I don’t agree that it would be the argument but I appreciate the response.
I get it, when you have a system that you are good at, a change might push you back a few steps especially when it gives newer players a higher starting footing. But I don’t think that is enough reason to remove something that makes life easier for all players (but more so for newer players).
I don’t think booming will be impacted as much as all that, because booming under pressure still requires you to balance you eco, update you lumber yards, and manage your troops and villagers. It takes out one part of the equation, but it doesn’t even do that entirely because you might find yourself out of food (or good or wood) when you need it most.
Booming under pressure is much much more then just building villagers just as AoE is much more then building villagers.
The problem is that a lot of people purposedly “forget” to separate apples and oranges to further their argumental narrative, so it doesn’t matter if you are against auto-scouting, if you want AQ then “you want the whole game automated by AI aswell because you’re a noob.”
It doesn’t even passes over their heads that you maybe want it because:
It’s a simple command that makes sense.(like being able to jump over small terrain in 3rd peson adventure games).
Shift of focus to actual decisions of the game like splitting villagers correctly, attacking and engaging correctly, defending your eco, raiding theirs, scouting effectively, taking territorial control, which techs to research, how to help your allies etc.
Imagine this being a real war:
King: “How did we lose the battle? Were we flanked? Surprise reinforcements? Bad positioning?”
Advisor: “No my king, the general just forgot to train troops…”
I also don’t get why people are afraid of that because it is unlikely to happen, just look at the polls. So it’s basically moot.
Look, if there’s someone that can develop an scenario or a mod that brings auto-vills or auto-queue, I would be willing to test it and see how it feels.
If it happens, we could meet in steam and give a try. Otherwise we would be just going in circles like other trheads (and I dont feel like doing it).
I come from the oldest generation of this game (since AOK with all the lack of posible qol features) to the point in which MQ vs SQ was an issue. I’m open to test, even though i don’t like the suggestion.
It doesn’t. You keep trying to combine auto scouting with the argument for auto queueing, despite the fact that there is only limited overlap and the people you are currently arguing with dont actually want or are not sure about auto scouting.
Yet you insist on lumping it together and making a vague claim on something that doesn’t exist.
Yes, and it’s the reason why auto scout is much more fine than autoqueue.
@BelatedLemur1 and @Ptee92 yes, but many more people are for both, or against both, and a bigger minority is for autoscout but agains autoqueue.
I’m trying my best, but many people provided good arguments, @ReTuRnOfpRaCtIs posted a vid where someone who played thousands of games with autoqueue explains its downsides, and yet it did nothing to change anyone’s mind. There is a reason AoM has been left out (and it’s not because of imbalance, or else Age of Kings would have died waiting 1 year for OP Teutons to be fixed)
I watched that video. Do you know what the guy actually said? Cause I do.
Here is a quote from the video.
“Autoqueue goes beyond simplifying the user interface. Quality of life features have the potential to completely change how a game is played and make otherwise hidden problems suddenly super visible”
So, basically, the game was having issues, but adding autoqueueing made them visible. It didn’t cause them, it made them visible. He talks at length how there were huge balance issues with AoM, but some how, we are focused on AQ, which just made it apparent.
He also talks about how people where leaving before AQ was added, so AQ wasn’t even the cause for the community to leave.
That is the video that @ReTuRnOfpRaCtIs posted, and that was what I gleamed from it.
As for auto scouting, it’s silly, and shouldn’t be added the way it was. It’s helpful though, but it takes control away from players. AQ does not.
Or you now, the game wasn’t balanced around having autoqueue (just like AoE2) and adding it caused balance problems. Also, if the problem isn’t visible, it isn’t a problem! Koreans spent years with OP tower rushing potential, but since no one knew it they were actually bottom tier. Once someone found the imbalance (without autoqueue btw) quick action was taken to fix that. Also, just based on latest patches:
Cuman, Tatars and Bulgarian being OP
Teutons, Viets, Goths, Khmer being UP
were all problems detected without needing autoqueue. Teutons being OP years before AoM was even released was also perfectly understable without autoqueue. Less flagrant imbalances like LC and pikemen being too weak in AoK was also identified and fixed without it.
If you aren’t being sarcastic:
I’m not sure letting the AI choose when to build a camp for you is a good idea. Farms have auto-reseed which is also building but they aren’t the same as a lumbercamp and always stay in the same place, plus there are a lot of them, while you only have, at most, 3 lumbercamps around.
I don’t like when the AI makes decisions for you. Also, rebuilding the lumbercamp is something you don’t need to be doing all the time so I don’t think it should be automated.