Make reclaiming more intuitive

[Jip]

I agree that the situation is unintuitive - streamlining this would be my preference too.

[deletethis]

I'm not sure it's to be considered an exploit to begin with, and I highly doubt that so many people don't know specifically about it, besides it is even mentioned in the loading tips

which also further mention

.
Therefore it's not really hidden at all: play enough games and, even if you don't learn about it by experience, you'll read the relevant tip.

I personally would just consider this a game mechanic like any other.

Interested to see what others would say.

I can't take you seriously when you say that this will reduce toxicity.

[ThomasHiatt]

Removing factory attack move would greatly increase toxicity because hundreds of existing players would get very mad about it and complain about it.

[ZLO]

maybe let engineers to not break trees and remove factory attack move bug?

[Rowey]

the Factory Attack move has been around for so long now id just call is a Feature at this point not a bug as it so well know by people I would not even call it a bug

[JaggedAppliance]

I can sum up my thoughts in a single phrase. Leave it alone.

[arma473]

@penguin_ said in Make reclaiming more intuitive:

(1) the factory attack move range being decreased to the regular reclaim range
(2) the regular attack move range being increased to the factory attack move range
(3) both the factory attack move range and the regular attack move range being changed to be the same value that is somewhere in between their current ranges

The problem is, FAM is due to an engine bug based on "guard range." Since we can't edit the source code, only the LUA files, we would have to reduce the "guard range" to make the change proposed for (1) and (3). I don't know exactly how the engine uses "guard range" in other situations (such as an engineer on patrol or an engineer with a ground assist order). My guess is that reducing guard range would change the engineer's behavior in ways that actually make FAM even better than having engineers on patrol.

For the change at (2), you would have to increase the engineer's build range I think. If you change the build range, that would allow reclaiming at much longer distances, people would be able to reclaim enemy structures from silly distances. Imagine an engineer reclaiming enemy wall sections from a range farther than the range of light arty. You could scoop the mass out of the middle of setons from far away. You could capture structures from a much longer distance. It would be weird.

If it's possible, my suggestion for a fix would be to eliminate the delay between switching targets when an engineer is reclaiming. This would allow an engineer on patrol or attack-move to scoop up small wrecks (broken trees, etc.) just as fast as big wrecks. It solves the "broken trees kill my eco" problem and it solves the "I don't want to spend APM on manual reclaim" problem.

[arma473]

@penguin_ said in Make reclaiming more intuitive:

(1) make it so attack move orders don't end when a player's mass storage is nearly full - I think it would be more intuitive if the order basically paused its reclaiming (either when the player's storage is nearly full, or when the whole team's storage is nearly full) and then continued once the storage was less full

It would be very nice if the game took into account whether teammates' mass storages were full when deciding whether to keep scooping. I would not mind overflowing mass to my team in that situation and as a side benefit, I would be less likely to lose FAM orders.

How many times do we see a match on Setons where one person has like tens of thousands of mass in storage and a teammate has 0, and then the engineers of Mr. Moneybags stop scooping because his storage is full

Edit: This would also protect air players on Setons from losing reclaim orders because a "helpful" teammate gives them mass.

[FtXCommando]

I don’t want my engies funding unreliable players, if a person wants to keep his engies working while floating a billion mass then he should transfer it himself.

[Resistance]

why would you change reclaim?
is there something wrong with the reclaim or i just don't get the idea of where are we heading.
The current meta is about gathering resources, who gathers more resources-wins, pretty easy, high ranked players are mostly "high ranked" 80% because they know how valuable it is, afterall that's what makes those guys better, automatization, ui mods and now reclaim will just lead to a point where you won't be able to tell who's good at the game and who's just mimicking patterns.
IMO, those will just make the game not fun, there is no need to think, no need to keep on progressing, no need to do basically anything in order to win, the game will just go down to a very-very raw form of chess where 1-2 moves will just kill the game
I see no need in working towards reclaim as it's a core part of the game that should be changed only if everything else work properly and as we all know there're a bunch of other stuff that could use some work.

[MrBeast]

@rezy-noob Thats a first words when u borned is so greatfull!

[FtXCommando]

Hard to say if reclaim is working fine, one of the more hotly contested things is messing with the reclaim value for higher tier units to stop high level games from devolving into who does the first bad t3 attack that donates 10k mass. Or rather who makes a t3 army that gets immediately washered and becomes a 10k mass donation.

Offtopic for this thread tho