Why is AoE2 player base so low?

[I_Sniper_]

Hi guys,
I think that AoE2DE player base is very low compared to the reputation of the game, daily twitch stats and also all the big events we've had.
Comparing AoE2de to the playerbase of AoE3 and AoE4 (a game that came out completely broken) is complete denial.
I have an explanation for this :
We have 1vs1 rankeds : An elitist mod
Community discord games : For hard fans
Ranked team games : For people that plays with friends
Lobbies and campaign : For casuals

BUT we do not have a game mod for everyone : Easy to play, competitive, fun.etc..

What was the game mod that was the most played before AoE2DE got released ?

-->Ranked random teams.

If we had this at launch, I think AoE4 would have been canceled or postponed. Because AoE2DE would have built a much larger player base

 

[GorLeon]

You were one of the biggest supporters of AOE4 when it came out. At some point, you were even trying to encourage people to ditch AOE2 and play AOE4 instead. Glad you changed your mind eventually.

 

[I_Sniper_]

You were one of the biggest supporters of AOE4 when it came out. At some point, you were even trying to encourage people to ditch AOE2 and play AOE4 instead. Glad you changed your mind eventually.

I never did that (Encouraging people to "ditch"). And i never changed anything.
Is it possible to act like adults ? https://twitter.com/TheSniper_AOE/status/1563115252417368064
In 2006 when I was 16, I was like in some sort of Holy war vs AoE3. But I was 16. How old are you? XD

 

[Funito]

Ranked TG lobbies, maybe? TG matchmaking is frustating (pick civ vs not picking is just too drastic) and you are forced to play maps you don't enjoy with teams that are too imbalanced, while people fell discouraged by current lobbies i guess because they aren't ranked. And a guy with a shitty pc ****s the experience (maybe a public benchmark?). Lobbies helps casual players meeting new people (Public voice channel may work great for this). On matchmaking you don't have time to join a public voice chat with strangers. This could be part of the experience of playing TGs.
Lobbies should be the norm and leaving matchmaking only for 1vs1. TG used to work well on voobly with a way lower playerbase. Even if you have to wait a bit more, the wait is more bearable.
Also the experience of playing a map you don't enjoy on TG is even worse because you are trapped there for an hour. I think devs just don't get how frustating is playing a map you just don't enjoy. Also there isn't an interest for learning them because most of them aren't even competitive maps, so you can't say, well, at least i'm learning a skill. It's a feature that can work for games that matches last 5 minutes, not for aoe.

 

[I_Sniper_]

Ranked TG lobbies, maybe? TG matchmaking is frustating (pick civ vs not picking is just too drastic) and you are forced to play maps you don't enjoy with teams that are too imbalanced, while people fell discouraged by current lobbies i guess because they aren't ranked. And a guy with a shitty pc ****s the experience. Also lobbies helps casual players meeting new people (Public voice channel may work great for this). On matchmaking you don't have time to join a public voice chat with strangers. This could be part of the experience of playing TGs.
Lobbies should be the norm and leaving matchmaking only for 1vs1. TG used to work well on voobly with a way lower playerbase. Even if you have to wait a bit more, the wait is more bearable.
Also the experience of playing a map you don't enjoy on TG is even worse because you are trapped there for an hour. I think devs just don't get how frustating is playing a map you just don't enjoy. Also there isn't an interest for learning them because most of them aren't even competitive maps, so you can't say, well, at least i'm learning a skill. It's a feature that can work for games that matches last 5 minutes, not for aoe.

I agree that maps is an other problem*
I think that, ranked teams should maybe go to lobbies, and rankeds random teams with matchmaking, it has always worked fine to play on voobly without vocal or anything. And it can be added into the game like a lot of games in 2022.
I watched my voobly profile today, and I had 3000 games in random team games. I think that AoE2 (and AoE4) needs that.
I really think that random team games will gives to age of empires games a new start.I dont know if NC_Zone is still working fine, but I got there my best TG experience.

 

[HongeyKong]

Lobbies should be the norm and leaving matchmaking only for 1vs1. TG used to work well on voobly with a way lower playerbase.

It "worked well" becoz there was a way smaller playerbase.

"This guy is a clown, better split him with that noob."
"This guy mains BF, better kick him."

 

[The Bloodless]

I gotta agree, from what I recall, games were always balanced (tgs) in voobly and even better in HD than now. Also, there were far fewer rage quitters who leave at the first battle.

Putting tgs ranked like for dm, in lobbies and in the ranked queue, may be the perfect solution.

P.s. 1v1s are 10x better now though, than those dark Ara huns games on voobly and hd.

 

[IYIyTh]

Must. Expand. Custom. Scenario!

TTF League!

 

[Eren_AoE]

¿Lobbies clasificados de TG, tal vez? El emparejamiento de TG es frustrante (elegir civ vs no elegir es demasiado drástico) y te ves obligado a jugar mapas que no disfrutas con equipos que están demasiado desequilibrados, mientras que la gente se desanimó por los lobbies actuales, supongo porque no están clasificados. Y un tipo con una PC de mierda se come la experiencia (¿tal vez un punto de referencia público?). Los lobbies ayudan a los jugadores casuales a conocer gente nueva (el canal de voz pública puede funcionar muy bien para esto). En el emparejamiento, no tienes tiempo para unirte a un chat de voz público con extraños. Esto podría ser parte de la experiencia de jugar TG.
Los lobbies deberían ser la norma y dejar el emparejamiento solo para 1vs1. TG solía funcionar bien en voobly con una base de jugadores mucho más baja. Aunque hay que esperar un poco más, la espera es más llevadera.
Además, la experiencia de jugar un mapa que no disfrutas en TG es aún peor porque estás atrapado allí durante una hora. Creo que los desarrolladores no entienden lo frustrante que es jugar un mapa que simplemente no disfrutas. Además, no hay interés en aprenderlos porque la mayoría de ellos ni siquiera son mapas competitivos, por lo que no puedes decir, bueno, al menos estoy aprendiendo una habilidad. Es una característica que puede funcionar para juegos que coincidan en los últimos 5 minutos, no para aoe.

Funitoo!<3

 

[SouFire]

The playerbase is the biggest ever around 64k active players using multiplayer monthly, the problem is that the game is not growing exponentially, it has hit the ground and it has been going lower and lower ever since the punishment patch(also covid restrictions being decreased), the devs have failed as they can clearly see those numbers going down but they keep acting like the players need to adapt to what they say and following such mentality aoe4 and halo infinite are ded projects, aoe2de is alive cause we are an already established community but to be honest the devs have never given the conditions for the game to thrive and grow.

Here are their biggest mistakes:
1.-Forced match making map pools, don't fool yourselves the devs choose the maps they want and you only vote for 3 of them, if the maps are garbage or non competitive is due their choice.
2.-Match making giving priority to those who are waiting longer, which has promoted noob bashing and this greatly reduces any desire to keep queuing up if the matches are not balanced.
3.-Not a single social tool to interact with other players, such as real spectator chat or even a global chat, without mentioning the chat filter that tends to block most basic communications.
4.-Too many civs, yes it is a problem, you need to learn build orders for every single map in the map pool and you need to learn 41 civs, altogether it is a terrible mix, think as a new player willing to learn even the basics, too much info for newcomers.
5.-You can't avoid users, meaning that you have to play ertug, other cheaters, hoang, vill rushes, racist, etc, the list is endless, no one should be forced to play against some one with bad reputation, manners or style, the games are for casuals not for tournaments.
6.-The punishment system, while you can make up a case for 1x1 to be there, such system is dead weight for team games (the biggest playerbase), for the previous reasons explained there are countless motives to avoid cheaters, non competitive maps, unfair games, etc, the game can't punish people if they are having a terrible experience.
7.-Not listening to the rational community demands, they have stuck with their limited vision and they can't accept failure.
8.-Awful balance team, yet again team game balance is pure garbage, despite being the most played game mode, cysion and his bros tend to create civs like gurjaras or hindustanis to break all knight civs and they are blind when it comes to franks or britons, they have failed us with the balance which forces picking civ most of the time.
9.-Ranked lobbies, the lack of those have almost killed game modes that were harmless in the past such as FFA, FN,BF, LN, nomad, and one of the biggest portions of the community...Custom scenario players. Accept it folks, we need ranked lobbies for team games at very least, the system is just a fest for stackers abusing of solo players getting 1100 allies on maps they don't wanna play.
10.-Censoring most voices against their bad decisions, they don't want to hear complains, they control reddit, aoeforums, steam forums by banning those voices, all they want to read is about "Moar civs" comments.

 

[Lokalo]

@SouFire while I agree with almost everything, I don't think number of civs is an issue. Although I do agree hindustanis and gurjaras broke balance big time and in it can be noticed in TGs very well. At this point maybe there could be separate queue with a marked "random civs only", is just way different game playing random civs and not.

Moving DM out of queue... Such big mistakes cost a lot... Keeping useless EW TG instead DM 1v1 is just a joke.

And I fully agree with map pool. I already heard comments people saying they won't play this map pool. I personally also often quite demotivated with map pools, lately they are getting worse and worse, because some dumb dev who do not even play himself thinks Bog Islands should be a fun map, holy moly. Next map pool Michi 1v1 in ranked will be there, what is even going on with that map pool. Before it seemed it was more like putting 1-2 new maps into voting and looking if people will like the choice, if they do then they will repeat it, now they just throw random maps into voting. I would need to think if I would play Bog Islands even if I get paid 10 euros per game, that is worst map ever and devs should never ever troll like that. Then people are surprised why there are so many smurfs, well with such map pool to have good time you need to have a smurf account I suppose 11

 

[Potkeny]

Yea, this map pool is the worst, just see what the pros are playing, no point even queueing up...

 

[Lokalo]

Yea, this map pool is the worst, just see what the pros are playing, no point even queueing up...

You can be sarcastic as much you want, but this just proves the point that majority wants to play arabia and devs keep trying to force players to play some dumb **** instead. Take a screenshot when there will be more clowns playing and post it then.

 

[Potkeny]

You can be sarcastic as much you want, but this just proves the point that majority wants to play arabia and devs keep trying to force players to play some dumb **** instead. Take a screenshot when there will be more clowns playing and post it then.

But if the majority can play arabia even with this mappool, that means you don't play arabia only if the other player didn't want to play arabia. And we should not forget that half of the mappool was voted by the players themselves, so clearly at least some of them want those other maps in the matchmaking.

So we're back at the usual "let's split the queue" discussion, and if the aoe2 playerbase is so low, the longer waiting times and even worse quality matchmaking sounds like a disaster.

 

[Lokalo]

But if the majority can play arabia even with this mappool, that means you don't play arabia only if the other player didn't want to play arabia.

That's obvious. But that's the main issue as well, most people play arabia and clowns dont. Issue is, that clowns don't like any map similar to arabia, not only arabia, which means they not only ban arabia, but ban any decent land open map and in the end you have to play least favorite map you would want to play, but didn't have a ban for it anymore.

So we're back at the usual "let's split the queue" discussion, and if the aoe2 playerbase is so low, the longer waiting times and even worse quality matchmaking sounds like a disaster.

And no, because this is getting just worse. When I came to DE a year ago or something, it used to have decent balance between maps, you could ban arena, islands and some other like four lakes(map having water). And still had few decent maps like hideout, gold rush and sometimes wallstones. Now you ban arena, bog islands and lets say baltic, cuz water just sucks. So I still have open hideout, socotra and amazon tunnel. Hideout is fine to play some, don't have too many complains about the map, although clowns should be kind of favorite there I suppose. Socotra, well for me it's quite trash map, which can be fun for few times, but wouldn't like to play it often and overall even if it's land map, but is very different from standard game play with very limited options. And amazon tunnel, well is hard to say too much yet, would have never thought having it in ladder, watching Dracken and JonSlow showmatch a bit it seemed like the better version of arena, easier early aggression and without that dumb scout+monk fight for relics every game. However still favorite for arena players.

I might be wrong, but I think many clowns do leave water maps open and ban all open land maps, so in this situation if they for example have baltic or bog islands open and my bans look like this.

Would mean I have to play either amazon tunnel either hideout every time I meet a clown, where both seems semi arena maps.

 

[HongeyKong]

Devs should just remove map bans (and maybe keep map favouriting), problem solved.

 

[Potkeny]

watching Dracken and JonSlow showmatch a bit it seemed like the better version of arena, easier early aggression and without that dumb scout+monk fight for relics every game. However still favorite for arena players.

Depends on Tunnel generation, sometimes the tunnel is so wide its basically arabia at least until late castle-age, 'cos you can't realistically wall it all before the usual arabia-opening play arrives.

and in the end you have to play least favorite map you would want to play, but didn't have a ban for it anymore.

There are some interesting ways of map-preference without changing the matchmaking (right now, map preference is not taken account into matchmaking, and I don't see Relic, the maintainer of multiplayer services, changing that), right now we prioritize not playing on map X, the ban-system.

Another would be only favorites, and you get the map both of the players favorited, or 50% roll between the players who gets (one of) theirs. But that means the meeting of an arabia and arena player would be only 50% arena, and I can't help but think that would result in even more complaining.

In theory they could make a system where you rank the maps in the pool, and the matchmaking system selects the map with the overall "highest position", but on one hand that requires development I don't see happening and on the other hand I feel like that would result in almost the same experience as we have with bans, considering most non-arabia players would put arabia/open-maps at bottom and vice versa with arena/closed maps.

 

[_Donatello_]

yea map pool is horrible for open map players again, for me I just end up not playing. I had 9 games this pool, 3 socota 2 hideout and 4 arabia so maybe its fine on high lvl were everyone play arabia but low lvl you are forced to play trash maps 50% of the time and it kills my spirit to play.

ive said it before and I know its pointless but of the 4 maps dev pick should be arabia, arena, nomad then 1 hybrid/water, playerbase is mostly casual so I expect the player picked pool to be like this most of the time.

 

[HongeyKong]

Another would be only favorites, and you get the map both of the players favorited, or 50% roll between the players who gets (one of) theirs. But that means the meeting of an arabia and arena player would be only 50% arena, and I can't help but think that would result in even more complaining.

It will only be 5050 when they meet clowns tho, if arabia players are actually the majority, they will still get Arabia most of the time. (Or you mean the clowns?)

Someone hv also proposed a system like this before, imo TGs would benefit the most, you wont not get a map just becoz someone bans it, while the minority still has a chance to play their favourite map.

 

[otw_Da]

I can only speak for my view. I didn't bought the new dlc - the taste of pay to win was to hugh (for AoE-lvl). I don't enjoy the new civs.
It still takes to long for me to find games. Most of the time I cancel queue because I lose passion while im searching.
Back in HD I could host every map it took me max 10 minutes to fill the lobby and balance teams.
Since 6 months I'm not able to fill a 4on4 TG lobby with a map like mega random.
If I would play arabia, nomad and bf only I would be happy. Because the lobbies fill fast in DE but all the rest of 99% mappool won't get touched.
Back in HD people were way more open. They have no reason to check out lobbies because waiting in queue is easier for them.
Back then was it like "ok there is no game in my strength league, hmm no arabia, oh what do we have here, 4on4 mega random, my elo, hmm why not, lets go for it"
To choose the map I want with the players I balanced by myself was for me the greatest expierence in RTS.

 

[LowEloNobody]

I love how people keep saying "the majority want to play Arabia" and yet the first time they integrate map voting into the game, the democratic majority chooses mostly non-Arabia style maps.

 

[Potkeny]

It will only be 5050 when they meet clowns tho, if arabia players are actually the majority, they will still get Arabia most of the time

But that's already the case?

Two arabia-players meet, they get arabia.

Arabia + no fav/no ban player meets, they get arabia.

The difference comes in when arabia player meets someone who has arabia banned, and while it would increase their chance of getting arabia in that matchup, that also means they increase the chance of actually playing a map they banned (be that water or closed), which is why bans became a thing iirc.

You can find people say they get around 60-80% arabia on ladder with no ban no fav settings, and randomly checking out (known arabia-favored) player history usually shows around similar % of arabia games, would be interesting to get up to date statistics though, preferably sorted by favored map, so like "favored arabia, got arabia % the time". But I don't expect the devs to share data like that, and I don't think 3rd party sites can know what the player starred.

 

[DracKeN]

I love how people keep saying "the majority want to play Arabia" and yet the first time they integrate map voting into the game, the democratic majority chooses mostly non-Arabia style maps.

I heard many arguments that Arabia is the map that 80-90% of the community clearly wants to play. And the same people explaining how ******ed the queue is, because 1/2 of the games they have to play are on different map than Arabia. I mean...

 

[Lokalo]

I heard many arguments that Arabia is the map that 80-90% of the community clearly wants to play. And the same people explaining how ******ed the queue is, because 1/2 of the games they have to play are on different map than Arabia. I mean...

What do you even trying to say? 1/2 is 50%, that doesnt even happen, if it would happen, people would have quited or played on lobbies already.

And I do believe is around 80%+ arabia, I think there were some stats some time ago. Although why people vote for dumb maps is different and good question. Sure part is that devs did put mostly trash maps into voting, so not like you could choose proper maps in the first place. Although it must be that many players still do not vote, posible is that many TG players voting for troll 1v1 maps, idk, again is a good question, but I think there is no doubt arabia is by far most played and favorited map, so do not try to imply it is not.

 

[GmanStreams]

Hi guys,
I think that AoE2DE player base is very low compared to the reputation of the game, daily twitch stats and also all the big events we've had.
Comparing AoE2de to the playerbase of AoE3 and AoE4 (a game that came out completely broken) is complete denial.
I have an explanation for this :
We have 1vs1 rankeds : An elitist mod
Community discord games : For hard fans
Ranked team games : For people that plays with friends
Lobbies and campaign : For casuals

BUT we do not have a game mod for everyone : Easy to play, competitive, fun.etc..

What was the game mod that was the most played before AoE2DE got released ?

-->Ranked random teams.

If we had this at launch, I think AoE4 would have been canceled or postponed. Because AoE2DE would have built a much larger player base

wtf did i just read, literally nothing in this makes any sense