far from your dream. If you would would like to earn enough from making an indie game(s) you will either need to target scam kind of games for phones, which isn't much about the development itself, but about the marketing and studies how to best hide the fact that it is legally allowed gambling with real money for children, OR make another technological advancement like Minecraft. Unfortunately these are scales, but with big empty space in the middle 😞 When I started with Skylords Reborn I did have almost 0 (or actually 0) experience in reverse engineering, server development, networking, server management, game development, ... I stated programing so many years ago, first in some game-ish things where I give a wizard visual instructions, and wizard then followed that "program" to complete some objective, but I find the command pallet kind of limiting, so I looked up actual programing language on the internet (which is much easier these days, and you can find much better languages). It was C++ and I started creating programs and games I did know at that time. I would say good way to start is decide what you actually want to do. There are options to make games from purely aesthetic point of view without writing a single line of code, or from purely design point of view without doing any art, or the "engine code", or you can do purely the coding part, follow some simple or existing design, and use free art, or buy the art, or you can do it all, or you can join some team. We use no game engine, and EA did use some old internal engine, that to my knowledge does not have a publicly known name. We use multiple programing languages for different things like Rust, C++, LUA, C#, ...

I did not analyze their strategies in too much details, but I hope no one will be to angry if I say some repeated pattern I seen was buying "expensive" cards in direct trades, for relatively cheap. Simple math saving 10% on 10 card saves 1 , but saving 10% on 1000 card is 100 , and then selling for 10% above average is 200 profit. I personally go over all transactions one of the first persons that claimed to "finish" the game (all cards x4 + promos), and was majority of transactions was not over 10% from market average, but there was a lot of transactions...

To be clear I did not said it is easy to get full collection in less than a month, just that more than few people did it, starting at different times since release. I would say that there is no good metric to measure trading skills 😛 So no clue what "average" trader is 😄

🤔 how can "trading" route take that long? Multiple people already proved that it can be done under a month including promos. There is no cap on trading income, and it was made much easier by increasing the amount of cards you can have in auction.

Not likely at all, why would we waste time on something as complicated as this, where there is so many 3rd party solutions, that thanks to being outside o game, have multiple unique advantages.

I do not know which of these issues it is, but some general advice for these points make sure that the GPU is properly mounted and supported. Take it out and clean both connectors. Disable the "smart" software. Or if you trust it enough just tell it, that BF should always use only 1 GPU. Ask you GPU manufacturer for a fixed driver. Do not run more than one application that requires exclusive access to the GPU.

DXGI_ERROR_DEVICE_REMOVED, that mean GPU was logically disconnected. Few possible reasons your GPU was physically disconnected you have more than one GPU and some "smart" software decided to switch them Your GPU driver contains some bug, that causes logical disconnect of the GPU You run another software that wants exclusive access to the GPU, and windows was stupid enough to allow that

Are you using one drive?

definitely weirdest disconnect timing I ever seen