The official fixed crate topic

Fixed crates?

Yes
66
58%
No
48
42%
 
Total votes: 114

User avatar
Serbia Atomiswave
Lancer
Posts: 794
Joined: Dec 27, 2015

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by Atomiswave »

Goodspeed wrote:
WickedCossack wrote:You could argue though that china always get the food + wood start, so it's only fair the enemy does too.
It doesn't matter which way you look at it, the problem is the difference between a gold start and a wood + food start since China starts with the same crates either way


I that case China needs +100f.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by Goodspeed »

I would rather give them the wood. I really don't see the problem as long as other civs also get the wood crate and we slightly buff civs which don't benefit from it as much.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by Goodspeed »

Atomiswave wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:
WickedCossack wrote:You could argue though that china always get the food + wood start, so it's only fair the enemy does too.
It doesn't matter which way you look at it, the problem is the difference between a gold start and a wood + food start since China starts with the same crates either way


I that case China needs +100f.
Fixed? That doesn't change anything except it buffs China for no reason.
User avatar
Serbia Atomiswave
Lancer
Posts: 794
Joined: Dec 27, 2015

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by Atomiswave »

WickedCossack wrote:
Atomiswave wrote:My concern is that already unstable tp meta will blow out of proportions if almost every civ get one more wood crate. It has to be food for some...


Well I think civs like Germany and French would get a coin or food start as Diarouga said on his first post.


Food ofc, coin is useful only for Dutch. Besides its easy to get 50 g for dogs on all ep and even re map.
User avatar
Serbia Atomiswave
Lancer
Posts: 794
Joined: Dec 27, 2015

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by Atomiswave »

Goodspeed wrote:
Atomiswave wrote:
Show hidden quotes


I that case China needs +100f.
Fixed? That doesn't change anything except it buffs China for no reason.


It would compensate for 3 nerfs China got in last ep version. Or you plan to reverse/lessen some of them?
User avatar
Serbia Atomiswave
Lancer
Posts: 794
Joined: Dec 27, 2015

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by Atomiswave »

Goodspeed wrote:I would rather give them the wood. I really don't see the problem as long as other civs also get the wood crate and we slightly buff civs which don't benefit from it as much.


Then we'll see tp starts from all civs, because tp's are so fucking GOOD.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by Goodspeed »

We already see that with wood starts. All food is also an option but wood adds options and early TP adds depth. Also I think it would be kind of disappointing to go for fixed crates and then not give people the best possible start. Players would need to go to RE patch to get their beloved wood crate.
User avatar
Serbia Atomiswave
Lancer
Posts: 794
Joined: Dec 27, 2015

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by Atomiswave »

Goodspeed wrote:We already see that with wood starts


Maybe civs that are considered weaker should get wood crate. Stronger civs should have their prior nerfs reversed to compensate. Also, more changes will need to be made. What changes, who knows....
User avatar
Hungary Dsy
Lancer
Posts: 994
Joined: Jun 27, 2015

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by Dsy »

Think about random crates compare to the new:
old vs new
f+g vs w
f+w vs w
w vs w
g vs w
f vs w

write ur own conclusion and summarize for EVERY civ
I help w vs w is equal. :D
User avatar
Serbia Atomiswave
Lancer
Posts: 794
Joined: Dec 27, 2015

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by Atomiswave »

Goodspeed wrote:We already see that with wood starts. All food is also an option but wood adds options and early TP adds depth. Also I think it would be kind of disappointing to go for fixed crates and then not give people the best possible start. Players would need to go to RE patch to get their beloved wood crate.


More wood gives more bo options, so your logic is sound. Maybe I am wrong, maybe we won't see tp inflation, because tp usefulness varies among civs.

And what about Otto's crates?
User avatar
Italy Garja
Retired Contributor
Donator 02
Posts: 9729
Joined: Feb 11, 2015
ESO: Garja

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by Garja »

Civilization F G W
Aztec 3 0 2
British 2 0 2
China 2 0 3
Dutch 0 4 1
French 3 0 1
German 2 0 1
India 1 0 3 (on RE it is 2 0 2)
Iroquois 3 0 0
Japan 4 0 2
Ottoman 0 0 3
Portuguese 1 0 1 (on RE it is 2 0 1)
Russian 5 0 1
Sioux 3 0 0
Spanish 2 0 1

Food+food as extra crates is not possible.


All civs should get the same extra crate even with fixed crates. Which obviously shows how the current system is just fine.
Image Image Image
User avatar
Hungary Dsy
Lancer
Posts: 994
Joined: Jun 27, 2015

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by Dsy »

France
f+g, easy market
f+w, easy tp
f, building a market is even hard, can dealy age with no treasures
g, same as food
w, tp but can delay age up

So replace all above with the last basicly.
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by deleted_user0 »

WickedCossack wrote:You could argue though that china always get the food + wood start, so it's only fair the enemy does too.


why would u argue that... does the same apply to otto and india because they always have 3 crates? you could just as easily argue that china is missing 1 crate.
Great Britain WickedCossack
Retired Contributor
Posts: 1904
Joined: Feb 11, 2015

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by WickedCossack »

umeu wrote:
WickedCossack wrote:You could argue though that china always get the food + wood start, so it's only fair the enemy does too.


why would u argue that... does the same apply to otto and india because they always have 3 crates? you could just as easily argue that china is missing 1 crate.


I said you could argue that. :P
User avatar
India drsingh
Dragoon
Posts: 273
Joined: Jun 10, 2016
ESO: drsingh

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by drsingh »

Can anyone confirm if the 2nd random food crate can be removed without fixing crates??
If it is possible. Then just do that + fix crate for iro.

Germany, France, portugese can be balanced if tp cost changes to 220/230. It will still be worth on 100wood start for most civ but a little slower. + without nerfs semi ff civ are good both on tp and non tp maps.

If fixing crates has been decided. Then I feel it should be same for all (xcpt iro, port, sioux extremes). So that balance work achieved till now doesn't go to waste. Only reason we are discussing crate starts is because balance is already good.

I would prefer 100f(xcpt iro)since it would be simplest with minimum further tweaking required.
But 100 w will keep more ppl happy.
But if 100w is finalised. Instead of changing most civ which don't benefit as much.
A 220 cost tp, will allow to remove German and french nerf, and reduce the need to nerf portugal, since its main issue was 5tp maps.
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by zoom »

IAmSoldieR wrote:The issue with changing crates is that it is a large change from re.
That's funny, because to me, it's the opposite; its impact on balance is great, compared to its impact on play.
User avatar
United States of America SoldieR
Pro Player
Posts: 2270
Joined: Feb 22, 2015
ESO: SoldieR
Location: Chi City

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by SoldieR »

n0eL wrote:
zoom wrote:
IAmSoldieR wrote:The issue with changing crates is that it is a large change from re.
That's funny, because to me, it's the opposite; its impact on balance is great, compared to its impact on play.


Agreed. I view it as one of the smallest changes possible from RE and a huge potential impact.

Huge impact = large change, no? :P

Either way tho, it is clear that it would change quite a bit of macro in age 1 -- making it considerably easier.
Germany lordraphael
Pro Player
EWTNWC LAN SilverAdvanced Division WinnerDonator 01
Posts: 2549
Joined: Jun 28, 2015

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by lordraphael »

Age 1 macro is already so easy it would make barely any difference.
breeze wrote: they cant even guess how much f***ing piece of stupid retarded they look they are trying to give lesson to people who are over pr35 and know the best mu. im pretty sure that we need a page that only pr30+ post and then we could have a nice discussins.
User avatar
New Zealand zoom
Gendarme
Posts: 9314
Joined: Apr 26, 2015
ESO: Funnu
Location: New_Sweland

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by zoom »

Garja wrote:
gibson wrote:There really is no legitimate argument against it except this "don't standardize the game blah blah blah blah" bullshit I think

It is much more complex than this honestly. I think also it is more inherent to whether you think that randomness is a good or bad factor in a game. Many games of success (e.g. poker) have some degree of randomness (generally more way more than AOE3) and they are still games of skill.

I can tell you that having played 40k (rough estimate) of games this is one of those elements that would have made it 20k or less.
The problem is not the perceived randomness as such, but that inter-civilization balance is often quite different from one crate-spawn to another. This isn't about unpredictability in general, but rather this one factor of it in particular, due to the disproportionate impact it has on the balance of many match-ups.

While it is definitely the case that random crate-spawns add an element of surprise and unpredictability to each and every game, it is, as far as I can tell, also the case that this does not add any actual strategic depth, since it neither increases the number of viable options in a given game, nor rewards skill to any degree worthy of mention (at most, it changes what specific build-order is viable in a given game). Instead, it simply makes a given civilization more or less strong. If variety concerns only the strength of a given build-order, or—worse yet—constricting the player, it can hardly be considered meaningful – let alone substantial. Because in many match-ups the significance of this differs between sides, it makes for an exceptional balance issue.

One alternative would be to fixate the crate-spawn(s) of select civilizations, another to remove coin from the possible spawns of the "full-random" crate, and a third to remove the "full-random" crate altogether, keeping only the food random crate. Not only would this help make civilizations' performance consistent – it would also remove the need to decide what civilization shall have what crate.

[spoiler][video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsUW8JcnzZs[/video][/spoiler]
[spoiler=PS]Please let me know if I'm missing anything.[/spoiler]
User avatar
United States of America SoldieR
Pro Player
Posts: 2270
Joined: Feb 22, 2015
ESO: SoldieR
Location: Chi City

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by SoldieR »

Crate spawn is kinda like how we dont use random maps.. if you play QS and have to make a strat based on civ MU and maps instantly, its much different than knowing maps and civs before you play.

"since it neither increases the number of viable options in a given game, nor rewards skill to any degree worthy of mention"

Also, yes, crates determine what you can start with, and based on treasures how you can adapt it, and that definitely takes skill for adapting, but since everything else is basically fixed in tourney, whats the difference.
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by deleted_user0 »

Ye and it takes more skill to adapt to map than it does to crates. Its a different skill to prepare for a map, opponent and mu as well. The skill argument is quite bs when it comes to crates
No Flag deleted_user
Ninja
Posts: 14364
Joined: Mar 26, 2015

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by deleted_user »

Diarouga cant post here so who will defend his ideas???
France iNcog
Ninja
Posts: 13236
Joined: Mar 7, 2015

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by iNcog »

We need an embassy thread for the rouga
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/incog_aoe
Garja wrote: ↑
20 Mar 2020, 21:46
I just hope DE is not going to implement all of the EP changes. Right now it is a big clusterfuck.
User avatar
India drsingh
Dragoon
Posts: 273
Joined: Jun 10, 2016
ESO: drsingh

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by drsingh »

There is not much left to discuss here. A lot has been said for both sides. No matter which side wins balance will still be very good next patch.

There is already a 60-40 inclination now. Though I guess this includes many players with less knowledge about matchups and balance problems (like me), so the numbers don't mean much. What matters is how the discussion turns out in internal forums.

Which brings me to this suggestion..

Ep has been under development for quite some time. And you guys have probably have your hands full most of the times. What if instead of testing every tournament, you get a closed beta and let some players you trust, battle it out and post the win rates with recordings. Simple statistics of win rates are far more reliable than polls of perceived opinions.
And let those non developers who want to help, be able to contribute. I am sure if you made a post about it, you will get many volunteers who play actively. And you can select ppl according to your requirements.
This could possibly remove the bias to buff under used civ which are not under powered actually.

Wherever possible - evidence and experimental results are preferred over theories and hypothesis.

Worth a try?
User avatar
Netherlands edeholland
ESOC Community Team
Donator 01
Posts: 5033
Joined: Feb 11, 2015
ESO: edeholland
GameRanger ID: 4053888
Clan: ESOC

Re: The official fixed crate topic

Post by edeholland »

drsingh wrote:There is not much left to discuss here. A lot has been said for both sides. No matter which side wins balance will still be very good next patch.

There is already a 60-40 inclination now. Though I guess this includes many players with less knowledge about matchups and balance problems (like me), so the numbers don't mean much. What matters is how the discussion turns out in internal forums.

Which brings me to this suggestion..

Ep has been under development for quite some time. And you guys have probably have your hands full most of the times. What if instead of testing every tournament, you get a closed beta and let some players you trust, battle it out and post the win rates with recordings. Simple statistics of win rates are far more reliable than polls of perceived opinions.
And let those non developers who want to help, be able to contribute. I am sure if you made a post about it, you will get many volunteers who play actively. And you can select ppl according to your requirements.
This could possibly remove the bias to buff under used civ which are not under powered actually.

Wherever possible - evidence and experimental results are preferred over theories and hypothesis.

Worth a try?


@Goodspeed

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests

Which top 10 players do you wish to see listed?

All-time

Active last two weeks

Active last month

Supremacy

Treaty

Official

ESOC Patch

Treaty Patch

1v1 Elo

2v2 Elo

3v3 Elo

Power Rating

Which streams do you wish to see listed?

Twitch

Age of Empires III

Age of Empires IV