Tell People You're Playing Shared Resources? You Should Probably Just Trick Them Into Playing It

Age of Empires III: DE III - Discussion
1

After trying the new team shared-resource mode for many, many days, I have come to a rather unpleasant conclusion:

If there are even 50 players in the entire Age of Empires III community who regularly want to play this mode, that might already be an optimistic estimate.

At first, I tried putting “Shared Resources” directly in the room title. I waited for an entire hour.

Nobody joined.

So I tried the traditional approach instead: I simply named the lobby something like “3v3” or “4v4,” while enabling team shared resources.

This obviously caused some players to join the game, notice something was different, ask what was going on, and eventually leave.

But strangely enough, it worked much better.

I could actually get a proper game going around 4–6 times out of every 8 attempts.

Then someone told me that I should clearly label the lobby so people would know what they were joining.

Fair enough. I politely tried it.

It worked for one evening.

One game.

The next evening, I spent another entire hour waiting for people to join a clearly labeled Shared Resources lobby.

Again, nobody came.

So now I have a hypothesis.

And perhaps a rather malicious one.

Old players simply don’t want to try this mode.

Or maybe they don’t want to try anything that changes the way they are accustomed to playing the game. If they have never played Shared Resources before, they apparently have very little reason to enter a lobby explicitly advertising it.

Which leads me to the ridiculous conclusion that perhaps the only way to get people to play Shared Resources is to trick them into playing it.

Yes, I realize how terrible that sounds.

But the funny thing is that I have actually tested both approaches.

“Shared Resources 3v3” → nobody comes.

“3v3” + Shared Resources enabled → people actually play.

And after they have played it, some of them seem perfectly willing to continue.

So perhaps the problem isn’t that people hate the mode.

Perhaps they simply refuse to give it a chance.

And, to be fair, I am a player too.

I am not some ambassador for the Shared Resources developers. I am just someone who wants to play the game mode I enjoy.

Other players have every right to refuse to play it.

But I also have the right to try to find people who will.

At this point, I am honestly not very worried that this slightly dishonest strategy will “damage the reputation” of the mode.

Because from my perspective, I don’t think the current situation is fair either.

If clearly advertising the mode means I can spend an entire hour sitting in an empty lobby, while hiding the information gives me an actual game several times out of eight attempts, then I have to ask:

Why am I supposed to accept that the first method is somehow more legitimate?

Maybe the players need to be tricked into trying Shared Resources once.

Maybe after that, they can decide for themselves whether they like it.

And if they don’t?

They can leave.

But at least they tried.

2

I think this mode is better suited for teaming up with friends; after all, the level of trust between strangers tends to be relatively low.

4 Likes
3

The main problem with shared resources is you need very good communication and the shared army, 1st you need to coordinate with your team what each plays focus on gathering, when age up what to train, etc if you have a random who don’t speak english, is not familiarize with their civilization or is a begginer, this player will drag you down worse then if is a team game with no shared resources in regular mode you can somewhat carry even if your teammates are bad, if you good enough, now try that with a teamate wasting the team resources on some pikes vs cannons while you telling him otherwise, because he thinks he knows better, or you getting supply blocked cos your teamate decide is too good to make houses, the 2nd major problem is team shared army, as I said before some players just spam whatever, they don’t know what counter is, they prevent you from making army while wasting army on fodder to the enemy, if at least they remove team shared army this mode would be captivating.

Another thing people often forget is that you and everyone in the team needs to know how each of your teamates civilization work, boom, timings etc, is almost impossible to coordinate a team game if you don’t have the basics concepts of what makes a civ strong or weak.

4

don’t trick people into playing modes they don’t want to play
don’t waste other people’s time

5

I think if everyone understands the rules clearly, people will naturally learn to trust each other.

6

Actually, I don’t think shared resources necessarily mean that one player gets more while another gets less. In a normal team game where everyone manages their own resources, the same kind of problem can still happen.

And I also have to disagree with the idea of excluding beginners. At least I would never kick someone just because they are a beginner. If you don’t like playing with beginners, or if a beginner doesn’t like playing with me, either of us can simply leave. But that should be a choice, not something I force on them.

As for the shared army, the actual control of the army is not shared. If you are saying that a teammate can empty the team’s savings by spending resources badly, then honestly, I don’t necessarily see that as a reason not to trust them.

If you hate or distrust your teammate, you can always try to exploit your own teammate’s resources faster than they can exploit yours. But personally, I am also trying very hard to avoid having my opponents cooperate as a proper team.

After all, I am a player too.

And I am the host.

That’s probably the most important part of my perspective: I am looking at this from the perspective of a player who simply wants to play the mode he enjoys.

7

I never said that people were obligated to play it.

You can choose not to play it. I chose to play it. From my perspective, that makes my choice just as legitimate as yours.

The problem is that my actual experience has shown me that if I don’t hide the fact that the lobby uses Shared Resources, I simply can’t play the game mode I want to play.

I’m not saying that you have to play it.

I’m saying that I am also trying to get what I want as a player.

I am not doing this because I think other players owe me a game of Shared Resources. I’m doing it because, after trying the honest way for many days, I found that the honest way simply leaves me sitting in an empty lobby for an hour.

So yes, I am trying to get people to try it without telling them beforehand.

Not because I think I have the right to force them to play it, but because I am also a player, and I am trying to play the game I actually want to play.

8

You outright say you’re not telling people that the matches you create have shared resources. Once the game starts, anyone that didn’t notice the little tab for shared resources was on, is going to be confused why the new mechanics aren’t lining up with what their used to. They get pissed off and many end up leaving the match within minutes, wasting everyone’s time.

I get you want to play more matches with shared resources, but that’s not very good way to advertise the new mode.

1 Like
9

I get your point, and yes, I know some people will leave once they realize the match has shared resources. I’m not pretending that doesn’t happen.

But here’s the problem: when I openly put “shared resources” in the title, almost nobody joins in the first place. So from my perspective, I’m not really giving people a choice between playing it and not playing it — I’m getting a choice between playing shared resources and playing nothing at all.

What I’m trying to do is get people to actually experience the mode before deciding they hate it. Some players do leave when they notice the setting, but some don’t. And those are the players I’m looking for.

I’m not saying people should be forced to play it. I just don’t think a game mode can ever get new players if everyone refuses to try it the moment they see its name.

So yes, I understand the problem with not mentioning it. But I also think there’s a difference between forcing someone to play a mode they don’t want and giving them an opportunity to discover that they might actually enjoy it.

10

There’s also one more thing I think is worth pointing out: the shared-resources setting is actually visible to everyone in the game setup screen. So while it may sound a bit strange for me to say this, I could also argue that players simply didn’t pay enough attention to the settings before the game started.

And I think this gets into a much broader problem with custom settings in general. For example, some players like playing on larger maps, while others only want the standard map size. If I host a game with a larger map without putting it in the title, is that also misleading? What if someone joins without checking the settings and then leaves because they don’t like the map size?

There are a lot of settings like this where different players simply have different preferences. So I’m not sure there’s a clear line between “not telling people every setting beforehand” and “misleading them.”

That’s part of why I’m experimenting with this. I’m trying to find out whether people actually dislike shared resources after playing it, or whether they just avoid it because they see the label and immediately decide not to try it.

11

But are these players actually liking it or just putting up with it to play a match? If it’s the latter, I don’t think they are going to end up fans of the mode. It would just be an annoyance.

Shared resources mode requires a level of cooperation and teamwork that is hard to get with randoms anyways. How effective are these players in this mode? Have you won full matches with shared resources active?

1 Like
12

From my experience, I’ve actually had plenty of random teammates who were willing to accommodate each other, provide support when needed, communicate their decisions, and take responsibility for those decisions. I’ve won full matches with shared resources active dozens of times, so I wouldn’t say that cooperation with randoms is impossible.

What I find a little strange is the assumption that poor cooperation is somehow a special problem of shared resources. AoE3 already has plenty of random games where people refuse to cooperate, spam taunts whether they win or lose, or simply give up when things go badly. Should we conclude that the game was deliberately designed to make players attack and insult each other?

If your teammate gets rushed, for example, being a bad teammate doesn’t somehow become inevitable just because you’re playing with shared resources. You can still choose to help them, adapt to the situation, communicate, and cooperate. And if someone completely refuses to cooperate, that can happen in a normal team game too.

So yes, I have had many successful shared-resources games with random players. I’ve had at least dozens of them.

But here’s the part that I find most interesting: when I put “shared resources” in the title, I have never once managed to get a game started. Not even once.

That’s why I’m experimenting with not advertising it in the title. I already know that random players can cooperate in this mode because I’ve experienced it repeatedly. What I’m trying to figure out is whether the biggest obstacle is actually the mode itself, or whether people simply refuse to give it a chance when they see the label.

13

Obviously, in a normal team game, you also have no way to completely guarantee whether your random teammate is going to be a good teammate or a bad one. That uncertainty exists regardless of whether shared resources are enabled.

Shared resources may make cooperation more important, but it doesn’t create the problem of having an uncooperative teammate in the first place. You can have a great teammate or a terrible teammate in a completely normal match as well.

So I don’t think it’s fair to treat “random teammates may not cooperate” as an argument specifically against shared resources. That’s simply one of the uncertainties of playing team games with random people.

14

No, I don’t believe the issue of poor cooperation is unique to shared resources mode. Poor cooperation can be issue in any team game. The issue is just exacerbated when resources are shared, and someone decides to use them in ineffective or just plain dumb ways I can’t do anything about it. Also, population spaces are also shared. Some units were definitely not meant to be massed this way.

15

I agree that shared resources can amplify the consequences of a bad teammate. But I think that is a different argument from saying random players cannot work in this mode. I’ve played dozens of full matches with random teammates, and in many of them people communicated, adapted to each other, and made reasonable decisions. So for me, the question is not whether a bad teammate can cause more damage — obviously they can. The question is whether that risk is so significant that random players fundamentally cannot play the mode effectively. My experience so far doesn’t really support that

16

If you don’t trust your teammate with the resources, shared resources has already failed before the game even begins.

17

Ideally, yes randoms can still work well together but that’s not a guarantee with randoms.

To be honest though, even in the ideal situation I still don’t see the appeal of this mode. Wouldn’t trading resources among teammates have a similar effect while being easier to plan out? Like trading a large number of resources to another player so they can make a bunch of gatling guns or something.

18

I agree that randoms are never guaranteed to cooperate well. But I don’t think a guarantee is really possible in any team game. At some point you have to trust the other player and see what they actually do.

As for resource trading, I think it creates a different kind of cooperation. With trading, one player still has to decide to transfer resources to another player. Shared resources removes that step and creates a common pool that everyone can directly work with.

For example, if we’ve agreed that I’m going to mass Gatling Guns, I don’t need to repeatedly ask you to send me wood and coin, and you don’t need to predict exactly how much I’ll need. I can simply use the resources available to the team.

So for me, the appeal isn’t just “we can give each other resources.” It’s the fact that the entire team is working with the same pool of resources. That changes how you plan your economy and how much you have to trust your teammates.

19

Hmm, ok I understand better why some players would find the shared resources mode appealing.

20

I feel like trying to play shared resources mode with randos will only generate salt in quantities seldom seen outside MOBA games.