You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

General Discussions
Moderated by Maffia, LordKivlov, JimXIX

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.31 replies
Age of Empires III Heaven » Forums » General Discussions » ES blowing smoke, Booming=Rusher, big joke
Bottom
Topic Subject:ES blowing smoke, Booming=Rusher, big joke
« Previous Page  1 2  Next Page »
putdownpete
Banned
posted 02-21-05 01:52 AM EDT (US)         
Every AOE game has featured the same quality. Rushers win. Boomers lose. Turtlers don't bother playing the game 'cause it's no fun.

So ES is blowing smoke up our proverbial butts. The chances of AOE3 having any booming strategy that amounts to anything is ridiculous. Its just an ES lure to bring boomers to the game, because they know how much RUSHERS love killing boomers. So, what do we see? We see that ALL RTS games are rushing games.

When rushers win, a boomers men lie dead and buildings destroyed. When a boomer wins, his bank account is bigger, wow, what an ego boost. LOL.

And making turtling fun is IMPOSSIBLE. "I won cause I built more towers than you and had 100,000 gold." What a comeback. NOT.

So the formula at every AOE game is the same. Find the rushing formula. Humiliate the boomer. Gloat. Build clans of rushers. Gloat more. Its endless.

Land Nomad was AOK2's salvation. Rushing was much less succesful due to the unpredictability of the map situation and the capacity to build better defensive positions.

We quickly saw that rushers were over-rated. But ...

Still, even in LN there wasn't really an effective strategy for winning as a boomer that didn't mimic the rushers strategy. Which is, kill everybody, destroy the buildings. So why bother to boom if the end result is the same?

Better booming strategies for winning would be wholescale losses of men, equipment and economic units to the successful boomer. The boomer should be able to 'bribe' attacking units. Unsuccessful rushers should see their uneconomic lands 'rebel' and join the boomers side.

Get too far behind as a rusher and PRESTO, some of your economic units 'rebel' and join the boomer.

A successful boomer should win a bloodless victory. The lands of the unsuccessful rusher would simply 'defect' and the rusher would find himself without any resources. His final moments would not be to see his last men killed, his last building destroyed.

No, the last moments of the rusher would be to see himself arrested, his accounts seized, and his lot to be in an inmate in some squalid prison.

Like in real life.


AuthorReplies:
beekay
Skirmisher
(id: black_knight_101)
posted 02-21-05 03:02 AM EDT (US)     1 / 31       
...And your solution?

sig
Fwiffo del desierto
Skirmisher
(id: Fwiffo)
posted 02-21-05 03:15 AM EDT (US)     2 / 31       
umm, booming owns in aot. It's way more effective than rushing. And while I never played aoc a lot, I always figured booming was a viable tactic there depending on the map. After all, people can make 5 tcs and 120 vils.

Everyone got AIDS and shit
nz_upy
Skirmisher
posted 02-21-05 04:41 AM EDT (US)     3 / 31       
If rushers win all the time how do the games get to last so long, me personally have played 2hr+ games.
This is primarally(?) a game of warfare, if you want to have bloodless victories then go play Civ3.

In a 1v1 your goal is to wipe the other player off the map,
Of which there are many viable strategies.
Far be it to become a game where micromanagement determines the victor, but controlling your military is and integral part of the game.
Go play Tycoon games if bloodless is your goal.

beekay
Skirmisher
(id: black_knight_101)
posted 02-21-05 04:50 AM EDT (US)     4 / 31       

Quote:

So why bother to boom if the end result is the same?

...Sometimes I wonder about this forum.


sig
nz_upy
Skirmisher
posted 02-21-05 04:57 AM EDT (US)     5 / 31       
Only sometimes?
It perplexes me at all times with the glaring inconsistencies of common sense and reason.
beekay
Skirmisher
(id: black_knight_101)
posted 02-21-05 04:58 AM EDT (US)     6 / 31       

Quote:

It perplexes me at all times with the glaring inconsistencies of common sense and reason.

Quoted for truth.


sig
barley_n_oats
Skirmisher
posted 02-21-05 05:34 AM EDT (US)     7 / 31       
Sounds like someone lost to a couple rushes and was rejected by a clan...

It makes sense. Rushers always have more fun because newer players always will 'turtle' or 'boom.' There should be a viable defense that can disable a rusher more.

-Say a rush is successful, then the rusher is able to cripple the other player.
-But if a rush fails, the rusher him/herself is not affected adversely as much.

The risk taken in the beginning should be more equal. Personally, I am a fan of the rush.


ESO: oats
ESO2: dirtyoatmeal
nz_upy
Skirmisher
posted 02-21-05 05:42 AM EDT (US)     8 / 31       
I am a fan of all out war from about the 10min mark if not before. Continuous battle as each player strives to expand and exert their authority on both the map and the other player.

I am not a fan of quick destruction.

Rookierookie
Banned
posted 02-21-05 06:17 AM EDT (US)     9 / 31       

Quote:

Boomers lose.


Guy, never played AOM before, decides to post without knowledge.
MoogleFish
Skirmisher
posted 02-21-05 07:21 AM EDT (US)     10 / 31       
I see where you are coming from Pete. In Theory Rush>Boom>Turtle>Rush. But does Turtling really beat the rush? Sure it may stop the rush from destroying you but then the Rusher will have map control and will just boom away and crush the Turtler with his superior forces.

However, in TT, Towncentres in classical allowed a turtler to also boom as his economy is protected despite being spread out, so therefore booming was made to be very viable. So really we should all be hoping that the rush is more effective in AoE3 than it is in TT (for example.)


ESO:NoFx__MoogleFish
Proud Co-leader of NoFx
Shiva
HG Alumnus
posted 02-21-05 08:41 AM EDT (US)     11 / 31       

Quote:

Every AOE game has featured the same quality. Rushers win. Boomers lose. Turtlers don't bother playing the game 'cause it's no fun.

Sorry man, but you lost all credibility when you wrote those three lines. Both Supremacy and Deathmatch in Age of Mythology made quick rushers vulnerable to those that knew how to Boom properly.

IMO, it's all varies on a Player-to-player basis, and one shouldn't make a generalized statement without backing it up.


.¸¸.· · .¸¸.·´ §hïvå | RágeOfHaemòn · .¸¸.· · .¸¸.·
« . ° ¤ Scenario Designer | Woad Creations ¤ º . »
Exilon
Skirmisher
posted 02-21-05 09:25 AM EDT (US)     12 / 31       
Does he even have any credibility? THe last 3 topics he made were just to flame ES.

He obviously is going with the whiners. When we see a topic on how AOE 3 is going to suck, he writes something along the line. Now the whiners moved on to rushing because they want to play Sim City and now he is complaining about rushing.


Meteor Shower = mini-ICBM Shower <-- Given
mini-ICBM x 20 = Nuclear Pwnage <-- Given
Pwnage = w00tage <-- Given
Meteor Shower = Nuclear w00tage <-- Transitional Property

[This message has been edited by Exilon (edited 02-21-2005 @ 09:25 AM).]

Adri
Skirmisher
posted 02-21-05 09:36 AM EDT (US)     13 / 31       
can anyone explane to me what a boomer and a Turtler is ?
I know what a rusher is and I always though that a boomer is a defensive player, but what is a turtler then ?
Blitzer_231
Skirmisher
posted 02-21-05 09:54 AM EDT (US)     14 / 31       
Why do people have to say a game sucks before it even comes out...

Click HERE if you need a spam blocker!! Click HERE if you love kittens and puppies!!
Click HERE if you believe in logic!! Click HERE if you plan to go outside!!
Anti-Climatic winner of LPW 17
Elpea needs your brain creativity
Adder
Fallen Angel
(id: The Adder)
posted 02-21-05 11:08 AM EDT (US)     15 / 31       

Quote:

can anyone explane to me what a boomer and a Turtler is ?


A boomer is someone who just focuses on eco for a long time. A turtler is someone who does eco but also builds defensive structures and units.

Adder |
"I would like to wonder if Adder always acts like a stuck up asshole?" - Coldviper
JackalRat
HG Alumnus
(id: BrandNewCar)
posted 02-21-05 11:23 AM EDT (US)     16 / 31       
First off a rush is by definition an attack your opponent is not ready for, else its an attack.

Secondly its about commanding armies, I dont know what kind of games you play but if you played aoc it'd prolly be Black Forest maps []. Since you can wall and boom more easily before attacking begins. The majority of people though like to control both army and economy together.

Bill.


Discworld Designer!
MY DESIGNS:-] 2002PTC Honourable mention, collaboration with Qazitory
Troll Bridge v1.3, Dragons Lair v1.1
Project Page
Supremacy
Skirmisher
posted 02-21-05 11:27 AM EDT (US)     17 / 31       
More detailed: Booming is focusing strongly on eco early so that you can pump out huge armies later. Turtling are those people who build insanly defense ie: in AoK build walls 20 rows thick and just build up behind it.

In response to what putdownpete said: Rushing is a really good strategy and yes to most players it seems to be the best. This is not the case, while a much more skilled player can beat a less skilled player easily with a rush it is not true if both know what they are doing. If a player rushes and it fails he then puts himself in a very bad position. The defender can then boom while rusher recovers and crush him 10 minutes later.

If you dont want people to win by economy then turn on conquest... ive never had someone win due t0 more gold.

The bloodless victory sounds stupid in my opinion, no offense. I would get real pissed off if I was attacking somone and suddenly I lost because my whole town "turned on me" and locked me up. Besides that would be insanly hard to put into a game and if you want that realise "like real life" you are forgetting alot. What about putting a town guard that was people who try to rebel against me i can use town guard to kill them or arrest them. Than the game becomes insanly complicated and you fight your self more than enemy. You would need like 5 players to control one civ.

I dont liek that idea and I see no problem with using a rushing type strategy or booming or even turtling, though i think turtling is very boring myself. You win wars by attacking when the opponent is the least capable of defending, whether this is really early: rush, or later due to your more powerful nation: boom.

fhertlein
Skirmisher
posted 02-21-05 11:38 AM EDT (US)     18 / 31       
I stink at rushing but I can survive most rushing attempts.

I think most rush complainers are the individuals that play 1v1 and get their behinds handed to them, compared with a 2v2 where a teammate can help out.

If a person can not survive a rush and keep their economy growing, then the game is going to end the same way regardless of what the boomer/turtler does.

Generally speaking, the better player will always win, whether they rush or boom. Most good players are not going to turtle.

As many people have stated over and over, put No Rush in the game title, or play in 3v3 games to increase your chances of survival.

Most 1v1 games will start with a rush strategy.

Defiler_of_INRI
Skirmisher
posted 02-21-05 12:22 PM EDT (US)     19 / 31       
Now now, let the poor man be. His words holds merit in the sence he represent a good bit of the new player who hasn't learned the basic of a RTS, with keeping the economy going, constantly upgrade etc.

Each time i play a new RTS, i always get the "YOU DAMN RUSHER!!!!!"

ES help out the poor players, by giving them a new game type "no rush in x minutes" just like the DM, RM, Lightning and Scenario, that would please all.

Suecotero
Skirmisher
posted 02-21-05 02:51 PM EDT (US)     20 / 31       
All this seems very noobish. What good strategist lets his enemy build uf his 200 pop army with all upgrades before attaccking? good players harass and raid the enemies enconomies WHILE teching/booming. Turtling = lose since you dont control the map and its resources, it just makes the game end slower. Defences are for defending enemy rushes or to force the battle in a position to your advantage. Its called MICRO/MACRO-MANAGMENT people something known since enternity by the pro starcraft and war3 communities. If you want es to make AoE into a game for people who dont want to fight before they have a pretty little army that isnt worth a damn vs a skilled player go and play simcity or something. I want a competitive game. All this "ow its imbalanced because the enemy attacked me before i wanted him to" is tiresome. Now there ARE some serius imbalances in rushing both in AoK and AoM, but that is because ES hasnt given enough attention to gameplay issues. All imba rushes are constatly being patched away in blizzard games for example. Dont get me wrong, i love age of empires and ES, but i was a little dissapointed at the gameplay in their latest titles. Now they have a chance of learning from mistakes. Sure early military vs teching/booming is important choice in any game, but it is a WAR game, its kill or get killed, get it?
Defiler_of_INRI
Skirmisher
posted 02-21-05 03:36 PM EDT (US)     21 / 31       

Quoted from Suecotero:

All this seems very noobish


Gee, guess what?! There is a large amount of noobs out there. They don't know about buildorders, they don't know about critical masses, they don't know about anything.

Back when i started, worth 1300 rating i was annoyed with the rushers joining my noob games bashing on me. I had hoped for a no rush feature, preventing just 1 guy to ruin a no rush noob game, but fortunaly i got better 1850+

Quoted from Suecotero:

What good strategist lets his enemy build uf his 200 pop army with all upgrades before attaccking? good players harass and raid the enemies enconomies WHILE teching/booming. Turtling = lose since you dont control the map and its resources, it just makes the game end slower. Defences are for defending enemy rushes or to force the battle in a position to your advantage. Its called MICRO/MACRO-MANAGMENT people something known since enternity by the pro starcraft and war3 communities


Yaddayadda, blahblah. Guess what, not all people have time to sit down and practise. You know you get older, wife, kids, job and a life to live, that doesn't leave much time to learn how to play the game.

Quoted from Suecotero:

If you want es to make AoE into a game for people who dont want to fight before they have a pretty little army that isnt worth a damn vs a skilled player go and play simcity or something. I want a competitive game. All this "ow its imbalanced because the enemy attacked me before i wanted him to" is tiresome


I assume a RM game doesn't get affected by DM games, nor vice versa? Nor would you join a No Rush in X min game?
A gameoption wouldn't affect all, but only benefit the crowd who needs it, and in no way ruin the fun of rushing for others.

Because i like potatoes and lobster, doesn't mean my neighbour has to like it nor consort with it, totally separated factors.

[This message has been edited by Defiler_of_INRI (edited 02-21-2005 @ 03:39 PM).]

beekay
Skirmisher
(id: black_knight_101)
posted 02-21-05 03:40 PM EDT (US)     22 / 31       

Quote:

that doesn't leave much time to learn how to play the game.

Quote:

They don't know about buildorders,

So you have no time to learn to play, yet you study build orders?

Quote:

Gee, guess what?! There is a large amount of noobs out there.

And they are the ones who are quitting games with a parting 'OMFG STFU n00b!!1!'. Which, incidently, is what putdownpete is saying, 'OMFG RUSHING IS OP!!!!'.


sig
THE_champion95
Skirmisher
posted 02-21-05 03:40 PM EDT (US)     23 / 31       
apparently ES are thinking of a No rush option or somethng like that.

supporter of Crystal Palace Football club
Leader of The VnX clan!


ESO Name: Rulezzz
Defiler_of_INRI
Skirmisher
posted 02-21-05 04:00 PM EDT (US)     24 / 31       

Quoted from black_knight_101:

So you have no time to learn to play, yet you study build orders?


Wasn't referring to myself.
lief ericson
Skirmisher
posted 02-21-05 06:17 PM EDT (US)     25 / 31       
Well, I don't know about you, but I think fighting is much more fun than managing your economy and then having one big fight. This game is about warfare. If you want a game where you boom, play a city builder.

SEXITUP.
Former Leader of the FPH Clan
Acting-President of AoMH
« Previous Page  1 2  Next Page »
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Age of Empires III Heaven | HeavenGames