@ninrai said in New version of the map generator has been released:

@xiaomao
When you open with "my man" you know its gonna be hyperbolic cringe. well done

Dear @Ninrai . I'm writing this post to you to let you know that the foul language I have used in my previous post is unacceptable. And as such I will refrain from using the phrase "my man" in my future correspondence with your person.

So if you will allow, please let me reiterate my last post in a more acceptable manner.

Regarding your point about reducing the contrast, it is something that I don't really agree with you as the colours used in the new version of the mapgen are now closely corresponding to the colours used not only by mappers, but also the different biomes in the game. As such I don't think it is acceptable to be pushing the blame on Blackyps who is doing his best to make sure that RMG can generate maps that not only are playable but also closely resembling polished man made maps. Instead of presenting a colourful mismatch of random colour palettes.

I also do have to raise a point about water blending in with the part traversable by land. In my rather subjective opinion it is non issue. The traversable land areas are clearly distinguished by different colouring and more importantly by different texturing of the ground. Another big giveaway of the the map having water in it is the clear as day texturing used by water(you can see as the beautiful waves roll around). If you will look at the map it's pretty clear where the water cuts itself apart from the traversable land mass.

I could understand if there was no way to distinguish submerged parts of the map from hills or ravines. But fortunately due to the amazing work of people behind RMG this is not an issue. As such, the benevolent man I am I have to ask what kind of PC are you gaming on, what kind of graphical settings are you using, what type monitor etc. Cuz' at this moment everything points that there is some kind of hardware or setting problem on your side. Which I hope we will be able to troubleshoot together in the near future so that you can fully enjoy this new iteration of map gen.

As for the HQ debate, I think that we should simply move on to other more appropriate place. Either on forum or discord, as both of those places have already an ongoing and more importantly quite substantial debate happening on this topic. As such I really do not think there is a reason to bring up this topic here.

And lastly. I'm glad that you have pointed out the issue with see through aeon shields. Unfortunately it is something that's been part of this game for years and is not aeon specific. It happen to all of the shields, but each of them suffers from it in different biome. As such it's not really something that can be fixed on RMG part, rather I would kindly ask you to forward your complaint to the art departament in the next meeting.

Sincerely Endranii.

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.

Or we can just make nukes cost more, exactly as we did, without some stupid total rebalancing of the unit feel.

Ban 20x20 maps. They are horrible. 99.9342% of games take over 45minutes to finish. 100% of 20x20 maps are not fun. All the 20x20 maps are garbage and depressing. If you ban 20x20 maps from the ladder pool you will get more people playing it. 20x20 maps are anti-new players, they are anti-fun and anti-everything. Would you enjoy playing on a 200x200 chess board with 100 pawns and 1 king each, no, nobody would, in exactly the same way nobody likes 20x20 maps.

Please consider banning them from the pool, or at least drastically reducing them to 1, MAYBE 2 in the pool if they must stay. They are toxic maps.

Title is pretty self explanatory. I would like to ask if it's possible and feasible to introduce MMR penalty for premade teams in 2v2 and 4v4 match makers in the same way that many other games do. That is raise their overall team trueskill rating by certain amount of points per every premade teammate.

Obviously I'm also open to discussion why someone thinks it's a bad idea and that coms and simply playing with people whose faf gaming habits you know, is not that much of advantage when going up against a team of 4 randoms whose overall true skill rating is exactly the same as of the premade team without the premade MMR penalty.

They are colour based. Red note is from red player, white is from FtX etc. And if there is hundreds of them then Foley is dead.

While I can see it helping out in low rated games, it will ruin some of the more complex play in higher brackets due to killing off some of the strategies that thrive on abusing other players early or doing unconventional plays.

Imo totally not worth the time for higher bracket games, or any games in competitive scenario as it makes it impossible to properly abuse other players in early game as recovering from first bomber will be much easier.

As for casts? Skill issue kappa. Instead of looking at the BO caster should try to speak about the map and players. What type of gameplay the map is promoting and what can we expect the players to do? What kind of cheeky plays are possible etc. So it's not fault of BO's being boring but rather FAF casters (me included) being just bad.

Stop playing gap.

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?

No. You are not getting unbanned.

You forgot to mention that some of them have entry fees.

You might be misremembering as gunships can shoot other gunships and I think transports. But not aircraft.

@funkoff said in Please remove dark red from the color options in TMM:

@endranii You are misinterpreting. I can tell my units apart from my ally's, what I can't do is tell my artillery from my tanks... at least it takes a lot longer than it should.

Oh, that makes way more sense. And while I don't have that problem while playing at over 10% of my screens brightness I do struggle a tad bit when it's all the way down. So it seems to be mostly contrast issue for some screens or brightness levels.

So yeah, now I fully get what you mean. Imo, instead of just removing the colour it might be better to maybe introduce a second set of "outlines" and "inlines" for the darker colours. So that instead of the black on dark colours we get something more visible for them.

Yeah, but those colours are nowhere close to each other. And considering he says he have perfect visions it seems like he is playing on some shitty laptop from 2010 or some fucked up monitor that needs replacing.

And yeah, I would be much more willing to agree about dark blue and dark purple as they are way closer to each other than those 2 reds imo. And look close to each other when using low brightness.

One is very, very, very dark. The other is eye killing bright red. Maybe need to get new monitor?

Wow, I'm actually agreeing with espi for once!

@spikeynoob
The dude above me who is trolling you for the past few days?

Can you just ban him?

Bring downvotes back you cowards.

Nothing will change about the game in the next 5 years. Man, when was the last time you played steam or vanilla?