I made a pathing test and posted the results in a reddit post here you can discuss the results in case you don't have a reddit account.
I made a pathing test and posted the results in a reddit post here you can discuss the results in case you don't have a reddit account.
I tested with 1.5 Userpatch. There is not difference except faster calculation of the path. No i didnt test it, its hard to do that with triggers i assumeDE's pathing is abhorrent compared to user patch. I'm guessing you compared to vanilla 1.0c.
Did you test group functions? Where in DE your units try to re-gather with the group they're selected and thus step back/stutter?
You are living a dream, 1.0c and UP have bad pathing, UP improved patrolling, but pathing is something hard coded, they fixed small issues like the deer going crazy when it was running to the edges of the map, but in fact villagers also stop working in UP, units sometimes don't engage battles and stand still getting hits without attacking back, the better example is that you can see villagers in woodline, if they target a tree and other vill block its patch the villager randomly goes to chop the tree behind the woodline, if you are 100% that that pathing is superior than the one in DE, then i am looking for really good explanation, cause everyone here can confirm path finding errors in UP and older versions.Eh, know it's not your intent, but this kinda grinds my gears. Comparisons like this tend to minimize the poor state of pathing in DE by trying to question how it was in the past. Also it's pretty clear units are clunkier and their hitboxes are ridiculous in DE as compared to previous versions. I can't think of a scenario where I could consider pathing even close to being near parity.
Kinda makes me skeptical when the real comparison should be why isn't DE more like userpatch.
Now, units are buffed based on the lack of correct game mechanics to compensate currently it's hard to even compare how they perform in one vs. another in previous iterations. It's like trying to question why CA shot correctly in userpatch, or why shouldn't they always be crap? The solution shouldn't be to buff units because they don't perform like they should, but fix game mechanics that are hindering them.
Anyone ever play castle blood back in the day and sneak a stack of woad raiders, samurai, tarkans first through an opponents army of war elephants because they had a half tile gap? Then have all 30-40 attacking a castle at once on one tile? Good ****ing luck chuck doing that in DE. You'd be lucky not to alt+f4 out of the game three steps in.
Instead, we get weird ass pathing, vils bumping into eachother, 12 months of trying to fix military pathing that is still not right, units peel off selected targets like they patrol in on right click still... units step backwards when grouped and you try to switch groups while attacking....groups in general are buggy and sometimes units are not responsive...patrol is still bugged to attack buildings over units, etc...towers don't auto fire at units or you have to force them to attack them if they path out of LOS.
I don't even see a world where we're like "okay we're close now!". Would love to see how the meta of custom scenario games has changed -- but I can't because the CS community won't come to DE because of the pathing.
Hi, maybe I am not understanding your reply correctly since english is not my first language and I am a casual player, but is it not better that it works like this now? I mean, 40 units stacking in one tile sounds very unrealistic to me.Anyone ever play castle blood back in the day and sneak a stack of woad raiders, samurai, tarkans first through an opponents army of war elephants because they had a half tile gap? Then have all 30-40 attacking a castle at once on one tile? Good ****ing luck chuck doing that in DE. You'd be lucky not to alt+f4 out of the game three steps in.
games on voobly with 2-5 fps? People may lag like ****, but huge FPS drops are exceedingly rare. Happens every day on DE though. Just had a game yesterday with two laggers causing the game to drop to, as you said, 2-5 fps.You are living a dream, 1.0c and UP have bad pathing, UP improved patrolling, but pathing is something hard coded, they fixed small issues like the deer going crazy when it was running to the edges of the map, but in fact villagers also stop working in UP, units sometimes don't engage battles and stand still getting hits without attacking back, the better example is that you can see villagers in woodline, if they target a tree and other vill block its patch the villager randomly goes to chop the tree behind the woodline, if you are 100% that that pathing is superior than the one in DE, then i am looking for really good explanation, cause everyone here can confirm path finding errors in UP and older versions.
In DE with the last patch and hotfix a new bug was added, villagers sometimes just don't work, like building gates or even hunting, they stand there until you move them again, but melee units engage better.
Another thing that changes things is the fast response in DE, ranged units got an indirect buff, while in UP and older version there was always a delay in any command in multiplayer games, any test based on single player with minimum latency does not represent a real scenario.
The only way to have a perfect path finding is to change the game source to something modern capable of using multithreading for compute power.
Oh yeah CS community doesn't go to DE because hardware limitation i used to play there, nice CBA games with 600 ping, every time one or 5 guys lagging badly, up to 10 seconds in delay for any command, yeah patrolling and pathing under that lag was something painful to watch and to play at 2-5 fps.
Short Walls by GregRising (applies to Palisades aswell)what's the short walls mod ur using called? View attachment 182623
You are living a dream, 1.0c and UP have bad pathing, UP improved patrolling, but pathing is something hard coded, they fixed small issues like the deer going crazy when it was running to the edges of the map, but in fact villagers also stop working in UP, units sometimes don't engage battles and stand still getting hits without attacking back, the better example is that you can see villagers in woodline, if they target a tree and other vill block its patch the villager randomly goes to chop the tree behind the woodline, if you are 100% that that pathing is superior than the one in DE, then i am looking for really good explanation, cause everyone here can confirm path finding errors in UP and older versions.
In DE with the last patch and hotfix a new bug was added, villagers sometimes just don't work, like building gates or even hunting, they stand there until you move them again, but melee units engage better.
Another thing that changes things is the fast response in DE, ranged units got an indirect buff, while in UP and older version there was always a delay in any command in multiplayer games, any test based on single player with minimum latency does not represent a real scenario.
The only way to have a perfect path finding is to change the game source to something modern capable of using multithreading for compute power.
Oh yeah CS community doesn't go to DE because hardware limitation i used to play there, nice CBA games with 600 ping, every time one or 5 guys lagging badly, up to 10 seconds in delay for any command, yeah patrolling and pathing under that lag was something painful to watch and to play at 2-5 fps.
Hi, maybe I am not understanding your reply correctly since english is not my first language and I am a casual player, but is it not better that it works like this now? I mean, 40 units stacking in one tile sounds very unrealistic to me.
The problem is changing the game mechanics from classic aoe =/= better. People can argue that bumping into units and having hitboxes twice their normal size is "better," or that the completely screwy group formations is "better," but it's not. Also, latency is not relevant when comparing pathing. I never had "lag," interfere with a game or how units are supposed to work after patrolling -- where in DE the game can speed up, slow down-- or your units will patrol off of a right click. It's kind of hilarious that people are like "just put your units on stand ground to fix it," as a solution. That's absolutely bogus - and simply shifting goalposts from what game mechanics for aoe should be. Patrolling archers into a couple squares is fine when you can actually catch out archers in the open in staggered formation and patrol in -- now you're lucky to kill a few archers before they just kite you into oblivion due to units pathing back to their group when you re-task.
Claiming DE's mechanics are superior is just wrong. Also -- latency as a selling point for DE.... ehhhh unsure it's a selling point for DE when for the first six months people couldn't even play because they kept dropping -- and still have issues.
Let's not whitewash history -- I have probably more games played than anyone in this thread -- doesn't mean I can't be dissatisfied that the game mechanics I grew up playing with have been thrown out the window and are still pretty broken nearly a year after release -- to the point in updates I see devs and customers alike trying to justify the incomplete product as the best we'll get. Things don't change if people just smile and say "gee thanks for taking my money."
It's one thing to be appreciative of DE for what it is, which is completely fine.
It's another to try to claim aspects of the game, parts of which are documented as having been broken or "in process," fixes for nearly a year -- are superior. It's just not true.
why are you always so negative you really should focus on the bright side of life !!
You're right DE is a superior product, no issues at all. In fact its bugs are features aoc should've incorporated decades ago. DEs pathing is just amazing/better than ever, in spite of 20+ years of evidence. We should be thankful Microsoft sold us a third iteration of the same game, and not critical of the near year of borked patches and issues it has taken to get at the incomplete game we have today. Anyone who criticizes DE, its development process, lack of beta testing and poor QA is clearly just being mean and not a nice person.
oh, I thought it's a different & new oneShort Walls by GregRising (applies to Palisades aswell)
His criticisms don't really miss the mark that much though.
You are totally right about how embarrassing DE is as a product and how problematic it is that people try to discredit valid criticisms about it. I think the only thing you could change is your tone. It is not really necessary to toss in things like "I have probably more games played than anyone in this thread" because it adds nothing to your credibility and sounds like the dumb obnoxious bravado people detest but expect from someone with your flag. Since your point stands without this, including it makes it seem like you are either being a jerk or trying to mask insecurity about the arguments, both of which make them less willing to accept what you are saying.
You don't think games played and rating matters when being able to tell whether pathing is "better," or at the very least -- "different," in one system or another?
I'm going to go out a limb that someone's 500 games at 1300 aren't going to be as better for comparison as someone at 1100 games at ~1600.
When you think about it critically -- I've probably tested DE more than Microsoft.
It's because they do matter. A 1300's interpretation of whether pathing "works better in DE," is discernibly different than someone at 1600 or 2100.
It's not grandiose, it's a pretty simple concept. People are free to be insecure of their rating, but it's like creating a "Definitive Edition," of chess.
Would you take the advice of an amateur more seriously, or the view of an CM/IM/GM on the changes/impacts to how pieces move since the developers couldn't quite get it right from previous iterations?
I surely hope you don't take advice on your health based on how much you like the person presenting the information -- granted, I'm sure given the world's state/pandemic there's plenty of people who do. (was going to say "morons," but wouldn't want people to think I was talking about them -- they might dismiss my internet argument out of hand, and how would I proceed with my own life if someone disagreed with or didn't like me on the internet?)
In your version the 1600 offers less relative to the 2100 than the 1300 offers relative to them, so I am not sure what you are trying to accomplish by emphasizing this so heavily. It just suggests you should be quiet on the subject and allow the numerous high ELO/pro players that frequent the forums provide their opinion instead.
Thankfully for you, of course, rating doesn't matter nearly as much as games played and actual ability to observe and analyze something. But that when you try to express your credentials in such aggressive "I am better than you terms" people tend to not like that because it is hostile for no reason. That - not your generally spot on criticisms of DE - is where you are being overly negative.
I don't find stating a fact like "i have played more games at a reasonably higher level than those in this thread thus far on both Voobly & DE and find the assertion DE pathing is superior to be wrong for x y and z reasons," as aggressive or negative.
No, because the variance of skill at which the games are played is actually extremely relevant, especially in the context you use. I don't know why you can't acknowledge that. (Actually, I think I know why :P )
If I say I have played 1k games at 500 ELO, my perspective is different than someone with 1k games at 1600, 1800, or 2100 ELO. Kipchak's might not be broken at 500 ELO. M@A rushes might end games in ten minutes at 1300 ELO. Inca Trush may be hard to defend to someone at 1500 ELO, etc. Not sure the ~1300 range is the best for how pathing is, or how it should be compared to how it was.