Is rushing in AOE3 dead?

[pecelot]

I mean in the round of 128 there's 1 TP map and bengal and pampas aren't very high res either.

praise @Mr_Bramboy

notification

[_venox_]

Having balanced resources (each player same amount) and having a low resource map don't contradict one another. Strategically speaking having balanced resources is good but I think there can be something as too much resources to just turtle in your base and not care about map control or delay pushing out of your base until your army is too strong to beat.

[momuuu]

By marts logic tr40 builds are the most strategic thing in this game.

[tedere12]

No, india aztec and rushia can do some all in bo's and catch the enemy off guard

[Goodspeed]

By marts logic tr40 builds are the most strategic thing in this game.

Only if you're playing Knights and Merchants

[fei123456]

disagree. early timings (jan abus, india consulate rush) are also called "rush" and they're still quite viable.

[pecelot]

they're also called lame :(

[yemshi]

Disagree.

[vaso413]

Rushing is defendable in high level play, though it does depend on the map quite a lot. For example, the Indian 10/10 rush on Mongolia can be pretty darn strong if you have good crate spawns, especially if you manage to get a lot of yaks with your 2 fast-moving explorers. The thing about rushing is IMO, rushing as hard as you can while having decent eco behind it. As you said, all-in rushes are effectively dead but containment, harrassment and timings are viable alternatives.

[Mitoe]

Having balanced resources (each player same amount) and having a low resource map don't contradict one another.

Thank you for being the only person to understand this.

[Goodspeed]

When I mentioned balanced resources I was talking about the amount, ie "balanced" being between high and low. Obviously you can have low resources and have them be distributed evenly between the 2 players.

[Papist]

Colonial play died when the creators of ESOC removed all counters to Fortress play. Just look at the changes made on the first EP: 2 mines under TC, 2 hunts that can be herded in during transition, civs with strong timing pushes nerfed, Port and Dutch (FF civs) given huge buffs. All of these things made it near-impossible to punish FF's. This is a big deal, because the ability to contain and starve used the be an age 2 civ's only viable response.

The team has since realized its mistake, and has nerfed FF play. Because of this, civs like Russia and Brit are finally doing to damage they should be able to when the other guy throws away 2200 resources. Not surprisingly, the people who were laming Germany on EP 1.0 are complaining.

[Goodspeed]

Colonial play is not dead at all, there are still a good amount of maps in the pool that even favour it. On high res maps it's still the way to go in some match ups, and in many more it is a viable option.

The prevalence of fortress age builds can of course be attributed to the generally higher amount of resources on the maps compared to RE patch, but it's also a very natural meta development especially with TPs being used more and more. You could say it's a development that was allowed by ESOC maps being as balanced as they are. Adapting to a changing meta game is part of being an RTS player. In any case, with the ro128 serving as a perfect example, low res and non-TP maps are well represented.

Anyway this thread is about rushes, not colonial play in general.

[pecelot]

Wow, so much whining about balanced maps, seriously go out and play RE standard and tell me if you stand any chance against tier 4 Russia on Carolina or Sonora.

Port and Dutch (FF civs) given huge buffs.

These civs have been buffed in general, ESOC Patch Team didn't do it specifically to improve semi-FF meta, just to make these civs viable, and by the looks of things they were intended to be inherently more Fortress-orientated nations.

[_venox_]

Wow, so much whining about balanced maps, seriously go out and play RE standard and tell me if you stand any chance against tier 4 Russia on Carolina or Sonora.

Port and Dutch (FF civs) given huge buffs.

These civs have been buffed in general, ESOC Patch Team didn't do it specifically to improve semi-FF meta, just to make these civs viable, and by the looks of things they were intended to be inherently more Fortress-orientated nations.

Because criticising the new maps is equal to shitting on the efforts of the EP-team. I hate it when people state something negative and somebody else says that the statement has no value ("so much whining") because something else is worse. "There can be a thing as too many res on EP maps" "Go back and play on RE you fuck."

"Rape victims should be protected more than they currently are" "If you don't appreciate the protection they already have go to India because there rape victims have it worse than here you fuck."

[bobabu]

All-in rushes are dumb in any RTS and shouldn't work except as a surprise. Yes, the meta is more boom-orientated now, but that's mostly because Otto/Iro were too good at rushing and had to be nerfed. Now the issue is tbh that most maps have too many hunts near or in base for rushing to be good, which hurts India/Russia.

India and russia are too good in the current meta...

[pecelot]

Wow, so much whining about balanced maps, seriously go out and play RE standard and tell me if you stand any chance against tier 4 Russia on Carolina or Sonora.

Port and Dutch (FF civs) given huge buffs.

These civs have been buffed in general, ESOC Patch Team didn't do it specifically to improve semi-FF meta, just to make these civs viable, and by the looks of things they were intended to be inherently more Fortress-orientated nations.

Because criticising the new maps is equal to shitting on the efforts of the EP-team. I hate it when people state something negative and somebody else says that the statement has no value ("so much whining") because something else is worse. "There can be a thing as too many res on EP maps" "Go back and play on RE you fuck."

"Rape victims should be protected more than they currently are" "If you don't appreciate the protection they already have go to India because there rape victims have it worse than here you fuck."

Yeah, you're kinda right, sorry. I think, however, that low-resources maps should be an exception rather than a norm, as balanced maps do promote creative gameplay instead of just cheesy all-in rushes. There are still maps in the pool that have limited hunts, like Cascade Range or Tibet. The rest IMO is fine, especially considering the wall nerf. Sure, you have more hunts available, but it doesn't mean you all of a sudden have 5 sets of hunts in your base that are perfectly safe and impossible to harrass.

[Papist]

Yeah, you're kinda right, sorry. I think, however, that low-resources maps should be an exception rather than a norm, as balanced maps do promote creative gameplay instead of just cheesy all-in rushes. There are still maps in the pool that have limited hunts, like Cascade Range or Tibet. The rest IMO is fine, especially considering the wall nerf. Sure, you have more hunts available, but it doesn't mean you all of a sudden have 5 sets of hunts in your base that are perfectly safe and impossible to harrass.

What's creative about a boom civ sitting in base and massing/aging largely unmolested because it has 3 safe hunt available? Imo, nothing - either the guy who chooses a pressuring civ gets straight-up crushed, or both people choose France/Germany/Port and have a 30 minute skirm/goon/falc war with little room for anything different. At least rushes spice things up - they force boom civs to orchestrate a good defense instead of sending 700c and aging up immediately.

[deleted_user]

Yeah, you're kinda right, sorry. I think, however, that low-resources maps should be an exception rather than a norm, as balanced maps do promote creative gameplay instead of just cheesy all-in rushes. There are still maps in the pool that have limited hunts, like Cascade Range or Tibet. The rest IMO is fine, especially considering the wall nerf. Sure, you have more hunts available, but it doesn't mean you all of a sudden have 5 sets of hunts in your base that are perfectly safe and impossible to harrass.

What's creative about a boom civ sitting in base and massing/aging largely unmolested because it has 3 safe hunt available?

sometimes you send 1k wood first, sometimes you send a unit shipment first.

[The Bailbondsman]

I wouldn't say it's dead, india has a strong rush, especially with the two flail elephent compliment.

[SenorCallen]

Yeah, you're kinda right, sorry. I think, however, that low-resources maps should be an exception rather than a norm, as balanced maps do promote creative gameplay instead of just cheesy all-in rushes. There are still maps in the pool that have limited hunts, like Cascade Range or Tibet. The rest IMO is fine, especially considering the wall nerf. Sure, you have more hunts available, but it doesn't mean you all of a sudden have 5 sets of hunts in your base that are perfectly safe and impossible to harrass.

What's creative about a boom civ sitting in base and massing/aging largely unmolested because it has 3 safe hunt available?

sometimes you send 1k wood first, sometimes you send a unit shipment first.

But you cant deny that both ports and dutch are both mitoe civs and its very weird they both got a big boost

[noissance]

I wouldn't say it's dead, india has a strong rush, especially with the two flail elephent compliment.

WOW ITS THE BAILBONDSMAN.

Also, ive seen some players do aztec all-in rushes with age 2 merc-like shipments.

[The Bailbondsman]

People doubt the india 2 flail card, when I have taken down captain players with it!

[pecelot]

Yeah, you're kinda right, sorry. I think, however, that low-resources maps should be an exception rather than a norm, as balanced maps do promote creative gameplay instead of just cheesy all-in rushes. There are still maps in the pool that have limited hunts, like Cascade Range or Tibet. The rest IMO is fine, especially considering the wall nerf. Sure, you have more hunts available, but it doesn't mean you all of a sudden have 5 sets of hunts in your base that are perfectly safe and impossible to harrass.

What's creative about a boom civ sitting in base and massing/aging largely unmolested because it has 3 safe hunt available? Imo, nothing - either the guy who chooses a pressuring civ gets straight-up crushed, or both people choose France/Germany/Port and have a 30 minute skirm/goon/falc war with little room for anything different. At least rushes spice things up - they force boom civs to orchestrate a good defense instead of sending 700c and aging up immediately.

It's not like you can't die to a timing, there's much more diversity when you don't run out of food at the 6th minute, you have actually more options viable instead of pure defence/rush.

[The Bailbondsman]

Yeah, you're kinda right, sorry. I think, however, that low-resources maps should be an exception rather than a norm, as balanced maps do promote creative gameplay instead of just cheesy all-in rushes. There are still maps in the pool that have limited hunts, like Cascade Range or Tibet. The rest IMO is fine, especially considering the wall nerf. Sure, you have more hunts available, but it doesn't mean you all of a sudden have 5 sets of hunts in your base that are perfectly safe and impossible to harrass.

What's creative about a boom civ sitting in base and massing/aging largely unmolested because it has 3 safe hunt available? Imo, nothing - either the guy who chooses a pressuring civ gets straight-up crushed, or both people choose France/Germany/Port and have a 30 minute skirm/goon/falc war with little room for anything different. At least rushes spice things up - they force boom civs to orchestrate a good defense instead of sending 700c and aging up immediately.

It's not like you can't die to a timing, there's much more diversity when you don't run out of food at the 6th minute, you have actually more options viable instead of pure defence/rush.

It's better if you run out of food at 6 min and are actually forced to adapt.