New Parfait video

[giveuanxiety]

Another good watch from Parfait.

LOL man this dude is out dated, is he like unaware of aoe3 scene and esoc?

"last major tournament in 2008" He forgetting about the 4K lan tournament and regularly hosted tournaments?

"Trading post didnt matter, it was irrelevant."

[GiBthedurrty]

parfait is right

[Zutazuta]

Gonna take a stroll down Fird lane.

[aaryngend]

Well, he is obviously talking about the time he competed in, which was until late 2008. It's okay to do that and make sense, but as GuA said, he should have consulted with a current player to describe all the differences from then to now, as an appendix. That would do aoe3 and its ongoing development justice.

[Squamiger]

I was a big fan of parfait back in the day. I remember his vids taught me really basic stuff like splitting off a wounded xbow, clicking the ground after shooting an animal and then retasking to the dead hunt to avoid the vil reload, and other stuff

[chris1089]

Enjoyed the theory, but wish he'd done a bit more research on the more recent aoe3 scene.

[P i k i l i c]

parfait n'est pas parfait

[WickedCossack]

Enjoyed the theory, but wish he'd done a bit more research on the more recent aoe3 scene.

Yea there were a number of comments he said that were outdated and missing any context from the last 12 years that made it not as enjoyable to watch as it could have been.

[Mitoe]

Kinda feel like someone would've mentioned sepoy/urumi ceasefire and he would've just believed his theory 100% confirmed

[Goodspeed]

TLDW what's "the theory"?

[lordraphael]

tbh hes right. TPs are important nowadays but they only reinforce his theory becasue they allow even more and safer advances to age 3. So his core theory still holds up, regardless of wheather he includes tps or not. Its a sign of a good theory or that it still holds up even if some important factors that arent known to it still can be explained/ support the claim it makes.

[WickedCossack]

TLDW what's "the theory"?

That aoe3 is more tech focussed than eco/army macro based.

[Goodspeed]

Hmm guess I have to watch the video now then. To me the game is very military-focused.

[Goodspeed]

I think he's partly right.

He says, in support of the argument that AoE3's focus on fortress age is a design choice, that units scale poorly into later ages. This isn't true. Comparing to AoE2, units in AoE3 actually scale much better into later ages. Musk+huss vs skirm+goon is quite playable if your eco advantage is big enough, as opposed to literally any feudal unit comp against knights in AoE2. Even spearmen, supposedly the hard counter to knights, do very poorly. The same is true for crossbows, which are all but uncounterable in feudal age.

It's much more common to see colonial age versus fortress age unit comps in AoE3 than it is to see feudal age versus castle age unit comps in AoE2. In fact, the latter is pretty much unheard of.

Imo, AoE3's current focus on fortress age is not really a design choice but a result of balancing choices. Parfait at some point says "this may all seem very meta" and I immediately thought "yes it very much does". It's no coincidence that, during ASFP times, the meta was very colonial age focused. I think it would be the same today if not for RE's choice to reduce the cost of TPs, the inclusion of trade routes on nearly every modern map, and EP's refusal to nerf them (which I still think is/was the right decision).

When he lists his version of AoE3's historical meta, did you notice how his examples were all of particular units that were OP at the time? Imagine what the meta had looked like if all of those balance issues had been solved in a timely fashion. I think it's silly to argue that the focus on teching to certain unit comps was ever a design choice, when all of the examples he gives were the result of poor balancing.

It becomes even more obvious that he is cherrypicking data to support his argument when he attempts to draw contrast between AoE3's historical meta and AoM's OP Egyptians. He says that, when you think of OP Egypt in AoM, you think of a variety of civ bonuses that make it so. This as opposed to when you think of AoE3's historical meta, where you think of the OP units that defined it.
But the only times AoE3's meta was defined by OP units was when there was a specific and glaring balance issue with that unit. All other times, which is 95% of its history, OP civs were defined by a variety of civ bonuses, from economic to military-based. You would think that, as someone who played high level Dutch in 2007, he would have known that. He becomes significantly less believable when he pretends that, when you think of OP Dutch in 2007, you think of Ruyters and nothing else. Surely he knows better.

He is partly right though in that, with the tech/military/economy triangle in mind, AoE3's removal of the "economy" aspect naturally makes it more tech-focused than its predecessor. In AoE2, until you "max" your economy you are constantly faced with the choice of whether to invest in eco, tech, or military. When you tech it's not just for better units but also for access to more TCs, better defensive buildings, economic upgrades etc. When AoE3 players tech beyond colonial age, it's never for economy. With economy removed from the list of "what do I invest my resources into?" choices, you are choosing between tech and units. It only makes sense, then, that you would invest in tech until you reached your preferred unit comp and then switch to units. But where he is wrong imo is when he claims that proves a disproportionate focus on tech. I would say it proves a disproportionate lack of focus on economy.

[chris1089]

I think your last sentence is particularly pertinent @Goodspeed , and since my knowledge of other games in the series is very limited, providing that context helped me see the cherry picking.

[Imperial Noob]

what is "luring dear"?

[chris1089]

In AOE2, instead or herding with villagers, you place your scout next to the deer so that it runs away from your scout and towards the town centre. You repeat this several times until the deer reaches your base.
@Imperial Noob

[Imperial Noob]

So... in hunting terms, it's still herding, but with a military unit, and not damaging the prey.

[[Armag] diarouga]

So... in hunting terms, it's still herding, but with a military unit, and not damaging the prey.

Yes. You can also do the same with villagers, but then you waste a lot of vill seconds.

[iNcog]

Some interesting points in this thread.

I guess it's not possible to overboom in AOE3 like it is in AOE2 or even SC2. Or it is but only with a few niche civilizations. You can hardly overboom with France for example. In AOE3 you're basically always booming as hard as you can.

Tech in AOE2 is crucial. You HAVE to age to win. There is no winning with a flood of units and better eco in AOE2, you HAVE to age to get upgrades on your units, they're just that much more important. There is also basically no winning without siege in the form of rams or trebs or mangonels.

Bah. Seems the video in OP is somewhat out of the loop so I won't bother watching carefully; besides the comments in that video should just be AOE2 players shitting on AOE3 players, AOE3 players being super defensive about their game (rightfully so) and then parfait defending the points that he seemed to have glossed over.

[WickedCossack]

The comment about in aoe2 - "aoe2 features elements of all 3, different match ups and different maps call for different approaches"

Now I am an aoe2 noob but surely this statement is more valid for aoe3? Thinking things like port on water might schooner boom on on high tp go atp, japan might fi for arrow or shrine boom age 2 etc. I find it hard to believe there is more diversity caused by different mus and maps in aoe2.

[[Armag] diarouga]

The comment about in aoe2 - "aoe2 features elements of all 3, different match ups and different maps call for different approaches"

Now I am an aoe2 noob but surely this statement is more valid for aoe3? Thinking things like port on water might schooner boom on on high tp go atp, japan might fi for arrow or shrine boom age 2 etc. I find it hard to believe there is more diversity caused by different mus and maps in aoe2.

I think there is more diversity caused by different MUs in aoe3, but there is much more map diversity (and thus, much more strat diversity thanks to the maps in aoe2).
Just check these maps :
https://aoe2map.net/

In aoe3, we don't have competitive maps where you start on an island, or with a fully walled base.

In general, I'd say that in aoe3, maps differ by :
a) TP count
b) amount of hunts/mines
c) presence of a side sea
d) cliffs and chokes

That's only 4 criterias. On top of this, aoe2 maps differ by :
1) their size (and I guess it could be interesting to see how the meta would evolve on bigger maps)
2) the type of resources (on some maps you can fish with your villagers, or gather berries but this wouldn't work in aoe3)
3) the shape of the sea, which doesn't really matter in aoe3.

[WickedCossack]

Yea the maps is a good point, tho each aoe3 map plays slightly differently I guess we only notice it at top level. e.g Look at lumaco and what just a single 1 extra wood crate with a cliff mid map does.

I still want my islands map!

[Imperial Noob]

In aoe3, we don't have competitive maps where you start on an island, or with a fully walled base.

In general, I'd say that in aoe3, maps differ by :
a) TP count
b) amount of hunts/mines
c) presence of a side sea
d) cliffs and chokes

That's only 4 criterias. On top of this, aoe2 maps differ by :
1) their size (and I guess it could be interesting to see how the meta would evolve on bigger maps)
2) the type of resources (on some maps you can fish with your villagers, or gather berries but this wouldn't work in aoe3)
3) the shape of the sea, which doesn't really matter in aoe3.

Why could that be... Weren't you and other top players always against non-standard maps?

[iNcog]

The comment about in aoe2 - "aoe2 features elements of all 3, different match ups and different maps call for different approaches"

Now I am an aoe2 noob but surely this statement is more valid for aoe3? Thinking things like port on water might schooner boom on on high tp go atp, japan might fi for arrow or shrine boom age 2 etc. I find it hard to believe there is more diversity caused by different mus and maps in aoe2.

Well the video poster is out of the loop in terms of AOE3 meta and how it has evolved, EP balance making more play-styles viable and of course the good maps that we have now that opens up even more possibilities.

In AOE2 I am comfortable playing a game at my admittedly low level without even knowing what the other civilization is.