FAFLive Feedback & Suggestions

0

@harzer99 said in FAFLive Feedback & Suggestions:

Also the map ban website @Rowey is working with has a neat streamoverlay feature. But it would require someone other than the streamer to handle it. Probably the tournament director could do it but that person should be in voice. One big downside of mapban in my opinion is that it doesn't support tournaments yet. So it cannot replace challonge.

The system was not intedned to replace Chalonge, rather than Co-Exist along side it it a tool that is ther and can be used but it not nessary.

0

Is it possible to do splitscreen so that 50% of the screen is showing a completely zoomed-out view (strategic level)? Then you wouldn't need a minimap. Basically at the start of the match you would split screen the build orders and then zoom out on the right side for the rest of the game so we can always see what is going on. Then you can zoom in or do whatever you want with the camera on the left.

It might even be possible, using a program like UI-Party or UI-Festival, maybe with the "fullscreen script," to change the size of the split screens. E.g. the left could be 60% and the right side could be 40%.

Most of the time, when the map was zoomed out, almost half of the screen was just dead space (black). The mini map was small and kept appearing and disappearing so it's not really something people could look at.

0

I second Tagada's suggestion. There could be weekly Phantom or FFA streams. People should be able to submit requests to stream on FAFLive. Ladder players can sign-up on a calendar to stream on FAFLive. Smaller tournaments can apply to stream on FAFLive.

0

I'll be honest I think most the previously suggested content sounds good, but the one thing that matters above all is that there's consistently high quality. I can easily see all of the suggestions going disastrously wrong and faflive becoming a full on meme, if done poorly.

I think even a relatively small amount of tryharding will go a long way here.

  • wait timers to replace awkward game finding phase
  • scenes and overlays setup (eg. pre-game with caster facecams and tourny bracket, ingame with series score)
  • facecams for casters/hosts/participants
  • multiple teams of casters rotated in and out whenever possible (for tourny streams)
  • dedicated producer if possible (eg. caster streams to producer which streams to audience)
  • general tryharding/prep from casters (breaks between games certainly help here). Eg. taking notes beforehand about players, looking at their match histories, veto histories, etc.
  • producer/td setting up games for stream, casters shouldnt have to do any of that stuff

Obviously caster charisma would be incredible too, but learning that is a long road for anyone to take, unless you are already a good speaker.

1

I guess the one content type i disagree on is some random ladder streams from high level players. I think each stream should be at least some kind of event with more than 1 person involved. This comes back to the point of having consistently high quality content. I'm not gonna bother checking or following faflive if half the stuff i dont care 1% about

0

Rather than a ladder stream, it could be custom 1v1s or 2v2s, that way there could be a live observer. The observer could be in voice chat with the player. The stream would show the player's screen (so we can see the player's POV, what they're clicking on). The commentator would only observe from the streamer's POV, so they wouldn't know what the enemy player is doing.

The commentator could talk about basically anything that is happening in the game, ask why the streamer is making certain choices, what they're planning to do next, what they think the enemy player is doing, that sort of thing. People could learn a lot about how to play the game by listening to top players talk about what they're doing and why.

You can't really do that without a live observer because of the stream delay

You could make a point of playing some of the 1v1s on maps in the lower-rated ladder pools or just classic ladder maps so people would learn about the meta for various maps so they could try to incorporate some of that into their own games.

The person playing and the person commentating don't have to be both very high level (1800+). If just one of them is high level, I think you could have compelling content and still be giving good info to viewers. Someone who is 800-rated might still be able to ask interesting questions of the player. They are probably a lot more curious about what is happening and why than someone who is 1400-rated or 1800-rated. Or someone who is 800-rated could benefit from having an 1800-rated person essentially coaching them live. I wouldn't say 800s all make the same mistakes, but people on the lower end of the ladder might more from watching 800-rated players bumble their way through games, and get advice about their mistakes, compared to watching 2000-rated players perform near-flawlessly.

I've seen some streams where F-Odin coaches people (without voice) and it's not bad content. It would be better with voice chat of course.

It probably goes without saying that coaching on FAF_Live should only be done by high-rated players.

0

I'd like to note that besides a player-stream it may also be interesting to have a development stream of some kind. Whether this is for maps, mods, a PR for the faf-code or the client / backend - they are all an essential to faf and they are interesting to see too 🙂 .

0

If I missed this on stream I preemptively apologize. But Faflive should also talk about recent events in the community. When it streams (and it should be streaming something once a week), for example latest nvidia driver issue. It could been brought up. At start of stream. And the low rated tournament in a couple days

5

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)

  1. 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.

  1. 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.

0

that's two pretty cool ideas.

both are really pertinent.

I think the first idea in particular because newer players often say they can't identify at all with the 2000+ type game-play they often see in videos and this makes it hard to captivate students.

so showing them 400 rated play is much better. the dualist did a series kinda like this : https://youtu.be/NK-LvGL9HKc
he's no FA expert though so I can see how having commentary from someone more knowledgeable would really improove this recipe.