Missing two sheep => one more vill on berries and push deer , missing 4 sheep or a boar or more is nearly gg. But yeah then the player has deservedly lost and its ok that the game is over minute 6. Yeah you can push deer to reach feudal still but op will also do that and has better eco when reaching feudal.
He could have done things differently and won. Well, guess what thats the case for any reason you lose. But you decided not to do or simply didnt know the whole situation at the time you decided. Losing the game because of playing super different because of a forward boar and the fear of being lamed and thus messing up your strat while opponent doesnt need to adapt that hard, is the same dumb reason to lose a game as being successfully lamed. It all goes together with the imbalance of risk and reward that you always must suspect the game-ending lame and need to play differently to avoid it. But being under pressure just because of that can decide games itself. And the possibitiy that atleast one boar is forward is 25% and other than other ressources being forward you need both to reach feudal somewhat properly. So you cant argue with he should have got it earlier when he got the other fwd boar already.
While you can play around a forward main gold (even though its also hard) -you still can fall back on other ressources and mine smaller back gold which gives you time until mid castle age to make the map-control winning push - a forward boar means gg with no alternative (if the competitive level is equal). So if you wanna fix the boar generation to avoid laming and make boars spawn closer to tcs or backwards, you already adressed laming by any means that is equal of changing the game mechanics.
I think a 8 vill start that removes 2 minutes from dark age without affecting balance too much and removing one boar of food (400 food instead) ressource to balance the -250 food needed to get to the vill count is the future. Then you have less "boring" dark age without changing the whole game and laming is less of a problem then but then hype if successful. Mongols then must be adjusted to get a hunt bonus that is of equal strength as recently.
He could have done things differently and won. Well, guess what thats the case for any reason you lose. But you decided not to do or simply didnt know the whole situation at the time you decided. Losing the game because of playing super different because of a forward boar and the fear of being lamed and thus messing up your strat while opponent doesnt need to adapt that hard, is the same dumb reason to lose a game as being successfully lamed. It all goes together with the imbalance of risk and reward that you always must suspect the game-ending lame and need to play differently to avoid it. But being under pressure just because of that can decide games itself. And the possibitiy that atleast one boar is forward is 25% and other than other ressources being forward you need both to reach feudal somewhat properly. So you cant argue with he should have got it earlier when he got the other fwd boar already.
While you can play around a forward main gold (even though its also hard) -you still can fall back on other ressources and mine smaller back gold which gives you time until mid castle age to make the map-control winning push - a forward boar means gg with no alternative (if the competitive level is equal). So if you wanna fix the boar generation to avoid laming and make boars spawn closer to tcs or backwards, you already adressed laming by any means that is equal of changing the game mechanics.
I think a 8 vill start that removes 2 minutes from dark age without affecting balance too much and removing one boar of food (400 food instead) ressource to balance the -250 food needed to get to the vill count is the future. Then you have less "boring" dark age without changing the whole game and laming is less of a problem then but then hype if successful. Mongols then must be adjusted to get a hunt bonus that is of equal strength as recently.