I recently read a lot opinions about how auto-Q is a must in new AOM and people complaining about apparently not being a thing in Retold.
First I want to say that I think auto-macro patterns presented in gameplays is great idea. I really want to RTS be more accessible and that feature is great QOL. So what is the difference between auto-Q and auto-macro in being QOL?
The simple reason behind this is auto-macro being worse than macroing manually. Every player that want be good at the game and reach highest ranks (presumpting that there will be ranked system) or play tournaments will not use auto-macro. But still it will certainly help new players to manage their economy.
On the other hand there is no reason to not use auto-Q. It is always better to use it than queueing manually, because there is no disadvantage going auto. In my opinion this simplyfies gameplay and this is not good approach to make game better for new/casual players.
There is an argument saying that it will only make game better for casuals and e-sports will not be harmed anyway because they are making villagers consantly / if you are good player you will make villagers etc.
This statement is NOT true.
To support my argument with an example I searched Grand Final of AOE2 RedBull Wololo and just in very first game I found a ton of not making a villagers moments. Here is one of them.
This is Game 1 of Grand Finals of Redbull Wololo tournament so I remind you that is indeed the highest level of gameplay you can actually get.
In just 8:37 of game time both players have meaningful idle TC and one of them having way more.
In next 20 seconds of game time both players - especially Lierrey got their idle TC time even bigger while having resources to make villagers. So he got behind more. Why is that? Because it is a skill to maintain villager production while being stressed and focused on fighting, defending harrassment etc.
To conclude my topic I want to say what in my opinion would be good QOL feature regarding auto-Q.
Auto-Q should have disadvantage against manual-Q just as auto-macro has against manual macro. For example 2 seconds delayed production. That way casual player can turn it on while still having fun + game is saying - sure use it, but if you want to be better - you better not. Then auto-Q is the same level of good QOL feature as auto-macro and both casual players and competetive ones can have fun enjoying the game.
Iâm still curious whatâs yours opinion about handling auto-Q problem so let us know!
Just yesterday I watch an old match (I think it was old) between Hera and Viper and notice this.
That being said, I really donât hate AQ as I am not a tryhard player and think the most important thing should be decision making. Also, some strats like Zeus Centaurs X Oranos will be almost impossible for 99% of players. Itâs already a hard matchup and meta, cant imagine without AQ lol
I think saying that realizing a certain strat is impossible for 99% without AQ is just a habit of having that âluxuryâ we had in Titans. I donât hear voices from AOE2 and AOE4 players that they canât play a certain civs and tactics because itâs too difficult - they just realize them but less efficient if casuals or people play more less difficult civs if want to win and still donât have enough skill.
I agree that decision making is very important. But also think that is equal to other aspects of the game. Doing proper micro, proper macro, decisions, scouting all together makes game great - both mechanical and mind-games aspects.
Sorry, TeCH, but do you even play AoM in a competitive level? Dont need to be a pro, but it is just impossible to compare AoM with AoE 2. AoE 2 is far easier to balance, AoM is almost impossible.
Think about competitive Zeus or Poseidon X Atty that have an absurdly easy macro. Players have 1 min to queue next villager, dont even need to think about units comp, citizens are really easy to protect with Manors, dont need to even think about storage and efficiency, etc.
Meanwhile, Zeus starts on back foot and need to take the most out of first centaurs and 2 heroes, not having the option to lose them cuz of high cost and need to go back home check vills, double amount of houses, etc.
Then, I greek player lose 2 sec, Ora uses a good shockwave and with their free heroes just kill 1-2 centaurs and / or Odysseus.
This is just one matchup where AQ will be a HUGE game changerâŠ
This is more of a problem of game balance not AQ. And as we know, game balance and matchups in Retold will be very different than in classic game, because of changes in pop cap and god powers. Iâm mentioning this because devs said that they want the game to be e-sports ready - so they are confident about balancing the game is possible. If itâs that difficult then is just a bad matchup and if itâs too bad - then it is gameplay balance problem.
To answer your question I have played some RTS more tryhardish, e.g. AOE4, in AOM when played I was typical casual.
Well, Auto-queue is part of AOM now, so it should stay. Anyone that donât like it can go play AOE or whatever. All strategy games have some sort of automation. Imagine if you have to deposit every resource manually after the villagers gather them⊠in that case, of course a player with GOD micro will have a big advantage. More âskillâ ? maybe⊠more strategy? definitely not.
You see other ideas on this form like âallow TC building without settlementsâ or âadd Stone as a resourceâ. It seem they wonât stop until they turn AOM into AOE2. Why donât they just go play AOE2?
If you want to play AOM you should respect its core mechanics and adapt to them. That includes auto-queue.
Sorry if this sounds a bit harsh, and I am not talking directly to you TeCH (by the way you explain your point of view coherently).
Yeah I agree it should be a part of the game but it seems they changed the autoqueue to the economic system they showed in the interview, I donât think it will be in the game
Iâm a firm supporter of having an auto-queuing feature in the game, if people donât want it then Iâm willing to compromise. Weâve had some great back-and-forth discussions regarding it recently- some more heated than others, but Iâm fine with having a 1-3 second delay, making an optional feature for games, banning it from ranked, etc. If itâs not in the game, well tough luck for me, Iâm still gonna play my favorite game of all time.
Why canât we ask for changes for better? Repurposing settlements is change for enabling more strategies⊠TC shouldnât be locked behind map, it hurts variety of viable strategies
My point is not all changes asked for are by hardcore AOE2 community, lot of them are made by AoE3 and casuals⊠that also wants AQ to stay
I suggested the same thing before.
I do think it should only be 1 second in AoM since the villager train time is only 14 seconds compared to the 25 seconds in AoE2.
So 1 second in AoM and 2 seconds in AoE2 seem like good numbers to me.
That would mean in AoM you would be 1 villager behind after 14 villagers and in AoE2 you would be 1 villager behind after 12.5 villagers.
The advantage increases once you have multiple TCs.
Another idea I have is making autoqueue a technology. This autoqueue would not have any delay.
It would be cheap (50 Food 50 Wood/Gold) and take as long to research as 1 villager to train at the Town Centre.
This way you are instantly 1 villager behind when you research it, but it will likely be worth it at some point especially when you have multiple TCs.
I understand why people believe that AQ would cause a player to suffer, but why is it necessary for them to receive penalties? If AQ is a crutch holding people back shouldnât a player of equivalent skill be able to beat someone using it?
Iâve been playing a lot of rtses over the last 20 years, have over 3000 hours between aoe titles, but Iâve spent more time in games like SpringTA and supreme commander. Those games feature battles with around 1k units on each side and are about macro scale economy wars. Being able to automate the production of units leads to a focus on a grander scale of strategy, but also makes raiding and countering much more important, as attention to what is being produced actually matters. Hit them in gold for example and their automated production of gold hungry units may starve them in other places.
It often feels that critics of an auto queue style system would benefit from experiencing it firsthand, as the critiques donât line up with what autoqueue actually is in action. If youâre going to make auto queue ineffective in any way, or even prohibit it in standard/ranked queues, it may as well not be added at all. You canât make everyone happy with a compromise on this feature.
Guy that never played AOM comes in the AOM forum and asks to remove a feature that the game has had for years to make it similar to aoe2 and aoe4 (games he plays and thinks are the best)
People who play RTS are overwhelmingly too stupid to play this game âeven withâ autoqueuing.
It would be better if they instead balanced out âstupid waysâ of playing like made archaic age farming better, to improve those players who never learn; even though Greek was intended to be the âAoE2/AoE1 resembling civilizationâ in a way.
I donât think it would matter even if/not there.
Wasnât it âaddedâ in the expansion circa ~2003? But since itâs been so long, it is just long considered part of the game since it was added. I believe the original did not have it, although someone then made a mod to allow it, and it later got added afaik.
I donât think it is a major determining factor except that:
autoqueuing actually will get you the game lost against any better player, because you will then âmake too muchâ of a unit ⊠once they see this they will just make counters or change up; you will just make too much of something. otherwise I think itâs a fine feature.
it seems mostly incels wanted to have it removed, because they âbelievedâ theyâll get marginally better or will just mod/cheat it in themselves; it was always about âthemâ thinking theyâll become better, but was shortsighted insight since it seems âredundantâ to click a button 100 times each and every time, for no reason; but doesnât matter to me or really at all if AQ is disabled, it could be a âlobby settingâ too
Otherwise:
streamlining games is way better (can only hope for, just non-crashing and better lobby)
rebalancing âwasâ needed, some ways of playing alienated the dumber players who donât follow the 1-way logic of hunting dogs/fishing
ELO scores are very always inaccurate or just a small guideline, compared to seeing overall games played or other auto-metrics⊠and are yet used by lesser IQs to try to ârandom gambleâ the team games; which was always sad because just how easy it is to be a âtop rated playerâ in games like this, but instead of individual getting better they tried matchfixing and these games are notorious for bad players doing matchfixing like hispanics tend to do
AQ is an accessibility feature at heart - removing it is removing the reach the game has to an audience.
The vast majority of people who buy this wonât be able to keep up with the micro necessary to continually spam out villagers, especially in AoMâs design.
Auto-enable it as a feature by default, then let players turn it off if they donât want it.
Letâs try to keep the conversion civil. You lose your case and credibility if you need to resort to insults and name-calling, leave that for Twitter.
If you want to put more time into the auto queue villagers, these would be the equivalents
With a production time of 21 seconds, a villager would be lost at exactly 7 minutes.
With a production time of 22 seconds, a villager would be lost at 3 minutes and 40 seconds.
Beastyqt (one of the top 10 aoe4 players in the world) said they should definitely bring up auto-queue without a peantly/disadvantage.
Because it helps new players and doesnât make a difference in higher elo.
