#Discord Specific Suggestion - Clean up Meta Discussion

1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

robust wyvern
#

From what I understand, meta-discussion is designed around talking about stategies and how to counter plays, but scrolling through its just another forum for people to complain about balance for the most part. Can we get a mod to go through and clean out all the junk so its no longer a platform for complaining about perceived unfairness and instead a forum for opening discussing the meta?

It'd be cool to hear things like "I got co-op'd on sea in Ithismus. How do I counter?" then watching the BAR gamers discuss how one might counter it. This would actively allow the meta to grow on maps rather than the cest pit of complaints it currently is.

tropic basalt
#

if you want to learn how to play sea better feel free to ask your questions there
For some reason, strategy wasn't discussed much even when there was a dedicated strategy forum

#

Meta discussion is a place for open discussion and vetting suggestions, not censoring sentiment that you don't agree with. It's a balance and design observation, you can agree with it or disagree with it

coral mango
#

You need to read this @robust wyvern : #1309904457382887455 message

Basically all the balance complaints used to be in suggestions channel which clogged up the suggestions channel. So they were moved to meta discussion.

So meta discussion is basically: strategy discussion + balance complaints.

Maybe strategy and balance complaints could be separated. I dunno.

robust wyvern
#

Oh man, I guess the complainers do need an outlet, but meta discussion is such an awesome idea, I think it would make sense to separate the balance out of it. I guess I missed the balance part in there.

Honestly, creating an echo chamber for the people crying about perceived issues would be awesome. Leave suggestions for gameplay changes, map tweaks, and gameplay features. Meta for discussing meta, then a new channel called "Echo Chamber" for where the peopel complaining about nonesense can complain?

Its just wild to me how theres basically no meta conversations happening, and the ones that are are burried under ridiculous posts like "Co-op is a problem" which is a thread complaining about co-op...but not discussing how to address it in game...just that the devs should nerf it because its too powerful. It'd be so much more productive if the title was "How do I deal with Co-Op?" or something in the meta channel, then a separate echo chamber for people to just complain about htings they don't like. Complainers do need to be complaining I guess.

Which is ironic because here I am complaining about there even being a forum for complainers. But the idea of open meta discussion focused around current in-game tools... that sounds rad.

robust wyvern
# tropic basalt Meta discussion is a place for open discussion and vetting suggestions, not cens...

Its filled with you complaining about a bunch of nonsense. Not how to use the in-game resources to counter plays. Dude half the channel is you complaining because you lost to something. And my suggestion is tailored around trying to figure out a way to remove that forum to a place where it can die.

You're not the only one, but there's zero proactive talk about using in-game resources to counter in-game plays. Its always "THIS IS TOO POWERFUL BECAUSE I AM NOT GOOD ENOUGH TO DEAL WITH IT." And I think that kind of dialog SHOULD be censored. It adds no value to the meta.

sage prairie
#

So you want to shut down coop discussion because it makes you rage ? Lol

#

There’s a lively discussion going on in the thread. High level players are in it as well. I see no issue there

robust wyvern
#

Not at all. I LOVE the idea of meta discussion. Its cool to talk about strategies and would be a great resource for people to go look at when they lose to a strat so they can see other people's thoughts on how to counter it.

sage prairie
#

There’s like 10 people in the thread talking and a lot of those people are top players giving interesting insights

robust wyvern
#

I don't disagree with that at all.

#

But the OP is just complaining because not good enough. That's not healthy for a forum.

sage prairie
#

I think the op is proven to be good based on the great discussion it’s started. QED

robust wyvern
#

Mmm, point.

#

Though that same discussion has been going on for over a year and the devs have already released their opinion on the matter...so its kind of a dead horse?

sage prairie
#

Yeah that’s because some people think it’s a big problem and some people don’t. So there’s a lot to talk about

#

Thus a discussion thread where they talk about it

robust wyvern
#

The dev's don't think its a problem, and players aren't using the ingame tools to remove it from being a thing. And there is some major hypocracy there, because someone always demands a transport from me when playing sea (eyes Chrono). But, this is outside of the point. Point of this thread is to separate the two. A place where people can complain about balance to their hearts content...including the merits of coop. And a separate place to discuss the meta of different maps.

sage prairie
#

The description of channel says it’s to discuss strategies and balance. What’s the issue. You just want it split up?

robust wyvern
#

Yeah, because very few meta conversations are happening because their burried under complaints about losing to a perceived balance issue.

#

Imagine a thread in there titled: "I got 2v1'd in geo sea because my oponents co-op'd. What can I do to counter?" Then people talking about things you could do to counter like: opening early air on sea to do a quick bombing run on opponent, or com dropping, or getting an early scout off, or how to turtle/delaying tactics until your team can react.

#

That'd be so much more....wholesome first off, and much more productive in terms of dealing with the "problem" of teamplay.

#

This would also be a great resource for new players feeling lost about how to deal with things they haven't seen before.

sage prairie
#

As someone who loves to learn it would be awesome if there was a place I could make a thread with really specific questions and players - mentors or not like yourself - could chime in with their thoughts

#

So I think that’s a cool idea

#

I find way too many people in this community don’t ask questions enough

robust wyvern
#

I don't think academy has a chat? But Meta discussion would be no different. But, yeah, either way having open dialog on how to counter current strats would be really cool.

sage prairie
#

Yeah that would be dope

#

They offer replay reviews and stuff like that as well

#

I personally think it’s a little too isolated. It would be cool like you’re saying if random players > 30 os were replying to stuff. I would love that

robust wyvern
#

Ah, yeah, but its all one giant thread. I think more specific targeting would be more in lines of what would interest me. To be fair, Lobster HQ already does this, as its basically all of the top players anyways at this point.

#

BAR discord needs to leverage the interest the top players have in meta conversations...because thats basically all we talk about. We talk about interesting new strats, and who we can try them out on that will be the most effective for the win.

#

I think targeted threads would also help people understand how to be more adaptable to different plays, because thats the real issue going on in the community. Few are able to adapt or understands how to adapt, and meta discussion would open people up to different ways to dealing with things.

sage prairie
#

Yeah that would be neat
Taking it out of noob academy could be good in a way

tropic basalt
#

I'm all for strategy discussion

#

misconception

#

I do engage in coop counter play to deal with co-op players

robust wyvern
tropic basalt
#

if you understand what is the best thing you can do with X resources it is not hard to understand how to best leverage 1.5x or 2x that

#

is it fun tho for my teammate who is a battery? or noob getting giga stomped by the higher os? the topic is long and complicated

robust wyvern
tropic basalt
#

sure.

robust wyvern
#

But even still, noobs will almost always get stomped by higher os. That will always be a thing. So why not give that noob a resource to learn how to deal with the higher os player?

sage prairie
#

“Ok first of all you gotta scout the 50 os coop all in”

#

Yeah losing to 50 os coop is a great learning experience for them

#

I agree though they have no chance no matter what against skilled players

#

Coop just makes it a lot more extreme and obvious

robust wyvern
#

Which is another reason to have a meta/academy thread channel that breaks down specific meta strats and how to deal with them. Helps the noobs. Top players get to geek out about high level stuff. And overall the meta develops for the better. And once co-op has been learned on how to be dealt with, due to developing meta, then there will be some new meta that is OP until people learn how to deal with it.

robust wyvern
sage prairie
robust wyvern
#

It would solve the RNG of a 10 versus a 50.

sage prairie
#

I only want to play 1 spot glitters it helps you learn way faster when you isolate variables like that

sage prairie
robust wyvern
sage prairie
#

Why? That’s a fatal flaw btw

tropic basalt
#

you can't simply turn an open source project with it's volunteers and turn it into a for profit company without it imploding

#

who gets paid first, and for what? what about past work?

sage prairie
#

It will never get heavily marketed then. There’s no reason to expand community really without profit motive. Just a lot more work for everyone involved

tropic basalt
#

a common mission perhaps. there's some open source examples to look at for example

#

dunno if there are any open source competitive games tho

sage prairie
#

I’ve played some like CDDA and they’re a disaster partially due to this

robust wyvern
#

There is a LOT of politics that happened a few years ago. It was absolutely a hostile take-over, probably for the better, but ownership is complicated. To be fair, its a passion project that is very cut throat. They don't leave space for "older versions" and whatnot. If you want to go down the rabbit hole sometime, I'd share the history of BAR ownership/poltics with you anotehr day. But honestly, the game is never going to be a paid thing. Its a passion project trying to create the ultimate RTS. As soon as you bring investors into that....the dream of the perfect RTS goes up in smoke.

sage prairie
#

I just think that will severely limit how popular the game will get. Marketing spend and a team devoted to growth / distribution is critical for selling products like this

#

Of course things do pop off without it but you’re in competition with products that have these things

robust wyvern
#

The goal isn't to have the game pop off. The goal is to create an amazing game, in the creator's eyes, unbeholden to anyone else's opinion.

sage prairie
#

Possibly you could do that not for profit and still pay people

#

Yeah well without it popping off you’ll always have these issues

sage prairie
robust wyvern
#

Yup. But thats what makes the game so niche-fun for us. We get to play the ultimate chess game and its ours and only passionate people play. Thats pretty wild.

sage prairie
#

The skill level would go way up if it were more popular

#

At the highest level I mean

robust wyvern
#

Oh for sure. And a lot of the best players who've navigated away would be more like to come back. The game has hemoraged players. Two years ago Chrono and I were barely 25 OS. We've gotten better at the game, sure, but the people who were in the 30-40s were more numerous and the games much more competitive.

sage prairie
#

Why did they all quit

robust wyvern
#

Slow leak of disinterest, no competition, perceived bad development decisions, other passions, burnout, other players rising to their level, etc.

sage prairie
#

Another reason they need to market. No user is forever. You have to replace people

#

The product is in a very good state imo they literally just need marketing money

robust wyvern
#

I mean, I maybe play 1 game a week, but its more like 1 game a month because there's so few players who can adapt anymore. I like dynamic gameplay, which is why I like talking meta and how to counter meta, and why I like the idea of a channel for that specifically. There are other games that have a better player base in terms of adaptability that are more fun. But I am right there with you. I wish they'd focus on a larger player base so they can implement the things they want to.

sage prairie
#

Wow see that just sucks

#

one thing I noticed in bar right off the rip is the avg player skill is low. even 25-35 os players i see doing things that are noob rts things.

#

units afk as fuck, slow gamers, etc

#

I think it’s bc team rts attracts weaker players

robust wyvern
#

Syphos and I ran an experiment to see how many games in a row we could win with a specific strategy. It took him to 47 OS. Same strat, very little changes, only adapting to changing map environment. No one ever countered it, even though they knew it was coming. That is how low-skill the community is. A meta discussion channel where people could talk about that play he ran over and over again... would be awesome and then maybe we'd get some adaptability in the game.

sage prairie
#

Yeah I believe that. No one seems to scout either mid game

#

I saw spookiedookie do the same bomber rush like 15 times in a row and it worked 80% of the time

robust wyvern
sage prairie
#

Yeah I know it’s a joke

#

I make fun of them for this makes them rage a lot when they lose to low os

#

Like if os is avg -15 below you you should get almost 0

robust wyvern
#

You want to win 90% of your games? Do a tier 1 air bombing from air. No one builds AA to this day.

sage prairie
#

I swear I had a guy 25 os fly all his shit over a control group of whistlers

sage prairie
#

But I can’t impact my games enough in the spots I play to win more than 60% of my games

robust wyvern
sage prairie
#

Because people game the system like you’re saying and by other means you basically have to grind os sometimes it seems like

robust wyvern
#

Nah, you grind to lose. Its much more fun being at lower os than higher os because you can do shenanigans.

sage prairie
#

Especially if you choose to play in lobbies where you’re in the bottom half skill wise

robust wyvern
#

There is no reward for being higher os.

sage prairie
#

Yeah but like I don’t care about os I just want to improve

#

Yeah true except positions

#

Low os doesn’t even get you on the worse team though lol

#

So many bad players inflated os

robust wyvern
#

Yeah, I guess positions now is a reward. That'd be another reason to have a meta-exclusive conversation. So people forced into "undesirable" roles can learn how to play those roles.

sage prairie
#

Even if you improve a lot if you’re in positions that don’t impact the game enough in most games it’s harder to up your win rate

#

But yeah you’re right I should just do 4 min bomber if I care

robust wyvern
sage prairie