AOE3 Conquest format

[momuuu]

The conquest format is a format frequently used in hearthstone tournaments. Hearthstone is a card game with 9 different classes that have different cards. It is similair to aoe3 in the sense that it does not only matter how well you build/play your deck (or in aoe3 terms, how well you play your civ) but also what you are up against (or in aoe3 terms, what match up you face). Whereas ESOC has tried the counter pick system to ensure diversity, there have been some pretty succesful experiments (mono civ cup for example) with other civ picking systems. Hearthstone has come up with the conquest format to ensure deck diversity and to mitigate the effect of intentional counterpicks.

Let me quote Liquipedia on the conquest format:

Brief description
[*]All matches will be best-of-5. The first player to win 3 games within the match is considered the winner of the match and advances.
[*]Each player must submit decklists from three unique classes prior to each stage of the event. Players may submit new decks prior to each stage of the event.
[*]A player must win one game with each of his three decks to win the match.
[*]When a player wins a game, the deck used by the winning player cannot be used for the remainder of the match.
[*]The losing player can keep the same deck used or switch to a different one of their choice.
[*]Players will be told what classes their opponent has available, but they won’t know which class is picked until both players have picked.

This system can be converted relatively easily to be used by aoe3. The only 'problematic' aspect that might need to be revised is that hearthstone has a functionality where you can easily hide what deck you selected, whereas in aoe3 this is visible. This could provide practical difficulties but should be something that can be overcome. This might ultimately provide a nice mix between the counterpick format and the mono-civ format. There's room to specialize in a handful of civs and try to understand the full spectrum of match ups (one of the goals of the mono-civ format), but it doesn't force people to pick civs that perform well in the meta.

I would really like to see a tournament hosted in this format some day. With this post I wanted to raise awareness and make people enthousiastic about the format. Just try to come up with a strategy as to which 3 civs you would like to pick. I feel like there's a lot of freedom to the point where you don't auto pick the 3 top civs but can also decide to go with some civs you are comfortable with and then add some complementary civs.

Thoughts? What would your civ strategy be? Would you like ESOC to host a tournament with this format?

[n0el]

sounds interesting for sure. how much diversity do the decks need to have? 1 card?

[momuuu]

sounds interesting for sure. how much diversity do the decks need to have? 1 card?

In hearthstone its generally 1 deck per class with no other restrictions (note though that most classes have almost no overlap). In other words it's rather comparable to one civ. Sometimes some classes have 1-3 top tier decks that are very different, in which cases this system still limits you to one deck per class, but that's a fringe case. It can be compared to the aoe3 civs in quite a few ways I think.

[P i k i l i c]

I am confuses by the word "deck", different meaning in both games, and the name "Conquest", why?
Can you clarify how this mode would be in AoE3 please?

[momuuu]

I am confuses by the word "deck", different meaning in both games, and the name "Conquest", why?
Can you clarify how this mode would be in AoE3 please?

Instead of deck, read it as "civ". The name is "conquest" because you have to win with every civ you signed up with once. Let me provide an example:

I bring Dutch, India and Japan to the tournament. You select France, Germany and British (just some civs that I chose for the sake of the example).

Game 2: I pick Dutch and you pick British. You win with British.
This means you've won a game with British and thus can't pick them again. Now you need to win a game with France and germany to win the BO5. I can still pick all civs.
Game 2: I pick Japan and you pick Germany. You win again with Germany.
This means you've won with both germany and British and can't play those again. You now need to win with France. I can still play all civs.
Game 3: I pick Dutch and you have to pick France. I win with Dutch.
Now I can't pick Dutch again.
Game 4: I pick India and you have to pick France. I win with India too.
Now I just need to win a game with Japan, while you just need a win with France.
Game 5: I have to pick Japan and you have to pick France. You win with France.

You've won a game with France, Germany and British and thus have 'conquested' and win the match.

I hope that clears it up a bit.

[P i k i l i c]

Thanks a lot for the explanation @momuuu it's very clear to me now! Indeed, this idea is interesting, with 3 civs it's more doable than with 14 and we could see unexpected match ups

[PeachTree]

Hmm... How about a conquest game mode.... Where if u lose ur tc u lose the game, like oldschool aoe

[[Armag] diarouga]

Hmm... How about a conquest game mode.... Where if u lose ur tc u lose the game, like oldschool aoe

Tbh in 99.9% of the games, if you lose your TC you lose the game...
It would make petards a lot more scary though.

[pecelot]

it's basically Smackdown rules but with pre-selected civs — sounds good enough

would you consider civ resets for longer series?

[WickedCossack]

TAD has the regicide game mode which is similar to what you are proposing, just with a unit instead of a TC.

[PeachTree]

Hmm... How about a conquest game mode.... Where if u lose ur tc u lose the game, like oldschool aoe

Tbh in 99.9% of the games, if you lose your TC you lose the game...
It would make petards a lot more scary though.

Idk man i have won many games where i lost tc... We traded bases but i ended up killin all the enemys vills... Then it became a game of find the native scout (i walled his explorer)... Annoying

[aligator92]

How would you handle the information about who chooses which civs?
Do both players tell the staff member x days before the event and then he revelas the picks to both?
Does he only reveal them to the players before game 1?
Does he not reveal them at all?

[momuuu]

How would you handle the information about who chooses which civs?
Do both players tell the staff member x days before the event and then he revelas the picks to both?
Does he only reveal them to the players before game 1?
Does he not reveal them at all?

Yeah this would be the most problematic aspect of this format. Maybe counterpicking could still be a thing, and people sign up with civ #1 secretly?

[BrookG]

You dont have to reveal the chosen civs, but as an outsider you can assume the picks from the players' preferences and winrates

[Papist]

I like this idea. There probably wouldn't be much point in hiding the players' pools since everyone would know what they were after the first round (or would they reset every round?), but making players lock in before the civs are revealed would add a cool "mind game" component to the tourney. We would also see a more diverse set of MUs, especially as the number of games (and thus each player's civ pool) per round increased.