I think it’s important to note that if the player base votes on ALL maps, you can legitimately end up with a map pool of 100% closed fast castle maps that viper is rallying against.
I remember when michi first got voted in, and people on here cried that it was being voted in as a joke/to annoy people. And that ‘real’ players would never vote for michi.
Yet it is voted in time and time again.
So I’m not sure this is answer you’re looking for if you want more variety.
Hera responds to Viper, and agrees:
I think it’s important to note that if the player base votes on ALL maps, you can legitimately end up with a map pool of 100% closed fast castle maps that viper is rallying against.
The player base can vote for 3 closed maps in the current system too. So I don’t see that this chnages things.
But my second point (Storing votes of losing map for the next poll) would mean that after a map got voted in it is in a disadvantage for the next vote compared to other maps. So basically it would be only a matter of time until all maps would get played. Without this second point the first makes no sense of course, because the same maps would likly always win.
I remember when michi first got voted in, and people on here cried that it was being voted in as a joke/to annoy people. And that ‘real’ players would never vote for michi.
Yet it is voted in time and time again.
So I’m not sure this is answer you’re looking for if you want more variety.
Michi means also variety. Its a very unique map. You have to do things differently than usual. I would welcome it for 1v1 too.
Not really. It’s just a more tedious, more long-winded version of the other fast castle turtle boom maps, just with the added extra step of cutting through with onagers with a faster imp time. Adding even more closed maps to a pool already full of them is not variety. Having an equal number of map types is variety. We currently only have Arabia for open maps which is ridiculous.
Maybe I misunderstood, my interpretation was that the devs would no longer pick any maps. So now instead of 3 maps being closed community votes in 7 closed maps.
But maybe you were saying devs pick 4 still and then we vote 3 based on remaining 70 maps or whatever?
Not really. It’s just a more tedious, more long-winded version of the other fast castle turtle boom maps, just with the added extra step of cutting through with onagers with a faster imp time.
Michi is not just closed, it is a totally closed map. Since it is never in the 1v1 pool I have not much experience on it, but I played a few 1v1v1v1v1v1 death matches on Michi. These turned out to be Goth versus Portuguese 1v1 in the end, Goth spam versus Bombard towers and gunpowder, these were a very interessting unique experience, I absoultely want to play this again. In comparison to that my experience on Arena is some Tower rushing/Castle droping bullshit, garabge games I don’t want to play.
Adding even more closed maps to a pool already full of them is not variety. Having an equal number of map types is variety. We currently only have Arabia for open maps which is ridiculous.
Michi could be added to future map pools with more diversity overall. But currently I also see a second open map: African Clearing.
Last rotation we had 4 open maps with Arabia, Mountain Ridge, Valley and Four Lakes.
Overall I see a lack of open maps with a lot of food like Mountain Ridge, Valley, Greenland, Morast, very closed Forest maps like Black Forest, Michi and Amazon Tunnel and also alternative water maps like Pacific Islands, Sandbank, City of Lakes, Nile Delta.
But Arabia and Arena are always in the map pool, so Arabia-, and Arena-style maps like Runestones and Hideout for example are not really what is missing.
Not really. It’s just a more tedious, more long-winded version of the other fast castle turtle boom maps, just with the added extra step of cutting through with onagers with a faster imp time. Adding even more closed maps to a pool already full of them is not variety. Having an equal number of map types is variety. We currently only have Arabia for open maps which is ridiculous.
They say they pick Arabia and Arena, but they are just standard maps in reality. I don’t suggest to change these 2 standard maps.
I would suggest: Increase the number of maps to 9 with 4 bans.
The player base votes the other 6 maps out of all maps.
The number of votes for all winning maps gets set to 0 for the next voting. All losing maps keep their votes.
The number of votes are visible during voting, but no percentage.
But as Viper said, it’s still usually a fast castle map because you can easily put your first TC on the edge of the map woodline near some gold, which keeps all three major resources protected and very difficult to raid in Feudal. Having TC’s on opposite ends of the map also creates a bigger distance from the opponent, making early aggression much slower and less worth the investment. So despite the lack of walls, it usually still plays out more similarly to a closed map than an open map.
Yes they are, but only having one map Arabia for early aggression is a problem. All these players are not favouriting Arabia because it’s their favourite map. They’re picking it because they don’t want to play fast castle maps. Give us more Feudal age aggression maps and we won’t need to favourite Arabia. So having more early aggression maps helps players who hate Arabia too.
But as Viper said, it’s still usually a fast castle map because you can easily put your first TC on the edge of the map woodline near some gold, which keeps all three major resources protected and very difficult to raid in Feudal.
Best is probabaly the TC next to gold and wood. The close food runs out when feudal is reached anyway. But food is the most important ressource in feudal, and you have the choice to take fast shore fish/hunt far away from the TC or slow and expensive food from farms next to the TC. I think it is a strategic choice, and I personally always take risky food far away, and like to make early military with it. But maybe at 2500 elo its differnt, I don’t know.
Having TC’s on opposite ends of the map also creates a bigger distance from the opponent, making early aggression much slower and less worth the investment. So despite the lack of walls, it usually still plays out more similarly to a closed map than an open map.
But how close the opponent is is random.
That you and TheViper kinda equate closed maps with fast castle maps and low diversity, is something I can not agree with. First of all there are much more units and buildings available in castle age. Even Viper says that the Arabia Meta is a bit stale, and Hera notices that he round about mentioned all possible strategies in feudal. Just the choice between Archers, Scouts and MAA is not that great. Fast risky food versus safe slow food like on African Clearing is an additional choice on a different level, that I find interessting.
Imo players like Viper and Hera care a bit too much about just feudal age. Where are complains about not enough dark age diversity, or the lack of late game strategies like Bombard towers in 1v1? The game is more than just feudal age.
Yes they are, but only having one map Arabia for early aggression is a problem. All these players are not favouriting Arabia because it’s their favourite map. They’re picking it because they don’t want to play fast castle maps. Give us more Feudal age aggression maps and we won’t need to favourite Arabia. So having more early aggression maps helps players who hate Arabia too.
Yeah, I would also like too see more early aggresion maps, maps that are maybe more aggresive than Arabia. For example we didn’t had Land madness and Sokotra in the 1v1 map pool since the map pool vote was relocated into the game. That is pity imo, even though Sokotra was like my worst map. With my suggested voting system every map would eventually be in the map pool.
I personally would like to see an additional “increased map pool” option that players would be able to select before queueing up. The main idea behind this is that players who like to play a variety of maps aren’t restricted to playing the same maps over and over again, while players who don’t like to play a variety of maps would still be able to restrict the maps they would have to play. This would be an option for every queue, not a queue itself. For instance, when you queue up for 1v1, you would be able to select this option, and once the matchmaking system has found an opponent, it will check if both players have this option enabled. If they do, the matchmaking system could select a map from the increased map pool. Furthermore, I believe the “Empire Wars” queue should be removed and moved to the lobby, similar to deathmatch. The “Empire Wars” 1v1 leaderboard has 2201 players, and the “Empire Wars” team leaderboard has 3740 players. I have recently played a few team games in EW, and in my experience, queueing up usually takes five to ten minutes while not even ensuring a balanced game. With absolutely nobody covering EW, tournaments being rare, and the fast-paced nature of the mode, I am not convinced that the popularity of EW will ever rise.
It’s not a choice between the two, you can do both. Make your TC on the woodline on the edge of the map first, taking any initial sheep you find on the way, then take fish and hunt with a mill out on the map once you have enough on sheep. The wood you save from not making a lumber camp means you can afford the mill. Usually you can take enough hunt and fish before any enemy attacks, or if it’s a drush you can just fight it off with loomed villagers. I always get loom quite early on that map because boars can be unpredictably far away. Lots of sheep elsewhere on the map too, which you can scout with a villager in the early game and send back to the TC and also complete scouting for more sheep with a feudal age scout if you’re going for a castle age stable play.
If you were extremely unlucky you might start building your TC on the edge woodline and be fairly close, but you’ll never be super close because once the enemy TC foundation is up, you can see the TC range in the fog of war. It’s way more likely that you’ll be fairly far away and well protected enough to avoid significant Feudal pressure.
How can you disagree with the statement that closed maps are fast castle maps? What fast feudal strategy can you use on maps like Arena which will win you the game? Low diversity of closed maps means you don’t have the option to go aggressive in dark or feudal age. So with open maps, you can either go aggressive feudal or you can wall up and try to go FC. Or you can drush and then FC. So there is the option there for aggression in all 3x ages on Arabia and proper open maps in general. Closed maps only have 1 out of those 3 options; that’s what we mean by lack of diversity. It means the lack of offensive options throughout all the ages, not the lack of units to choose from. Choosing to go for a drush or aggressive feudal will almost definitely lose you the game on closed maps, unless serious mistakes are made by the opponent. The key point about feudal aggression is choice, it’s the option available there for you if you want it, but you don’t have to take it. You don’t have that option on closed maps.
The decision making on closed maps is streamlined towards an FC-only strategy into whatever power unit you typically open with, usually crossbow + siege or knights + siege, then either 3x TC or forward castle. Whereas on Arabia, anything can happen. If you prepare for heavy feudal pressure after scouting his buildings and then make too many defensive units with upgrades, the opponent can surprise you with a super fast castle time and it’s GG. Or alternatively, you might see him fully walled and anticipate a fast castle, so you stop making units and then boom, he’s got 20 archers with fletching and armour already hitting your palisade and you can’t wall behind and you don’t have enough skirms to defend.
Dark age aggression is too limited because you only have the option of very weak militia who die to loomed villagers and TC fire and will severely delay your feudal age time. And the only way to force aggression on those maps is with low skill cheese strats like laming hunt and walling in resources. Most people don’t like those kind of messy games with villager fights. The beauty in this game for a lot of people is the skillful micro and the decision making. There is no room in dark age for creative strategy because it is too limited by lack of military buildings, units and techs. Yes the number of unit types are limited in feudal age, but the number of strategies is quite varied when it comes to combining openings into other transitions. Man at arms → archers. Man at arms → towers. Man at arms → skirms. Scouts into archers. Scouts into skirms. Scouts with spears. Skirms / spears. Archers into scouts. etc. etc.
It’s not a choice between the two, you can do both. Make your TC on the woodline on the edge of the map first, taking any initial sheep you find on the way, then take fish and hunt with a mill out on the map once you have enough on sheep. The wood you save from not making a lumber camp means you can afford the mill. Usually you can take enough hunt and fish before any enemy attacks, or if it’s a drush you can just fight it off with loomed villagers. I always get loom quite early on that map because boars can be unpredictably far away. Lots of sheep elsewhere on the map too, which you can scout with a villager in the early game and send back to the TC and also complete scouting for more sheep with a feudal age scout if you’re going for a castle age stable play.
I’m not convinced that the sheep eating strategy is good. I barly eat any sheep early and use them all for scouting, to find the enemy and the locations of the shore fish and hunt. When the TC is on wood the first other buidling can be a mill on shore fish, and I build more mills for more shore fish and hunt later. My preferred civ for the map is Japanese what makes this strategy more efficient, because mills are cheaper. But it can happen that 3-4 villgers on a pond get wiped out in feudal by enemy scouts. But you have so much food, that you can make your own military and attacking yourself is the best strat against such enemy aggresion.
How can you disagree with the statement that closed maps are fast castle maps?
I disagree rather with that fast castle maps are closed maps. If an open map is a fast castle map, it is still open, and it is still easier to attack (later) than on a closed map.
What fast feudal strategy can you use on maps like Arena which will win you the game?
Tower rush?
On Black Forest you can send a sneak villager to the enemy side in dark age. That villager will be rather unproductive, but it can win the game.
So with open maps, you can either go aggressive feudal or you can wall up and try to go FC. Or you can drush and then FC. So there is the option there for aggression in all 3x ages on Arabia and proper open maps in general. Closed maps only have 1 out of those 3 options; that’s what we mean by lack of diversity.
Ok, in most cases open maps have more options in feudal age. But I have a working thesis: The later the age the more diverse it is, because of more units, buildings and technologies available. And the more diverse an earlier age is, the less likely is reaching a later age. So maybe the downside of a diverse feudal age is, that imperial age is often never reached. Best example is probably the lack of bombard towers in 1v1. I saw it only once in a pro game on Black Forest.
But imo there is a place for every map, closed maps lack options open maps have, but open maps also practically lack completely different options which closed maps can develop.
Dark age aggression is too limited because you only have the option of very weak militia who die to loomed villagers and TC fire and will severely delay your feudal age time.
For me it seems we have a heavy fast feudal meta, and I think that is quite annoying. A hoang militia rush should be more viable. From pro players I see only complains against Fast Castle startegies but not against Fast Feudal. Some little changes could be done to dark age like Militia gain +1 against buildings, Looms reaearches slower, a map with different food sources/placement, that make Fast Feudal more difficult.
And the only way to force aggression on those maps is with low skill cheese strats like laming hunt and walling in resources.
Yeah, such Sokotra-stuff should not be stronger than Militia imo.
There is no room in dark age for creative strategy because it is too limited by lack of military buildings, units and techs.
But strategy can be about different things. Looks at the map Greenland for example. There are no berries and I think only 1 boar, but a lot of shore fish in the middle only availabe for villagers and some additional shore fish all over the map also available for ships. So a good startegy is to mill the middle very early, because it is just the best food income. But this can create interessting situations with the opponent. Maybe it is a good idea to make very early infantry. And it is of course also an option to stay home or to dock. It is a map with dark age startegy imo.
Yeah obviously you always scout with sheep, but I meant there is always at least one sheep being eaten at the TC. Also scouting too wide an area with sheep is risky because you can lose them to enemy, especially when the game first starts.
That’s not what I said. I said closed maps are fast castle maps, not that the only fast castle maps are closed. So by that I meant that it’s almost always a mistake to go aggressive in feudal age on closed maps. I’d say it’s actually wrong to do it on Arena. But I didn’t say you can’t fast castle on open maps, sometimes the map is perfect for it, other times it’s too open, the important thing is having the option or possibility to choose to do it or not, rather than having it pre-determined and decided for you like on Arena.
Also I think our definition of open map is different. You probably classify Runestones or Mongolia as an open map or maybe as Arabia clones, but maps like that with thick front woodlines or cliffs are so easy to wall that effectively they play out basically the same as closed maps. Very little investment into walls and very easy to turtle and boom.
Almost always a losing play on Arena. Puts you so far behind economically having villagers forward and you can’t do enough damage to the stone walls to justify the investment. And it’s easily killed when opponent inevitably hits castle age way sooner. One TC on their front resources and it’s dead in the water. Even on palisade closed maps like Hideout, it’s easy to house wall behind a tower rush and just get up to the next age faster.
Again, that’s not what diversity means. Diversity means you have the option of all of those Feudal units and the castle age ones you’re talking about. For example if your power spike is in Castle Age, you might respond to enemy feudal aggression by walling up and/or distracting him with your limited feudal units so you can get up faster. Sure, very occasionally you can finish a game in Feudal Age on Arabia, but it’s not typical. Usually goes on until at least Castle Age (and often imperial) before calling the GG. Maybe we can check the map stats of how often Arabia games end in Imperial. Getting to imperial is definitely not a rare occurence on Arabia, that’s for sure. And bombard towers are kind of just shit. Projectiles are so slow, even a mangonel can dodge them. Pretty much useless unless there’s a stone walled chokepoint, which is a situation that just doesn’t really exist on open maps. You’d be better off having a castle for the same amount of resources as 3x bombard towers. Or your own BBC or onagers to take out rams.
I agree there is room for all types of map. It’s just that there is a lack of true open maps on the ladder right now, yet there’s no shortage of fast castle maps. I think the only units rarely seen on 1v1 open maps is stuff like heavy scorpions and siege onager. But it’s not uncommon to see normal onagers or normal scorpions. Of course unique units from castles see more action on closed maps, but a lot of them are almost as common on 1v1 open maps. Camel Archers, Ratha, Longbows, Coustillier, Arambai, Chu Ko Nu, Kipchak, Urumi swords, Huskarl, Chakram, Kamayuk, Genoese, Leitis, Plumes, Mangudai, Mamelukes, Rattan, Beserks as well as generic units like hand cannons, trebs and BBC etc. All these units are seen frequently on 1v1 open maps. And closed maps skip the militia line and feudal age units completely, so the closed map diversity you’re talking about is at the cost of skipping the first 2 ages of military. Closed maps just get more upgraded versions of the same things (like elite upgrades etc.) more frequently than on open maps and go heavier with siege + upgrades, that’s the main difference.
I do see militia drush a fair amount on the ladder actually. 2 or 3 man drush with scout. Pre mill drush is still a thing sometimes too. I think dark age agression is in a good place. Dark age economy and build orders nowadays are so tight and crucial, so making drush more powerful would just be GG. Losing a villager in dark age is an extreme disadvantage compared to losing one in mid or late feudal, or castle age etc. I don’t think drush needs a buff honestly.
This time’s team game map pool is absolute garbage, holy $h!t. You have michi, fortress, arena, black forest, and team Islands. You have coastal, and golden pit for some relief, but those never show up. I got fortress like 3 times in a row and I’m so sick of that map.
I thought you loved closed maps?
There are certain times when I enjoy fully closed ones like michi, amazon tunnel, and black forest. But I still need my feudal aggression and castle age mangonel push on a regular basis. Semi-open maps like yucatan, highlands, and high-apm maps like budapest are my general go-to maps. Fully open clumped maps like lombardia too.
My most played map is nomad, followed by black forest. However, I can assure you that most of black forest and arena I play aren’t done willingly. At least I still have nomad on this rotation. I’d have to quit teamgames otherwise.
Yeah obviously you always scout with sheep, but I meant there is always at least one sheep being eaten at the TC. Also scouting too wide an area with sheep is risky because you can lose them to enemy, especially when the game first starts.
What can the enemy do with the sheep? Eat it? It is so slow. It is better than placing a farm, but as long as fish and hunt is somewhere near, I don’t see the point in eating sheep.
That’s not what I said. I said closed maps are fast castle maps, not that the only fast castle maps are closed. So by that I meant that it’s almost always a mistake to go aggressive in feudal age on closed maps. I’d say it’s actually wrong to do it on Arena. But I didn’t say you can’t fast castle on open maps
You grouped African Clearing together with closed maps, despite it being more open than Arabia regarding terrain. That is why I said it.
Also I think our definition of open map is different. You probably classify Runestones or Mongolia as an open map or maybe as Arabia clones
Mongolia is rather closed, in a way even more closed than Fortress, since there is random tarrain everywhere, while Fortress is rather open outside the walls. But you have to make some walls on Mongolia to close it, so overall not a very closed map.
Runestones on the other hand is an open map and Arabia-clone as far as I remember.
And bombard towers are kind of just shit. Projectiles are so slow, even a mangonel can dodge them. Pretty much useless unless there’s a stone walled chokepoint, which is a situation that just doesn’t really exist on open maps. You’d be better off having a castle for the same amount of resources as 3x bombard towers. Or your own BBC or onagers to take out rams.
What is good about them is that they don’t cost pop space. I think there are really strong in diplomacy and FFA games. Its a bit similar to War Elephants. Diplomacy and FFA games tend to have different things happening in imperial age that I miss in many 1v1s. But I made War Elephants and Bombard Towers work on 1v1 Fortress in the past. So diversity-wise I really like the map. If you want to try out some specific late game stuff, that usually don’t work in a 1v1 it is the right map.
I do see militia drush a fair amount on the ladder actually. 2 or 3 man drush with scout. Pre mill drush is still a thing sometimes too. I think dark age agression is in a good place. Dark age economy and build orders nowadays are so tight and crucial, so making drush more powerful would just be GG. Losing a villager in dark age is an extreme disadvantage compared to losing one in mid or late feudal, or castle age etc. I don’t think drush needs a buff honestly.
In december I had a game on MegaRandom where I started with a Baracks, I made 20 militia in dark age as Goth and won very early. That was cool. Just 3 militia is boring.
Tight and cruicial build orders are also boring. That is one reason why I play alternative maps, where the strategies are not so much figured out. Copying pro buildorders is uncreative, kinda unstrategic.
Agreed, but only if you are actually just copying the build step by step and nothing else. But if you use build orders properly, the way they’re actually supposed to be used, they are actually just about understanding how much of each resource you’ve got to collect to produce what you need and adapting to the situation. Copying a build order would mean doggedly sticking to say, an archer build no matter what, even when enemy has double range skirms with armour and fletching. That’s why I prefer to use Survivalist’s Heroku app so I can memorise how many villagers I need on each resource per military building / per unit, rather than a rigid build order from start to finish. E.g. If you know in your head that each stable needs 6 on gold and 6 on food to make knights, you don’t need a step by step build order, you just have the rough figures in your head for each military unit. That way you can react to the situation and think on your feet when your opponent has a strong counter strategy.
Playing “less solved” maps and just winging it without understanding build orders is just as bad as doggedly pursuing a rigid build order and being unable to adapt. Obviously I’m not saying you don’t know what you’re doing, but avoiding the underlying maths of build orders is not a good habit to get into imo. That is, of course, unless you’re not playing competitively and just playing for fun, so you’re not too concerned about improving or climbing the ELO ladder etc. In which case, yeah, you don’t have to worry about those kind of calculations.
Some good news. Viper gets to pick the map pool (within certain restrictions).
Watch from 2:07:00 or so: AoE2 w Snek | Age & Rage & 1v1s | By TheViper | Facebook
Amazing 
this is so cool !!!