Sign up

@snoog said in Setons Clutch Tourney 2024:

Can I propose a meta ban? Beach cannot walk mid. Thanks.

lol

What even is this? Just people hosting games, people joining them and playing the game?

FAF has been operational for over a decade, and has yet to establish reliable consistent connections between players.

You rarely see this issue occur in steam, and the best part in steam is that, if someone does disconnect, you can simply wait for them to reconnect. 9/10 times they successfully reconnect too. I remember when you could do this in faf many moons ago, but sadly this is no longer the case. And you can't reconnect in the client either to try salvage it.

Idk what the problem is with faf and players not being able to reliably connect to eachother in game. It's very painful going through 32 minutes of video gameplay only to have some random player randomly disconnect for no apparent reason.

I doubt faf will ever fully resolve this issue, I don't think they even know how.

Signing up Yew 2074 + KuhwaKlimakleber 2078

The logic is quite simple.

Larger maps > increased probability of longer games > increased probability of the games scope being realised (i.e. nukes/experimental/technology three units and strategies of eliminating the enemy armoured command unit) > which for many players ultimately translates to more fun.

In smaller maps, especially 5x5 maps, you are lucky if you get to use 25-30% +/- of what the game has to offer in terms of its units and the strategies available to kill an opponent.

Granted this may be daunting in a 1v1 game and can be drawn out and even "boring" for some players. But there are players that enjoy this, even in the context of 1v1.

They enjoy long games consisting of big battles, not short games consisting of short battles

signing up

This game is a lot better on steam, just play there instead

Just play on steam instead. I've found that all my problems with faf go away when I don't use the faf client to play the game. The steam version is superior in a number of ways.

For you personally, obviously no recall exists so that would be of great benefit to you.

Additionally, you will find that the game runs a lot smoother on steam, and there are practically 0 connection issues with players. It is very rare for someone to disconnect from a steam game, unlike faf which has been plagued with this issues since it's inception probably.

Some other small things too. Players are generally nice and are just there to play the game and chill. Of course it is still competitive, but not nearly as sweaty and unpleasant as faf. One of the downsides though is that the player base in steam is sadly quite small. Other than that, steam is great for playing this game.

Please point out where I say anything of the kind. I am curious if and by how much we can rely on 4 year data. Surely it's not exactly the same.

Preference by and large probably does remain the same.

News flash: You do not need to be in the client all day long to find out the name history of a user.

@brutus5000 said in Time to go:

@yew said in Time to go:

@brutus5000 said in Time to go:

It's Endranii, once again pointing out how silly the renaming thing is.

Right click user check name history. Checkmate server admin guy.

In the forum? On mobile? Tell me more, Mr. Passive Aggressive

In the Forged Alliance Forever Client, Mr. Woke Snowflake

How relevant is 4 year data?

@brutus5000 said in Time to go:

It's Endranii, once again pointing out how silly the renaming thing is.

Right click user check name history. Checkmate server admin guy.

Here's how:

1. Delete all 5x5 maps from the pool (maybe 1 is acceptable)

Reason: 95%> of 5x5 map games end within 15minutes, which I bet for most players is not fun. Therefore anything larger, like the customary 10x or 20x maps incentivise longer gameplay. You can rationalise this logic by using an endless amount of analogies. Here's a few.

Analogy 1 - I like to watch TV shows, and find great pleasure in binge watching them. One of my favourite TV shows is Dexter. I recently binge watched the first 5 series (for the second time). When I begin my binge watching, I don't just watch 10 minutes of one episode, or 18 minutes of an episode, what is the point of that, unless you suddenly have to stop watching it for whatever reason. At minimum I watch a full episode, which ranges from 45 - 60 minutes. Often I would watch back to back episodes. By doing this, I see the full arc and plot of the episode, and become engrossed in the story and characters being portrayed.

Analogy 2 - I am partial to a bit of online, and over the board chess. It's a timeless game that millions enjoy. Now imagine a chess game where you're playing bullet chess. Games last <3minutes. Imagine further that every piece on the board is removed for both players, except their king, and 1 or 2 pawns. Each player has 2/3 pieces. Imagine further, instead of the standard 8x8 board of 64 squares, you now have a 3x3 board of 9 squares. Now picture how this hypothetical game looks and feels as a player. It would be very fast, and frankly boring, in which both players gain little to no satisfaction in playing. At least by playing with all your pieces on a full size board you can explore the 10^120 possible moves the game has to offer.

Analogy 3 - As a lover of crisps (potato chip), I can easily devour any size portion of crisps, such as the 30g bag, a 50g bag, 100g or 200g sharing bag, no problem. Let's take the standard serving size bag which is typically around 30g. I open the bag, and I begin eating the contents. I eat the whole bag and finish the contents. The same applies to most bags up to 200g, where I will often save at least half a 200g bag, or a 1/3 if I'm feeling fat that day. I would never open a bag of crisps (30g) eat 1 or 2 crisps and leave the bag to eat later. I will eat the whole bag. There is little point or pleasure in eating a few crisps from the bag, when the bag has so much more to offer, i.e. it's entirety, of which provides a full and satiating serving.

Now,

Similarly, I do not enjoy playing this game for such a short period of time. I want to maximise my fun by playing for not too short a time, but equally not too long a time. Personally, I enjoy games that last a minimum of 40 - 60 minutes irl time. The game has a large scope, with many units, many things to do and actions to execute. This can not be explored to any real degree in such a limited and constrained scenario, of which, a 5x5 1v1 ladder match essentially is.

I understand that many players gain the most satisfaction from playing this game by simply defeating their opponent. Being the victor, the superior player is very satisfying, maybe the most satisfying aspect of any competitive game that requires you to end the virtual existence of your opponent. Defeating them fast can only serve to boost this feeling too right.

But take a step back. In the context of this game. Are you really serving the higher good by beating opponents as fast as humanly possible. Is that encouraging players to want to play more? How sure are you to get another game after you just spend 97 minutes in a queue only to have killed your guy, or being killed by the guy in a mere 9 minutes and 34 seconds? Is playing the game and winning in 9 minutes and 34 seconds more satisfying, pleasurable and entertaining than playing for 43 minutes and 12 seconds, win or lose?

The game was made to have fun, to remove you temporarily from the absurdity that is real life. Yes part of that fun involves beating an opponent in it's online competitive variant, but it's not the only aspect of it.

I disagree with the statement, "...is almost solely because of selfish moderation."

If FAF is dying and in decline as you posit, I think it's attributable to the dyer connectivity problems and recent insane game lagging by way of drastic FPS loss players are facing.

I for one, having frequented this game like a crackhead in crackden, am becoming pretty tired and fed up not being able to fully satiate my addiction.

I cannot remember the last time I had a full uninterrupted game where someone didn't disconnect or I myself did not lose connection to a player. It is impossible nowadays to have a full smooth game with 0 disconnects.

Reminds me of Youtube getting rid of the dislike counter.

FAF board of directors and shareholders should focus on fixing connection issues and important things like that instead of changing things that don't need changing.

Tempest and czars are also factory's, but do suffer from the same manufacturing inadequacies.

Granted Aeon technology is far superior to UEF's, and are likely utilising materials and engineering not yet discovered by the UEF. But for the purpose of this game and "balance", I do think they should get a HP boost.

There is also the Fatboy MK II, I'm not sure how it compares to the Wyvern. Both are certainly far stronger than the base unit Fatboy

Can an exception not be made given it is an experimental unit, but I tend to agree about being consistent.

The hp should just get buffed then or at least vet buff on hp