Wrong in several ways, first of all the community doesn’t want the same, the community is highly divided between old players, new players, casual players and competitive players, every single group of them want and have different opinions, if you manage to make a poll involving all the community you will see that voting for a ranked lobby would win by a lot over the current match making, we are all being forced by the devs and their experiment, as result being forced to play settings you don’t really want causes the alt f4 phenomena and the player loss, adding punishments to an already forced situation will only cause more chaos, i really don’t see how the active community benefits of punishments in fact everyone loses, despite the group you identify yourself.
Ever since DE we don’t really have the top players playing ranked team games together or even interested in climbing the ladder, we have inflation cause of a terrible elo algorithm for team games, for 1x1 there is an artificial roof but for team game there is no limit so 4k ranks here we go, MM actually forces noob bashing, so where does it says that if a strong team or player has waited +12 mins has the right to humiliate other players? in no other games you see that, stop defending and inventing rules of a system that clearly hasn’t worked for this small community.
ok i might try to break it down as normal and neutral as i can because i clearly get sick of a community getting split in this way
yes the community is divided but there is surely a way to reunite certain groups of players to a general agreement
Obviously it wouldt count since only 10% roughly vote on the forums for the map pool and in general i dunno but it wouldt be a clear %that gives guidance
i mean we have differnt opinions on it but surely there should be a way on a small scale ever by more pressure or by the devs themself to try to fix it. as it currently stand nobody is forced to play a map there is a mappool only votet by 10% of the playerbase of this game on this forum and even if there would be unlimited bans for example as an eased way out it would still mean someone who plays arena only would grind even slower from the elo he gets subtracted by a certrain amount of factors for every over map he banned
i get that people get demotivated by a system that isnt fair and i clearly get it but other then that on a mappool you yourself have a choice to add something that you like to play and its not to ignore that many people like different things even if you dont like them
this problem stems from another factor and thats because there is a certain motivation in going with premades and certain premades have higher Elo then the player so yea there is an inflation but there is no real cap on the difference of elo of player that can play together then it would might fix the giant inflation
i get that point and i am not suprised that people who are 2.4k elo wait around 30 minutes for a single queue and decide instead to go for low elo accounts but this margely happend in HD aswell and we and the devs have no real influence to determine rather its someone real with 1200 elo or someone who just smurfs aswell as a whole over system to let smurfs play against smurfs
iv seen the same problem in leauge of legends and other games and i just try to make a point that there is a middleground even in aoe2de that serves to please most of the community
I would like to comment on this topic as well. I always play with with the same IRL friend. We are both over 40 years old and used to play the game when it was originally released. We are both not so good in open maps and we want to have fun playing the game and drinking beers on the side.
Therefore we do not want to play extremly open and rushy maps such as atacama / socotra. Also managing both land and water units is too much when getting drunk so we also do not play water/hybrid maps.
Every now and then the map pool sucks for us and we have to ALT F4 or insta resign a lot. I fully support the unlimited ban option. I would much rather wait 20 minutes to get a match than play maps I don’t want to play. This would be a complete waste of my time.
Bottom line is that forcing maps on people just won’t work. Some people just play for fun and playing annyoing maps is no fun at all. Everyone should have a choicce how they would like to play. ALT F4-ing is no fun and forcing maps on people also isn’t. So introduce unlimited bans and this issue is resolved.
Seriously, allow frigging unlimited bans per person on 1v1 or TGs, and bans get dropped if queue time for the player reaches 8 minutes or something.
I have been away from this game for a full year expecting to get back to something better, but I see the exact same discussion is still on going and they havent tested alternatives.
I decided to play again this week. First 20 games were 1 Arabia, 2 arena, 5 steppe, 4 Mega Random, 3 Team Islands, 3 Yucatan, 2 Golden Rush. I thought of alt+f4 17 times…
For those with the argument of being bad player, I lost only 5 of those games (apparently the TG ELO has continue to inflate whilst I was away)… I just won a Steppe game and still decided to come here to post because seriously… My opponent was surrounded by wood on all sides and isolated even from his teammates, with just a small gap out towards me. Mostly a 4v3 until imp as he got walled in. Terrible, terrible map generation, and pointless to start without a TC on that map.
Cant even disagree with the altf4’ers. Look at the TG map pool. Arabia is an open, regular map. Lombardia is mostly a team wall into full boom into imp fight which favours a few civs due to heavy sheep and easy to wall, Arena and Hideout TGs play similar but favour less civs as its balanced in food… BF is kinda the same. Then you have two TCs or no TCs, and for whatever reason, Wolf Hill, which also heeeavily favours two civs.
So if you like to play whats considered regular starts (1 tc, 3 villagers, a scout, no walls) and no funny gimmick (extra sheep, infinite relics, etc), you have ONE map out of nine.
Seriously. How many Aztec & Lithuanians match-ups can you have on Wolf Hill before you alt f4 yourself?
arabia with position-picking is a gimmick too because only 2 units are viable (heavy cavalry and xbows). if you play civs that don’t have bonuses for those, you just lose
there isn’t any real justification for alt+f4’ing in order to play arabia. everything interesting or normal about that map has been deleted by the nonsensical DE balance & settings
I partially agree because I dont think its just 2 units that are playable on Arabia or that its a gimmick. Eagles, CA, Camels and a few UUs are also very viable on Arabia at a tier A/B level and unless you are top50 I dont think it makes that much of a difference if you are playing Britons or Saracens flank, Khmer or Malians pocket.
There are civs that are a bit stronger… But you will have that issue on all maps as its intrinsic to the game and how civ bonus work… however most of the game seems to be balanced around Arabia and I believe its the map where most civs are viable. Even MegaRandom has civs like Mongols being picked every single game.
It is also a characteristic of TGs (and not of the map) that you want a combination of units to make a good composition and having the pockets provide cavalry (or units with similar movement speed) simply makes more sense as they have to travel more distance to the nearest enemy or to quickly help each ally on opposite sides. The counter to cavalry being infantry so you want your ally to have something that can handle it, usually archers or similar.
If you make the argument above for Arabia, it certainly applies to other maps where position and civ are exploited as well, added to whatever gimmick the map has… For a 4v4 in Wolf Hill you will still want 2 archer civs on flanks (britons, due to the extra sheep), and optimally 2 lithuanians as the pockets…
So perhaps people altf4 to play the map with less gimmicks.
i even sended a support ticket/ email about this and nothing happened. Also its sad that there is not even a respond to such a big topic. I hope atleast in AoE4 there will be a solution from the beginning.
Solution: Add 2 bans to map pool so someone can ban islands and nomads if they wish, then make the leaver just lose 10 elo for leaving in that time period. Also add short reconnect technical timeouts so someone can do a quick reboot and get back into game (2 mins should be enough).
Elo score implies legitimacy of the gameplay so follow the standard practices other titles use to keep cheap trickery out of the scoring system.
The problem is some people just want to play in a map in which other players are not feeling comfortable with. Thats all .Simply they want to force everyone just play in arabia tiny map so that they can finish game with some youtube things they have watched 11 xD As game goes longer and things are getting difficult to control i think those players are having harsh time creating their own strategy . At least thats what im feeling like
Yes this is true that smurfing/deranking wills till happen, but if the leaver gets the penalty only, then no one else is adversely affected during their derank. Most people want highest possible elo to make the matches most interesting, deranking could be identified and timed out.
The main purpose here is to provide normalized content for the people who are acting responsibly and not get too hitched up over gimmicks and trolls.
Not sure about this statement. For me and many others, elo is just a number used in match making, so you get balanced games. For 1v1s this works good, for TGs there are some issues why this still doesnt really work. Adding things that will result in less accurate matchings, is bad.
For that reason i prefer to give dodgers a time penalty and not an elo penalty.
