Why would you have left FAF?

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.

0

@zukko this goes too far, but you are right to point out that reclaim adds a problem.

This could also be accomplished by giving level 1 players ladder maps with almost no reclaim, level 2 with easy reclaim near base, level 3 normal.

0

I still think about something like Total Annihilation Battle Tactics . Several small missions to train every aspect of the game.

0

@blackjaguar I like the idea of missions within FAF, I think it would be a valuable add on to the game, allowing new players to learn in a non competative environment, and just adding more playable content to the game.

1

Zukko, I'm afraid a lot of the new player ideas will create crutches and bad habits

0

@valki Perhaps you are right about it being to much, I just cant help myself, maybe theres something there that could be useful.

0

Hey

When I first enter FAF i thought it looked very hardshaped, didn't like the UI very much and its old looking. Anyway I started to fall in love with the possible things you could do, lover your gunships below shields etc.

So remembering my first interaction with the game that would be nice to do.

  • Update UI to look more modern
  • Explain features in the game (example that you could block a nuke with a scout but its very rare and very hard to do)

Playing with some friends with different level of skills, some feeling more newbie like. A tutorial would be good, limit them to do movement, patrol, etc unlocking a feature at the time. Help them zoom out to let them learn why its good to play more macro than micro.

Also people have trouble learning what to do right, for example when playing chess, it can be analyzed to point out errors, that might be hard to do by data but simple things like reclaim when mass stalling or something would help them feel progress about themself.

As you explained earlier, people in learning progress have it hard when playing against experienced players, hopefully the AI tournament can help pointing out which Ai to play against at certain skills to help improving at the game.

To avoid the custom game lobby looking like it does, full with Astro and Dualgaps, maybe a cue to match people on a random map would be good, like you do on most games, more queues for ladder and global games. A map there people don't have the exact build order and can do errors so the low rated players doesn't get too crushed by T3 bomber at min 10 against exeprienced players.

Achievements are good aswell, help them try out new stuff, but you don't feel as awarded like you would in another game. For example league rates players in game and keep progression tracks on you and shows that you are doing some progress (maybe too much which ends up being ignored instead).

Maybe also more resets for player giving them a chance to come back in rating, specially players under a certain rating. For example it wouldn't feel good to have a negative rating. Maybe reset some players around a certain scale. For example rate the bronze, silver, gold. And then you come abobe 1400 rating you could have your rating shown instead, so it doesn't create fear for new players to play 100rated vs 300rated player, call them both bronze instead and they wouldn't know and do their best.
For example I played a player who did very good trying to snipe me with earlie bombers, I managed to survive but were damaged in my expansion, but it was his shot and he quit since he thought it would be impossible to beat me even if I were only like 100-200 rating higher than him.

As for the queue for random game, if low rated players match you could fill with some Ai without them knowing what is what. Flaming a Ai may seem very stupid and hopefully that removes some toxic specially against lower rated players.

And since all games (pretty much all games) are rated games, people find it easy to pray on the weak when losing. So maybe a non-rated queue playing on a random map like playing like crap would be good for new players.

Hope you find a way to introduce new players!
Best of luck!