Ah, not the hives and soul ripper, the most used in 1v1 units

My only issue with ladder is long queue times and low player variety. You wait like 20 minutes to play with same dude like 5 times in a row.
Also i dont think that bos matter that much, just that familiarity with map is a big factor. Like i dont think i have ever lost to something i would consider superior bo, every time its me taking poor trades and being slow to scale. That being said its still frustrating to play against superior players. It feels like you can do nothing about your loss, and thats really sad.
I think i also reached the rating where i have to change how i play a lot, and its not really motivating me to play more games.

https://github.com/FAForever/fa/commit/0912e85ff31b50d286207c9ec4fa964d0ce12704
http://patchnotes.faforever.com/balance/3761.html#transports
The problem is after latest changes to transports they behave badly around mountains, you can see it on many ladder maps such as PoR or vulcan reach. Transport "bumps" into mountain and instantly stops, then starts sloooowly climbing up, after it has passed the mountain, it starts to descend comically slowly.
My problem is:

1. It looks bad.
2. there is no indication of how big the mountains are. Would they bump, how long would they take to climb up/down?
3. you cant even reliably fly around mountains because pathfinding might just say "fuck you" and make transport graze the side of a mountain making it slow down considerably.
4. it happens on already existing maps which are currently in rotation, so you cant really say its "map issue".

Would be fun to see how much rating m27 and other ais can get if you throw them into the system.

@t_r_u_putin dude noone cares about dual gap meta, if you do, go create dual gap rebalance mod or smth. Also i dont really understand why do you think nukes should be built with sole purpose of killing base, and if they dont - its unhealthy smh. Like its really stupid if nukes are just instawin if you didnt build smd in time AND they have great utility even when you built them. Not to mention that on many maps you need multiple (3+) smds to cover everything that will lose you game if nuked, which cost more money than building nuke. And then nuke kills like 4-5 t3 mexes/naval bp/land army/naval group. How is it balanced in your eyes?

@xejinord11 "contact moderator team for rename". The ban is permanent (until you rename). Like what is your point here?

We live in a clown world

@gabitii its just a matter of different perspectives, you play dual gap so your opinion on balance is wildly different from dudes playing like 1800+ mapgen, and dualgap is a map known for its simplicity and general resident burger vibes, and rightfully so. Balance team does not account for dualgap so you need to understand why your opinion is met how it is met. Perhaps, if you tried to play in those 1800+ lobbies you would understand why some of your ideas are not working. Right now noone wants to explain stuff for you because like these complaints were mused over like 82737363 times and its a waste of time really

In russian translation depth charges are called "смертельный разряд" in unit tags. Could we change it to something more appropriate like "глубинные бомбы"? Its kinda misleading.

@khaldounn please show me those bo beasts. Like every time i play map i do mostly random stuff in terms of bo, every game is a bit different, and i'm like 1800 so clearly bos arent necessary to play at that level. You really dont need to memorise anything, just be good at scaling and know what moves are good in different situations.

I just dont see t1 arties being a problem. At t1 stage they are kinda a necessity you build to counter pds, prevent shift+g micro and later on harass armies from distance a bit. They are also good at cleaning up buildings, but like you also dont want to build too much of them as they are trash at being reliable. They are certainly not efficient vs t3 land in any way shape or form, nor they are really useful vs experimentals as they are protected by t3 units that farm them insanely hard.

Jesus just fork faf already like gaf/rufaf has done already or smth

I dont really mind the meta shakeups as a concept, i think it can be done right. I also think they should come from a place of tension, where the game feels the most stale/shit to play, and not from a random "wouldnt it be cool if this feature existed?". For example, i wouldnt mind even some big sim level changes to t3 arties and gameenders to make them fun and not lame to play with and against, or maybe some changes to early transport rushes so they are less volatile, maybe even some changes to make spamming full t1 into omega agression on many ladder maps less viable. Area reclaim just seems to come out of nowhere, and i really fail to see how it fixes anything.
Also i think the jips post regarding the area reclaim reads as an analysis of some random 1k rated dude, no offense. Like i just really dont see the reclaim as being the most fundamental mechanic that somehow makes you a gamer god compared to the folk who dont appreciate it. Its just another part of macro, and not even the most fundamental. Like just having a economy that isnt collapsing all the time, knowing what your game plan on the map is and using your units smartly is the basis of the game ultimately, not clicking rocks to proceed to overflow all your reclaim. I really want to get into specifics, but currently im on my phone so its omega inconvenient.

@ftxcommando so like why gas every gamer because of the newbros? Cant you make the rating change invisible for dudes in placement/with less than insert number games or just make it a toggle switched to brackets by defdault? It really seems shitty to force it on everyone

Clasic mods having mental breakdown over funny renames moment

I am too dumbfounded by this injustice, we must mend it by allowing ilshies shoot from transports

Ngl t2 air is pretty op, and it is retardedly easy to abuse it in shitty lobbies, but thats not problem of t2 air, its problem of teamgames. If you make t2 air worse it ruins it in 1v1/2v2 too much

@siwaonadaphnewen
First of all, e storages provide decent adjacency bonus for t2 and t3 pgens, so if you want to build e storage, might as well connect it. Anyway, the reason you want e storage is because you can OC with it, mass storages give you no such utility.
Scenario you provided is easily dealt with by anticipating you will have reclaim influx before it happens and preparing pgens and buildpower to spend it. Mass storage in this situation isnt that relevant, though it might make life slightly more annoying because you wont always manage to nail eco balance, so you would have to pause reclaim engies for a bit, but overall you will be limited by your e/bp anyway.
Also you will never want to attack storages separately - just because you dont know if your opponent is floating (you wont have time to look at some obscure texture on storage to see how much mass there is in real game), and also because its usually not a choice you make anyway. Storages are built around t2 mexes, and like everything that kills mexes also kills storages essentially automatically (bombers, arty drops, big army pushes), so the only case you can theoretically target storages is like some loya/titan raid, and still mexes are safer choice

The reason players dont place mass storages separately is because mass storage has near 0 utility, you want your mass to be as low as possible because mass in storage is essentially dead weight. If there is reclaim around you also dont want to build storages - you want to spend asap, and in situations where reclaim is contested you still dont want to build storage (on, for example, setons and such). In very late game having storage is nice sometimes, but you already have mass storages around mexes which is more than enough, you still dont want to have too much mass floating. So your reasons for why mass storages are not built for storing mass are wrong.
Also i hardly see how your changes promote building storages for storing mass anyway. Mass storage from facs and engies is meaningless anyway, scaling mass storages down affects economy (why should it) and i really dont see why it should be done, and the last, removing mass when storage gets destroyed is just silly.

Who knew 1v1 games see less indirect fire units and snipers, and snipes are more pronounced.