FAForever Forums
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Login

    Why does Fullshare exist?

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
    51 Posts 24 Posters 3.5k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • ValkiV Offline
      Valki
      last edited by

      What we need is a question on a FAF poll, but as I understand Morax is not in office yet.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • Z Offline
        zappazapper @Exselsior
        last edited by

        @exselsior said in Why does Fullshare exist?:

        If you have an issue with assassination then host supremacy lobbies. That sounds tedious to play in my mind, but more power to you. It's a game at the end of the day, do what makes you happy. Removing assassination from the default would make most people unhappy and there aren't really any legitimate arguments for not having it as the default.

        That's a common response on this forum, as if one person is telling another person how to play the game. I'm not telling you how to play. We're having a discussion, a debate. I'm making my arguments, you're making yours. Saying "just host Supremacy lobbies" isn't a compelling argument in this case. Of course I'm going to play how I want and you're going to play how you want. But you haven't convinced me that Assassination is a realistic gameplay mechanic in what might be the most realistic RTS ever created. That's all I'm saying. This game allows us to explore strategy and tactics that have been used all throughout human history, not just what might happen in a far-future universe. I don't think you can find a battle in human history where one guy died and the whole rest of the army went, "ok, fuck it" and went home. It's just not a realistic aspect of this game and I'm just suggesting that just playing Supremacy instead of Assassination with full-share makes for a more realistic battle experience. Of course, this game will generally be played in Assassination; the 1v1 games, which is kinda the only thing I play, are Assassination, and to be quite honest even when I play against AI, I play in Assassination, because it is fun, don't get me wrong. But it's not realistic and that's the reason why the OP even asked the question in the first place, and the answer for me is that for maps where full-share is the only way to play Assassination, like Seton's, for example, it might be a better solution to just play Supremacy. The commander is still a valuable unit, and it removes both the situation where a team has lost a quarter of its units and a quarter of its attention/APM, which as @Jip suggests is almost as likely to create an automatic win situation as losing the entire army.

        🤷

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • ResistanceR Offline
          Resistance
          last edited by

          oh well,it goes downside,pretty sure everyone figured out why it "does" exist,but this turns into some more arguments,locking for 1 day to remind what is being discussed there.

          queuing with a newbie to show him the beauty of tmm and meeting tagada be like:
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLcRpdZ0Xb0&ab_channel=Tomoko

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
          • J Offline
            jcvjcvjcvjcv
            last edited by jcvjcvjcvjcv

            Fullshare was once the default and it should be again. Without it, too many games are decided by disconnects.

            If you are dumb enough to kill the lowest rated enemies first in a fullshare game... well... you will tend to lose rating xD

            If you join a Setons lobby and Full share is not enabled while not as such advertized in title... you can be pretty sure the host has a team full of buddies with some optimized strategy to whack 1-2 of your teammates...

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • Z Offline
              ZOB
              last edited by

              " I don't think you can find a battle in human history where one guy died and the whole rest of the army went, "ok, fuck it" and went home. "

              WW2 (hitler) and chess, many other wars and battles

              Z 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • K Offline
                Khal
                last edited by

                I don't agree with your premise that full share = annihilation.

                I would argue that the full share is a compromise between annihilation and assassination. therefore, it should exist as a legit option to play with.

                also, the replay you shared doesn't prove anything. I don't have the statistics ready but I imagine that most of the time when an entire army goes poof! . the game collapses quickly after in favor of the team who scored the kill.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • Z Offline
                  zappazapper @ZOB
                  last edited by

                  @zob said in Why does Fullshare exist?:

                  " I don't think you can find a battle in human history where one guy died and the whole rest of the army went, "ok, fuck it" and went home. "

                  WW2 (hitler) and chess, many other wars and battles

                  Hitler died April 30. Combat operations ceased on May 8, by order of the German High Command. There was still someone at the top issuing orders after he died.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • TheWeakieT Offline
                    TheWeakie Balance Team
                    last edited by

                    Is that why fullshare exists?

                    E 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • E Offline
                      Exselsior @TheWeakie
                      last edited by Exselsior

                      @thewheelie Yes, Hitler died to give FAF fullshare.

                      Well there's a sentence I never thought I'd type.

                      EDIT: I think this thread has long since run its course and probably should just be closed.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • ZeldafanboyZ Offline
                        Zeldafanboy
                        last edited by

                        Fullshare sucks, because it basically punishes snipes in many instances by giving the best player, furthest away, even more eco. And the way eco scales in this game is exponentially, not linearly. I don't tolerate it on anything other than Setons, where I suppose it kind of makes sense.

                        put the xbox units in the game pls u_u

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • E Offline
                          Exselsior
                          last edited by

                          Eco does scale linearly though. If you have two people with equal eco and one of them dies giving the other player their eco, that player now has 2*x their original eco, not 2^x their original eco.

                          Math aside, if you take advantage of it snipes are still worth it unless there is a massive rating disparity. Just because someone doesn't understand how to capitalize on snipes in a certain game mode doesn't make that game mode bad. It would make for garbage gameplay to have anything other than full share in TMM for example.

                          ZeldafanboyZ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                          • ZeldafanboyZ Offline
                            Zeldafanboy @Exselsior
                            last edited by

                            @exselsior said in Why does Fullshare exist?:

                            Eco does scale linearly though. If you have two people with equal eco and one of them dies giving the other player their eco, that player now has 2*x their original eco, not 2^x their original eco.

                            Yes, when I say scales I mean the player who got 2x eco now has much more base income to make upgrades, which do exponentially scale. I'm referring to the economy scaling in the future past that point.

                            put the xbox units in the game pls u_u

                            E 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • E Offline
                              Exselsior @Zeldafanboy
                              last edited by

                              @zeldafanboy That's not how it works though. They have to maintain not only at least the same level of unit production that was originally being made, but often slightly more to offset the fact they now have one less ACU in combat. That's if you actually take advantage of the snipe though. If you rest on your laurels then yeah, you're putting your team on a massive disadvantage.

                              The eco advantage comes from the higher rated player using the eco better than the lower rated player. Only very good players can simultaneously eco two bases and fight on all the fronts better than two players each trying to do their part. If you let a 1k player do this then well it's kinda on you for letting them afk manage their bases.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • ZeldafanboyZ Offline
                                Zeldafanboy
                                last edited by

                                The ACU that was sniped isn't necessarily integral to the frontline defense though. On a map like Canis River the other remaining teammates can quite easily fill the hole, while the air player now has double mex and power.

                                It's not very hard to upgrade eco when you're in the back slot... simple math and making enough buildpower.

                                put the xbox units in the game pls u_u

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • E Offline
                                  Exselsior
                                  last edited by

                                  Stuff like Canis, Dual Gap, and any Astro map are generally exceptions to normal gameplay. Canis less so, but still any team game map that has teams spawning very close together with most the mass there and far away from the enemy team are pretty cancerous to play with full share. This is very different from most of the more competitive team game maps and TMM where it switches to being cancerous to play without full share.

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • ZeldafanboyZ Offline
                                    Zeldafanboy
                                    last edited by

                                    Not really, maps like Wonder, Diversity, Twin Rivers etc. are almost never played with fullshare in my experience. Canis River has pretty dense spawns but it's definitely not a cancerous turtle map like Astro Craters or Dual Gap...

                                    put the xbox units in the game pls u_u

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • First post
                                      Last post