An idea about much more fair game

[deradlerskartal]

hey. I have an idea about much more fair game in AoE II. As you know that enemy army can go right point to entry your base when your wall has a gap even your all walls in his fog. They can decide right way to enter your base without see map. this is all bulshit . for fair game they should directly go your walls until see here they are. and then try to go close point to final destination. defenders should know their base well like logically so enemy lose some time to far away atack point. this will be positive effect for defenders little bit like history too. Fogs should be real fogs for everyone.

 

[Freezing_Point]

I mean, even if we grant that right clicking army through to find holes in walls is unfair, to make that impossible would involve yet more overhauls to unit pathing, and we need more of that like we need syphilis.

 

[Tommutjah]

I agree with the sentiment that you should only be rewarded for something you have actually scouted. The problem is that the game cannot differentiate between a hole in the enemy wall, or an enemy base that is not walled at all. Then you should almost say that units can only enter an area that is already explored, which would be a bit too much imo.

Edit: And I also think that the defender should wall correctly, you can always check with a unit

 

[Impostorengineer]

I agree. An enemy should not be able to find a path where they haven't scouted yet. They should follow a direct path to the flag. They should try to go around any obstacle they find. But they shouldn't just go straight to an undiscovered path and find their way.
I also agree that this would be a difficult task. However, this will improve the quality of the game.
Pathing is already bad. Vills going berserk. Including this while working on a fix would be great .

 

[deradlerskartal]

I agree with the sentiment that you should only be rewarded for something you have actually scouted. The problem is that the game cannot differentiate between a hole in the enemy wall, or an enemy base that is not walled at all. Then you should almost say that units can only enter an area that is already explored, which would be a bit too much imo.

Edit: And I also think that the defender should wall correctly, you can always check with a unit

"almost say that units can only enter an area that is already explored" not exactly. It can be work like real life. they can try to go as possible short route accorfing to explored map in seconds. just think like real life. when your majesty says; " go there x/y coordination my soldier" you just decide route with every changed route conditions if you dont have a map.

 

[deradlerskartal]

I agree. An enemy should not be able to find a path where they haven't scouted yet. They should follow a direct path to the flag. They should try to go around any obstacle they find. But they shouldn't just go straight to an undiscovered path and find their way.
I also agree that this would be a difficult task. However, this will improve the quality of the game.
Pathing is already bad. Vills going berserk. Including this while working on a fix would be great .

exactly. and much more another important point is advantage defender. I think AoE is not fair for defenders. logically it is your homeland. you should has an advantage about it. for much more realistic game play I think AoE needs some little defenders buffs. I have another idea about buff for defenders too; upgrades should come like a wave from done point with a time period. like a tsunami. for example when fletcing upgrade is done a BS it would be expand tile per tile 1v1 map can complete like 20 sec. front BS for early ups will has some risk for destroy defenders. btw palading upgrades come visial seems awesome

 

[Tommutjah]

"almost say that units can only enter an area that is already explored" not exactly. It can be work like real life. they can try to go as possible short route accorfing to explored map in seconds. just think like real life. when your majesty says; " go there x/y coordination my soldier" you just decide route with every changed route conditions if you dont have a map.

I don't know if I understand you correctly, but I think the fundamental problem is this: what we consider a 'base' is something we project onto the game, it is not an entity in the game itself. The same goes with a 'hole'. Something is a hole, because it is a small gap that let units go in and out of what we consider a 'base'. But how should the game know what this 'base' is? You can say: 'a certain radius around the starting TC'. But what decides whether the base is walled? If there are still 10 tiles open, is that a hole? Do you still think that the enemy is not allowed to enter this big hole if it is not scouted yet? But how are we able the scout the map at all in the first place if we first have to explore it?

I don't know if I make myself sufficiently clear, but I think there is an interesting philosophical problem at the bottom of this issue

 

[deradlerskartal]

I don't know if I understand you correctly, but I think the fundamental problem is this: what we consider a 'base' is something we project onto the game, it is not an entity in the game itself. The same goes with a 'hole'. Something is a hole, because it is a small gap that let units go in and out of what we consider a 'base'. But how should the game know what this 'base' is? You can say: 'a certain radius around the starting TC'. But what decides whether the base is walled? If there are still 10 tiles open, is that a hole? Do you still think that the enemy is not allowed to enter this big hole if it is not scouted yet? But how are we able the scout the map at all in the first place if we first have to explore it?

I don't know if I make myself sufficiently clear, but I think there is an interesting philosophical problem at the bottom of this issue

actually quite simple. think like real life. you decide route like that; if the route is clean you just go directly to it, if it is not (blocked a river) you would go second best options that you have. until see bridge units should go riverside. bridge or gap in fog area is unknown status that cannot pass without explored. for exploring gap, units should contionously try to go best options with explored information. like real life.

 

[deradlerskartal]

like that;
from red to purple should be like that on unexplored map;

it works like that on AoEII for now:

 

[MuscleChamp]

I think if you forward these images to the devs nothing can go wrong

Maybe consider publishing them in a journal aswell

 

[Tommutjah]

I understand the basics of pathfinding, but I still don't understand what you propose. That units can only apply this pathfinding in explored areas? But what if in Dark Age you send your scout to an unexplored corner of the map and on the route the scout stumbles upon a forest. Do you want the scout to stop at this forest rather than finding a way around it? Surely not, right? You only want the scout not to find holes in the opponent's base, right? But my point is: what do you define as a 'base'? This is not a simple thing for the devs to program.

Or maybe I still don't understand you and you think making every unit stop when they stumble upon something that is not yet explored is good for the game?

 

[HelloWorld]

It works like this - It's only us who see the fog of war. Units dont have fog at war at all. They know the paths and units that are in the fog. But they only attack the units in the LoS.

It works via A* pathfinding algorithm (or some variant) - https://medium.com/@nicholas.w.swift/easy-a-star-pathfinding-7e6689c7f7b2

Either they have to work around the entire pathing algorithm or address the LoS within which the units can see the hole, lets say - if the units are within the vicinity about 25 tiles, then they can path through the hole or they have to find the hole by going to nearby tiles.

 

[LmScar12]

I understand the basics of pathfinding, but I still don't understand what you propose. That units can only apply this pathfinding in explored areas? But what if in Dark Age you send your scout to an unexplored corner of the map and on the route the scout stumbles upon a forest. Do you want the scout to stop at this forest rather than finding a way around it? Surely not, right? You only want the scout not to find holes in the opponent's base, right? But my point is: what do you define as a 'base'? This is not a simple thing for the devs to program.

Or maybe I still don't understand you and you think making every unit stop when they stumble upon something that is not yet explored is good for the game?

Have you played civ 6? you can send your unit to the far corner of the map, and it will try to take the shortest route, treating each unexplored tile as 1-movement point passable. Every turn it recomputes the path based on latest information.

Not sure this sort of pathing is possible in AoE2, I think the CPU load might be quite a bit higher than it is now. Also it would require code changes at the fundamental level, since currently pathfinding is computed against true game state. This change would require each player's units to pathfind based on separate incomplete game states.

 

[Elvaenor]

I don't know if I understand you correctly, but I think the fundamental problem is this: what we consider a 'base' is something we project onto the game, it is not an entity in the game itself. The same goes with a 'hole'. Something is a hole, because it is a small gap that let units go in and out of what we consider a 'base'. But how should the game know what this 'base' is? You can say: 'a certain radius around the starting TC'. But what decides whether the base is walled? If there are still 10 tiles open, is that a hole? Do you still think that the enemy is not allowed to enter this big hole if it is not scouted yet? But how are we able the scout the map at all in the first place if we first have to explore it?

I don't know if I make myself sufficiently clear, but I think there is an interesting philosophical problem at the bottom of this issue

I'm not sure how they determine things like these, but in Stronghold:Crusader, which was released in 2002 already, you do actually get a notification when your keep is enclosed in a game. You do have the advantage in this game, though, that you have a very clear base, which is your keep. In aoe2 you do have your initial tc, but that won't always be your actual base throughout the game.

 

[USC_kiky]

Imagine that you try to walled yourself inside and you want to send a villager to confirm that. The villager will have to go through every inch of your wall and unexplored forest to check if any hole exist. Currently the villager can point you where the hole is directly.

 

[sheeesh]

I'm not sure how they determine things like these, but in Stronghold:Crusader, which was released in 2002 already, you do actually get a notification when your keep is enclosed in a game. You do have the advantage in this game, though, that you have a very clear base, which is your keep. In aoe2 you do have your initial tc, but that won't always be your actual base throughout the game.

oh, the good old days with awesome RTS which you could buy once (or crack it) and play forever. Cliché as it may sound, they just don't make them like that anymore.

 

[LmScar12]

Imagine that you try to walled yourself inside and you want to send a villager to confirm that. The villager will have to go through every inch of your wall and unexplored forest to check if any hole exist. Currently the villager can point you where the hole is directly.

True, but you'd have to imagine that it would find it fairly quickly. The amount of unexplored territory forming your wall won't be very much.

 

[Uselessaurus Rex]

Imagine that you try to walled yourself inside and you want to send a villager to confirm that. The villager will have to go through every inch of your wall and unexplored forest to check if any hole exist. Currently the villager can point you where the hole is directly.

Not true, your villagers know where they have walled, they're in your LOS 11

They will go to all the unexplored bits of forest as you say, but the OP would was suggesting that would be valid

 

[Paulad]

Walls have been nerfed patches after patches, and there is a reason. Your statement about defenders being in disadvantage is wrong. Even with 0 wall, the defender will always have the advantage due do the distance that the attacker have to do to reach the defender base. Even if they do the military building near the defender base since there is one idle vil for long time.

Your suggestion would add realism but have you ever seen a camel in fire which explode while colluding someone? :D

 

[USC_kiky]

Well, if you want a real game, I don't see how a villager can go to the enemy's base barefoot and build a Siege workshop. I mean, where does the wood come from? In the real world, the villager has to carry some resources, e.g. 50 wood, from his own TC to the enemy's base and start the construction. After spending that 50 wood, he has to go home to carry another 50 wood. That way the defender would have a clear advantage because it's faster to carry resources from the defender own base to build fortifications 11

 

[Potkeny]

I mean, where does the wood come from?

The villager chops down the trees near the opponent's base of course.

 

[deradlerskartal]

Imagine that you try to walled yourself inside and you want to send a villager to confirm that. The villager will have to go through every inch of your wall and unexplored forest to check if any hole exist. Currently the villager can point you where the hole is directly.

your walls in explored side so pathing will be created without their side. we talking about fog/unexplored areas. if you have unexplored near forest, yes you are right your villiger will have much more walk to find gap.it is fair way because it is your base. your explored map ratio should be much more higher than enemy. btw you logically should explore it before enemy for hoımelander/defender advantage. unfortunatlly we are going to luring in these days that is not important to explore your base for this pathing style. like every sports, every historical battles homelander should has a defender advantage.

 

[deradlerskartal]

Not true, your villagers know where they have walled, they're in your LOS 11

They will go to all the unexplored bits of forest as you say, but the OP would was suggesting that would be valid

100% right.

 

[ProudObuch]

it works like that on AoEII for now:
View attachment 201311

I don't see a problem with that tbh.

 

[deradlerskartal]

Walls have been nerfed patches after patches, and there is a reason. Your statement about defenders being in disadvantage is wrong. Even with 0 wall, the defender will always have the advantage due do the distance that the attacker have to do to reach the defender base. Even if they do the military building near the defender base since there is one idle vil for long time.

Your suggestion would add realism but have you ever seen a camel in fire which explode while colluding someone? :D

dude, distance advantage on 1v1 is just 3 sec. it is not just about time. it will effect on gameplay style like luring a boar, trapping a enemy military, scouting logic etc. we need a small buff about homelander defensive game play in early ages.