Profile of Gbpirate

I doubt future Relic games will be good. All of the top tier talent that was at Relic are now in Blackbird Interactive working on Homeworld 3. Quin Duffy (created COH 2 and AOE 4) also just left Relic.

seems like they are struggling to keep players in what should've been a great game? https://steamcharts.com/app/281610#All

IMO the worst part about the USF base is that it's just about the same size as the barrage area for OKW's Scavenge Doctrine artillery which for a certain period of time did not have a maximum to the number of shells; it increased to the theoretical maximum of 9,999 munitions.

A simple puma rush into the base and an ascetic adherence to the preservation of munitions led to annihilation losses especially in 1v1 where shouts of "you should be thankful you don't have to spend fuel to rebuild your base" were infinitely both confounding and enraging due to the conspicuous display of ignorance. To this day I am barely able to muster a brief chuckle as I relive the past horrors of this ignorance which, somehow, was worse than suffering a defeat from such a silly strategy.

I saw a dude here that said he saw 44fps on a 3060 laptop, I'm wondering if I'd get reasonable frames a 1440p or if anyone tried..

I'd say your biggest issue is going to be cooling.

I play on a laptop that's five years old, 1070. They're not made to be taken apart and cleaned thoroughly but I've got my computer on an amazon basics stand with a big cooling fan underneath and that has really improved performance and extended my computer's life.

You'll probably be fine in terms of framerate and performance but be sure to track your internal parts' temperatures to make sure they're doing alright.

So in a nutshell, to fix matchmaking one is required to join an arranged team in order to get roflstomped by the other cult members.

"Constructive criticism" my ass. Stop shilling.

As this game is nearing the end of its life cycle — or perhaps is already there — I would be baffled if Relic were to make changes to the matchmaking algorithm.

Based on this assumption and analysis of the information I have, I give a suggestion to improve player experience.

A question and then notes based on the assumption:

Are you designing a competitive 1v1 map? If not, a lot of these things might not apply, but some will.

Here are suggestions from A_E's map making competition from ~1 year ago:
MAP CRITERIA

1) No rural maps: the map cannot be a rural map like Cossroads, Faymonville, Amily etc. – use a different setting and be creative.

2) Same flow as rural maps: the same spacing ratio, LOS distribution, and flow as tournament level rural maps.

3) VP spacing: All three should lie across the halfway line of the map or near to it. There shouldn't be a 'safe' VP.

4) Resources. 10 standard resource points per map. 2 High fuels, 2 high munis. 2 aggressively placed cut-offs per side.

5) Elevation: As little elevation as possible.

6) Garrisons: they should exist but not be dominant over VPs, cutoffs, or fuel points.

7) Red cover: should be used sparingly and logically or not at all.

8) Even point spacing. Evenly placed in clear logical capping order chains (see Amily Fields).

9) Green cover should be evenly distributed and equally accessible for both sides.

10) Lighting/Weather the map should have good brightness and contrast levels without weather affects such as snow/ rain/ or fog - to maximise visibility.

This is pretty strict as the maps were designed for super competitive play but these guiding principles are good for any map you're making with an eye for the competitive or even automatch scene:

Some notes from myself:
1) improper fuel and munition points used. The standard is +11 muni and +7 fuel; those both have the _mp at the end to indicate they're for multiplayer maps with the right values

2) Cutoffs are too close to base, munitions points too close to base. If you want munition points to be "safe" that's fine, but ideally the cutoff for them would be closer to the middle.

3) garrisonable buildings in or near base sectors are bad. This means an opponent could put a unit in there and kill units in your base which is supposed to be your safe space. It's possible to block the doors for the buildings on the outside but accessible from the inside but I'm not sure if that's worth the hassle.

4) The top section having three access points is fine as they're evenly spaced, but you might want to consider making that space somewhat safe from the rest of the map. Reason being, you can operate somewhat independently there with units you're taking away from the rest of the map while your opponent can't stop a push with a unit that has easy access to the rest of the map.

5) one too many standard territory point; the competitive standard is 10 but you've got 11. The middle point could be a great single munition point (as opposed to one from each side) or otherwise you've got to figure out how to divide the space up.

6) two big buildings on the bottom VP; could work as it's fair and balanced in layout but in practice, due to faction design, building play just isn't fun or balanced for all factions.

7) Middle VP being inside a building is a bit of a meme tbh. Depending on how much you want to change, the middle train station could be maneuverable ruins with the point inside of it! But that would upset the scale of the map quite a bit.