That is just a bad example. The problem is ports is not balanced on land. If you say 90% of map is land, and Ports is bad on land then the problem is the balance of that civ
Doesnt that just make things alot more frustrating? the mind games in the games are already enough but if you have to deal with people even before the game start I might as well play lobby.
QS should just be click and go, everything else should be done before that
The game is juat lacking soul right now. It feels very solitary…this will go a long way in fixing that.
A lot of the frustration with QS right now is just too many things that are percieved as ranomly unbalanced. This veto system will at least provide players some ability to control that
It’s the same with any civ, they have maps they are better on than others so the same thing applies. It’s just more fair to leave it to chance. It’s impossible to perfectly balance so many civs so they’re equal on all maps.
There is still lobby if you want the soul and drama, not everything has to be in a single setting
I am ok with some sort of veto. I am saying that there is no reason to make it needlessly complicated by having it be some weird interaction between people. Just let people choose what they absolutely dont want and the rest they have to be fine with. dont make it so people have to mind game in real time before they even load into the game
The mind game already starts the moment the civ screen is visible, that is enough, atleast for me
If you can at least veto a map that at least provide you some control to better balance in your favour. Your opponent has the same control…then it becomes a mind game.
But the net result is at least both feel they had some control over the balance.
Randomly just sticking you to a game where its super unbalanced is a lot more frustratiing since you get no sense of control whatsover
The mind games is what makes it fun. Its like playing chess before you load in.
And it gives you feeling that at least you had some control over the balance
Casual lobby is just boring because u gain or lose nothing after a game
Again all it will result in is the same few maps being played repeatedly which is exactly why the old ranked system sucked because it was always the same maps.
1 Like
then thats a preference difference between, I have enough of mind games from the lobbies, I play QS to just dive in, to just say ok lets see what happens, I dont care about the controls I have tbh.
1 Like
It took awhile but we finally agree on something. You are 100% on this.
1 Like
Exactly, there is a guy there that posts games on a specific map. He plays Russians. On this map you can gain total map control by building three blockhouse forwards. Guess what he does? Guess what he does if you ask for a different map? His right I suppose but some people only care about the win. If it’s a qs rated the chips have to fall where they may.
1 Like
It wont make it only limited to certain maps because there will be a cap of 2 veto per player
Well u might be unique. But the game keeps losing players regardless of how much content the devs keep pumping into the game.
Im telling you from my perspective what this game is lacking. I have a few friends who used to play and now have stopped.
I rarely play these days.
They all say (and i feel the same) that they load in and half the time they have no idea whats going on half the time. Too many things changing all the time, too many op cheese strats.
And a lot of them said qs feels like loading to play against AI in qs but having to wait 5min+. Just lacks soul.
But yeah keep thinking all is well in aoe3 and that qs is good as is
And that is a vaild concern but the suggestions of more live mindgame in map picking with the opponent aint going to change that.
If anything it will just make it worse since if the map pool becomes more selective because of the vetos people they will just veto away the maps they cant cheese.
I have said it before, I am ok with a veto, what i am not ok with is the suggestion of vetos after you have matched with an opponent. It should be before you click to search.
I dont want to have to mindgame with people before I load into the game. The game has enough mindgames within the game as it is.
It seriously doesnt take too much brain power to do that at start of game.
I cant think of too many civs it will impact if you veto a random map selected on screen.
What at least it will do is allow to some degree to minimise known exploit on a map for some civs or minimise a big mismatch on a map for certain civ matchups.
I mean just a few examples (besides port and water)
- Otto/germans/spain/china will be impacted if you remove the tp maps
- Swedes is weakened if you remove the maps with high value mines
- Brits is worse if you veto high hunt maps
- Russian/aztec is weaker if you veto low hunt maps
- Lakota is weaker if you veto open maps
- Hausa/Ethiopia and to a lesser extent china are weaker if you veto livestock maps
I mean at the start of the game there is already scouting, treasure kiting and contention, herding, checking opponent’s deck, checking their base for age up and shipments, checking the map (livestock, tp, natives), choosing your own deck and doing your plans, building stuff. There is already a lot to do man and all of that happens before age 2 under 4 mins. I would rather reserve my brain power for all that then vetoing the map right before the game starts
If a civ relies on 2 mqps to get a fair game then the veto system is not the problem
Not just a fair game but perhaps to their advantage.
If you make it work like this Japan will always dominate, on every map it is good and therefore it is like always having an advantage for him and his team and never for the opponent. It counts that in tournaments you already know the map in advance so it is up to you to decide which civ to play on that map, in this case it would work the same. It counts that you will choose the map first then the performing civilizations for tot maps change (except Japan).
It would make everything much more competitive and you will begin to understand the civilizations dependent on certain maps and their performance on the maps again.
You should design a system that bans people who fall regardless of whether they do it accidentally or not and start with a 30-minute or 15-minute ban so that kids will stop.