[poll] auto-queue

Age of Mythology: Retold Discussion
1
Should Age of Mythology Retold have auto-queue?
  • Yes
  • No
  • Lobby setting (not available in ranked)
0 voters

Yes

The main argument for auto-queue is that it makes the game easier to learn.
It helps casual players to enjoy the campaign or matches against bots.
It also makes it easier to get into ranked.

No

The main argument auto-queue is that it takes away one of the skills required to play the game. It requires skill to keep up the villager queue while fighting of an enemy attack.

Lobby setting

This sounds like the best solution for everyone. You can enable cheats in the lobby too so why not auto-queue.
But it makes it harder to transition from playing against bots to playing ranked when you get used to auto-queue.
It’s like learning to drive on an automatic and then buying a manual for your first car (there are reasons why practising driving manual is required to drive manual cars in some countries).

But this would likely still be the solution that most people would be happy with.

Would you accept Auto-Queue as a lobby setting (not in ranked)
  • Yes
  • No
0 voters

Auto-queue with disadvantage in ranked

An alternative to completely removing auto-queue from ranked would be to introduce a disadvantage.
This would allow people to still use the auto-queue that they are used to from single player but also give people an advantage that know how to manually queue.

Would you accept auto-queue in ranked if it had following disadvantages?
  • No disadvantage
  • Slower then manual queue
  • Locked behind technology
  • Other disadvantage (please post your ideas)
  • I would never accept auto queue!
0 voters

No disadvantage

Auto-queue with no disadvantages is almost always better then manual queuing since the resources are only taken of your stockpile when needed and you simply have less things to worry about.

Slower then manual queue

Auto-queue should have a small delay (1-3 seconds) or just generally take longer (like 10% for example).
A villager takes 14 seconds to train in AoM. With a 1 second penalty you would be 1 villager ahead at 14 villagers if you queue manually compared to auto queue.
With a delay of 2 seconds it would already be at 7 villagers.
With a delay of 10% it would be 10 villagers.

Atlantean Citizens need 35 seconds to train, but you need to consider that they are also a lot easier to manually queue.

Locked behind technology

Auto-queue should be locked behind a technology so people that use it are instantly 1 villager behind.
If auto-queue would be behind a technology that takes the same time to research as a villager needs to train the player researching it early would have a clear and immediate disadvantage.
This would punish auto-queue a lot more in the early game but a lot less in the late game compared to the delay.

Other disadvantage (please post your ideas)

This could be a combination of the 2 others.
Increased cost.
Random lightning strikes.
Popup to confirm the next unit to be queued.
All of the above.

I would never accept auto queue!

For people that really love clicking buttons and wanting to make sure that everyone else has to do the same.

Discussions on this topic

I made a new topic to have an unbiased poll at the beginning of the thread.
Adding polls to ongoing threads is not really helpful because most people won’t see them.

Remove auto-queue in the remaster

If Auto Queue is not in age of mythology retold, we have a problem

Why are devs silent about AUTO QUEUE?

Queueing villagers is indeed a skill and auto-queueing should NOT be in-game

2

The second option (AQ only available in lobby but not in ranked) is probably the best option, it will be satysfing both casual and old-school rts players who come from other games.

1 Like
3

I disagree about finding the “middle ground” of enabling AQ in lobby and i’d not think that’s reasonable or the thing that people who want AQ would settle for. Why not enable vills auto resource gathering in lobby but not in ranked? Why not make farms infinite like we are used but just in lobby? Why not keep the TC’s auto attack but again, just in lobby?

All those features ALREADY in the game could be just a lobby toggle right?

Either we keep all we have or start cutting corners until we have a AOE2 clone with some myth flavor.

1 Like
4

Auto-queue is a lot more controversial thing then most other things.
There are a few AoE2 fans that will argue that infinite farms are bad because some resource balance stuff.
But I bet surprisingly many people would even accept them being added to AoE2.
Almost everyone accepted the auto reseeding farms in AoE2DE, there is basically no one who argues about the removal of the feature now.
Auto scout is another thing that most AoE2DE players don’t mind anymore.

So I don’t see a slippery slope here.
Auto-queue is probably the most dividing feature in the whole franchise.

2 Likes
5

Ok. We had this feature for more than 20 years. If people don’t want to play with it can’t they just go to other Age games? I don’t understand why we must make the most casual of all age games another AOE2 clone.

Also, from the looks of it we will have all sorts of imbalanced shiet in the game (repeatable ragnarok, Norse can still build with army, atty don’t need drop points, repeatable earthquakes…) so this emphasis on “competitiveness” is most bizarre to me.

Would casting powers that alter the game state so much be tolerated in AOE2? Would having a civ whose ENTIRE infantry is able to build be well received? Would being able to buy instant mercs from the TC at a moments notice be good for competitive play?

I dont think those elements that exist in AOM would be well tolerated in AOE2 either.

Why try to make this game something that it isn’t?

1 Like
6

Because AoM is much better designed otherwise:

  • % based armor: If you’re age behind your archers still do something. Single ugrades are important, but they don’t double your tankiness/damage.
  • Teamgames are better due to above
  • Each major god had 8 different routes of minor gods (AoE4 has this as well)
  • Myth units - Hero - Human units, Infantry - Cavalry - Archers. Each unit has more than 1 counter (certain myths also counter myths).
  • Unit diversity. Very few unique type of units between 2 regions in AoE2/AoE4.
  • Norse. Such a fun concept that no other RTS can provide.
  • Godpowers: Extra layer of strategy and instant age up benefit.
  • Less bunkering and faster gamepace: Settlements, villager training time.

So you would be hard pressed to make AoM AoE2 clone as AoE2 lacks depth in many departments.

5 Likes
7

Have to agree about the all or nothing approach to the issue. We wouldn’t flip it around and make it a default option while forcing those who want to play without it to do that on a custom lobby. People will already be having crossplatform matches between pc and console where the console players can autoplace villagers on resources. In my opinion it would be better as a toggle in the game settings, where it’s able to be used everywhere but players can choose to opt out. That way those who don’t want it don’t need to use it… that’s a better compromise than forcing those who want it to only have it in customs.

8

Pretty much this. For me, as much as I like AoE4, the game lacks detail, visual fidelity and variety in gameplay (despite civilization differences, gameplay strategy always boils down to the same compositions between civilizations, and siege is boring). Unique units in that game are barely unique at all.

AoM is a different type of game, with many more interesting traits and mechanics. So if you’re asking “Why don’t you play this other game that doesn’t have AutoQ”, then it is just silly–all of AoM’s greatly differing features are far more preferable to the alternative, even with AutoQ.

However, I’ve always disliked AutoQ since its introduction way back when, and I hold that stance to this day.

Is AoM so bland that removing AutoQ would automatically turn it into AoE2? I understand you like the feature, but AoM has much more to offer than a mechanic that discourages input.

4 Likes
9

Thank you guys for the discussion but I just don’t agree. I think that the option to AQ was always optional ( you didn’t have to use it and some players payed without it even to this day). Thus, wanting to have it in lobby is just a way to have your preferred way as the default way.

Also, we will have to accept auto macro, profound changes to GP’s and other things that willl change the game so much but AQ is the thing that will shake the player base to its core?

All those changes are coming to ranked and won’t be a choice.

I think it will boil down to “is this game going to have a feature I want or not” at the moment of buying, and it’s crazy how different people’s opinion is on other forums. Here the opinion is somewhat split and in other places (reddit, YouTube, fb) people are overwhelmingly in favor of keeping it as it is.

I just wanted to share my two cents here because I believe that devs read these posts and might get a wrong opinion of what people really want.

Thanks again for your past replies and have a good day.

10

I’m cool with it, it’ll make it easier for new players. But I’d like there to be an option in lobby settings to turn it off. Also it shouldn’t be in ranked games.

2 Likes
11

I suppose we can agree to disagree on certain game aspects, optional or not. This has been an interesting discussion to read and hear multiple viewpoints. Maybe the Devs decide to remove auto queue for one reason or another, maybe we go with the current status quote, or maybe we get thrown a curveball and get a weird hybrid option that no one sees coming. Whatever the case as long as AoM stays the same at its core, I think long-time fans are going to adapt and keep playing.

I like its asymmetrical gameplay style that makes each Civ feel so unique with its own strengths and weaknesses. AoM accommodates a lot of different playstyles and strategies with its god powers, myth units, unique tech, etc. It’s a fun chaotic game and I think greater efforts to homogenize Civs (I’m thinking of a more extreme version of that EE patch that added new units) might hurt that.

2 Likes
12

It’s interesting to see that 50% of people are now in favour of making it a lobby setting and according to the 2nd poll (that has less voters) over 80% would be ok with it being a lobby setting.

There are more people in favour of Auto Queue everywhere then people that don’t want the feature to exist at all.
That somewhat makes sense. Most competitive players don’t really care what other people do in single player or coop.
The game has literal cheats as lobby setting already anyway.

13

Age of Empires 4 is my favorite game in the franchise, and I’d love to see similar quality-of-life improvements made in that game in AoM Retold that do not in any way take away from the AoM feel.

2 Likes
14

Like what?

For me, I’d love to see AoM pathfinding/formations to take a more modern approach like AoE4. Units that try to individually catch up to formations rather than slowing it all down for instance. The whole approach to formations in AoE4 is far more loose and makes micro feel way better.

I’m not a fan of snare and would honestly see it go away in AoM, but part of the reason it feels awful is related to formations and keeping units on the same speed–one unit gets snared, everything goes to shit. AoE4 has far more intelligent usage of formations and individual pathfinding, which feels great.

There is also a proper weight to AoE4 units which feels nice; AoM has a very floaty feeling to combat, albeit less so than AoE3 thankfully. This may be partially related to the sounds of combat.

1 Like
15

Well, auto-queue was in the first AoE3DE versions. But players is strongly criticized this feature. Remember? I am for that it was optional in Aoe3DE and AoMR, and everyone will be happy!

1 Like
16

Glad thet so many people could live even without autoqueue ahah, in the end it’s just a lame feature that won’t be missed at all, you will get a lot better without it, trust me!

1 Like
17

The poll just shows the obvious , making it disabled only on competitve is the best choice, satisfy the majority of competitive players while keeping it for the casual players…

18

Because the 45 people who have bothered to vote and who are looking around the forum represent the majority of the AoM community on this matter. This vote doesn’t show anything, really, and I’d wager that if the majority of players voted, it would be in favor of having this enabled in all modes because most players don’t care and aren’t bothered by it.

5 Likes
19
1 Like
20

The general question is what is more important:
The opinion of a few people that play your game a lot or the opinion of a lot of people that only play your game a little?

99% of your player base are not pro players but the majority of public facing people are. Most of the streamers that make free advertisement for your game are way better then the average player.

But if you make a game that is only tailored to competitive players a lot of the fun has to be removed to preserve balance.
All RTS that focused on competitive players failed.
Even Stracraft 2 mostly succeeded because Coop, Single player and Arcade, not competitive ranked play.
But Stracraft 2 plays completely different in Single Player and Coop compared to the competitive multiplayer.
They added a lot of Quality of Life features to Single Player only.

The success of Starcraft might be a good example of how making Single Player and Multiplayer be different can work.
AoE4 is a bad example for that in my opinion since it’s only different because they didn’t want to rebalance Single Player, it’s basically just an outdated version of the Mulitplayer not a unique enhanced experience like in SC2.

AoE3 did Single Player exclusive civilisations btw.

2 Likes