As in title, would it be possible to have the amount of players in-game for each Q showed?
Cuz as it currently stands I find it hard to judge if the Q is actually alive and players are simply in-game or if the Q is dead and I'm gonna waste 1.5h again just for one 15 minute shitfest even though there is 1.6k people online which.

Something like that.

Am I the only now who thinks that this responses are actually kinda pathetic? And are only made here and now considering they can directly profit from them as they make for nice PR stunts during the elections?

How is it that before the whole election you wouldn't even think about answering those questions. Hell you could have answered those so long ago but do it only now when it's clear that you will profit from it.

So, why only now, why didn't you actually try to make this a better place before you set your sights at becoming the PC?

Exactly what others have said, this isn't King's of setons clutch tournament and I have no clue who allowed for the avatars to be even used in a tournament that's not even trying to determine the best people on clutch. Not to mention the addition of nomads...

As much as I would love to watch it, I can't say I'm to thrilled about your usage of the "king of map" brand in a tournament that is anything but that...

I think one of the problems that you aren't just willing to look at is the presentation to new players.
This is something that Biass and FtX have to watch out for.
Sure the map gen is great addition for us seasoned players who are all sick of BO whoring and want less competitive enviroment where burden of map knowledge is kept to minimum. We can also live with smaller and bigger mistakes like terrain not being obvious or something, as we are getting the kick out of finding new random map to play on. We are fine with ugly decals as long as we don't get to play the same game of burden of knowledge for the first 10 minutes of the game as to how to expand on certain maps or how to not lose the game at minute 11 by having worse Air BO.

But new players won't be as amazed, they will be pissed for having to fight against game again and again where nothing makes sense to them. Them getting a bad map will be much more impactful compared to us. Them seeing ugly map compared to what they can see on current ladder will also look strange. Why are they playing on ugly maps with pathfinding problems when there are hundreds of great hand crafted maps available to them.
Not to mention the fact that with random maps they will never get to feel at home seeing the same map for 3-4 time and now kinda knowing what to play on that map. Instead they will be faced with the daunting experience of having to play against not only enemy but also against brand new map with each new game.

Not to mention the fact that the newbies will have even harder time getting accustomed to setting economy up and running when they have to learn how to improvise BO each and every time they enter the match. What you all want to do is all nice and dandy if you are seasoned player who already have played the game for a while and is accustomed to it's problems.
But a new player? You are literally inviting living hell upon them and making sure that the ladder experience will become even more daunting to many of them as they get scared of yet another layer of unknown.

Sad caster noises:
Bases? What bases?

Like somebody should teach me how to speak "Igirisu".

Thumbnail by courtesy of Javi<3

After seeing this BO's I have cured my FAF depression and actually played some games today!

Also dunno if useful but I just remembered I can do bootleg brackman if needed:
https://voca.ro/1od8Ne9n73w2

Gib replay.

I mean, the approval should be given before the tournament. It's on @Lenkin for not working it out.

Games 1 and 2 of the showmatch

It's FAF. Half the people have no clue what they are doing, letting them play around with wikia surely won't mean rampant disinformation.

Case in point, latest balance thread.

@nex Look up advanced target priorities. There you can set your units to target engies first for you raiding parties, have your tanks focus on ACU alone or have your BS aim at enemy BS first among some of the settings.

@sprouto
"The chance to hit is not determined by the size of the hitbox - but by the accuracy and tolerance values on the firing weapon. Again, the faction has zero to do with this - which I note you're not bringing up any more."

Please play a little bit more of competitive games before you take out your dev attitude for everyone to see. If you think I didn't already take weapon platforms and weaponry into consideration you are mistaken. Smaller hitbox makes stuff harder to hit, period. Unless you aren't simulating shit, but this game fortunately does it and it makes it so not even half of the shots fired in t2-t3 navy fights ever hits their target due to micro.

And no, factions have a lot to do with it considering how micro intensive t2 navy can be. And yes, cybran is gonna get fucked without any lube in the t2 stage if the models and hitboxes get smaller. It's gonna be rape in the daylight while everyone else is just happily clapping along to the rhytm of the butcheeks getting smashed. Those ships can't hit a barn even if it were placed in front of them.

So no, I'm not dropping it. I was just expecting the very least of knowledge about how t2 navy works.

"The only chance to 'dodge' comes from the ability to move out of that targeting solution - something that's more relative to the velocity of the projectile, and not the marginal velocity of the target - hitbox size can have a very tiny impact on that, provided the projectile is slow, and the ship moves very quickly (such as the UEF Cooper) - but that's about the only place that's going to be an issue."

If cooper is the only issue and all the other ships always get hit then tell me why is it that in proper microed t3 fight half the battleship shoots get's dodged all the time with just a little bit micro? Now tell me what will happen if they get even lower hitbox? They will have even easier time dodging the shoots. Won't they?

"In the real world, yes - the size of the vessel might have an impact on the ability to be targeted - but not in SCFA."

It's not about being able to be targeted, it's about abusing said targeting with micro and dodging the shots. Which already happens a lot. Vessels being smaller 100% make it even easier to abuse as it's easier to dodge the AoE of the enemy salvos.

" I should point out that the hitbox - and the footprint - are two completely distinct and different things. Many of the ships have footprints much larger than the hitbox. This is abundantly true of most T2, and almost all the T3 units."

Well, could have started out with this. That the footprint being smaller doesn't make any difference for the unit hitbox or size at all. You said "Decrease the size" which implies making the hitbox smaller, thus changing the balance of the game.

@sprouto said in Adjust the build skirt of naval factories:

@e33144211332424 said in Adjust the build skirt of naval factories:

I wouldn't be too sure about this being so clean of a fix considering it will mean a need to rebalance all the navy units to compensate for their additional nimbleness. RIP cybran t2 navy.

It would have no impact whatsoever on 'nimbleness'. Performance characteristics would remain unchanged - turn rates et al. Cybran ships don't have any mobility performance benefits over other factions - certainly not related to footprint size - and not in the unit blueprints either.

As for the fantasy ? That's entirely in one's own mind. LOUD has reduced almost all naval units, except the smallest, by upto 30%, and not one comment ever mentioned a suspension of disbelief - but, while I'm sure that's an issue for some - it's not a tangible issue.

Smaller hitbox 100% affects how good unit is at dodging enemy shots. 30% reduction in size for a ship of Battleship or Carrier class is absolutely massive. If you are semi competent you can already dodge 50% of enemy shots at ease. With smaller hitbox it's gonna get even easier to do so.

The turn rates, speed, acceleration doesn't have to change at all. Smaller hitbox makes the unit better by simply making it harder to hit and thus more nimble. Even more when it comes to the shootouts at the range of 110-150 units that navy fights take place at.

@sprouto said in Adjust the build skirt of naval factories:

Rather than blaming the factory for the issue - you might wish to simply consider the scaling of naval units. There is a LOT of room to decrease the size, especially of the largest units - and I can say, having done this years ago in LOUD, ships rarely have issues leaving the yard now.

I wouldn't be too sure about this being so clean of a fix considering it will mean a need to rebalance all the navy units to compensate for their additional nimbleness. RIP cybran t2 navy.

It also takes a lot away from the navy fantasy, the units are supposed to be big and hulking like real warships. Making them smaller would imo take away a lot of fun that is associated with fielding this behemoths at t3 stage.

It doesn't make much difference. It's a problem with how the game handles it that makes it so even if you quit normally it doesn't guarantee that there won't be the disconnection screen.

Umm, play on FAF? Not on steam?
The vanilla game doesn't have the HQ system as it was added in FAF so it makes sense it's not on steam.

The airfights aren't long and boring so not sure what the turrets would be supposed to fix. Not to mention the ASF already slaughter each other just fine, if anything the problem you are looking at is the overall air balance and the fact that people do tend to mindlessly spam T3 air without ever trying to take any fights due to how brutal an air loss might be. How to fix this? No clue, so far the only interesting option was an AoE fighter but that seems out of question as it would be a new unit.

Desynced replay.

@blackyps
That also doesn't work. The stats regarding my profile clearly prove it. I play basically only random and yet according to stats I only played like 5% of games as random in this year.