I would support the idea to make engi (and therefore tech sharing) impossible. I don't know another RTS game where you can do that as casually as in SupCom.

This would make Team Games more interesting since it would require some thinking about the team composition before starting the Match and would benefit Teams that ACTUALLY play and support each other instead of just handing each other the tech.

At least give the option in custom games to deactivate engi trade while leaving in ranked. might be worth a try.

well, as a complete layman regarding programming I am at awe of what you guys do and achieve with this game. It makes me question my carreer choices just because I would love to understand all the thechnical stuff that is going on to make this game work as it does and how you guys improve it.

THANK YOU!! And please keep up the great work!

I like the Idea of a mapgen ladder. Also I have no problem with includint AI as a possible opponent in the lower ranks (let's say below 500?). On chess sites you can also play vs AI of different difficulties which are considered to have a certain rating (Elo).

Of course you can set up your own game vs the AI but the element of randomness with the mapgen and the match getting rated sounds pretty appealing to me. It would also help newbies getting some expierience without getting crushed from more experienced players and avoid some frustration.

Another thing could be a 10min build up timer for games in lower ratings so you can focus on your bo without getting harassed.

@ftxcommando Sup Com 2 was exactly trying this no? Easier economy and more big robots. It didn't work out so well.

Marketing doesn't have the aspiration of being "realistic" so people dont get disappointed. The goal of Marketing ist to get people interested and try it out. Watching the sup com trailer (the best RTS Trailer of all times imo) again it does a decent job showing that the game is about base building and (very) large battles with some cool units and even nukes. If you ask me it already attracts the people who are less into Starcraft 2 and more into big scale Macro heavy RTS games.

I think considering that there are not many new RTS games around this game just needs a bit more visibility, easier accessibility for new players and a "modern" reward system and it would do well gaining more players.

@exselsior
Well, one of the problems seems to be that we lose new players too quickly. by creating a less competitive 'safe zone' for newer players in form of a ladder it would help keeping these players longer and give them a chance get more familiar with the game and learn to love it.

Right now the learning curve for new players seems too steep and it's frustrating to get blown away by a 10min spam rush or 20min nuke while being called noob. no wonder newer players leave and don't come back.

since this game is old and most players already play it for years even the skill gap to a mid range rated player is huge. So I think creating an artificial more noob friendly area by automated ladders for specific maps or limited rating range would go a long way.

why would we want to attract StarCraft 2 players anyway. FAF is completely different and being a guy who played Warcraft 3 and Sc2 extensively I wouldn't go back to it.

They are welcome to try FAF but I wouldn't change anything in FAF to get it closer to the gameplay of SC2.

I would support the idea to make engi (and therefore tech sharing) impossible. I don't know another RTS game where you can do that as casually as in SupCom.

This would make Team Games more interesting since it would require some thinking about the team composition before starting the Match and would benefit Teams that ACTUALLY play and support each other instead of just handing each other the tech.

At least give the option in custom games to deactivate engi trade while leaving in ranked. might be worth a try.

@exselsior
Well, one of the problems seems to be that we lose new players too quickly. by creating a less competitive 'safe zone' for newer players in form of a ladder it would help keeping these players longer and give them a chance get more familiar with the game and learn to love it.

Right now the learning curve for new players seems too steep and it's frustrating to get blown away by a 10min spam rush or 20min nuke while being called noob. no wonder newer players leave and don't come back.

since this game is old and most players already play it for years even the skill gap to a mid range rated player is huge. So I think creating an artificial more noob friendly area by automated ladders for specific maps or limited rating range would go a long way.

The way I understood it so far from the comments paying core developers for additional features is very expensive and brings future problems or dependencys. I said giving better tools to map developers and paying the license of these tools for instance.

adding additional ladder options aren't that difficult or costly to implement I imagine. maybe something like an arranged team ladder or some noobs friendly ladder with build timer and with the option to be unranked. just ideas...

if there is no option to improve the connection or lag issues through further investments that's of course a pitty because that is THE major issue with the multiplayer in this game I think. everyone is bothered by the restarts you have to do sometimes because someone drops early in the game no? would be great to find some solution or work around to this problem

Spending money on developpers, casters etc. seems to be problematic and "marketing" the game is not a very efficient use of the money.

I would suggest the money should be spent to just optimize the game. better tools for map developers, a few ladder options more and some nice servers to reduce the lag and disconnection issues. Just anything that makes the CURRENT playerbase happy.

let's face it, the period we have in our life where we enjoy playing a game like this is limited. And FAF did already an amazing job as a community to keep this game alive. But I dont think the goal should be to re-promote the game to try to catch up to games with larger player bases. I dont see any way that could be successful nor is it necessary.

Just use the money to optimize the game itself further (technically and if possible with new features) but let's not try to go down a "game publisher" kind of way.

@ftxcommando Sup Com 2 was exactly trying this no? Easier economy and more big robots. It didn't work out so well.

Marketing doesn't have the aspiration of being "realistic" so people dont get disappointed. The goal of Marketing ist to get people interested and try it out. Watching the sup com trailer (the best RTS Trailer of all times imo) again it does a decent job showing that the game is about base building and (very) large battles with some cool units and even nukes. If you ask me it already attracts the people who are less into Starcraft 2 and more into big scale Macro heavy RTS games.

I think considering that there are not many new RTS games around this game just needs a bit more visibility, easier accessibility for new players and a "modern" reward system and it would do well gaining more players.

@azraeel said in What would be an efficient use of FAF's funds to improve FAF?:

Game has fundamentals issues and its hard to have retention unless you are dedicated to improving or you play purely for fun and eventually people who play purely for fun go away.

I think a lot of people also play pvp a few times then just quit because toxicity and just generally ass maps/players on global.

I don't think most play ladder Because it's not pushed enough to the front. If anything we need to start making matchmaker more of a focus and push global into a arcade type style like SC2 does.

So paying many to promote FAF is a huge waste of money when nobody is dedicated to actually dealing with core issues that just make players not want to come back.

Everything money wise for tournaments, promotion etc could be a lot more if we had a more dedicated fan base instead of people who just play with 0 interaction. I think that stems from a toxic mentality and an inability to actually change major components of the game and not only the game but how even the client is structured and etc.

I kind of agree on many aspects. Marketing without improving the accessibility to the game and the motivation to come back is not an efficient use of the money.

If you want more people to stay or come back you have to consider your audience. Generation Z is not so eager to get into steep learning curves and has a low frustration tolerance. So basically you need to "dumb" it down a bit for players new to the game and make a reward system where they can gain coins or rank or something to keep them motivated.

Specifically I would suggest the following:

• An optional Ladder which is unranked so people can just fool around while learning the game and try new stuff without being punished losing rating points.

• An automated "noob" friendly Dual Gap (I know, I know, but people love it) bot that creates a game noobs (definition: < 50 games and 800 Rating maybe) can join anytime and just start playing as soon as it's full (auto balance). As rules you can put 10min build up time and ban nukes, that shoud keep them entertained for hours while getting the hang of the game and learn to love it.

• How about making new "Skins" as reward for playing x amount of games or reaching a rating? Can be just a new ACU skin for the start and later maybe from other units as well. I know, this is probably the most difficult one to implement but also something that could motivate a lot of players to play more or come back to the game to earn new skins or whatever.

@arkangel_ Thank you! Very helpful.

I like the Idea of a mapgen ladder. Also I have no problem with includint AI as a possible opponent in the lower ranks (let's say below 500?). On chess sites you can also play vs AI of different difficulties which are considered to have a certain rating (Elo).

Of course you can set up your own game vs the AI but the element of randomness with the mapgen and the match getting rated sounds pretty appealing to me. It would also help newbies getting some expierience without getting crushed from more experienced players and avoid some frustration.

Another thing could be a 10min build up timer for games in lower ratings so you can focus on your bo without getting harassed.

Well okay, here is a replay:

https://replay.faforever.com/19344508

It's not a strong game of me but the fact that my main opponent (dark blue) has faster a stronger eco and also me being behind everyone in eco before the 30min mark kind of shows my problem I think.

mainly team games, since in custom maps like dual gap the eco difference doesnt get so big or at least it doesnt show so significantly.

Thx for your replys!