Another problem sorta related is that if it's an 8v8 screen all the players don't show up on 1920x1080 resolution when the kick screen shows up. If it could be ever so slightly downscaled it would solve that as well.
Posts made by FtXCommando
How are the scores calculated? I'm surprised yudi has such low micro capability compared to what I see on his stream.
Everyone in LotS rated each other and themselves. 1 group had 3 people estimate themselves as stronger than the average rating given to them aka the group of arrogance.
This doesn't help land factories at all because they have 2 points of exit, it's only navy facs that would see any decent use from it since you cannot turn the direction that the unit exits. If you could make it be "produced" facing the opposite direction it would basically resolve all navy issues too.
I disagree with vet being the problem, you can fight against and take down an ACU with much higher vet if you have some compensation, however fighting a Gun Acu usually requires your own gun, or least an acu and multiple T2 PD.
No, a gun ACU dies to like 15 t2 tanks no problem if it overextends. Or at least gets into such low hp it is basically incapacitated if it has somewhere to retreat to unless it gets an hp upgrade or farms several vets. Even more so if you include shields to waste initial OCs since people arent (or shouldn't be) running around with +1000 overflow at min 10-11.
Gun upgrade rush min 5 is only going to be countered by gun upgrade or t2 upgrade yeah, nature of clustered teamgames because you have nowhere to emphasize a unit advantage and so generally stacking utility upgrades on the ACU is the best move to gain or hold ground. Gun is more expensive than T2 and should generally require 5 more pgens, this translates to about 70% of the cost of a t2 pd alongside a later upgrade finish.
I'd also say clustered teamgames already are disgustingly static but that's mostly because of how the t3 stage plays and there being essentially no counterplay against a ball of snipers aside from spending the 12k mass to set up a t2 arty firebase or a t4 like a fatboy or a mega. Nerfing gun just pushes the game forward into static play earlier in those games.
Lower rated maps are likely not going to be maps with a strong and weak slot, at least to the degree of maps such as phenom or sentons. If you do some average then you allow maps waaaaay out of the league of some people that can barely handle making a hydro before stalling.
Gun upgrade isn't the problem in ur post, it's vet allowing u to carry off of tanking efficiently, but I think that's one of the few critical micro mechanics that exist in the game and would rather not harm it.
Gun itself isn't that strong in later T2 stage due to the OC nerf imo, even in larger teamgames you need supplemental combat upgrades to stay on the front and not get murked by a competent push.
Balance between T2 and gun in teamgames is pretty decent to me, if you make 1 or 2 t2 pd and position ACU properly a gun ACU can basically do nothing to dislodge you. It just comes down to how important it is to hold a set point on the map vs just dick around and get mass efficient trades.
Also there isn’t a conservation law but rather a parameter (tau) which FAF adjusted to be higher. It essentially controls a “floor” for your uncertainty. This is why people seemingly hover around the 70-100 mark depending on the types of games they play.
With regards to the idea of conservation you could vaguely stretch it to exist, but it’s really just TrueSkill ironing out where you should exist based on your performance across a variety of other entities. The problem with “settled” ratings comes in when the system has a solid pool of players it has placed at 1200 with low uncertainty and it takes A LOT of games where they beat the “true 1200s” for them to adjust. This is partially why I imagine FAF did adjust their tau value in the past as many complaints of having to farm weaker players for near no gain in rating existed.
It doesn’t care about the new 1500 that a new player puts into the system as the singular impact gets dissipated across the whole population. For it to matter you need to specifically target and farm new players for your rating (playing all welcome games as an 1800 and farming the 1500,500 new players for 600 more rating and then never or rarely playing with others) which cannot happen in a coherent trueskill implementation.
Yes, every year’s players have settled at a lower and lower average as time has gone on. During the first few years FAF matches closer to the intended distribution around 1500, then it slowly deviated to where 1000 or so mu is now the peak of the curve.
I attribute it to a skewed sample at the start of FAF’s implementation which skewed the “skill level” of players since the system got settled on some win rate against 1200s (who may 4 years later have been considered 1800s at that skill level) being the expected competency of a 1500.
As time has gone on, less and less old players arrive with the new players and so it’s more people with zero exposure to the game and average rating in that “year” decreases.
Does this matter? Not really. It’s all about your relativist position on the distribution. Doesn’t matter if we rate players from (0,1) (0,100) or (0,10000). In the end people will still lose their games, biggest issue is the efficiency of your initial games since 1500 is intended to be the top of the curve, but we already went away from that because of interpolation due to FAF’s deflation.
Somebody explain to me why inflation ruins a TrueSkill system. Doesn’t matter if 800 on global is -47108689 on ladder, the dudes gaining rating will feed it back into global as he loses games and there are hardly that many players with global lower than their ladder or other matchmaker ratings. Even less that are only that temporarily and actually are somehow great at those game modes but terrible in custom games.
Making a new rating that is expressed differently from global changes 0, people will still kick anybody considered an unknown entity. If he’s 1000 on ladder and 0 in the global game he might be good, but he still ruins “my rating” by being here in my 1000 median rating lobby where he might win.
Also, FAF has general deflation not inflation in all its implementations.
Doesn't most of graphic design fall into "you didn't notice, but your brain sure did"
I don't think it's about dudes not watching the stream because of the design decisions but just trying to make the overlay more coherent by following good practices. It's better than what we had for sure because we didn't really have anything, but it's kind of a cop-out to the criticism about things working better as a unit or the comments about the transition phases.
Ending your day 1 stream coverage of the tournament with "oh I guess he forfeited haha" or "b-but he's playing for honor!" is quite the buzzkill to the supposed biggest event of the year.
That's not a problem with TD'ing or the tournament, and more a problem with the fact that of the 16 best players we can scrape together for FAF, the skill difference between 1st and 16th is astronomical. You love TrueSkill, how much hope does an 1800 ladder have vs a 2400? Even a mid 2200 (me) vs a 2400 tagada or 2300 yudi seems unwinnable in a bo3 format. There will be imbalanced matches in any group due to this.
Why are you talking about this as a problem with TrueSkill I don't know why you quoted me on Double Elim format discussions for this paragraph. If every FAF player was an SC2 Maru equivalent it doesn't change that Round Robin results in situations where a dude is guaranteed a loss simply because there are 4 possibilities for it and people inevitably have bad days. Nobody wants to hear about rounds concluding because a guy quits or seeing games go on for no real reason except a dude feels like continuing to play. It's basically impossible to make it sound epic as a caster especially if anyone in the audience cares to look up why they are watching this game. If we're agreeing that we should just flat out ignore the games and pretend they aren't happening for the audience and the casters, why are are we including them? If both these players want to play "because tourney experience" they can go ahead and do it on their own freetime outside of the tournament. Maybe literally do it immediately after the group stage is over and accomplish the same thing.
In this theoretical situation, exactly a maximum of 4 people are ever benefitting from this round robin with a potential 4 not wanting to play (otherwise they would freely in their own time) with 2 casters not wanting to cover it and a potential infinite of viewers rather watching a game that actually matters for the rest of the event.
We also have to account for the fluctuation of skill from AFK players who may or may not prep for a tournament, who may or may not be at their peak form from 4-6 YEARS ago. Try seeding that fairly.
Easy. Let players in the tournament seed it through captain or sequential seeding. Don't do some random seeding 10 days before the tournament using some system nobody expected to be used for seeding that wasn't even intended to be used to showcase skill. It's like the shittiest thing possible. Seeding by rating would be strictly better, a home-baked tourney ELO would be the best but even that would fall apart due to lack of data breadth.
...also yes, BH is only a little stronger then me, if at all xD