I guess I fail to understand the difference between a displayed ELO number, and a rank associated with said ELO number. ELO was designed long time ago and a lot of newer players wont necessarily understand the number, while “ranks” are pretty easy to grasp, and achieve essential the same thing. It just seems that some people don’t want it to be more accessible to newcomers for the sake of “it wasnt broken, why fix it” type logic.
There is no difference between them. The problem, which has now been stated explicitly in this thread, is that the ELO behind the ranks is going to reset each season, making it a big grind to achieve the highest rank rewards, even if a player has sufficient skill from the start of the season. This is not an inherent feature of ranked seasons, so the discussion has been obscured by people criticising ranked seasons when what they are actually complaining about is the ELO reset that is planned to take place between each season.
2 Likes
That makes much more sense. I know MTG: Arena has essentially monthly ranked resets, and League of Legends has yearly. Where on this line do you guys feel Aoe4 should fall? Is a year too long? What are the benefits to linger/short resets?
Well, unfortunately, all of my friends from this game decided to quit yesterday & I hate playing alone. 
A shame, I enjoyed playing this game till today; peace to those still running the marathon.
Hope they add more utility to elephants one day, that’ll bring me back in a heartbeat.
-6
2 Likes
Cuál fue el motivo de su salida?
They tossed team gamers to the curb and cater to pro 1 v1. Ranked is a mess of garbage. Game just gets worse and worse
3 Likes
Me and my friend stopped playing because the mechanics of the game is unsophisticated and unidimensional. We both played since betas and winning and losing a fair amount of games (over 1000 games) knowing many build orders and playstyles, we asked ourselves what difference can another game make to us? Every other games now feel the same from start to finish. We can easily predict how it would happen in advance and response to it.
The game mechanics is shallow, it’s the main problem.
When your enemy make X units, you make Y units to counter. If they boom you boom or rush. If you rush, you spam X units then it becomes an APM race point and click game. If they build A you counter with B, then follow with C and so on… the same every time. Lacking tactical options to choose from, basically make X in response to Y, or make ABC to rush. You can win or lose games in many different ways, but there are not that many to be honest.
We have a number of ideas to add. It would be nice to see units have more upgrade options than +1 damage, armors, add some HP. Combat options eg. switching armor piercing or poison round for a reduced attack speed, special abilities like spearman using a special weapon to dismount a heavy cavalries. Wooden wall block LoS, wooden platform allows archers to stand on and shoot, more defensive structures… can bring more interesting alternatives.
Current meta favors early aggression civs and if you push early with those civs you have at a great advantage so why not? But rush is hollow and boring cuz you don’t unlock the full potential of your civs. Maps are imbalance and generation inconsistences sometime create unfair games.
Other problem is the lack of realism (blood, broken weapons, dead bodies). It’s nice to randomly stop for a second to enjoy the details in the game, but sadly there aren’t many to see. It’s nice to see units open a door and walk out of a building, man in armor climb onto the horse and ride to battle, but they all just magically appear next to it instead. No visual indicators of a damaged infantry like broken armors, helmets, shattered weapon, etc… Dead bodies look like plastic toy soldier and just magically disappear without a trace. All killed sieges just magically explode turning into the same looking pile of logs that you can’t tell which was which etc…
While every once in a while there are small adjustments in the form of nerfs and buffs in order to change the meta, it is just an attempt to cover the fact that the mechanic is shallow and the details are lacking. It would be hard to not get bored of.
7 Likes
En age of empires 3 en su nuevo dlc agregaron unidades que mejoran sus stats cuando matan (suben de rango) incluso hay una unidad que puede ser guerrillero y caballeria ligera al mismo tiempo ya que posee una animación para montar y desmontar
I got to play against Mongols (finally NOT English!) and it was a pretty intense game that lasted about 40 minutes. It had back and forth, countering and counter-countering, and even some big battles as well! This is the kind of matches I’d like to play. Finally I got to play in the Imperial Age!
1 Like
Balance. Top tier civs may hold their positions for months. But the bottom tier civs should rotate frequently to keep players passionate. No one wanna there favoirate civ do badly for longtime.
1 Like
Played it for 1 day. Didnt like the graphical style. Units didnt look distinct and vibrant. They looked like a clump of bacteria moving around left and right instead of a group of glorius knights or longbowmen.
A 3d style rts game needs a warcraft3 type color and graphical style to be pleasing and have distinct vibrant units.
Or do the 2d aoe2 DE spirites thing which also looks great. This aoe4 had a very empire earth look to it. Neither commiting to vibrant over the top 3d models like Warcraft3 nor resorting to simple and beautiful 2d like aoe2
Didnt like the voicelines “yokel fokle babble gabble” instead of the classic aoe2 pleasing “mandatum, equilen”
Didnt like the basic ■■■ scifi ish UI. Not fitting for a medieval game.
In other words it was neither aoe2 nor warcraft3 which are the 2 greatest rts games of all time.
2 Likes
That information has been freely available for a while, you should have done your research before claiming otherwise, it’s not my fault I did some reading.
Because frankly it’s not a good comparison. Rocket League isn’t the baseline game everyone, especially not Microsoft and its hired studios, looks to in order to judge their decisions. Again, it’s clouding your arguments since you’re comparing everything to a game that has nothing to do with this game.
I’m going to be very blunt, I can guarantee that not a single person who worked on this game ever looked at Rocket League for comparison. You seriously need to stop thinking about Rocket League in comparison to AoE4. Ranked seasons are not Rocket League’s invention, AoE4 didn’t change “Rocket League’s” formula for the worse, it used a very established formula that has been used in loads of games including RTSs. Ranked seasons were in StarCraft II from 2010. This isn’t the result of years of tweaking from Rocket League suddenly thrown out of the system, this is the result of years of RTS games being designed with e-sports in mind instead of casual players. Nobody “realised” anything about Rocket League, it’s a game from an entirely different genre that didn’t innovate on ranked at all. Stop talking about Rocket League.
Elo (it’s not an acronym by the way, even Microsoft doesn’t realise that, it was named after Arpad Elo, the inventor, it doesn’t stand for anything) determines your matchup and how many ranked points you gain/lose upon losing a ranked match. Elo is linked to your ranked points, but your ranked points aren’t linked to your Elo.Again, Elo determines everything from your matchups to how many ranked points you get, the only thing ranked points do is determine what badge you get.
It is needlessly complicated, not simplier. Your Elo already determines who you are matched up against, so what is the point of adding a front system? The ranked points are superfluous, purely determining your rank, which only determines what time-gated rewards you get.
I also think you’re overestimating just how complicated Elo is to understand. Number go up when win, go down when lose, therefore big number good. I figured it out when I was a child. Ranked seasons are far less accessible because they punish you for not playing constantly. Your Elo is constant, your Elo is already tracked, the only reason they added a time-sensitive front system is because that system is far better at encouraging constant grinding to a higher rank.
I won’t repeat myself because I explained it above, but they are different.
Should have read the FAQ.
You are extremely wrong. I encourage you to read the FAQ again, because it specifically says:
While Rank Points are reset with each new Season, your ELO in the Ranked 1v1 queue will persist and will play a role in determining your starting Rank after your 5 placement matches are completed in future Ranked Seasons.
The problem is not the Elo, the problem is the ranked points, and by extension the entire ranked season system.
I don’t know whose arguments you’re reading, but I have made very, very clear from the start that no, the problem is specifically ranked seasons and ranked points. The fact they reset is the standard, virtually every game with ranked seasons has a reset, because it encourages you to start the grind again. Contrary to what you think, Rocket League isn’t the standard. Ranked seasons are inherently flawed because they are time sensitive, rank points don’t determine anything of importance, its only job is to give people a sense of urgency to grind ranked.
I know you weren’t exactly asking me this, because my answer is very bluntly “seasons should be abolished”, but if this game os going to have ranked seasons (which is the reality, they’re not suddenly going to get rid of them no matter how much I annihilate the concept of them), I 100% think that the longer the season the better. Although it is very clear that resets are not what makes ranked seasons an extremely flawed system, a longer period before a reset does make the symptoms of the flaws of ranked seasons at least more bearable. The reset isn’t the problem, the problem is that seasons end, whether or not the ranked points reset or not. Having solely Elo was the best system.
Yeah holy shit the UI is pretty appalling. Especially the tech tree. Compare AoE2’s tech tree, it feels vibrant, alive, it actually looks like the end product of the techs you research. Then look at AoE4’s, flat, boring, no flare.
1 Like
Yet I see virtually none of these complaints from players of Rocket League, who vastly outnumber players of AoE 4, so maybe if they aren’t looking at it for inspiration, they should be.
Rocket League is in its core ideal casual game, easy to play, fast paced, takes less then 10 minutes (super ideal as you dont need any heavy time investment and can literally play on short break). Which is the reason why its popular in first place. On other hand AOE4 has average game length close to 45 minutes. Is not easy to play, is much slower. Its okay to look at other games and take inspiration, but what works for one and its playerbase, might be actually not really good for other and its playerbase, And if we look at current dwindling numbers of AOE4, then ranked seasons are not really something that in their forms helped AOE4 at all and making it closer to other games will not fix it. AOE players just dont care enough about PvP as the main selling point of a game.
4 Likes
Why exactly does the current meta favour early aggression? Scout your opponent well, use your defensive structures and counter him, hit his base where he should be vulnerable. Cut off unprotected army supply, etc.
With all those defensive structures this game offers I heavily struggle to see how aggressive playstyles would be favoured and I’ve played RTS games that certainly did favour aggressive playstyles. This game feels like the opposite with all those defensive structures. To me it seems like many (inexperienced) players just have a very big problem with being attacked in the early-mid game. And since everything that does not match ones taste is odd it has to be stupid/hollow whatever. To be honest, that is just very narrow minded.
I’ve already stopped playing aoe4 in February due to games lasting too long and activity not being rewarded to my desired extent. Ending games in feudal ages meant rams which is dull. When games didn’t end in feudal they usually became very long static games of nutrition without any surprise moments. I don’t have the time (even on weekends) for those long games and I have zero fun fighting 10 minutes for 5 cm map space. I like dynamic games with little but powerfull tweaks.
Once again, that is because we are not talking about Rocket League. I get it, you’re a Rocket League fan, it is incredibly obvious because you’ve spent more time talking about Rocket League than AoE4 including on my first thread, to the point that you’ve entirely assumed completely incorrect stuff about this game just because of Rocket League.
AoE4 is nothing like Rocket League. They are two entirely different games with entirely different genres, so of course they’re going to have entirely different playerbase numbers. One is a F2P sports game, the other is a $100AUD RTS game. In what universe are they going to have even remotely similar playerbases?
They shouldn’t look at Rocket League at all. Rocket League has nothing to do with AoE4 and it shouldn’t. It is not a good starting point for an RTS game, not in any remotely conceivable way. They should have looked at AoE2:HD and saw the absolute success its ranked system was. I get it, you’re a Rocket League fan, but nobody else here, least of all me, cares about Rocket League.
Eh, that’s not necessarily true. You don’t care for it, but that’s as far as the statement can go.
I feel like you both have points on this with regards to decisions made in games in other genres, for the record.
I’m not talking about the game as a whole, I’m sure there are plenty of people who enjoy Rocket League. What I am saying is that think we can all agree that breeminator’s comparisons to Rocket League are totally irrelevant towards the discussion and has actively hindered them in putting forward their points by making them say things that are factually incorrect purely based on “how Rocket League does it” to which I once again need to reiterate, Rocket League and AoE4 are not examples for each other. They also haven’t really made any points beyond comparisons to Rocket League and totally misinterpreting what I am saying (claiming that my only complaints about ranked seasons were the ranked point reset).
I have never suggested that they should look at the gameplay of RL for inspiration. RL’s use of cosmetics and how that interacts with ranks is directly comparable to how the same things work in AoE 4, as those things are independent of game genre. Of course the developers should be looking at highly successful games for inspiration in these areas. To argue otherwise would be like saying no game should use an ELO-style system because they aren’t chess.