Civ draft

[DracKeN]

Every map has civs which are dominant on it. As the meta is shifted around Arabia, most maps have only 2-4 civs that feel level above others. Using TTL maps as an example, Shoals is for Ita, Nomad - Spanish, Malians, Portuguese, Arena - Turks, Bengalis, Bohemians, Cross - Japanese, Byzantines, Lithuanians, Italians etc. Even worse case would be Kilimanjaro, where Gurjaras seems so far better than any other civ. Going back to Arabia, even there 90% of top players would agree China is the best civ, but at least there are 10 other civs that aren't that much worse. That creates ton of repetivive matchups. And when everyone pretty much already knows how Turks vs Bohemians will play out on Arena and then the game goes like that it's not too exciting.

Recently we had different draft in Arena tournament and I have to say it worked better than any civ draft. You randomly generate smaller sum of civs and the civ draft will only feature those. Like this. This can even be done for every single set. In my ideal scenario this randomizer will be added to aoe2cm - the website where aoe drafts happen. Players do the map draft as usual. Then they go to civ draft, both click rdy (to make sure everything is fair and at the same time for both) and the randomizer will generate the sum of civs (for TTL Group Stage that would be 14) and creates civ draft with those civs for players. Same as in TTL, they can both ban 2 civs each, then pick the remaining 10 civs. If using that, I'd also add 1 snipe for each player at the end.

+ Adds variability. Keeps creating unique matchups for every single set.
+ Forces players to be more creative with their picks and even strategies.
+ Rewards knowledge of different straegies and different civs on different maps. Players right now don't need to be Nomad/Arena specialists to perform well on those maps in tournaments. Learn 1 BO with 1/2 powerful civs, stick to it. Wouldn't be possible anymore.
+ The civ draft will be more entertaining. Right now, casters + viewers mostly know which civ is for which map the moment those are picked and there isn't too much to talk about. However, when player has 4-5 civs for 3 maps and none of his civs would be even top10 on any of the 3 maps, it's more challenging and interesting.

- 'Removes part of map/civ preparation.' Although, this preparation is IMO substituted by experience and knowledge. In the end, the preparation with testing different civs on given maps is very rewarded.
- 'It can lead to unfair matchups.' Yes, but both players would have global bans, both players have ideally snipe in the end aswell. If despite all of that someone ends vs Spanish on Nomad, it's his fault. I think it's actually even better for diverse map tournaments than for 1 map tournaments.
- 'Prolongs the draft.' Talking about ideal scenario where this is part of aoe2cm, not really. The randomizer can create the draft with 10/12/14 civs instantly, the only downside would be that players might need 2-3 minutes to think about the civs. I could see it as players click rdy - randomizer generates civs - 2 min countdown - draft starts. In the end, the actual civ draft usually went faster, because there's less civs to think about, so less decisions.
- Someone has program it. In our tournament, we were using duck race to determine the civs for each round. We're in 21st century though.
- 'But I want to see Bohemians vs Turks BBC micro for the 50th time.' Jk, none thinks like that.

 

[HarshtJ]

Great idea. I hope tournament organisers see this and incorporate it in their tourneys. Would love to see this.

 

[LeoMontero]

for me the best would be no repeat, at least in the group stages
noone can play 2 times with the same civ, no matter the oponent.
For example in a TTL format:
- first game viper against yo, viper choose celt, byz, korea;
- second game against hera, he cant choose those 3, he must pick other civs.
- so on.

it will bring more tactic in the long run

 

[nimanoe]

for me the best would be no repeat, at least in the group stages
noone can play 2 times with the same civ, no matter the oponent.
For example in a TTL format:
- first game viper against yo, viper choose celt, byz, korea;
- second game against hera, he cant choose those 3, he must pick other civs.
- so on.

it will bring more tactic in the long run

This was used in KotD2 and it's terrible, it makes later matches much less interesting. It makes underdogs much better in the early matches and in the later matches makes them generally more one-sided, as the best players will have save their best civs for last.

 

[DracKeN]

This was used in KotD2 and it's terrible, it makes later matches much less interesting. It makes underdogs much better in the early matches and in the later matches makes them generally more one-sided, as the best players will have save their best civs for last.

Not only that, imagine someone playing 3rd round while opponent is playing 1st round. And the one who's playing will be punished then while the one waiting would still have his civs to play + know what opponent can't use.

 

[SouFire]

That option doesn't remove civ win conditions on those specialized maps, basically any civ on arena with bbc vs non bbc civ has a clear advantage, same things on water maps with civs missing bracer.

But it would be great to mock about those guys who keep claiming we have the best balance ever, even if you remove bohemians or turk from the drafts there are plenty clown civs that just destroys average civs on maps like arena.

 

[LeoMontero]

Not only that, imagine someone playing 3rd round while opponent is playing 1st round. And the one who's playing will be punished then while the one waiting would still have his civs to play + know what opponent can't use.

the thing is that all players should play 1st round at the same time, not like this TTL. so everyone advance at the same time. all players play 1st round in the same week, all players play 2nd round in the same week, and so on.
regarding the kotd2, it is diferent format if I dont remember well. you could not do no repeat civ if there is a BEST OF, you only can do it if it is play all games, like TTL.
I organized a 4-4 DM tournament with no repeat civs and it was really good. really interesting match ups, and strategies.

 

[DracKeN]

the thing is that all players should play 1st round at the same time, not like this TTL. so everyone advance at the same time. all players play 1st round in the same week, all players play 2nd round in the same week, and so on.
regarding the kotd2, it is diferent format if I dont remember well. you could not do no repeat civ if there is a BEST OF, you only can do it if it is play all games, like TTL.
I organized a 4-4 DM tournament with no repeat civs and it was really good. really interesting match ups, and strategies.

Well first, TTL is heavily based around player's flexibility and it's absolutely crucial part of this format. You can't expect all players to have time 5 weeks in a row, twice a year. And if someone makes it to Platinum in Season 2 then goes on vacation for 2 weeks during TTL Group Stage S3, he shouldn't be able to play in S3 and then start in Silver in S4? In this league system, players need to have flexibility, it's simple.
On top, as nimanoe pointed out, this system was tested in KotD 2 and it proved to be bad idea. Players like Viper or Liereyy with easier brackets were picking weaker civs in 1st rounds to keep their best for later. And then they matched vs top10 players in QFs, but those top10 players were pretty much out of their best civs already (due to more difficult brackets) and got stomped. It's even worse if you'd put this system in TTL. Round 4 - player A got 3x Nomad already. Used Malians, Portuguese, Spanish. Player B didn't play single Nomad so far and all 3 civs are available for him. Nomad is drafted - B has huge advantage in civ draft.
I think civ draft as it stands now is the best format regarding civ picks we ever had. We experimented in the past with
- mirrors (usually same strat and unit combo)
- random and repeat with switched civs (2 games can play basically the same, possibility of 2 civ wins) - preselected civ pools with few civs (always one civ proved to be dominant among the pool)
- hidden no repeat (lots of mirrors and generally even more repetitive matchups as there are no restrictions like in civ draft)
- hidden no repeat in entire tournament (KotD2) - not again, unfair format
- picking for opponent (Resurgence) - watching/playing Slavs, Teutons, Goths all time is not fun
Civ draft requires strategy, preparation, is generally fair and allows variety (more than the formats above). My main issue with it is that after while it still creates repetitive matchups and allows players getting away with 1/2 strong civ and 1 strategy. That's what CL draft solves.

 

[kalpit00]

Yes, the kotd2 system of civ picks is horrendous. Rewards the lower seeds the most by giving them a chance, the top seeds have to be strategic in their civ picks (again, its not strategy really, its more like feeling superior/confident in earlier rounds and counting on beating the lower seed with a weaker civ). The middle seeds are completely f*cked, because they face someone who is of their level (Seed 10 vs Seed 11 for example) and so they must pick their best civs, and then get stomped in the next round vs a higher seed who has saved their better civs

 

[LeoMontero]

Well first, TTL is heavily based around player's flexibility and it's absolutely crucial part of this format. You can't expect all players to have time 5 weeks in a row, twice a year. And if someone makes it to Platinum in Season 2 then goes on vacation for 2 weeks during TTL Group Stage S3, he shouldn't be able to play in S3 and then start in Silver in S4? In this league system, players need to have flexibility, it's simple.
On top, as nimanoe pointed out, this system was tested in KotD 2 and it proved to be bad idea. Players like Viper or Liereyy with easier brackets were picking weaker civs in 1st rounds to keep their best for later. And then they matched vs top10 players in QFs, but those top10 players were pretty much out of their best civs already (due to more difficult brackets) and got stomped. It's even worse if you'd put this system in TTL. Round 4 - player A got 3x Nomad already. Used Malians, Portuguese, Spanish. Player B didn't play single Nomad so far and all 3 civs are available for him. Nomad is drafted - B has huge advantage in civ draft.
I think civ draft as it stands now is the best format regarding civ picks we ever had. We experimented in the past with
- mirrors (usually same strat and unit combo)
- random and repeat with switched civs (2 games can play basically the same, possibility of 2 civ wins) - preselected civ pools with few civs (always one civ proved to be dominant among the pool)
- hidden no repeat (lots of mirrors and generally even more repetitive matchups as there are no restrictions like in civ draft)
- hidden no repeat in entire tournament (KotD2) - not again, unfair format
- picking for opponent (Resurgence) - watching/playing Slavs, Teutons, Goths all time is not fun
Civ draft requires strategy, preparation, is generally fair and allows variety (more than the formats above). My main issue with it is that after while it still creates repetitive matchups and allows players getting away with 1/2 strong civ and 1 strategy. That's what CL draft solves.

i understand your point.
the thing that im saying is that the no repeat civ is in the group stage, and then it renewed for the elimination round, and the final again, like yellow cards in the world cup.
also it could be only a league, like any football championship in europe, where there si no elimination stage. they play all against each other, no repeat civ. and there the one with more points is the winner

 

[LeoMontero]

now that im thinking, the 4v4 showmatches that WWP organize with other clans, most of them all arabia, they re all no repeat civs. and they are glorius. maybe this no repeat sistem is better for team games.
my dream is a TG tournament, 4-4, league format with 8 teams, where teams play all against all, 2 rounds of 5 games (like an european footbal championship), all arabia, no repeat civ against the same team. so every team would use against other 40 civs out of 42. at the end, if it is needed, you can do elimination with no repeat in the series.
also you can do something similar with a 3-3 and play 7 games two times, and there all teams will use the 42 civs against each other.

 

[kalpit00]

now that im thinking, the 4v4 showmatches that WWP organize with other clans, most of them all arabia, they re all no repeat civs. and they are glorius. maybe this no repeat sistem is better for team games.
my dream is a TG tournament, 4-4, league format with 8 teams, where teams play all against all, 2 rounds of 5 games (like an european footbal championship), all arabia, no repeat civ against the same team. so every team would use against other 40 civs out of 42. at the end, if it is needed, you can do elimination with no repeat in the series.
also you can do something similar with a 3-3 and play 7 games two times, and there all teams will use the 42 civs against each other.

basically ECL in a nutshell

unfortunately TG tourneys are rare because they take more time than 1v1s. And no, all game arabia will be sc-arch into kt-xbow every game, that's meta and you will never see variety in TG. You need different maps, chaotic maps and hybrid nomad style maps if you want teams to prepare strategies and use civ combinations. NC23 is a good example, it will be fun!

I don't think we will have another TG tournament after NC23 for a while, until the next BOA. Even that, Memb probably wants a KOTD before that. My guess would be GL or Siestes/Hue or Nova might host a TG tournament sometime later this year

 

[DracKeN]

TGs are completely different topic, 42 civs are enough for Bo7 3v3 team or Bo5 4v4, draft without any global bans would work there perfectly. There are also endless combinations, so no point to bring that here.
Anyways, I guess it could be difficult to imagine how exactly will the 1v1 tournament matchups look in the end, using CL draft. I took Hera vs Jordan as an example from TTL Group Stage, because there was varied map draft and both players went for quite standard picks.
Acropolis: Khmer vs Chinese
Scandinavia: Italians vs Byzantines
Arena: Poles vs Bohemians
Hera also had Hindustanis for Acropolis and Turks for Arena, Jordan had Gurjaras for Acropolis/Arena and Portuguese for Scandinavia/Arena. All pretty common, all top5 for the given maps or at least solid counters. Now repeat the situation many times, you'd end with repetitive matchups where 5 civs would be used in 80%+ of games.
I applied CL draft on this match and used some improvements from the feedback I had so far. I randomly drew 15 civs (1 extra so even the last pick is a choice between 2 civs) and then performed the civ draft using TTL rules - 2 bans, 5 picks for both players. I tried to draft as I'd in TTL if I ended with those 3 maps. I also added a snipe in the end, because it works better with CL draft. Out of those 4 civs that I had left for each player I tried to go for the best possible setup for the 3 maps. I've done it 5 times to get at least a small sample:
Scandinavia:
1) Persians vs Koreans
2) Spanish vs Lithuanians
3) Italians vs Japanese
4) Lithuanians vs Aztecs
5) Mayans vs Berbers

Acropolis:
1) Saracens vs Franks
2) Magyars vs Aztecs
3) Khmer vs Bulgarians
4) Malians vs Berbers
5) Chinese vs Gurjaras

Arena:
1) Ethiopians vs Vietnamese
2) Franks vs Saracens
3) Spanish vs Hindustanis
4) Spanish vs Ethiopians
5) Teutons vs Slavs
I only drew 75 civs (5x15), some civs weren't drawn at all, others even 4x, there would be far more civs on the list if this was done 20 times. My take: definitely leads to more variability and would force the players sometimes playing out of the box, for example with Aztecs/Spanish on Scandinavia. The downside is, that it can lead to civ advantages although mostly it's quite even matchup with both civs being top20 - top10 for the given map. The draft itself is way more interesting as well. We tested this in CL League and it was definitely superior format to any civ draft before, although I believe this is even better with varied map pools.

 

[LeoMontero]

basically ECL in a nutshell

unfortunately TG tourneys are rare because they take more time than 1v1s. And no, all game arabia will be sc-arch into kt-xbow every game, that's meta and you will never see variety in TG. You need different maps, chaotic maps and hybrid nomad style maps if you want teams to prepare strategies and use civ combinations. NC23 is a good example, it will be fun!

I don't think we will have another TG tournament after NC23 for a while, until the next BOA. Even that, Memb probably wants a KOTD before that. My guess would be GL or Siestes/Hue or Nova might host a TG tournament sometime later this year

i dont know about that meta, watch the WWP games, they definetly dont do that every game. Lyx+yo do a lot of diferent strategies. even pick goth as flank, and burmese pocket with arambai. the other day viper do the same with arambai pocket. i think the showmatches show us that 4-4 arabia are not the same as before.

 

[Zeev]

i dont know about that meta, watch the WWP games, they definetly dont do that every game. Lyx+yo do a lot of diferent strategies. even pick goth as flank, and burmese pocket with arambai. the other day viper do the same with arambai pocket. i think the showmatches show us that 4-4 arabia are not the same as before.

Showmatches aren't dead serious. Knights and archers meta has been well established in previous TG tournaments. Granted WWP is the most likely team to try something off meta. And maybe Suomi and Rubenstock will throw a douche. But in normal TG tournament in the final we'll see GL and AM and knights and archers slaughtering each other.

 

[uberkerl]

Single or similar map tournaments have diffrent needs than mutli map tournaments and civ drafts work diffrently for each. sot hey ned to be discussed separately.

hidden civ no repeat means everyone always has a highly competetive civ but also leads to a lot of mirror matchups. this is even more so on multi map settings where a lot of diffrent civs are good and often by a quite significant margin.
The problem is that most mirror matchups are super boring to watch, even though the better player is more likely to win.

If you want to force civ variety at the cost of not having the top top civs on display every time it makes sense for some settings to say ban 7 or 10 civs at random for every stage. To allow for preparation have this known beforehand not 30s mins before the first pick if this is about real stakes.
This works well for settings like RBW or NAC or if TTL forced people to play 1 match every week. but is really hard to remember if matches arent synchronised.

snipes complicate the civ draft bc they increases the possible permutations by an order of magnitude. This is good for players that can think ahead in drafts and prepare a lot. It gets also easier to engineer a free win. good for tension in a series. **** bc 1 or 2 games a series are easy claps if players prepare.
They also make it hard to make a surprise picks bc the opponent can just snipe it.
for a similar purpose you could make 1 set map with or without set mirror per stage. if you can come up with a fun one. at least you wont see the same game 20 times per tournaments.


larger team games work pretty well with Hidden civ no repeat bc you go through all the good civs anyway and drafts can get really complicated bc all diffrent compositions and positions need to be thought of beforehand really hard to keep track of everything with 30s per pick and nongames are worse bc they take so long to set up in the first place.

 

[kalpit00]

i dont know about that meta, watch the WWP games, they definetly dont do that every game. Lyx+yo do a lot of diferent strategies. even pick goth as flank, and burmese pocket with arambai. the other day viper do the same with arambai pocket. i think the showmatches show us that 4-4 arabia are not the same as before.

in BOA on Arabia no team will try such goth burmese bs. Its scout archers all day any day.

 

[LeoMontero]

in BOA on Arabia no team will try such goth burmese bs. Its scout archers all day any day.

BOA is a 3-3 tournament, showmatches are 4-4, its diferent

 

[LeoMontero]

Single or similar map tournaments have diffrent needs than mutli map tournaments and civ drafts work diffrently for each. sot hey ned to be discussed separately.

hidden civ no repeat means everyone always has a highly competetive civ but also leads to a lot of mirror matchups. this is even more so on multi map settings where a lot of diffrent civs are good and often by a quite significant margin.
The problem is that most mirror matchups are super boring to watch, even though the better player is more likely to win.

If you want to force civ variety at the cost of not having the top top civs on display every time it makes sense for some settings to say ban 7 or 10 civs at random for every stage. To allow for preparation have this known beforehand not 30s mins before the first pick if this is about real stakes.
This works well for settings like RBW or NAC or if TTL forced people to play 1 match every week. but is really hard to remember if matches arent synchronised.

snipes complicate the civ draft bc they increases the possible permutations by an order of magnitude. This is good for players that can think ahead in drafts and prepare a lot. It gets also easier to engineer a free win. good for tension in a series. **** bc 1 or 2 games a series are easy claps if players prepare.
They also make it hard to make a surprise picks bc the opponent can just snipe it.
for a similar purpose you could make 1 set map with or without set mirror per stage. if you can come up with a fun one. at least you wont see the same game 20 times per tournaments.


larger team games work pretty well with Hidden civ no repeat bc you go through all the good civs anyway and drafts can get really complicated bc all diffrent compositions and positions need to be thought of beforehand really hard to keep track of everything with 30s per pick and nongames are worse bc they take so long to set up in the first place.

this is exactly what i want to say.
the thing with diferent maps, is that teams will choose the best civs for those maps, and i want that teams pick civs that they are not use to it. so lets say, arabia, they will pick brits-franks-hindus-maya, and then in team island they will pick jap-port-ital-sarra. and i want to see this last 4 civs in arabia. so, the maps should be similar, or the same.
but this game, which i love, is in my opinion, the more complete and complex game, so, its diferent 1-1, 2-2, 3-3, 4-4, same maps, diferent maps, similar maps, RM, EW, DM.
its not easy, and its really good that is not easy. this is the magic of this game. enjoy it.

 

[SalzZ_fans]

Every map has civs which are dominant on it. As the meta is shifted around Arabia, most maps have only 2-4 civs that feel level above others. Using TTL maps as an example, Shoals is for Ita, Nomad - Spanish, Malians, Portuguese, Arena - Turks, Bengalis, Bohemians, Cross - Japanese, Byzantines, Lithuanians, Italians etc. Even worse case would be Kilimanjaro, where Gurjaras seems so far better than any other civ. Going back to Arabia, even there 90% of top players would agree China is the best civ, but at least there are 10 other civs that aren't that much worse. That creates ton of repetivive matchups. And when everyone pretty much already knows how Turks vs Bohemians will play out on Arena and then the game goes like that it's not too exciting.

Recently we had different draft in Arena tournament and I have to say it worked better than any civ draft. You randomly generate smaller sum of civs and the civ draft will only feature those. Like this. This can even be done for every single set. In my ideal scenario this randomizer will be added to aoe2cm - the website where aoe drafts happen. Players do the map draft as usual. Then they go to civ draft, both click rdy (to make sure everything is fair and at the same time for both) and the randomizer will generate the sum of civs (for TTL Group Stage that would be 14) and creates civ draft with those civs for players. Same as in TTL, they can both ban 2 civs each, then pick the remaining 10 civs. If using that, I'd also add 1 snipe for each player at the end.

+ Adds variability. Keeps creating unique matchups for every single set.
+ Forces players to be more creative with their picks and even strategies.
+ Rewards knowledge of different straegies and different civs on different maps. Players right now don't need to be Nomad/Arena specialists to perform well on those maps in tournaments. Learn 1 BO with 1/2 powerful civs, stick to it. Wouldn't be possible anymore.
+ The civ draft will be more entertaining. Right now, casters + viewers mostly know which civ is for which map the moment those are picked and there isn't too much to talk about. However, when player has 4-5 civs for 3 maps and none of his civs would be even top10 on any of the 3 maps, it's more challenging and interesting.

- 'Removes part of map/civ preparation.' Although, this preparation is IMO substituted by experience and knowledge. In the end, the preparation with testing different civs on given maps is very rewarded.
- 'It can lead to unfair matchups.' Yes, but both players would have global bans, both players have ideally snipe in the end aswell. If despite all of that someone ends vs Spanish on Nomad, it's his fault. I think it's actually even better for diverse map tournaments than for 1 map tournaments.
- 'Prolongs the draft.' Talking about ideal scenario where this is part of aoe2cm, not really. The randomizer can create the draft with 10/12/14 civs instantly, the only downside would be that players might need 2-3 minutes to think about the civs. I could see it as players click rdy - randomizer generates civs - 2 min countdown - draft starts. In the end, the actual civ draft usually went faster, because there's less civs to think about, so less decisions.
- Someone has program it. In our tournament, we were using duck race to determine the civs for each round. We're in 21st century though.
- 'But I want to see Bohemians vs Turks BBC micro for the 50th time.' Jk, none thinks like that.

11 can't agree with u more.After watching your fantastic performance against lierrey,recently I always use portugal in arena of RM1vs1,I feel boring,not because using the same civ ,but because opponent civs are always turkey and poles.And when it's turkey,I feel more boring.On the other hand,I enjoy learning running playing arena,but yesterday it was another portugal winner in arena against jibatong.I remember some interesting RM 1vs1 games and keep watching,such as running using Chinese to tower u,and freakinandy using celts to attack your Byzantine.