How the EP is made?

[OrangeRage]

This question is about the process of how the EP team makes the updates that they do. I was wondering if someone from the EP team can post a video of what they do or similar to from YouTube of how they engineered this together. It would be cool to get an idea of the kind of work that's being done in the background so I could possibly see if this is something I might want to learn how to do. Thanks for the help

[deleted_user]

Hmmm I was in the ep team for a bit there maybe I can help answer your question.


The actual process of changing game data is quite complicated, involving many, many candles lit in a dark room. At the center of the room is a luciferian circle and pentagram, with a burn bowl at its center. Now comes the tricky part:

One begins the ceremony in a state of mental purity, calling forth the essence of balance from within their soul. Make sure to bring along a four pronged ritual dagger and lie it on the floor like a compass, used to point towards and invoke the four crowned princes of balance from ELO hell: garja, zoi, diarouga, and breezebrothers. Next, while holding an effigy of Microsoft CEO and founder, bill gates, chant the balance change you would like to see three times with a whispered force, feeling the balance from within your soul melt and form with the souls of the balance princes. After the third incantation, pluck one or more hairs from your head and throw them into the burn bowl along with the bill gates effigy. If done correctly and if your energy is brimming with balance the dark lord of balance himself, goodspeed, will appear to you in his dark majesty. One final step must be completed: the dark lord will ask you, "has this balance change been based on mathematical reason?" You answer, "yes, and may the Virginia company be with you." Goodspeed leaves, the room is removed of its past presence, and, often muttered as a form of thanks, the ceremony performer closes with, "get milked; hail to phish."

You'll see that even for a single change the process can be quite cumbersome and emotionally and physically exhausting. This is why the ep team tends to stick to making as few and as minimal changes as genuinely possible.

[n0el]

Post of the century. Time to close the forums.

[Mitoe]

Oh my god, Callen, that was brilliant.

[fei123456]

The main idea should be "how to let more players play EP", instead of 180hp uhlan etc.
If only a few western players use them in a few certain cases, such as tournament, i'd say the patch has failed.

[momuuu]

I dont get why people sometimes ridicule ep balance a little and kinda decide to just play together on re instead. Seems absolutely nonsensical to me.

[OrangeRage]

I dont get why people sometimes ridicule ep balance a little and kinda decide to just play together on re instead. Seems absolutely nonsensical to me.

I think it's because the balances happen too often to get comfortable about the facts of the game while RE is well known and documented. When Microsoft had patches to the game they didn't do them that often which made it more accepted.

It really comes down to the frequency of change that either makes it appealing or not.

Anyways my question was not how changes are agreed upon but how you make the EP changes through software and programming. I should of been a bit more clear on that though but I did enjoy SirCallens post lol

[deleted_user]

Playing on RE qs is a horrible experience. The nature of the maps essentially halves the number of viable civs, along with already poor civ balance on fair maps, it is not anywhere near a balanced state. Sure, EP isn't perfect, but I'm strongly looking forward to the next iteration as I think the team is really figuring stuff out and outside of the obvious balance outliers (i.e. port op, sioux up, maybe dutch and russia slightly too strong) the 1v1 balance feels pretty close. Team and 1v1 naturally play differently and thus balance changes affect them disproportionately so I can see a potential argument that RE team balance is not far removed from EP team balance but in the end it's hard to argue that RE is more balanced than anything.

Of course, for some reason, changes that improve balance can also be negatively received, like uhlan nerf and fr -100 food and then people just write off the patch. That is disappointing to see. In the end, change is almost universally always initially perceived with skepticism, but I personally love the ep project and enjoy playing on it over RE most any day.

If OP is wondering about the theory-crafting process that produces the changes seen in the patch, well, after the conclusion of a major tournament, community polls are opened and civs are rated on scales of 1-10, ep team polls are opened and civs are rated on 1-10, tournament win rates are looked at, and the combination of all this data generally produces outliers on either end of the weak/strong spectrum. These outliers receive their own balance threads and members propose potential changes in them, often with a mathematical basis in reason. Debate is had until a majority decision can be made on a civ's change(s) and the changes are implemented into a beta patch which is play-tested to get a feel for how it translates from theory to practice. Then it's released to the public.

[evilcheadar]

Playing on RE qs is a horrible experience. The nature of the maps essentially halves the number of viable civs, along with already poor civ balance on fair maps, it is not anywhere near a balanced state. Sure, EP isn't perfect, but I'm strongly looking forward to the next iteration as I think the team is really figuring stuff out and outside of the obvious balance outliers (i.e. port op, sioux up, maybe dutch and russia slightly too strong) the 1v1 balance feels pretty close. Team and 1v1 naturally play differently and thus balance changes affect them disproportionately so I can see a potential argument that RE team balance is not far removed from EP team balance but in the end it's hard to argue that RE is more balanced than anything.

Of course, for some reason, changes that improve balance can also be negatively received, like uhlan nerf and fr -100 food and then people just write off the patch. That is disappointing to see. In the end, change is almost universally always initially perceived with skepticism, but I personally love the ep project and enjoy playing on it over RE most any day.

If OP is wondering about the theory-crafting process that produces the changes seen in the patch, well, after the conclusion of a major tournament, community polls are opened and civs are rated on scales of 1-10, ep team polls are opened and civs are rated on 1-10, tournament win rates are looked at, and the combination of all this data generally produces outliers on either end of the weak/strong spectrum. These outliers receive their own balance threads and members propose potential changes in them, often with a mathematical basis in reason. Debate is had until a majority decision can be made on a civ's change(s) and the changes are implemented into a beta patch which is play-tested to get a feel for how it translates from theory to practice. Then it's released to the public.

Its obvious France got nerfed too much, I barely even see people playing it.

[deleted_user]

The play rate for a civ is not the unanimous factor regarding its level of balance. France is a good example of a change that accomplished balance that was simply unpopular, like I said above. -100f is not a significant change, really.

edit: equal to 100f treasure or even a 75 xp treasure if gathered before 3 cdb come (3 cdb gather 100f in ~33 sec).

[momuuu]

Playing on RE qs is a horrible experience. The nature of the maps essentially halves the number of viable civs, along with already poor civ balance on fair maps, it is not anywhere near a balanced state. Sure, EP isn't perfect, but I'm strongly looking forward to the next iteration as I think the team is really figuring stuff out and outside of the obvious balance outliers (i.e. port op, sioux up, maybe dutch and russia slightly too strong) the 1v1 balance feels pretty close. Team and 1v1 naturally play differently and thus balance changes affect them disproportionately so I can see a potential argument that RE team balance is not far removed from EP team balance but in the end it's hard to argue that RE is more balanced than anything.

Of course, for some reason, changes that improve balance can also be negatively received, like uhlan nerf and fr -100 food and then people just write off the patch. That is disappointing to see. In the end, change is almost universally always initially perceived with skepticism, but I personally love the ep project and enjoy playing on it over RE most any day.

If OP is wondering about the theory-crafting process that produces the changes seen in the patch, well, after the conclusion of a major tournament, community polls are opened and civs are rated on scales of 1-10, ep team polls are opened and civs are rated on 1-10, tournament win rates are looked at, and the combination of all this data generally produces outliers on either end of the weak/strong spectrum. These outliers receive their own balance threads and members propose potential changes in them, often with a mathematical basis in reason. Debate is had until a majority decision can be made on a civ's change(s) and the changes are implemented into a beta patch which is play-tested to get a feel for how it translates from theory to practice. Then it's released to the public.

Why do people still think dutch is too strong? I dont see any arguments that could potentially back that up, ranging from viability on a wide range of maps, the expected winrate when taken all match ups into account, the pick rate and win rate in tournaments and my opinion (all clearly facts!) dont back that up at all.

[evilcheadar]

Playing on RE qs is a horrible experience. The nature of the maps essentially halves the number of viable civs, along with already poor civ balance on fair maps, it is not anywhere near a balanced state. Sure, EP isn't perfect, but I'm strongly looking forward to the next iteration as I think the team is really figuring stuff out and outside of the obvious balance outliers (i.e. port op, sioux up, maybe dutch and russia slightly too strong) the 1v1 balance feels pretty close. Team and 1v1 naturally play differently and thus balance changes affect them disproportionately so I can see a potential argument that RE team balance is not far removed from EP team balance but in the end it's hard to argue that RE is more balanced than anything.

Of course, for some reason, changes that improve balance can also be negatively received, like uhlan nerf and fr -100 food and then people just write off the patch. That is disappointing to see. In the end, change is almost universally always initially perceived with skepticism, but I personally love the ep project and enjoy playing on it over RE most any day.

If OP is wondering about the theory-crafting process that produces the changes seen in the patch, well, after the conclusion of a major tournament, community polls are opened and civs are rated on scales of 1-10, ep team polls are opened and civs are rated on 1-10, tournament win rates are looked at, and the combination of all this data generally produces outliers on either end of the weak/strong spectrum. These outliers receive their own balance threads and members propose potential changes in them, often with a mathematical basis in reason. Debate is had until a majority decision can be made on a civ's change(s) and the changes are implemented into a beta patch which is play-tested to get a feel for how it translates from theory to practice. Then it's released to the public.

Why do people still think dutch is too strong? I dont see any arguments that could potentially back that up, ranging from viability on a wide range of maps, the expected winrate when taken all match ups into account, the pick rate and win rate in tournaments and my opinion (all clearly facts!) dont back that up at all.

Building rotate

[deleted_user]

[spoiler=spoiler]

Playing on RE qs is a horrible experience. The nature of the maps essentially halves the number of viable civs, along with already poor civ balance on fair maps, it is not anywhere near a balanced state. Sure, EP isn't perfect, but I'm strongly looking forward to the next iteration as I think the team is really figuring stuff out and outside of the obvious balance outliers (i.e. port op, sioux up, maybe dutch and russia slightly too strong) the 1v1 balance feels pretty close. Team and 1v1 naturally play differently and thus balance changes affect them disproportionately so I can see a potential argument that RE team balance is not far removed from EP team balance but in the end it's hard to argue that RE is more balanced than anything.

Of course, for some reason, changes that improve balance can also be negatively received, like uhlan nerf and fr -100 food and then people just write off the patch. That is disappointing to see. In the end, change is almost universally always initially perceived with skepticism, but I personally love the ep project and enjoy playing on it over RE most any day.

If OP is wondering about the theory-crafting process that produces the changes seen in the patch, well, after the conclusion of a major tournament, community polls are opened and civs are rated on scales of 1-10, ep team polls are opened and civs are rated on 1-10, tournament win rates are looked at, and the combination of all this data generally produces outliers on either end of the weak/strong spectrum. These outliers receive their own balance threads and members propose potential changes in them, often with a mathematical basis in reason. Debate is had until a majority decision can be made on a civ's change(s) and the changes are implemented into a beta patch which is play-tested to get a feel for how it translates from theory to practice. Then it's released to the public.

Why do people still think dutch is too strong? I dont see any arguments that could potentially back that up, ranging from viability on a wide range of maps, the expected winrate when taken all match ups into account, the pick rate and win rate in tournaments and my opinion (all clearly facts!) dont back that up at all.

[/spoiler]

Well I said maybe, slightly, too strong. But you're right in that when you look at it that way they are certainly not op; I'd agree. The only change I'd entertain is a possible xp nerf to banks, but that's just me, I think they are okay. I understand they are your baby and finally became good so you are very passionate and adamant about their matter-of-fact-non-op-ness.

[momuuu]

But why? Its going off topic too much but I just dont get why dutch needs a nerf. Theyre like middle tier..

[deleted_user]

Theyre like middle tier..

So that's the argument then, isn't it? I think most people would agree that nerfing a mid tier civ is a bad idea, but a lot of people don't think dutch are mid tier.

Anyways I'm not really involved with ep anymore nor do I peruse those forums though you certainly are welcome to since you still have access I think and you can make your thoughts known there. IIRC ep isn't even touching dutch but don't quote me on that.

[wardyb1]

If OP is wondering about the theory-crafting process that produces the changes seen in the patch, well, after the conclusion of a major tournament, community polls are opened and civs are rated on scales of 1-10, ep team polls are opened and civs are rated on 1-10, tournament win rates are looked at, and the combination of all this data generally produces outliers on either end of the weak/strong spectrum. These outliers receive their own balance threads and members propose potential changes in them, often with a mathematical basis in reason. Debate is had until a majority decision can be made on a civ's change(s) and the changes are implemented into a beta patch which is play-tested to get a feel for how it translates from theory to practice. Then it's released to the public.

I think OP might be wondering more about the programming/actually how to make changes on EP. Not the reasoning behind the changes on EP. I could be wrong though...

[fightinfrenchman]

But why? Its going off topic too much but I just dont get why dutch needs a nerf. Theyre like middle tier..

Ye you're right, it is going off topic too much

[Rikikipu]

This question is about the process of how the EP team makes the updates that they do. I was wondering if someone from the EP team can post a video of what they do or similar to from YouTube of how they engineered this together. It would be cool to get an idea of the kind of work that's being done in the background so I could possibly see if this is something I might want to learn how to do. Thanks for the help

Well, if you really wanna see it, I'll record it.
But mostly it's :
prepared your games file (DataPF.bar)
running a batch file that set the order of things to do:
running some python that thanks to pywinauto, automatize fileviewer and bareditor to get your DataPF.bar automatically and generates some hash that gonna be added to the EP launcher
open the EP project in Visual Studios and generate ESOCP1.dll, ESOCP2.dll and ESOCP3.dll and ESOC launcher.
Compress everyfiles generated with Winrar and make an autoinstaller with InnoDB.

I don't know what's your informatic level, so if there isn't something clear, don't hesitate to ask, I'll answer to you

[milku3459]

Post of the century. Time to close the forums.

Be sure to have a shut down test run first!