• Breaking News

    Wednesday, May 12, 2021

    Home Unlabelled Age of Empires II I did a thing with my laptop today...

    Age of Empires II I did a thing with my laptop today...

    May 12, 2021

    Age of Empires II I did a thing with my laptop today...

    I did a thing with my laptop today...

    Posted: 11 May 2021 01:22 PM PDT

    The duality of man

    Posted: 12 May 2021 07:19 AM PDT

    While we're on the subject of ranked queues...

    Posted: 12 May 2021 03:02 AM PDT

    I think now is the perfect opportunity to fix something which almost everyone agrees needs fixing - the RM Team Game queue.

    The best course of action imo is to reset everyone's TG ELO to 1000, and make ELO gain based off of the teams average ELO rather than whatever it is now, which is leading to a huge spiralling TG ELO inflation. I'm not actually sure what the calculation is - I would be really interested to find out. Whatever it is though, it's not working.

    This fixes a few issues at once.

    1) A player's 1v1 rank and TG rank (should...) be a bit closer together, because ELO gain for a win (should...) be a closer to the ELO loss for a loss. At the moment my anecdotal experience is that you gain ELO much easier than you lose it. An balanced ELO system between 1v1s and TGs is a good thing, because it means you can more easily compare your ability to yourself and others. It will also make the TG ladder genuinely competitive, rather than basically a contest to see who can play the most games.

    2) The Alt+F4 epidemic. I genuinely believe an ELO reset will help, and the reason for that is I bet a lot of people join the lobby, scan over their teammates' icons, see their 1v1 ranks, and make a judgement of their ability and whether the game is "already over". I've done this before, and although I don't Alt+F4, it's not exactly a confidence boost to see a <1000 ELO player at 2k2 or 2k3 TG ELO, when I am also there but with 1300 1v1 ELO. A lot of people claim that they Alt+F4 in the lobby because of the map but I don't believe that's the only reason. Having comparable TG and 1v1 ELOs will surely lessen the rate of the annoying Alt+F4s.

    3) Sideways ladder jumping, which is much less of an issue, should no longer be an issue but actually a benefit. At the moment TG ELO is used to determine starting 1v1 ELO, so obviously with the two ladders so far skewed there are some pretty silly instances of new players to 1v1 starting at over 2k 1v1 ELO. If the ladders were reset and the ELO calculation was fixed, this would actually help new players to 1v1 find their appropriate place.

    The downside of this is that a lot of people would have to play upwards of 25/30 games to get back to where they belong. Personally, I think its worth it just to have the system work properly, but I can understand if it's a very undesirable situation for some.

    Would love to hear your thoughts, sorry this is a bit long.

    submitted by /u/BigWaltie
    [link] [comments]

    6 range visualized (indicator versus actual)

    Posted: 11 May 2021 02:01 PM PDT

    WE DID IT

    Posted: 11 May 2021 04:14 PM PDT

    Can someone explain the appeal of Deathmatch to me?

    Posted: 12 May 2021 03:37 AM PDT

    I've seen the sadness about the DM queue being taken away and I thought I'd look at some streams because I know nothing about the meta and man, it's just so ugly and messy! It doesn't "feel" like Age of Empires to me. Feels like the kind of stuff I made on the scenario editor for myself when I was younger. Obviously it's fine if it's not for me and other people enjoy it, but I was wondering if someone could explain why they enjoy it? Because I can't get my head around it. Something about seeing farms arranged around a TC and a couple of busy woodlines just feels right to me, rather than bases which are a complete mess of random houses and production buildings from minute 1. Also seems to me like starting in post-Imp gives a pretty clear hierarchy of civs, functionally removing a bunch of them from the game?

    submitted by /u/Snikhop
    [link] [comments]

    Dave quickwalls in a ranked game using a controller

    Posted: 11 May 2021 03:10 PM PDT

    Why is Empire Wars a thing?

    Posted: 12 May 2021 03:34 AM PDT

    This is a genuine question and I am open to being convinced Empire Wars is an improvement of the game I should check out.

    The thought behind EW is that it will attract more people to AoE because you'll have more action right from the start, right? And is that thought directed at people who watch tournaments or at people who simply want to play a game where they can fight from the start?

    I personally like dark age from a viewer perspective, because it gives the casters time to explain the map and the civ-match-ups, elaborating on possible strategies etc.

    I like Dark Age from a player perspective, because it has different requirements than the other ages. Every tiny mistake is weighing heavier and potentially giving your opponent the lead without even fighting. It has been a part of the game forever, and everyone who has played it for a while has learned (some better than others) how to play it. Plus, it's like 6 minutes of real time. That's not that long, is it?

    Is it about attracting new players? You have AoE 4 coming out soon, don't you think players who didn't play AoE2 before and now want to play an RTS will turn to AoE4 anyway? Why try to make the game something it isn't?

    Empire Wars has never bothered me as long as it was just there, but now they are killing DM queue to make room for it and I'm afraid it will thin out the RM queue and possibly they'll even "balance" civs so they are fairer to play in EW but unfairer in RM.

    P.S.: I enjoyed RBW3, and I'll probably also watch some of RBW4, but simply because it's the best players and after 5 minutes of feudal age fighting I can make myself forget that something was missing. I would enjoy the tournaments more if it wasn't in Empire Wars mode.

    submitted by /u/tjb937
    [link] [comments]

    Why not remove unpopular team games and leave 1v1s?

    Posted: 12 May 2021 06:22 AM PDT

    DM is being removed partially due to the complete disuse of the team game que? Would it be possible to instead simply replace the 2v2, 3v3 and 4v4 DM ques with other 1v1 options like Empire Wars? Same amount of ques but more variety.

    submitted by /u/Tarwins-Gap
    [link] [comments]

    Unpopular opinion : replacing the DM ladder with EW is a good choice

    Posted: 11 May 2021 09:58 AM PDT

    Since the announcement I've seen a lot of people disappointed with this change but here is why I'm with the dev team on this one : - They have the data to back up their choice (see the link attached) - Empire Wars has a brighter future than DM, for both casual players and e-sport - It goes to show that the game is not done trying to improve, even if it involves unpopular experiments

    Feel free to disagree as long as it is constructive !

    submitted by /u/KobaPolo
    [link] [comments]

    Italians as TG Flank

    Posted: 12 May 2021 03:07 AM PDT

    Hey everybody,

    what are your thoughts on italians as TG flank. I think they shine on possibly every map.

    We don't need to talk about them on water maps as they are a pretty easy choice as the combination of cheaper fishing ships, faster up and cheaper dock techs let them get on water fast and with less ressources.

    On closed maps they are good as well, as they have a decent FI monk trebs + genuese to defend against light cav. Maybe there boom isn't supported by eco bonuses but the cheaper Upping costs might help as well. As a flank to boom is if at all just possible on BF on higher levels.

    On open maps they are fine as a archer civ as well. Again the cheaper up time helps them to compensate somehow for the lack of eco bonusses. They also lack the power of briton or ethiopian archers, but they have a secret weapon in classic archer + cav fight on open map TGs: The genuese crossbow. It is less easy to mass them i must admit as you need castles, but their creation time is 18 seconds and much faster than the crossbow 27 seconds. So you get a Unit with 10 more HP and more attack which costs less gold but more wood. Yes they have a bigger attack delay and one less range but the genuese xbow has 100% accuracy while the normal one only got 85%. The biggest difference and the game changer though will be the attack bonus against cav. A crossbow with no upgrades will do 3 damage against a knight without upgrades killing him with 34 shots. A genuese crossbow does 11 damage against the same knight killing him in 10 shots. On top of that as a smell extra you will get ballistics faster as it is cheaper.

    What do you guys think? Is the genuese crossbow as italian flank a viable thing to do in a classic archer + cav TG after doing archers in feudal age? Or is the transition to slow and to costly as you need to gather the stone for the castle? Is the lack of eco upgrades to bad and archery bonuses to decisive so they will always be behind against classic flanks like britons, ethiopians, mayans or vikings and going genuese won't change much?

    In my opinion it is fine if you will play agressive. You need to profit from the power spike you get in the fights when you have massed like 30 genuese crossbow. That being said if you are allready to much behind and the enemy has massed enough normal crossbows and has a strong eco behind that the italians will struggle for sure.

    submitted by /u/NaniVitani
    [link] [comments]

    I wish Empire Wars started just a little earlier in the game

    Posted: 12 May 2021 07:37 AM PDT

    The idea of a game mode where you get to the action sooner is very appealing to me. A lot of dark age is pretty repetitive, and Age of Empires is already a longish game by competitive RTS standards. But I feel that Empire Wars cuts out not only the repetitive parts, but also some really important decision points.

    The facts that you already have a gold mine, that you can't have made militia on your way up to Feudal, and that you are ready to start making Feudal buildings but don't know where your opponent lives all take away from the diversity of Feudal options -- you can't really go Scouts or M@A as effectively, so it really feels like you're playing Archer Wars. If this gamemode just started you off at a typical 20 pop Dark Age, give or take, I would find it a lot more interesting

    submitted by /u/CrocodileSword
    [link] [comments]

    Feudal only in ranked?

    Posted: 12 May 2021 04:16 AM PDT

    I just played a ranked 1v1 on golden pit and I was behind when I went into castle age, but then the other guy gave me grief saying it was a feudal only game, said he reported me for cheating and then resigned while he was ahead?

    I have never heard of this, what was going on? Am I missing something or was he trolling

    submitted by /u/davidnio42
    [link] [comments]

    Civilization Match-up Discussion Round 11 Week 18: Britons vs Cumans

    Posted: 11 May 2021 09:19 PM PDT

    A civ that everyone knows and loves... vs Cumans! Kappa

    ​

    Hello and welcome back for another Age of Empires 2 civilization match up discussion! This is a series where we discuss the various advantages, disadvantages, and quirks found within the numerous match ups of the game. The goal is to collectively gain a deeper understanding of how two civilizations interact with each other in a variety of different settings. Feel free to ask questions, pose strategies, or provide insight on how the two civilizations in question interact with each other on any map type and game mode. This is not limited to 1v1 either. Feel free to discuss how the civilizations compare in team games as well! So long as you are talking about how the two civilizations interact, anything is fair game! Last week we discussed the Franks vs Lithuanians, and next up is the Britons vs Cumans!

    ​

    Britons: Foot Archer civilization

    • Town Centers cost -50% wood starting in Castle Age
    • Archer-line and Longbowmen gain +1/+2 range in Castle/Imperial Age
    • Shepherds work +25% faster
    • TEAM BONUS: Archery Ranges work +20% faster
    • Unique Unit: Longbowman (Powerful long-range foot archer)
    • Castle Age Unique Tech: Yeoman (Foot archers gain +1 range; towers gain +2 attack)
    • Imperial Age Unique Tech: Warwolf (Trebuchets 100% accurate, deal blast damage in 0.5 tile radius)

    ​

    Cumans: Cavalry civilization

    • One additional Town Center may be constructed in Feudal Age
    • Siege Workshop and Battering Rams available in Feudal Age; Capped Ram available in Castle Age
    • Cavalry move +5/10/15% in Feudal/Castle/Imperial Age
    • TEAM BONUS: Palisade Walls +33% hp
    • Unique Unit: Kipchak (Cheap, nimble cavalry archer that fires multiple arrows at once)
    • Castle Age Unique Tech: Steppe Husbandry (Scout-line, Cav Archers, and Steppe Lancers train +100% faster)
    • Imperial Age Unique Tech: Cuman Mercenaries (All team members can create 10 free Elite Kipchaks at the Castle)

    ​

    Below are some match up-specific talking points to get you all started. These are just to give people ideas, you do not need to address them specifically if you do not want to!

    • Okay, so this is going to be a weird one lol. For 1v1 on open maps, Britons are, and have always been, a strong choice. You have relevant bonuses at all stages of the game, and your archers can take amazing engagements with good micro. Cumans meanwhile... require you to do things a bit differently. You can have an amazing economy, but you are somewhat predictable. However, the Cuman army is far more mobile than the Briton army. Can the Cuman player ever reliably survive early-midgame to get there?
    • On closed maps, things get interesting. Britons, again, are a really strong choice for pretty much the same reasons as open maps, but with the additional bonus of mobility not being as important as open maps. Cumans, however, can freely boom to their heart's content. Will they be able to get to an army to match Britons in a head-to-head fight though?

    Thanks as always for participating! Next week we will continue our discussions with the Burmese vs Tatars. Hope to see you there! :)

    ​

    Previous discussions: Part 1 Part 2 Part 3

    submitted by /u/OrnLu528
    [link] [comments]

    aoe2 in 1920p (voobly),any fix to these blue spots?

    Posted: 12 May 2021 03:25 AM PDT

    AoE2 DE is so advanced sometimes triggers just break

    Posted: 12 May 2021 12:21 AM PDT

    21 POP Man at Arms into Archers

    Posted: 12 May 2021 02:16 AM PDT

    So I've been working on adapting my generic civ version of the 21 pop man at arms into archers to a build order for Ethiopians.

    With the generic civ, I'd struggle quite a bit to get a decent time for the end point of double range and fletching, often finding it difficult to afford fletching quickly due to the wood requirements just after clicking up to feudal. I'd hit that be point at a lit 15:10

    BUT with the ETHIOPIANS I've had no such problems! :D and we can hit it at around 14:00

    I'm really proud of this following build order, but I know things can often always be ammended tweaked and improved and that where I'm hoping you'll be coming in to help me!!

    Suggestions very most welcome for better optimisation of the build if you have any :)

    https://youtu.be/ESB1GLPvbUk

    submitted by /u/Aoeleagues
    [link] [comments]

    Need help creating a scenario

    Posted: 12 May 2021 05:38 AM PDT

    How can I award a bonus to a specific player when that player kills a specific unit?

    submitted by /u/Psychological_Tax407
    [link] [comments]

    aoe2 scenario editor- getting resources for killing enemies?

    Posted: 12 May 2021 07:31 AM PDT

    Does anyone know how to do this, or can you point me in the right direction?

    submitted by /u/Tav534
    [link] [comments]

    Hera wins tournament with Inca rush in Castle Age. The devs did not see this coming. Microsoft at a loss, their stock is decreasing. This is mind boggling stuff.

    Posted: 11 May 2021 09:28 AM PDT

    Hmmmmm

    Posted: 11 May 2021 01:25 PM PDT

    Ethiopians or Italians on Arabia, 1v1 or TG as Flank option?

    Posted: 12 May 2021 06:18 AM PDT

    I was reading a post from another user talking about Italians on Flank in TG, and wanted to make another, separate discussion, comparing them to Ethiopians, who are used more than Italians as Archer civ on Arabia in 1v1, but TG as well. Here are some of the discounts these two civs have, so why do you guys think Ethiopians are used more on Arabia? Is faster fire Archers that better?

    I like Italians as Flank civ, but in general as Archers civ on Arabia too. Yes, they lack early Archer unique upgrades or bonuses, but get other eco bonuses in every age and Pavise in Imp is a great tech. For instance, comparing them to Ethiopians, they don't look that bad, main difference is faster fire rate of Ethiopians. In next few lines, you can see the difference in eco bonuses.

    Ethi:

    F: 100f + 100g

    C: 100f + 100g

    Imp: 100f + 100g

    In total: 300f and 300g

    Ita:

    F: 75f

    C: 120f + 30g

    Imp: 150f + 120g

    Balistics: 99w + 58g

    Chemistry: 99f + 66g

    In total: 345f, 274g and 99w

    You can look at differently, but Ethiopians only get 100f and 100g until hitting Castle Age, while Italians have 195f and 30g in that same time, because of cheaper advancing to castle age. Also, if you are playing archers, Balistics early in Castle age and Chemistry early in Imperial is something you can get easier with Italians, because of the discount they have. Other University techs are cheaper as well (Masonry and Architecture for instance, and they are researched almost always), so that saving with Italians can be even bigger.

    In all ages, faster fire of Ethiopians is for sure a big thing, but with Pavise, their advantage is not that big anymore, at least compared to Italians.

    Also, many can argue that it will be easier to switch to Inf or Cav counter with Italians, because, if you are playing Archers, you already have everything you need for Genoese Crossbowman, and for Shotel Warrior to be effective, you need Blacksmith Infantry upgrades, and Barracks upgrades as well, and that takes time and resources as well. Of course, Shotels are created faster.

    Also, Italians have a little better Hussars, and that helps late game as well, especially because all their unites (Archers and Genoese if needed) are not needing food.

    Early aggression with M&A and faster fire archers is probably something that helps Ethiopians more, and that is the reason why pro players are using them more. But, last patch helped Italians a bit on Arabia, so maybe they are even stronger now on Arabia then before.

    So guys, what are your thoughts?

    submitted by /u/KingPupk
    [link] [comments]
    Read more
    at

    No comments:

    Post a Comment