Bannable offmapping

[A Former User]

@ftxcommando said in Bannable offmapping:

But if a dude bombs, then flys to the edge, then ctrl+k's, then yeah he should be banned.

This is your personal opinion. Nothing like that in the rules.

[FtXCommando]

You just quoted the rules saying it lol

[cunnismeta]

@melanol set waypoint at edge of map so planes are flying at the edge of the map, perpendicular to the edge of the map.
set second waypoint at corner of map.
set third waypoint at next corner of the map
set final waypoint behind enemy base
shift+G all targets of opportunity

FAF seems to have offmapping prevention implemented to some degree. Trying this might just get your units stuck offmap. And you banned.

though uh, what's a bit of unrated offmapping between friends lmfao.
all's fair in love and war

[A Former User]

@ftxcommando Yes, I can read. Dead units are not units. Anyway, I will wait for someone with more authority to reply.

[Conny_Action]

but letting your air units die offmap makes the unreclaimable, which is nasty for t4 air or gunships or bomber. i mean there is some room of tolerance i think, you wont get reported for offmapping a t3 scout once. although its pretty hard to not offmap when the enemy got his base in the corner. but its obvious 2 or 3 times when you do this intentionally, so you are supposed to watch out a little your way points or micro your units so your strats wont bypass the asf cloud offmap.
but thats where i would be interested too, bcs you can either say offmapping strats should be accepted till some degree when the enmy builds his base directly in the corner (or hides his para or whatever) or any offmapping is stricly banned so you can make enemy bomber runs very hard to manage by building your base in the corner intentionally and shutting down 2 sides from whre enemy bombs could come. how is this dealt by the pros or in tournaments? chivalry and fairplay?
the idea of implementing some kind of air space which is bigger than the map is old and not feasible isnt it? radar and and air micro should work there too.

i would cosider dead units as units somehow, bcs their entity dont disappear like in other rts games and reclaiming their wrecks can be game changing.

[Jip]

Dead units are units. Intentionally crashing your air units outside of the map with the goal to deny the reclaim is a good example of what 'offmapping' is too, and is against the rules.

As dynamics points out - some maps have spawns or extractors that are so close to the edge that you can't do much about it. That is bad map design, and that is 'okay' - as long as you don't do it intentionally (use ctrl + k to kill the bomber earlier, for example).

[maudlin27]

@melanol @FtXCommando @Mach
Currently the view of the mod team is that Ctrl-King a unit so that the wreck falls off-map (e.g. to deny your opponent the reclaim) is not considered a breach of the FAF rules, that is it's not considered to be using an exploit.

However, deliberately abusing off-mapping for (alive) air units is considered a bannable exploit.

[FtXCommando]

Mod team back at it again with insane interpretations of gameplay

Anyone on mod team want to explain the positive aspect of allowing that type of play?

[maudlin27]

My own (personal) view:
-bannable offences should be reasonably clear to be something wrong-most people wont be going through the various items in a forum post to check they dont do them. Banning something that many users wouldnt intuitively think to be wrong leads to frustration for those players (potentially decreasing playerbase) and increased work for the mod team dealing with such reports. There needs to be a strong case for going against this rule
-increased depth/gameplay-do you risk trying another bomb and have your enemy get the reclaim? Do you risk trying to get the wreck outside the map and end up falling just short?
-you can already do similar things by getting the wreck in an impathable cliff (excl uef) or in water (less wreck value, although Ive not tested recently to confirm)
-Your opponent is more easily able to stop you doing this than with offmapping. Offmapping allows bombers to sneak past your opponents defences. Ctrl-king doesnt (eg if you have loads of AA you could kill them before they can reach the edge of the map to ctrl-k)

It’s also not currently highlighted specifically as an exploit or breach of rules.

[TheVVheelboy]

Lmao, making 40k mass unrecoverable for enemy team on their own territory is not bannable XD

[arma473]

@maudlin27 There isn't a rule against intentionally (or accidentally) dropping wrecks on un-pathable terrain or in the water.

And, you can still reclaim wrecks from those places with drones or factory attack move.

There is a rule against intentionally dropping wrecks off map. The rule is clear enough.

Greater gameplay depth is not always a good thing. It is not good to have increased depth of gameplay where the depth is because exploits exist. If anything there's already too much depth to the gameplay in FAF, so we'd benefit by removing things like v***rancy bonuses.

[cunnismeta]

Clearly there should be a rule forbidding intentionally offmapping reclaim

[FtXCommando]

@maudlin27 said in Bannable offmapping:

My own (personal) view:
-bannable offences should be reasonably clear to be something wrong-most people wont be going through the various items in a forum post to check they dont do them. Banning something that many users wouldnt intuitively think to be wrong leads to frustration for those players (potentially decreasing playerbase) and increased work for the mod team dealing with such reports. There needs to be a strong case for going against this rule

How is it less intuitive to not intentionally drop a 30k mass wreck off the map than to hide a strat off the map as it sneaks on the enemy?

-increased depth/gameplay-do you risk trying another bomb and have your enemy get the reclaim? Do you risk trying to get the wreck outside the map and end up falling just short?

Nice meme. There is no depth, if it is gonna die you ctrl+k it off map so that half the penalty of losing the air unit doesn't happen.

How is it not raising the skill ceiling to have to be aware a strat could be hiding off map or abusing the auto-loss targeting to get better air fights?

-you can already do similar things by getting the wreck in an impathable cliff (excl uef) or in water (less wreck value, although Ive not tested recently to confirm)

Drop on anything super far, fac attack move grabs anything else. I never see a wreck I can't grab, even with drones excluded.

-Your opponent is more easily able to stop you doing this than with offmapping. Offmapping allows bombers to sneak past your opponents defences. Ctrl-king doesnt (eg if you have loads of AA you could kill them before they can reach the edge of the map to ctrl-k)

No he can't. You realize you potentially need double the mass investment to one shot something as to to 2 shot it? And that not giving enemy the reclaim makes basically all air aggression pay off twice as quickly?

It’s also not currently highlighted specifically as an exploit or breach of rules.

Wrong. By the definition of the game code, reclaim wrecks are still units.

Functionally everything you wrote here also applies to building under transport drops btw.

[A Former User]

If dead units are units, state this in the exploit list, because as of right now, if this was in court, it would be like fining a dead person for parking off cliff.

[A Former User]

And no, a regular player does not know that the code considers wrecks to be units. Does it, though?

[ThomasHiatt]

I don't think causing wrecks to go off map has ever actually been considered against the rules, but it probably should be. Really the game team should just make off map reclaim move onto the edge of the map.

[cunnismeta]

@thomashiatt said in Bannable offmapping:

just make off map reclaim move onto the edge of the map.

easily the best suggestion.

[Mach]

@cunnismeta said in Bannable offmapping:

@thomashiatt said in Bannable offmapping:

just make off map reclaim move onto the edge of the map.

easily the best suggestion.

first

@mach said in Bannable offmapping:

I suggest plane wrecks bounce off the map boundary same as they do from shields

[maudlin27]

Before I go through specific points people have raised, I think it's important to focus on the bigger picture points:

• If it's decided that ctrl-king units to make the wrecks fall off-map should be bannable, then the current rules should be changed/rewritten to state this.
• It's a bad idea to use the underresourced mod team and ban system to try and prevent people playing a particular way, when it both isn't obvious that playing in such a way would be abusive to a typical player, and when it is possible to prevent this result via other means.

In particular, as others have also suggested, if you dont want wrecks off-mapped, that's easily fixable via the game code. You could either do it for all wrecks, or (since I suspect Jip wouldn't be a fan of the performance hit involved in applying the logic to every wreck) you could just introduce it for any wreck of at least 1k mass or higher which will limit it to mostly strats and air experimentals. You're not essentially criminalising people for doing something they dont even realise is wrong, you're not overburdening the mods with enforcing such a rule, and you're actually stopping it from even being able to happen in-game.

---

Now taking each post in turn...
@xiaomao said in Bannable offmapping:

Lmao, making 40k mass unrecoverable for enemy team on their own territory is not bannable XD

That logic would suggest ctrl-king off-map is ok if it's not in the enemy team territory, but ctrl-king an ahwassa into water is bannable if the water is in the enemy team territory

@arma473 said in Bannable offmapping:

you can still reclaim wrecks from those places with drones or factory attack move.

Drones requires UEF (1 faction out of 4), factory attack move only increases the reclaim range so it's still possible it is out of reach of it, although admitedly I expect I would struggle to find a map/scenario where it's impossible.

There is a rule against intentionally dropping wrecks off map. The rule is clear enough.
This thread is proof that if you think there's a rule that prohibits this, it is not clear enough!

Greater gameplay depth is not always a good thing. It is not good to have increased depth of gameplay where the depth is because exploits exist. If anything there's already too much depth to the gameplay in FAF
Agreed, and I'm not arguing that ctrl-king a wreck is clearly a good thing. I'm arguing that making it a bannable offence enforceable by mods is a bad thing.

@ftxcommando said in Bannable offmapping:

How is it less intuitive to not intentionally drop a 30k mass wreck off the map than to hide a strat off the map as it sneaks on the enemy?

Making a unit untargetable is more obviously likely to be breaching a rule than denying your opponent reclaim (something which in various other contexts is actually encouraged)

Nice meme. There is no depth, if it is gonna die you ctrl+k it off map so that half the penalty of losing the air unit doesn't happen.

Maybe for you, I'm very sceptical that the average FAF player could predict with 100% accuracy whether an air unit will die and react quick enough to ctrl-k to make the wreck go off-map vs trying for a second bomb.

How is it not raising the skill ceiling to have to be aware a strat could be hiding off map or abusing the auto-loss targeting to get better air fights?

I didn't say it isnt. However I see making units essentially invulnerable as a bad idea, and it's more obvious that if you find a way of doing this you're more likely to be falling foul of a rule that will prohibit it.

-Your opponent is more easily able to stop you doing this than with offmapping.

No he can't. You realize you potentially need double the mass investment to one shot something as to to 2 shot it? And that not giving enemy the reclaim makes basically all air aggression pay off twice as quickly?

So your opponent can stop it more easily than offmapping...

It’s also not currently highlighted specifically as an exploit or breach of rules.

Wrong. By the definition of the game code, reclaim wrecks are still units.

Wrong. Requiring a user to consider wrecks to be units and to infer from this that a rule saying dont hide units via offmapping means dont ctrl-k a unit so its wreck lands offmap is not specifically highlighting.

As mentioned above, this thread is proof that if this rule was meant to stop ctrl-king units offmap, then it is not clear and should be rewritten.

Functionally everything you wrote here also applies to building under transport drops btw.

Wrong. Causing opponents units to self destruct by deliberately doing this is in a similar category to making your own units invulnerable. Some of the points might apply, but the biggest point doesnt.

[FtXCommando]

Your reclaim flying off the map is making your reclaim functionally invulnerable to the enemy. I cannot believe you are making these points and thinking they don’t directly apply vice versa.

Just admit there is no rational reason beyond the fact it increases the quantity of reports and it not being worth increasing the backlog.