This meta favors the defensive player, who has no risk of making three Town centers, if the TC is not destroyed the attack is in vain, the rival will continue producing villagers, as if nothing, and will repair his TC whenever he wants. To favor the attacker, the proposal is as follows:
Proposal
The Town Center that has less than 70% health, will double its production time of the villagers, until its repair exceeds 70% hp
I would say it’s on the contrary, that the meta today favors attacking players. The player who is more aggressive, taking map control and hammering the opponent asap wins in 80% of the games.
My problem is exactly that, I’m too defensive … but I’m trying to get more aggressive to move up from Platinum level
I mean the professional elo, the average elo does not define the meta
u most likely expand to defensive take the risk of placing ur first tc on a hunt further away. U really need to secure the food outside ur general starting area else u just run out of food vs players that are aggressive
Its an interesting take.
Its really hard to say wether multiple TCs are really OP or not.
Right now i would say there’s a good balance between attacking and deffending. Rams are cheaper, TCs and towers fire slightly slower and siege enginering is cheaper while on the other hand tcs and towers not autotargeting rams is a big buff to deffensive play.
The thing is, the strength of either side will differ a lot depending on which level you are.
In lower levels attacking will be a lot stronger, because its easier to attack while defenders will usually keep loosing villagers and make a lot of mistakes due to being under pressure, also its much easier to play with one base as it requires less macro skills, however in higher levels this drastically changes because more skilled players become much better at deffending, and this is mostly visible at the pro level, they have such good villager control, macro and micro skills that majority of times going for an all in is a waste of time, so you will usually see pros going for the greed war. But this is only the case in the top or 2%.
Statistics less than silver, the largest number of games end in 25-34 min adding 14600 games, therefore the games in the middle rating do not end in feudal, I am showing you with data not with personal assumptions
… that’s not counting the games longer than 40 minutes, which are many.
Do you really think you can spend 1400 resources on 3TC while someone is attacking you in feudal and be able to defend? Lol.
If you are attacking just make 2 rams and a lot of archers and spears and destroy the TCs, you will kill villagers also in the process and the game is over for the defensive guy.
I would say that making a second TC is risky if the other one is trying to rush you all or nothing, but a third TC… No way.
I canNOT speak to what level (plat+ diam+ conq only) where 2TC meta is standard but can link you where Beasty says 2TC is meta; and if u watch his stream pretty much all his games are 2+ TC boom and likewise does its opponents. Only civ I see doing something else before adding 2nd tC are mongols and Delhi; everybody else EVEN English is going 2 TC. (again at the pro level conq+). But like @HasanIchess presented if the data shows games prolong into the 30+min, its likely the majority of those games are single TC feudal in-all/something comparable.
Edit
At the plat+ and diamon+ the concentration of games are between 15-35 min with the largest window per rank range being 15-24min and 20-34min respectively. This at mininum suggest diamond plus players are extending the game in some way that is not as common in the plat+ range??
Yes, and? And if you check other games where someone would go 2 TC versus 3 TC the guy building just 2TC will win. I’ve won some matches being at 90 villagers vs people at 120. Do you really think making 3TC automatically gives to you victory? So, I don’t know why you are not playing the Wololo series vs Beastyqt or MarineLord.
This proves nothing. Capoch in the last Wololo won with HRE vs a French (Core) that feudal pushed and got the water, but Capoch tried to leave the water and do a feudal push with MAA and gain map control, and he won because got the control of french gold and killed some villagers.
There are tons of variables that can lead someone to win or to lose, no matter if you get the water, you go 5TC or whatever. Trying to argue that doing TCs must be punished just because you have not the enough level to go 3TC and maintain a good economy while defending and doing some harass is just a cry.
Do you think you will be able to win Beastyqt or MarineLord, if they go 1TC vs you with 3TC? I will bet for them not for you.
+2TC is meta because you will get villagers faster hence you will get better eco and you will be able to produce more units to gain the control over the map and things like that. I don’t know what are you trying to prove to be honest.
PS. I am in plattinum maining Abbasid and I ever try to go 3TC.
I’m just trying to nerf the boom meta in the game a bit, please don’t put words in my mouth
Not only should the ram be buffed like in the PuP, but the tech should be somewhat cheaper and the units inside the ram should give it a percentage speed and attack buff (also the hotkey that dislodges units immediately, like the Ottoman siege ).
With that, the average meta will be more balanced imo.
P.S: I am very worried, because in RBW AoE2 will be Empire Wars (15-20 minute games on average) and AoE4 usually lasts close to 23 minutes on average, one of the reasons being the current meta.
Don’t make it too easy to finish off game in Feudal. Only easier to punish 3rd TC, each subsequent TC should be made weaker or harder to build.
The way to go is make horseman and Sipahi raid viable, +20% attack vs villager or attack animation faster. Small scale stuff, doesn’t end game but punishes greed. Only knight can raid in this game, it’s an aberration.
I don’t see anything wrong with that proposal.
It is trying to find a balanced metagame, not that 2 TCs are made in 90% of the games.
Nope, you said that meta favors defensive players, what is not true. The meta favors the player who plays more aggressive and harass and gain map control.
Then you said that killing a TC is hard, have you tried to just burn a TC? The landmark is hard, but you will notice that the 2500 hp from regular ones are easy to take down with a few horsemen, MAA or just spearmen.
And lastly, I don’t get why determinate way of play the game has to be nerfed. Just because you don’t like it?
There are 3 ways to play a game, turtle, boom and rush.
In a simple way, rush beats boom, boom beats turtle, and turtle beats rush.
If you can’t beat a player booming rushing him, maybe there’s the reason:
What you can’t expect is to not boom, not rush, not harass or don’t turtle, and expect the enemy to not boom. If you don’t attack, don’t get map control, etc… The enemy will do what he can: boom.
About the pro scenary… 23 min games average is fine for me. When I watched SC2 there was games between 5-8 minutes, that’s not fun to watch. The dude just try a zergling rush and if fails just surrender.
I don’t like games of 10 minutes but neither of more than 40 minutes
This is an example that Marinelord made three TC against Abbasid and the game lasted 44 min
And check the previous games, 4 TC with Abbasid
03h46m44s
SC2 averages around 10-12 min.
An average of 23-25 minutes is long, as that means there are a lot of games, early on, that take 7-8 or even more minutes of action because it’s so complex to punish greedy play. That usually leads to the second TC at the very least (current meta).
Aggressive hybrid tournament maps tend to have shorter durations because you attack in Dark and Feudal a lot trying to control water.
If for you the initial aggressive game is to do 2 TC, control map and accumulate units until attacking/raiding at minute 12, then that’s fine. There are many who do not see it that way.
I agree it does but I think your solution is too convoluted and not very intuitive for a player
You can incorporate that, but the average player isn’t going to register this, neither do I think that will necessarily solve the cause of the problems.
Walling /stone towers needs to be punished
Siege Vs buildings needs to be buffed.
Trebs shouldn’t be the singular response to buildings in Castle age
ideas are welcome ,ideas are welcome
And you think making less TCs will speed the game? It’s the opposite, making more TCs speed the game because you gain eco faster and can build more units to attack.
Most of the feudal ages in the tournaments lasts more than a half of the game duration. I’ve seen games where in minute 20 they were still fighting for map control and harassing in feudal, isn’t that fun?
No one in the pro scenary makes 2TC, then accumulate units and then attacks. In most of the games action starts at feudal age without a second TC or even in dark age as you said.
I say to you the same that I said to Hassan, making less TC, will just slow the game.
Just check other RTS like SC2. People in SC2 get map control and put a lot of bases to just get eco faster. It’s just a caracteristic of the RTS games, not from this game.
