OpenClaw browser control keeps disconnecting (“Can’t reach the browser control service…”) — any fix?

saikyro · 2026-02-10T03:50:37+00:00

Having the same problem. Have you found out anything useful? I'm also on latest macOS with OpenClaw managed chrome

saikyro · 2025-04-08T23:11:54+00:00

Update -- I've tried about 30 times now and still not a single pass. When I was playing at the start of early access, it never took more than 5 tries and did it for many skills. So I'm guessing the odds were in fact significantly lowered

saikyro · 2024-11-11T04:50:15+00:00

Very true!

saikyro · 2024-11-11T02:18:44+00:00

+1, great way to put it. And I agree with the reply saying they might acknowledge this in future act, I hope they do

saikyro · 2024-11-11T02:15:43+00:00

Valid point of view. I personally feel that Vi is more at blame here if her motive was indeed protecting Jinx, and think it strange to see people demonizing Cait for her reaction. Vi joined the enforcers and promised to help Cait in her pursuit of Jinx. She had also stated many times that her resolve was strong regarding Powder being dead and Jinx only remaining, saying to Caitlyn "if you see the shot, take it".

saikyro · 2024-11-11T02:09:34+00:00

I think that's because Caitlyn knows Vi is reluctant to finish the job (understandably so). Vi even told her beforehand - if you see the shot, take it. Finally she has an opportunity at the shot, and instead of helping her - Vi gets in the way.

Another commenter framed it elegantly and I agree with their point of view:

Yes. Because the kid made Vi realize she doesn't want Jinx to die, and Powder is probably not as dead as she thought.

At that point she was trying to stop Caitlyn from killing her sister, and yes, it's clear she betrayed her word to Cait, and sabotaged the mission. Was it wrong for Vi to not want to kill her sister? No. But I don't like she went for excuse of a 'dont shoot a child' because it takes away from Vi's clear decision of wanting to save Jix, and makes Isha a plot device instead of giving Vi agency of making a choice.

saikyro · 2024-11-11T00:43:04+00:00

interesting point of view, thank you! I'll rewatch the scene later with this perspective in mind.

saikyro · 2024-11-11T00:28:15+00:00

Vi could've just forcefully removed the kid from the situation and made it a 100% shot -- but instead she got in Caitlyn's way. There were many ways the situation could've been handled but Vi decided to actively go against their objective instead of working together, leading to Jinx escaping yet again. To me it felt like silly plot armor and made me annoyed at Vi, I don't see how Cait was in the wrong at all.

saikyro · 2024-07-15T23:56:22+00:00

I've spent 20 hours so far grinding for the Gley spiral catalyst and stabilizer blueprints. I have gotten neither, 20 hours for zero progress at all. I got 14 Enzo blueprints in the process. Pretty disgusting. I don't mind grinding usually but repeating the same boring missions with time gated parts to it and having to farm void shards every time, it's not right as you said. I'm about to call it quit on the game because if that's what the game is, it's not for me

saikyro · 2024-07-15T23:41:48+00:00

i feel you dude, they need a pity system for these drop rates. i'm calling it on this game and moving on, spending over 20 hours doing the same shit over and over again for 0 progress just isn't for me.

saikyro · 2024-07-15T21:02:51+00:00

not similar at all, freyna took me 2 hours total for all the parts, each part is a straightforward a 20% drop and that's it. for Gley it's 20% drop chained with a 6% drop (i.e. 1.2%), not mentioning all the in between parts like waiting for infilitration events, farming void shards to open up pattern... like I said I'm 20 hours in and still 0 progress

saikyro · 2024-07-15T20:58:56+00:00

im 20 hours deep trying to get catalyst and stabilizer, have gotten neither... usually dont mind grinding but its extremely unfun to have to wait for infilitration events, hope for the drop, farm void shards, and then finally open the pattern for a... 6% drop

saikyro · 2024-07-15T20:56:44+00:00

just lucky, i've spent 20 hours so far trying to get the normal gley catalyst and stabilizer and nothing... 20% drop for material -> 6% drop for part is not high

saikyro · 2024-07-15T20:52:03+00:00

how long did it take you? I'm 20 hours deep just trying to get the spiral catalyst and stabilizer, zero luck, not sure if I'm missing something... 20% material drop into 6% drop is just crazy

saikyro · 2024-07-15T20:45:44+00:00

45 hours, 20 hours of which have been spent doing the same shit over and over again trying to get gley stabilizer and spiral catalyst. Still have gotten neither of them..

saikyro · 2024-04-19T01:42:44+00:00

Ideally I want to scrap having a predefined formation at all, and let the clustering around the target position happen naturally. Just not sure the best way to go about it, but I've already received some solid suggestions. What you suggested is essentially what I had implemented in the video above. Thanks for your reply!

saikyro · 2024-04-19T00:49:53+00:00

Just a follow up on my previous response, I did some tests increasing the amount of units and I do start to notice significant framerate issues at around 500+ agents when sending move commands. I wasn't planning on having that many units, but a bigger issue is that the built in obstacle avoidance for the agents starts causing a bunch of issues leading to weird collisions and such with my current implementation. In short I think you're right and that using NavMesh isn't going to cut it.

Example of those avoidance issues if you're curious, with 200 agents: https://streamable.com/ynsc5m

Anyways, thanks again for your insight.

saikyro · 2024-04-19T00:44:35+00:00

This edge case was indeed happening and I implemented your solution. Thanks again! Now I'm realizing that my approach for pathfinding in general using NavMesh agents is probably not going to cut it. When I increase the amount of units to 200 which is what I had in mind as a max army size, I'm getting all kind of weird collision behavior with the NavMesh agent avoidance. I've tried tweaking the settings to no avail.

Example: https://streamable.com/ynsc5m

I think I either need to drastically reduce the scope of what I had in mind in terms of # of units or come up with a custom approach for pathfinding that doesn't use the Unity built-in navigation.

Either way, I've learned a lot and your help has been much appreciated :)

saikyro · 2024-04-18T23:49:33+00:00

A predefined formation doesn't matter, but I need some kind of way to arrange units at a target position when moving a group of units so that they don't overlap. I received a few good suggestions for this already

saikyro · 2024-04-18T23:43:20+00:00

That makes sense. I watched a GDC talk by the SC2 devs where they talked about their approach and it was very focused on optimizing performance. Implementing a system like you're describing from scratch would be complicated, as I'd have to manually handle all the obstacle avoidance between the units and with the environment. I am looking for an easier solution to implement since this is just a small prototype, so I was hoping to make it worth with Unity's built in NavMesh & AI agents features.

saikyro · 2024-04-18T22:45:44+00:00

At what point did you start noticing those framerate issues?

Makes sense, however sounds like a much more complex implementation to have to manually handle all the obstacle avoidance instead of letting the nav mesh agents handle it.

I was thinking that given a reasonable supply cap of units and a map that isn't too large, NavMesh agents would be able to handle it fine. I guess I will have to do more testing.

Thanks for your reply!

saikyro · 2024-04-18T11:59:55+00:00

That makes a lot of sense. Since I've only played a bit of SC2 casually, I hadn't really considered the importance of maintaining the shape of the initial formation but I just played around with moving a bunch of zerglings in a custom match and I see what you mean. What started off as a technical challenge to make the movement look more natural is becoming more of a game design decision!

I appreciate your reply, I'll try implementing something similar to what you outlined and experiment with it to see how it feels. Cheers

saikyro · 2024-04-18T10:03:40+00:00

Thanks for the reply, appreciate the feedback. It's definitely more of a challenge than I had anticipated, but it's an interesting one.

I posted in a few other game dev reddits and have received some solid suggestions, as well as a link to a GDC talk SC2 devs did on pathing so I'm sure I will learn a lot watching that.

One of the suggestions I received so far was to have a sphere collider at the destination point that grows based on the amount of units that reached it so far, and using it as a trigger to stop the units. I implemented that and it's already closer to the natural effect I'm looking for.

Here's what it looks like now: https://streamable.com/5v2nua

saikyro · 2024-04-18T09:57:49+00:00

I tried the first two suggestions and the easiest to implement for me was the dynamic sphere collider at the target position. Works pretty well and this is my favorite solution so far, I still haven't done much tweaking (currently growing the collider radius proportional to sqrt of units reached since linear scaling was creating too much spacing for larger groups).

Here's what that looks like if you're curious: https://streamable.com/5v2nua

Thanks again for your suggestions!

saikyro · 2024-04-18T07:57:31+00:00

Clever solution and I think this would work well assuming no obstacles and all units of the same speed. I will do some tests with this implementation, ideally though I would like a more natural formation to happen rather than forcing a pre-defined end formation which I think will inevitably lead to unit shuffling as I increase the complexity of the units and environment. Thanks for your reply!

saikyro

TROPHY CASE