I disagree, you’re doing the exact exaggeration that you’re frustrated about.
the game is better to have some luck involved and it has been over the years. they could certainly change it and they have more or less on woodline/gold etc, for better or worse.
determine an early laming requires scouting way early means sacrifice has to be made. the only luck involved is placement of the sheep. everything, EVERYTHING ELSE aside from placement is skilled based. don’t blow it out of proportion.
@CactusSteak2171 wasn’t it obvious wood/gold were moved and not sheep/boar? tells us much what they are fine currently.
Just scout the front of your base first so that in the off chance they lame super early they have to explore like behind ur base.
Your point is somewhat confusing.
I’m sure you’re not in favour of increasing luck to the point the match becomes a coin flip. Are you saying that the ideal amount of luck in a game just so happens to be the amount of luck that’s present with the current resource generation when both players try to lame? That’s a very suspicious coincidence.
At least it seems you’re agreeing with @Nheltarion.
BTW I’d quite like to be able to garrison herdables to make sure my rogue vills can’t kill them
And I think it would be cool if the Devs developed an option to make sheep and boar unlamable. Just tag them with a player and don’t allow other player’s scouts or vills to touch them. No need to force everyone in the ranked que to play with such a change, just develop it as an option.
And funny thing about luck is back in AOC days, map generation of resources were heavily dependent on luck. I am talking about bugged resource generation and all that. Bad? Bad. But that was where we were.
Ranked game needs to maintain a set of settings that everyone must follow. So including a setting that “is an option” does not make sense.
As for sheep laming, similar to boar laming, gives me a feeling that people are just trying to turn AOE2’s classic random map generation into SC2’s fixed map for ranked games. To prevent the opponent to lame sheep or boar, those animals would better be spawned right within the vision range of the starting TC. Same for starting gold, stone and berries. But then, people are going to wall the map more easily cause they have everything within reach, so initial scouting importance suddenly drops off by a big margin. Idk if this is good for the game or bad for the game, but I’m up for a two-week test run if dev feels daring.
@VioletTexas3273 people can argue that luck is bad, I mean look at the game mode, its called random map. they should just change the name to “random map with fixed resources” lmao.
@TougherTrack508 seriously if people want it so bad they make the game less variation and at that point, why not just have pre made maps like starcraft where the only luck is where you spawn in a 4 player map size.
if people prefer that, theres broodwar you can play which is definitely more skilled based than this game for sure, less luck involved too.
and no to garrison sheep, it would kill off celt’s bonus which is a big no no for having more variation. vills getting stuck when theres clearly room for another shepherd is causing them to kill another sheep and pathing needs fixing.
I meant as an option for lobby games / games against AI.
If it’s fun and if tournaments start using it, it could maybe get added to the ranked queue (in the same way as random mirror), but that’s not something I really wanted to discus. I just think it’d be nice if it was there as an option for the people who want it. (Certainly I wouldn’t want it in all my games, but I play few enough lobby games that having it in my lobby games wouldn’t hurt.)
@thieftdp8498 I haven’t made up my mind how much luck I want in my random map generation. Maybe having bugged resources occasionally is actually a good thing Extra-exciting if you can win with half your gold stuck behind a woodline?
Variation is certainly a good thing, and here you’re making precisely the strawman argument @phoenix1089 accused you of. Some things contribute more to chance than to variation. See eg bugged resources and sheep.
So @thieftdp8498 could you please commit to an answer of how much luck and how much variation you want? Do you want missing stone piles, extra deer, sheep randomly poly-morphed into boar? Gold hidden in the forest? relics blocking your farm spots?
You’ve made it clear you don’t want less variation, and what may be worse is that you accused me of wanting less variation. But you’ve placed yourself in a very suspicious position.
So please, give us an answer.
I literally don’t care what his answer is going to be. He doesn’t determine the balance of the game and is clearly in the minority about luck. Neither is he applying any logic to his arguments…
Don’t know how laming a boar can actually offend someone. It’s irritating okay … but it’s part of the game. People should also try counter laming
@TougherTrack508 I did comment on how much luck and variation I want… the current system is fine and thats what I want.
what people saying that laming involves huge luck and no skill, which is NOT true. they are skipping all the middle steps you need to do with lame. all the work scout early, + hit boar twice, + hoping the other player dont scout their own first since he is technically MUCH closer, + hoping other player scout dont block you and kill your scout.
all they see is a game where someone steal boar and the opposing player does 0 thing about it and only see the 700 food difference.
laming takes huge amount of skill if both player equally skilled and understands how ot prevent lame. sheep spawn IS the only luck involved, which is the same as woodline, gold etc. so their argument of fixing sheep spawn is non sense, because if they did that, same needs to be done about all other resources, which at that point is just pre-made map.
Thanks for clarifying.
So you think that it’s ideal that each game each player starts with precisely 5+4 stone tiles, 6+4+4 gold tiles, 6 berry bushes, 3 clumps of trees, 3 deer, 2 boar and 8 sheep, but once every 4 games or so one of the players manages to steal 2 sheep more than the other one, resulting in a 6/10 sheep imbalance? [insert better numbers if desired]
Doesn’t that strike even yourself as awfully suspicious?
And you’re absolutely convinced that removing this last random element would make the game worse?
I think allowing herdables to decay if killed is great. That way it’s still worth it to attack instead of lame with your scout (if you realize you can’t steal in time) and the defender has to either mill near the herdable or sacrifice walking time if he wants that food, depending on the distance of the dead sheep. But laming should still be a thing.
Why is there such a trend to remove any hurdle that separates higher ELO play from lower ELO play?
IT’S NOT RANDOM IF IT REQUIRES PLAYER ACTION.
The Celt bonus is already not good for laming, because instead of being able to kill the enemy sheep, it converts and they usually can get them back from you.
Likewise, it encourages the enemy to kill sheep instead of steal them… which is whatever. I think changing the instant decay would be good, but would give indirect bonuses to Mongols/Mayans… onced they get lamed.
It’s a viable strategy for civs that don’t have alot of other options. The better solution would be to fix those civs so they don’t have to resort to that (Hello recently nerfed Goths) then making OP civs lives easier
you you need to show me the map result generation of what all of those maps look like to put all those words in my mouth.
besides, a lot of these that you DO see, players dont see them until it is scouted, which ultimately it is skills. yes skill, you control a scout to go to a certain place to see whats there is part of the skill.