Why would you have left FAF?

2

I started to play recently, hit slightly above 200 games now.
Things that lean me towards quitting are:
1)no interactive tutorials for build orders and other aspects. AoE2DE for example have pretty good interactive tutorials, much better then FAF. You get comments and instructions while you are doing tutorial rather then "watch and then try to repeat what you just saw". And absolutely no in-game interactive tutorials for late game.
2) toxic community towards new players. It is really hard to find a game when you have 0 rating, at least in NA. Every time I host a game and grey 0 rating player would join in the rest of players would tell me to kick him. This "rating segregation" problem is annoying.
3)Dual gap and astro. I have a feeling that 99% of the games are Dualgap and Astro. Feels like game should have been called SC: Dual gap. And it is hard to compete with someone who played dual gap 100K times.
4)Luck of random maps. This is somewhat related to previous one. It is hard to compete with someone who knows specific build orders.
5)Luck of player base. At least that is a problem for NA. Have to wait full lobby for 30-60 minutes
6) Nobody plays with new content. Srlsy, we have nomads, why nobody play it?

SC have the best RTS mechanics: strategic map, build queue is awesome, physics of unit interaction but some of the above listed drawbacks are in the way

3

Having tried a few times to get into the pvp of FAF, the main thing I keep running into is players either being very hostile to newer, low rated, and especially grey players, as well as not understanding how the trueskill system works and entirely trusting game quality, resulting in new or grey players having a terrible experience since often if you're lucky enough to get into a game it'll be stacked against you. Another thing is how when you're grey you still impact the ratings of others fully, so players who've got a decent rating will refuse to play ranked games with greys lest they ruin their own rating.

1

@h-master said in Why would you have left FAF?:

You could also try TMM together!

Yep, the problem of lobby sim and poor map diversity was the primary reason why TMM was built. It’s limited to 2v2 for now but we are still working on expanding it to larger team sizes.

4

Bit of a late addition to the topic, but am a new player and noticed it. I think how many players stay for 2 years isn't that interesting. What'd be more interesting to me is how many stay for say 50 or 100 games.

As mentioned the lobby can be a fairly hostile place for new players. I'm at about 50 games now and around 900 rating, but still 'grey', which means I still get excluded from a fair amount of games. Now, I understand, because balancing with grey players can be difficult. But it doesn't help new players get into the game, and feels discouraging.

That said, the game is great, and the community is passionate, and a fair amount of resources are available. I find Jagged's stream an excellent resource. And the 1v1 and 2v2 matchmaking are a lot of fun. Also a bit discouraging for the first few games perhaps, but as long as the rating gap isn't tooo large, it can be quite good/educational. And some higher rated players will give you some advice after or during the match, which is awesome.

1

If greys are such an issue, isn't there a way of "bribing" players with an in-game or out-game reward?

Maybe for each grey player in team each non-grey ACU starts with 1 rank of veterancy - to compensate for potential absence of ACU, or a 1k mass donation to all non-grey players at 8 minute mark. If this is somewhat overpowered, grey players will get lots of games and stop being grey.

Or some commendation, maybe just a spam in #aeolus "Players A, B, C, D and E gracefully accepted and educated a new player in their game" - have an achievement count the number of grey players they played with.

0

@valki said in Why would you have left FAF?:

If greys are such an issue, isn't there a way of "bribing" players with an in-game or out-game reward?

Maybe for each grey player in team each non-grey ACU starts with 1 rank of veterancy - to compensate for potential absence of ACU, or a 1k mass donation to all non-grey players at 8 minute mark. If this is somewhat overpowered, grey players will get lots of games and stop being grey.

Or some commendation, maybe just a spam in #aeolus "Players A, B, C, D and E gracefully accepted and educated a new player in their game" - have an achievement count the number of grey players they played with.

Giving in-game bonuses would reward smurfing and in general it's very bad for a competitive RTS. People also resent having things taken away from them. Some people would quit as soon as the bonuses ended.

I don't remember having a problem finding games when I was gray. Sure, I couldn't get in to some, but others were available.

Gray players are "rewarded" with losing the gray status if they just play ranked games. In the current system, the right people have the incentives to modify their behavior (the gray players themselves).

0

What is this? Preschool for baby gamers? Asinine idea.

As much as I think global is dogshit way to differentiate player skill level in our current environment it's still a tool that helps players get somewhat balanced games. There should be no incentive to making games unbalanced.
Another thing is that everyone is able to host their own games or join other all-welcome lobbies so I can't imagine that they are still having trouble in finding games. I somehow didn't have that trouble even when I was at -400 rating and gray so I can't imagine now being much different considering the player base only got bigger.

0

New players don’t read aeolus. I’ve done surveys to see what areas on FAF have what bias. Anyone interested in clicking a link in aeolus was basically 1500+, to reach new players you either need a FAF server public broadcast message or something like vk.com.

And yes, in game rewards for playing with new players is not an option.

0

@ftxcommando said in Why would you have left FAF?:

New players don’t read aeolus. I’ve done surveys to see what areas on FAF have what bias. Anyone interested in clicking a link in aeolus was basically 1500+, to reach new players you either need a FAF server public broadcast message or something like vk.com.

It is actually not about them, it is about the other players. Do the players who are in the group that matters most to not rejecting greys care about #aeolus?

2

I play faf since january this year and posted something here 3 months ago.
I got now to my 1000 ranking with ~ 250 games (i mystified 1000 rank or im more a true 600/700). i realized the first big rank increase came, when i learned t1 spam. Maybe there could be a non - compulsive tutorial series where like 4 vs 4 greys get matched, or against an AI. first mission could be like spam 200 t1 tanks in the first 10 minutes or so. Maybe some Missions that could be won by achieving some stats not beating the opponent. Another mission could be scoop all the mass in setons middle till minute 4 maybe. some things i had to realize to play better (and i dont feel like i am a good player now, but indeed better than 3 months ago): t1 spam, use ACU in field, reclaim like a dustsucker, dont force teching as fast as possible and go full stall, pd creeps....
Lol, dual gap grey matches be like: front player at min 12 walks around with his whole batillion of 8 Pillars, bcs t2 is better than t1, air player builds his 5th t2 factory to spam more crossfires, navy player keeps spamming t1 subs, eco stalling -350 mass.... no cringe here we all had to learn:P
but my point is, maybe there could be missions, that can be won by using standart tactics and clear up misconceptions that come form playing against the ai. Players could start at -200 and get to 0 or 200 by playing these missions. in those emissions the most popular maps could be introduced: (as i observed) Dual Gap, Astro Crater, Setons Clutch, Gap of Rohan, Canis River maybe?

0

@valki said in Why would you have left FAF?:

It is actually not about them, it is about the other players. Do the players who are in the group that matters most to not rejecting greys care about #aeolus?

High rated players care 0% about who is hosting games for gray players unless they’re doing it to the point of abusing the uncertainty of gray players to boost their rating 400+ points.

Aeolus reaches only high rated players.

1

@valki this is why Galactic War was so good. It literally bribed players to want newbies, because they were worth TP credits.

but this whole formula could be done so much better. instead of just wanting them on your team and have them do something, you could actually be rewarded for having them do things like outputting tanks at a certain rate and/or upgrading mass points.

2

Can’t imagine a more frustrating experience than losing a game because you had the misfortune of getting the new player that doesn’t speak English.

Also, tying bonuses to the performance of the worst dude in your game is exactly how you increase in game toxicity.

0

What about a non-game reward/recognition say every month for the person who plays the most ranked games with <50 game players as host (or alternatively just as host or player)? A cheap way would just be a simple headline in the news section giving the name of the player who achieved this (more effort would e.g. be a custom avatar).
This assumes there'd be some way of easily/automatically tracking this.

0

Honestly promoting gap maps for new players is the best play. One could be crap and die on them and it's not a big deal, real problem is after 600-700 rating you need to stop playing these as your rating won't fit your real ability.

Okay a "you shall not pass" kind of game, there is typically 25% really not doing anything and 25% doing game winning plays.

0

@veteranashe said in Why would you have left FAF?:

Honestly promoting gap maps for new players is the best play. One could be crap and die on them and it's not a big deal, real problem is after 600-700 rating you need to stop playing these as your rating won't fit your real ability.

Okay a "you shall not pass" kind of game, there is typically 25% really not doing anything and 25% doing game winning plays.

Instead of complaining about people playing gap, shouldn't there be a "level 2 gap" map that is maybe slightly bigger or slightly more challenging technically?

3

@valki

shouldn't there be a "level 2 gap" map that is maybe slightly bigger or slightly more challenging technically?

Doesn’t "Canis River" fit that Description? Or "Wonder".

0

Dual gap is gap 1 and the original gap is gap 2 IMO, and then you got every team game map imaginable, and then ladder maps

2

I think they leave because the game is too hard for them.

0

My solution is to reduce the complexity of the game for newer players.

As we all know there is an extremely steep learning curve for all new players, the idea is to create 3 levels of complexity within the game, basic, regular and pro, allowing players to learn at their own pace and playing within a certain comfort Zone. Also giving them the ability to progress to a higher complexity level at their own discretion.

Not throwing them in at the deep end.

So new players start at game complexity level 1

Level 1 / FAF Basic
No Reclaim Option (units should not leave wrecks)
No mass extractor upgrades
Given more mass and energy to begin with to reduce stalling *not reclaiming trees etc
Mass Cost of units adjusted accordingly (power remains the same)

This level of the game allows new players to focus on the basics like expanding, taking map control and playing with air, without having to keep up with eco.

Level 2 / FAF Regular
No Reclaim Option (units should not leave wrecks)
Given more mass and energy to begin with to reduce stalling *not reclaiming trees etc
All other aspects of the game remain the same

This version of the game would allow the progression of a player's ability to use units and keep a balance of economy, without the issue that many players fall victim to, that of donating mass to their opponents with failed attacks. Also I believe that this level will be where most casual players choose to play at. Not leaving wrecks would also mean that successful attacks would be more impactful, and unsuccessful attacks would not give your opponent an advantage.

Level 3 / FAF Pro
This is FAF as it is now.

There could also be a version that has no environmental reclaim, because let's face it, who can say their favourite part of the game is clicking on rocks and trees.

It also reduces the amount of harassment new players will face when playing more experienced opponents, as the advantages that those players have will be reduced significantly within the levels.

Such as if a player has mastered the art of reclaiming and a new player has yet to learn what reclaim is, the advantage is removed for the experienced player. Creating a much more even playing field and reduces the feeling of being overwhelmed to the point that they feel they could never keep up and therefore not play again

After a certain number of games the player can be given the option of progressing to the next level if they wish to do so, and once they have progressed they should have the option to freely move between levels at will.

These differences allow different players to find a comfort zone, as more casual players will not want to (try hard) and will simply just want to play a fun game, giving them the option to stay at a certain complexity level without feeling the need to keep up with player score, also allowing players to feel more competitive within their chosen complexity level.

Some will say that the game can be reduced in complexity with build restrictions, ie only access to T1 Tech and no air etc, but this does not accomplish anything as most new players just want go get to the point where they can play with experimental units, limits to T1 tech can be effective training for new players but not suitable to the casual gamers who will just lose interest.

Also within custom game lobbies could there be a big green light to say whether a game is rated or not, its a personal frustration of mine.

Also not rating people as a negative rating that's depressing, the lowest rating should be 0, and not giving them the feeling of being punished for making mistakes and losing games, and giving them a very large hole to dig themselves out of.

Anyway it's just an idea, I'm sure there are many flaws but maybe not too many as not to explore further.

Sorry for the late reply, and thanks for reading.

Zukko.