On the resource checking...

France Kaiserklein
Pro Player
Posts: 10278
Joined: Jun 6, 2015
Location: Paris
GameRanger ID: 5529322

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by Kaiserklein »

deleted_user wrote:True, the much more interesting question is whether equally shitty spawns is fair.

Well it's up to the tourney admins to decide whether x map should be rehosted if the amount of resources is under the expected standards for that given map, or if it's fine as long as the spawn is fair.
Imo when you train on a map for tourney, you take into account the amount of resources on that map, and prepare accordingly, so it's a problem if the amount of resources is really underwhelming. But it's still not as bad as the spawn being not fair, and it's probably tolerable to a certain extend.
Image
Image
Image
LoOk_tOm wrote:I have something in particular against Kaisar (GERMANY NOOB mercenary LAMME FOREVER) And the other people (noobs) like suck kaiser ... just this ..
Netherlands momuuu
Ninja
Posts: 14237
Joined: Jun 7, 2015
ESO: Jerom_

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by momuuu »

The entire problem is that garja insists on having gamebreaking random elements in the maps. Maybe its fine for ladder games, but some of these inbalanced are really giving an unfair advantage to one player. It seems silly to be annoyed by rehosts when you are literally the one causing them.
User avatar
United States of America SoldieR
Pro Player
Posts: 2270
Joined: Feb 22, 2015
ESO: SoldieR
Location: Chi City

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by SoldieR »

How are you all assuming I meant that the map was suppose to have 1 hunt.

It's suppose to have 3, but has one, for example.

Is that fair? It's even res distribution
No Flag deleted_user
Ninja
Posts: 14364
Joined: Mar 26, 2015

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by deleted_user »

Tourney admins are normally MIA. Power to the caster!
No Flag deleted_user
Ninja
Posts: 14364
Joined: Mar 26, 2015

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by deleted_user »

Jerom wrote:The entire problem is that garja insists on having gamebreaking random elements in the maps. Maybe its fine for ladder games, but some of these inbalanced are really giving an unfair advantage to one player. It seems silly to be annoyed by rehosts when you are literally the one causing them.

Well he's making a poor case as both of his examples were rehosted for arguably good reasons.

Casters are doing well enough in this regard. 90% of the map spawns probably spawn fair. And when they don't casters are taking a conservative approach and re hosting anyways.
No Flag kami_ryu
Retired Contributor
Posts: 2196
Joined: Jan 2, 2017

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by kami_ryu »

So, in the case of doubt, is it better to rehost or to let them play?

I think rehost is safer but I'm not sure. Because time is wasted for all parties.
No Flag deleted_user
Ninja
Posts: 14364
Joined: Mar 26, 2015

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by deleted_user »

Rehost for sure.

At that point crate spawns become a larger issue. I wish there were a feature which allowed you to set crate spawns.

Or maybe not, randomness and all.
User avatar
Tuvalu gibson
Ninja
ECL Reigning Champs
Posts: 13597
Joined: May 4, 2015
Location: USA

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by gibson »

Jerom wrote:The entire problem is that garja insists on having gamebreaking random elements in the maps. Maybe its fine for ladder games, but some of these inbalanced are really giving an unfair advantage to one player. It seems silly to be annoyed by rehosts when you are literally the one causing them.
It's not so much that as that he gets offended whenever caster rehost a map. It's much better to rehost a borderline decent map than to play out a game on an poorly spawned map. If a casters gut instinct is to rehost I'd rehost every time.
India Ashvin
Retired Contributor
Posts: 2432
Joined: Jul 6, 2016
ESO: Octanium

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by Ashvin »

deleted_user wrote:
Gendarme wrote:tfw people don't bother reading and addressing the original post and only post to share their borderline irrelevant opinions

It's a somewhat irrelevant topic poorly formatted and entirely too long.

Some threads have to be long to have the idea put clearly in front of everyone, I don't know why you think it's irrelevant being an ex-Media Team member
Image
No Flag deleted_user
Ninja
Posts: 14364
Joined: Mar 26, 2015

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by deleted_user »

I mean it's really a non issue. It's one person giving their verbose opinion on a largely unimportant topic. Casters have done well to restart unfair maps. It really hasn't been a problem.

Ex-media team reeeeee I can't have an opinion!! I casted like a lot of games one tournament. I've got grounds.
France Kaiserklein
Pro Player
Posts: 10278
Joined: Jun 6, 2015
Location: Paris
GameRanger ID: 5529322

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by Kaiserklein »

IAmSoldieR wrote:How are you all assuming I meant that the map was suppose to have 1 hunt.

It's suppose to have 3, but has one, for example.

Is that fair? It's even res distribution

I asked you which one you mean, I didn't assume. In this case, it should probably be rehosted. If it's 2 instead of 3, probably play it
Image
Image
Image
LoOk_tOm wrote:I have something in particular against Kaisar (GERMANY NOOB mercenary LAMME FOREVER) And the other people (noobs) like suck kaiser ... just this ..
User avatar
United States of America musketeer925
Retired Contributor
Donator 01
Posts: 2483
Joined: Mar 28, 2015
ESO: musketeer925

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by musketeer925 »

Why should a casted game be any different than a non-casted one? Non-casted games don't get rehosts.
No Flag deleted_user
Ninja
Posts: 14364
Joined: Mar 26, 2015

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by deleted_user »

musketeer925 wrote:Why should a casted game be any different than a non-casted one? Non-casted games don't get rehosts.

Presumably because non casted games do not receive the luxury of immediate resource intel and cannot be restarted upon those grounds. I believe competitive integrity is a universal goal for all parties involved and as such when the given intel is acquired a restart may be enacted. Ideally there would be no map screws, yes, but this appears to be impossible without the randomness that is inherent to aoe3 and such randomness is a part of the game.
User avatar
Czech Republic EAGLEMUT
ESOC Dev Team
Donator 05
Posts: 4513
Joined: Mar 31, 2015
ESO: EAGLEMUT
Clan: WPact

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by EAGLEMUT »

musketeer925 wrote:Why should a casted game be any different than a non-casted one? Non-casted games don't get rehosts.

Per rule 1.6 you have the right to rehost a non-casted game too. It's usually too tough to decide without a caster though, unless the imbalance is really obvious.
Image
momuuu wrote: ↑theres no way eaglemut is truly a top player
User avatar
Italy Garja
Retired Contributor
Donator 02
Posts: 9729
Joined: Feb 11, 2015
ESO: Garja

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by Garja »

deleted_user wrote:I wouldn't say queen's post is irrelevant either.

Nonetheless not everyone can be expected to read an essay on resource distribution - and she makes a good point.

A caster should have the time to read an essay on resource distribution given the responsibility of rehost calls.

Kaiserklein wrote:You're literally stating your opinion, and saying it's the absolute truth. Discussing with you is really useless honestly. But I'll still try, though I'm not sure why.

Garja wrote:Secondly it's important to stress that lot of maps are not supposed to be mirror. In fact no map should be necessarily be a mirror but since many EP maps are coded that way casters tend to interpret all maps in that sense.

Garja wrote:Practically this means that casters should not go too (stupidly) picky about perfect symmetry of resources, unless perhaps for very decisive matches (e.g important mirrors, last game of a series, etc.).

Who said the map should be a mirror? I don't care if it's perfectly symmetrical or not. I just want both players to start the game with roughly equal chances, as in, approx the same amount of resources in range of each tc (and also approx the same amount of resources on each side of the map, though this one is less important obviously, and a fair margin of error can definitely be tolerated here).

In both the rehosted spawns the players have roughly enough chances with same amount of resources in range of each TC, especially in the 2nd spawn.
Garja wrote:Well the general rule, which is valid for all maps (fixed mirrors or not), is that if players get the minimum guaranteed amount of resources for that specific map, the map is fine.

Yeah so that's pure bullshit. You arbitrarily decided that a given map has a minimum guaranteed amount of resources. So you mean that if both players have at least 2 hunts for example, 2 hunts being the minimum amount, it's automatically a good spawn? Doesn't matter that one player might have, say, 4 hunts, while the other has only 2? This makes no sense, and is definitely not the way you can rule a tourney. It's far from being a competitive setting. Now I understand why you've been ranting in the chat everytime there was a rehost, you just don't seem to understand what a fair spawn is, and that a tournament should theoretically only involve fair spawns (though for practical reasons it's not always possible, but at least let's try to get close to that...).

I arbitrarily decided that a map has a minimum guaranteed amount of resources because I arbitrarily made that map with that amount of resources.
Yes, if players both have the minimum amount of hunts it is very likely a good spawn. And no, one player won't have 4 hunts simply because players can't fuckin have 4 hunts, since those hunts are in the middle of the map up for grab.
If you cared to read my post I said that that first spawn could have been rehosted since most hunts are toward one side of the map. Yet that doesn't mean one player has 4 hunts.

Garja wrote:In particular it's just stupid to overthink on stuff like 3rd-4th hunts when hunts in general move a lot by themselves in this game.

Yeah, when your opponent has 2 more hunts than you in range of tc, and your third hunt is half map or so, everything is definitely gonna get fixed when the hunts start moving...

Again the opponent doesn't have 2 more hunts in ranfe of TC. That map specifically can't realistically grant more than one hunt in range of TC (ok maybe another one barely in range with perfect herding).
Garja wrote:In any case casters should at least also check other things such as treasures (one good treasure can compensate a potentially slightly inferior hunt spawn) and contextualize the resource distribution for each situation (e.g who cares about perfect hunts if one player plays Japan).

Treasures are inherently random. That's the luck factor, and it shouldn't be compared to the resources, which shouldn't be that random.
You also can't start making decision based on the civ someone is playing... Then I can also rehost until the brit guy gets 5 hunts while we're at it?

Resource placement is inherently random in the very same way of treasure placement (similar placement constraints in most cases). The only difference is that within the same difficulty tier treasures can differ, while a hunt is a hunt.
Of course you should consider the civs. If you're looking for almost middle hunts and one player is Japan it makes no sense to spend time rehosting since it won't affect the game at all. Same thing if you're looking for 3rd mine exact placement when a player is using Dutch. In 80% of games the Dutch player doesn't even touch the 3rd mine before the game is over.

Garja wrote:Casters should ask themselves if it is really worth to rehost the game. Rehosting is never pleasent for the players nor the viewers. Also randomness is an important part of many maps. Players should be prepared for that and not give for granted that map will look symmetric and always the same (with all the relative implications). Exposed resources make for important strategic choices such as going proxy or investing in strategic walling.
In general, if rehosting can be avoided the better.

Of course, I also wish I wouldn't need to rehost. But I'd rather rehost and get a competitive setup, than be lazy and go for an unfair game. Also having exposed resources is fine, as long as your opponent's are exposed as well... I don't see why I'd be forced to rush in a french mirror, while my opponent can just semi-ff safely just because of the map, and win the match-up this way.

That's simply not a good example since it's too extreme. With EP standards there isn't a single map where a difference in resources allows the same strategy to be viable or not in a mirror.
And it's not about being lazy, it is about allowing situations where adaptation to the map conditions happens.

Garja wrote:I'll try to give an example of what I mean, hoping everyone can agree after the necessary clarifications.
These two spawns have been rehosted in a tourney match on the map Fertile Crescent. This map intentionally have big but rather scattered hunt patches. After spawning the maps few times it's clear that players can get a minimum of just a 2nd hunt and a very lucky situation of 3 extra reasonably close hunts. 70% of times it will be a clear (in fact coded) 2nd hunt plus a reasonable 3rd hunt nearby the TC area. A spawn like that is actually quite conservative, granting enough hunts for 10-12 minutes without even moving vills outside of your close portion of the map. And that without even considering 3k berries in base plus a likely 3k berries somewhere near.

After spawning the map 2 times, it was clear that it was shit spawns. Anything else is bullshit tbh.
First time, blue could herd 2 hunts under his tc, and another one close to his tc, while red could realistically grab only 1 hunt. This is not competitive.
Second time, blue could herd only 1 hunt under his tc, while red could bring 2 hunts under tc and another one close to it. This is not competitive.

No.
First is rehostable because blue gets 3 relatively safe ones and red only 2 (2nd being a bit more exposed).
Second time however both got 2 relatively controllable hunts and a 3rd one just across the river. That spawn is perfectly fair.

Garja wrote:Now, first spawn displays one player having 2 reasonable hunts and the other player have lucky 3 ones. Bullshit
Mines are almost symmetrical. No one complained about the mines
The game wasn't decisive for the series although it was a mirror. Who fucking cares? Shouldn't influence anything.

It should influence since it's totally playable and game is not super high profile so a minor difference doesn't even justify a rehost.
This spawn is certainly playable but casters could discretionally rehost that since other hunts also seem a bit more accessible for the blue player. However I think that a spawn like this should be actually played because luck on the exact res placement is part of this game. "exact res placement" like starting with 2 extra hunts?

No, having hunts start more toward your side. They could easily move in the opposite direction after 2 minutes.
Here both players got enough stuff to carry on their respective strategies and everything within the first 10-12 minutes of game should be totally fair. This map also has berry patches that can easily substitute a hunt in precarious situations and may actually be better in some cases (harder to scout). Berries can't be compared to hunts. And you don't reach 12 min in game with 1 hunt Garja.

Berries are not compared to hunts, they're considered together with hunts. And it's 2 controllable hunts anyway so ye you can last 12 mins just outside TC range which is very conservative already. Most games are already decided by that point.
Maybe one player decides to proxy and then the game flow will be totally unrelated to the hunt disposition. Casters should let these things happen for what it is possible. Again, shouldn't force one payer to proxy, while the other doesn't need to. It is not competitive, it's called quicksearch. Plus, even if you rush, you can still get raided when you have low food.
For the record, I don't know the treasure situation (wasn't considered by casters) but here it could have very well helped the player with 2 hunts making it, in fact, a good spawn for him. No one cares about treasures in this debate

No, it's called learn to play aoe3, a game that features random map scripting.

Garja wrote:Second spawn is even a more obvious case of spawns that should not be rehosted. Mines are mirror and hunts are very close to that too. Both players got a sided 3rd hunt and even a pocket 4th hunt across the river on the same side of the TC. This is as fortunate as the hunt situation can be on this map and certainly is not challenging at all for players. I think it's important to stress the last point since that's in the end what really matters. "Will be one player struggling significantly more than the other player in controlling the resources given the very starting situation?". This is what casters should ask themselves. And clearly the answer here is not since both players got 2nd and 3rd hunts, allowing for a nice game to be played. Then what comes next is not predictable since too many things can happen and those 4th-5th etc. hunts can just move closer or farther.

Funnily enough, when we rehosted the second spawn, we did get better. So no, it wasn't "as fortunate as it could be". We had a very low hunt spawn in the second rehost, with only 1 hunt for each player, but it was fair, and that's what matters. Idk, just get glasses and look againat the mini-map, it's just so obvious that it was super unfair.

Perhaps you should familiarize more with the map in question because the 2nd spawn is totally fair. Basically whenever both players have a 2nd hunt (always the case) and another hunt behind the nat post and inside the rivers that's a fair spawn. In this specific case both players even got another hunts in their pocket corner across the river at about the same distance. And if you argue that red got a closer 3rd (which is by like 4 tiles so irrelevant) then I point out that blue actually got the middle hunts closer to his side (mines as well for the record).
I appreciate that you made a lot of maps, and they're very enjoyable to play on. But it doesn't mean that you're a kind of map god who can set up his own rules and decide when games should be rehosted or not, regardless of the spawn being (at least a little bit) fair or not. You're just always ranting when they rehost, even if 90% of the chat consistently agrees with the casters. It's ridiculous at this point, just admit that your maps can be flawed, or fix them idk...

My own rules are simply how the map is supposed to work. And since I obviously have more insight on that I'm just sharing some guidelines.
I've seen a lot of rehost calls being just bad, with some extreme ones where played spawns were in fact worse than the rehosted ones.
I would be extremely pissed off as a player realizing casters decided to rehost a fair spawn where maybe I had a good treasure on my side of the map. Maybe even a rehost where both players get less amount of res which might favor the opponent civ.
Image Image Image
No Flag deleted_user
Ninja
Posts: 14364
Joined: Mar 26, 2015

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by deleted_user »

I mean, has this been an issue? Your two examples are both rehostable. And don't people agree that it is better to rehost if unsure? And do you believe too many games are being rehosted? Seems a rare event.
User avatar
Italy Garja
Retired Contributor
Donator 02
Posts: 9729
Joined: Feb 11, 2015
ESO: Garja

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by Garja »

Jerom wrote:The entire problem is that garja insists on having gamebreaking random elements in the maps. Maybe its fine for ladder games, but some of these inbalanced are really giving an unfair advantage to one player. It seems silly to be annoyed by rehosts when you are literally the one causing them.

To be fair your supposed "gamebreaking random elements" is something that in practice doesn't affect 99% of games, so basically all games but the finals.
The unfair advantage most of times is in your mind as a cognitive bias.
deleted_user wrote:I mean, has this been an issue? Your two examples are both rehostable. And don't people agree that it is better to rehost if unsure? And do you believe too many games are being rehosted? Seems a rare event.

Yes it has been, in past and recently too.
I think 2nd example is not rehostable. I actually tell you that's basically as good as the map gets with already mentioned 2nd and 3rd hunt plus a conservative 4th hunt across the river . I hope you realize that a spawn like that is super safe in terms of hunts and it is equal for both players.
I believe too many games are being rehosted but mostly that the wrong ones are rehosted because casters calls are just based on wrong decision making. Instead of counting each player hunts (silly because aside from 2nd hunt, the others do not belong to any player) they should ask if a spawn actually penalizes any of the players.
Image Image Image
No Flag deleted_user
Ninja
Posts: 14364
Joined: Mar 26, 2015

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by deleted_user »

Fair enough. Good points then.
User avatar
Malaysia Aizamk
Pro Player
ESOC WarChiefs Classic 2017
Posts: 1459
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
Location: ded

Re: On the resource checking...

  • Quote

Post by Aizamk »

UI has a console command to state total hunt, mines, trees etc within a specified radius of a selected unit, if that's of any use. (probably not since it's not weighted)

Can't remember what it is though.
oranges.
Germany _LeGiT
Crossbow
Posts: 43
Joined: Oct 17, 2017
ESO: ILeGiTBosSI

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by _LeGiT »

Garja makes a valid point here!
Random spawns is part of the game and makes it more interesting and fun.
You shouldnt rehost every slight asymmetrical spawn. Only if It‘s a CLEAR case, like one player has clearly more and close mines and more herdable hunts or it’s a deciding game in the grand final.
Other than that , just adapt to what you get. If you play 5huss semi ff every game and you now spawn no herdable third hunt vs rush. Then dont go for a semi ff. it‘s that simple.
There are other ways to play the game than just semiff.
If theres a given offside goal to win a game in the worldcup. Well too fucking bad for the opposite team.
At least in this game you can adapt and are not down 0:1
France Kaiserklein
Pro Player
Posts: 10278
Joined: Jun 6, 2015
Location: Paris
GameRanger ID: 5529322

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by Kaiserklein »

Well I tried...

@Garja you're just arguing against everyone that having 2 less herdable hunts is not a problem, and that the game shouldn't be rehosted. The truth is that there is a huge difference between being able to bring 2 hunts under tc + one very close, and being able to bring only 1 hunt under tc. It can be game-changing and that's not normal. You know perfectly well that going semi-ff with only 1 hunt, for example, is kind of risky because you'll basically be out of food right after you aged up. While the other guy, with his 2.5 hunts, could have the res to go semi-FI.
And if it's "as good as the map can get", then let's remove that map from the map pool, because it's not competitive.
Also all the bullshit about "he's playing this or this civ so it doesn't matter", "he had this treasure it makes up for it", "it's not a high level game anyway", "it's not the decisive game in the bo3"... It's just so subjective, I don't understand how you can have this kind of reasoning. Tourney rules should be the same for everyone, in every case, you can't just have double standards.

At some point, I'd also like the tourney admins to give their opinion on the matter tbh. In the end, they decide how casters should rehost maps.
Image
Image
Image
LoOk_tOm wrote:I have something in particular against Kaisar (GERMANY NOOB mercenary LAMME FOREVER) And the other people (noobs) like suck kaiser ... just this ..
User avatar
Italy Garja
Retired Contributor
Donator 02
Posts: 9729
Joined: Feb 11, 2015
ESO: Garja

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by Garja »

Or maybe just learn to play the damn game and din't be spoiled because your closestt 3 hunts are 5 tiles farther than the opponent ones.
Image Image Image
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by deleted_user0 »

Garja wrote:Randomness is the best thing of this game.
Thank you for not reading the post anyway.


ok so lets play all games on RE bayou, sonora and patagonia from now on!
France Kaiserklein
Pro Player
Posts: 10278
Joined: Jun 6, 2015
Location: Paris
GameRanger ID: 5529322

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by Kaiserklein »

Garja wrote:Or maybe just learn to play the damn game and din't be spoiled because your closestt 3 hunts are 5 tiles farther than the opponent ones.


I don't think I've had problems to "learn the damn game", especially not if you look at the history of my games against you :o

Anyway it's just ridiculous how you're so often disagreeing with 90% of the community, but you're still sure that you're so right. Just because you have absolutely no self-questioning, a super inflated ego, and you're never ashamed of anything. For real, just keep making maps, you're really good at that, but please let reasonable people take decisions and discuss stuff.
Image
Image
Image
LoOk_tOm wrote:I have something in particular against Kaisar (GERMANY NOOB mercenary LAMME FOREVER) And the other people (noobs) like suck kaiser ... just this ..
Germany _LeGiT
Crossbow
Posts: 43
Joined: Oct 17, 2017
ESO: ILeGiTBosSI

Re: On the resource checking...

Post by _LeGiT »

umeu wrote:
Garja wrote:Randomness is the best thing of this game.
Thank you for not reading the post anyway.


ok so lets play all games on RE bayou, sonora and patagonia from now on!

I still rather play those maps than have perfectly symmetrical maps with 3 hunts every game. I actually rather play tetris. At least I get random blocks and have to use my mind to win and not just play down 1 fucking way like solving a rubics cube

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 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