Community Forums > General > Suggestions & New Game Support > Small Balance Changes To Fix Voobly Ladder Deception

Small Balance Changes To Fix Voobly Ladder Deception

Poll: Are with these Changes ?
Yes
No
 GregStein


Group: Gold Membership
Join Date: 4 September 2012
Posts:401
Edited 13 June 2017 - 10:04 am by GregStein
How many games have you lost because you didn't find your sheep?

How many villagers have you lost to boars on a weekly basis? Why are 14++ and 15++ a significantly good players but yet downrated ?

Why would overrated players make use of cheap and fast built walls to win games without any effort?


Voobly RM Medieval Siege Lobby has been for a very long time a battlefield where passionate medium to skilled players compete and have fun. Sadly, So many issues have NOT been addressed to improve the multiplayer experience and make players enjoy the game to its full potential.

Solutions ?
Without further redo; Here are answers/solutions to all questions listed above:

(1) How many games have you lost because you didn't find your sheep?

- Standard maps generations should spawn starting sheep nearby town centers. (This fix allows players to have a fair start and hence a true competitive gameplay.)

(2) How many villagers have you lost to boars on a weekly basis?

-Reduce boar damage to non-loomed villagers. (Losing villagers to boars in lag is not fair for anyone, Villagers are supposed to be picked off by enemy units, not by a resource (boar)

(3) Why would overrated players make use of cheap and fast built walls to win games without any effort?

-Increase walls cost + build time. (AOE2 as an RTS game is meant to be macro-micro oriented. Walls limit the game aspects and provide unfair advantage especially in situations where maps are NOT generated in a correspondingly equal manner).

(4) Why are 14++ and 15++ a significantly good players but yet downrated ?

- 14++ and 15++ are going to climb in the ladder fair in square thanks to (1) & (2) & (3)

As another positive result, Players who have moved in from New player Lobby will get to truly play an opponent that is not as good as 14++ and 15++.
Link | Reply | Quote
 ['RB']nhoobish


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 8 August 2010
Posts:2795
Posted 13 June 2017 - 3:57 pm
1) Someone would have to simply change the maximum distance from player start area in the .rms file and call the file Easy Arabia or something. Voobly would have to provide a pack of new player-friendly custom .rms files then.

2) and 3) would be obviously made as a modification, however, this should not be forced.

4) You cannot do anything about it, since that is how ELO works. It generates the ladder around the entry rating and falling below the entry rating is not restricted by the calculations. Even if there was an option to choose from 3 different entry ratings such as 1200, 1400 and 1600, the average points per player would start to drop below current 1600 average, meaning the 13xx 14xx rated players would be pushed even farther down and ultimately nothing changes, just the numbers people complain about.
Link | Reply | Quote
 GregStein


Group: Gold Membership
Join Date: 4 September 2012
Posts:401
Posted 13 June 2017 - 5:05 pm
Bugs and unbalances such as these are intolerable in an RTS game - As if you were to play Chess with random missing pieces every game.

You have to open your mind to a positive change that can improve the gameplay and make AOE2 more fun to play.
Link | Reply | Quote
 +Jaraldo


Group: VCOM Lead
Join Date: 26 September 2009
Posts:201
Edited 13 June 2017 - 7:03 pm by +Jaraldo
Hey,
  1. Many options are already available now to fix this and applying these kind of beneficial changes to the standard maps should be done sooner than later imo.
  2. Wait for 1.5UP release/results first
  3. Wait for 1.5UP release/results first
  4. This is closer to a player problem and not one of the game's design. The same argument comes up in LoL with "elo-hell" and the truth is that the opponents of the 1400-1500's suffer from the same handicaps, meaning there is really no disparity in fairness.
    Other clients/games have tried to tackle player issues, but it's a question of whether Voobly wants to "steer" it's playerbase or not.
    Not to mention that with many changes in the last years, the rating system has taken a beating and it partial caused these better 1600 players' ratings to drop to 1400/1500.
Link | Reply | Quote
 GregStein


Group: Gold Membership
Join Date: 4 September 2012
Posts:401
Edited 14 June 2017 - 12:04 am by GregStein
+Jaraldo wrote:
Hey,
  1. Many options are already available now to fix this and applying these kind of beneficial changes to the standard maps should be done sooner than later imo.
  2. Wait for 1.5UP release/results first
  3. Wait for 1.5UP release/results first
  4. This is closer to a player problem and not one of the game's design. The same argument comes up in LoL with "elo-hell" and the truth is that the opponents of the 1400-1500's suffer from the same handicaps, meaning there is really no disparity in fairness.
    Other clients/games have tried to tackle player issues, but it's a question of whether Voobly wants to "steer" it's playerbase or not.
    Not to mention that with many changes in the last years, the rating system has taken a beating and it partial caused these better 1600 players' ratings to drop to 1400/1500.

1.5UP Patch is a blast to embrace. But still, these minor changes should be considered. Remember Patch 1.0c they gave scouts +2 attack. Look How it turned out since then. Players adapted a whole new build order and games are now so much better and faster than trash wars in 2000s.

Take a look at a very successful RTS game 'Starcraft 2' .. Did You know that Viper is a Grand Master (which is Top player) in Starcraft 2 ? Check out the cheering public in 2016 WCS championship of Starcraft 2: [You must login to view link]
You will be shocked how starcraft 2 is similar to age of empires 2 Otherwise viper, and other players wouldn't be playing it and enjoying it.

What does age of empires 2 have ? Autism Players ready to flame and BabyRage at any second to a good change in the game. Whereas Starcraft 2 Itself with a base of over 2 millions players get monthly BALANCE UPDATES (Last patched: 5/22/2017 [You must login to view link] )
Changes are meant to make the game fun and fair. Not pleasing to Autistic/Non-open to change players.
Link | Reply | Quote
 kwin


Group: Platinum Membership
Join Date: 21 November 2012
Posts:713
Posted 14 June 2017 - 2:37 am
I totally disagree...

1: NO, If you loose a game because you can't find your sheeps, start learning how to find them. Finding sheeps is a part of the game, keep it so if you want to keep AOC popular, what you suggest looks nice, but it's too easy. There is a reason why this 15 year old game is still popular.

2: NO, similar answer as in 1.

3: NO, again similar answer as in 1.

4: I disagree, 14++ and 15++ players are downrated for other reasons, 1/2/3 will not fix that...

Sorry, just my opinion...
Link | Reply | Quote
 GregStein


Group: Gold Membership
Join Date: 4 September 2012
Posts:401
Posted 14 June 2017 - 6:18 am
kwin wrote:
I totally disagree...

1: NO, If you loose a game because you can't find your sheeps, start learning how to find them.

Could you teach me how to find sheep?

lololol
You must login into Voobly to view image
Link | Reply | Quote
 ['RB']nhoobish


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 8 August 2010
Posts:2795
Posted 14 June 2017 - 7:42 am
GregStein wrote:
Bugs and unbalances such as these are intolerable in an RTS game - As if you were to play Chess with random missing pieces every game.

These are not bugs what you speak of, nor unbalances. The way random map scripts work are related to its creator, if the creator desires to have far sheep then so be it. You do not have to touch those maps, or perhaps simply ask someone for a remake or a small adjustment from the community. I am convinced that many players map scouting as skill itself that has perfect purpose thanks to randomized and close or far resourse locations.

The way buildings in work in general could be called a bug, that a 2 HP Barracks is impassable, eventhough it barely exists, but that is something about the game engine itself. The developers of course had to compromise with resource costs and build time in order to achieve something they would deem balanced and with it not lose the effectiveness or goal of the building.
Link | Reply | Quote
 GregStein


Group: Gold Membership
Join Date: 4 September 2012
Posts:401
Posted 14 June 2017 - 8:41 am
These are not bugs what you speak of, nor unbalances. The way random map scripts work are related to its creator, if the creator desires to have far sheep then so be it. You do not have to touch those maps, or perhaps simply ask someone for a remake or a small adjustment from the community. I am convinced that many players map scouting as skill itself that has perfect purpose thanks to randomized and close or far resourse locations.

The way buildings in work in general could be called a bug, that a 2 HP Barracks is impassable, eventhough it barely exists, but that is something about the game engine itself. The developers of course had to compromise with resource costs and build time in order to achieve something they would deem balanced and with it not lose the effectiveness or goal of the building.

Any coding or development project is bound to bugs even if the debugging continues for centuries they will always be other bugs occurring.

You must login into Voobly to view image


The developers of AOE 2 must have been bright enough to make the game as fair as possible otherwise It would not be RTS.

Probably buildings that catch fire should slowly lose HP, but then again how are going to pass along this logic if we can not put minor changes.

Anyhow, I discussed this thread with Jaraldo, and he spoke some sense to me that we should wait for 1.5UP.
Link | Reply | Quote
 kwin


Group: Platinum Membership
Join Date: 21 November 2012
Posts:713
Posted 14 June 2017 - 4:46 pm
GregStein wrote:
Could you teach me how to find sheep?

lololol
You must login into Voobly to view image

You are much higher rated then I am, so I am sure you know better then me how to find those sheep's ^^

It's always possible that you have bad luck and you don't find 2 sheep or enemy find them before you do, but again, that's a part of the game that makes AOC what it is...

I loose many games because my 86 year old mother come talking to me while I am playing, that's not fair, and so I have to???

It's only a game, and change is not always good...
Link | Reply | Quote
 +Jaraldo


Group: VCOM Lead
Join Date: 26 September 2009
Posts:201
Edited 14 June 2017 - 6:16 pm by +Jaraldo
kwin wrote:
There is a reason why this 15 year old game is still popular.

Yes, it's popular because it has a variety of settings, is based on a very niche timeline compared to today's games and has huge nostalgia factor. Not to mention it has an enthusiastic and active community. (hint: nothing to do with balance)
kwin wrote:
I totally disagree...

1: NO, If you loose a game because you can't find your sheeps, start learning how to find them. Finding sheeps is a part of the game

Greg's argument was flawed on that point and you are only building on his mistake. People may not lose games because of not finding sheep, and they certainly aren't stuck at 1500 rating because of it, but not finding early sheep and having to constantly force drop or get early loom is a noticeable disadvantage. The same is with having a boar on a large hill 20 tiles from your base and having to loom while the other player doesn't.

This doesn't effect lower rated players as much because they can not abuse such advantages consistently. But at the top of the ladder these issues are significant enough to take notice of.

AoC is 100x more competitive now than it was in 2001, when eSports was barely starting, and so all these luck-based problems that effect higher rated players should at least start to be looked at as a bare-minimum starting point.
kwin wrote:
It's only a game, and change is not always good...
In the gaming/tech industry it's actually the opposite. No change = stagnation

We don't have to have biweekly updates like League of Legends, but some basic balance changes would be nice. If the AoE1, AoE3 and AoM communities all now play and support fan-made patches that improve the game, why is the biggest Age community so against any change? Even HD has balance changes and is popular, so your theory doesn't make sense.
Link | Reply | Quote
 ['RB']nhoobish


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 8 August 2010
Posts:2795
Posted 14 June 2017 - 6:25 pm
Opinion versus opinion. This discussion is pointless and should anything come out of it, I sincerely hope it will be an optional "update" or "change".
Link | Reply | Quote
 +[email protected]


Group: Game Moderation Lead
Join Date: 11 July 2009
Posts:13576
Posted 14 June 2017 - 6:40 pm
Play blackforest, finding sheep np.

;lol ;flowers
Link | Reply | Quote
 +Jaraldo


Group: VCOM Lead
Join Date: 26 September 2009
Posts:201
Edited 14 June 2017 - 6:53 pm by +Jaraldo
I sincerely hope it will be an optional "update" or "change".

I think many people over-dramatize this concern a lot. Even with something that didn't touch balance such as 1.4UP (was made default), if someone dislikes those changes, they have the option to play 1.0c if they wish. I haven't seen any patch released so far that doesn't also apply to that logic. It would be fairly immoral to not allow someone the option to play the version of the game they purchased after all.
Opinion versus opinion.

Balance is technically subjective, yes, but all the arguments to not change the game can be inverted and applied to why the game should have some change.

"change is bad" "change is good"
"change imbalances the game" "change balances the game"
etc

The reality is the status-quo atm is playing 1.0c balance with no real alternative for anyone wanting more balance besides going to buy HD and it's expansion (when considering playerbases). The discussion is relevant from that stand-point alone.
Link | Reply | Quote
 kwin


Group: Platinum Membership
Join Date: 21 November 2012
Posts:713
Edited 14 June 2017 - 9:43 pm by kwin
About 1 and 2, there are enough mapmakers who can make the exact same arabia map but with sheeps and boars close to the TC, I would be surprised if nobody made that map yet, but I would not prefer to play that map, even if it means that I loose many games because it's sometimes more difficult to find sheep/boar for me then for my enemy, there is no patch needed for this, only another map...

Personally, I don't think many players would play that map...

(And I was saying in my post "change is not ALWAYS good". The word always is there for a reason)

Anyway, I just say my opinion, It's nice if you agree, but If you don't agree, that's np at all :)
I suppose the topic starter made this topic to see what other people think of it, well, I just told here what I think of it...


Link | Reply | Quote
[1]23
Displaying 1 - 15 out of 39 posts
Forum Jump:
1 User(s) are reading this topic (in the past 30 minutes)
0 members, 1 guests

Most active threads in past week: