People always tend to prefer things they know, when they have a choice. This is why the mapgen can do what handmade maps cannot.
If a person goes into the map vault, they see a bunch of maps they have never seen alongside ones that they already now, and their brain is automatically going to dismiss the maps they dont't know because anything thats new is frightening on a primitive human level.
The mapgen solves this problem by frontloading that choice:
And then forcing you to stay with that choice by preventing your brain from categorizing it as just another map and therefore reverting your decision to try something new. So the way in which the mapgen creates an advantage is not necessarily by just creating unknown maps, but psychologycally.
Of course the mapgen should eventually still reach higher level of quality. But its important to realize how important the UI is here.
Lets assume that there is a way for the client to automatically select a handmade map that
Then maybe handmade maps could in some way fullfill the same function that the mapgen does. However, we dont have that kind of UI for handmade maps, and as long as it is that way, people will resort to the mapgen to play unknown maps instead of simply selecting a not much played handmade map.
The mapgen also crates some sort of unspoken contract: The map is guarantueed to be new to everybody (in reality thats not true because you can regenerate a seed, but this is still the expectation that people have). This is of course very hard to replicate with handmade maps.
Could participants in this thread please stop assuming that everybody else argues in bad faith or against their interests? Turning this thread into a mapgen vs handmade war will not create many usefull insights on this topic. Too late probably.
Ok now i want to look at the far future.
Arguably there is still a lot of time until map generator maps reach a level of quality where somebody like FTX will replace 100% of the 1v1 queue with random maps. But still.
Lets make some likely assuptions:
If we make these assumptions, it should be quite easy to see, that after a long period of transition, the endgame is AOE2, in other words, the death of handmade maps in competitive play. You might disagree with those assumptions, but please think about wether you actually disagree with them OR if you just dont want to follow through to the conclusion, maybe because this conclusion is subjectively horrifying.
Now, in that scenario, a lot of people will just not care and go with it, some people will be sad, and handmade maps will fight a war for dominance, that they will slowly and agonizinly loose as more and more players desire the things that mapgen can provide. This thread is a good indicator for how that will look like imo.
Now, there is another hidden asumption here:
But we could change this if we want. We already have adaptive maps. What if handmade maps could provide the same guarantuess that generated maps could in terms of BO-whoring?
Im not saying we need to do this. But if the first too assumptions hold, i think that handmade maps need to evolve in the long term. And i think they can, and anyway discussing how that would look like would be much more productive than descussing how far along the trajectory mapgen maps are right now.
In in additon to that, we can think about maybe a better way to present handmade maps or allow players to select them, but that is mo harder to achieve.
This guy still has not understood what it means to not have the source code. I doubt he has ever written code in a compiled programming language ever.
Im sorry to say that there is probably no random hero dev hiding in the woods that is just waiting to be encouraged by your non-sensical expectations and will spring into action once you say "its so easy" 100 times in a row.
@ThomasHiatt said in Legacy client not working:
Java client has cost FAF a very large amount of developer time for an inferior and unneeded product. Dev power is supposedly scarce around here and this is an egregious waste. The python client could have simply been refactored and improved. Even after several years of work the Java client is not really any better.
"not really any better" : repeating urself
"could have simply been refactored": so simple that nobody showed up for like 2 years after repeated calls for more python devs in the forums;
If was repeated about a 100 times already, but the python client was so abandoned that it actively blocked improvements to the entire rest of the FAF infrustructure.
Your nice idea about making websites today for vault tabs is only easily possible today because the Java API exists, which was basically blocked from being improved upon by the python client.
Java client reduced backend maintenance cost (which is more important than all of the points in your list), made map gen improvements easier or even happen at all, makes TMM UI happen and will probably in the future wipe your ass for you while you sit on the toilet complaining about it without noticing.
It makes no sense (both in terms of gameplay and lore) that you can zoom in and clearly see that its a Mantis (aka bigger threat than lab), and then just zoom out and somehow the information lost now?
The other factions would have to gimp their own tactical overview on purpose to remove information they already have, why.
Funny because FAF has stopped caring about which PC you use for over a year now.
There is no "new security", you could say there is less than before. The only thing that you need is valid Steam link that is linked to exactly one account. Then you can use that account anywhere.
Btw why should anybody try to help you if you didnt even take the time to properly describe the problem your are having.
TMM tests are being scheduled in the FAF Discord, anybody can help out by joining the tests when they happen.
I modified armas answer into a potential FAQ entry because i think it was well written:
How do mods work?
UI = User Interface
Sim = Simulation
A UI mod affects only your computer, it affects how you interact with the game. It can change how information is displayed to you (for example on the scoreboard) and it can turn things on and off for you, like it could sometimes turn your radar off to save power.
A SIM mod can make much more serious changes to the game for all players. For example, a SIM mod could change the amount of HP that a tank has or add new units. A SIM mod could change how the scoreboard looks to every player. Games with SIM mods are unrated.
Each player can choose their own selection of UI mods, but SIM mods (which can be activated in custom games by the host) need to be identical for every player in a game.
That is because each player's computer is simulating the entire game and they must stay synchronized. It would break ("desync") the game if, on your computer, a tank had 300 hp, and on your teammate's computer, the tank only had 250hp. To ensure this, when you join a lobby with activated SIM mods, your client will automatically attempt to download and activate (only) those mods.
Advanced strategic icons are actually 3 entirely different set of icons in different sizes. The middle and bigger setting lead to overlapping symbols.
The mex symbol gets overriden in my case by the EcoManager (which i only use for the mex symbols, no other funcitonality), so i dont get to see the mex icons from the icon mod.
I have a video here but its only campaign gameplay, not even trying to play competitive here:
In general i dont think that small strategic icons are too bad. It not gonna become a better player by swicthing to default icons. I will just die more often to nukes or defences i wanst able to see because default icons look all the same.
Can somebody explain to me how Advanced Strategic Icons "blinds out" information? I have it set to the lowest size and the icons are not really covering anything more than the default icons. I agree that the other settings are too big and result in too much overlapping, but i mean thats why its a setting?
Corrected. I made my post into a video, maybe im gonna do the other missions as well at some point:
Important tips for new players for this mission:
You have infinite mass for a long time: All those wrecks/reclaim in your base. If you place a building somewhere, your ACU/engies will reclaim the wrecks underneath it before building. This makes you waste mass if you are already full! This includes mass extractor wrecks! Always manually reclaim big wrecks when you need them before placing buildings on top of them.
Get a decent number of T1 power (for overcharge, com upgrades and factory T2 upgrade), and once you are T2 you want T2 power first!
You ACU is a killing machine and can single-handedly kill any attacking unit in the first 20 minutes except air, if you use overcharge! You need one or two (not more) energy storage to be able to use overcharge. When fighting arty or t2 missile launchers, keep moving in circles while shooting them. When fighting T2 assault bots, use overcharge! Make sure you can retreat to anti-air. Upgrading gun (the cheap one) makes using ACU much easier. Build a T1 radar!
The AI does not build counters at all. It always sends the same unit mix at about the same time.
Yeah exactly the point is not or should not be to get an AI to >= 700 ladder rating.. It should be simple to select, not too much options. Maybe 4 difficulty levels without further options, fixed map pool that is known to work with those AIs somwhat ok, done.
And if you get people to learn to ACU-tank-spam-bum-rush the AI you have already prepared them better for PvP than they were before. Is it going to be boring fast: Yes. But thats where you switch to ladder or TMM if you want the challenge.
Now about ranking them into the 4 difficulty levels: I think this has been suggested before, but the most logical way would be to just let them play in ladder for a time. The question is how to do that automatically.
No, we generally watched them on Youtube before playing the missions.