It has been over a month since a the last major patch.
Is this the normal frequency of patch releases now of once a month?.
I mean I don’t mind if they move it once a month as long as there are significant fixes and additions but more importantly testing before each release.
Trying to be optimistic
I’m wondering the same. I mean, I don’t think we should expect big updates every week or every other week like we saw shortly after release, because in many ways the game was virtually unplayable and I applaud the devs for working quickly to fix things.
However, there are still certain bugs or QOL items that are badly needed from launch that need to be addressed (hacks, lacking social/multiplayer functionality, balance updates for Sweden, etc.). I think we’re due for an update no later than next week, but it definitely before April. I’m not even playing ranked matches in fear of facing players that hack cheat codes into the match (lots of videos/posts about this in the forums and on Reddit). Any game without a mostly bulletproof ranked multiplayer arena is doomed if not quickly fixed.
They 100% said it will come this month, so i also guess around next week or maybe the one after… But tbh its totally fine, why ? The less often they patch, the better the contend will be.
Because the first few weeks or months was really not patching. It was firefighting.
Now that things are moving toward the actual pace of normal “patching” such frequency could be acceptable.
As long as they fix pathfinding, they could take the whole year, for all I care.
I just do not want to lose more troops, because they got stuck around Trees…
Sorry but why are you guys talking as if the game is in a fine state to have a “normal” release schedule? I think many players here have encountered hackers while playing ranked, as well as your TPs not being constructed, memory leaks that makes you restart the game after every match so you don’t crash and, since the last january patch (we are march),units graphics became blurry, specially in movement, making the game kinda awful to see, while somehow managing to reduce performance with worse looking graphics than previous builds.
Don’t get me wrong, I love this game and have since its release, but it is not in a state where you can say we can have a “regular schedule” and not continuing putting out fires.
And as I’ve said before, if only devs would communicate with us, we wouldn’t need these threads and we all could have a rough idea what is being worked on, theres no need for secrecy, really. But their lack of communication move us to ask and wonder what takes so long.
I’m in the boat of I don’t think the game state is where we should see regular scheduled patches.
The game still has many things it needs to resolve and much needed QoL.
For example team games is a shambles in DE.
QS needs some fine tuning even for 1v1.
Friends functionality needs a lot of work, atm such a useless feature.
Observer mode is buggy as hell.
Then you have the other bugs such as pathing, attack move, ladder not showing more than 200, performance issues, close up the loop hole that is enabling current hacking etc…
That’s at 4 major patches at least judging by previous patches
Its been about once a month so far, the last one was in late Feb and so I would expect it in a week or so. The fact that there has been tourneys in the last few weeks also makes releasing patches sketchy.
Also the dev team must be busy with AoE2, which recently came out with an expansion and as with AoE3 DE, it came with several bugs 21
Balance patch to nerf Sweden and Japan is desperately needed. Its been talked about enough already, so I’m not going to bring up the needed changes after having suggested them atleast 5 times already.
Adjusting Hudenaise and Lakota should also happen. Both civs have been dominating the tournaments recently. I think some small nerfs are understandable.
Walls need to be nerfed. Bastion Walls having 7500 hitpoints is too much considering they only cost 5 wood to rebuild and you can have several layers of these. Bastion Walls slow the game down to a crawl, make the map layout matter less and are overall bad for the game if Walls are spammed by both players. Bastion walls should have their cost increased and maybe have a coin cost, aswell as increase build time. Something like a no-build zone like Torps have should also be considered, to force more space inbetween walls and not have 5 layers of walls.
We know that even top players have had enough of current Sweden and are already making jokes about the tabletopper tournament “just pick Sweden 2 times and get 2 easy wins” which is precisely what happened, and its going to keep happening unless Sweden is properly nerfed.
More balance changes to China Age 2 are also needed. Many of us suggested to buff Flamethrowers since that unit is just terrible for its cost, unlock all German consulate trickles by age 2 like all French trickles and maybe consider a small dmg buff to Steppe Riders (in combination with increasing their coin cost possibly?). These are easy changes that are not going to directly buff China FF since China usually never played with French and German consulate, but Brit consulate instead. But for prolonged Age 2 play, French and German consulate could be great, together with Good Faith Agreements and 300 export.
If we are talking about Sweden is too weak to play, the patch can be released within 2 weeks.
But now we are talking to nerf Sweden, sorry that needs some time.
We don’t care other 15 civs can play or not, we just care Sweden can be top civ or not.
Hmm Uh huh ~Hey developers,I think Sweden was too bad when fighting the Dragoons.
“Platoon Fire” should give crossbowmen extra damage when dealing with light cavalry, just like Carolean. Crossbowmen don’t have any buff cards in Sweden, don’t they?
They are probably working on the things that they teased about in the last update (known bugs and some minor QoS features). But you can’t give up yet. At least they are somewhat engaged with us. It could be TAD where support just totally dropped for the game, and players had to take it into their own patches to balance it.
You gotta remember and give credit to what they have listened to:
- Making the game playable (compared to when it was first released)
- Removing cav and doppel boxes
- Nerfing Sweden to the dirt at one point due due to huge player complaints
- Improving the AI
- Attempting to put some rank into the casual games
- Giving Aztecs their eagle scouts
- Nerfing Lakota’s fast age up
- Implementing some ranked treaty options
- China got sort of got buffed
- Gendarmes not that much of a problem anymore
But yeah, definitely I don’t think the devs experience the game the same way we do. For some reason, a lot of other things in this forum keep being brought back up and seemingly ignored:
Casual ranks are inadequate at determining players’ skill levels, so casual games for team games and treaty games are still a mess of all skill levels. There have been multiple forum posts complaining about its inadequacies, and about simply bringing the old rank system back.
Lack of community from not having a friends list, being able to private message or group chat one another
Long-term civ imbalances that are constantly voiced by players. No one knows how or who is leading the conversation about civ balances, but they don’t seem to want to change anything if it doesn’t break the game. Different game modes have their unique list of complaints, such as in 1v1 games, some civs still aren’t as competitive as others and are rarely ever played (China’s main weaknesses aren’t really addressed, Sweden eco still outgrowing other civs like crazy, etc.)
And in treaty games, the Warchief civs or Dutch are rarely ever played due to bad, long-term economies. Brits don’t have a skirm unit late-game (no wood for longbows). Japan is still a source of complaint in treaty games for its annoying playstyle and excess of features compared to most other civs. Aztec units are also needing unit attributes buffs (ranged resist, speed) to be useful, etc.
Maybe it’s because these posts don’t gain popularity or are game-breaking, but they are still big wins for the players who love this game. I really wish these could be brought up somehow.
In fact I don’t think Sweden was nerfed to the dirt, only they were not top civ anymore.
Seems everyone got used to Sweden of course have to be the top 1 civ.
Oh before I can use Sweden to kill everything, now they only can kill half, Sweden became bottom and we can’t play anymore, omg.
That was a hotfix according to their own words, and it only was made to prepare the game files to the next update, as their other 3 fixes don’t work. So its really been more than a month since the last real update.
Didn’t the tease state this patch is going to be a small one?
Communication is indeed a problem, especially for balancing.
Some major QoL improvements look like results of interacting with the community, but there is no way we could tell by whom and how balancing decisions are made. The only exception being of course “Sweden became unplayable after the nerf” — that post gained much more popularity and attention than any other balancing post just like Swedish mid-game economy, especially compared to many other civs that have been long considered as less competitive but received little attention (Russians, Chinese, Dutch, etc.) This made me wonder who are actually playing this game and what they are playing it for.
Balancing with Japan has literally been requested for 12 years since the release of TAD, and has been thoroughly discussed over and over again and partially addressed in some fan-made patches.
Considering that no major nerfs to Japan has occurred so far and that they released an even crazier version of Japan, perhaps the devs really enjoyed this idea.
From their design keep using eco house we can see asking for nerfing Japan is not feasible.
Since China got a themed update with a customizable city it would make sense India and Japan are also on the docket. We could see some balance changes then.