What if I told you RNG was part of what makes AOE2 great?
So you think if Dark Age is so boring that people want to skip it that speaks to a problem with the game elsewhere?I feel like people who want this should play EmpireWars.
EmpireWars is a flawed game because the game is not balanced around a feudal-age start, and units like eagles or certain eco bonuses fundamentally alter the viability of certain civilizations.
The games civilizations and bonuses are developed around four distinct ages.
Eliminating / removing one from the game fundamentally changes the balance of the game and in my opinion reduces strategy and logical buildup, effectively creating a new game mode vs. the one we all have loved and played since the beginning of aoe2, which happens to be very successful based on all indicators.
I would also argue the continued deconstruction of defensive play (what are we at, 5-6 nerfs to walls/buildings since DE came out?) also alters this fundamental balance that makes random civ a fun thing to play. As a result, replicability is harmed -- a fundamental tenet of AOE2's continued success. I liked when I could random a civ and build an effective strategy either with defensive or offensive play. Now early pressure is required or else you will spend 3-400 res and 3 minutes of idle eco time to play defensively for what it cost another player 250 and a minute of idle eco time, mindlessly sending early units forward.
RNG is good rng if it makes game more diverse and bad when it gives advantage to one player.What if I told you RNG was part of what makes AOE2 great?
At times, yes. Esp when it gives rise to new strategies and gameplay. At some other times no.What if I told you RNG was part of what makes AOE2 great?
The question is: How many players do want that, vs how many viewers do want it?So you think if Dark Age is so boring that people want to skip it that speaks to a problem with the game elsewhere?
there is a huge difference between empire wars and increasing the number of starting villagers to 6 or 9.I feel like people who want this should play EmpireWars.
EmpireWars is a flawed game because the game is not balanced around a feudal-age start, and units like eagles or certain eco bonuses fundamentally alter the viability of certain civilizations.
this doesn't eliminate the dark age though, it just speeds it up a little bit, that is all. Like i said, I know this likely won't happen, but i think it would be cool to see it tested.Eliminating / removing one from the game fundamentally changes the balance of the game and in my opinion reduces strategy and logical buildup, effectively creating a new game mode vs. the one we all have loved and played since the beginning of aoe2, which happens to be very successful based on all indicators
not really. heck i'm not even sure i want this change, i know i'd like to see it tested though. it's not like this magically makes the dark age dissapear, it just speeds the game up a little bit.POV. You want a combination between empire wars and regicide fortress game mode settings
DWL has proven that you have time to scout and that one starts with 9 villagers. I don't think starting with 6 villagers would be overly problematic, but then again there is always testing that could be done.Dark age is incredibly boring to watch, and sure it's a bit repetetive to play, but while playing i rarely feel like things are going too slow. You simply need the time to scout the map and your opponent
The question is: How many players do want that, vs how many viewers do want it?
Dark age is incredibly boring to watch, and sure it's a bit repetetive to play, but while playing i rarely feel like things are going too slow. You simply need the time to scout the map and your opponent, so there is always something to do there, in order for you not to fall into the same problem as in empire wars, where once your starting gold is saturated you have no idea where to expand to.
We are talking about removing 75 seconds not 7 minutes. Still plenty of time to talk about the dark ageI also feel like casters egg this on because some are incapable of filling the dead air -- when there is absolutely a lot going on that could impact late game play (lumber camp placement, x vils on y resource might mean they're going for this or that build.)
A lot of people are influenced for the worse by the lack of early game explanation.
Doesn't help that most of the casters have been playing forever and feel like they're repeating themselves when it's possible some of their audience may have just tuned in and don't understand the nuances they assume.
We are talking about removing 75 seconds not 7 minutes. Still plenty of time to talk about the dark age
Well EW deleted the entire dark age. There were some people who liked it (because it was fast) but most people I think agree that the dark age has value.First it was 7 minutes (EW), then it was 75 seconds. Why not just leave it alone when there is no problem with it and it is overwhelmingly the most successful game mode in AOE2?
probably more like 2 minutes but yeah, DWL, which starts with 9 villagers, was still seeing uptimes around 6 to 7 minutes. I agree that the person you are responding too is completely blowing it out of proportion though.We are talking about removing 75 seconds not 7 minutes.
Well EW deleted the entire dark age. There were some people who liked it (because it was fast) but most people I think agree that the dark age has value.
But, there is really nothing valuable that happens in those first 75 seconds of game time. The players will scout their sheep, and start sending vils to wood. It's the same in 90% of games.
If you add 3 vils and effectively fast forward through those 75 seconds, the game starts and you are closer to doing and watching and talking about decisions and actions that matter
im not saying, it cant be done, just that i feel for the player its kind of pointless, and its just an issue for the viewer. So this is not any show of there being something wrong with the game.DWL has proven that you have time to scout and that one starts with 9 villagers. I don't think starting with 6 villagers would be overly problematic, but then again there is always testing that could be done.
you'd be surprised how much an impact it could have. that said some of the civs on his list could do with some rebalancing either way.I don't think there is any major issue here