Why is everyone playing some custom green ara like its 2005, asking me to put MQ and doing m@a everygame... Seriously, I began to miss aoc hunwars...
we can justify the elo inflation to this factor.
Yeah, I miss them too. Today's play is a pansy style tbh.
Like Ra said, "There's no big plays in aoc anymore, only small plays."
You guys remind me of grandpas who cherish the days of their youth and complain about how everything was better then than today.The m@a rush is the new meta sadly, even 1300 are doing it every single game, from 17++ to 2k they just add towers to the equation to make it as boring as possible.
The maps well i agree i dislike hcup2 ara and others because it benefits trushes due the small woods.
The random civs thing is more messy than in aoc, there are more OP civs now so it is about getting lucky with the civs, we can justify the elo inflation to this factor.
But with the gates and the current meta, its gonna be hard to go back to the open sc wars.
Well true, meta might change but MQ and custom maps are not meta. And it is quite big change of mechanics of game.You guys remind me of grandpas who cherish the days of their youth and complain about how everything was better then than today.
I also prefer stabdard ara. All those custom ara maps put the deer in ur tc. Nothing like some good old trash desert ara map where everyone goes yolo aggressiveWell true, meta might change but MQ and custom maps are not meta. And it is quite big change of mechanics of game.
You guys remind me of grandpas who cherish the days of their youth and complain about how everything was better then than today.
Everything changes, whether you like it or not. The meta is constantly changing, and might be different tomorrow. You might not like it but it's bound to change. If you want to play hun wars like the old days, host one. I'm sure you will find an opponent. Or just embrace the change.
Good to knowI just hate m@a openings, never doing then and just die to m@a every game...
Well month or two ago i told u Guys we have to do like random groups of civs. If someone got aztec he have to play vs slav mayans or franks and if u get vitnamese or saracen u play vs persian or teuton. Ita terrible to play aztec vs saracen or something like it.As a guy who loved the old hun war style and played thousands of them, I agree the new meta game and popular styles are very different. I think though, that most changes are for the better, simply due to the diversity of strategies that u see in random civ games. I disagree that maa openings is the only thing we see. Sure its popular, but it's quite easy to defend against especially if u can anticipate it. In my eyes there are at least 5 openings that can consistently win u games, and it's interesting to see different civs using different openings go at each other.
My only criticism of 1v1 random civ arabia games, is how often we see pure civ wins. I'm not talking about getting a slightly better civ, but rather civ matchups that are pretty much impossible to win. Example Aztecs vs vietnamese. Other than that, I'd strongly argue that what we play today is far better and more diverse than the old hun war era. It also makes u a more well rounded player since u are forced to play and interact with a variety of civs.
As far as maps go, I dont mind any Arabia but I usually stay away from the standard one cuz the oasis' in the wood lines can be very unfair.
Lastly MQ IS the standard now, no debate here imo.
I think its because the full wal strategy is so meta nowadays. pretty much everone fully walls, and if you play standard arabia and you get a bad map vs some map that is wallable, its just annoying.
So people move to a map that is always wallable to make it more fair.
I agree that dealing with rng is a very important skill in aoe2 but there is limitations to what kind of rng you can deal with unless you are a far better player.
But yeah its kinda boring now i agree 11, its why i dont play much any more.
Still dont think 1x1 ara hun war every game is going to be more interesting though
Well my "began to miss aoc hunwars" was rather sarcastic remark not entirely true.As a guy who loved the old hun war style and played thousands of them, I agree the new meta game and popular styles are very different. I think though, that most changes are for the better, simply due to the diversity of strategies that u see in random civ games. I disagree that maa openings is the only thing we see. Sure its popular, but it's quite easy to defend against especially if u can anticipate it. In my eyes there are at least 5 openings that can consistently win u games, and it's interesting to see different civs using different openings go at each other.
My only criticism of 1v1 random civ arabia games, is how often we see pure civ wins. I'm not talking about getting a slightly better civ, but rather civ matchups that are pretty much impossible to win. Example Aztecs vs vietnamese. Other than that, I'd strongly argue that what we play today is far better and more diverse than the old hun war era. It also makes u a more well rounded player since u are forced to play and interact with a variety of civs.
As far as maps go, I dont mind any Arabia but I usually stay away from the standard one cuz the oasis' in the wood lines can be very unfair.
Lastly MQ IS the standard now, no debate here imo.
Where is MQ standart? In Voobly it's SQ by default. Play on SQ and make your own touraments with SQ only. Gl hf!Yes I see MQ is standard but my question is why is it standard? Who made that decision and why?