So two training concepts I'm interested in doing/entertaining on the twitch (so it can exist as highlights there and maybe exported to FAF YT)
- A rating review of general ladder games across every rating bracket for FAF.
This would be taking a game or two from <300, 300-800, 800-1300, 1300-1800, and 1800+ and then essentially reviewing the replays to explain where players lost the game. The intent would be to showcase what kind of mistakes people are making at various levels of FAF gameplay and what kind of things they should be focusing on in order to avoid game losses. The point would NOT be to explain everything a 600 rated player is doing badly, but rather the major errors that ultimately result in him losing the game.
The games for these sort of reviews would generally be short and standard. There is no need to review some epic 1 hour game that is neck and neck as this isn't being done for the end goal of a cast. It should be the typical 15-20 minute FAF game with typical moves and motions that people can easily apply to their own games.
For this to happen, I would need people interested in reviewing the replays as well as people that are interested in gathering these sort of replays. If people are interested, PM me about it.
- A FAF "Overexplained" Series
This can go one of two ways. The more intensive one but likely more interesting for general players is one in which 2 high rated players play one another and then proceed to take turns explaining their actions via a replay watch. This would then result in people having 2 different views of the same game explained to them and they can both see how two different players approach the game as well as how they respond to the major game moments. Otherwise, we could just have a single person overexplaining some nice, standard game they played
I would imagine these would be replays that are being watched at -3 or -4 speed just so that a person is capable of keeping pace with the game as they are explaining things. Why did they send that first engie there? Why did they build a few less pgens? Why did they send their ACU now rather than stay in base and make 2 more facs? Why did they go first int instead of first bomber? Stuff like that. Give us the train of thought that is going through your mind as you play.
Obviously this requires players that have some level of coherency in their play. It isn't very interesting to hear people say they did things "because" or "it just works" like we're listening to Todd Howard. If you are interested in taking part in such a series, PM me. We can work something out where either we just have a solo person overexplain their game or have two people take part in the explanation of the game.