Alright you baited me. For a dude that has been following the project for 7 years you sure don’t seem to have any idea about the project. Let’s break down each point.
Balance is taken as a given to players. Players have the ability to “organically” impact balance by designing maps which act as restrictions and multipliers on the tools of balance as they currently exist. Balance is not designed for dual gap. Balance is not designed for sentons. Balance isn’t even designed for ladder. Balance is designed to ensure that the game has a healthy ecosystem on maps that follow traditional mapmaking practices. For a long time, this meant all you could really use for balancing was ladder because it was the only area which enforced some quality standard on maps. With new matchmakers for higher player counts , it should allow a wider range of valid inputs for balance considerations.
So no, changing balance to make dual gap have a vibrant meta is not a good plan. It was made by players and is played by players specifically because it is restrictive and follows a simple meta that is difficult to break out of. It’s comfortable, pure and simple. Make it uncomfortable and people make dual gap^2. If you really had 7 years in the project, you would be aware this is why tons moved from gap to dual gap. Gap had significantly more aggressive “cheese” options ranging from early air snipes, base donations, t4 rushes, tml snipes, and arty drops.
“99% dual gap”
Just objectively wrong. Dual gap isn’t even the most commonly hosted map on FAF. Currently, it makes up like 12% of launched games I believe. Might be 15% if you combine all versions. In any case, you failed to provide any analysis here so let me provide it for you.
Custom games create a positive reinforcement system that softly encourages players to play the same map, with the same people, on the same slots. You won, you want to keep winning, and you want to keep gaining rating. This means don’t change the winning formula. However, that also means don’t try new things and so a feedback cycle in which players stay on dual gap and astro exists.
To change it, you need to create an environment that removes some of this choice (the matchmakers being worked on) and hamper the association between winning and rating (the new league system). Both being worked on. Both address the problem you failed to specify.
Fun fact. FAF nowadays is about as popular as AoE2 was before Microsoft took serious interest in it. FAF is far and beyond the biggest fish in the TA-style rts pond and it is like half the playerpool size of CoH2. FAF growth trends have been increasing, not stagnate or downwards.
“no game plan”
Tell me you have no idea about the FAF project without telling me you have no idea about the FAF project.
Jip just told you he was working on improving performance. You told him this wasn’t a big deal and that you knew what the big problems were. You then list what he is doing. Nice one. This is what made me think you’re just a complete troll.
The rest of your post is just negging drivel because you can’t think of anything except insulting people.