The_Dragonstar toxic behaviour

[Influenza]

This is an interesting point to make, because it's subjective.

What definitively makes a strategy low-skill? Who gets to decide? Is it some sort of council of whatever 800 ELO pleb is in charge of balance changes for DE, who frequently bases their opinions on the highest of ELO, or famous streaming twitch players? Certainly, plenty of folks claim Hoang's most famous civ (Celts) playstyle is "low-skill," but all in all it's just a different prioritization of vil gathering and hotkeys. Further, very few can replicate the success he does. I would say Hera has probably top 200 monk micro. Not bad, but no where near his meta, preferred playstyle. What makes spamming scouts in Feudal, or queuing hussar in late game "high skill?"

Another example would be Vinchester's Trush on Arena. It requires a significant amount of timing and macro adjustment to remain viable, but is exceedingly difficult to defend appropriately -- to the extent that the Arena clowns have started making their stone walls have MORE HP during tournaments due to copycat (though I dare say far less effective than Vinchester himself playing it,) prevalence.

Vil fighting is another example some have claimed is "low-skill," but vil fighting micro is quite intensive and can be quite costly as it pertains to an idle eco and the potential for lost villagers.

Why is it not fair to question how low-skill dancing around someone's woodline or berries with militia is, but suddenly someone perfects a build order to maximize the market and one's macro capabilities to perform an even more all-in attempt that quickly dies to almost any counter -- and it's verboten? What makes dancing around with archers to avoid shots "high-skill," and not just a "cheese strategy?"

In this aoe2 subcommunity, one can almost substitute "low-skill," as merely a different way of what they truly intend to say - "a strategy I prefer not to be employed against me."

It's all a silly game a few people play to justify their own preferred playstyles and to nerf alternatives, and is a toxic mindset that should be nuked from orbit.

anyone who spams 1 strategy with 1 civ 10 hours a day is engaging in behavior indicative of a pitifully low amount of skill. just my opinion though.

 

[IYIyTh]

anyone who spams 1 strategy with 1 civ 10 hours a day is engaging in behavior indicative of a pitifully low amount of skill. just my opinion though.

Interesting.

So does this apply to the loud folks in this thread mindlessly pursuing pre-mill drush, or m@a archers -- regardless of civ, who claim to be "learning how to correctly play aoe2?"

Or because they do the same boring strategy, but with a different civ, it somehow becomes "more skilled?" and "superior gameplay?"

I'm not sure there's a difference.

 

[vince]

Here come the hoards of people to defend que dodging because Nicov said it's fine. It's blatant rating manipulation.

If some prefer not to play Hoang, perhaps some might not prefer to play Viper or Hera for fear their ELO might suffer. Some might prefer to dodge a certain map. You can not justify one instance over another.

you just presented two completely different situations. dodging hoang because his playstyle is unappealing is completely different from dodging players due to fear of losing elo.

and dodging someone due to an unappealing gameplay, yet regularly playing against literally everyone else (including far superior players to hoang, both in rating and abilities) is not rating manipulation whatsoever. did you even take the time to think before you read that? 11

 

[SotallyTober123]

loud folks in this thread

Ummm, okay

 

[Influenza]

Interesting.

So does this apply to the loud folks in this thread mindlessly pursuing pre-mill drush, or m@a archers -- regardless of civ, who claim to be "learning how to correctly play aoe2?"

Or because they do the same boring strategy, but with a different civ, it somehow becomes "more skilled?" and "superior gameplay?"

I'm not sure there's a difference.

with one civ you have one tech tree and one set of bonuses to work around, with 40 civs you have 40 sets of bonuses and tech trees. Games rarely end with opening strategies. there's a pretty big difference. The preponderance of maa->archers is more reflective of the meta rather than a single player's preferences

 

[IYIyTh]

you just presented two completely different situations. dodging hoang because his playstyle is unappealing is completely different from dodging players due to fear of losing elo.

and dodging someone due to an unappealing gameplay, yet regularly playing against literally everyone else (including far superior players to hoang, both in rating and abilities) is not rating manipulation whatsoever. did you even take the time to think before you read that? 11

That wasn't the point, if you read. They are ultimately the same. If I dislike playing against Hoang tactics because I know they will frustrate me, and I will play worse -- I am artificially inflating my ELO ceteris paribus.

I compare it to choosing to dodge a higher rated player -- say if I'm on the cusp of a certain ELO or tier for a given tournament bracket -- I can either throw games, or if I need to climb -- dodge games against players I know my gameplay will suffer against. Meanwhile, perhaps a competitor near me plays Hoang and loses and as a result I receive a more amiable seed -- they are worse off for not dodging. Thus, they have a more accurate representation of their ELO as the ladder is intended to be played.

It absolutely is a form of rating manipulation.

 

[IYIyTh]

with one civ you have one tech tree and one set of bonuses to work around, with 40 civs you have 40 sets of bonuses and tech trees. Games rarely end with opening strategies. there's a pretty big difference. The preponderance of maa->archers is more reflective of the meta rather than a player's preferences

Sure, but games rarely end with a 2 TC cuman play, Saracen market play, fIMP, Douche or a lame as well.

They are all birds of a feather.

 

[vince]

That wasn't the point, if you read. They are ultimately the same. If I dislike playing against Hoang tactics because I know they will frustrate me, and I will play worse -- I am artificially inflating my ELO ceteris paribus.

I compare it to choosing to dodge a higher rated player -- say if I'm on the cusp of a certain ELO or tier for a given tournament bracket -- I can either throw games, or if I need to climb -- dodge games against players I know my gameplay will suffer against. Meanwhile, perhaps a competitor near me plays Hoang and loses and as a result I receive a more amiable seed -- they are worse off for not dodging. Thus, they have a more accurate representation of their ELO as the ladder is intended to be played.

It absolutely is a form of rating manipulation.

it could potentially be rating manipulation if someone struggles against it. on the other hand, there are plenty who beat him on a regular basis but still just don't care to play against him. not sure how that could be considered manipulation.

you act as if it's just some black and white matter. it's not.

 

[IYIyTh]

it could potentially be rating manipulation if someone struggles against it. on the other hand, there are plenty who beat him on a regular basis but still just don't care to play against him. not sure how that could be considered manipulation.

you act as if it's just some black and white matter. it's not.

I don't have the stats to discern the difference. I would love to compare the W/L of Nicov vs Hoang and Nicov's opponents vs. near Hoangs rating. Either way, Nicov is the exception more the rule regarding your point. Rules, however must be black and white for it must apply to all and not just a few. Shades for example, and other 2k2+ players more aptly fit the point.

That it's not black and white is the point I've made on playstyles, however.

 

[Rise_]

So Hoang is NOT A CANCER to aoe2.

 

[Nicov]

Here come the hoards of people to defend que dodging because Nicov said it's fine. It's blatant rating manipulation. Hoang uses more than one civ and is quite capable of beating plenty of players with other than what he is primarily best at. He simply is not gifted with 2k6 meta abilities, but he is very good at playing within the confines of the game and making his opponents uncomfortable using his civilizations strengths. He plays well with many other civs than Celts, and the idea that he ONLY plays Celts is inaccurate. Besides, Nicov himself favors Mongols I believe on his main account. Tangentially related, Dragonstar also primarily picks his own certain civ (Huns.) This is not uncommon for high ELO players -- but frankly these two players pick civ to an extent it's fair to challenge they play those civs "to learn," and not "to win."

Apparently some would rather "learn and get better," by playing the same stale archer skirm drush meta -- or picking their own favorite civ to play with. This is just a poor excuse of saying they don't want to play a given player because it's not easy and/or uncomfortable.

The claim that some play the ladder for an accurate rating (when they have multiple smurfs, or warm up aka's) and then abuse a tool to specifically not play someone they are uncomfortable against -- their rating is no longer accurate and I presume would be violating plenty of tournaments rating manipulation rules.

If some prefer not to play Hoang, perhaps some might not prefer to play Viper or Hera for fear their ELO might suffer. Some might prefer to dodge a certain map. You can not justify one instance over another.

Another beautiful yet absolutely empty wall of text. Now go ahead and quote where I said that queue dodging is fine. Have fun.

 

[IYIyTh]

Another beautiful yet absolutely empty wall of text. Now go ahead and quote where I said that queue dodging is fine. Have fun.

The_Dragonstar toxic behaviour

Good advertisement to show that you're very immature though. :wink: yeah thats pretty sad imo

www.aoezone.net

I'll just assume you forgot you posted this. Monday.

If only dragonstar knew about the glorious dashboard all of this drama could have been avoided Kappa

You weren't the only high level player to suggest it either.

You're welcome to make another pithy comment about the length of the post for likes if you wish to deflect further.

 

[Nicov]

The_Dragonstar toxic behaviour

Good advertisement to show that you're very immature though. :wink: yeah thats pretty sad imo

www.aoezone.net

I still don't read myself saying queue dodging is fine OR encouraging people to do so.

Have I queue dodged hoang in the past? Yes. Do I think it's the right thing to do? No, so I accept the timeout I might receive from the matchmaking and then I go do something else instead. Like everyone else. Do I recommend people to do the same? No, they can do what they want. It's their choice.

I'm eager to read your next strawman.

 

[IYIyTh]

I still don't read myself saying queue dodging is fine OR encouraging people to do so.

Have I queue dodged hoang in the past? Yes. Do I think it's the right thing to do? No, so I accept the timeout I might receive from the matchmaking and then I go do something else instead. Like everyone else. Do I recommend people to do the same? No, they can do what they want. It's their choice.

I'm eager to read your next strawman.

How is it a straw man, you literally admit to que dodging Hoang in this post?

In the preceeding one quoted you state if dragonstar used the dashboard they could've avoided him entirely.

I don't think it's unfair to say that you both participate and condone it based on those two facts alone.

 

[Nicov]

Also if you truly believe it's rating manipulation then go ahead and report me and everyone else who dodged hoang in the past few months before the next tournament begins. I find it hilarious yet a better use of your time instead of writing several paragraphs of non sense of something made up in your own mind.

 

[zShades]

Time to burn hoang dodgers at the stake or aoezone users will get triggered cuz players walls to much and they cant play open copium. let me go back and admire my huns war pictures on my desk

​

 

[deadmeatnoob]

View attachment 203339

Hoang is a Capricorn

 

[IYIyTh]

Also if you truly believe it's rating manipulation then go ahead and report me and everyone else who dodged hoang in the past few months before the next tournament begins. I find it hilarious yet a better use of your time instead of writing several paragraphs of non sense of something made up in your own mind.

Spoiler

Que dodging is an obvious and blatant form of rating manipulation, especially when targeted towards player(s) whom you find playing against uncomfortable and/or difficult. If you'd like a breakdown you can read the previous post where I kindly explained to you why and/or how.

I am under no illusion as to whether tournaments would choose to look the other way for certain people regarding rule breaking and/or enforcement. My point was merely to explain to how what you are doing and advocating for is not just poor sportsmanship but against most tournament rules. Similarly, I am under no illusion that you care, that is obvious by your employment of que dodging in the first place.

I do mind that certain people with influence in the community use it to denigrate other players simply for using alternative playstyles and/or excuse poor behavior towards these players. This trickles down to the common pleb who then talks trash and debases an opponent for employing a strategy other than whatever meta is blessed for the month/day rather than learning how to recognize and/or defeat it.

I do enjoy that folks will question the use of time on an internet forum dedicated to a 20+ year old game.
We are all wasting our time together, like it or not. Some more than others, for certain.