Treaty > Supremacy
Treaty > Supremacy
Due to having an absurdely long train travel ahead of me I figured I could just use this thread to enjoy some funny comments from an easily triggered community.
Treaty is the obviously more challenging and more difficult game mode to master which both paper and reality showcase.
You may either agree or be wrong.
Treaty is the obviously more challenging and more difficult game mode to master which both paper and reality showcase.
You may either agree or be wrong.
- harcha
- Gendarme
- Posts: 5136
- Joined: Jul 2, 2015
- ESO: hatamoto_samurai
Re: Treaty > Supremacy
treaty all the way
POC wrote:Also I most likely know a whole lot more than you.
POC wrote:Also as an objective third party, and near 100% accuracy of giving correct information, I would say my opinions are more reliable than yours.
Re: Treaty > Supremacy
Of course treaty is better than supremacy in terms of skill it requires, a good treaty player can also be a good sup player, which is proven by JulianK aka you by becoming top 4 player in just 1 month of supremacy practice. Meanwhile hazza who has been one of the greatest supremacy player has been playing constantly treaty since years, respectively, he can't even hit top 10 in that game mode while easily top 3 in supremacy. For another comprasion. Let's look at another example, Hazza has 0% winrate against JulianK in treaty, they have been playing 1v1 since 2017, meanwhile JulianK in his practice games has reached 40% winrate against hazza in just a month, just imagine if JulianK played supremacy for like a year and where he would be at. Treaty gives a better understanding of the game overall and rewards you from multiple angles. It's just the best game mode in Aoe3.
Re: Treaty > Supremacy
You can't say you're good at AOE3 if you never won a 5 hours collo cree 2.93.
- kevinitalien
- Lancer
- Posts: 669
- Joined: Oct 31, 2015
- ESO: KEVINITALIEN
- Clan: PLOP
Re: Treaty > Supremacy
skirm goon option is funny, 4 civ over 22 play skirm goon as main option, should have put " i like botting musk " because honestly musk is the unit you see every game
Re: Treaty > Supremacy
Definitely more than 4, but 4 default into it with 100% rate i guess.kevinitalien wrote: ↑04 Sep 2022, 14:14skirm goon option is funny, 4 civ over 22 play skirm goon as main option, should have put " i like botting musk " because honestly musk is the unit you see every game
Its still the most boring style ever to me personally.
- kevinitalien
- Lancer
- Posts: 669
- Joined: Oct 31, 2015
- ESO: KEVINITALIEN
- Clan: PLOP
Re: Treaty > Supremacy
ye dutch and fre are just super broken, the 2 other are ports and hauds for me, ports are broken too i guess and hauds are strong for sure but even them can't have 100% win rate, also i don't see any other civ who play as MAIN OPTION skirm goonFloKo83 Aoe3 wrote: ↑04 Sep 2022, 14:39Definitely more than 4, but 4 default into it with 100% rate i guess.kevinitalien wrote: ↑04 Sep 2022, 14:14skirm goon option is funny, 4 civ over 22 play skirm goon as main option, should have put " i like botting musk " because honestly musk is the unit you see every game
Its still the most boring style ever to me personally.
Re: Treaty > Supremacy
Yea not main option, but civs like lakota/germany/italy/malta/ethiopia/hausa all have the tools and according matchups for it.
& to be fair skirm gooning makes sense too gamewise, but it really bores me compared to tr where u spam micro of all kinds so I just figured Id use it to portrait sup
& to be fair skirm gooning makes sense too gamewise, but it really bores me compared to tr where u spam micro of all kinds so I just figured Id use it to portrait sup
Re: Treaty > Supremacy
I don't know if my opinion matters since I generally play supremacy but also tried to play other game modes.
In my perspective it seems like supremacy requires more diverse strategies since you need to defend/pressure even in first minutes of the game on the other hand in treaty you are booming for 40 minutes and meanwhile you don't counter your opponent or do something and when the treaty is over you just fight next to walls and try to micro. So we can say treaty is more like only macro in first 40 mins of the game without getting any pressure so you can fully focus on your macro and it's more like only micro in next stage of the game after 40 minutes and in this stage you can only focus on micro but in supremacy you have to focus on both macro and micro at the same time while trying to create a build order.
Maybe Julian is a really skilled player and that's why he managed to be top player in tournament but I doubt this means all treaty players can success such thing. So I don't think we can say one game mode requires more skill than the other one both game modes require different type of concentration.
In my perspective it seems like supremacy requires more diverse strategies since you need to defend/pressure even in first minutes of the game on the other hand in treaty you are booming for 40 minutes and meanwhile you don't counter your opponent or do something and when the treaty is over you just fight next to walls and try to micro. So we can say treaty is more like only macro in first 40 mins of the game without getting any pressure so you can fully focus on your macro and it's more like only micro in next stage of the game after 40 minutes and in this stage you can only focus on micro but in supremacy you have to focus on both macro and micro at the same time while trying to create a build order.
Maybe Julian is a really skilled player and that's why he managed to be top player in tournament but I doubt this means all treaty players can success such thing. So I don't think we can say one game mode requires more skill than the other one both game modes require different type of concentration.
Re: Treaty > Supremacy
I don't think we can base a claim such as game mode x is harder and more complex than game mode y on how quickly a single extremely talented player learned one or the other. We just simply don't have enough data. One thing is certainly true though: treaty does force you to go through all the stages of the game, from early to uber late, although what's before the latest stage is effectively a one-player booming simulator. Most 1v1 supremacy games cover less than half of the available game content (no age 5, unit shipments over greedy or utility cards, hardly any native techs/units, etc). It would be interesting to note down how long on average a competitive 1v1 supremacy game is, but I wouldn't expect it to be over 15 minutes. You can be top 3 in sup 1v1 without having the ghost of a clue of what's beyond a 2 falc timing push that forces the game to be over, either way, in less than 10 mins.
Re: Treaty > Supremacy
Alright so here is my take on it:Yukietty wrote: ↑04 Sep 2022, 15:01I don't know if my opinion matters since I generally play supremacy but also tried to play other game modes.
In my perspective it seems like supremacy requires more diverse strategies since you need to defend/pressure even in first minutes of the game on the other hand in treaty you are booming for 40 minutes and meanwhile you don't counter your opponent or do something and when the treaty is over you just fight next to walls and try to micro. So we can say treaty is more like only macro in first 40 mins of the game without getting any pressure so you can fully focus on your macro and it's more like only micro in next stage of the game after 40 minutes and in this stage you can only focus on micro but in supremacy you have to focus on both macro and micro at the same time while trying to create a build order.
Maybe Julian is a really skilled player and that's why he managed to be top player in tournament but I doubt this means all treaty players can success such thing. So I don't think we can say one game mode requires more skill than the other one both game modes require different type of concentration.
Youre right - treaty seperates macro and micro (to some extend).
Imo that allows you to really focus on those points on their own. Knowing how to macro is far more valueable than knowing how a single civ's macro works from practicing it and having to learn it every game again.
Same goes for micro, after playing treaty for a few years I know how all units work position/composition/cannons etc.
So learning supremacy when u come from the top of treaty is not really about learning either of those. Its about decisionmaking in game and timings. Not easy, but with a bit of practice it works. Learning matchups, getting familiar with maps, some routine.
Meanwhile learning treaty when you come from the top of supremacy is hard. Very hard. Because you come to realize u have Nothing the game mode requires. U dont know what units to make, how to Position them, how to Base, how to macro a perfect boom, how to move artillery and not even which decisions to make in game.
Thats a process i have watched serveral top sup players go through.
And Big Daniel is the only one who made it into the treaty top 3 in a tourney after 2 years. However im not sure how much game time dan has in the game modes overall.
- harcha
- Gendarme
- Posts: 5136
- Joined: Jul 2, 2015
- ESO: hatamoto_samurai
Re: Treaty > Supremacy
To give it an honest shake:
I've seen treaty players try sup and they mostly fall apart in gamesense and timings. They don't know exactly what you are supposed to do at each moment, how much eco you can afford to do before being under pressure, how to react to pressure without walls, simple things like this.
On the other hand sup players will probably be worse in macro, basebuilding, nerding out the boom (not too important imo), and artillery micro.
I really wouldn't say one is better/more skilled, but obviously you are more exposed to different kind of things in each gamemode. There is such a small number of actually high skilled players (best of the best) in any aoe3 gamemode that we can't reliably compare any data, these generalizations are very general.
I've seen treaty players try sup and they mostly fall apart in gamesense and timings. They don't know exactly what you are supposed to do at each moment, how much eco you can afford to do before being under pressure, how to react to pressure without walls, simple things like this.
On the other hand sup players will probably be worse in macro, basebuilding, nerding out the boom (not too important imo), and artillery micro.
I really wouldn't say one is better/more skilled, but obviously you are more exposed to different kind of things in each gamemode. There is such a small number of actually high skilled players (best of the best) in any aoe3 gamemode that we can't reliably compare any data, these generalizations are very general.
POC wrote:Also I most likely know a whole lot more than you.
POC wrote:Also as an objective third party, and near 100% accuracy of giving correct information, I would say my opinions are more reliable than yours.
- juicyfruit1268
- Skirmisher
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Jun 6, 2015
- ESO: Torie
Re: Treaty > Supremacy
I think it might be worth taking a look at all of the case studies of players who have reached a high level in both treaty and supremacy, at least from what I know.
In terms of treaty to supremacy transition, I can name Lukas, Nick, and Julian as the three that transitioned from high level treaty to supremacy and had successes. I would argue that all three players were very standard in terms of their playstyle and relied heavily on their macro and micro initially in supremacy. While their decision making wasn't ideal, they were able to compensate with their excellent unit macro and resource management, and that's what propelled initially. What really set them back were when situations arose that wasn't standard and wasn't in their calculations. I think all three players were able to really push beyond into the top tier once their decision making caught up and they were able to react to surprise plays and difficult situations.
From the other side of supremacy to treaty, I am familiar with the cases of Daniel and Hazza. I know that Kaiserklein and H2O both also played in a few treaty tournaments, but I wasn't around during the time that they played. Daniel and Hazza both have good unit compositions in their treaty games and it didn't take very long for either of them to get accustomed to microing the most clunky culverins of all time. However, I noticed with Daniel and Hazza that they both gravitated towards a "fight in one spot" mentality initially and especially avoided split map situations, which resulted in brute forcing terrible matchups. I think Daniel quickly progressed past that stage during the team tournament with Julian, where the refinement to the larger scale decision making really showed afterwards.
I think ultimately it was the improvements in decision making that allowed people to move beyond the "good at other game mode" stage and really become top tier players of the other game mode. You are still using the same units and fighting the same other units as you do in either game mode, you just need to know how to use them correctly.
In terms of treaty to supremacy transition, I can name Lukas, Nick, and Julian as the three that transitioned from high level treaty to supremacy and had successes. I would argue that all three players were very standard in terms of their playstyle and relied heavily on their macro and micro initially in supremacy. While their decision making wasn't ideal, they were able to compensate with their excellent unit macro and resource management, and that's what propelled initially. What really set them back were when situations arose that wasn't standard and wasn't in their calculations. I think all three players were able to really push beyond into the top tier once their decision making caught up and they were able to react to surprise plays and difficult situations.
From the other side of supremacy to treaty, I am familiar with the cases of Daniel and Hazza. I know that Kaiserklein and H2O both also played in a few treaty tournaments, but I wasn't around during the time that they played. Daniel and Hazza both have good unit compositions in their treaty games and it didn't take very long for either of them to get accustomed to microing the most clunky culverins of all time. However, I noticed with Daniel and Hazza that they both gravitated towards a "fight in one spot" mentality initially and especially avoided split map situations, which resulted in brute forcing terrible matchups. I think Daniel quickly progressed past that stage during the team tournament with Julian, where the refinement to the larger scale decision making really showed afterwards.
I think ultimately it was the improvements in decision making that allowed people to move beyond the "good at other game mode" stage and really become top tier players of the other game mode. You are still using the same units and fighting the same other units as you do in either game mode, you just need to know how to use them correctly.
- princeofkabul
- Pro Player
- Posts: 2372
- Joined: Feb 28, 2015
- ESO: Princeofkabul
- Location: In retirement home with Sam and Vic
Re: Treaty > Supremacy
these days anyone can be good at anything in aoe 3
Chairman of Washed Up clan
Leader of the Shady Swedes
Team Manager of the Blockhouse Boomers
Leader of the Shady Swedes
Team Manager of the Blockhouse Boomers
- dicktator_
- Howdah
- Posts: 1565
- Joined: Nov 14, 2015
- ESO: Conquerer999
Re: Treaty > Supremacy
Yea, I don't think this thread is very fair. Julian is the only treaty player who improved enough at supremacy to be competitive in a big tournament in two months. For me, Lukas, and kingownage, it took years and thousands of games before we could be competitive in tournaments. Saying that supremacy is easier because Julian improved at it fast from TR to sup is like saying treaty is easier because TheNameDaniel improved at it quickly from sup to tr, it has more to do with the players than the civs.
I know I'm no fun
I know I'm no fun
steniothejonjoe wrote:I can micro better than 99% of the player base and that's 100% objective
Re: Treaty > Supremacy
Do you think trying to learn treaty for a bit would make someone better at supremacy in the long run? I definitely feel like I could use a lot of work on long-term macro and artillery micro. Also if a game goes past the fortress age and I'm not prepared for it I feel like I just lose like 90% of the time
Re: Treaty > Supremacy
treaty is insanely mechanical so if you wanna learn anything related to mechanics it's the right choice. & obviously its all about late game unit choices too so yea.Squamiger wrote: ↑04 Sep 2022, 21:54Do you think trying to learn treaty for a bit would make someone better at supremacy in the long run? I definitely feel like I could use a lot of work on long-term macro and artillery micro. Also if a game goes past the fortress age and I'm not prepared for it I feel like I just lose like 90% of the time
-
- Howdah
- Posts: 1149
- Joined: Oct 16, 2019
- ESO: LeHussardsurletoit
Re: Treaty > Supremacy
I don't want to sound disparaging on Floko and the players in the last tournament but the level in supremacy has never been that bad. Do you really think that Floko would have done as well in a tournament with, say Kaiser, Mitoe and Hazza at the top of their game ? Does someone want to argue that current Floko would have qualified for the LAN tournament in 2019 ?
ESOC : came for the game, stayed for the drama.
- EliteRifleman
- Dragoon
- Posts: 354
- Joined: Jan 24, 2021
- ESO: EliteRifleman
- Clan: SpNz
Re: Treaty > Supremacy
I don't know, but the new blood looks promising.
Re: Treaty > Supremacy
Title: Lukas_L99: A Comparative Study in What It Means To Be Washed Up
Word Count: 464
Inductive Reasoning
How has Lukas_L99, an Age of Empire 3 player, performed lately in the competitive scene? To measure Lukas' performance through time, we can review his tournament placings, Elo ladder rating and leaderboard history, and hours spent playing the game via his Steam profile data. In 2019, Lukas earned Silver in the Time2Treaty Blitz Bash 2, qualified for the Playoffs of the ESOC Grand Tour Season 2, and finished 4th place in the ESOC Winter Championship 2020. He maintained a top twelve Elo leaderboard position via the ESOC Ladder system for the majority of 2019, and logged 378 hours playing Age of Empires 3: The Asian Dynasties according to his Steam profile data. In 2020, Lukas' best tournament showing was a Top 8 finish in iNcog's Empire Cup 2 while having competed in a comparable number of events to the year prior. Lukas suffered a loss of Elo rating in March of 2020 which saw him float down to the #40 position where he would remain for about six months. Finally, Lukas only logged 192 hours on Age of Empires 3: The Asian Dynasties and 86 hours on Age of Empires 3: Definitive Edition. The trends downward in playtime and lack of comparable success in both online ladder and competitive events show that Lukas' competitive edge has decayed. We might find this to indicate more generally that Lukas has become "washed up".
Deductive Reasoning
Lukas_L99, an Age of Empires 3 player, is washed up. On a comparative basis, he has not performed as well in recent years in the competitive scene as he has in the past. To measure Lukas' performance through time, we can review his tournament placings, Elo ladder rating and leaderboard history, and hours spent playing the game via his Steam profile data. In 2019, Lukas earned Silver in the Time2Treaty Blitz Bash 2, qualified for the Playoffs of the ESOC Grand Tour Season 2, and finished 4th place in the ESOC Winter Championship 2020. The following year, however, while participating in a comparable number of events, Lukas' best performance saw him finish Top 8 in iNcog's Empire Cup 2. 2019 Lukas maintained a top twelve Elo leaderboard position via the ESOC Ladder system for the majority of the year, however 2020 saw him float downwards towards to the #40 position where he would remain for about six months. Lukas spent 378 hours playing Age of Empires 3: The Asian Dynasties in 2019, but 2020 saw him reduce his time spent to only 192 hours on Age of Empires 3: The Asian Dynasties and 86 hours on Age of Empires 3: Definitive Edition. The trends downward in playtime and lack of comparable success in both online ladder and competitive events confirm our assertion that Lukas_L99 is a "washed up" player.
- ShinkuroYukinari
- Dragoon
- Posts: 423
- Joined: Apr 27, 2019
- ESO: ShinkuroYukinari
- Clan: BANIN
Re: Treaty > Supremacy
9 times out of 10 treaty devolves into players making decks to jack up whatever unit is best for them and bruteforcing it cause its most optimal in team treaty, and proceeding to be pissed off cause of american gatling guns with protection that cant be beaten by anything
#NerfCoffeeMill
#NerfCoffeeMill
My signature was removed, MOD ABUSE!
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests