Why would you have left FAF?

Other than that FAF is very difficult to learn and tutoring will definitely help.

I would say that new players run into the below issues.

1- Specific map dominant strategies/dominant groups of players.
regular players in FAF usually stick to specific maps and continue to play them over and over again versus the same players which means that this group of players will be aware of tactics that help dominate the game and crush the opponent instantly. But this is not the issue.
The issue lies in the fact that these players will be extremely underrated in these maps. a player who plays Gap of Rohan over and over again and is rated 800 would definitely crush an unfamiliar with the map player who is 1100. Imagine what is the situation for a new player, he/she would continue to get crushed by players equal to them or lower which will drain their energy and drive them away.

2-Broken rating system:
I don't think that FAF rating system reflects players' true level. I remember some players who were 1600 and then the next week suddenly they are 1100. which means the game gets balanced accordingly and they usually crush their opponent quickly.

3- FAF balancing units towards favoring pros' play style.
AIR is OP, rushing com upgrades is OP. early raids is OP.
I used to play supcom the original version and after moving to faf, I noticed that the way things are balanced is forcing you to play with a certain style.

4- Smurfing Culture. XD
I play FAF like four times a month and I don't know any group to play with and I must say that when you log in to random games you keep getting baited into games with smurfs. although this is not a big issue.

5- Lack of low-ranking players to play with. if you are below 1000, good luck finding a game. with people who are similar to your level.

all of the above leads to frustrating the new players and driving them away and I personally would have left FAF if not for some pros who helped me.

I think solving these issues would be quite the challenge. so good luck.

Also, I would like to share some suggestions that might help per issue. please take them with a grain of salt as I have a limited point of view since I don't play that often.

1 & 2-tweak the rating system.
3- make rushing things harder.
4- the gray ranking system is enough for this issue to be solved.
5- engaging new players and telling them how to find similar ranking opponents & teammates.

@KhaldounN
it's weird that you get that impression that the majority is over 1000 ...well weird but understandable.

https://forum.faforever.com/topic/705/faf-statistics-megathread/36

https://forum.faforever.com/topic/705/faf-statistics-megathread/27

https://forum.faforever.com/topic/705/faf-statistics-megathread/21

https://forum.faforever.com/topic/705/faf-statistics-megathread/16

https://forum.faforever.com/topic/705/faf-statistics-megathread/8

https://forum.faforever.com/topic/705/faf-statistics-megathread/7

https://forum.faforever.com/topic/705/faf-statistics-megathread/6

as you can see the majority of players are in the < 1000 range

I would advise perseverance, though, as more often then not it just seems like you can't get a game but shoving the door open without asking reveals that you totally can. And dont let a certain map's preference influence what you want to play.

we've also found that persisting in hosting new maps, (even randomly generated ones that have literally never been played before) yields results. It's only by multiplying this behavior of being willing to host and join "less frequent" maps among lower-rated players that lower rated players will be able to free themselves from the shackles of those over-prominent maps.

I do agree with what you've said in the big lines.

The vast majority (80%) of everything wrong with FAF as a social multiplayer experience is bad map culture and lobby sim. The other 19% has to do with teammates who don't communicate, speak in another language, or are toxic. The final 1% is disconnects, lag, and performance issues in the late game but there's not much you can do about that.

I find myself enjoying ladder far more than team games recently, but the latter is often dead...

@tatsu
Well the distribution of players is not the same as the distribution of games played, right? Do we have some statistics on the latter?

If I were to leave FAF (not a new player, but still low rated), it would be because of FUCKING GAP. I hate Gap with a passion, but it seems 98% of games for lower rated players will be on Gap. I don't want to play Gap. I don't give a fuck about Gap. Stop hosting Gap, and only Gap. And before you say it, yes, I try hosting for myself, but no one will join, because people only ever play Gap, because it's easy, requires almost no strategy, and is a ridiculously streamlined version of FA.

To many gap/astro maps seems to be a recurring answer in this thread. I wonder if de-ranking all gap/astro maps would ultimately be a positive and long term gain for FAF. It would piss a lot of people off and accusations of moderator/admin overreach but it would probably be better for all. A healthier ladder/team matchmaker community would probably form out of it, especially with the upcoming 3v3 and 4v4 ladder.

@keene I hope they do something about it. Every time I log onto FAF and see all the fucking astro/gap games, I wanna die.

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

To many gap/astro maps seems to be a recurring answer in this thread. I wonder if de-ranking all gap/astro maps would ultimately be a positive and long term gain for FAF.

It’s not a feasible solution with our current map distribution method. (Vault rules like that are stupid easy to evade)

That aside, if we took away something you enjoyed, and asked you to instead do something you fundamentally didn’t want to do; would you do it or would you go and play something else?

I’m not accusing anyone in this thread, but there have been countless people who claim “they would play X other thing if only…” and for a lot of them, they’re never going to have the confidence to do so. There are probably a lot more gap/astro slaves than you think exist, it’s just that a lot of them are in the closet.

@tatsu I find the charts you referenced very interesting and at the same time surprising given my personal experience. .. I am curious to investigate deeper..how can I get my hands on the games data?

@khaldounn there is an api for the game, I know of thread around here that uses this to pull data on players such as game stats

how you would go about using the API yourself, I have no idea

@MajorTrouble Currently you cant as the API is Closed and we dont have a time frame when the API will be back up.

Well I think you still could, you'd just have to figure out how to get a login token first and then pass that token along with every request you make.

I am an old player, that will never really abandon FAF. But in order to play this game more often I need to get new ladder games faster, not waiting like 3-10 minutes to get a new one. This literally kills me and practically makes me avoid "team" games because I know that the situation there is light years worse in terms of finding and actually beginning a new game.

Also , through the years a ton of changes happened, first GPG, then FAF through the years of Ze_Pilot, then gradually the forced link of the game with Steam , and the inability during the previous years to install the game on a different computer and connection with the same name, means I am shown as a player that I have played only a few custom games(nowadays called ranked) and about same amount of ladder(no matter the fact that I have certainly played over 10000, about half of them 1v1); being in danger to be called out as a smurf as well. I am pretty average to low skill, but still the experience accumulated through the years means if you pit me against a new player with a "low" but same rating he/she will have an unpleasant experience. So it is very basic , the true number of our games is displayed properly which is difficult , I know.

Well, you asked.

1. Rampant, unpunished lagers. REHOST 24/7 Self explanatory.

2. Toxicity.

Some examples:

2.1. People blaming others (can take variety of forms, including insults) for their own low performance (happens).

2.2. Some 1+ k nobody treating lower rank players with neglect and disrespect. Usually goes something like this: you have 500 - you are nothing, but I have 1000 so I am the SUPREME COMMANDER.

2.3. Russian language in the mixed nationalities teams. LOL

2.4. "GIVE ME AN ENGINEER" text marker. To who? Leads to toxic reaction, therefore toxic.

2.5. Add your own example.

3. Lobby Kicks - yes, this one, THE ONE.

People, who should not have the right to host games, are hosting games.

What?

Some players create a lobby with Insufficient information in the lobby name.
For example: some host is convinced that all Australia players lag (NOT TRUE), does he write "ONLY EU" in the lobby name? No. So what? So, this: a player from Australia joins that lobby and waits, sometimes the host kicks him instantly (best scenario), sometimes the host waits till the lobby is full and only then kicks the Aussie.
Result: how would you feel when you have wasted your time just to get kicked with reason: SORRY (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!). LOL

One more example, because this point is THE ONE.

No "NO GRAYS" in the lobby name, grays join that lobby, they wait, they get kicked. But why they got kicked? Because some idiot host did not add "NO GRAYS" to the lobby name! Result? People are left with that special feeling of their wasted time. Real nice.

And now...

4. CPU Snobs - this one is also HUGE.

Before I proceed to this one, to remove all prejudice, my CPU Score is 264. So I know what am I writing about.

Anyway... What's a CPU Snob? Well, CPU Snobs basically are people who are obsessed with the size of other player's CPU. You can compare them to dogs sniffing other dog's rears.

So what? Well, CPU Snobs are the number one TOXICITY source in the FAF.
More details, please. Okay.

4.1. Lobby name has no CPU limit. Player joins, waits, gets kicked, usual reasons: SORRY ; CPU ; SLOW - three separate reasons.

4.2. PLAYER WITH CPU 251 (FOR EXAMPLE) JOINS A LOBBY WITH NO CPU LIMIT, HE WAITS, THE HOST DOES NOT KICK, LOBBY GETS FULL, SOME OTHER PLAYER ASKS THE HOST TO KICK THE PLAYER WITH 251 CPU, THE SMART HOST KICKS THE PLAYER WITH 251 CPU.

DO YOU SEE THE SHIRE AMOUNT OF SHIT THAT IS PLAGUING THE FAF?

Some will say: what can be done, people are people?
True, just leave everything as it is ;D

In the cases of CPU the FAF itself is cultivating the DISCRIMINATING atmosphere, by providing the numerical CPU Score.
But we want to play without slow people - lame ass excuse.
CPU Score is seen as some smart innovative feature, lol.
Removing it is no solution, but tweaking it in a way that it does not cultivate CPU Snobbing is the way to go, developers may think otherwise, up to them.

Now, I might have missed something, but I think it is more than enough to get a clear picture of where the FAF is at regarding casual players.

Thank you all, friends and foes, it is fun playing the current best RTS with you.

Thank you Chris Taylor.

@fiercelv If I may try to help:
"GIVE ME AN ENGINEER" (or other) text markers have color on top of them, showing who made them. So you know who want engie etc.

"Rampant, unpunished lagers. REHOST 24/7 Self explanatory." And "Lobby Kicks" / "CPU Snobs". Those are two sides of the same problem. Might want to learn how to use f11 ingame, to determine who is lagging, or is it you. And what type of maps and player count your computer can handle. Smaller maps and less players and smaller unit limit of course are easyer on CPU. If necessary you can pick smaller maps, and also tell in lobby, that you have played/ you know you can handle this type of map. Lieing of course can make joining later much harder.
Also you can ask joining lobby, if your score is a problem. Some players/ greys too ask that.

You can host your own games.

And you can choose games you join. If host is bad, as you described. Remember him and dont join any more. And if host is good, remember him and join his games. Same applys to accepting toxic players in your own games. This can be quite effective way. Especially if lots of people would acknowledge theyr impact on game. I have seen bad hosts later wait for hours and never getting game full.

Best wishes

@FierceLV basically said matchmaking is a swamp and he would like green plains to play on instead.
@wikingest you say that if he looks hard enough there are some patches of green grass in the swamp and that you can kill the mosquitos

I basically completely gave up on the swamp that is custom games, bad start due to rating system, but it has never been appealing despite empty ladder queues at times.

What if instead of showing people's CPU scores, you instead show a warning flag if they're likely to have too low a CPU for the map in question, similar to how you get a ping warning if someone's ping goes over 500?

It'd be impossible to get a perfect measure, but I'd have thought you could still have a reasonable approximation by considering the map size, and the number of players available on the map, coming up with an approximate CPU score that you'd want to play that map late game without significant slowdown, and then showing a player's CPU score only if they exceed that level.

So for example a 3v3 on a 10x10 map might show a warning if they're about 400 CPU, while a 4v4 on a 20x20 map might show a warning around >200 CPU (testing could be done to come up with better thresholds - I just picked these numbers out of thin air).

This way the person with the bad CPU knows by staying in the game lobby they're at risk of being kicked, while they also dont have to worry about being kicked based on their CPU if they've got a good enough CPU for the map and the host just likes going over the top with CPU scores.

An alternative would be making it a rule that you can't kick someone due to CPU/Country/Ranking/Grey status if you host an "All welcome" game (and reporting and punishing people who break the rule) but my understanding is there's already a large backlog of moderation reports so that's probably a non-starter as an option.

@maudlin27 I think the problem is being kicked, pretty unique to FAF by the way.
If a World of Warcraft (2005 era) dungeon party already accepted a paladin as healer, kicking him to take a priest is rude.

There is something to be said for people to become unkickable after a certain period say 1 minute. Saying they should expect it is like saying your personal wait time is worth less because your CPU is worth less.

Just play in the upcoming TMM, the player experience for newer players (no games, getting kicked due to low game number/grey rating, etc.) was the driving factor for devs to implement the TMM and it aims to solve those issues.

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

Just play in the upcoming TMM, the player experience for newer players (no games, getting kicked due to low game number/grey rating, etc.) was the driving factor for devs to implement the TMM and it aims to solve those issues.

Any news on a release date?