I give up.

I'm a new player. Answering the question of why I would quit...

And I'm being told I'm wrong.

Are there any other NEW players here with under 100 games that can provide feedback?

Because mine isn't valid. So we need a new valid opinion. It should preferably involve something about "community" and "training" cause you need friends and you don't understand the game. That's why you're leaving. In fact, we know that's why you're leaving. Don't bother answering.

"BARTENDER! Can you make a "Community with Training"... on the rocks... Make it a double."

@nine2 - I'm sorry. I was just trying to help.

<disclaimer> I am not fully aware of the history of FAF and the iterations it's taken to get to this point. I'm a Total Annihilation player that never liked SupCom when I first tried it, but rediscovered it this past year thanks to the FAF community, and enjoy it now. </disclaimer>

I am a technically newbie with less than 100 games. I am most likely one of the people you're going to lose in 2 years. If I try to look forward, here's what I see and feel. I mostly play custom games, because that's the first thing that presents itself when you start Downlord's FAF Client, so I've stuck with it. I'm not a huge fan of 1v1. I like Team Games.

So, in that regards:

First - I think Heaven on YouTube said this in a similar way at one point... This game is not an RTS. This is an efficiency manager. This is a supply chain manager. For Low and Mid Tier players, there's no way to overcome a player who has better eco than you. This essentially means that people who are looking to take units to battle(what you normally do in an RTS), will lose. Because unless I get in a match that restricts T4, Exps, Nukes, T3 arty... it's just a tech race to end game. Sure you build some units to stop some attacks, but most games start out with action to probe for weakness/easy ACU kills, and then there's a noticeable lull... then there's the finale of whoever built T3 arty and EXPs first.

The problem is that even if you take that aspect out of it (no T3 ARty, Nuke, Exps, T4 Units), then the better eco-ing player wins by higher tech spam. I don't know how to solve this problem. But I've witnessed other new players talking/complaining about the boredom of the tech race.

Second, what's great about this game is never used. All the units!!! When the game is "advertised" you see all these units working together LAND/SEA/AIR... when in reality it's 3-4 units from each Faction that get play... when are we going to use all these other units and what strategies do they get used in? (Hint, you don't, they don't) Because by the time you get to the point where you could use them, it's 19 minutes into the game and there's a nuke inbound... soooooo you better tech up to match the tech race(see above)... i.e. this is now about who's the most efficient with getting to the highest tech level ASAP. Heck, I feel like I'm seeing ASFs showing their face 10 minutes into a game on Setons. So its like 1-3 minutes T1 Air, 3-9 minutes, AA built up, skip T2 entirely, T3!. Why even bother having T2? Especially when 1 ASF can seemingly take down a very large amount of T1 units by itself.

Third, the lack of a large English speaking community makes me feel like it's dying off and I'm sure that turns some people off. But honestly, I don't feel like the RTS community has every been that large in the US, when compared to other Genres (FPS, Sports).

What does this community do right? It changes. That's the biggest thing. If you're willing to change to ensure a higher rate of player retention, then maybe things can work out. But at some point you may have to come to the reckoning of "Do I want this to be more popular or do I like this game the way it is? And if it's not for everyone, so be it."

I'm here cause you guys cared enough to keep it going. You may only have me for a little while, but I appreciate all the effort you guys have put in to making this what it is and keeping it going.

@nine2
I'll try one more time because I don't want this community to wither away, and I feel the only thing to do is retain the new players and keep new ones coming through. If you would be so kind as to share the source of your retention numbers, that would help, because as you can see in responses above, there's some who think retention really isn't an issue.

We don't know the source of a new player. How did they find the project, what were they looking for? Are they SupCom players from years ago that just wanted to play the game again? Did they just search for "Active RTS Games". Can anyone say who these people are or how they got here? Do we have that data?

So I can only theorize, based on my own experiences with how I came to discover FAF, and conversations with other sub 100 game players during matches, that SOME people got here the same way I did.

YouTube > Gyle.

So let's look at Gyle's videos. Here's the data for his last 40 videos (about 1 year) sorted by number of views, notice a trend?

Type/Views x1000

4v4 181
4v4 97
6v6 83
4v4 74
7v7 69
6v6 67
6v6 61
5v5 52
5v5 52
1v1 48
4v4 46
6v6 46
7v7 41
5v5 40
2v2 39
1v1 39
4v4 37
6v6 35
1v1 34
5v5 34
1v1 34
1v1 34
8v8 33
7v7 31
5v5 26
6v6 26
1v1 23
1v1 22
1v1 22
1v1 22
4v4 22
5v5 21
3v3 20
2v2 19
1v1 19
8v8 18
1v1 18
1v1 18
1v1 17
1v1 15

If what people see is these multi layered battles happening across huge maps with a variety of units with UP TO 16 PLAYERS (as advertised on FAF website), then 1v1 and 2v2 Matchmaking aren't going to cut it. Up that matchmaking to 4v4, and block/remove/take away those maps that undermine what's great about the game and you might have it. Perhaps, the "Custom" lobby IS the problem.

This is the thing about bringing a successful product to market. You can't make it what YOU want. You have to make what THEY want. The "THEY" should be the largest portion of the potential users you can find.

Now, if we want to say "No Thanks. The product is what it is. I'm the one who's doing the work of maintaining it, so it's going to be what I want." That's ok. There's nothing wrong with that. But then putting any energy towards wondering why people are leaving is pointless. Because unless their reasoning lines up with what YOU want, nothing's going to change anyway.

I personally don't think the lack of training, education, community events is the problem with retention. Unless there's data to support that. People want to eat the hamburger they saw advertised the way they want. They don't want to be told they're eating it wrong way.

Anyway, thanks for asking the question to begin with.

@Blodir Look at your rank though. I watch Gyle's casts, and I see variations in units and different strategies you guys use. But those are at the higher level. Most people will never get there. They just aren't as skilled.

Those of us playing down here (the ones that are leaving), there's not a ton of variety because of the way the tech race is structured and having to defend yourself from the higher tier players. Games last 60 minutes, and you need to be T3 by minute 20.

There's no room for slow growth because the opposing side doesn't use the middle tech tiers.

The only stuff I see from T2 is Cruisers to bombard bases that haven't figured out how to build TMD yet.

@Amygdala
You are definitely on point. Alot of it has to do with maps that incorporate a defined choke point and give players enough eco at their starting point that they do not need to move very far to have everything they need.

However, it's difficult to get a match going without using one of those maps particular maps. People who are interested in the efficiency aspect of the game just want to play SimCity to the higher tiers.

I don't believe that the experience I have is true to the entire experience that FAF can give you. It's a much broader game than that and the potential is phenomenal.

However, it is indicative of what most players are presented with the first time they start FAF.

You go to the Play Tab, the first thing you see is a list of Custom Games.

Right now, while I'm writing this, here's the maps:

Astro, Gap, Gap, Gap, Astro Gap, Setons, Gap, Astro, Rohan, Gap, Setons, Vale of Isis, Canis, Astro, Plateau of Arracis.

@biass
Fantastic! I did not know that. 4v4 in match making would be great.

@FtXCommando
I thought the matchmaking already had a set list of maps? I thought that's what the "Map List" button was there for.

I think there are people who would appreciate both styles of maps.

The larger, more realistic maps allow a person who's playing single player or maybe Co-Op to become immersed and create a narrative on their own during the course of the battle. Perhaps positions that are at a disadvantage from the start, so that can challenge is created just by the terrain.

And there is definitely a need for balance maps to be used for, let's call it "competitive" play. These are basically chess boards.

@biass
Fantastic! I did not know that. 4v4 in match making would be great.

@FtXCommando
I thought the matchmaking already had a set list of maps? I thought that's what the "Map List" button was there for.

@nine2
I'll try one more time because I don't want this community to wither away, and I feel the only thing to do is retain the new players and keep new ones coming through. If you would be so kind as to share the source of your retention numbers, that would help, because as you can see in responses above, there's some who think retention really isn't an issue.

We don't know the source of a new player. How did they find the project, what were they looking for? Are they SupCom players from years ago that just wanted to play the game again? Did they just search for "Active RTS Games". Can anyone say who these people are or how they got here? Do we have that data?

So I can only theorize, based on my own experiences with how I came to discover FAF, and conversations with other sub 100 game players during matches, that SOME people got here the same way I did.

YouTube > Gyle.

So let's look at Gyle's videos. Here's the data for his last 40 videos (about 1 year) sorted by number of views, notice a trend?

Type/Views x1000

4v4 181
4v4 97
6v6 83
4v4 74
7v7 69
6v6 67
6v6 61
5v5 52
5v5 52
1v1 48
4v4 46
6v6 46
7v7 41
5v5 40
2v2 39
1v1 39
4v4 37
6v6 35
1v1 34
5v5 34
1v1 34
1v1 34
8v8 33
7v7 31
5v5 26
6v6 26
1v1 23
1v1 22
1v1 22
1v1 22
4v4 22
5v5 21
3v3 20
2v2 19
1v1 19
8v8 18
1v1 18
1v1 18
1v1 17
1v1 15

If what people see is these multi layered battles happening across huge maps with a variety of units with UP TO 16 PLAYERS (as advertised on FAF website), then 1v1 and 2v2 Matchmaking aren't going to cut it. Up that matchmaking to 4v4, and block/remove/take away those maps that undermine what's great about the game and you might have it. Perhaps, the "Custom" lobby IS the problem.

This is the thing about bringing a successful product to market. You can't make it what YOU want. You have to make what THEY want. The "THEY" should be the largest portion of the potential users you can find.

Now, if we want to say "No Thanks. The product is what it is. I'm the one who's doing the work of maintaining it, so it's going to be what I want." That's ok. There's nothing wrong with that. But then putting any energy towards wondering why people are leaving is pointless. Because unless their reasoning lines up with what YOU want, nothing's going to change anyway.

I personally don't think the lack of training, education, community events is the problem with retention. Unless there's data to support that. People want to eat the hamburger they saw advertised the way they want. They don't want to be told they're eating it wrong way.

Anyway, thanks for asking the question to begin with.

I give up.

I'm a new player. Answering the question of why I would quit...

And I'm being told I'm wrong.

Are there any other NEW players here with under 100 games that can provide feedback?

Because mine isn't valid. So we need a new valid opinion. It should preferably involve something about "community" and "training" cause you need friends and you don't understand the game. That's why you're leaving. In fact, we know that's why you're leaving. Don't bother answering.

"BARTENDER! Can you make a "Community with Training"... on the rocks... Make it a double."

@nine2 - I'm sorry. I was just trying to help.

@F-Odin
Because I'm not a 1v1 guy. That's why I don't play ladder. It's not fun for me. I like the team games.

I told you what I don't enjoy about the Team Play game, which is what I like to play to help shed light on why some people might not stick around.

Your responses, thus far, have been.

• Don't play Team Games
• Don't play the Maps that everyone plays Team Games on.

?????????

@F-Odin
That very well may be. But either way, if you're trying to grow the community you have to identify what you can change to increase retention.

People who are leaving because they're just done with it, yeah, there's not much you can do.

So my original post is directed towards the things that bore me with the game and might chase me out sooner than 2 years. And my tech race point is actually being echoed by players with many games, so it is something to be considered. Whether that's trying to dissuade players from using the same maps constantly, or whatever other solutions may come about.

https://forum.faforever.com/topic/1098/increase-t3-mex-cost-reduce-reclaim-to-reward-aggressive-gameplay-at-t2-stage?_=1611169438095

@F-Odin
Well, if the current player base enjoys those maps, but you have a 90% drop off rate of new players, I don't think that means that the majority of new players like that play style too. Otherwise it wouldn't be 90%, it would be 49% or lower.

This thread is about the inability to retain new players.

You're not going to figure that out by asking the people who have played it for years and are involved in the community. You need to ask the guy that quits after 5 games.

@Amygdala
You are definitely on point. Alot of it has to do with maps that incorporate a defined choke point and give players enough eco at their starting point that they do not need to move very far to have everything they need.

However, it's difficult to get a match going without using one of those maps particular maps. People who are interested in the efficiency aspect of the game just want to play SimCity to the higher tiers.

I don't believe that the experience I have is true to the entire experience that FAF can give you. It's a much broader game than that and the potential is phenomenal.

However, it is indicative of what most players are presented with the first time they start FAF.

You go to the Play Tab, the first thing you see is a list of Custom Games.

Right now, while I'm writing this, here's the maps:

Astro, Gap, Gap, Gap, Astro Gap, Setons, Gap, Astro, Rohan, Gap, Setons, Vale of Isis, Canis, Astro, Plateau of Arracis.

@Blodir Look at your rank though. I watch Gyle's casts, and I see variations in units and different strategies you guys use. But those are at the higher level. Most people will never get there. They just aren't as skilled.

Those of us playing down here (the ones that are leaving), there's not a ton of variety because of the way the tech race is structured and having to defend yourself from the higher tier players. Games last 60 minutes, and you need to be T3 by minute 20.

There's no room for slow growth because the opposing side doesn't use the middle tech tiers.

The only stuff I see from T2 is Cruisers to bombard bases that haven't figured out how to build TMD yet.

<disclaimer> I am not fully aware of the history of FAF and the iterations it's taken to get to this point. I'm a Total Annihilation player that never liked SupCom when I first tried it, but rediscovered it this past year thanks to the FAF community, and enjoy it now. </disclaimer>

I am a technically newbie with less than 100 games. I am most likely one of the people you're going to lose in 2 years. If I try to look forward, here's what I see and feel. I mostly play custom games, because that's the first thing that presents itself when you start Downlord's FAF Client, so I've stuck with it. I'm not a huge fan of 1v1. I like Team Games.

So, in that regards:

First - I think Heaven on YouTube said this in a similar way at one point... This game is not an RTS. This is an efficiency manager. This is a supply chain manager. For Low and Mid Tier players, there's no way to overcome a player who has better eco than you. This essentially means that people who are looking to take units to battle(what you normally do in an RTS), will lose. Because unless I get in a match that restricts T4, Exps, Nukes, T3 arty... it's just a tech race to end game. Sure you build some units to stop some attacks, but most games start out with action to probe for weakness/easy ACU kills, and then there's a noticeable lull... then there's the finale of whoever built T3 arty and EXPs first.

The problem is that even if you take that aspect out of it (no T3 ARty, Nuke, Exps, T4 Units), then the better eco-ing player wins by higher tech spam. I don't know how to solve this problem. But I've witnessed other new players talking/complaining about the boredom of the tech race.

Second, what's great about this game is never used. All the units!!! When the game is "advertised" you see all these units working together LAND/SEA/AIR... when in reality it's 3-4 units from each Faction that get play... when are we going to use all these other units and what strategies do they get used in? (Hint, you don't, they don't) Because by the time you get to the point where you could use them, it's 19 minutes into the game and there's a nuke inbound... soooooo you better tech up to match the tech race(see above)... i.e. this is now about who's the most efficient with getting to the highest tech level ASAP. Heck, I feel like I'm seeing ASFs showing their face 10 minutes into a game on Setons. So its like 1-3 minutes T1 Air, 3-9 minutes, AA built up, skip T2 entirely, T3!. Why even bother having T2? Especially when 1 ASF can seemingly take down a very large amount of T1 units by itself.

Third, the lack of a large English speaking community makes me feel like it's dying off and I'm sure that turns some people off. But honestly, I don't feel like the RTS community has every been that large in the US, when compared to other Genres (FPS, Sports).

What does this community do right? It changes. That's the biggest thing. If you're willing to change to ensure a higher rate of player retention, then maybe things can work out. But at some point you may have to come to the reckoning of "Do I want this to be more popular or do I like this game the way it is? And if it's not for everyone, so be it."

I'm here cause you guys cared enough to keep it going. You may only have me for a little while, but I appreciate all the effort you guys have put in to making this what it is and keeping it going.