If you want to use Double elimination then 5 teams is a terrible number. One team will get a bye 1st round. Better to either have a limit of 4 teams and keep using double elimination or use other tournament format eg. Swiss Style or some Swiss Style adjusted one.
If you assume decently balanced teams then Swiss Style will also produce more (decent quality) games.
I'm currently on holidays but I will take a deep dive when I'm back. I read through the post and it seemed really solid
The most important thing is to reward both activity and skill. You can't allow the highest rated dude to play 5 games and then just stop playing and sit on their rating awaiting their reward.
@Sheikah When you have time could we get an updated graph that includes 2024?
Also, would it be possible to get stats on how many active players we have in different rating brackets? It would be useful to gauge if there is a decline in new players or if high-rated scene is declining.
@elusive said in SACU Rebalance:
As for giving gateways the nuke treatment (~10x the build power, ~10x the build time) that could be done, but feels kind of antithetical to the primary goal of this thread, to make them more common, not less common.
That cannot be done in a way that works since you can obtain the SACU with upgrades via 2 ways. Make the preset using the gate or make a stock SACU and upgrade it. Even if we give the gateway nuke launcher treatment you could just make stock SACUs and upgrade them manually. And you can't give the SACUs the nuke launcher treatment for obvious reasons (they can use the insane BP to build things).
@sainserow said in SACU Rebalance:
Reclaim value & veterancy are based on the initial SACU cost (i.e. they're not taking in account any upgrade added later). There are a lot of important tradeoffs there. Do I want fast veterancy for battle SACU? Or high reclaim so I can regain my mass when it dies? Etc
AFAIK that was fixed some time ago and now the veterancy and reclaim should work properly for both upgraded and preset SACUs.
I would like to be there as well. I thought about contributing to the client for some time now and recently I wrote a bit in Java so it seems like a perfect time. Obviously I am too inexperienced to be a maintainer but I would like to start contributing a little bit.
Let's get back on topic and not discuss some hypothetical further. Currently, there are no plans to change the tech 1 stage, and I doubt we would ever buff the whole T1.
Changes to the reclaim rates have been merged to FAF Develop for testing. With these changes, we aim to make the new feature of Area Reclaim work with FAF's gameplay (Area Reclaim is also on FAF Develop). These changes are also an experiment to reduce the volatility of the early game and slow the rapid progression of high reclaim maps.
If you lose a reclaiming engineer early on it won't be as punishing and with the area reclaim it will be easier to requeue the reclaim orders quickly.
Current stats of the game:
Reclaim speed of Props (Rocks): 50 m/s
Reclaim speed of Trees: 50 e/s
Reclaim speed of Wrecks: 25 m/s
Proposed changes:
Reclaim speed of Props (Rocks): 10 m/s
Reclaim speed of Trees: 50 e/s
Reclaim speed of Wrecks: 20 m/s
Before jumping to the conclusion that this will completely break the game and it will feel very weird please make sure to test out the changes. You might be surprised how these changes feel despite the 5x decrease. Especially if you used an attack move and now will utilize the Area reclaim instead.
For comparison here is a replay of me testing it out on The Ditch. The map where these adjustments will have the biggest effect.
Replay ID: #22701041
I was considering writing a lengthy response but @BlackYps summed up everything I wanted to say basically.
If there are issues with distinguishing users, we should use the user ID anyway. That's what it's for.
The rules regarding impersonations and making similar names to somebody else should be more clear.
The limit of 12 months is IMO pretty insane and doesn't solve the underlying issues anyway. It should be reverted to the original 1 month.
I think you should use FAF version, for non 4v4 games it can matter quite a bit. Mid hydro position is super imba
You should probably add a rating cap at 2.3k or 2.2k. Otherwise people above 2.5k can't even participate (their team mate would need to be <1800).
Will do so when I come back home
@noc We never had BO7 RO8 and BO9 Semis/bronze/finals. I think that's just a bit too much. If I were to play full BO7 in the RO8 followed by a BO9 in the semi Final I probably would just stop at some time, that's simply too many games. I think that 8-10 games per day is a max.
Are you sure that BO7 RO8 and BO9 semis and finals is not a little too much? That will take hours
The primary reason for the creation of the balance channels in discord was to provide a space where people can talk about balance and suggest different ideas without the more strict requirements that exist on forum. Unfortunately the dc channels turned into a meme quite quickly without any proper moderation. Ideally on discord there would be more relaxed restrictions that mostly deal with trolls and spammers while the forum would be the place for the more thought-out and serious disscusion.
While a good solution it would also require someone to moderate those dc channels which would be quite a lot of work and I'm unsure if any of the mods would like to do this. There is also a question of how and where to display the rules for these channels.
If someone writes something I disagree with but makes an effort to explain why he thinks such a thing is good or w/e and makes some actual arguments, then I reply and explain why I disagree.
If someone makes a shit low-effort post that I disagree with then I downvote.
Will some people abuse such a feature? Probably.
Do we need to lose a useful feature like this one because of the few people who will abuse it? I don't think so.
To all of the people who think that somehow this will make people simply use upvote/downvote instead of writing posts to discuss things, voice their disagreements etc. I can't speak for others but in the past, if I disagreed with some low-effort post I simply ignored it or waited for someone else to reply and upvoted their post. Now at least I have a similar low-effort tool to show that I disagree with OP. It won't make me give more feedback, it will simply allow me to show my feedback when I am commuting and don't have time to write well-thought-out responses anyway.