Bye

[fitzbro]

Looks like he is back already and learning Sweden! An old dog can learn new tricks.

[Mitoe]

Maybe he didn't have real skill if blaming loss to an explosive building 0-3 lol.
AoE3 pros are notorious for following build order but then getting thrashed by high APM pros from like starcraft, aom ,etc., not having that adaptability that does something amazing to win the game, just sayin.
But understood anyway it's such a flawed game anyway at this point.

Aside from lilbow (who had quite a bit of AoE3 experience in the past), I don’t recall any SC2, AoM, etc. player ever having a chance of beating a top 10 player? Am I forgetting someone?

[Rohbrot]

Calling the today's top players shitters, who also Do stream for the community is just outrageous. You just have to adapt to the New civs/metas and Not blame the game for being dogshit, what it isnt at all in my opionion.

[Cometk]

If the game was totally dead before DE it sure as shit is now.

imo i thought the game was in a pretty great state before DE release, EP was such a refined and consummate product after the years of iteration (bless eaglemut, kev, musketeer and all those who contributed) and it was super smooth to play and easy to host events on. i think it could've gone on into perpetuity for many years more without losing steam, even with the inevitable change in life circumstances of players, organizers, and community members that would affect engagement with the hobby.

[JKProwler]

Holy shit this kaiser guy has longest streak of 45 games and just out worldly win %

https://aoeiv.net/#aoe3de-profile-3559355

Yep his definatley struggling with new meta in DE

[princeofkabul]

Agreed with Hazza, just a bunch of shitters.

#Kaiserwasright

[Hazza54321]

And the fact that this “new game” has the lowest skill ceiling of all time where it doesnt reward the better player. The sheer amount of nonsense and bullshit added is unarguable. Exactly the reason why shitters like this new aoe is its so much easier beating much better players whilst doing fuck all

Thats just patently untrue. The only reason theres perceived lower skill ceiling is due to the old "top" players refusing to even learn how the new game works, so "worse" players who actually learn how the new game works perform better. But believe it or not learning how the game works is actually part of being good at it, so the "better" players arent actually better, although if they also put the time into learning the game they probably would be.

You just love the argue about anything. I could learn (which wouldnt be hard) to otto/spain/portugese revolt and press the “i win” button but thats just not fun for me. I could also spend money on dlc civs and press several “i win” buttons but once again not fun for me. It just isnt rewarding at all and with all these stupid techs and abilities being added to nat tps and cards just makes the game broken and unbalanced.

No worse feeling going into a game knowing youve most likely lost due to the mu or some tech from nat tp or card that clearly is way too strong. Auto macro buttons, auto micro buttons, fucking fireworks and mercs way too strong for their cost. Techs such as giving more range resist to cav or double resists, or rofs that vary per range is just impossible to balance.

This sort of thing is popular with the more casual community but dont expect people who want to play the game competitively to even bother learning this shit and it annoys me when people say learn the new shit because theres literally no point because it will never be as fun as it once was. I learned all the new shit last June and it probably was the least fun ive ever had playing this game but i won the tournament pretty easily abusing it all.

[Rohbrot]

And the fact that this “new game” has the lowest skill ceiling of all time where it doesnt reward the better player. The sheer amount of nonsense and bullshit added is unarguable. Exactly the reason why shitters like this new aoe is its so much easier beating much better players whilst doing fuck all

Thats just patently untrue. The only reason theres perceived lower skill ceiling is due to the old "top" players refusing to even learn how the new game works, so "worse" players who actually learn how the new game works perform better. But believe it or not learning how the game works is actually part of being good at it, so the "better" players arent actually better, although if they also put the time into learning the game they probably would be.

You just love the argue about anything. I could learn (which wouldnt be hard) to otto/spain/portugese revolt and press the “i win” button but thats just not fun for me. I could also spend money on dlc civs and press several “i win” buttons but once again not fun for me. It just isnt rewarding at all and with all these stupid techs and abilities being added to nat tps and cards just makes the game broken and unbalanced.

No worse feeling going into a game knowing youve most likely lost due to the mu or some tech from nat tp or card that clearly is way too strong. Auto macro buttons, auto micro buttons, fucking fireworks and mercs way too strong for their cost. Techs such as giving more range resist to cav or double resists, or rofs that vary per range is just impossible to balance.

This sort of thing is popular with the more casual community but dont expect people who want to play the game competitively to even bother learning this shit and it annoys me when people say learn the new shit because theres literally no point because it will never be as fun as it once was. I learned all the new shit last June and it probably was the least fun ive ever had playing this game but i won the tournament pretty easily abusing it all.

Bye honey

[Hazza54321]

[harcha]

If the game was totally dead before DE it sure as shit is now.

imo i thought the game was in a pretty great state before DE release, EP was such a refined and consummate product after the years of iteration (bless eaglemut, kev, musketeer and all those who contributed) and it was super smooth to play and easy to host events on. i think it could've gone on into perpetuity for many years more without losing steam, even with the inevitable change in life circumstances of players, organizers, and community members that would affect engagement with the hobby.

It was great but it was also pretty damn dead if you ever tried to find anyone online.

[Goodspeed]

If the game was totally dead before DE it sure as shit is now.

imo i thought the game was in a pretty great state before DE release, EP was such a refined and consummate product after the years of iteration (bless eaglemut, kev, musketeer and all those who contributed) and it was super smooth to play and easy to host events on. i think it could've gone on into perpetuity for many years more without losing steam, even with the inevitable change in life circumstances of players, organizers, and community members that would affect engagement with the hobby.

I don't think the game was dead pre-DE either but dead is a subjective/relative term so it's pointless to argue. Hence my comparison to now saying IF it was dead at the time, it certainly is now

[Rohbrot]

If the game was totally dead before DE it sure as shit is now.

imo i thought the game was in a pretty great state before DE release, EP was such a refined and consummate product after the years of iteration (bless eaglemut, kev, musketeer and all those who contributed) and it was super smooth to play and easy to host events on. i think it could've gone on into perpetuity for many years more without losing steam, even with the inevitable change in life circumstances of players, organizers, and community members that would affect engagement with the hobby.

It was great but it was also pretty damn dead if you ever tried to find anyone online.

good old times where harcha was spamming japan 24/7

[gibson]

And the fact that this “new game” has the lowest skill ceiling of all time where it doesnt reward the better player. The sheer amount of nonsense and bullshit added is unarguable. Exactly the reason why shitters like this new aoe is its so much easier beating much better players whilst doing fuck all

Thats just patently untrue. The only reason theres perceived lower skill ceiling is due to the old "top" players refusing to even learn how the new game works, so "worse" players who actually learn how the new game works perform better. But believe it or not learning how the game works is actually part of being good at it, so the "better" players arent actually better, although if they also put the time into learning the game they probably would be.

You just love the argue about anything. I could learn (which wouldnt be hard) to otto/spain/portugese revolt and press the “i win” button but thats just not fun for me. I could also spend money on dlc civs and press several “i win” buttons but once again not fun for me. It just isnt rewarding at all and with all these stupid techs and abilities being added to nat tps and cards just makes the game broken and unbalanced.

No worse feeling going into a game knowing youve most likely lost due to the mu or some tech from nat tp or card that clearly is way too strong. Auto macro buttons, auto micro buttons, fucking fireworks and mercs way too strong for their cost. Techs such as giving more range resist to cav or double resists, or rofs that vary per range is just impossible to balance.

This sort of thing is popular with the more casual community but dont expect people who want to play the game competitively to even bother learning this shit and it annoys me when people say learn the new shit because theres literally no point because it will never be as fun as it once was. I learned all the new shit last June and it probably was the least fun ive ever had playing this game but i won the tournament pretty easily abusing it all.

You: The new game has a much lower skill ceiling and it’s way easier for “worse” players to beat better players cause of all the bullshit!

Me: Actually it’s not, the better players just aren’t learning the game which is what makes it seem like that, although if they did learn it they probably could be the best again.

You: The new game just isn’t fun and I can’t be assed to learn it. Don’t tell me to learn it cause it’s not fun! I won the last tournament that I did learn it but it wasn’t fun!

Maybe now that I’ve simplified the past 3 posts for you you’ll see that you’re actually agreeing with me.

[Goodspeed]

Show hidden quotes

And the fact that this “new game” has the lowest skill ceiling of all time where it doesnt reward the better player. The sheer amount of nonsense and bullshit added is unarguable. Exactly the reason why shitters like this new aoe is its so much easier beating much better players whilst doing fuck all

Thats just patently untrue. The only reason theres perceived lower skill ceiling is due to the old "top" players refusing to even learn how the new game works, so "worse" players who actually learn how the new game works perform better. But believe it or not learning how the game works is actually part of being good at it, so the "better" players arent actually better, although if they also put the time into learning the game they probably would be.

You just love the argue about anything. I could learn (which wouldnt be hard) to otto/spain/portugese revolt and press the “i win” button but thats just not fun for me. I could also spend money on dlc civs and press several “i win” buttons but once again not fun for me. It just isnt rewarding at all and with all these stupid techs and abilities being added to nat tps and cards just makes the game broken and unbalanced.

No worse feeling going into a game knowing youve most likely lost due to the mu or some tech from nat tp or card that clearly is way too strong. Auto macro buttons, auto micro buttons, fucking fireworks and mercs way too strong for their cost. Techs such as giving more range resist to cav or double resists, or rofs that vary per range is just impossible to balance.

This sort of thing is popular with the more casual community but dont expect people who want to play the game competitively to even bother learning this shit and it annoys me when people say learn the new shit because theres literally no point because it will never be as fun as it once was. I learned all the new shit last June and it probably was the least fun ive ever had playing this game but i won the tournament pretty easily abusing it all.

You: The new game has a much lower skill ceiling and it’s way easier for “worse” players to beat better players cause of all the bullshit!

Me: Actually it’s not, the better players just aren’t learning the game which is what makes it seem like that, although if they did learn it they probably could be the best again.

You: The new game just isn’t fun and I can’t be assed to learn it. Don’t tell me to learn it cause it’s not fun! I won the last tournament that I did learn it but it wasn’t fun!

Maybe now that I’ve simplified the past 3 posts for you you’ll see that you’re actually agreeing with me.

What if it's not fun because it's uncompetitive

[Rohbrot]

Show hidden quotes

And the fact that this “new game” has the lowest skill ceiling of all time where it doesnt reward the better player. The sheer amount of nonsense and bullshit added is unarguable. Exactly the reason why shitters like this new aoe is its so much easier beating much better players whilst doing fuck all

Thats just patently untrue. The only reason theres perceived lower skill ceiling is due to the old "top" players refusing to even learn how the new game works, so "worse" players who actually learn how the new game works perform better. But believe it or not learning how the game works is actually part of being good at it, so the "better" players arent actually better, although if they also put the time into learning the game they probably would be.

You just love the argue about anything. I could learn (which wouldnt be hard) to otto/spain/portugese revolt and press the “i win” button but thats just not fun for me. I could also spend money on dlc civs and press several “i win” buttons but once again not fun for me. It just isnt rewarding at all and with all these stupid techs and abilities being added to nat tps and cards just makes the game broken and unbalanced.

No worse feeling going into a game knowing youve most likely lost due to the mu or some tech from nat tp or card that clearly is way too strong. Auto macro buttons, auto micro buttons, fucking fireworks and mercs way too strong for their cost. Techs such as giving more range resist to cav or double resists, or rofs that vary per range is just impossible to balance.

This sort of thing is popular with the more casual community but dont expect people who want to play the game competitively to even bother learning this shit and it annoys me when people say learn the new shit because theres literally no point because it will never be as fun as it once was. I learned all the new shit last June and it probably was the least fun ive ever had playing this game but i won the tournament pretty easily abusing it all.

You: The new game has a much lower skill ceiling and it’s way easier for “worse” players to beat better players cause of all the bullshit!

Me: Actually it’s not, the better players just aren’t learning the game which is what makes it seem like that, although if they did learn it they probably could be the best again.

You: The new game just isn’t fun and I can’t be assed to learn it. Don’t tell me to learn it cause it’s not fun! I won the last tournament that I did learn it but it wasn’t fun!

Maybe now that I’ve simplified the past 3 posts for you you’ll see that you’re actually agreeing with me.

What if it's not fun because it's uncompetitive

Why it shouldnt be uncompetitive?

[iNcog]

Maybe he didn't have real skill if blaming loss to an explosive building 0-3 lol.
AoE3 pros are notorious for following build order but then getting thrashed by high APM pros from like starcraft, aom ,etc., not having that adaptability that does something amazing to win the game, just sayin.
But understood anyway it's such a flawed game anyway at this point.

Aside from lilbow (who had quite a bit of AoE3 experience in the past), I don’t recall any SC2, AoM, etc. player ever having a chance of beating a top 10 player? Am I forgetting someone?

@leg[] yeah maybe you could elaborate on what events you're talking about? Who are the high APM pros and in what matches did they beat legacy AoE3 top players?

[princeofkabul]

Show hidden quotes

And the fact that this “new game” has the lowest skill ceiling of all time where it doesnt reward the better player. The sheer amount of nonsense and bullshit added is unarguable. Exactly the reason why shitters like this new aoe is its so much easier beating much better players whilst doing fuck all

Thats just patently untrue. The only reason theres perceived lower skill ceiling is due to the old "top" players refusing to even learn how the new game works, so "worse" players who actually learn how the new game works perform better. But believe it or not learning how the game works is actually part of being good at it, so the "better" players arent actually better, although if they also put the time into learning the game they probably would be.

You just love the argue about anything. I could learn (which wouldnt be hard) to otto/spain/portugese revolt and press the “i win” button but thats just not fun for me. I could also spend money on dlc civs and press several “i win” buttons but once again not fun for me. It just isnt rewarding at all and with all these stupid techs and abilities being added to nat tps and cards just makes the game broken and unbalanced.

No worse feeling going into a game knowing youve most likely lost due to the mu or some tech from nat tp or card that clearly is way too strong. Auto macro buttons, auto micro buttons, fucking fireworks and mercs way too strong for their cost. Techs such as giving more range resist to cav or double resists, or rofs that vary per range is just impossible to balance.

This sort of thing is popular with the more casual community but dont expect people who want to play the game competitively to even bother learning this shit and it annoys me when people say learn the new shit because theres literally no point because it will never be as fun as it once was. I learned all the new shit last June and it probably was the least fun ive ever had playing this game but i won the tournament pretty easily abusing it all.

You: The new game has a much lower skill ceiling and it’s way easier for “worse” players to beat better players cause of all the bullshit!

Me: Actually it’s not, the better players just aren’t learning the game which is what makes it seem like that, although if they did learn it they probably could be the best again.

You: The new game just isn’t fun and I can’t be assed to learn it. Don’t tell me to learn it cause it’s not fun! I won the last tournament that I did learn it but it wasn’t fun!

Maybe now that I’ve simplified the past 3 posts for you you’ll see that you’re actually agreeing with me.

It doesn't matter if the "better players" are learning the new game or not. When the skill ceiling is what it is anyone can do the same shit as well as anyone else. Abusive mechanics and "creativity" are not the same thing.

[Goodspeed]

Show hidden quotes

And the fact that this “new game” has the lowest skill ceiling of all time where it doesnt reward the better player. The sheer amount of nonsense and bullshit added is unarguable. Exactly the reason why shitters like this new aoe is its so much easier beating much better players whilst doing fuck all

Thats just patently untrue. The only reason theres perceived lower skill ceiling is due to the old "top" players refusing to even learn how the new game works, so "worse" players who actually learn how the new game works perform better. But believe it or not learning how the game works is actually part of being good at it, so the "better" players arent actually better, although if they also put the time into learning the game they probably would be.

You just love the argue about anything. I could learn (which wouldnt be hard) to otto/spain/portugese revolt and press the “i win” button but thats just not fun for me. I could also spend money on dlc civs and press several “i win” buttons but once again not fun for me. It just isnt rewarding at all and with all these stupid techs and abilities being added to nat tps and cards just makes the game broken and unbalanced.

No worse feeling going into a game knowing youve most likely lost due to the mu or some tech from nat tp or card that clearly is way too strong. Auto macro buttons, auto micro buttons, fucking fireworks and mercs way too strong for their cost. Techs such as giving more range resist to cav or double resists, or rofs that vary per range is just impossible to balance.

This sort of thing is popular with the more casual community but dont expect people who want to play the game competitively to even bother learning this shit and it annoys me when people say learn the new shit because theres literally no point because it will never be as fun as it once was. I learned all the new shit last June and it probably was the least fun ive ever had playing this game but i won the tournament pretty easily abusing it all.

You: The new game has a much lower skill ceiling and it’s way easier for “worse” players to beat better players cause of all the bullshit!

Me: Actually it’s not, the better players just aren’t learning the game which is what makes it seem like that, although if they did learn it they probably could be the best again.

You: The new game just isn’t fun and I can’t be assed to learn it. Don’t tell me to learn it cause it’s not fun! I won the last tournament that I did learn it but it wasn’t fun!

Maybe now that I’ve simplified the past 3 posts for you you’ll see that you’re actually agreeing with me.

What if it's not fun because it's uncompetitive

Why it shouldnt be uncompetitive?

Replay value

[Hawk_Girl]

If the game was totally dead before DE it sure as shit is now.

imo i thought the game was in a pretty great state before DE release, EP was such a refined and consummate product after the years of iteration (bless eaglemut, kev, musketeer and all those who contributed) and it was super smooth to play and easy to host events on. i think it could've gone on into perpetuity for many years more without losing steam, even with the inevitable change in life circumstances of players, organizers, and community members that would affect engagement with the hobby.

let's host an ep event

[callentournies]

dont imo

[Houseki]

can we just stop living in nilla and exept the fact that this game is not the same? why kynesie ezad and tit can learn new stuff and use it and some people cant?

[RefluxSemantic]

If the game was totally dead before DE it sure as shit is now.

imo i thought the game was in a pretty great state before DE release, EP was such a refined and consummate product after the years of iteration (bless eaglemut, kev, musketeer and all those who contributed) and it was super smooth to play and easy to host events on. i think it could've gone on into perpetuity for many years more without losing steam, even with the inevitable change in life circumstances of players, organizers, and community members that would affect engagement with the hobby.

The 'ded' part was imo primarily because of the fact that the game was no longer supported (thus, RE being plagued with blatant cheaters, terrible balance, bad maps and EP only containing a fragment of the players).

I think that a DE which only really adressed these issues would have 'revived' the community just as much, if not more, than what DE is like right now. Though surely the current format, while imo bad for the core community, brings in more money for microsoft.

I think related to this point, I want to remark that it is a strawman to pretend that garja/goodspeed and others are arguing that legacy was better than DE. The game was definitely in need of official support (cheating, map and balance issues were quite atrocious). I feel like they obviously also understand that this aspect was a huge improvement. Its just that many people (its not even a minority, I count a majority here in this thread including quite a few forum members that are usually not that vocal) dont seem to like the way they are handling the gameplay.

I also dont really see whats wrong about people voicing a conservative opinion. At some point, you've definitely earned the right to voice respectful disappointment with a new version of a game. People like Garja or Goodspeed, who have been playing fhe game since its inception and have been part of the community since the beginning havd definitely earned that right. I find it very peculiar that some people attack them for voicing their opinion and reinforcing it with well laid out arguments. Seems kinda toxic to me.

[RefluxSemantic]

I cant really comment on the more or less competitive part of this discussion, but I feel like there is another aspect that might frustrate some old players:
On RE and on EP the game was more settled, with a meta that was very deep but mostly figured out. The difference was made through subtle strategic touches, which were very in depth and required an immense amount of understanding of the game and meta, and of course the execution of builds. This is what aoe3 was like for a decade or so. With DE (and also earlier to a much smaller extend with EP iterations, particularly the zoi approach) there are so many changes and new content that the game doesnt settle into a state where the meta is deep and mostly figured out. With the amount of stuff that they added, it might honestly take many years before things settle again.

At the higher levels of play, this really has a very profound impact on what the game plays like. Its going to be more about figuring out what builds/strats are even good, and which new mechanics can be abused. I dont know if this makes the game more or less competitive, but the emphasis on a deep strategic understanding of a match up is removed. Given that before DE, that was one of the main aspects of competitive gameplay, it is unsurprising and pretty reasonable that old competitive players dont like it as much. Maybe that is what some of them mean with 'its just not as competitive'. Its at the very least a big reason why I have no desire to pick up aoe3 again.

[dansil92]

I'll agree with reflux here. I don't think theres a way to feel "settled" as a player right now. I might develop a new build with one of these new civs, get great at it, comfortable, new little adaptations for different matchups or map types and then wake up after dumping dozens of hours into practice only to discover a patch note that absolutely nukes the whole thing. Its incredibly frustrating, and its why I (and seemingly most of the former ep players) have no intention on learning the new civs-- why sink all this practice into an unstable and short lived patch? I'm unenthusiastic to even practice my DE specific japan and otto builds anymore because im just waiting for the nerf hammer to ruin them. If the game was "locked in" to a fairly stable state (such as ep7 and 8, 9 to some extent) where you know the biggest change will be a 1% change to indias shipment penalty, 5 or 10 hp change here or there... was fine to learn and practice builds and matchups because you know those little changes won't nuke your whole build.

[Aizamk]

lol l2play skrubs