Player plays a game mode present in the game. Wants to see that mode improved. Specially because some of these issues also affect casual players.
ArrivedLeader22 - That’s where you are wrong kiddo. Just don’t play that mode. tralalala
I’m pretty sure the vast majority plays ranked in any AoE game to get fair matches against human players, not to grind for some kind of Elo rating.
Imho this “You can either only play competitive or for fun” type of argument is heavily flawed.
that’s just completely false. 90% of aoe3 games I played were unranked lobbies. When I actually bothered to play ranked 10% of the time I wanted to have fun on ranked games too, I never cared about my elo. Players use wacky stuff on both unranked and ranked. It is the design issue of aoe3.
The issue is balance vs unbalance, traditional design vs new fancy stuff. It is NOT ranked vs unranked. Stop trying to distract the discussion.
If only any of your peers is really asking for “improvement” like qol, balancing (meaning stats tweaks), better matchmaking etc. instead of REMOVING CONTENTS FOR EVERYONE!!! I’d buy such bs.
But because you ranked pvp competitive veteran guard imperial elites naturally team up with whoever say the magic word “balance” or “ranked” ignoring what they are asking for, it’s not arbitrary for me to consider you guys’ real intention is not “want to see that mode improved” blahblahblah but returning it to the same familiar semi-FF or whatever fest that only your previous small clandestine group of high caste people are allowed to breathe.
For example there are people who complain about problems with treaty. They don’t ask for removing this removing that because they cannot beat it or remember it all the time. That’s how “want it improved” works. Right next door there is a “rework” discussion. Don’t pretend you guys think the same way because obviously you don’t.
I’m not against balancing or improving the game. I’m against you people. Don’t get me wrong.
Correction: I’m not that radical. My opinion is that mode should be thrown into oblivion.
I don’t think the current ranked ladder mode really encourages that. For any game. Soon it turns into a toxic grindfest.
For those who really want “fair match against human players”, they are faced with people who copy meta to quickly climb the ladder because all games’ ranked will naturally be saturated with such people.
Most of the time you don’t match up with “people with similar skills” (it’ll be extremely lucky when you do) but “people who are grinding the ladder but haven’t reached higher ranks”.
It’s not that any game can prevent that. That’s the flaw with the ranked mode itself not game design. It deviates so far from the original intention (or maybe this current state is the real intention) because it ignores humanity. If you have some score that can be improved, you’ll naturally want to improve on that, and soon afterwards it becomes a habit, and then the only thing left in you is how to improve it as fast as possible. That’s how every game’s ranked degenerates.
1 Like
I’m not against balance, but balance is NOT removing stuff. It’s adjusting numbers. I don’t know why many people just want whatever they cannot beat removed.
I never had fun on ranked for ANY other game that’s why I don’t play ranked for AOE (and I would not think it will be any better than other games). It’s a means to keep players around even when they suffer. If you want to have fun ranked is not the place to go.
1 Like
Now who is asking for …
You are very welcome.
But in case you don’t bother to read like you never did:
the condition or state of being forgotten or unknown*
While
to get rid of : ELIMINATE
In fact it will be much healthier for both the game and you ranked pvp veteran elite imperial people from some certain forum if you could really FORGET about your scores, your caste, your small community, and your impulse to play every single game with whatever meta there is.
If there is some really lame gameplay that gives you quick and easy wins, it will not be fun after a few games (unless you feed on some stupid score) Forget about it. Done.
They still can exist, but nobody cares. That is the healthiest state. Just like some certain renowned community that sAvEd the game so that every single of its members thinks he is naturally granted with sone privilege, but in reality most people don’t give a f.
EDIT: I’m timing your next witty response. Don’t take too long.
1 Like
If only there was as much passion in balancing the game, as you have in arguing semantics. Ah lol.
Ok maybe my thoughts are misplaced and wrong and sacrilegious. WHat about OP? He says he plays unranked most of the time. He doesnt not care about numbers and fake pixel points. Why are you blasting him xD?
From someone who just wants to come up with a “gotcha” on semantics so eagerly that he forgot about BASIC BASIC semantics.
I am not a native speaker of English. I can differentiate those words since primary school. I don’t need PASSION to differentiate them.
Not sure about you though. The only reason I have to clarify on semantics is because it seems you cannot understand. So I’m doing you a big favor.
Ah lolololololololol
BTW I’m not the developer (in case you don’t know) so I have no idea why you want me to transfer my PASSION to that.
There are balancing discussions next door. I’m not an expert so I leave it to experts. But why experts like you rarely come up with anything beyond REMOVE?
As you need PASSION to understand semantics, let me explain it in more detail:
This means I respect those who can come up with good and realistic balancing plans than removing things. For example this discussion:
(BTW abus gun has been a lame unit but why nobody wants to remove it? Because it is a unit in the sacred legacy you dare not touch? And only post-DE additions are what you can safely tread on?)
You are not such people.
You’re welcome.
Because I’m against;
- REMOVING already existing contents for balance purposes, NOT balance itself. I believe I have made it pretty clear, but as you need PASSION to understand semantics, allow me to do it again. You’re welcome.
- The ranked mentality of grinding with the meta, that propagates into every game, every mode, and even the brain of many game developers
Just to clarify I hate meta and laming in other games too (that’s why I don’t play ranked for AOEs). But my opinion is not “removing this or that so people will not lame”. No. People will always lame. The solution is either constant dynamics stats balancing, or seeking a completely different alternative than ranked (on the developers’ side).
The first is not realistic considering the resource the game is given. If the game promotes sp or co-op pve, people will still lame on ranked, but that becomes a minority so that they won’t disgust other players in other modes. The current situation is the complete opposite. Because the developers add contents that are beneficial to most other modes but don’t provide or promote other alternatives.
BTW I don’t believe people lame a lot for unranked games (at least still relatively lower ratio) so I’m not buying OP’s position.
There have been people who want a certain unit removed but hid that intention under the disguise of changing the name of a totally unrelated unit. It may sound stupid, but believe me someone really did.
Now let me ask you: if he is not a ranked player why are you teaming up with him? xDDDDDD
1 Like
Thanks, I am enriched. I am not a native english speaker too.
By simple reasoning, one can deduce it was meant for devs, since it is they who balance the game.
Actually we do. Plenty of them too. Huge list by Kaiserklien right there at the beginning of DE. I fail to understand why asking for better pathing, better UI, better features is considered removal. I have personally added to the discussion of ADDING better UI features many times by making mockups, which devs have even acknowledged.
Some people just want to play in peace and balance. Fair matches are not an astoundingly far fetched idea. Some would say it is a bare minimum even.
Belief doesn’t equal to true. I believe in green aliens on mars. Doesn’t make it true.
Easy logic to follow. Similar problems faced > similar ideas to fix it > team up! yay!
Actually no. It only speaks to the DE and its levels of shenanigans. Before DE there were ample forum posts for criticising Abus, Ashigaru, Cuirassiers, Eagle runner knights, and other overpowered and underpowered units. Just because you didn’t see them, doesn’t mean didn’t happen.
Oh and by simple reasoning it is also the devs who are arguing semantics with you.
Are you called Kaiserklein or “we” or “them”? Is that your name? Or are you their representative?
Or does UI feature has anything to do with balancing?
I never said better pathing, better UI, better features is considered removal. In fact I respect the people who discuss these, even when you do.
I’m talking about YOU and some other people asking for the literal EXACT meaning of REMOVAL, for the sake the literal EXACT meaning of BALANCING. These particular people, doing this particular thing, nothing else.
Again I’m talking about removal, removal, REMOVAL.
Now when does “criticize” equate with “ask for removal”?
That’s why I have to talk about semantics because you always broaden the topic.
I’m talking about REMOVAL exactly.
I believe I have also said this a million times even in this exact thread but you still cannot read. But that’s what you always do: you hide behind bigger generic groups and broader topics to cover your own bad faith and false argument.
You don’t have any privilege of being right about everything by being a member of some community or a minion of some other “great” figures. Neither do those “great” figures. Neither is any point within a broader, generally correct direction naturally correct.
It may be too hard for you to understand, but let me clarify it for you:
I am against removing contents for balancing (meaning this action specifically and nothing else) and I am against it when people propose it.
For your convenience:
Improving ranked
Improving ranked by better balancing, pathfinding, matchmaking etc.
Improving ranked by removing stuff.
Better balancing, pathfinding, matchmaking etc. can improve ranked.
Removing stuff is part of balancing, pathfinding, or matchmaking.
Kaiserklein or other top player talking about improving ranked
Kaiserklein or other top player talking about improving ranked by better balancing, pathfinding, matchmaking etc.
Kaiserklein or other top player talking about improving ranked by removing stuff.
You talking about improving ranked
You talking about improving ranked by better balancing, pathfinding, matchmaking etc.
You talking about improving ranked by removing stuff (now this is what you mostly do)
Someone is respected.
Someone is respected for doing good things.
Someone is respected for doing anything.
If that is not clear enough to you already and you’re still stretching or shrinking the discussion all the time, I think there is no need for further discussion.
Oh BTW as you would see “generic” and interpret it as “shared”, I need to clarify it’s not what I mean.
1 Like
Ranked is not where you find peace. You will only find people who have not climbed high enough on the ladder.
If the true intention is to match people against those with similar levels of skills, then the score should be hidden. You naturally improve and naturally match up with better opponents. Not those who find the fastest way to improve that score.
But of course game companies would not want to do that because their sole purpose is to get people addicted to some virtual score or meaningless rewards.
1 Like
You play unranked 4v4 or 3v3, opponent uses gimmicky units, super OP shadowtech units, op cards, send team stuff that are broken, doing OP revolts, getting a hell lot of free bundling and units, you lose because of all that. You think it is fair? This game is badly designed because of all these. It is basically the daily routine of unranked team lobby experience. You don’t need to play ranked to experience that.
Let me be very clear:
If you always face opponents that play the same few laming stuff every time, I’d consider it a valid criticism. Then my opinion is devs should either improve balancing (by tweaking stats, not removing things), or think of promoting other modes that make better use of the contents in the game.
If those “op units, lame strategies, blahblahblah” are different in every game like you’ve seen 20 different variants——isn’t that the exact purpose of playing the game for 90% of the time?
2 Likes
Kaiserklein - one example, there are many others. And guess what we don’t all agree on al things, still we manage to discuss things rationally, without all caps, and huge wall of text.
Ui features do affect balance. Asking for removal is a discussion too. If you disagree, you do so and move on.
And yes, people have asked million times to remove things pre DE. Following things come to mind - japan civ for being op, aztec for being up, TAD civs, certain revolts, certain maps, certain treasures, certain wonder powers.
Says which law? I do find peace in a good and fair match even if I lose. I praise the other for playing well.
This applies to casual singleplayer and campaign mode too. Campaigns award pixel points. Even tycoon mode awards pixel points.
If you want to get away from all the pixel points, playing scenario editor is the way. (which i actually enjoy, i like simulating and watching armies fight with no supervision)
I don’t think anyone in this thread has ever mentioned removing things other than you tbh. Infact i think all the mentions of removal are from you. You are presenting a boogeyman of dimwit ranked players coming to take your units away!
——says the one who begun the argument with picking on words, pretending two drastically different words mean the same and blaming others for arguing about semantics when being pointed out.
You need be presented with caps and wall of text otherwise you will avoid the point and tweak the argument
Kaiserklien needs be presented with caps and wall of text otherwise he will avoid the point and tweak the argument
You’re welcome
Can you ever talk without pulling other people as your shield like walking without a walking stick?
I will apologize if you turn out to be Kaiserklein himself though.
So how many of them actually got removed?
Removed, in its literal meaning, not changing stats, improving UI, etc.
And I still need to add more to that checklist
Removing DE stuff is bad
Removing pre-DE stuff is also bad
Someone asking to remove things before DE justifies removing things after DE.
I just find it hilarious that people SUDDENLY almost exclusively start pointing fingers at post DE stuff soon after DE.
——says the one who supports removing a hundred different names because he cannot beat one unit.
Sure “returning the game to early DE” in op means keeping everything added since then but magically slide them to the early DE stage.
I can stay away from the stink from ranked by ignoring it because it has nothing to do with me. In fact I usually do. But when someone from that stinking blob jumps out in front of me yelling “no you cannot play this unit/card/build versus ai from now on because I lose a ranked game!” Then it has everything to do with me.
I can throw this in front of every one of your arguments.
Guess why I’m not doing it?
Because I am not like someone seeking rAtIoNaL discussion.
1 Like
There is no need to argue so much. The game can be rebalanced without the need to delete or change drastically.
2 Likes
I won’t be surprised you saying this because you think generic means shared, UI improvement means removing stuff, changing historical names means balancing units, or you are Kaiserklein.
Seems in your world two things are the same as long as they have anything in common. And you are wise enough to selectively choose certain common aspects for your sophism and ignoring some others when needed. Unfortunately I don’t grow up in a world like that.
And surprise surprise I will also be against it if they slapped a ladder score onto campaigns.
Seems unimaginable to you because aren’t they all the same.
1 Like
I was.
I am not.
None. That’s the point. It was to show arguments about removal can be handled fairly without false blames and wall of texts. Not that asking for removal actually works. If anything, why should you be so scared of people asking of removal - when none of the things have been removed, ever. xD You should just ignore such threads, instead of yelling ‘these pesky removal guys are at it again’.
Again, this thread and OP don’t even mention removal. It mentions tweaking numbers, which you admitted is good. You started this conspiracy of removal cabal and their secret plan to remove all things fun.
Never did. Never have. Only thing I have ever said about names of unit was just a mild suggestion of adding a generic + unique name system (you know, adding something, not removing). Which was shouted down by you, evidently.
I mean, you said an absolute statement that ranked is not for peace. That was my retort, since you presented it like it is a universal fact/law. All I do is suggest present my views, which maybe wrong or right.
Because someone always show up with the same bad faith arguments.
I’m not worried that they would have any impact. They just irritate me. And it has nothing to do with balancing itself.
Reminder that someone was angry about the name “merchant” because some other skirmisher unit can stun and have 5.0 speed. It took 10 back and forth arguments to reveal that.
And whoever proposed the “generic+unique name system” pretended it has already been a convention before DE and use the “runner/prowler” names in legacy as a positive example (when they are all different units).
That is the bad faith argument I’m irritated by.
Because of that I do not trust those come from real good intentions of improving the game, but rather outbursts after losing games or attempts to return the game to their more familiar state so they can continue to dominate.
Maybe I misunderstood.
1 Like