What I know about the current EP team

[Gendarme]

Jermon and Eddie tag-teaming! Such a lovely sight!

[[Armag] diarouga]

When we started it made sense to stay as close to RE as possible. This was, in fact, a requirement in order to get a lot of key people on board with the idea of a new patch in the first place. The reasons were:
- We wanted to make it easier for people to switch from RE to EP and back
- It was easier to keep track of balance that way, since we already had a good understanding of RE patch balance

And it's still easier if we stay close to the previous EP version.

- We didn't have the time/manpower to discuss and test so many changes

We had more manpower and time than today. I remember there was an EP team with more than 10 active top players including every ESOC tournament winner except bsop. Now who's going to test and discuss so many changes? Zoi alone?

- Many changes can make it hard to filter the significant changes from the patch notes

Which is still true, and even more relevant today. Tbh the patch notes are already way too long.

I tried to stick with this philosophy but I think it's time to breathe some fresh air into the game in every possible way.

Don't you think that the community, or at least the players who're going to compete on the EP should be asked before that? I don't know if you realise that you and Zoi decided that alone, without asking anyone, while you both don't play the game anymore. I understand that it might be entertaining to play god with the game and see what happens, but when you play the game you don't want that to happen.

The above arguments still stand, but on the other hand there have been complaints about a stale meta, and that will happen if all you're doing is balancing.

The meta is stale because people don't want to adapt. There are still plenty of strats unexplored but people want to stick with the same BOs. It's just going to be the same if you change the game: people will stick to a few civs/BOs.

Take SC2 as an example: They frequently make big game-changing patches not just to improve balance but also to make room for new strategic ideas to pop up in the meta.

They do. But they only have 3 races and no stupid mechanics such as TP and no TP maps to manage, and as a result their patch is always well balanced, which is not going to happen here.

Another reason to explore more changes is the possibility that the DE people ask for our advice. I would if I were them.

I would too, but I would want most people to like the new patch. If it splits the community, then it's not a good thing, and that's what is going to happen. Atm I can't think of a single player on ESOC who would rather play on the RE.

In that case we shouldn't give them advice on how to fix RE patch, but advice on how to fix the whole game.

But we can't. Do you really think that Zoi can fix the game by throwing random changes?

We don't have to hold onto RE patch as the base, since it will eventually be obsolete. We can explore design changes that are sorely needed in AoE3, for example we can actually try to fix water and make many irrelevant units relevant again. The time we have before DE is a time to test changes and come to as good of an understanding as we can of how to make the best possible AoE3. RE patch certainly isn't that, and by extension neither is the current EP.

Again, if the EP becomes an official patch, shouldn't the community be aware of this approach, and be allowed to give his opinion? That seems fair to me.

@zoom has this vision. He did from the beginning, but I held him back because we had the mandate to stay close to RE patch. Recently the community as well as most of the people involved with the EP process have been coming around about this, so it's a very good time for Zoi to take over. He's a perfectionist, is very knowledgeable about the game, has a good grasp on game design and knows how to combine the opinions of various top players into one coherent patch. He has been doing most of the work for a while already, to be honest. For me he has always been indispensable quality control and a stream of fresh ideas, most of them good.

He indeed has a particular vision on the game, which isn't shared by the community and the top players. And no, he isn't very knowledgeable about the game. Knowledge is everything in aoe3, if he understood how high level games worked, then he would at least be pr35. If you really think that a captain/major can understand the game as well as a top player, then you're making a big mistake, it's a strategy game after all.
Also I'd argue that except last year because I didn't have time, I'm the one who's been doing most of the work for the past 3 years. The stream of fresh ideas is indeed an important quality to have in the EP team, but the leader has to be a someone who understands the game deeply and who is looking for balance.

@[Armag] diarouga You have also been important to the process. You understand the game better than most, and your opinion is valuable. But if you can't work with Zoi by giving him constructive feedback then I can't blame him for cutting you out of the process.

So you mean that one top of being bad at the game and lacking a lot of knowledge about the current meta, he is unable to manage top players? What is he good at then? Throwing random ideas? Vane is good at that too, why isn't he EP leader?

I warned you about this, as you mentioned in your OP. I gave this project to Zoi because I believe he is the best man for the job, and you should try to work with him on it. I'm sure if you're willing, so is he.

Nah, I'm not goona argue about balance with someone who's 10+ pr lower than me, because by default I'll be right since I know the game better.
You know, it reminds me of a guy on a twitch chat who thought he knew the game better than me because he watched about 500 recorded games of top players, and played 50h vs the computer, but who never actually played a game online. You can't understand the game if you just think theorically and put nothing into practice yourself.

I look forward to the next patch. Balance may worsen if more drastic changes are explored, but long term the patch will improve either way.

[Gendarme]

Put some effort into converting your trained internal clock to timings on paper. Then even a Conscript can understand the game, given that you are articulate enough.

[[Armag] diarouga]

Put some effort into converting your trained internal clock to timings on paper. Then even a Conscript can understand the game, given that you are articulate enough.

It's not that simple to understand timings, else most pr30 would be pr40.

[momuuu]

Put some effort into converting your trained internal clock to timings on paper. Then even a Conscript can understand the game, given that you are articulate enough.

It's not that simple to understand timings, else most pr30 would be pr40.

I disagree with this. The thing is that the knowledge isn't really out there, so you become pr40 by figuring the things out yourself. And that is hard or at the very least rather time consuming.

[Gendarme]

It is. It is just not as straight-forward to figure out things unless you actively try, which almost no one does.

[HUMMAN]

Since top players disagree about game anyway, why would pr of leader so important if he takes account of other players. You say u wont argue with him, what if he listened your opinion and another player's opinion on the subject? Then how to achieve consensus, elaborate. You claim everything u say is right?

[[Armag] diarouga]

Put some effort into converting your trained internal clock to timings on paper. Then even a Conscript can understand the game, given that you are articulate enough.

It's not that simple to understand timings, else most pr30 would be pr40.

I disagree with this. The thing is that the knowledge isn't really out there, so you become pr40 by figuring the things out yourself. And that is hard or at the very least rather time consuming.

Yea, you become pr40 by figuring out things essentially, ie by understanding the game. Thus, shouldn't the EP leader be a guy who figured those things out?

[Gendarme]

Perhaps, if you can demonstrate why. It seems sufficient to have people explaining stuff though. I'd rather make sure the leader is objective rather than knowledgeable.

[[Armag] diarouga]

Perhaps, if you can demonstrate why. It seems sufficient to have people explaining stuff though. I'd rather make sure the leader is objective rather than knowledgeable.

How do you want me to demonstrate that? I can play with a mousepad or without a keyboard vs a captain if you really want me to show you that mechanics don't matter and that it's all about game knowledge.

[Gendarme]

I don't need you to demonstrate that. I have seen gibson's streams.

[[Armag] diarouga]

I don't need you to demonstrate that. I have seen gibson's streams.

Yea, so what do you want me to demonstrate?

[Gendarme]

That a knowledgeable EP leader is necessary, since knowledgeable people like you can just put the information on paper for them to digest instead.

[[Armag] diarouga]

That a knowledgeable EP leader is necessary, since knowledgeable people like you can just put the information on paper for them to digest instead.

I don't understand your point. Do you want me to explain why we want a knowledgeable EP leader?

[Gendarme]

Yes. Why does the leader have to be good at the game? Surely it is enough to have good players contributing and the leader objectively listening to what they have to say.

[HUMMAN]

Yea for example leader of tad patch was a Pr 40?

[Youssef]

Yea for example leader of tad patch was a Pr 40?

If he was, the game wouldnt be so unbalanced

[[Armag] diarouga]

Yea for example leader of tad patch was a Pr 40?

No, which is why they had to make like 3 patchs to balance the game, and the game is still super unbalanced.

[gibson]

Well the game will never be balanced, balanced and 14 unique civs are kinda mutually exclusive

[momuuu]

Well the game will never be balanced, balanced and 14 unique civs are kinda mutually exclusive

Without extreme standardizing that is.

[Gendarme]

The mirrors are pretty balanced IMO, and that's already 14 MUs. Not too bad!

[[Armag] diarouga]

Well the game will never be balanced, balanced and 14 unique civs are kinda mutually exclusive

Not perfectly balanced, that's for sure, but we can make try to improve the balance.

[HUMMAN]

Yea for example leader of tad patch was a Pr 40?

No, which is why they had to make like 3 patchs to balance the game, and the game is still super unbalanced.

This is a natural process. Even on most popular stategy games (dota, hearthstone) new content greatly damage game balance and get fixed by future patches. I dont think you can add 3 unique civs with not damaging game balance. The point is people now play tad and some asians civs are personal favorite by many.

[edeholland]

Yea for example leader of tad patch was a Pr 40?

No, which is why they had to make like 3 patchs to balance the game, and the game is still super unbalanced.

This is a natural process. Even on most popular stategy games (dota, hearthstone) new content greatly damage game balance and get fixed by future patches. I dont think you can add 3 unique civs with not damaging game balance. The point is people now play tad and some asians civs are personal favorite by many.

They also made patches after releasing TAD, though, which I think is what Diarouga means.

[[Armag] diarouga]

Show hidden quotes

Yea for example leader of tad patch was a Pr 40?

No, which is why they had to make like 3 patchs to balance the game, and the game is still super unbalanced.

This is a natural process. Even on most popular stategy games (dota, hearthstone) new content greatly damage game balance and get fixed by future patches. I dont think you can add 3 unique civs with not damaging game balance. The point is people now play tad and some asians civs are personal favorite by many.

They also made patches after releasing TAD, though, which I think is what Diarouga means.

Yea. Probably more actually.