No one said you should compete only on open land maps. Having some water on maps is fine. But maps like Black Forest and the Islands map take map design to the extreme.
Each Ranked season must have several maps in the map pool. Since each Season has several different maps in the map pool, you can have a variety of land-only maps and some maps with more or less naval combat. Just not extreme maps like Black Forest or the Islands map.
Players will choose their civ first, before knowing the map. This is crucial, otherwise we will have low civ variety, low matchup variety and less fun as players are forced to pick the civs according to maps. No one wants to switch away from their main civ because they see it will put them at a disadvantage. But you will feel like you have to and thats terrible design, because no one wants to play at a disadvantage.
I see no problem here, just learn different strategies for different maps. You will need a different build order anyway if water is available.
Also where is AOE4 BF extreme? Replace the forest with cliffs and you have a Mongolian Heights map. There were other defensive maps in the Closed Beta where you could easily wall.
While I see your point, I still disagree.
I want to see the map and then chose my faction for it. I as a mid-tier ELO player donât have the skill to play a civ on a map where it is at an disadvantage. It doesnât fit into AOE.
Do that for the high ranked ELO players, they can handle it. But it will definitely keep lower players out of ranked play.
No idea how you could come to this conclusion. You always select your civ first when searching for a ranked game. Thats how it works in Aoe3, in Warcraft 3, in Starcraft 1 and 2 and even in Company of Heroes.
Choosing a civ depending on map doesnât fit Age of Empires.
You choose your civ based on what civ you enjoy playing and then you master it. Thats the core design of RTS. Not âchoosing what gives you the biggest advantage on the specific map.â
Thats not how you play RTS. We play RTS to test our skill against opponents and not to test our endurance in not picking our favourite civ because there is a better civ for the map.
If you call your self a mid-tier ELO player you will be getting better result than investing your time into 1 specific civ and mastering the match ups anyway. If maps have this much of an impact on your chances to win, then the maps are poorly designed and do not fit into ranked mode.
Then play custom games and select the map you like. But thats not how any RTS works in ranked mode and thats not how any RTS should work when it comes to ranked mode. Tournaments are different conditions. The vast majority of players are going to play Ranked matchmaking and thats where they should always select their civ first.
I donât disagree with you from a competitive point of view but from the perspective of the entire player base these maps are some of the most popular and therefore I would argue some of the best designed.
If you like them, all power to you.
Nothing wrong with goofing around and playing a completely different gameflow than usual.
Heck even I did it with some premates of mine back then.
Iâm not saying the maps are â â â â or should be deleted or anything, just that the flaws in a competitive scenario are really bad, especially when you have to play that out like 10-20% of your matches since ranked map pool has itsâ limits.
They are not really fun to play or to look at, when you take everything that happens super seriously.
It just feels restricted and on rails, less about you and more about how the game enforces a certain very limited playstyle/gameflow if you aim for the win super hard.
Every game you listed has very asymmetric civs, AOE4 does not reach that level.
Yet AOE2:DE, the game that inspired AOE4 is using this system.
I enjoy different civs on different maps. Even with civ selection after map reveal most civs can be used and depend on your playstyle, so it does not go against your point.
By picking the superior strategy and having the better game plan, you donât need to be artificially put in suboptimal map types to show your skill.
This is just SC2 talking out from you, but as many need to underline that this is not AOE2, it also is not SC2. And no, I am confident enough to say that I crush most players with the Delhi Sultanate on land maps, but I would pick another civ if there is a significant portion of water involved.
It should though, this game tries very hard to attract new players and casuals alike to play this game, so you should only deal with such rules at a high enough level.
Since there are two threads having almost the same discussion, I will just quote @sailingship17 here:
Frost Giant seems more interested in âprioritising diversity in their hiringâ (see Twitter) than focusing on making games and hiring the best people, so Iâm trying to keep a healthy dose of skepticism with regards to the result. Donât get me wrong, thereâs nothing wrong with diversity, as long as youâre prioritising skill and hiring the best people, REGARDLESS of their background, and not the other way around.
Thereâs also Uncapped Games, I think Tencent backed studio run by the one and only David Kim to look forward to.
According to what is SC2 mm notoriously bad, and while I have zero interest in a â â â â measuring contest between sc2 and aoe2⊠you realize sc2 has a bigger multiplayer community right?
Iâm not on Twitter, so I hadnt heard anything about them being more focused on hiring diverse teams rather than making good games⊠frankly, I think there are things diverse teams can do that homogeneous teams cant⊠if we believe that humans learn from experience anyway.
What Im most excited about re: FG is their focus on unit responsiveness and pathfinding as a pillar of their engine. Have you seen their demo in The Pylon Show?
Itâs not so much about that, its more them talking about other random game development and stuff like that that I think is off topic. This post is about people trying to incorporate Starcraft elements into AoE4, so I think that some discussion about SC2 is acceptable, but it is not the purpose of the original post.
I mean, it raises a very interesting question. How do we distinguish between aspects all RTS games should have vs things than fundamentally change an RTS into SC2⊠or whatever other TTS we dont want it to be