Thank you T90. 5 new maps are exactly what was needed. Hope the players can come with some cool strategies on theseHopefully main event will have some new maps so that we get to see some new strategies as well as reward preparation
Thank you T90. 5 new maps are exactly what was needed. Hope the players can come with some cool strategies on theseHopefully main event will have some new maps so that we get to see some new strategies as well as reward preparation
No map is perfectly balanced in that every civ is equally strong on it, but some are clearly more balanced than others. Arabia is more balanced than Hideout and Cross, but I wouldn't call the latter two "unbalanced," especially not compared to Islands, Pants, and Slopes. So it's obviously a question of degree, and if you're saying that it's impossible to have a map pool without unbalanced maps in it then we'll have to agree to disagree.You mentioned that "strategies will coalesce around two or three options." Drafting has always produced situations where one civ may be slightly preferred to another on a certain map. Look at atacama or haboob in redbull, players would draft magyars and if they couldn't get magyars, would go slavs. Maybe you're arguing that no map should have preferred options or what not, but just pointing out that this is not an uncommon thing for any tournament using a draft. It's how it works. The only solution is to allow free pick across the board, which produces many mirror matchups at times.
I'm a fan of drafting being a part of the players' strategies, but not when that strategy amounts to variations on "I'll take a civ loss on this map in order to get two civ wins on these maps." That's putting the cart before the horse, since the point (presumably) is to have entertaining games with out of the box strategies, not a succession of results heavily dictated by the choice of civs.Last point regarding the civs and strats in general, I factored in civ dominance into the new maps. For example, Quarry (or pokeball) has a lot of hunt in the middle. This is an easy choice for mongols if it's available, but then what will you do for Bay? Slopes? Bypass? Also lithuanians could be sick with a insta drush. What about cross, bay, and other maps? Japanese is strong on Bay, but what about Islands, High Tides, etc? This combined with introducing maps that haven't been played in the public eye by high level players means that many training over the next week may produce completely different outlooks and results.
Thanks, I appreciate the response as well.Appreciate the feedback, wanted to give a detailed response.
Ever thought about banning Feitoria on Islands ? Portuguese have so much going for them on water maps already that makes them competitive to any other civ. They just got a buff that allows them to research any tech faster, and those tech advantage spikes are really strong on water maps. Any game going down to this weird AoE3 copy cat building feels just very sad and spoils the whole series. I mean who wants to see a game going over an hour due to the Portuguese player just playing turtle style and watching the opponent starve to death. We also dont have wonder victories to avoid this kind of ultra defensive playstyle.
I think even without that wincondition on a timer mechanic, I still think Portuguese are a very strong water civ due to:
- Faster researched techs
- Saving gold on War Ships
- More HP on Ships
- Carrack UT making their Ships even tankier
- Caravels as very good counter to Longboats
- Deathly gunpowder late game.
Especially, now that the Islands gens are balanced, the non-portuguese player cant even rely on a lucky generation to have some counterbalance to portuguese just have that free ress button.
I have a question about player identities: we won't know which player is which and have to watch. but players will always know by the server and the ping of their opponent, if their opponent is vietnamese/chinese, european or from america.
will there something be done about this?
I also heard the same, so I think that's correct.I don't see it in the rules but I heard T90 say that they would select the best 3 most fair servers for the pair of players and pick randomly from those. Something like that.
two anonymous European players will need to live in Vietnam and Brazil for the week.I have a question about player identities: we won't know which player is which and have to watch. but players will always know by the server and the ping of their opponent, if their opponent is vietnamese/chinese, european or from america.
will there something be done about this?
I have a question about player identities: we won't know which player is which and have to watch. but players will always know by the server and the ping of their opponent, if their opponent is vietnamese/chinese, european or from america.
will there something be done about this?
@T90Official It would be great if you were able to organise hidden showmatches like the last time for HC 3 with a guessing from chat
If Robo has that data (as in player guesses) from previous Hidden Cups, making a nice sheet that's easy to digest would be a matter of one evening ^^This is ofcourse a concern that is in some ways unavoidable, however according to player feedback form Hidden Cup 1 and 2 (peer to peer) and 3 (DE servers) it was harder to guess on DE than ever. We have to pick a somewhat neutral server while also not making it obvious, we can't give one player a massive ping advantage just for the sake of hiding identities. Tough balance.
I don't have the data on me right now, but for a quick example Viper guessed he played Hera in the semi final when it really was dogao, and they are ofcourse in very different areas. Others guessed wrong as well after their sets. I'll hope to bring some more info to the table on how it works behind the scenes, I ofcourse don't handle that and it's all an admin.
If Robo has that data (as in player guesses) from previous Hidden Cups, making a nice sheet that's easy to digest would be a matter of one evening ^^
We didn't track guessing data or ask it after HC1 and HC2. In HC3 we required players to guess who they played after each round, and off the top of my head about 50% were correct. Also in the guessing competition the only high level player who submitted and guessed all players correctly (one of like... 5 or 6 people who did this) was Villese. Really interesting and we'll work on getting data out there leading up to main event time.If Robo has that data (as in player guesses) from previous Hidden Cups, making a nice sheet that's easy to digest would be a matter of one evening ^^
Players guessing each other's identity, not twitch poll results ya goof! :DDaut beat Viper every round
Right, getting pro players to do extra work is probably not worth the effort 11We didn't track guessing data or ask it after HC1 and HC2. In HC3 we required players to guess who they played after each round, and off the top of my head about 50% were correct. Also in the guessing competition the only high level player who submitted and guessed all players correctly (one of like... 5 or 6 people who did this) was Villese. Really interesting and we'll work on getting data out there leading up to main event time.
Players guessing each other's identity, not twitch poll results ya goof! :D
I agree strongly with this, specially given the draw is totally random. If only the semifinalists qualified for the next tourney it would be more fair in my opinion.for HC5 please less invited players and more qualifier spots! The level is just too close to have that many people invited
That is why Hidden cup 5 should be a Lan event.This is ofcourse a concern that is in some ways unavoidable,
I'd be tempted to just make everybody qualify - no invites and make it as open as possible. Players like Viper and Hera should comfortably be good enough that they can beat someone around 30th in the world to qualify for the main event, and if they don't then the player who beats them deserves to qualify.for HC5 please less invited players and more qualifier spots! The level is just too close to have that many people invited
Yes, there is also a good case for invites and you can make the argument either way.yeah, lets have TheViper qualify, that's at least one player garantueed not getting in.
Have you considered the fact that invites might actually be a good thing?
Sure, it is always the players to blame, if they just win all games, they would have qualified and won the tournament easily. But realistically what you expect them to do, is like quit their job and grind the ladder for two weeks to overtake people who have a high rating by playing Arena 1v1 only the last 5 months.8 spots to qualify for in a 16 people tournament seems really fair to me. especially if we keep in mind that the top 6-8 players are still quite a bit ahead of 9-30. it might be true, that 9-30 have gotten closer in skill, but i think the 30th best player has a way higher chance to qualify in the current settings.
the only sad thing about the qualifiers is, that the brackets were really unfortunate for some players. to me it felt like the losers from friday would have gone through in at least 2 of the 3 deciders that happened yesterday. but then again it is just the players to blame that they did not grind the ladder enough to get higher up in seeding.