I’d leave the dang thing alone at this point, we don’t see war elephants in 1v1 either but i don’t see many people complaining about them, outside of the huge elephant fans.
but frankly short of revamping how elephants work (which would probably require revamping the entire game and going multipopulation across the board), i don’t think you can get them to a point where they are 1v1 viable. good luck getting the community to get behind that kind of revamp of the game.
they are proven to be good to great units when massed up, the problem is them just costing a lot to do so.
if the recent Battle Elephant nerfs indicate anything to me, it’s that Elephants are supposed to be team game units. and in late game team games, death match, and battle royal you can see how strong Elephant Archers are, and they are scary good when massed up.
so how do you take a unit that when massed is almost unstoppable, but not really easily doable in 1v1, and make it usable in 1v1 without impacting that strength that makes them good where they are already good? honestly. you can’t really, short of revamping the unit, and quite possibly the game.
This is exactly where I beg to differ. Why not experiment with changes to make something better? And I’m not saying this with just the Elephant Archer in mind but everything else as well, from units to game mechanics.
Okay you are probably right so here I would suggest an ongoing beta test version of AOE2DE, like we have one of Minecraft Windows 10 Edition, to test out such changes. And if something pans out right it can make it’s way to the final version of the game.
whose definition of better? yours? mine? someone elses? aoe2 already has 20+ years of experience as arguably a top 5 RTS game. pretty hard to improve upon that, especially within the confines of aoe gameplay.
just to get what you want we’d have to slow the game down, and redesign every unit and unit interaction there is. that doesn’t sound fun to me at all.
so basically make it like aoe3. that doesn’t sound better to me in the slightest. especially if you look at how awful balance is in that game.
Sounds like you want a completely different game. I can tell you that I dont think that’s something the community probably doesn’t want. And I sure as heck don’t want. If sales of aoe3 are any indication the game you want definitely isn’t better then aoe2
The general definition of better. To improve upon something. If you really think AOE2 is perfect in every way and no changes are necessary you should go back to playing HD or even CD. Because they are perfect in every which way right? God Mat, that’s such an archaic way of thinking. I mean, I absolutely love Age of Empires 2, it was the first game I got with my first PC back in and I played the hell out of it. I loved everything about it but would never go as far as claiming that it was perfect. Nothing is ever perfect and that is the very essence of life itself, gradual improvement in the journey towards perfection.
Did you completely miss the part where I suggested a separate version for testing as Microsoft already has for other games or are you being willfully ignorant? Either way it’s not just what I want, there are many others and if you really want to go down that way I could also say just because you feel something is perfect doesn’t mean the devs should stop working on it.
And there it is, when you run out of valid arguments hit em with “You are trying to turn this game into AOE3” allegation.
Oh holy hell despicable me. How dare I try and suggest changes to this perfect game? A game so perfect that the devs are all sitting with their thumb up their butts and it’s not undergoing any changes at all and we are all blissfully basking in its glorious perfection. NOT.
There are updates every month, updates that sometimes screw things up pretty bad. The game is a far cry from stability and balance that AOE2 CD somewhat achieved and that’s pretty obvious and neither is anything wrong about that because just as I said before, the road to perfection is a never ending journey.
All I suggested was that we have another test edition of the game just like many other games have and trust me that’s the best solution but you just conveniently ignored that because I’m just a nobody (unlike you ofcourse) and I know nothing about this game and I’m trying to turn this into AOE3.
You know what Mat, I don’t know if you remember but some time back here in these forums you and I were on the same side in a topic where a bunch of ideologically motivated individuals were advocating for splitting up of civilizations. Now I see there isn’t much of difference between you and them. They were for change for change sake or rather to satiate their crooked ideas, whereas you my friend are completely opposed to any change at all. You are just at the opposite ends of the spectrum.
the problem is that some people might think one thing is better and someone else thinks something else is better.
did you miss the part where they pretty much already tried that and the game flopped hard.
it is a valid argument - exactly what you are asking for was tried in AoE3 and It didn’t work.
there is a difference between - let’s try to change it in the confines of aoe2 and “lets change it into a completely separate game”.
oh really? what games have this? yeah SC2 has places to test changes but they never try to reinvent the wheel on those.
is it the best solution? for who? sounds like a heck of a lot of work for the devs that they won’t get paid for, all to throw together a huge change that the community will largely hate and won’t go live.
false - you’ll find i’ve posted numerous ideas for changes - just within the confines of what aoe2 is and how it runs. i’m not a fan of radical changes to this already great game because i feel they would largely fail. you want to know why i feel that way? if radical changes to the age of franchise worked well, AoE3 would have been a much better received game then it has been. but clearly the community largely prefers too. so yeah i’m against some idea of changing pops of units and radically changing how the game plays. I like this faster style of play with more aggression, and i don’t think slowing the game down will help at all.
here you go - at the end of September i posed a list of changes for the game. and i’ve done this every couple months too.
Almost every Blizzard game has a test server. Minecraft Windows 10 Edition has a beta test editon, if you want to try it you have to enroll from the Xbox Insider app.
Whats the point about flopping I don’t understand. We have a separate say Insider edition of AOE2DE that completely optional and open to people who have AOE2DE on their Windows Store or Steam account. So it’s basically a test game where people who are interested in testing out changes can try it out. Where does the failure part come in this? They are already making changes, pushing updates every month and sometimes even more updates to fix the issues those updates caused. So instead we have a test version, like a rough draft where we test out changes and only the ones that doesn’t radically alter the game make it through.
Devs wont get paid for doing their work? Is this Microsoft or Crytek? They absolutely will keep getting paid only difference is they won’t have to do the extra work of fixing bugs their updates cause many times because they can sort out the kinks in the test version.
yeah and you know what they don’t do? overhaul the game completely. they make tuning passes but that’s it. and Blizzard is also a shadow of its former self and literally can’t even balance sc2 properly right now. and that game has 3 civs not 35.
aoe3 is considered a failure, even by some of the devs who worked upon it.
where does that money come from though. my point is that to achieve what you (and some others) would like, you’re talking about a lot of time to completely redesign how the game works and put it up on a test server. for what purpose? considering that aoe3 is not well regarded at all, i don’t think the revamp for aoe2 making it more like aoe3 would either, and it would be just a huge waste of resources i don’t see microsoft throwing at the game.
Let’s not make assumptions as to someone’s motivation for arguing something.
If I have any contribution on this subject, it’s going to be to simply say that Mat isn’t resistant to change enough for my liking. Consider the possibility that someone disagrees with you on their evaluation of the merits of your argument, and the conversation will be better.
considering i’m all for balance patches to shake up the meta? probably not.
by that i mean - i’m all for every 6-9 months choosing and nerfing 5-6 of the top civs and buffing other civs to take there spot as top civs. it would be interesting to see new blood instead of “oh look, its Mayans, Khmer, Aztecs, Franks, Britons, and Lithuanians again.”
Blizzards been like that ever since the success of World of Warcraft got into their collective heads. Trust me, 8 years of Diablo 3 has taught me a heck of a lesson. Never touching any Blizzard game ever again.
I am not talking about AOE3. I thoroughly dislike AOE3 as well but that’s my personal opinion. I was talking about a test version to test out any changes but certainly changes that will make AOE2 to AOE3 will never make it through. I have that much faith in the AOE2 community who will do much of the testing.
For the final time I am NOT for radically changing this game to AOE3. If only one suggested change to one unique unit makes you think that way, I have nothing more to say.
except how else do you think you’re going to get elephant unique units to see competitive 1v1 play?
the units are already very strong - yes even elephant archers are strong - when massed up.
the problem is the cost and the time to mass.
that there is 39 Elephant archers chewing through MALIAN Infantry, Cavaliers, and completely ignoring everything the Arbs chuck at them.
so the mere idea of trying to make them usable in 1v1 would require one of a few things.
a complete revamp of game mechanics and how units interact.
breaking them even harder then they already in team games, death match, etc.
so thus when you agree with me above where i say this
and your response is this
yeah you definitely sound like you’re hardcore for changing the nature of the game and how units interact.
If you think Bill Gates got where he is by throwing money at something that most would consider a poor investment…I got news for you.
You think that’s what I’m aiming for, to make the Elephant Archers so OP that they rule in competitive 1v1 play? Sigh! No Mat I’m not. I know how OP the Indian civ in AOE3 1v1 play is and I’m not aiming for that at all. All I’m trying to do is make Elephants a more prominent unit in the Indian civ in terms of general use but you keep attacking the idea as if its something personal to you which makes me think you definitely have pachydermophobia. What happened, an elephant took your lunch money back in high school?
Except, you conveniently choose to ignore a certain fact. That’s the Viper, not your average joe. And there are way more average joes that play this game than vipers.
Fine. Be like that. A little change like making the Elephant Archer a little more viable by maybe giving them an after-death unit like the Konnik will make them so powerful and completely break the game that it will result in this game transforming to AOE3 with an OP Indian civ. Bravo.
But you know what, changes will happen and keep on happening whether you or I like it or not but at least I am open minded towards changes and won’t hurt me as much as it would you with your obstinate rigidity.
no, the unit is plenty strong, the game just got too fast for it. it’s hardly the only unique unit not seeing play right now, most of them aren’t just because games are faster and ending earlier. there isn’t much you can do with that. I can’t even remember the last time i saw most unique units see 1v1 play.
yes but the viper isn’t microing and if you see what he’s saying - he says it was viable for the average guy level, but not at the tournament level. the problem as i said above is games are just ending before you get to unique units.
the problem is that does nothing. if you’re actually making EA your opponent is likely to make skirms to counter it. which also counter archers. whereas the konnik becoming a foot soldier actually works well because the natural counter to cavalry is pikes. which foot konniks are good against.
So your whole point is you want the games to be short and end sooner? How about post imperial DMs? Many people like to play that you know, you don’t think any changes are necessary for those games? It’s this my way or the highway attitude I find really annoying.
Okay then how about something some other guy up here suggested that the elephant dies and the archer lives. Is that better? I wasn’t really dead set on my initial idea you know, just discussing possibilities.
That is the trend the game is going, and based on what i’m seeing from viewers they like that, because it means more attacking and less turtling.
they actually see use in situations like this and battle royal and the like. and are very strong.
if so many people like to play these style of games why is DM ladder basically dead? furthermore i’ve seen people who complain about elephants being too strong in maps like BF. (they take too much population to counter).
like i said the problem is that one of the best counters to EA is skirmishers, which also can easily kill the crossbowman that spawns upon death. so you aren’t getting much value there. I just honestly don’t think there is much you can do with UU right now due to the faster pace of the game. even units like the Longbow aren’t seeing much use due to speed of the game.
And you’re also against the idea of adding Battle Elephants or War Elephants as additional units. I just wanted to see Elephants as a more viable unit, with new strats and counter-strats but no, everyone is in a hurry. That’s why the DM is dead and if we carry on this trend I see this game eventually following the Warcraft 3 path. We already have a Battle Royale so why not a AOE2 MOBA DOTE (Defense of the Empires) and RIP classic AOE2.
The day that happens remember this that guys like you had a hand in it.
that’s because i don’t think it would do anything for them. either you leave them generic and you have units that see no use (see vietnamese as an example), and had no reason to add…
or you give them enough bonuses to see use, which further expands what indians are from camel and gunpowder into camel gunpowder and elephants. the problem with this is that Indians also have insane booming potential and i point you to Khmer and why that is a bad idea.
even the devs seem to view Elephants as a team game unit if all the nerfs are any indiciation.
WC3 was heavily played by the RTS community for a long time until Reforged ruined it.
that has more to do with the RTS genre becoming incredibly niche then anything.
why? because we didn’t want your changes that would slow the game down?
if you want proof with why that’s a bad idea, there is a reason mobas and FPS and the like overtook RTS - Speed. people want faster games.
i think holding onto a ideology isnt that good since think dident always go fast as you said i can debunk that with the first patches were they gradiuatly changed the speed of games with the introduction of second UT and other changes then the holy CA Meta that was a good approach but not really healthy and i can understand why the ca got nerfed. but we in a state of aoe2 were things indefinetly will change and maybe drag the speed of the game maybe to a even faster or slower approach
so i think its reasonable to let go andlet things happen in terms of balance changes aswell as ideas how to make something been played more often since its healthier for the game
you misunderstand - i’m all for letting them make the balance changes they want to make. i just don’t think they are going to try slowing the game. based on changes it looks to me like they aren’t even considering that
they removed a woodline on arabia, they made walling slower, etc.
it appears they are trying to actively make games more open and aggressive personally. that doesn’t lend itself to a style of play that lasts longer.
the buffs to koreans, turks, tatars all lend themselves towards getting into the faster aggression slice of pie as well.
