haven't played that many RTS games, makes sense
Why would you have left FAF?
@zappazapper said in Why would you have left FAF?:
@sladow-noob But I'm sitting here looking at the "IN QUEUE" number go up to 5 or 6 at times, so obviously someone is playing.
That's not a lot sadly. It's not uncommon that the numbers during primetime are in between 20 and 35.
There was a feature on the old client with "A player in your rating range is searching for a game" which was brought up recently again, but I cannot tell you the current state or its priority. That might fix the problem.
Regarding the AIs: Personally I'd not mind it, but it has some counter arguments which is the reason it's not a simple decision to make and the playerbase is a problem again. From what I remember, player A doesn't want AI, player B wants AI. Solution: Toggle the option "Get AI" on/off with each player. Problem: Playerbase, so if a single player doesn't want an AI, everyone else can't get it if they get matched.
Not saying that you're wrong or that your idea makes no sense, don't get me wrong please as I highly appreciate any feedback, just giving some input here for you (and others) to read as "We're aware of the problem and input is appreciated"
Required rating for participation in balance talks when?
@jfuruness said in Why would you have left FAF?:
Also I think it would be nice to have a simple optional walkthrough of changes with faf compared to the original game for new players
May I ask what exactly you mean? It exists for the most important balance changes, or are you thinking of "What to find where in the client" or "how to setup lobbies" etc.?
Required rating for participation in balance talks when?
@jfuruness said in Why would you have left FAF?:
Also after meeting up with some people I learned about all the micro stuff you have to do with your commander in order to remain competitive. Such as move your commander to a spot before selecting to build something so that it's in range. Moving units to dodge artillery. Same for subs. Personally I don't like any aspect of micro stuff, I feel like it should be automated. Why can't the com get just close enough to build something, why is the default to walk right up to it? idk but to me the micro aspects of the game don't add to the fun.
Some problems lie in the source as FAF does not have the permission for it (at least afaik), so there are functions which cannot be changed without having to recode the entire game.
When talking about micro and macro, every RTS game obviously has both. FAF is by far one of the RTS games which are on the macro side. While it's true that decent micro is needed for the upper ratings, it's not a strict requirenment in lower ranked lobbies. Usually the call "use your ressources efficient (macro) and do not just suicide 30 tanks into some t1 PDs (small micro)" is enough to stay competitive.
Required rating for participation in balance talks when?
ah gotcha makes sense regarding the micro. As far as balance changes, ya I'm not sure where that list is?
My apologies. I just figured out the reason I wasn't getting games was that I wasn't also clicking the brown "PLAY FAF" button (or whatever it says) in addition to the blue 1v1 button. There's a case to be made that I'm just stupid and didn't understand how it works, but also, I'm not really that stupid and maybe it needs to be made a little clearer how it works. Thank you all.
Yeah others have had the same issue. Seems like the UI isn't very clear for some. Which I think is understanable in this case. Still, can you explain what your thought process was when qeueing? Since I believe all the different qeues should already be activated from the get go, so you only need to click the play button in order for it to work.
@stormlantern my thought process was that I only want to play 1v1 because I don't want to subject my horrible play to a potential teammate 
But ya, I figured clicking the 1v1 box was enough. The brown box says "PLAY FORGED ALLIANCE FOREVER", which I guess is kind of vague. It's a big enough box that it could theoretically say "Choose game type below and click here to search for game..." or something similar.
@BlackYps see above for reference. Perhaps some button outline or glowing effect could help in addition to a textual change?
Why do I even need "yet another button" to enqueue? Why not automatically be enqueued as soon as you check any of the queues.
"Nerds have a really complicated relationship with change: Change is awesome when WE'RE the ones doing it. As soon as change is coming from outside of us it becomes untrustworthy and it threatens what we think of is the familiar."
ā Benno Rice
