Some good news about Team Matchmaking (TMM)

Great work guys. I hope a lot of underplayed maps get more played this way.

Is there already a draft for the Mappool? I suppose you @FtxCommando will be in charge of that as well?

Yes I’m responsible for map pools.

will there still be a "global rating" outside of TMM, and if not how can "setons players" or the like keep on playing the maps they like with fair/balanced teams?

"We are NOT deleting your global rating. Custom games will continue to function exactly as they do now (provided there are no bugs)."

Reading is hard.

@FtXCommando Please for the love of FAF, include mapgen

and crazyrush!

Actually I'm strongly against gimmick maps in map pools because they break my personal principle of a player being able to spawn in with full grasp of game mechanics and being able to iron out a strategy as well as a guy that has 1000 games on the map. Obviously experience has a lot of value and it's impractical to really expect such players to be competitive against one another, but the point is that everything is equal when you enter the game and survey what your options are.

If I had a map that had one random crazyrush mex in the corner, then there's no real reason for you to realize that's a mechanic until it's possibly too late to adjust anything about your build to account for it. Same with the crazyrush map itself. You have no idea if these mexes are infinite, you have no idea if buildings block the script, you might have had no idea that the mexes even expand and blocked it with pgens at the start. It's BS as a player, like if every FAF map had 0 natural reclaim except this one map that is put into a pool every 3rd month.

Of course it is put in tournaments, and that's mostly because people for whatever reason enjoy playing it. I just rationalize it as people knowing the make exists beforehand so it's a fair game since they should be expected to enter the tournament with a knowledge base of the maps in it.

When it comes to map gen, it's the same criteria I had before. It needs to meet the same minimum baseline of quality that I require manual maps to reach.

@speed2 said in Some good news about Team Matchmaking (TMM):

soooooooo GW soon?

@Morax said in Some good news about Team Matchmaking (TMM):

In the words of Mando,

"This is the way."

Is Princess Rhianne a joke to you?
Heretic.
-.-

@FtXCommando Would some kind of partial full share be possible? Where a portion of the killed players units are killed instead of transferred? Something to make killing a player slightly more impactful, if possible.

Is it possible? Yes.

Is it coded? No.

Will map sizes be chosen at random or will there be more weight for a specific map sizes?

If I put more 20x20s in a pool, you're statistically more likely to get 20x20s as every map has equal weight.

@FtXCommando 10x10s are superior, 5x5s are good too, please fewer 20x20s (but 20x20s that play like 10x10s are fine)

@FunkOff Are 30x30s possible?

@FtXCommando Ok. I will get to work on that then.

Not directly. You can make 40x40 map and set the playable area to 30x30. This will accomplish the same effect.

@KaletheQuick Sheikah made a sim mod called Structure Share: you inherit a dead teammate's structures and engineers, but attacking units die. If this is what you're looking for, you can find it in the Mod Vault

@FunkOff Hmm, not too bad. Still loading all that data into memory and Vram, but still probably less slow than a 40x40.

@phong Not exactly, but it sounds like it would use a lot of the same hooks and functions.

I like full share, but I just feel like the enemy team should be 'hurt' a little more by losing a commander. And incentivize a little away from suicide com strats.

That mod was made as a first step to just let people play around with it. If there is interest it can save some units as a percentage of mass cost as well. Just some effort would need to be added to make sure it was predictable and doesnt come across as random as that would be bad since it would make it harder for skill to be a factor