Do they? I don’t recall Blizzard making arbitrary balance changes while there are resource exploits, map bugs, etc. If they did, and if your exaggerated all rts games do this, then they’re all doing it wrong and we should not perpetuate a bad practice on the grounds of tradition. That’s completely illogical.
It isn’t. You fix your game breaking bugs, then you consider concepts like balance. Anything else is flat out doing it wrong. There might be some very specific exceptions, like I do agree with altering how the spearman anti-horse stuff works so that you don’t have to hold position and the horses just walk around it; but golden rule is Bugs before Feature Enhancements.
I think we mostly agree here, I still say it’s bad engineering to not fix glaring bugs before trying to balance; and the weirdness of the balance decisions reflect unsurity. I don’t blame them for being unsure of what to change, I would be too if the game states of my game were broken. But that’s why I would refuse to adjust 99% of the game until the major bugs are fixed.
Broodlords had buggy range for years. Tankivaks were considered a bug by them. I remember blizzard certainly keeping in bugs while doing patches.
These days, Blizzard keeps cheaters around and doesn’t do any patches anyway.
I’m not saying the best way to go about it is to fix bugs slowly, but they are doing it at an ok speed. I wish it was faster, but what can we do. It’s heavily supported right now.
If I was the lead developer, I’d want 100% of the bugs fixed on this patch and then focus on balance issues as well. In fact, I would have fixed them in beta. I do not know if they are having trouble with some of them or don’t prioritize it, but I’m confident that they will all be fixed within a few weeks, based on how much they are trying to be attentive to their consumer base otherwise.
Longtime AoE fan, but a dozen nearly identical civs with a handful of unique units will never match the complexity, aesthetic, or entertainment value of an RTS with 3 unique races. I’ll trade perfect balance for the benefits of BW or SC2’s’ asymmetry.
I ran into AOE4 with Lowko playing some and Lowko+WinterStarCraft playing as a team. Also later on I found Trump HS (Hearthstone) playing some.
interesting to watch
it was cool hearing the game people speak in their native languages
didn’t really look too close at interface to get an opinion
I liked the slower pace of game play and strategy of how to attack
the many win conditions are fascinating
neat graphics
Overall, a neat game to watch for a bit here and there. It’s not something I’d want to get into as I don’t really play RTS’s that much anymore. I will Jump into StarCraft II every few weeks or months here and there. Finally got ranked again! Huzzah Silver 2 after 5 losses. Not sure I wanna go back yet.
It may be hard to find a new RTS to pull me into. StarCraft exploded into my life in my mid teenage years, and I haven’t gone a week without thinking about the lore and game play since.
I think I’ve seen some Supreme Commander before. Really slow combat pace. Hills and such. Hard to recall what I saw. Fantastic graphics. Hero units? I think.
Yeah they did a prod release of an incomplete product without the bare-minimum features for ranked and now they’re doing a second beta release of that bare-minimum product well after the hype for it died.
It’s actually kind of impressive how they managed to bungle a release that could have been more successful if it had been yet another AoE2 copy paste job
They just didn’t it to hit the “competitive” RTS scene, so they only originally made it “for fun” as thats been the AoE franchise before AoE4, just for fun without thinking too much about balance.
when AoE4 became a sensation among compeitive RTS players, they were caught off guard and are trying to keep up to date on what a balanced RTS actually consists of.
Depends on how well it’s supposrted. If is well supported, then it should stay in at least “ok” form. If it’s ever abandoned, it will die extremely quickly because it’s clear there is still a lot of balancing left.
It’s one of my favorites right now because I don’t have time to practice mechanics day in and day out like you need for SC2.
It looks slow when watching, but I always felt like it played pretty fast when you’re actually the one in control.
Really? Because the Devs when speaking on streams before release they were singing the opposite tune. They wanted this to be a success competitively. They were also very aware of AoE2’s professional scene.
AoE4 is also not really a sensation among competitive RTS players. It’s already fallen well below current SC2 levels of play and viewership. The number of daily games is staggeringly low for such a recent RTS. It could have been a lot better if the Devs had fixed bugs and created a stable game before worrying about balance but for some reason they thought adjusting balance figures while game breaking bugs weren’t fixed was the right move.
But you are right that AoE4 is a lot more fun if you’re going into it non-competitively. It’s a fun game to drink to with a small group of friends and play together. But that’s about it.
They may have wanted it to be competitive, but didn’t expect it to be as popular. They knew they had to tune up their balancing issues and all that after the release. It should have been done in beat, without a doubt.
I was looking up how to do some stretching for in between SC ladder games and thought of you. Do you remember that time you were convinced ripped 6 pack abs always show while simultaneously claiming to be a doctor? Lmao. Here is “Strength Side” on YouTube explaining how to stretch your quads:
https://i.imgur.com/kQuxfRc.png
He gives some excellent stretching advice. You can do it inbetween ladder games. I’ll bet those muscles get stiff playing SC 16 hours a day. But, you really should get out of your house more, “doc”:
P:S: the key to low bodyfat is a high caffeine and low carb intake:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30335479/
For every doubling in caffeine intake, the mean reduction in weight, BMI, and fat mass increased 2 Beta-fold (20.29 = 1.22, 20.23 = 1.17, and 20.36 = 1.28), which corresponding to 22, 17, and 28 percent, respectively. Overall, the current meta-analysis demonstrated that caffeine intake might promote weight, BMI and body fat reduction.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK499830/
A recent systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing the long-term effects (greater than 1 year) of dietary interventions on weight loss showed no sound evidence for recommending low-fat diets. In fact, low-carbohydrate diets led to significantly greater weight loss compared to low-fat interventions. It was observed that a carbohydrate-restricted diet is better than a low-fat diet for retaining an individual’s BMR. In other words, the quality of calories consumed may affect the number of calories burned. BMR dropped by more than 400 kcal/day on a low-fat diet when compared to a very low-carb diet.
I’ve known for several years that abs exist on everyone (as its muscles we all have), that we can work them out, but the amount of body fat can allow them to seen more clearly.
I.e. you can workout abs, but if you dont lose body fat they won’t be as visible.
I don’t think physicians research the best bodybuilder methods beyond that. Physicians deal with a tremendous amount of diabetic patients. We tell patients simple things “lose weight, diet, etc.”, “here is a referral to a dietician”, and “we refilled your diabetic medication”.
It’s extremely rare to come across someone with long-term diabetic problems who want to become much more healthy. If they did, they wouldn’t be in said situation in the first place.
I wouldn’t advise using this as a deterrent (rather using it as a fact), but diabetic patients respond to “if you don’t lose weight and diet, you’ll lose a leg”, better than even “If you don’t lose weight and diet, you’ll die”.
Diabetic patients care more about losing a limb than dying, at least that what was taught by the other physicians. I believe there is research articles on it somewhere.
