Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 12710
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by [Armag] diarouga »

Le Hussard sur le toit wrote:
Cometk wrote: No TP maps were removed because there was literally a 50% likelihood that the matchup would be Russia vs India.
This was only true on low ressource no TP maps, pampa sierra for example had OK diversity during the NWC.
Pampas had ok diversity during the NWC because you had to use Russia on Thar Desert and India on Deccan, so it was no TP map without Russia/India.
France Kaiserklein
Pro Player
Posts: 10278
Joined: Jun 6, 2015
Location: Paris
GameRanger ID: 5529322

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by Kaiserklein »

Well 8 maps for a whole event is boring. However as a weekend event it's probably okay, unlike when it goes on for months with the same maps.
Yalu river is not tournament worthy. Not sure about guatemala, maybe it's acceptable. Baja is also not really tournament worthy anymore btw, with the middle TP bias and the screwed hunts.

Other than that the pool is alright I guess
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: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by Garja »

the whole russia/india thing is dumb
Image Image Image
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 12710
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by [Armag] diarouga »

Garja wrote:the whole russia/india thing is dumb
We agree here.
France Kaiserklein
Pro Player
Posts: 10278
Joined: Jun 6, 2015
Location: Paris
GameRanger ID: 5529322

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by Kaiserklein »

[Armag] diarouga wrote:1) Maybe the issue is the otto ff then ?
No it's not, since otto ff isn't too strong. The issue is people just go for the same suboptimal easy strat every game, which shows that playing on the same map over and over again doesn't improve the meta, rather the opposite.

[Armag] diarouga wrote:2) We're trying to fix it, but it won't be enough let's be honest. And it's not just a matter of getting counterpicked, Russia counters every civ on no TP maps so even without civ rules it would be Russia all the time.
Nah, russia on no TP doesn't counter dutch or aztecs, nor india with the buffs.

[Armag] diarouga wrote:3) That's because many civs can fight for the sea, while Russie dominates the no TP maps, so there is some diversity on water maps at least. Furthermore, playing the pond war is actually not simple from a strategical point of view, you need to hit a timing on the sea, sometimes go for a tower, or add culvs. There are many decisions you need to make. With Russia you just rush.
No. Many civs can't fight for ponds. The discrepancies are absolutely huge between most civs and the top pond civs. Not to mention Yalu where if you ever lose water control (which should happen in so many match ups) your opponent has a ton of safe resources on the other side which is ridiculous.
And again you don't have to play russia on no TP. And no you don't necessarily "just rush" if you play them properly.
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
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 12710
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by [Armag] diarouga »

Kaiserklein wrote:
[Armag] diarouga wrote:1) Maybe the issue is the otto ff then ?
No it's not, since otto ff isn't too strong. The issue is people just go for the same suboptimal easy strat every game, which shows that playing on the same map over and over again doesn't improve the meta, rather the opposite.

[Armag] diarouga wrote:2) We're trying to fix it, but it won't be enough let's be honest. And it's not just a matter of getting counterpicked, Russia counters every civ on no TP maps so even without civ rules it would be Russia all the time.
Nah, russia on no TP doesn't counter dutch or aztecs, nor india with the buffs.

[Armag] diarouga wrote:3) That's because many civs can fight for the sea, while Russie dominates the no TP maps, so there is some diversity on water maps at least. Furthermore, playing the pond war is actually not simple from a strategical point of view, you need to hit a timing on the sea, sometimes go for a tower, or add culvs. There are many decisions you need to make. With Russia you just rush.
No. Many civs can't fight for ponds. The discrepancies are absolutely huge between most civs and the top pond civs. Not to mention Yalu where if you ever lose water control (which should happen in so many match ups) your opponent has a ton of safe resources on the other side which is ridiculous.
And again you don't have to play russia on no TP. And no you don't necessarily "just rush" if you play them properly.
2) Russia does counter Dutch, and imo it counters Aztec (and since I'm kinda the only Aztec player with Lukas, we'll never see Russia vs Aztec). It doesn't hard counter India which is why no TP maps are Russia/India fests.

3) Most civs can fight for the sea honestly. The 3 TAD civs can, Aztec and Iro have warhuts and a 3 pirate shipment in colonial, Spain, Dutch, Otto, France (with 2 falcs+fregate), Brit, Russia (with blockhouses) and Port all can.
Out of 14 civs, 12 can contest the pond easily, that's a lot of diversity. Yalu is another story and the map is not meant for competitive play of course.
I just explained in my previous point why you kinda have to play Russia on no TP maps, and while it's true you don't have to rush, that's what 95% of the people do, so it leads to boring games. And honestly, even if you don't rush it's boring to watch Russia.
User avatar
Australia robo
ESOC Media Team
Posts: 218
Joined: Sep 17, 2016
ESO: robo_boro
Location: Australia
Clan: sQad

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by robo »

Has anyone tried having a map pool for a tourney (8-12 maps) where each round one map is set as game 1, then each following Game the map is chosen (from the pool) by the Loser of the previous game.

Obviously there would need to be changes to counterpicking, as picking the map and getting a favourable mu is too much. Maybe go the other way winner picks map and civ, or if Loser picks map winner gets a counter pick.
Or simply Loser picks map and they need to agree to a mu every game.

Imho this still rewards practicing the map pool, and allows you to scout your opponent by trying to play maps that don't favour them/they don't like, but it also isn't completely random what maps could be played out of the dozens of esoc maps. This also means different tourneys can have different map pools so that there is variety over time.
France Kaiserklein
Pro Player
Posts: 10278
Joined: Jun 6, 2015
Location: Paris
GameRanger ID: 5529322

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by Kaiserklein »

[Armag] diarouga wrote:2) Russia does counter Dutch, and imo it counters Aztec (and since I'm kinda the only Aztec player with Lukas, we'll never see Russia vs Aztec). It doesn't hard counter India which is why no TP maps are Russia/India fests.

3) Most civs can fight for the sea honestly. The 3 TAD civs can, Aztec and Iro have warhuts and a 3 pirate shipment in colonial, Spain, Dutch, Otto, France (with 2 falcs+fregate), Brit, Russia (with blockhouses) and Port all can.
Out of 14 civs, 12 can contest the pond easily, that's a lot of diversity. Yalu is another story and the map is not meant for competitive play of course.
I just explained in my previous point why you kinda have to play Russia on no TP maps, and while it's true you don't have to rush, that's what 95% of the people do, so it leads to boring games. And honestly, even if you don't rush it's boring to watch Russia.
It doesn't counter dutch without having a stagecoach potential, it's a pretty close MU.
And no lol, not 12 civs can fight for the pond. Some civs obviously have big extra advantages, like an extra TC, a vel from the age up, a tower from the age up, a 3 vels shipment, a 2 falcs shipment, or even simply an easier time investing into these than other civs. There's a reason why everyone would go spain or otto on NE and dhaka... Go play dutch, germany, or france or whatever on these maps, I'll watch
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
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 12710
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by [Armag] diarouga »

robo wrote:Has anyone tried having a map pool for a tourney (8-12 maps) where each round one map is set as game 1, then each following Game the map is chosen (from the pool) by the Loser of the previous game.

Obviously there would need to be changes to counterpicking, as picking the map and getting a favourable mu is too much. Maybe go the other way winner picks map and civ, or if Loser picks map winner gets a counter pick.
Or simply Loser picks map and they need to agree to a mu every game.

Imho this still rewards practicing the map pool, and allows you to scout your opponent by trying to play maps that don't favour them/they don't like, but it also isn't completely random what maps could be played out of the dozens of esoc maps. This also means different tourneys can have different map pools so that there is variety over time.
This was done in the nilla pkclans in 2012, and it would be a fine idea.
The issue is that we can't have crazy maps, else kynesie is going to pick Indonesia and water boom every series, half of the people will pick a no TP map and play Russia, and same with Tibet and India/China
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 12710
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by [Armag] diarouga »

Kaiserklein wrote:
[Armag] diarouga wrote:2) Russia does counter Dutch, and imo it counters Aztec (and since I'm kinda the only Aztec player with Lukas, we'll never see Russia vs Aztec). It doesn't hard counter India which is why no TP maps are Russia/India fests.

3) Most civs can fight for the sea honestly. The 3 TAD civs can, Aztec and Iro have warhuts and a 3 pirate shipment in colonial, Spain, Dutch, Otto, France (with 2 falcs+fregate), Brit, Russia (with blockhouses) and Port all can.
Out of 14 civs, 12 can contest the pond easily, that's a lot of diversity. Yalu is another story and the map is not meant for competitive play of course.
I just explained in my previous point why you kinda have to play Russia on no TP maps, and while it's true you don't have to rush, that's what 95% of the people do, so it leads to boring games. And honestly, even if you don't rush it's boring to watch Russia.
It doesn't counter dutch without having a stagecoach potential, it's a pretty close MU.
And no lol, not 12 civs can fight for the pond. Some civs obviously have big extra advantages, like an extra TC, a vel from the age up, a tower from the age up, a 3 vels shipment, a 2 falcs shipment, or even simply an easier time investing into these than other civs. There's a reason why everyone would go spain or otto on NE and dhaka... Go play dutch, germany, or france or whatever on these maps, I'll watch
People pick Spain/Otto on these maps because of the TP line of course. Playing Dutch against Spain/Otto is suicide on stagecoach maps, and the pond isn't the reason why this MU sucks. Germany is bad on pond maps (I didn't include it in the 12 civs), so not sure why you're taking it as an example, and France loses to Spain/Otto on these pond maps yes, but that's just one civ.
No Flag helln00
Howdah
Posts: 1410
Joined: Jan 28, 2017
ESO: helln00

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by helln00 »

Considering that it will only happen once per series(if there is no civ reset) and the other player can counterpick I dont think its that bad.

The same thing will happen in the current system if we have maps that only have 1-2 viable civ in the pool right?
France Le Hussard sur le toit
Howdah
Posts: 1149
Joined: Oct 16, 2019
ESO: LeHussardsurletoit

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by Le Hussard sur le toit »

[Armag] diarouga wrote:
robo wrote:Has anyone tried having a map pool for a tourney (8-12 maps) where each round one map is set as game 1, then each following Game the map is chosen (from the pool) by the Loser of the previous game.

Obviously there would need to be changes to counterpicking, as picking the map and getting a favourable mu is too much. Maybe go the other way winner picks map and civ, or if Loser picks map winner gets a counter pick.
Or simply Loser picks map and they need to agree to a mu every game.

Imho this still rewards practicing the map pool, and allows you to scout your opponent by trying to play maps that don't favour them/they don't like, but it also isn't completely random what maps could be played out of the dozens of esoc maps. This also means different tourneys can have different map pools so that there is variety over time.
This was done in the nilla pkclans in 2012, and it would be a fine idea.
The issue is that we can't have crazy maps, else kynesie is going to pick Indonesia and water boom every series, half of the people will pick a no TP map and play Russia, and same with Tibet and India/China
Player 1 choses the map, player 2 choses the MU, player 1 picks the side he wants to play. This gives civs diversity, oblige people to go out of their confort zone in either map or MU but not both, guarantee theoreticaly-fair MUs while still allowing to play non-optimal civ (you were never going to play China-Germany on a no TP map but now it's possible).
ESOC : came for the game, stayed for the drama.
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 12710
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by [Armag] diarouga »

Le Hussard sur le toit wrote:
[Armag] diarouga wrote:
robo wrote:Has anyone tried having a map pool for a tourney (8-12 maps) where each round one map is set as game 1, then each following Game the map is chosen (from the pool) by the Loser of the previous game.

Obviously there would need to be changes to counterpicking, as picking the map and getting a favourable mu is too much. Maybe go the other way winner picks map and civ, or if Loser picks map winner gets a counter pick.
Or simply Loser picks map and they need to agree to a mu every game.

Imho this still rewards practicing the map pool, and allows you to scout your opponent by trying to play maps that don't favour them/they don't like, but it also isn't completely random what maps could be played out of the dozens of esoc maps. This also means different tourneys can have different map pools so that there is variety over time.
This was done in the nilla pkclans in 2012, and it would be a fine idea.
The issue is that we can't have crazy maps, else kynesie is going to pick Indonesia and water boom every series, half of the people will pick a no TP map and play Russia, and same with Tibet and India/China
Player 1 choses the map, player 2 choses the MU, player 1 picks the side he wants to play. This gives civs diversity, oblige people to go out of their confort zone in either map or MU but not both, guarantee theoreticaly-fair MUs while still allowing to play non-optimal civ (you were never going to play China-Germany on a no TP map but now it's possible).
This is super uncompetitive lol. I'd be forced to play Ger mirrors all the time and I'd force TAD mirrors against the people who don't play TAD civs.
France Kaiserklein
Pro Player
Posts: 10278
Joined: Jun 6, 2015
Location: Paris
GameRanger ID: 5529322

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by Kaiserklein »

[Armag] diarouga wrote:
Kaiserklein wrote:
[Armag] diarouga wrote:2) Russia does counter Dutch, and imo it counters Aztec (and since I'm kinda the only Aztec player with Lukas, we'll never see Russia vs Aztec). It doesn't hard counter India which is why no TP maps are Russia/India fests.

3) Most civs can fight for the sea honestly. The 3 TAD civs can, Aztec and Iro have warhuts and a 3 pirate shipment in colonial, Spain, Dutch, Otto, France (with 2 falcs+fregate), Brit, Russia (with blockhouses) and Port all can.
Out of 14 civs, 12 can contest the pond easily, that's a lot of diversity. Yalu is another story and the map is not meant for competitive play of course.
I just explained in my previous point why you kinda have to play Russia on no TP maps, and while it's true you don't have to rush, that's what 95% of the people do, so it leads to boring games. And honestly, even if you don't rush it's boring to watch Russia.
It doesn't counter dutch without having a stagecoach potential, it's a pretty close MU.
And no lol, not 12 civs can fight for the pond. Some civs obviously have big extra advantages, like an extra TC, a vel from the age up, a tower from the age up, a 3 vels shipment, a 2 falcs shipment, or even simply an easier time investing into these than other civs. There's a reason why everyone would go spain or otto on NE and dhaka... Go play dutch, germany, or france or whatever on these maps, I'll watch
People pick Spain/Otto on these maps because of the TP line of course. Playing Dutch against Spain/Otto is suicide on stagecoach maps, and the pond isn't the reason why this MU sucks. Germany is bad on pond maps (I didn't include it in the 12 civs), so not sure why you're taking it as an example, and France loses to Spain/Otto on these pond maps yes, but that's just one civ.
That's the point lol, the pond means you automatically get stagecoach control, on both NE and dhaka. On yalu it means you automatically control 75% of the land or something. If there was just a pond that doesn't control much no one would care
France dutch ger were just 3 examples. Is it any better for japan, china, india, sioux, iro, aztecs (yes, you can't go double warhut as they die to 2 vels)...
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: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by Garja »

I dont think we quite agree on the russia/india bs. What I meant is that other civs are good on no TP maps.
Also civ picks become more clear when there are civ restriction rules (in order to optimize your civ pool management).

Also otto on NE is bs too.
Image Image Image
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 12710
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by [Armag] diarouga »

Kaiserklein wrote:
[Armag] diarouga wrote:
Show hidden quotes
People pick Spain/Otto on these maps because of the TP line of course. Playing Dutch against Spain/Otto is suicide on stagecoach maps, and the pond isn't the reason why this MU sucks. Germany is bad on pond maps (I didn't include it in the 12 civs), so not sure why you're taking it as an example, and France loses to Spain/Otto on these pond maps yes, but that's just one civ.
That's the point lol, the pond means you automatically get stagecoach control, on both NE and dhaka. On yalu it means you automatically control 75% of the land or something. If there was just a pond that doesn't control much no one would care
France dutch ger were just 3 examples. Is it any better for japan, china, india, sioux, iro, aztecs (yes, you can't go double warhut as they die to 2 vels)...
The issue is the TP line, not the pond then. With just 2 TPs, the pond would be totally fine.
And the pond is actually totally fine for China/India, it's even an advantage. It's awkward for Iro/Aztec, but the 3 pirate shipment is really good.
France Le Hussard sur le toit
Howdah
Posts: 1149
Joined: Oct 16, 2019
ESO: LeHussardsurletoit

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by Le Hussard sur le toit »

[Armag] diarouga wrote:
Le Hussard sur le toit wrote:
Show hidden quotes
Player 1 choses the map, player 2 choses the MU, player 1 picks the side he wants to play. This gives civs diversity, oblige people to go out of their confort zone in either map or MU but not both, guarantee theoreticaly-fair MUs while still allowing to play non-optimal civ (you were never going to play China-Germany on a no TP map but now it's possible).
This is super uncompetitive lol. I'd be forced to play Ger mirrors all the time and I'd force TAD mirrors against the people who don't play TAD civs.
You'd ban mirrors and one player could not pick the same civ twice.
ESOC : came for the game, stayed for the drama.
No Flag helln00
Howdah
Posts: 1410
Joined: Jan 28, 2017
ESO: helln00

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by helln00 »

Yeah I think if we go for the map pick system you have to only allow a civ to be played once
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 12710
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by [Armag] diarouga »

helln00 wrote:Yeah I think if we go for the map pick system you have to only allow a civ to be played once
It doesn't change much, you'd still pick a fair MU between 2 civs your opponent can't play, like Japan/China or India/China for non TAD players.
User avatar
Italy Garja
Retired Contributor
Donator 02
Posts: 9729
Joined: Feb 11, 2015
ESO: Garja

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by Garja »

All those suggestions are crap for competitive play.
Image Image Image
France Kaiserklein
Pro Player
Posts: 10278
Joined: Jun 6, 2015
Location: Paris
GameRanger ID: 5529322

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by Kaiserklein »

[Armag] diarouga wrote:The issue is the TP line, not the pond then. With just 2 TPs, the pond would be totally fine.
And the pond is actually totally fine for China/India, it's even an advantage. It's awkward for Iro/Aztec, but the 3 pirate shipment is really good.
No, the issue is how much a simple stupid pond can control of the map. If you had 3 mines and 3 hunts next to it it would be just as bad as having a big TP line.
Besides, a 4 TP line isn't necessarily too much of an issue in these match ups. Fr, ger, or even dutch or brits (among others) can totally play against 4 TPs otto, for example by stealing a TP on one side, running pikes to the TP on the other side of the map, raiding, etc. Not saying it's not otto favoured, but it's playable. Now with a pond, it's not.

I won't pretend knusch played that game perfectly (neither did I), but still it's a good example of what I mean. Gua tourney, I was brits into otto on high plains, he never had control of the full TP line. High plains tp line is, regardless of what people say, not that much of a balance issue.
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 ..
United States of America charlemango
Musketeer
Posts: 98
Joined: Jul 22, 2017
ESO: 2ndLastKnight

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by charlemango »

[Armag] diarouga wrote:
charlemango wrote:It seems that counterpicking is too strong. You can have a civ that's good in 90% of matchups but one bad matchup and you can't choose it as your main civ in tourneys. Brit is always voted as a top civ but in nearly every tourney game I watch it loses to Russia.

Instead of no counterpicking I believe a more feasible route is to allow each player to "re-counter" once per match.

Example: player 1 chooses Brit, player 2 chooses Russia, player 1 re-counters with Germany. Final mu is russ vs ger.

The mere threat of getting recountered would prevent player 2 from choosing the hardest counter civ sometimes.
Ye except it would be player 1 chooses Brit, player 2 chooses Russia, player 1 re-couters with Germany, player 2 picks Japan, player 1 re-picks Brit and so on. This circle can last forever, and in the end, the more reasonable of the two players will either accept a MU he didn't want to play, or counterpick with another civ. Being a dick is rewarded with this system.
No you can't, you can only re-counter once per series. You have to consider when to use it wisely.
User avatar
Canada dansil92
Retired Contributor
Posts: 2231
Joined: Nov 3, 2018
ESO: dansil92

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by dansil92 »

I am gonna ask the question that needs to be asked though: is it possible in any way to make a no tp map that does not favour russia? If the answer is no that needs to be considered a glaring balance issue
Image
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Ninja
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 12710
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by [Armag] diarouga »

dansil92 wrote:I am gonna ask the question that needs to be asked though: is it possible in any way to make a no tp map that does not favour russia? If the answer is no that needs to be considered a glaring balance issue
Yes of course, add sea boom options. Or even without adding fish, I guess a map with a lot of resources in base and a central pond allows more civs to be competitive.
User avatar
United States of America GiBthedurrty
Lancer
Donator 01
Posts: 744
Joined: Mar 20, 2017
Clan: YumiW

Re: Tournaments should no longer have civilization rules

Post by GiBthedurrty »

Aizamk wrote:Tournaments not having civ rules would at least remove the inherent bias in recent years' tournament data. If you look at the trends you might reach the conclusion that the game is more balanced than before because we see more civ diversity in tournaments. When in actual fact that's not the case because not all civs have pikemen yet.
Why are you piki about pikemen?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 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