I think I’ve seen just about every possible combination of land map generation there is with the updated Arabia: Open front with forward, or forward/back, or back resources/hills; wallable front with forward, or forward/back, or back resources/hills. And players are not guaranteed to have the same type of map generation, which can lead to some hilariously one sided map generations. But this unfair randomness is also closer to the original Arabia like players wanted, and it is also why tournaments always use custom Arabia versions 11.
Now finding my sheep is super easy since they are closer to my TCs than forests lol
I am not sure but I think I like the change. It strengthens the Scout and MAA Rush and weakens the walling meta.
It is also good to know that you have exactly 3 wood patches by your base and by your enemy base. That helps with scouting and decision making.
Also you now longer have the situation where one player has 3 wood patches and one player had 5. That was pretty unfair…
3 Likes
I tested 3 maps yesterday and in all 3 of them one player had the wood in a better spot, about walling, yeah welcome to the old walling meta, instead of walling in small circle just wall 25% of the map.
best thing to happen to the matchmaking since they added favorite maps
Finally the Art of War mission where you get introduced to Feudal Age units has a purpose 
The map is more open, so walling, booming and defensive playstyle are more difficult.
As positive thing, I would say that the game is more dynamic. Scouts and maa openings are easier. In general feudal age is more relevant now.
As negative aspect, this is an indirect buff to the civs that where actually already strong on arabia, like Aztecs, and an indirect nerf to slow civs, which were already bad. Some weak civs like Italians and Portuguese have a weak start but also a modest late game, so the nerf is minor. The civs with weak start and strong late game (Koreans and Bulgarians for instance) are more penalized.
Overall, I would say the change is very positive, especially if you play the meta, since the games are more dynamic.
If you play random civ, there is the risk of a more imbalanced Aztecs vs Bulgarians, but if we focus on civ pick, the change is absolutely positive!
1 Like
There is a significant difference in the amount of time and resource between these two options, you’re not likely to have 25% of the map walled off by the time your opponent hits feudal.
2 Likes
Good change. Even though the map still wallable, there’s more time needed and thus more risk. So its ok for aggresive playstyle
The new map plays very differently.
I’ve had a couple of very short games. Still fun.
The sheep seem to spawn much further from the TC than I’m used to.
I certainly think it’s good to have a choice, and if I don’t feel like an open map I’ll ban it.
Good change, hopefully more aggressive play now
1 Like
arabia is back B****ES!
I would appreciate an addition of green arabia
1 Like
I think it’s a dramatic improvement for map diversity.
Having vividly different maps allows civs with varying strengths and weaknesses to find homes. Until recently, Arabia was way less the home of the aggressor than it should be.
Tried it out yesterday and in none of the matches any player was able to (fully) wall before feudal aggression unless they went for a drush. So no more straight archers or fc all the time. Big thumbs up!
1 Like
I hate the new arabia. If I wanted an open arabia, I would play serenguetti. I just don’t understad why they did this. They released an open arabia map, only to then transform arabia into serenguetti.
Traditional (AoC) Arabia was even more open than this. You could literally not defend with Walls, and had to wall in with Houses and units.
Yeah there are now more wins by maps plus try hards picking civ, that makes the new arabia less interesting than ever, i have been getting awful civ match up plus no wood or gold in the frontline in a hill, i never missed main gold on hills =(
Like i said arabia can be open but at least one woodline should be a the same distance for all players, the problem with hills are gold and woodline uphill, villagers get stuck there and don’t work efficiently.
Now I understand why everyone is picking Aztecs. Amazing how much a simple map tweak can change the entire game. I hate the new Arabia and now I switched my favorite map from Arabia to any other land map. Wood is hard to get now and I have to make extra Tcs to get safe wood. I was never a waller, except maybe walling in a wood line for example, which does no good vs archers (which everyone uses).
But apparently this is what everyone likes, Arabia with no wood. I thought the idea of Arabia was to have a balanced ‘normal’ map, not one that favors early aggression civs. Now we just have a bunch of try harders picking early aggression civs like Aztecs, and the late booming civs, which were already rarely seen, are likely never going to be seen. I hate walling turtlers as much as the next guy, but this new Arabia isn’t fun at all. I would prefer any land map over Arabia now, because they actually have wood. I really think they jumped the shark on this Arabia patch, good thing AOE3 DE is almost here.
Tip: For people who like the old Arabia where the wood lines aren’t super far away from the TC, just select Cenotes as your preferred map. Even though it says ‘wood is sparse’ it is still a lot more than the new Arabia. Haven’t gotten Arabia since!
Need dry arabia (open) AND green arabia (more closed), then everyone is happy.
2 Likes