@rezy-noob said in QoL changes: @thewheelie atlantis is bad, the fact that it is seen to deal with subs in the first place is stupid, uef has an entire unit specialised vs subs that would require rebalancing at this point. I don't think so. Because a t2 unit has a special role nothing from that faction later in the tech tree can partially cover that role? Especially if we're talking about t4's that shouldn't be the case at all. Moreover they work differently considering you want to kite from long range with atlantis while this doesn't happen for coopers at all. Vision is probably the best atlantis has to offer since it s damage is atrocious and vetting will take as many years as mercy removal from the game, atlantis is honestly just annoying with little to no usage. Again you do realise they almost have the same dps as a bs right? Also if you think it takes long for atlantis to vet then you just don't really know what you're talking about when they are one of the easiest units in the game to vet and it's one of their main strengths. I guess you agreed with grid nerf? Or you just missed it idk. Don't really have an opinion on it. And yeah, chrono, mercys cant compare since even their stats are imba, atlantis is just borderline unplayable What i meant is that you said these were mega obvious things that everyone knows about but by the fact that i'm disagreeing on most of the things you posted means it's nowhere near as clearcut as you make it out to be. Yes atlantis are bad which is why it gets a buff but it's nowhere near as bad as you make it out to be. It suffers from the same issue as vespers where you don't really make the unit because it doesn't have a proper roll or other units overshadow it (or a mix). t1 subs aren't anywhere close to being omega bad as you say. You see them build all the time every map with water, just not in large quantities

you can always downgrade the difficutly, hard is supposed to be hard and for now, it's the default difficutly.

Resi, I'm faced with the fact that the players told me that the rate on the contrary stops being calibrated from a large number of games, that is, + 1 or 2, that is, you haven't played for 2 years, for example, you got a -600 rating, but you will fill these 600 for about six months or even two. I think degradation should be if a person does not play rating games for a year or six months. I think it's right to downgrade since more time has passed since the creation and calibration and this is a pure imbalance. That can stops smurf accounts.

One issue i have found is that sometimes the mouse icon (move, attack, assist) is sometimes invisible when giving orders maybe this is related?. I am not sure - one is sim and the other is UI. I'll need data to investigate.

highly variable with a middle-ground in the ballpark of what is commonly found on mapgen maps atm both highly variable but mostly undefended or on the easier-to-take end of the spectrum (any type that doesn't prevent the player from reasonably playing is fine in theory though (ie: I'd probably avoid having a hostile mavor on the map at game start : P) - variety is the spice of life though : ))

The constant learning curve and the constant unexpected tricks/tactics/strategies used against me. I always feel like a beginner (in a good and exciting way) and I've been playing for 5+ years. When I get wrecked the feeling is usually "wow, how did they do that, i must learn that" as opposed to "i never had a chance". The full map zoom is something you cannot live without when you play other rts and the constant rebalancing of units with the updates to the client etc shows the constant evolution of the game. In no way has this game reached its peak and I dont see it reaching it anytime soon. i honestly believe if not for the single thread on cpu bottleneck issue then this game would be a top esport game.