what if they lame him on arenaplay arena
laming on arena has little impact at least :Pwhat if they lame him on arena
I don't think that's the way to play this game, have a huge lead from the start just because the opponent didn't go for lame as well, or because you're lucky.. but that's just my opinion. At least give the player a real chance to defend against it, or how about not lame if it's unstoppable?
I think the way it used to be was fine.. Just fix the host advantage somehow and it's even better.Just take away the ability of scout to attack boars.
Stealing res is not a well-thought strategy in a strategy game. It just messes up the strategy of your opponent if he doesn't steal res back as wellRemove the word lame, replace with M@A rush, flush, scrush.
You might say it's an incredibly well thought out strategy.I think the way it used to be was fine.. Just fix the host advantage somehow and it's even better.
Stealing res is not a well-thought strategy in a strategy game. It just messes up the strategy of your opponent if he doesn't steal res back as well
If you want to play with a 600 food advantage, whatever floats your boat man. 4Head And yes, I like to play that 'easy' game of me and my opponent thinking through what openings we play.
Killing a low hp vil or a walling vil is not 'lucky', you either were sloppy or had assumed that risk of walling late/without loom. Depending on whom I'm playing, I won't kill a vil that's alone on the side of a woodline or a vil building a Barracks/House like you say, because I want my opponent to have a good opening so that I learn something strategically from that game, so that the next time I'm playing someone who does the same, I want to learn to defend the best possible opening, not a crippled one.
Laming is part of the game, I like to see it in tournaments or in TGs. I think it's very fun, but in 1v1s, it can mean game over IMO more times than not.(equal skill) I just want to have a fair chance of stopping you in case I don't want to play that game.
Also, once I take my boars and I see your scout's close, if I can up, I don't follow your scout. I go scout for your base because that's more important, I think. (DEPENDS)
Aleph Omicron [developer] 6 hours ago
Hey there! You are correct that this is a bug, and the good news is that a fix is in the works for an upcoming build. Hang tight and let us know if it continues to be an issue after the coming update!
I played some games and the skill that I had on normal age2 to block the enemy scout doing a zig-zag on front of him or doing that to the boar so he can get back is totally gone.
The pathing is so weird right now that if the enemy lame my boar I cant block neither his sc or my boar...
Let's make this post about us then. I get what you're saying, I see how what I said could be interpreted as allowing the opponent to be much greedier than he would normally be. I will kill a walling vil if he's too far from safety or if I'm drushing, but I won't kill a barrack/house builder, gold taker, because then I feel like I can win by doing something that normally wouldn't work, just because the opponent didn't bother to wall in every exposed vil in Dark Age or his sheep were in my way. So that is just Dark Age stuff.
If my purpose is to learn to play that specific matchup so that I have the highest chances to win, I will want to play a fair game and the only 'lucky' thing to be the map generations. I want the adapting and experimenting to be mainly on my part.
Personally, I don't play by build orders. If I lose a vil, it merely just slows me down from I wanted to do anyway most likely. Having way less food makes adapting just either walling with 4 vils and FC-ing, drushing, or I don't know what else..
If it's only a ranked 1v1, I don't see the point in trying to win at all costs because against a better skilled player, you can't play the 'opponent's mistakes' card. I like more the idea of a decision-making competition, without the scale tipping in my favor for being the (luckiest) lamer or the opponent's map/mechanics behind being lamed.