What is people's opinion on Shared Exploration in Ranked?

[Pancrol]

It really helps when playing TGs without a pre-made party. I might have preferred it to start after the TC goes up in Nomad. But overall I think it's a good change.

That may be a bit harder to make. It's easy to program the map to have allied vision from the start. I assume DE does a similar thing to what we do in old AoC to achieve it, add the command in the generation of the map.

However, linking it to the Town Center AND allowing the old behaviour at the same time may require some programming. I know a way to do it but it takes a bit to reprogram the game.

 

[Lokalo]

That may be a bit harder to make. It's easy to program the map to have allied vision from the start. I assume DE does a similar thing to what we do in old AoC to achieve it, add the command in the generation of the map.

However, linking it to the Town Center AND allowing the old behaviour at the same time may require some programming. I know a way to do it but it takes a bit to reprogram the game.

I'm thinking if wouldn't have been better to make it so that you basically get carthography for free when reaching feudal age. So would avoid issues for nomad early and also no wacky stuff like 3-4 scouts comming way more easily for one opponent. Although I personally don't see this changing game too much, as is same for both teams and it was a bit weird attacking someone together with team mate while still having no market.

 

[Snizl]

I'm thinking if wouldn't have been better to make it so that you basically get carthography for free when reaching feudal age. So would avoid issues for nomad early and also no wacky stuff like 3-4 scouts comming way more easily for one opponent. Although I personally don't see this changing game too much, as is same for both teams and it was a bit weird attacking someone together with team mate while still having no market.

the problem with that is, that you couldnt simply revert to the old system for lobby games.
Of course, one could completely rework how the "allowed Vision" option works in general.

 

[Influenza]

What does shared exploration from the start have to do with scouting though? You didn't scout your allies to find out what they would be doing, if you wanted a plan just type or speak. The situation here is essentially unchanged, you might be able to see what your allies will be doing from the start, but for the team to work together you still have to type/speak. It's the enemies that people needed to scout, and shared exploration doesn't let you automatically know what your enemies are doing. People still need to scout their enemies and communicate with their allies when necessary, shared exploration just made the communication process a little bit easier and more efficient, just like voice chat is easier and more efficient than typing. If the game in its current balance favors people who push deer instead of scout, it's hardly the shared exploration's fault.

Shared exploration and scouting obviously have a lot in common, you will never scout the same thing twice with shared exploration. It's a change that benefits lazy players who have bad teamwork.

Anyways, I'm done responding to someone who acts like they never played a tg above 12xx level. The change is bad but honestly it's less destructive than what they have already done with color based map positions. Imagine knowing your opponents have to play off-meta from minute 0 based on their civ positions instead of the way the game was played for 20 years. Ty devs for ruining tgs

 

[MAE_ME]

Shared exploration and scouting obviously have a lot in common, you will never scout the same thing twice with shared exploration. It's a change that benefits lazy players who have bad teamwork.

Anyways, I'm done responding to someone who acts like they never played a tg above 12xx level. The change is bad but honestly it's less destructive than what they have already done with color based map positions. Imagine knowing your opponents have to play off-meta from minute 0 based on their civ positions instead of the way the game was played for 20 years. Ty devs for ruining tgs

It won't be that much problematic if the game was well balanced, but unfortunately it is not. Giving shared explanations available for all now will make the already broken tgs even more broken. Instead of nerfing the broken and strong civs like Burgundians, Sicilians, Franks, Britons, Lithuanians, China, mesos, Byzantine, Huns, Berbers, etc.. they just buffed a civ that doesn't even need buffs (Portuguese) and give meh nerfs to broken civs and on top of that now they have shared exploration that make the Britons/Franks in team games even better and easier and make the strong broken eco civs even bigger (Burgundians, Cumans, China).



It seems unfortunately that this game will never be balanced, never ever at all. Devs also take decades and years to balance the civs, so imo the best thing is just to make the game more flexible for the players from inside.

Now how and what does it mean?

I suggest to give players a civs ban choices like they have 5 bans and also give more options to map bans.

I also suggest to give an option to players in ranked team games to vote if they want to share exploration with their teams strat in dark or not, so just make it optional.

I would like to add another optional things like making the showing range mod allowable or no.

 

[LowEloNobody]

they just buffed a civ that doesn't even need buffs (Portuguese)

Literally the worst civ in the game by win rate, but go off I guess

Source: https://aoestats.io/

 

[heheloveer]

Shared exploration and scouting obviously have a lot in common, you will never scout the same thing twice with shared exploration. It's a change that benefits lazy players who have bad teamwork.

Anyways, I'm done responding to someone who acts like they never played a tg above 12xx level. The change is bad but honestly it's less destructive than what they have already done with color based map positions. Imagine knowing your opponents have to play off-meta from minute 0 based on their civ positions instead of the way the game was played for 20 years. Ty devs for ruining tgs

Fair enough I guess, but like you said, your frustration mostly comes from other changes that made the game "too easy" "dumbed down", or shall we say more predictable. More accessible shared exploration is by no means the most monumental step toward that direction, I think this is something we can all agree upon. Cheers.

 

[Lokalo]

Literally the worst civ in the game by win rate, but go off I guess
View attachment 204547
Source: https://aoestats.io/

Well not sure if that changes much, but your source:

No idea about what patch it counts as last. Although I really wish we had separate stats from people who play random civ. Also I'm bit surprised about those civs in the bottom, would expect few of those civs to be quite high. Although portuguese in strange spot, as if we are talking about 1v1 arabia, their buff there definetily makes sense, but in water or nomad doubt they needed a buff.

 

[MAE_ME]

Literally the worst civ in the game by win rate, but go off I guess
View attachment 204547
Source: https://aoestats.io/

11 this site sropped from wroking before you born.

 

[MAE_ME]

Well not sure if that changes much, but your source:
View attachment 204548
No idea about what patch it counts as last. Although I really wish we had separate stats from people who play random civ. Also I'm bit surprised about those civs in the bottom, would expect few of those civs to be quite high. Although portuguese in strange spot, as if we are talking about 1v1 arabia, their buff there definetily makes sense, but in water or nomad doubt they needed a buff.

Portuguese are not weak at all. The 20% discount on all gold units alone is ridiculously strong, and their 30% faster techs wad so strong. The civ was never bad at all.

 

[Beanslinger]

People are saying Britons and Franks are OP with a 50% winrate in a 2 player game.

 

[emarz4697]

Well not sure if that changes much, but your source:
View attachment 204548
No idea about what patch it counts as last. Although I really wish we had separate stats from people who play random civ. Also I'm bit surprised about those civs in the bottom, would expect few of those civs to be quite high. Although portuguese in strange spot, as if we are talking about 1v1 arabia, their buff there definitely makes sense, but in water or nomad doubt they needed a buff.

Tbf berries are a stable part of arabia builds but less so for nomad and water, with nomad you want hunt or shore fish way more than berries. And with water you're going dock fish before berries and between later berries and the fact that the bonus is 250 wood spread over time I don't think it's going to buff them majorly. It's just gonna make their mid game smoother.

I could be wrong but it seems like the perfect buff because it help way more Arabia than nomad and water. Closed maps on the other hand.....

 

[PlusNomad]

To chip in, towards the end of Voobly days before DE's release, a lot of TG tournaments DID use Allied vision maps, and a lot of these maps trickled down to be the ones people chose to use in lobby games. I've always viewed it as the "should be" standard and I'm glad now it is.

On the plus side, hey now I can autoscout in random matches because I'm too noob to give a **** these days, and I wont even look bad doing it. They'll never know.

 

[Rista]

Great change. People will moan about literally anything.

 

[SuperskinnyBLS]

Makes me feel nostalgic, I remember the famous carto for the viewers meme on Viper's channel, good times

 

[Socksyy]

Makes me feel nostalgic, I remember the famous carto for the viewers meme on Viper's channel, good times

aye those were the days

 

[MembTV]

Thing is that right now the TGs in matchmaking sadly are in a really bad state so this change help a bit for how big is the difference btw the teams that are premade and on voice against those that are solo, even like that is still stronger the premade ones so I think this help a lot to players get less frustrated and play more TG in rated.

Lobbies and for PROs if they prefer no shared well just don’t use it and for tournaments if I host another BOA rules might be without exploration from start since in my opinion with 2 pro teams on communication the shared one is not needed.

Conclusion this is better for casuals random games.

PS. Also for nomad games a bit chaotic but well that was the feeling with Portuguese and many people pick them in nomad TGs.

 

[_Raiden_]

I agree with Influenza.
This impacts Nomad negatively.
I also believe there is a skill gap to explore and communicate.
The high level teams even in casual games are simply going to full wall like demons.
Any land map with decent wood will be walled in.
Nobody agrees with me but give each civ Saracen bonus against walls.
Or a tech like Arson that allows for Feudal Play Archers.
Anyways, it's not life changing but certainly makes it more of a baby game.

Despite everything, a Lobby System is so needed.
That's what AoE is about.
Bringing diverse cultures together through banter or skilled games.
So much potential, Long Live AoE 2.

 

[kalpit00]

I agree with Influenza.
This impacts Nomad negatively.
I also believe there is a skill gap to explore and communicate.
The high level teams even in casual games are simply going to full wall like demons.
Any land map with decent wood will be walled in.
Nobody agrees with me but give each civ Saracen bonus against walls.
Or a tech like Arson that allows for Feudal Play Archers.
Anyways, it's not life changing but certainly makes it more of a baby game.

Despite everything, a Lobby System is so needed.
That's what AoE is about.
Bringing diverse cultures together through banter or skilled games.
So much potential, Long Live AoE 2.

Not the place for this discussion but the thing about feudal archer play is that it is economically impossible to sustain production of skirms (the counter) or any other feudal age unit for that matter (scouts, milita/MAA, spears) because they all cost food and get the all upgrades + maintain vil production as compared to the archer play. Archer is the ONLY unit in feudal age which doesn't cost food - and food is the scarcest resource in early game. Unless the map has 5 boars/**** ton of deer or shore fish under TC, it is not possible, with any civ for that matter, to be able to compete with that archer timing. And that's where walls comes in, it buys you time to get your food eco rolling to make skirms and get armor, fletching. if you aren't walled, enemy sneaks and kills vills.

You give every civ the ability to destroy walls with archers (aka nerf walls armor/saracen bonus), every game will be Tati Rush. 20 pop, 0 farms, all on wood gold, get fletching and make archers. The archers will be knocking at enemy door so fast enemy won't be prepared with any army (Towers might help but saracen archers can take them down as well, and most importantly idle so many vils).

I think archers are fine as they are right now. It's true feudal archers don't have a lot of potential, but that's where the beauty of macro comes in (unless you are Daut and addicted to the market). The meta has always developed around the xbow timing. <17-18 min Xbow timing with clean builds and good farming allows civs like franks/persians/slavs/berbers etc etc to transition into xbow+kts or xbow+camels, which is a devastating comp vs a defensive play of skirms/kts.

 

[leppard10]

Honestly i love it as a casual player who plays alone mostly i like seeing if my team mate needs help early and not seeing them dead just because i didnt make a market is nice .
this game is ment for fun and to enjoy so i dont understand how anyone thinks its negative
just salty players TBH

 

[LowEloNobody]

Despite everything, a Lobby System is so needed.

Did the lobbies get disabled or something?

 

[Potkeny]

Did the lobbies get disabled or something?

They mean lobbies with elo, 'cos that will work and nobody will make more smarfs than on the usual ladders.

 

[LeoMontero]

A game should be always easy to learn and hard to master.
Age is very hard to master and still very difficult to learn. So this change is definitely another huge step in the right direction since it makes everything easier in TGs.

i dont like the free carto but this person has a really good point

 

[RobChang]

Thing is that right now the TGs in matchmaking sadly are in a really bad state so this change help a bit for how big is the difference btw the teams that are premade and on voice against those that are solo, even like that is still stronger the premade ones so I think this help a lot to players get less frustrated and play more TG in rated.

Lobbies and for PROs if they prefer no shared well just don’t use it and for tournaments if I host another BOA rules might be without exploration from start since in my opinion with 2 pro teams on communication the shared one is not needed.

Conclusion this is better for casuals random games.

PS. Also for nomad games a bit chaotic but well that was the feeling with Portuguese and many people pick them in nomad TGs.

Well, but isnt it a fix for a more fundamental problem, i.e. that these two parties should not be matched against. It is a very different sport solo queueing for tgs or with friends. Basically first is what you could do on quickplay if anyone remembered it existed. Apparently, one does not care about elo anyhow, if one plays chatroulette in aoe2.

 

[Influenza]

i dont like the free carto but this person has a really good point

Except it's not a good point. The addition of instant carto only makes teamwork mastery easier. I'm not sure how it would significantly speed up someone learning that they need to help their allies in a team game. Pretty sure a single game of seeing your flank say "2v1" followed by "I'm dead" should do the trick regardless of carto