IronSteel and Memo were unstoppable during two trial tournaments held by Vietnam GameTV. Especially IronSteel who gained both solo and 2vs2 championships. Vietnamese Age fans obviously couldn’t satisfy as they have the biggest number of players joining those tournaments, including some professional player playing AoE1.
IronSteel showed an incredible performance during two trial tournaments.
Sparrow (Chim se di nang) will be the next election of Vietnamese AoE community. He and his teammate Truong are taking the mission to make a big challenge for HosTile team.
Sparrow - No1 Vietnamese AoE1 player. Can he bring his ability to maximum in the DE version?
12:30 pm (UTC) - Mar 21st: GameTV vs HosTile. Live at:
/gametvaoede
/teamgametv
It’s nice to have these tournaments but…
Personally, if 99% of games end in Tool Age, even in 2v2, there is something wrong with game balance/design and watching these games is not enjoyable. And no, I’m not counting Islands where the game is decided in Tool but someone makes it to Bronze.
For this reason I can only recommend viewing the game Memo won with Babylonians vs two players (Semi Final - Map 1), while the commentator was saying for an hour that he has no chance. All the other games are the same, axemen, slingers and of course, villagers.
I would say that early towers need to be buffed since AoE doesn’t have TC protection like AoE2, but that alone won’t work because everyone will just train Slingers.
I’ve nothing against rush but I’d rather have Bronze wars than Tool wars because of unit/tactic diversity.
@JosephC64 said:
It’s nice to have these tournaments but…
Personally, if 99% of games end in Tool Age, even in 2v2, there is something wrong with game balance/design and watching these games is not enjoyable. And no, I’m not counting Islands where the game is decided in Tool but someone makes it to Bronze.
For this reason I can only recommend viewing the game Memo won with Babylonians vs two players (Semi Final - Map 1), while the commentator was saying for an hour that he has no chance. All the other games are the same, axemen, slingers and of course, villagers.
I would say that early towers need to be buffed since AoE doesn’t have TC protection like AoE2, but that alone won’t work because everyone will just train Slingers.
I’ve nothing against rush but I’d rather have Bronze wars than Tool wars because of unit/tactic diversity.
Much appreciated, trust the official tournament will be more interesting ☺
@Rain19910610 said:
Much appreciated, trust the official tournament will be more interesting ☺
It won’t be if game balance/design is the same, everyone will still go only axemen/slingers 
I would love to see 3v3 and 4v4 tournaments. On Gigantic map maybe rush would be more difficult, and some players could go fast Bronze while others defend against rush. Maybe it would still be axemen and slingers but I’d still like to see how it plays out.
@JosephC64 said:
For this reason I can only recommend viewing the game Memo won with Babylonians vs two players (Semi Final - Map 1), while the commentator was saying for an hour that he has no chance. All the other games are the same, axemen, slingers and of course, villagers.
Just watched that, entertaining
The core design of AOE 1 and to a lesser extent, AOE 2 is flaw. That’s why if we play freely, most of the matches will be extremely boring, and a simple remaster doesn’t solve the problem.
By now, we should just accept that AOE1 wasn’t designed for multiplayers, rather it was designed for single player campaign. That’s why most of the shinny stuffs in this game only avaiable in Iron Age. However, if we play freely without treaty, the game will most likely end in a boring state at age 2 or early age 3 where we don’t have most of the shiny things.
Age of Mythology is the first game in the Age series that truly care about Multiplayers, where you can rush in Age 2 but still have a wide variety of unit choices to plays
@NonprofitChunk1 said:
The core design of AOE 1 and to a lesser extent, AOE 2 is flaw. That’s why if we play freely, most of the matches will be extremely boring, and a simple remaster doesn’t solve the problem.
By now, we should just accept that AOE1 wasn’t designed for multiplayers, rather it was designed for single player campaign. That’s why most of the shinny stuffs in this game only avaiable in Iron Age. However, if we play freely without treaty, the game will most likely end in a boring state at age 2 or early age 3 where we don’t have most of the shiny things.
Age of Mythology is the first game in the Age series that truly care about Multiplayers, where you can rush in Age 2 but still have a wide variety of unit choices to plays
I don’t think so mah friend. To me, the boring ending can be eliminated thanks to the rule we applied. Take most of tournaments in AOE 1 as examples, they applied rule that players must n’t attack their enemy before starting Bronze age upgrade, and those tournaments are really beloved. Let’s wait some changes in the next tournament
Games belows follwed the above rule, not too bad 
youtu.be/ey-tQet3rG4
youtu.be/0BI-xp3P_M
Hello, but guys u look at agame, battle start in tool age but often ended in bronze, and, what happens in aoe 2? IN aoe 2 1v1 2v2 normally is feudal battle, this was, is and will be age saga.
@Rain19910610 said:
@NonprofitChunk1 said:
The core design of AOE 1 and to a lesser extent, AOE 2 is flaw. That’s why if we play freely, most of the matches will be extremely boring, and a simple remaster doesn’t solve the problem.
By now, we should just accept that AOE1 wasn’t designed for multiplayers, rather it was designed for single player campaign. That’s why most of the shinny stuffs in this game only avaiable in Iron Age. However, if we play freely without treaty, the game will most likely end in a boring state at age 2 or early age 3 where we don’t have most of the shiny things.
Age of Mythology is the first game in the Age series that truly care about Multiplayers, where you can rush in Age 2 but still have a wide variety of unit choices to plays
I don’t think so mah friend. To me, the boring ending can be eliminated thanks to the rule we applied. Take most of tournaments in AOE 1 as examples, they applied rule that players must n’t attack their enemy before starting Bronze age upgrade, and those tournaments are really beloved. Let’s wait some changes in the next tournament
Games belows follwed the above rule, not too bad
youtu.be/ey-tQet3rG4
youtu.be/0BI-xp3P_M
That crappy rule was made by people who used to spam Hydralisk/Dragoon in Starcraft money map and cant adapt to a game with a wide variety of strategy. That rule was to optimize the use of Chariot Archer, so they can play a Chariot Archer spamfest just like Hydralisk/Dragoon spamfest in Starcraft money maps they already get used to. It doesn’t make the game better in any sense, if not worse
@NonprofitChunk1 said:
@Rain19910610 said:
@NonprofitChunk1 said:
The core design of AOE 1 and to a lesser extent, AOE 2 is flaw. That’s why if we play freely, most of the matches will be extremely boring, and a simple remaster doesn’t solve the problem.
By now, we should just accept that AOE1 wasn’t designed for multiplayers, rather it was designed for single player campaign. That’s why most of the shinny stuffs in this game only avaiable in Iron Age. However, if we play freely without treaty, the game will most likely end in a boring state at age 2 or early age 3 where we don’t have most of the shiny things.
Age of Mythology is the first game in the Age series that truly care about Multiplayers, where you can rush in Age 2 but still have a wide variety of unit choices to plays
I don’t think so mah friend. To me, the boring ending can be eliminated thanks to the rule we applied. Take most of tournaments in AOE 1 as examples, they applied rule that players must n’t attack their enemy before starting Bronze age upgrade, and those tournaments are really beloved. Let’s wait some changes in the next tournament
Games belows follwed the above rule, not too bad
youtu.be/ey-tQet3rG4
youtu.be/0BI-xp3P_M
That crappy rule was made by people who used to spam Hydralisk/Dragoon in Starcraft money map and cant adapt to a game with a wide variety of strategy. That rule was to optimize the use of Chariot Archer, so they can play a Chariot Archer spamfest just like Hydralisk/Dragoon spamfest in Starcraft money maps they already get used to. It doesn’t make the game better in any sense, if not worse
They are different, guy. Only attack time is limited, units are free. Game balance and tactic are diverse enough to enjoy.
@Marra333 said:
Hello, but guys u look at agame, battle start in tool age but often ended in bronze, and, what happens in aoe 2? IN aoe 2 1v1 2v2 normally is feudal battle, this was, is and will be age saga.
Ofc you fight already in feudal age, but the game nearly never ends in feudal age, most of the time it Ends in castle age or imp. This isnt comparable with aoe1 at all, aoe2 goes always in much later ages than aoe1.
ANd yes, defenses in aoe1 are way too weak or slingers are way to strong. It possible to at least wall up and go bronze age vs axeman agression, but if your enemy goes slingers he will easily kill your stone walls and kill your eco. Same goes for towers, it’s just ridiculous how fast they’re killed by slingers and at the same time only deal only 1 dmg to them.
@Rain19910610 said:
I don’t think so mah friend. To me, the boring ending can be eliminated thanks to the rule we applied. Take most of tournaments in AOE 1 as examples, they applied rule that players must n’t attack their enemy before starting Bronze age upgrade, and those tournaments are really beloved. Let’s wait some changes in the next tournament
Games belows follwed the above rule, not too bad
youtu.be/ey-tQet3rG4
youtu.be/0BI-xp3P_M
Oh please, I agree with @NonprofitChunk1 that these arbitrary rules make things even worse. Yes I’ve seen these Vietnamese tournaments and they are all about Chariot Archer spam. Every. Single. Game. That’s worse than Tool Age battles.
@JosephC64 said:
@Rain19910610 said:
I don’t think so mah friend. To me, the boring ending can be eliminated thanks to the rule we applied. Take most of tournaments in AOE 1 as examples, they applied rule that players must n’t attack their enemy before starting Bronze age upgrade, and those tournaments are really beloved. Let’s wait some changes in the next tournament
Games belows follwed the above rule, not too bad
youtu.be/ey-tQet3rG4
youtu.be/0BI-xp3P_M
Oh please, I agree with @NonprofitChunk1 that these arbitrary rules make things even worse. Yes I’ve seen these Vietnamese tournaments and they are all about Chariot Archer spam. Every. Single. Game. That’s worse than Tool Age battles.
No, most of vn tournaments do not limit units. I am not interested in Chariot archers spam too since it concentrates on player skills, however Bronze age rule with random civils and free units is really good, there would be a diversity of tactics there.
Vietnamese bans tower and wall, so spamming archer chariot is the best tactic.
How about playing 1v1 but on Gigantic maps? would that make rushing hard enough that people will prefer going into Bronze Age first?
@Rain19910610 said:
They are different, guy. Only attack time is limited, units are free. Game balance and tactic are diverse enough to enjoy.
They are not so much different. The banning of Tower and most importantly WALL make chariot archer the most optimal unit in Bronze Age. You might be pushed hard by camel at early bronze but if you wall up well with house, it wont be long before you Chariot Archer can overwhelm them with huge range. Ranged unit scale too well with high numbers in this game. I have played AOE1 in Vietnam from the beginning and I might even know the people who create that rule. That’s because I can easily build wall to stall their Chariot Archer/Camel, teching to Iron Age and get some super units like Heavy Catapult and Centurion that they don’t even know how to get and facerolling their Chariot Archer/Camel armies. Iron Age super units just laugh at Chariot Archers even if they are less spam-able.
If I really need to, I will spend my time to show many points why AOE 1 was made mostly for Single player campaign. It wasn’t until after the success of Starcraft that Microsoft started to care about MP. A simple remaster version (that follow Starcraft Remastered) isn’t enough to attract a large audience.
Well, their rules are sucks, but they enjoy that.
I think adding some more closed map types could increase variety and help people reach the later ages more often. The default map types in AoE1 are all quite open, so the games tend to end quickly. If maps like black forest and arena from AoE2 were adopted to AoEDE, the games would be more likely to reach the later ages.
So I just watched this 2-2 continental.
No wonder you gonna die in 12 minutes if you play Roman egyptian vs Yammie shang on the fastest map. Random civs is fun if you play 4-4 or something but 1-1 it’s gonna be a gamebraker shang vs slow civ.