Patch wall connectors

[Dsy]

But it shouldnt require skills to use a wall. Its not designed that way. Therefore deleting connectors without gap in wall is considered to be a bug.
Designers didnt put connectors into the game just for delete them.
So if you do so, you shouldnt be rewarded for it.

[[Armag] diarouga]

But it shouldnt require skills to use a wall.
Its not designed that way. Therefore deleting connectors without gap in wall is considered to be a bug.
Designers didnt put connectors into the game just for delete them.
So if you do so, you shouldnt be rewarded for it.

Well, it doesn't require skills to use a wall, you just build it . It requires skill if you want to have cheaper walls though, likewise, your units can get so much better if you micro properly. And as Eaglemut explained, it isn't a bug, just an abuse.
Now the question is, is this abuse bad for the game? Most top players seem to think it's not.

[Dsy]

But it shouldnt require skills to use a wall.
Its not designed that way. Therefore deleting connectors without gap in wall is considered to be a bug.
Designers didnt put connectors into the game just for delete them.
So if you do so, you shouldnt be rewarded for it.

Well, it doesn't require skills to use a wall, you just build it . It requires skill if you want to have cheaper walls though, likewise, your units can get so much better if you micro properly.

There is a whole difference between two.
Microing units are directly implemented into the game.
Microing walls isnt. Its also wierd to delete a units that you want to make. Makes no sense, its just a plain bug abuse.

[Dsy]

Plus i feel like when Garja (i believe it was him plus others) random crates require skills to use. lol
I hope he changed his mind. E Studio didnt plan to make this game esport. That wasnt a thing even back. But if you wanna improve its also blocking the path.
And its not good to reject quality of life changes, since attracting new players should be a goal to make this game better. The key thing the game shouldnt be only for pro players, and not only for who already learned mechanichs (and also bugs). It should be for everyone. Thats why its called Game, so people can enjoy it.
Thats why in esports games changes/bug fixes more important than anything else. Its improve the gameplay for Everyone. Balancing for pro levels comes second. In the end everyoe can be happy, not only one side.

And you think i suggest changes becuese i want to win matches, you are totally wrong. I didnt play AOE3 online for years now. I just modding and writing AI since i enjoy those.
And i think separate dev team and top level players should be a thing for a good reason.

[kami_ryu]

Why are we suddenly going after things like pulling units and walls? these things have been fine since 2005 when the game came out. I feel like there are more important changes to go after.

edit: what mitoe says in this thread is what I agree with.

[[Armag] diarouga]

Plus i feel like when Garja (i believe it was him plus others) random crates require skills to use. lol

No, this was kaiserklein and Mitoe.

I hope he changed his mind. E Studio didnt plan to make this game esport. That wasnt a thing even back. But if you wanna improve its also blocking the path.
And its not good to reject quality of life changes, since attracting new players should be a goal to make this game better.

As I said, new players do not care. The guys who don't like it are pr 20-25 from what I've seen.

The key thing the game shouldnt be only for pro players, and not only for who already learned mechanichs (and also bugs). It should be for everyone. Thats why its called Game, so people can enjoy it.
Thats why in esports games changes/bug fixes more important than anything else. Its improve the gameplay for Everyone. Balancing for pro levels comes second. In the end everyoe can be happy, not only one side.

Lol, every time someone tries to argue against a top player he brings this argument. I'm sorry, but here it doesn't work, the new players just don't give a shit.

And you think i suggest changes becuese i want to win matches, you are totally wrong. I didnt play AOE3 online for years now. I just modding and writing AI since i enjoy those.
And i think separate dev team and top level players should be a thing for a good reason.
Well, with Zoi being the EP leader it's already a thing, and it's actually a bad thing because the dev team doesn't have the knowledge to balance the game. Balancing the game at lower level isn't a thing. If you want to balance a game you have to assume perfect play. Ideally, you would want to win if you play well, ie like or better than a top player. The only thing you can do to "balance the game at low level" is make it user friendly, ie easier, which is in general not a good thing. Anyway, this wall mechanic doesn't affect the low level balance. If you lose a game it's because you lost 5 vills to a raid, wasted your army because of a bad timing/unit composition/macro or because you had 1500 resources in bank during a fight, not because you wasted 50w building a wall.

[Dsy]

Because some people puts lot of effort into this game and it could be much better and populare game.
Pulling trick (if you think one that makes your units move faster) is designed that way. Its skill based and totally fine. Even on role playing aspect if your group rallying than you move faster.
But works like interjecton doing aka "age up politician balance" is just ignored. Also random crates which is totally unfair ignored. Also bugs which are totally obvious ignored.

If you wanna improve the game you need to fix things and improve gameplay. Guess why Goodspeed left. He said "i bored that the game always looks the same". If the game stays the same it will keep the 300 watchers on stream. Thats fine btw. Just there are some people who wants better future for this game.

[Dsy]

Plus i feel like when Garja (i believe it was him plus others) random crates require skills to use. lol

No, this was kaiserklein and Mitoe.

I hope he changed his mind. E Studio didnt plan to make this game esport. That wasnt a thing even back. But if you wanna improve its also blocking the path.
And its not good to reject quality of life changes, since attracting new players should be a goal to make this game better.

As I said, new players do not care. The guys who don't like it are pr 20-25 from what I've seen.

The key thing the game shouldnt be only for pro players, and not only for who already learned mechanichs (and also bugs). It should be for everyone. Thats why its called Game, so people can enjoy it.
Thats why in esports games changes/bug fixes more important than anything else. Its improve the gameplay for Everyone. Balancing for pro levels comes second. In the end everyoe can be happy, not only one side.

Lol, every time someone tries to argue against a top player he brings this argument. I'm sorry, but here it doesn't work, the new players just don't give a shit.

And you think i suggest changes becuese i want to win matches, you are totally wrong. I didnt play AOE3 online for years now. I just modding and writing AI since i enjoy those.
And i think separate dev team and top level players should be a thing for a good reason.
Well, with Zoi being the EP leader it's already a thing, and it's actually a bad thing because the dev team doesn't have the knowledge to balance the game. Balancing the game at lower level isn't a thing. If you want to balance a game you have to assume perfect play. Ideally, you would want to win if you play well, ie like or better than a top player. The only thing you can do to "balance the game at low level" is make it user friendly, ie easier, which is in general not a good thing. Anyway, this wall mechanic doesn't affect the low level balance. If you lose a game it's because you lost 5 vills to a raid, wasted your army because of a bad timing/unit composition/macro or because you had 1500 resources in bank during a fight, not because you wasted 50w building a wall.

I agree with you that balancing should be around top level plays only. However balancing needs to come until gameplay and qol changes and bug fixes. Thats why i wrote everyone could be happy.

[[Armag] diarouga]

Because some people puts lot of effort into this game and it could be much better and populare game.

Do you genuially think that the game would be more popular if wall connectors were removed?

Pulling trick (if you think one that makes your units move faster) is designed that way. Its skill based and totally fine. Even on role playing aspect if your group rallying than you move faster.

The difference is that pull trick does affect the balance. As I said, 40w doesn't really affect the balance, especially since the walls got nerfed accordingly. I don't really mind the pull trick being an abuse, I would be fine if you could just slightly nerf it, the issue is that it just makes cav too weak.

But works like interjecton doing aka "age up politician balance" is just ignored.

It isn't ignored, Smackdowns are played on this patch.

Also random crates which is totally unfair ignored. Also bugs which are totally obvious ignored.

Random crates is definitely not a bug. I'm totally against random crates though, and I'd love if it were removed, but the community is against it. What can you do? Change the game although half of the community doesn't want it?

If you wanna improve the game you need to fix things and improve gameplay. Guess why Goodspeed left. He said "i bored that the game always looks the same". If the game stays the same it will keep the 300 watchers on stream. Thats fine btw. Just there are some people who wants better future for this game.

There's something you don't understand : there will always be a meta people will follow. This means that regardless of how you change the game, people are going to play the same way. GS wanted to change the game like every year to change the meta, which is not really an option considering the current activity.

[supahons]

It's not designed that way.

Maybe it just wasn't designed for a highly competitive environment It changes the game only for 1st Lt+ a bit, so it's more a matter of balance. High level players always break every a game at some point and there are no new patches. If the topplayers think something must be changed, then change it on EP.

With the select all hotkey on TAD it's possible to delete the pillars quickly, you couldn't do this on Nilla. It's only feasible because of this. On Nilla you can delete each pillar too to save some wood, but it takes too long. On TAD if you don't spend some apm on walling then you don't get cheaper walls, or they have holes in it. In the end it's spend more wood or spend more time.

[Dsy]

Yes the game would imrpove if wall connectors would be fixes. Its not a huge imrpovement, but every imrpovements stacks up.
I cant say much on tweaking the numbers on pulling trick. If its op for sure, i dont really mind.
He is kinda inored. I htink he would be more happy if the age up politician would be allowed on tournaments and regular games not only on his events ( that would be normal btw)
Voting on 2 option question shold pass over 50% since its more than half. In this case half community is sad since change didnt happen. I dont like dictatorships and can accept if less than 50% wants it.
But this game is going on about 15 years now with no changes. If you want better gameplay you must change stuffs.

[zoom]

From a design perspective, deleting pillars makes little sense. From a game-play perspective, however, deleting pillars makes sense. AoE3 is missing APM sinks, and the mechanic necessarily takes skill, too, now that limitations on certain macros have been put in place. It can be balanced around, if desirable.

Walls in general are poorly implemented in this game, although the gate mechanic is nice.

[Thrar]

I don't think an RTS game (or MOBA, for that matter) needs "APM sinks". Starcraft is considered high APM because APM makes a big difference in unit control, not because it makes you perform multiple consecutive actions to create a building efficiently (AoE3 walls) or constantly manage your workers to gather efficiently (AoE2 villagers). Faster players will always find ways to make use of their APM, but tasks like these just take away player time you could spend on the cool stuff and replace it with tedium.

From a development standpoint I wouldn't call deletable pillars a bug, but I do consider it an unintended design side-effect leading to an exploit that makes walls faster and cheaper to build than intended by the game designer. A better design solution to me would be e.g. enforcing that wall segments must end with a pillar, so the entire segment is removed when the pillar is deleted.

If this exploit had been known (and had high enough priority) back in the Ensemble days perhaps they could have handled it in this or some other way, but I'm not sure whether EP should (or even can) make such adjustments.

I'm starting to like the idea of different costs for different wall lengths. There's still a build time difference, but I think it makes sense for walls that cover the same length to cost roughly the same, no matter how many segments they have. Perhaps something like 10w for the longest segment and proportionally less for smaller segments, with a fixed 3w or whatever for pillars?
This way, players could still spend their time optimizing walls and gain a benefit if they want to, but it will be less of a requirement.

[Imperial Noob]

pull trick is what all the running and charging animations have been made for
deleting pillars is an abomination, like pathing issues. There is an empty space, but not really

[deleted_user]

Can making a gate on the wall segment I am researching bastion from not reset the upgrade?

[gibson]

I stopped ready this thread when people said that making pillar-less walls takes skill lmao.

[deleted_user]

I stopped ready this thread when people said that making pillar-less walls takes skill lmao.

It takes marginally more "skill" (however you want to define it) than making a regular wall, yes.

Grudge match me, noob.

[deleted_user0]

I don't think an RTS game (or MOBA, for that matter) needs "APM sinks". Starcraft is considered high APM because APM makes a big difference in unit control, not because it makes you perform multiple consecutive actions to create a building efficiently (AoE3 walls) or constantly manage your workers to gather efficiently (AoE2 villagers). Faster players will always find ways to make use of their APM, but tasks like these just take away player time you could spend on the cool stuff and replace it with tedium.

From a development standpoint I wouldn't call deletable pillars a bug, but I do consider it an unintended design side-effect leading to an exploit that makes walls faster and cheaper to build than intended by the game designer. A better design solution to me would be e.g. enforcing that wall segments must end with a pillar, so the entire segment is removed when the pillar is deleted.

If this exploit had been known (and had high enough priority) back in the Ensemble days perhaps they could have handled it in this or some other way, but I'm not sure whether EP should (or even can) make such adjustments.

I'm starting to like the idea of different costs for different wall lengths. There's still a build time difference, but I think it makes sense for walls that cover the same length to cost roughly the same, no matter how many segments they have. Perhaps something like 10w for the longest segment and proportionally less for smaller segments, with a fixed 3w or whatever for pillars?
This way, players could still spend their time optimizing walls and gain a benefit if they want to, but it will be less of a requirement.

Sc2 is high apm because they increased game speed. Thats all. Play aoe3 on fast speed and it will be high apm also,and its not even as much of an increase as sc2. Which is such a shit and boring game when played on normal mode.

[gibson]

I stopped ready this thread when people said that making pillar-less walls takes skill lmao.

It takes marginally more "skill" (however you want to define it) than making a regular wall, yes.

Grudge match me, noob.

Thats like saying it takes more skill to eat a pomegranate than to eat an apple. It takes more effort and time, but literally anyone with a functioning hand can do it.

[deleted_user0]

I stopped ready this thread when people said that making pillar-less walls takes skill lmao.

It takes marginally more "skill" (however you want to define it) than making a regular wall, yes.

Grudge match me, noob.

Thats like saying it takes more skill to eat a pomegranate than to eat an apple. It takes more effort and time, but literally anyone with a functioning hand can do it.

yea people use the word skill with anything these days, it's just a totally meaningless buzzword now. might as well say it takes soul! More than anything it's about knowledge. You need to know what the advantage is of doing it, and you need to know how to place the walls so there aren't any gaps. But anyone who knows can do it

[deleted_user]

I stopped ready this thread when people said that making pillar-less walls takes skill lmao.

It takes marginally more "skill" (however you want to define it) than making a regular wall, yes.

Grudge match me, noob.

Thats like saying it takes more skill to eat a pomegranate than to eat an apple. It takes more effort and time, but literally anyone with a functioning hand can do it.

Poor analogy.

We still routinely see walls with gaps where the pillars would have been (H2O was notorious for this - so much so he didn't consider the wood saved to be worth the risk).

It's accurate to stay that in supremacy, the time-crunch neccesitates skill from actions otherwise. Sure, anyone with a hand and who watched the YT tutorial can make pillar-less walls but in supremacy you have to perform actions quickly, and this is where mistakes happen.

Anyone with a hand who graduated 3rd grade can make idleless villagers, and complete a batch queue, and kite a treasure, and do any other regular task because they are a biped with a piece of hardware hooked to real-time software - but not everyone can do these at the same time, because of The Crunch.

Anologies suck but it's closer to say if you have 10 minutes to eat your lunch and a pomemgranate takes longer than an apple to eat but you receive more nutrients from it - it takes skill (nothing more than the fruit of labor aka practice) to eat it quickly enough to finish the rest of your meal too. Most people will easily reach this point, but it does require "marginally" more "skill."

Also, I'm 100% sure there's an age range of persons capable of making a normal wall in aoe3 and incapable of making a pillar-less wall. It's technically correct to say it requires marginally more skill.

[gibson]

youre wrong and an idiot

[deleted_user0]

it's also pointless to say it. as the margin is not worth considering.

[deleted_user]

youre wrong and an idiot

Then you're wronger.

[deleted_user0]

youre wrong and an idiot

Then you're wronger.

come on line and play me. I'll sub for gibshon in this grudgematch!