Forged Alliance Forever

Re: Why is fullshare on on seton ?

2017-11-06T12:43:53+02:00

Sniping is even less of a thing now since RAS is crap and no one does it. At least before sniping the players with RAS had a clear benefit of hindering or even outright removing the enemy team's capability to build T3 air/nukes, now that's no longer the case either since everyone has T2 power all around early on.

Also Hilde, get playing

Statistics: Posted by JoonasTo — 06 Nov 2017, 12:43

Re: Why is fullshare on on seton ?

2017-11-06T11:50:15+02:00

tatsu wrote:
eco is just too strong on this map and without full share you can go ham on all sorts of com snipes that the only counter to are going to be beating the other to the punch.

makes for very, very short, very unsatisfying games even for the winner.

Well this actually sums it up anyway.

Statistics: Posted by Hildegard — 06 Nov 2017, 11:50

Re: Why is fullshare on on seton ?

2017-11-06T11:44:16+02:00

Sorry for the lengthy post but here's my thoughts on this subject:

To say that "fullshare"-setting removes an integral meta of the game (assassination) is false; it changes the meta. It changes the type of penalty suffered from losing an ACU. While the penalty is arguably lesser, it is also fundamentally different, and one which adds a significant layer of depth into the game. Let me explain.

Specifically on Seton's Clutch, which is sized 20x20 and has considerable distances between player starting positions, sniping is a very attractive tactic. Killing an enemy team member at the start of the game will instantly mean that side loses, since nobody can re-populate the assassinated starting spot in any timely manner (unlike on some other team game maps, where the starting positions are right besides one another). If an enemy team member dies late in the game; the team loses a massive portion of their economy in one hit, and recovering will likely be impossible. It is nearly impossible to rebuild a wiped-out base on Seton's, for in almost all cases that would first require wiping out an enemy fleet, because once a navy has no opposition, it will anchor at the shoreline, and keep the entire base (or actually two bases) permanently dead. Considering that the map (thanks to its size and "openness", and fast economic progression) enables for literally every type of cheese snipe imaginable, having "fullshare"-turned off would make sniping disproportionately cost-effective. After all, you only have to succeed in killing one player, and that's game, or at least leaves the opponent with extremely slim chances of comeback.

Opposed to this, when using "fullshare", the type of penalty is more subtle; less devastating perhaps, but long-lasting and far more interesting. Assassination is still a valuable course of action, but the results are different, and ultimately allow for situations where individual player skill becomes more prominent than it could otherwise be. First you have to take into account the skill level of the commander-to-be-assassinated. Removing the weakest link of the enemy team grants the stronger players control of their economy, and will, in most cases, mean a tougher fight for your own side. The assassination-game gets a targeting priority: always from strongest players to the weakest. If a team is unbalanced, the best player will likely expect sniping attempts to be made (more than usually), and will prepare for this, making it harder to execute any cheese.

But what's really interesting is controlling multiple bases with huge economies and lots of area. Noobs like to think it just doubles or triples your economy with 0 penalty. But I bid you to play against players of your own skill in a situation where they have 2 players, both controlling one base, and you alone control two bases. Your economies are even, the only difference is that you have (most often) half the brain-cells, half the hands and half the number of mouse clicks and keybind hits. This will cause fatigue in long games. Perfectly controlling two bases allows for perhaps even higher level of performance than two players controlling one base individually (due to no communication delay or misunderstandings), but it requires constant high-intensity performance that's far more taxing than the level you usually play on. On Seton's this can get really tough with even two bases, since sometimes you have to divide your attention to three fronts at once: fighting your mirror with your initial base, fighting the mirror of your friends old base, and helping your losing friend on the other side of the map with a portion of the inherited economy/base. And now imagine controlling three bases. Fighting two navies simultaneously and controlling air units, and managing the economy and making game ending plans - Riveting! You should easily perceive that at this stage it will be impossible for any player to upkeep their level of micro with navy or air units (or sometimes to even progress base building as efficiently as you are able with only one); you have to prioritize your attention and leave some areas on lesser attention. This might be harder to notice at really low levels since players will, for example, just give a single attack order with their ships, which takes no time anyway, but at a little bit higher levels you'll notice that giving a single move/attack order for ships vs. keeping them on the move and focusing on critical targets makes a massive difference in the outcome of naval battles. Maneuvers you don't have the time to execute. And this can (and will) be used against you. Fighting against two or three active and aggressive players will eventually overwhelm you, and you will be forced to yield much easier on some fronts than if you only had to operate that particular base and mirror.

The challenge that rises from these game situations that only fullshare can enable is one of the most entertaining and definitely most rewarding experiences the game (or at least Setons) has to offer. Furthermore, it enables the games to continue and to progress into the late stages of built up economies and big units, and to remain in a more or less even state instead of abruptly ending the moment someone dies, which would ruin the entire game for all the players involved in fun/challenging fights, struggles and operations everywhere else on the map.

Statistics: Posted by Hildegard — 06 Nov 2017, 11:44

Re: Why is fullshare on on seton ?

2017-11-05T18:04:16+02:00

surtsan wrote:
And if it is a multi hour game (wut? 2 hours? I have never played that long in a game)

Well, you have like 10 games, I'm not surprised

Statistics: Posted by JoonasTo — 05 Nov 2017, 18:04

Re: Why is fullshare on on seton ?

2017-11-05T16:50:52+02:00

look what you say applies on any other map but setons is different in that the meta has been developed to a point that it's clearly unconventional and being so advanced makes the exponential possible gaps ginormous you don't want or need to exacerbate that any further.

you can try it out.

playing with people who know the meta and who are +1500 and setons will end in under 15 minutes if fullshare is off. and noone whill have gotten their fill.

eco is just too strong on this map and without full share you can go ham on all sorts of com snipes that the only counter to are going to be beating the other to the punch.

makes for very, very short, very unsatisfying games even for the winner.

but to each their own. If you don't like it host shareless setons. I'm sure you can fill em.

I'll just say that if you've upgraded your playstyle from fullshare to shareless then what are you doing sticking around on setons? time to upgrade that too.

Statistics: Posted by tatsu — 05 Nov 2017, 16:50

Re: Why is fullshare on on seton ?

2017-11-05T15:35:25+02:00

Yeah I understand that one death is/can a huge blow for enemy in fullshare off but for me it is normal, you should be penalized if you are in a 3v4 situation. If you see a weakness in enemy team you better exploit it.

Oh this one is a good one, for a connection loss (but tbh there is 50% chance of anyone disconnecting in your team or enemy team, or maybe even less chance in your team since you hopefully have a stable connection). And if it is a multi hour game (wut? 2 hours? I have never played that long in a game), in this scenario put t3 engineers in your friend bases I guess..

I was just thinking of seton for fullshare, not 2v2 or other scenario.
I don't know, I love the fact in fa that all maps can be insanely different to play, for example cramped teamgames maps means that it is often easier to have double eco (less apm usually as you said) whereas big maps it is often harder to double eco, variety is nice on that double eco scenario too.

And yes, in full share I guess you snipe the one who will have the biggest blow to loose for the enemy team.

Statistics: Posted by surtsan — 05 Nov 2017, 15:35

Re: Why is fullshare on on seton ?

2017-11-05T13:32:57+02:00

Because one player dropping or crashing halfway in a multi-hour game is garbage.

And yes, if you snipe people, start from the best okay?

Statistics: Posted by JoonasTo — 05 Nov 2017, 13:32

Re: Why is fullshare on on seton ?

2017-11-05T04:03:51+02:00

People come to faf for a fun experience (kappa)

A lot of people, myself included, don't think that snipes are a fun part of the game. It will ruin a lot of games and end them within 10 min.

Having to play 2v1, even with the same eco, will be a serious downside (especially in 2v2 games) because you will have half the apm of the other team. Because of that acu kills are still worth quite a lot, but not the insane value it normally has.

In normal teamgames though, full share probably won't be good for the gameplay because most teamgame maps are really cramped, which means having an extra base won't require a lot of apm. This means you can do stupid suicide charges on your enemy while keeping your base intact for your ally for when you die.

Statistics: Posted by Farmsletje — 05 Nov 2017, 04:03

Re: Why is fullshare on on seton ?

2017-11-05T03:42:50+02:00

Most 2v2s utilize full share.

Statistics: Posted by FtXCommando — 05 Nov 2017, 03:42

Re: Why is fullshare on on seton ?

2017-11-05T03:36:26+02:00

I hate it, but I assume it's because each player on a Seton's team has a specialized role (front, rock, beach, air) and if one of those go down (especially air, maybe not front) that team basically loses the game. I do agree that fullshare often makes it so losing a com can be a benefit to a team, which sucks, but Setons is so huge that managing two spots is pretty mentally taxing. Sniping during the T2 stage of the game is the worst because that can really slingshot the enemy into the T3 stage long before anyone else. As a Cybran player that can be a huge bummer because I love Corsair snipes.

Although, only roughly half the Seton's games I play are fullshare. Thankfully I've never seen it on another map.

Statistics: Posted by Zeldafanboy — 05 Nov 2017, 03:36

Re: Why is fullshare on on seton ?

2017-11-05T03:03:35+02:00

Real men play with the share setting that gives the base to the enemy if an ACU dies.

Statistics: Posted by FtXCommando — 05 Nov 2017, 03:03

Re: Why is fullshare on on seton ?

2017-11-05T02:33:43+02:00

Because somehow ironocally senton people are the smartest at picking good lobby settings.

Statistics: Posted by Petricpwnz — 05 Nov 2017, 02:33

Why is fullshare on on seton ?

2017-11-05T02:19:55+02:00

Hi,

I was just wondering (didn't really get an answer about that on aeolus, just one vague answer) why is full share on on "high level" seton (pray it doesn't spread to other maps, please) ? All the maps I have ever played on faf or even on gpg, it was never full share on the maps I was playing (never played seton before on faf/gpg btw).

It kinda kills the purpose of assassination (you want to snip an acu and then ideally take their base or at least the reclaim with engineers). With full share on, even if you kill an acu, it is just a double eco for another player (which can, and often is much more scary, if the player knows what he's doing with it) so you don't really get any advantage (can even be a disadvantage) in sniping an acu. Of course if it is a "beginner" who has double eco, it won't change anything on the game.
I guess the only scenario where it doesn't affect that much to have full share on instead of off is when you snip with drop com t3 for example, you can grab most of his eco rather easily)

tldr :
-Much less penalizing for a team to loose an acu
-Sniping is, most of the times, not really interesting anymore and can even worsen ur team situation if you snipe an acu because of double eco.

Dammit, had another argument but forgot it.

I would even think that supremacy may even be better than assassination full share (at least no double eco in supremacy, but games can last much longer in supremacy...)

Only talking about seton fullshare btw, no other map. I'm really curious to read the answers and see what I didn't think about that.

Statistics: Posted by surtsan — 05 Nov 2017, 02:19