I vote we fix by deleting it from the game

@morax said in "What will you do if you lose the election" and 5 Questions for FTX:

5. Have you ever donated your own money to a FAF event? Why or why not?

No comment on the rest but why do we care if a college student is donating money to FAF? Hell why would we care if anyone, college student or not, is donating money to FAF when they clearly put time into it? For all we know he’s broke as hell, and if you know he’s not it’s still kind of a strange question if he’s putting a lot of time in anyway imo.

Hi yeah it’s fucking stupid to hide global rating. I’ve stayed mostly quiet on this thread because it’s pure idiotic cancer, but if Mizer is here calling out bullshit I guess I will too. Getting rid of global rating is completely and utterly asinine, full stop. I don’t know what breed of ignorant elitism leads to people thinking it’s a good idea, but for the sake of FAF I’d like none of that in our community leadership.

What do you even think getting rid of that will accomplish? Congratulations you made any sort of manual balance in global games impossible unless you know every single player in the lobby! Wow! Amazing! Congrats, you took away a nice psychological trick to get people to play more games because seeing rating go up is fun. That’ll really help player retention! I’m sorry that you’re compensating for the fact some (in your mind) gaptard is higher rated than you globally, cry me a river.

Okay thanks I’ll get off my soapbox now. Have a nice day.

@thewheelie said in Novax needs to be nerfed, here's why.:

@exselsior said in Novax needs to be nerfed, here's why.:

It’s even worse than what @CorvathraNoob said because a single sat breaks t2 shields covering mexes.

No it doesnt. And even if it does it will be so time inefficient its not worth doing it at all

Just for fun I quickly tested this to make sure, it takes ~5 firing cycles and a little over a min of game time for a sat to break a uef t2 shield and kill a t3 mex. Now, the thing here is that the only maps where sats are cancer are high eco maps with spread out mexes. Meaning often the mexes will be surrounded by mass fabs. Killing the mass fab rings kills the t3 mex even faster if I am not mistaken, was too short on time to thoroughly test that part though.

Is this time inefficient? Probably. I can test this later but I'd bet on the novax killing distant mexes faster than a t3 arty would though, assuming mexes are spread out.

@arma473 said in Novax needs to be nerfed, here's why.:

I can think back to a match where I made something like 6 novax and they wouldn't break the enemy's shields. They made a significant number of shields but they spent a lot less on the shields than I spent on the novaxes.

You're doing it wrong. You don't build 6 sats unless you're doing that purely for laughs. You build one or two and then a Mavor. Good luck defending vs a mavor and 2 sats without having a ton of hives + sera t3 shields. And at that point unless you have a para all you can do with your eco is assist shields.

Edit: Also you should have synchronized the sats firing if you had that many. It would take a very large amount of assistance to defend against 6 sats on the exact same firing cycle.

@rezy-noob said in Novax needs to be nerfed, here's why.:

so far,i haven't seen a single game where novax spam beats arty grid spam and the single usage of a novax efficiently can probably be the t2 mex hunt if they are split across the map,aka setons but that's it?
i was also thinking about killing t1 assist,but making novax in order to do that isn't the best idea

Same thing I said to Arma, if you're just spamming sats with no arty then you're not using them effectively imo. It's sats + arty, not just spam sats. That combo brings down shields better than just sats do, and then the sats kill the shield generators the instant they go down to arty. Just arty and there's a decent chance it misses or lands after other shields come back up. With a well managed sat if there's any blip in the shields you start picking off shield gens.

That being said, on smaller and more compact maps sats make less sense than purely spamming arty, unless you don't have Aeon on your team then they're very nice for vision and situationally worth it.

Honestly the only situations where sats are arguably op are almost exclusively high eco 20x20 team games with spread out mexes, but they are obnoxious as hell when they are useful in a way that nukes, bombers, and arty aren't. Their perfect intel + perfect accuracy with decent damage is a pretty strong combo. That's just my opinion though.

I've played SupCom on and off since its release back in 2007. A big appeal for me is that it has had something for a wide variety a play styles or level of investment. What I mean by this is that back in the GPGNet days I was playing some other games more competitively with some friends and didn't really take this game that seriously, I just liked having massive survival battles or going through the campaign with different and usually troll strategies or self imposed limits like air only or defensive structures only. On the opposite side of that, much more recently I've been on a kick to start getting better at this game instead of playing chill games with zero effort or improvement and it's amazing the amount of depth there is. There's something for every level or type of player in this game.

Some more specific stuff:

• The scale
• Strategic zoom. This is one of the biggest reasons I never got into Starcraft despite giving it a few tries. Feels so limiting to not be able to zoom all the way out.
• The amount of outplay and comeback potential in the game at all stages
• Huge skill cap - even the best players have room for improvement
• The community - for keeping the game alive and all the new content that is added to it
• The community - for the nice good players willing to help not as good people get better
• Still plenty of new strategies or builds to try if you're feeling creative

@kekomander Sir come back! You’ve got time to derust in time for this

@blackyps said in Client v1.6.0:

This whole think makes him look not like a potential developer or an interested player, but like a script kiddie that needs to drop his "cool advice" that he read on the internet. The other option is that it is intentional trolling.

Of course in reality it could be different, but that is my impression from his behaviour.

This was my impression too when I read his post. It's just bad form in general to come into here and immediately accuse all the devs hard work as being "for nothing."

If he's legitimately an experienced dev he certainly doesn't have the how to communicate aspect of being an engineer down, and him commenting on JVM thread allocations really does seem like a script kiddie trying to be smart.

I like that this thread is here and that we can post on it, and I am pretty sure that if I came in here and said something like "hey, I know making the app fully non-blocking can add a lot of complexity in some scenarios, did you guys see a lot of improvements from making this change?" I probably wouldn't have been met with the same reception this guy did.

Though I also took a look at the pr and didn't get the feeling that it really made things more complex anyway. Not that me skimming through a 12k line pr in a language I don't use professionally for 5 minutes means much.

@archsimkat Makes sense and I didn't think about it in terms of radar being slow to actually show new signatures. Thanks for the clarification on that.

Honestly this is a perfect example of why the "why" is so important - players can learn from it. Tbh I thought that radar was just buggy sometimes and slow to actually show up, but it makes a lot more sense that it's just waiting on a certain game tick for it to refresh. While this isn't particularly useful information in the vast majority of in-game scenarios it is nice to know and there are a lot small details non pros who are interested in learning can pick up from balance changes.

@thomashiatt As I said, TMM is already nearly dead, and is effectively dead at most of the times I can play which is really unfortunate because I do like TMM. Adding more matchmaker queues is not a viable option. People are going to want their custom games.

This is my issue with removing global rating, the people wanting to do it are clearly out of touch and/or only get to play at peak times and are coming up with compromises that only work for a % of the player base.

The issue is that there are competitive as well as casual global games. There’s a competitive Seton’s scene, and please don’t give me some bullshit about Seton’s bad because you don’t like it or whatever. There’s a more general competitive high level team game scene on various maps, and trying to replace that with a 4v4 TMM just sounds rough for tons of reasons. People aren’t as willing to sit in a queue for as long as they’ll sit in a lobby where they can talk to a specific subset of players for their game they’re waiting on for instance. They’ll want specific maps and we’ll have more map list drama like we have with Ladder. Manual balance to help incorporate larger rating differences in off hours isn’t possible.

We already have an unranked global scene. Any modded game. Any survival game. Maps like Thermo. We have plenty of players that only do that. We need something for those that don’t fall into those categories, the unranked global and the ladder warriors.

If people had actual ideas on how to replace it that fill the role of global rating without being global rating then I’d be less against it, but all the ideas I hear are, well, shit.

Let’s get the achievement page working and working consistently. Let’s get more stats about players available, like w/l and number of time played per map and similar stats for factions. Let’s get more avatars available for lower rated people to show off things they’ve done. Actually do some of these and then come talk about removing global rating. Stop with the “well make a queue for everything and it’ll be okay” bs, because it’s bs for many people.

Not sure if I'd actually end up using this myself much since I personally like the faster paced game, but I love the concept and the work and thought you have put into this! Sounds like something a lot of people would like to use and I'll be sure to give it a try once it's finished.

Have seen all of the above more times than most people. Sats are still more obnoxious to me, rational or not. Washers are arguably brokenly op when used well but still less annoying when I see them.

Cadmium Green is 10x10 right? I think that’s the right name. I like that map, some contestable mass spots but not in a way that you’re likely to lose over half the mass unless you mess up decently hard. Lots of interesting BO options (double fac build ftw) and raiding potential.

Another vote for vya as well. There are a couple others, but I’m trash at remembering map names so I can’t think of them atm.

I vote we fix by deleting it from the game

My point is that manual reclaim isn't worth spending apm on in the first place for 95% of the player base, so another option in place of attack move isn't necessary and will just add more confusion - patrol vs attack move vs some area reclaim order.

Not only would we now have 4 ways to reclaim (patrol, attack move, reclaim brush, manual) there are performance considerations for the brush which have been brought up before. Auto clickers are banned for UI mods which this would fall under, and should stay that way. Regardless of the benefits I don't want half baked ui mods crashing games by suddenly having a million reclaim orders on individual trees in broken tree groups.

Which means it would have to be a core game feature rather a UI mod implementation. I'd much rather the game devs spend their time on more useful things than this which is at best a minor QoL improvement for some people. Hell, not to sidetrack this even more, but there are UI mods like advanced target priorities that would have 100x the impact and I would argue strongly for adding to the base game long before yet another way to reclaim things.

Lower rated players massively overstate the importance of manual reclaim. Anyone under, say, 1800 ladder can get away with zero manual reclaim outside of clicking 75 mass or more rocks manually on 99% of maps. I’m hit or miss if I feel like doing manual reclaim myself and I have never once felt I lost a game because I didn’t manual reclaim enough. I’ve had several top players give me feedback and not a single one has mentioned manual reclaim other than maybe one or two map specific meta stuff where one of the first engineers gets some reclaim orders while waiting on the next engy to come out since you don’t have anything else to do. And that was for some very high level map specific stuff that won’t win or lose games outside of the top 1% or whatever. Only other exception was doing a bit of manual reclaim with acu on dead land units to fix a stall.

People would be much better suited by pressing alt and right clicking a location with an engineer that at least vaguely makes sense to get reclaim and then using their brainpower and apm to figure out how much power they should be making to spend their mass. That’ll actually help them increase rating, not worrying about which of the 50 methods of reclaim they can use to get a bit more mass .5s faster.

I burned out from faf for a bit after doing far too much grinding, and the only reason I'm playing the odd ladder game right now is because I got some motivation from your posts. I might start doing something similar to this myself and work on slowly improving instead of sweaty grind.

I am about the same rating as you on ladder currently, if I'm ever around when you are I'll queue with you.

@evan_ said in 100 days of ladder:

I've uncovered yet another issue of mine that has gone unnoticed until now: Move overriding.

I do this a lot too, something that I found that helps is the unit lock function from I believe the UI party mod. There's a hotkey you can set and if you press it while having some units selected it'll lock them from being selected by anything other than a shift click. Super nice to use on inties/asf that are split from your main air unit group to kill bombers, and same for tanks and labs hunting down enemy tanks and labs. I currently have it set to F3 for me. That's about all the details I can remember off the top of my head away from my pc with FAF on it, hopefully it's accurate enough that you can figure out how to set that up yourself if you're interested.

Edit: It's a little buggy, you'll want to hit the hotkey and wait half a second or whatever to make sure the unit lock icon actually shows up before moving on. Still very worth it imo, I use it frequently now.

Practice zooming in and out to go to different locations. I haven’t use any other method of panning in over a decade of playing this game. When you get used to doing that you’ll never want anything different, it’s far, far superior with no downsides.

@maudlin27 said in Ban EcoManager & Similar Mods:

I can see a valid argument for allowing mods like this if the desire is for FAF to be primarily about what decisions you make, and for high apm to play as reduced a role as possible. However, this means that various other currently banned things like auto-clickers and auto-manual reclaim should be allowed. Essentially any automated micro should be permissible.

I thought these were already banned?

Anyway, +1 to getting rid of any automated bs

Wish I was in town to sign up for this sounds fun

@Jip how can you see that view of the tree groups like that? I will say that the north front spawn is already weaker than the south front spawn on Seton’s so that’ll be a further, though slight, nerf to north team. Does this also have an impact on other maps with lots of tree groups near the spawn like Selkie for instance?