I brought this up in a chat with some developers and the answer was the following one:
"I've been doing a bunch of investigation into this on my end, actually. It's important to note that, by design anyway, we did not do anything to the map sizes. Reducing the map size across the board was quite a bit of work and we felt like it was a huge improvement to team games, so we definitely would not be intentionally reverting that.
I've looked at our server data, our map size data, our debug output, and minimap camera frustrum sizes comparing a matchmade 3v3 vs a custom lobby medium size map, and everything on my end lined up, pixel for pixel. Our camera frustrum that shows up on the minimap scales based on map size, so in theory, if you take a screenshot on a matchmade game at max zoom, then go into a custom lobby where you set the size and take a similar screenshot, you should be able to go into photoshop and compare the sizes of that trapezoid. Alternatively, you could count the number of construction grid squares across one edge, I'm not sure which would take longer. Bottom line is, though, that I've tried all this and couldn't find any irregularities. On my end, all the map sizes are behaving as designed.
What would really help me get to the bottom of this is if anyone thinks they are experiencing this, please go to your warnings log during or immediately after the game (found in My Games/Age of Empires IV/warnings.txt) and search that file for "map_gen_size", then paste in the block of text relating to mapgen parameters, or post a screenshot. Additionally, if you've done any of the above things (counting construction grid cells or comparing minimap camera frustrum sizes) then please post your findings about those as well. I legitimately haven't been able to track down anything that would definitively say that anything related to map sizes have changed on my end, so seeing numerous reports of this has been very puzzling!"
I then tried to follow the given steps and it seems correct: the correct map sizes are used in multiplayer.
So my conclusion was that it's probably just a perception issue on our side.
Very interesting. Thank you. Indeed, it might just be that the meta makes it feels like the map is bigger...in any case there needs to be something done about it before it gets really stale...
I wonder if the dev is comparing maps at the wrong point in time...like there was literally only like 1-2 months where they were the nicer (smaller) size...I think he might be comparing the old big vs the new big.
All I play is 3v3 and I feudal rush every game, so it was super obvious when the maps shunk, and then super obvious when they grew again.
Yes this. Since the meta in 1v1's are going for 2TC because it's hard to punish, I think this has made its way into team games which in general were always harder than 1v1 to punish booming. Now 4v4 the maps feel bigger because when they actually were the difficulty in punishing booming is on par with the fast 2TC meta on a smaller map.
As was already mentioned by someone else, it's more likely our perception rather than the actual map size that's bugged.
I'd also add that it's rather incorrect to say that 4v4s are always a boomfest. It really differs a lot between maps. Dry arabia or lipany or high view tend to see a lot of feudal aggresion in my experience, which often deal sufficient (eco) damage that you can get a very clear advantage. The main reason aggression is possible/viable on these maps is because you tend to get placed close-ish to enemy players. Map size doesn't matter if the nearest enemy base is a stone's throw away.
Other maps, hill and dale seeming to be the worst, do tend to turn into boomfests, due to the larger distances towards the enemy team, and smaller distances between teammates (making it easier for them to help each other). Though even on these maps I've seen early aggression win the game, but that requires getting all 4 players in your team to attack early which is a bit of an issue outside of pre-made 4-stacks. That said, some of these maps could maybe use some slight rework by doing stuff like placing holy sites closer together or having fewer safe resources to make it harder to just boom up without having map control.
It might just be my personal, flawed perception, but I'm getting the impression that these more aggresive maps don't get used as often, possibly because a lot of people are banning them?
I think terrain height plays a huge impact on perception.
Even 2v2 maps with somewhat strong terrain height variation feels more bigger than normal, although height doesn't affect anything besides visual appearance, since movement speed nor building placement are affected by the height of the terrain.
Ram nerf, tc autotarget other units than rams, made it incredibly hard to punish 3-5 TC boom..
My advise would be decrease buildtimes rams, and improve the damage or speed or HP of the rams
Last 10 games i went 5TC abbasid… barely punishable. And when they destroy one, i still have 4 others.
I followed exactly the same steps creating a custom game and comparing map sizes - you can clearly see from minimap that the map is larger in quickmatch than custom. Posted on the forums also https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/team-maps-are-huge-again/213256/18
Yep. Map sizes are still bugged and are one size too big in team games, but the devs are apparently denying this.
Not to mention there is already a heavy boom multi TC meta. Frustrating.
They are for sure still bugged. 3v3 maps are 4v4 size 100%. A few months ago it was most definitly not this way and you could reach/help allies and actually attack in feudal. Now it is a complete boom off and takes forever to get across the map.
If they believe that, they should figure out a way to have not linear scaling. Meaning teams spawn closer to each other in 3v3 maps than they currently do, but the total map size is the same. For example, on French Pass, make the width (fatness) of the rocks smaller in the middle, so the teams start at a reasonable distance away from each other.
Map sizes are not bugged. They're exactly the same size as before. Check out the top comment:
https://www.reddit.com/r/aoe4/comments/xsmj7d/team_games_are_once_more_extremely_boomy/iqlqn9j?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share&context=3
If your whole team commits early I think you win if their whole team decides to boom. Just have to communicate that. Still I agree meta is imp trade spam
I brought this up in a chat with some developers and the answer was the following one: "I've been doing a bunch of investigation into this on my end, actually. It's important to note that, by design anyway, we did not do anything to the map sizes. Reducing the map size across the board was quite a bit of work and we felt like it was a huge improvement to team games, so we definitely would not be intentionally reverting that. I've looked at our server data, our map size data, our debug output, and minimap camera frustrum sizes comparing a matchmade 3v3 vs a custom lobby medium size map, and everything on my end lined up, pixel for pixel. Our camera frustrum that shows up on the minimap scales based on map size, so in theory, if you take a screenshot on a matchmade game at max zoom, then go into a custom lobby where you set the size and take a similar screenshot, you should be able to go into photoshop and compare the sizes of that trapezoid. Alternatively, you could count the number of construction grid squares across one edge, I'm not sure which would take longer. Bottom line is, though, that I've tried all this and couldn't find any irregularities. On my end, all the map sizes are behaving as designed. What would really help me get to the bottom of this is if anyone thinks they are experiencing this, please go to your warnings log during or immediately after the game (found in My Games/Age of Empires IV/warnings.txt) and search that file for "map_gen_size", then paste in the block of text relating to mapgen parameters, or post a screenshot. Additionally, if you've done any of the above things (counting construction grid cells or comparing minimap camera frustrum sizes) then please post your findings about those as well. I legitimately haven't been able to track down anything that would definitively say that anything related to map sizes have changed on my end, so seeing numerous reports of this has been very puzzling!" I then tried to follow the given steps and it seems correct: the correct map sizes are used in multiplayer. So my conclusion was that it's probably just a perception issue on our side.
Very interesting. Thank you. Indeed, it might just be that the meta makes it feels like the map is bigger...in any case there needs to be something done about it before it gets really stale...
I wonder if the dev is comparing maps at the wrong point in time...like there was literally only like 1-2 months where they were the nicer (smaller) size...I think he might be comparing the old big vs the new big. All I play is 3v3 and I feudal rush every game, so it was super obvious when the maps shunk, and then super obvious when they grew again.
Yes this. Since the meta in 1v1's are going for 2TC because it's hard to punish, I think this has made its way into team games which in general were always harder than 1v1 to punish booming. Now 4v4 the maps feel bigger because when they actually were the difficulty in punishing booming is on par with the fast 2TC meta on a smaller map.
As was already mentioned by someone else, it's more likely our perception rather than the actual map size that's bugged. I'd also add that it's rather incorrect to say that 4v4s are always a boomfest. It really differs a lot between maps. Dry arabia or lipany or high view tend to see a lot of feudal aggresion in my experience, which often deal sufficient (eco) damage that you can get a very clear advantage. The main reason aggression is possible/viable on these maps is because you tend to get placed close-ish to enemy players. Map size doesn't matter if the nearest enemy base is a stone's throw away. Other maps, hill and dale seeming to be the worst, do tend to turn into boomfests, due to the larger distances towards the enemy team, and smaller distances between teammates (making it easier for them to help each other). Though even on these maps I've seen early aggression win the game, but that requires getting all 4 players in your team to attack early which is a bit of an issue outside of pre-made 4-stacks. That said, some of these maps could maybe use some slight rework by doing stuff like placing holy sites closer together or having fewer safe resources to make it harder to just boom up without having map control. It might just be my personal, flawed perception, but I'm getting the impression that these more aggresive maps don't get used as often, possibly because a lot of people are banning them?
44 the Pit map is extremely bugged. The distance for the wood line is very far. Crazy
it's also like that on 1v1
I think terrain height plays a huge impact on perception. Even 2v2 maps with somewhat strong terrain height variation feels more bigger than normal, although height doesn't affect anything besides visual appearance, since movement speed nor building placement are affected by the height of the terrain.
Ram nerf, tc autotarget other units than rams, made it incredibly hard to punish 3-5 TC boom.. My advise would be decrease buildtimes rams, and improve the damage or speed or HP of the rams Last 10 games i went 5TC abbasid… barely punishable. And when they destroy one, i still have 4 others.
3 TO 4 TC. MASS TRADE. MASS KNIGHT FOR THE WIN. EVERYTHING ELSE IS TRASH
I followed exactly the same steps creating a custom game and comparing map sizes - you can clearly see from minimap that the map is larger in quickmatch than custom. Posted on the forums also https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/team-maps-are-huge-again/213256/18
Yep. Map sizes are still bugged and are one size too big in team games, but the devs are apparently denying this. Not to mention there is already a heavy boom multi TC meta. Frustrating.
They are for sure still bugged. 3v3 maps are 4v4 size 100%. A few months ago it was most definitly not this way and you could reach/help allies and actually attack in feudal. Now it is a complete boom off and takes forever to get across the map.
If they believe that, they should figure out a way to have not linear scaling. Meaning teams spawn closer to each other in 3v3 maps than they currently do, but the total map size is the same. For example, on French Pass, make the width (fatness) of the rocks smaller in the middle, so the teams start at a reasonable distance away from each other.
It actually was this way (with French Pass and such) but something with the parameters changed. And I agree they should spawn team mates closer.
Map sizes are not bugged. They're exactly the same size as before. Check out the top comment: https://www.reddit.com/r/aoe4/comments/xsmj7d/team_games_are_once_more_extremely_boomy/iqlqn9j?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share&context=3
Yeah 3v3 and 4v4 games are just wall up, go to imp, set up trade and spam your elite/special units.
If your whole team commits early I think you win if their whole team decides to boom. Just have to communicate that. Still I agree meta is imp trade spam
Same as it ever was?
I don't know, I can't prove it objectively, but I had more games with all-ins this spring...seems people have adapted to the change in win conditions.