>Video Games/Strategy
>No Age of Empires IV thread
Do anons seriously have to go to Reddit for discussion about the greatest RTS game of the era, AOEIV?
Anyway, Byzantines (Eastern Roman Empire) just got revealed.
https://www.ageofempires.com/games/age-of-empires-iv/civilizations/byzantines/
Discuss.
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Western slavs when
This game is based, online 1v1 is some of the most fun you can have today across the entire genre. Unfortunately, aoe4 gets constant hate on two fronts, coming from both the aoe2 gays and the singleplayer only gays. Stfu and enjoy some RTS kino, it’s been 10 years since we’ve had a game of this quality.
>online 1v1 is some of the most fun you can have today across the entire genre.
That's the problem, anon. the amount of people who like to play 1v1 online is miniscule compared to aoe2 singleplayer gays you meme on so much
Stay in your playpen and realize that you (along with starcraft and fighting game players) have a special type of autism. We're happy you finally have a new toy to play with but we get just a little annoyed when you REEEE about us not wanting to play it with you.
what does this mean?
eceleb reference
With how obscure he is even to total war players i wouldn't call him an eceleb. What is the context anyway, did he ban people from playing him? i wasn't into strategy when he was popular
>Stfu and enjoy some RTS kino, it’s been 10 years since we’ve had a game of this quality.
stfu and fix the game if you want me to play it, you rabid troglodyte. Fix the soulless UI. Fix the amount of playable civs. Fix the artstyle. Fix the arrows. You got so much BASIC shit COMPLETELY WRONG all you can do now is seethe how people don't want to play it.
>Fix the soulless UI
What’s wrong with it?
>Fix the amount of playable civs
No one wants AoE2 level civ bloat except morons
>Fix the artstyle
What’s wrong with it?
>Fix the arrows
No one cares about your ranged micro. The way it is now means that the game is actually balanced for unique army compositions.
>people don't want to play it.
16k concurrent players seems alright to me
I swear AoE2 gays are just like smelee players
There are 12 civs and 4 variant civs now. How many more do you need? AoE2 civ bloat is AIDS.
>Fix the arrows
Yeah because battles with crossbowmen shooting at each other and dodging in unison last second is exactly how battles from that era happened, totally fun, and doesn't look completely moronic. No more need to research 2 technologies to have your ranged units and buildings not be completely useless.
>Archer shooting at a side strafing unit and missing every shot
What a fun mechanic
I don't care for your multiplayerslop. People like you need to go back to your broodwar. We had a containment for you multiplayer Black folk and it worked just fine. Go back, you've ruined this genre.
frick up zoomer it's mobile garbage on pc
the last good original aoe game was aoe2
i bet half the devs weren't born before aoe1 was released
>aoe2
Let's be honest. Aoe2 sucked. It's kept alive by nostalgia and the only reason it's as popular as it is is because that's the game people thought was the most popular and ended up flocking to. Had nothing to do with the gameplay. Liking aoe2 is the biggest npc tell.
Literally no one talks about 3 or 4 despite the fact that Microsoft shilled 4 hard. I have this weird feeling that it's more like you're mad people don't like the game you like as much as the classic.
I've played every Age game as they came out, including Age of Mythology. Each one was an improvement on the last. Aoe2 was just another game. I played it, had fun, and moved on. The people who get hung up on aoe2 are RTS normies/ new comers to the genre that haven't played the rest of the age games let alone other RTS games. They hear about aoe2's popularity from the zealous aoe2 cultists and then bandwagon on it thinking it's the best in the series when it's not. See
to understand why
>List features that weaken the game
>"This is proof that AoE2 players just don't branch out!"
Shut up.
bro this game doesn't even have patrol move lmao, have the devs ever played an RTS before?
>patrol move
It has patrol move. I wish there was a follow command. A patrol move for villagers to gather anything in their route would be cool.
I heard that the Limitanei(Roman spearman) will have not only a shield, but a shieldwall ability. And that's all I've ever wanted from an Age game.
i mean all i did when i actually played pvp was play english and rush longbow and tower and rams
it is a fun game but very intimidating to try to get good at.
Jade Empire/Zhu Yi's [Neo-Confuscious] Legacy
https://www.ageofempires.com/games/age-of-empires-iv/civilizations/zhu-xis-legacy/
Sounds like a direct upgrade to basic China, unless I'm reading wrong, with cheaper upgrades and earlier Dynasty units
They revealed two civs this week! I wonder what China has over Zhu Xi's Legacy.
That's sort of the issue with the design of those variants. They just seem like base faction but more. Maybe the base version will still be better at some things competitively speaking but it feels like it would be playing the boring version when the fun one exists.
Honestly yeah, I'd rather they made another 2 totally new factions instead of the 4 variants but we are still getting the Japanese and the Byzantines and for that I am happy
>age4's first expansion that brings back some highly requested fan favorites (and is necessary for the lifeblood of the game)
>$15 pre-order
>age2 puts out another rework with some new civs for funsies
>$13 pre-order
how does one find someone to play strategy games with? I'd love to play aoe2/aoe4/vic2/total war or whatever but I find no motivation to play by myself
i've found that asking a 2v2 partner to stick around for another game sometimes works
Trying to find people to play RTS with made me realize that I don't actually have any friends
Anyone here who would be willing to play with a newfriend and kinda teach/mentor? Or just other new people who want to play. Maybe do some coop together against AIs while I learn? I’ve played the art of war tutorials but I feel like this is the kind of game where mentoring from someone who knows what they’re doing would be very helpful.
This is also a stealth request for just more friends to play RTS with, all of my other friends are too brainlet for the genre.
steam friend code: 34612983
Yes hello
It's a 1v1 game you're supposed to learn by GETTING YOUR butthole GAPED ON REPEAT
hmm i wonder why rts died
Yeah but I don't want to get my ass hole gaped I want to build a cozy castle town with a buddy and learn mechanics while watching my dudes fight Ai dudes
city builders might be more up your alley
3* the ottoman challenge its extremely fun
I enjoyed it. I'd like to see more challenges. Maybe the community could make some challenges and the challenge page could be integrated with a way to filter by Official challenges and Community-made challenges. The scenario editor still has to be added. Would be cool to have the community make their own campaigns. Same thing with an integrated filter that shows the official campaigns, and then any community campaigns further filtered by download count, rating, play count, etc.
unironically more challenges are very good and will be a good way to get good at the game
I just force myself to play and then annoy the shit out of people until they agree to play with me
BUUUUUMP
>Playing the Order of the Dragon
>Although more expensive than other civilizations, the soldiers of the Order of the Dragon stand without equal. Playing the Order of the Dragon means commanding a small, elite force that is not to be underestimated.
>Equipped with superior armor, weaponry, and training, the Order of the Dragon’s military lives longer, hits harder, and attacks from greater range than their counterparts. Each unit has specific traits that enhance its capabilities, allowing players to employ a variety of powerful military compositions and counters to thwart their enemies.
>A focus on quality carries over into the Order of the Dragon’s economy. Villagers are more expensive, but are hardier, gather faster, and construct buildings more quickly.
What the shit is this?
Atlanteans
Seems a bit racist. Are the devs nazis?
>Heh these guys are the master race and you are untermensch
Longbowmen but more annoying
>Longbowmen but more annoying
Will depend on how they actually balance the quantity vs quality gimmick, the annoyance of archers is that a critical mass of them oneshots everything, if they have longer range but can't reach that critical mass it'll actually be less annoying
have a nice day any time.
>greater range than their counterparts
longbowmen already piss me off enough
Speeees Mehreeeens!
>>have a nice day any time.
RIP realism
>he doesn't know
Japanese civilization revealed. Maybe this will get some of you weebs into the game. These new civs are definitely more unique than the base civs. The devs are doubling down on asymmetric civ design and at this rate they need to redo the base civs now.
Hard countered by onna-musha
>women soldiers for ESG points
Grim.
His dad, not him. (And actually the historicity of his dad ever having been part of it is disputed.)
Yeah the Byzantine aqueducts sound good honestly I'm looking forward to playing them
All it did was cluttering my fricking base up.
Vlad Tepes wasn't part of the order. It was his father. Even then, the Order wasn't that significant by Vlad's time and it reached it's peak when Sigismund was still alive. If Vlad had any say in the Order and it's command, he wouldn't have gone to ask Mathias Corvinus for reinforcements and then get arrested by him because of Saxon merchants falsifying some shit against him.
So this is the closest we get to a Hungarian faction?
Why would they redo the older civs? I'd rather see more new civs added to the game (European ones, i dont give a shit about the shitskin ones)
>Why would they redo the older civs? I'd rather see more new civs added to the game (European ones, i dont give a shit about the shitskin ones)
They've already added all the relevant civs and more so that's irrelevant. The problem now is that the game doesn't feel consistent with a mishmash of 8 aoe2 tier civs and 2 starcraft tier civs. It's clear they're doubling down on more asymmetry and uniqueness with the civs in their game design so seeing the base civs get a refresh will rejuvenate the game much more than flooding the game with a mishmash of random civs pulled out the wazoo.
Is this a joke? We have very little info of how the new civs are going to play out. Also, I can agree that the European civs are kinda aoe2 tier, but do you seriously think that the Mongols, Abbasids or Delhi are aoe2 tier? Even the Chinese have a unique playstyle, being able to build both landmarks in each age with bonuses incentivizing booming. You just got familiar with the current civs and think of them as a baseline. Also not every civ needs to be super unique, there should be some simpler civs as some playera prefer simplicity. Regarding the bloat, aoe4 should obviously release new civs slowly and focusing on making them unique and interesting, I just wish we got more Euro civs as I have 0 interest on playing as subhumans. Id like to see the Spanish, Poles and Magyars added in, but i'm aware that both the latter are unlikely
Watching beastyqt, he said which is just a recap of what was revealed that all but like 2 units for the Japanese are unique which is crazy. Byzantines (Eastern Roman Empire) have unique knights, unique men-at-arms, and unique spearmen. The mercenary system looks insane. Beasty said he doesn't give a shit what civs they add as long as they're unique. The civs look awesome especially Byzantines. But it leaves the question what about the base civs? I agree there should be some variation in terms of uniqueness but the new civs will spoil us and it'll make the old civs feel bland in comparison. Mongols, Abbasids, and Delhi are in a good place in terms of uniqueness. Could more things be adjusted, maybe.
>Spanish
Spanish would be cool but to remain objective during the time period (6th-15th centuries) the Iberian peninsula during most of this time period was held by the Ummayad Caliphate which falls under the umbrella of the Abbasid Dynasty. Reconquista happened later. The Spanish Golden Age occurred during the end of the 15 century into the mid 17th century.
I can't stand his squicky voice, it feels as if he had barely any testosterone left in his body. Well, the Japanese units may be unique, but it's just more flavourful, like the new paladin for Persia in aoe2. I'm not gonna forge an opinion before I can experience the gameplay, but you seem to be right with the gap in uniqueness between the new civs and the older ones. But to be fair, the base European civs are similar to each other because they share the same common herritage, unlike the Roman Empire(Byzantines) or Japan. It would be hard to make them as unique as either these new civs or the ones previously mentioned such as Mongols. Those new variations for the already existing civs are doing the job of adjusting them to the level of the dlc civs, while giving you the possibility to still play the standard civs without reworking them.
yeah you are right, unfortunately that's pretty much it when it comes to the Euro civs, I'd like them to add a variation for the Rus at least
nuh you really could get a lot of European civs if you wanted, Spanish, Portuguese, Cathars(maybe), Italians, Swiss, the Lowlands, Danish/Norse, Poles, Teutonic order, Novgorod(maybe), Finns, Magyars, Serbians, Wallachians, Ruthenians, Crimeans, Gerogians, Armenians, Scots and maybe Albanians. and I'm sure I'm leaving some options out
>Literally who "empires"
Aoe4 isn't the civ bloat age game. That would be aoe2de. Aoe4 is keeping it nice and asymmetric.
who the frick is zhu xi's legacy
well the the Christian kingdoms of the peninsula were alive and kicking way before that the Umayyads never really conquered all the peninsula, I think that getting maybe a Spanish civ that contains both Castillian and Aragonese units would be good, plus a Portuguese faction
>want to play Europeans
>wants to plays as Magyars
kek
AoE4 doesn't need AoE2's civ numbers bloat if each civ is meaningfully different. I'd rather they kept a tight focus.
Agreed
Forgot to mention, even tho the new civs are unique, they are nowhere near sc2 level
Not even AoE3 level but that's kind of the point, at a casual level you can play each civ in the game with the "regular" euro openings
well you said that the new civs are sc2 level, yet I don't see why you couldnt play the "regular" opening with them. Well Byzantines have a new resource and this whole aqueduct thing, so maybe it will spice the early game up, but the japs seem more "basic" regarding the dark age
Age of Empires 4 is getting a PS5 port. Its being worked on by Tantalus Media in Australia, who previous worked on several other ports for Age of Empires.
Interesting news, strange that microslop would allow them tho.
Is it to boost player numbers? or as a relation building thing between them and basedny?
where the frick are ViKANGZ???
Upcoming variant civ for Rus
Source: My dad works at Nintendo and told me
Doubt they'd miss a full DLC bait Northmen civ.
>rus
theyd do it just to spite me sounds right. just want savages with their own assets (so not aoe2)
The term "Viking" is a pop-history term belonging in loosely historical games like aoe2. A better word for that civ would be Norse but they called themselves Rus'. Viking just means raid and Vikingr meaning raider so Vikingrs for raiders.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikings#Other_names
Rus' came from Eastern Sweden and the Norse (Vikingr) called themselves Rus'. Rus even derives from a location in Sweden called Roslagen. So idk how you would implement that when they're already in the game.
Why does HRE only get 2 unique units? Seems like everyone else gets quite a bit more
Ingerland only gets longbow (king doesn't count)
some people consider ther men at arms a 3rd UU, as they get some upgrades for them
Ahem, game is saved now. Season 6 fixed EVERYTHING.
https://www.ageofempires.com/news/age-of-empires-iv-update-9-1-109/
>mfw I see stone walls
If see my opponent start building that shit, I'm out. Not spending an extra 15mn destroying it.
t. Mongol player
>linking to allied walls
That's awesome. Each teammate can be responsible for their own section and connect them up with each other. I wonder what they mean by the overhaul to gates. I didn't like how you have to start building a wall before being able to place a gate foundation. Maybe they changed that but that would be a big QOL update.
it's in the notes
>Gates are now omni-directional, meaning that they no longer require placement facing a particular direction. Owned and allied units can use gates to climb onto the wall, but enemy units can no longer use gates for access.
walls op?
yeah I'm not sure I like that part in specific but the rest sounds good
walls need a massive
t. turtler cause it's fun
They really missed an opportunity to add Portugal as Abbasid variant
>Portugal comes out
>All of its special bonuses relate to naval stuff
>Sometimes you will be playing waterless maps
Tiresome.png
I demand naval warfare maps in ranked as they are better than normal maps in every single feasible way
part of me thinks Spain or Korea would be a better add. I could see the Portuguese getting a decent navy and gunpowder but I can't think of much else.
the mercenary mechanic might be cool to reuse but I'd be hesitant since it's already sorta BS with the new Byzantines.
>part of me thinks Spain or Korea would be a better add.
Spain is not a medieval kingdom. They could add it, but it would be one of those low-effort civs like the Ottomans and Japanese, where it's just redoing the same old shit in slightly more more clothing.
Korea really never did anything of note. They spent most of their time prodding the Jurchens, that's about it. Massive lack of stuff to use for earlier eras so they'd just be a civ built all around Imjin War... 'muh turtle ships, 'muh hwacha, 'muh bringandines.
Someone like the Aztecs or Maya at least brings something interesting to the table and they'll have to put some effort into their potrayal, unlike copy-paste French with orange tile roofs or Chinese with dark green/blue ones.
Which civ do you think you will be playing the most in the new DLC? Jeanne d'arc seems really fun
definitely Byzantines I will be building aqueducts all the way to the enemies base
I'm excited to play as the nips because their mechanics seem interesting
whatever's top tier (seems like it's sushi legacy)
Ayyyys look fun. Napalm mangonel, melee/ranged unit that seems to have no hard counter, gambling addiction
it has 0 ranged armor in both forms archers mog it
Late game walls become nearly useless. Fellow turtles, how do you stop catapults and bombards? Even spamming castles usually doesn't do much
you need springalds, my dude. the more, the merrier. just be aware they need to be outside the walls to shoot down the enemy's siege
I should have specified that's typically what I do until they inevitably get wrecked and then I'm fricked. This is my usual gameplan:
>Play as French and rush knights
>try to ruin their econ, when they counter I fall back and play more defensive
>if my team isn't moronic I go for a wonder victory because it's fun
What's the most OP unit/strategy in the game? I'm in the mood to cheese it up
Units are extremely rock paper scissors. The strongest thing in the game is Mehter which is just an aura drummer unit
Mongol horse archers are moronicly op
>Mongol horse archers are moronicly op
They deal the same damage as a regular archer but without any bonus damage against light infantry, and they cost double the resources, hell you even have to use gold.
if you're a Mongol player and you want to raid, just do it with your keshiks or at most with horseman. mangudai are simply too weak to kill anything that isn't a villager.
if you ever struggle against them, just train a couple of archers and tower weak points if necessary
homie it's not the damage it's the movement. they're next to impossible to corner late game when the walls have been busted down and they will slowly kill your knights chasing them
Bro, if someone busted your walls in imp, and you let them in with any kinda of cav army, you are fricked, no matter what it is. Personally, I would be way more scared of an army of knights entering.
And by the way, knights are actually faster than mangudai right now, exactly to offset the fact they can attack while moving. And with their low damage, knights can easily tank them too, so you shouldn't have been having any major problems dealing with them if you're using knights
I hate how Chinese and Abbasids sound and I'm glad Byzantines speak a very pleasant language
give me two new Empires to learn how to play in the next season, I'm tired of being a one-trick Delhi pony
When update live?
Steam says about 24 hours.
I am a moron who thought today was the 14th
I suck forever at multiplayer but did my first placement yesterday. I was mongols as they are fun.
Went for some age 2 gold cav harassment as my general strat with archer/spear support depending on what they mass.
Here’s the trouble.
Town centres very good very long range. 3/5 of my games were against people who built with perfect tc coverage then just fenced up after my initial harass. Big long hour games of push and pull but I lost.
2/5 games ended with victory.I realise I gotta lean into the springalds more than just trebuchet and occasional bombard.
I'm bad at the game but the general understanding I have is that in the late game siege supremacy is a major edge and Mongol springalds can net you that with their long range if you use them right.
It's out
I won't get to play it until later tonight 🙁
i really wanted this game to fail why the frick is it still being played
Bcuz aoe4gays are full of Black folk
AoE2gays are the Meleegays of RTS
played a game as japs. They seemingly 3D print food faster than the Chinese. timing feels a bit off but maybe I need to play them more. they feel a little wishy washy with how much wood you need if you go the aged 2 eco landmark.
Playing as the nips is genuinely so refreshing and fun, I really do love this game
t. Rajesh and I was paid one rupee for this post
I'm new to this game, where can I find up-to-date build orders?
Season 5 guides should still apply for old civs
for new civs people are still cooking
The aesthetics are fricking dogshit and the game is so sluggish
so should I get this game or AoE2 DE?
they are about the same price for me
no I dont care for 1v1 multiplayer
I already played fighting game for that
I'd say AoE4. If you've played both you'd see the age on AoE2. AoE4 just werks. AoE2 is scuffed in comparison. The one thing AoE2 has is the scenario editor which AoE4 still doesn't have for some reason. Other than that, AoE4 is the comfier experience.
>no I dont care for 1v1 multiplayer
aoe4 campaigns few and number and are noticeably bad and boring, and have weird antiquated rulesets from previous versions of the game. aoe2 official campaigns reach hundreds of hours of content and usually have interesting mechanics so that they don't feel to repetitive. custom/modded campaigns add even more. if you care about singleplayer content go for aoe2.
>few and number
*are few in number
4 has better mechanics and better qol and is more fun to play. The single player is pretty good and interesting, don't listen to the gays saying otherwise
tbh senpai both 2 and 4 campaigns are mid af
Agreed. Campaigns for AOE games have always been meh with AOM being an exception and even thats sorta mid compared to goliaths like Starcraft or CoH1.
I agree, the civ depth and gameplay is more fun than AOE2s also less cheesy with house blocking. I do wish they brought back the high mechanic, they had it for siege and cav (cant charge uphill) in the close alpha but never brought it back.
Shill
fr fr nocap
>Pick Japan
>My soldiers are women
Wow just like my anime fr fr
>>My soldiers are women
Wtf why doesn't my main get women soldiers
Onna bugeisha are so bullshit, was raiding with horsemen and these frickers chased down the horses across half of a 4v4 map.
Legit only 0.01 slower movement speed.
Onna bugeisha aren't spearmen, horses can fight them
What do we think of the DLC so far? Been having a blast and about to hit ladder today. Wish the Byzantine masteries weren't so ass backwards. Having to kill 5 units with civs while using the Cistern buff is moronic lmao
I just got the game because of byzzies, having a blast with their rush castle build. Bases always look kino and melting morons that blob with greek fire makes my pp wet.
I've just played as the japs so far and I love it. The music is great and the samurai are fricking cool. I've only played one team game online but it seemed like the new empires are definitely OP (so you'll buy them). But overall I'm pleasantly surprised and I still think this is the best modern RTS on the market
shit taste. betetr play aoeo civ . jap buff military is kinda messy for a heavy micro civ and no samurai ashigaru and the gun ashigaru which is repalced by the lame hand canooneer. they dont even fixed that one thta makes the end game boring
Yeah some masteries are fricking ass in this game I swear.
Romans bros, do we all have the same exact profil now?
How do you unlock that?
I looked at the mastery list and for some reason it is glitched and shows a Mali mastery instead.
I have already completed the Japanese Mastery and am now doing it for Byzantines.
Nevermind, it fixed itself.
>Dlc named "the sultans ascend", heavily based on the crusades
>No Templar Order civ/variant
>Crusaders are portrayed as infidel bloodthirsty savages
>Muslims are portrayed as wise, just, Allah loving men.
>The Order of the Dragon variant doesn't even state in its description that its objective is to protect christianity from the invading muslims.
Another game whose devs sold their soul for the sweet ESG points. More slop.
Noticed this as well lmao. Was clear that AoE 4 had a more pozzed team working on it from the start, with shit like female Khans and adding fricking Malians before a cornerstone civ like Byzantium. Still the best modern RTS but shit like this will never not piss me off.
as far as woke homosexualry goes though it's fairly subdued compared to most modern games and it definitely could have been way worse. Playing the base game I rarely ever noticed it. Though the whole crusade shit in the dlc is definitely gay (even though I actually like the missions so far)
For sure but that's a very low bar to clear.
>adding fricking Malians before a cornerstone civ
Kek it was free because they knew it wouldn't sell
Not suprised, with them being a microslop product.
I know the other anon said it, but he is right, it could have been worse....
>Cornerstone civ
>The "discounted trash into OP UU" civ
Are you being serious?
We're talking about history not about how a 20-year old pop history game portrayed them
>20-year old pop history game
24-year old, soon to be 25-year old.
It's from 1999, alongside FF8, Shenmue, Donkey Kong 64, etc.
>Crusaders are portrayed as infidel bloodthirsty savages
>Muslims are portrayed as wise, just, Allah loving men.
I mean, no one complained when aoe2 did this.
old good, new bad newbie
At least aoe2 had the balls to have the teutonic order as a playable faction, which viewed from the eyes of modern homosexuals they would be miles more evil than the templars
Aoe2 had Teutons, not Teutonic Order. Aoe4 released with Holy Roman Empire which is more inclusive and historically accurate. The word Teutons is frequently associated with Nazism and ideas of racial supremacism.
"Teutons" are not an empire. The game is not called Age of Tribes
Who was the "Rex Teutonicorum," anon?
The HRE of course
Be real Anon, what did you expect?
The Crusades are basically the only setting where you can try to feature Muslims as the good guy because it's basically the only setting where they aren't the invader walking into someone else's land and trying to murder them.
Especially when the game is developed by modern Americans, who can't understand broader historical context and just view everything in the light of "Darker skinned people = victims and heroes, Lighter skinned people = oppressors and villains".
Crusaders chimped out in Constantinople and fricked up the Eastern Roman Empire. Essentially sabotaged another Christian empire holding back the Muslims from the East. They did more for Islam and the Mongols than their enemies could have hoped to do. They were more anti-Christian than the Muslims and Mongols. Not to mention how many Europeans they slaughtered because they practiced paganism. Which is why I find it strange pro-Westerners hold the Crusaders in a positive light. The Catholic sphere tended towards Crusades while the Orthodox sphere tended towards missionary work, establishing Old Slavonic and converting the Rus. If you want to see how it's done right in that respect, look to the Spaniards and Portuguese with the Reconquista and Inquisition.
>Always do my due diligence before purchasing product, especially vidya
>Checking out the Japs in the in-game tech tree
>75%+ farming rate
>Can make TCs into essentially castles
>Houses act as mills
>Heavy units have deflective armor like in anime
>Stealth/disguise units that can blink through walls
>Mining gold gives you stone too and vice versa
>Best horse archers in the game, better than Mongols kek
>And so on
What the frick is this? Are these just gimicky features or does this seem busted as hell. And Order of the Dragon would be cool except they get hard countered by Japs with Buddhist monks that halve their attack damage along with what are essentially mounted crossbowmen. Not to mention the number of unique units they get. Idk I guess we'll have to wait until aoe4world.com starts recording win rates. Otherwise I'll hold off on the DLC once I can be assured the game is balanced. Game balance concerns aside the new civs do look cool.
What civs and alternatives do you want to see in the future? We still have Dehli, Mongols, England, and Rus as base game civs without alternates. Timurids could be fun for Mongols. Italian, Scandi, or SEA would also be nice editions.
Alternate history England where the Normans never invaded.
Poland, Vikings/norse, Spain, Teutonic/Templar order as a variant (one can only dream)...
I really couldn't give a frick about unknown shitty civs like the Malians. If we get another trash civ from Africa or an American/Asian tribe Im quitting for good
Vikings got merged into Byzantines that's why they have shield wall and berserking
>Templar
All these simps out here, when the frick do Hospitaller Chads get their moment in the sun?
Agreed on Malians though, in hindsight I suspect they were originally planning for it to be Byzantines vs Ottomans for maximum kino, but the diversity quota needed to be met. I would tolerate Aztecs coming, that would be acceptable.
>Teutonic/Templar
meme shit tribe no one give a shit about this except white male. tell me what kino of this shit? nothing.
>meme shit tribe no one give a shit about this except white male
So the richest and most numerous demographic of gamer..?
>Templars as a Teutonic Order variant
I think it'd work better to have some kind of Crusader civs (or Kingdom of Jerusalem civ) and then have multiple Crusader Orders act as variant civs
Hospitallers already had their time in AoE3. But even then, I don't think there's a limit to how many civ variants you can have, so I think the Hospitallers can be squeezed in. Knights of Lazarus would be neat though you'd have to get pretty ahistorical about them since we don't know much about them.
If you strip away dumb pop culture assumptions of the Templars, they are fairly fascinating.
The trouble is pop culture depicts the Templars in three ways:
A.) Enlightened scientific proto-masonic group that's also evil because they have some truths that most don't know or some bullshit (Dan Brown and Assassin's Creed)
B.) Fanatical evil Crusaders that were evil because they were nobility whilst the real good didndunuffin ordinary Crusaders were good (Walter Scott and Ridley Scott)
C.) Deus Vult Crusader LARPer nonsense.
In reality, Templars were just an interesting religious order that actually practiced a lot of the shit they preached and had quite a fair bit of mystique around them. Add to the whole thing of them acquiring a frickload of relics and the fact that they guarded the Temple of Solomon as well as being literal warrior monks and if you depict the Templars correctly, you can get a pretty interesting if not kino take on them. Unfortunately that's rarely seen in fiction, it's mostly those three interpretations which are all shit. I won't answer for the Teutonic Knights as I don't know as much about them as the Templars, but they got cool armor and they make for good antagonists for slav civs (i.e. Rus, Czechs and Poles)
>no one give a shit about this except white male.
lol
lmao even
They should do their best to fill out the map, releasing civs as their designs are completed.
Novgorod/Nevsky for Rus
Hungary, Scandinavia, Poland, Spain, some sort of Teuton
Can someone give me some Byzantium tips?
I keep losing in quickplay because I cannot walk the fineline between all that macro vs micro.
How do you do it?
go to berries and make stacks of FREE longbows
The campaign is extremely bullshit on hard
How do you beat 1000 supply worth of French ships
Lots of docks and demo ships
I made a million towers and it worked
Like dude what
This is maybe half his army
man that mission sucked
That one took me a few attempts. Hard campaign difficulty.
Spoilers: What worked for me was first getting the cheaper vill tech, then sending villagers to each of your allied bases and building a TC there near the water. So 3 additional TCs. Then boom like crazy. Send them to wood and farms. I didn't build any additional fishing ships because they just kept get raided. Instead of sending trade ships across, crossing near the dangerous pirate base, I sent them northwest along the coastline. There is an additional gold mine and stone mine at the east corner of the map.
I never bothered clearing the pirate base because on hard it's just too well defended with springald towers. Pirate ships will attack Reynald's ships so keep that in mind. And pick up the floating supplies from destroyed ships for more resources. I built mostly springald ships with some arrow ships and demo ships sprinkled in. I covered the west coast with docks. Literally from the northwest base to my base. I built a keep on the northwestern base too which helped in the last phase. Those ships follow a pattern, attacking the northern docks, then western docks, then eastern docks. You can ignore the fleet of ships that attacks your base in the south since they will just sit there. Your other docks will be safe to continue pumping out ships. Then just focus on killing that roaming fleet before they attack the eastern docks. I killed them at the last moment and building a keep with the villagers I had there kept them distracted long enough. Then I killed the fleet camping my original base last. Oh and the sail ability is indispensable.
How the frick can I get this achievement? Disgusting bugged gorilla Black person game, I don't want to play another boring game just so MAYBE this time it won't be bugged
>start game vs easiest ai with infinite resources age 3 start
>make landmark
>get upgrades
>build siege
>kill ai
should take 10 minutes
I did a normal skirmish vs the easiest AI, the thing is, I build the landmark, get 2 upgrades, build 20 siege weapons, win the game (even tho I could just surrender and it would work too) and I still cant get this shit. Are some siege weapons not considered "siege engine"?
maybe the workshops have to be in high armory influence
i tried with them inside the zone of influence and outside of it, someone on reddit said he got the achievement with workshops outside of the zone. It really baffles me that such an easy task is somehow cancer-bugged yet things like kill 30 units while having saint's blessing worked fine
I finally got it, made a skirmish without AI, max resources, age III start, all 4 upgrades from the landmark and 20+ of every type of siege weapons
What does completing the masteries do? Is it just for the excerpts and cosmetic stuff like portraits
yes its just the excerpts and cosmetic stuff, but it's just a good way to learn a civ for newbies such as myself
how do i get good as a newbie?
pray wan mirron game (all with the same build order)
is the max unit really 200? i feel like im having trouble with which resources to focus at the early game but mid/later i farm really well and barely dont have idle villagers, i noticed in online quick matches that almost everyone i played with or against always have like 10+ villagers farming gold at the start (which i never did before)
also i usually take some time before i get some army so if anyone rushes me super early im fricked, i think my early game sucks
The most standard start is like 7 food 3 gold to age up fast then the next 7 to wood then whatever you need (ie knights take lots of food/gold, archers lots of wood, 2tc stone etc). It varies by civ however so take a shortcut and look up some comfy build orders
will do, thanks bro
>if anyone rushes me super early im fricked, i think my early game sucks
Scouting would be your best bet here. If you don't scout you miss out on sheep and map information but also about what the player is doing. Without that you're figuratively playing in the dark and that would mess up anyone about what to except from the opponent.
Play big team games and hope your teammates aren't Chinese or total morons and they can mask a lot of your inefficiencies as a noob and in general make it more fun. I play 3v3 and 4v4 ranked almost exclusively because it's more fun and I have almost 500 hours in it
And overall try to focus on constantly making villagers. You can even try to make extra TCs to produce even more villagers. More villagers=more resources=bigger army.
Learn and use hotkeys. Rebind them if you have to. Force yourself to not use the mouse to click things that can be quickly pressed on the keyboard. Make sure you have the hotkey to select idle villagers figured out. Keeping villager idle time low increases efficiency. No point in making villagers if they're just going to be idle. But other hotkeys like select all military units, cycle through scouts, cycle through TCs are useful.
Learn unit counters. Depends on how much RTS experience you have but if you have RTS experience your micro might already be good. If not it's something that can improve. It's really important during battles and can make or break a successful battle. Basically keep your units away from counter units and maneuver them towards units they actually counter. E.g. spearmen-->cav but away from archers. Cav towards archers and away from spearmen. That sort of thing. But with practice you will excel.
And it might be hard to follow higher ranked streamers but watching gameplay can give you a better sense for the game. Watching your replays might also be helpful. Oh and the Art of War challenges are great too.
What's up with this map? Every time I play it, I get a spawn issue. Last time, the enemy AI spawned inside the river.
>hiding nickname
pussy
I'm too slow for this shit
SC2 didn't ask for anywhere near the APM these games do
you might be moronic
With the new dlc, which civilization(s) (old or new) would you recommend for fast castle strategy ? I want to get into the game a bit more seriously and it's the gameplan I'm the most at ease with.
I'm fond of base(d) China. Imperial Academy on your starting gold camp with supervision can net you some extremely solid income to rush castle. From there you can start pumping out palace guard which, if produced on the academy aura, you functionally get for 100 food and only 17 gold since there's an 8 gold refund through taxes. On that note you can also get essentially paid to train trash units for the same reason. The tax income also kinda discounts the gold cost of a lot of feudal techs by about half.
I almost abandoned playing the game when I was watching beasty, his 400 apm spasms were really off-putting. But I started watching some small silver players and the Aussie Drongo commentary and it really seemed like a different game with people actually making mistakes and even getting housed. I'm about to finish the Rus mastery and start playing some mp
It's out
https://aoe4world.com/stats/rm_solo/civilizations
Didn't expect Byzantines to be all the way at the bottom but they're a pretty high difficulty civ to play. A few of the new civs have OP win rates but overall not terrible and definitely depends on player rank tier. Devs have some work cut out for them to balance all of this.
I don't really care about the stats/meta, but isn't Rus considered to be top tier? Or is their wr affected negatively by their difficulty(especialy the 3 scouts in the dark age)?
Beasty's last civ tier list from October ranked Rus as the best in 1v1s, but only in the highest player skill group. Other ranks is a different story he says. But going by those win rates they're middling tier for the vast majority of the player base. From reading the patch notes each update I've seen nerfs every time for them so idk.
Keep in mind the difference between a lot of these is only a few percentage points. Also the actual power level of a civ can be wildly divergent from their average win rate. By way of example I'm pretty sure China's low stats are influenced by a lot of actual Chinese players maining them and playing badly.
Give it to me straight /vst/, is this game ~~*fun*~~?
no too sweaty
Really? As in, you need 3593565 APM to be good at it?
I'm afraid so
Oh well.
It's not so much APM but meaningful actions per minute. You can spam the keyboard all day but if they aren't impactful then you're just wasting energy.
it is, don't listen to the other homosexual
It's addictive. Building a base, building an economy, creating an army and smashing it into the enemies. RTS games are underrated as a genre.
Which is more fun AoE4 or AoE2?
nta, but its obviously subjective, gay
both games are on sale rn, you can buy one or both, play for 2 hours and refund if you dont like it
AoE4 spoiled me. AoE2 is a 25 y/o game and its age shows. AoE4 is more fun and I'll tell you what I mean
>Sheep automatically follow scouts
>Sheep aren't hilariously slow
>Scouts regenerate HP
>Scouts yell to you when they spot an enemy
>Farms don't deplete
>Deep fish regenerate
>No jank-ass boar kiting
>No jank-ass deer herding
>No jank-ass quick walling
>No jank-ass scout battles
>No more scuffed looking units (sprites and icons)
>Landmarks
>Influence mechanic
>Much greater civ asymmetry, like night and day difference
>Interesting, better civs
>Variant civs
>There's a civ for everyone
>Civ specific music, progresses with each age
>Farms fit around mill
>Farms fit around town center
>No more tetris mines
>Berries aren't a meme
>Resources on mini-map are represented by icons instead of tiny yellow, gray, and green dots
>Buildings don't block
>Units can go on walls
>Can build TCs in Feudal offering more strategy and booming potential
>Better unit balance, civ balance, and general game balance
>All units and civs are viable
>Houses give 10 population
>Neutral trade posts
>Trade is viable
>Cool campaigns and challenges
>Scouts different from light cavalry
>Light cavalry isn't a useless 1-purpose unit
>Isn't a 24 year old game and engine
>Game flows smoother
>3D
>Animations
>Base auto decorates
>Score doesn't go down when aging up
>Buildings not tanky
>Units use torches instead of a unit stabbing a building 2400 times to destroy it
>Wololo conversion is a giant circle with a count down instead of single target conversion clusterfrick, having to individually click each monk and target and hope RNG favors you
>Brand new expansion
Like don't get me wrong AoE2 was fun during its time but it's like c'mon guys give it a rest. We have a cool new Age game to play. You complain that the RTS genre is dead but then don't care to buy news ones when they release. No ones gonna make RTS games if that's the case.
Wrong game. That is aoeo
This is correct and it makes aoe2 gays seethe because they have no rebuttal
They do have a rebuttal: its this
moronation where they complain about gwaphics or arrow dodging and then also pretend like having a gorillion civs that are nearly identical is better than 12 that are wildly different.
I used to love aoe2 but the community is so unbelievably annoying and cringe that it makes me almost hate the game. I really can't understand why they can't just fricking move on already. I do think some of the hatred is because 4 is inherently so similar yet is better in almost every way. If 4 had a different future/modern setting I think there would be a lot more love for it.
It also needed to not come out feeling really unfinished.
Explain.
These made the game really "fun" to play
+ some UI/UX issues that took a while to fix
The game is in a good state now but already got a bad rep from release
>I used to love aoe2 but the community is so unbelievably annoying and cringe that it makes me almost hate the game
Same. It was cool and became nostalgic. Now obviously that nostalgia is gone because people keep trying to keep the game going and if anything has been butchered with all the civ bloat. I liked it but the aoe2 grognards that shill against any other game have made the game frankly a blight now and almost hate it too. It it was just kept in the past it would have rested with good memories at the least.
>its this moronation where they complain about undercooked and underwhelming aspects of this fourth installment in a multimillion dollar franchise, and then also I pretend like having a gorillion civs that are vastly different in gameplay is worse than 12 after 2 years of financial support that have different one trick pony gimmicks nobody wants.
>no u
I accept your concession
I accept yours.
>that have different one trick pony gimmicks nobody wants
t. filtered noob
Oh man I sure LOVE having to build stuff close by to enjoy my stupid bonus! Or just how FUN it is to micro prelates and officers!
Frick off the game is boring as shit.
yeah super filtered
If I need bad taste to go through this filter then yea you can count me filtered.
>irrelevant or stupid points
>Wololo conversion is a giant circle with a count down instead of single target conversion clusterfrick, having to individually click each monk and target and hope RNG favors you
Wow a single nice thing over AoE2. Note gonna play touch that shit.
>In the end, he was unable to reply to without sounding mad
This. AoE4 has just been way more fun to control and all the asymmetric civs are cool.
>Complains about AoE2
>Praises AoE4 for its MUSIC
lol
lmao even
AoE4 music is souless as shit, it literally couldn't be worse.
dead wrong moron
Prove it.
?si=c4OkMxTnKaoVvvq0
?si=9xfs_qqyj8sDlHnh
Some of the civ music is a little generic but there's some absolute bangers in there and it's superior to 2 in every way. Anything other opinion is just a weird shill cope for 2.
>but there's some absolute bangers in there
AoE4 only has background music in its OST.
Simple, unintrusive, random melodies. It's like a Hollywood movie, but without the money-shot where they whack out that generic grandiose orchestra. It's meandering, aimless, can't decide what instrument to use, what melody to go for, what emotion to evoke. Think Richard Beddow's music compared to Jeff Van Dyck's stuff in Total War.
AoE2 just has moronic chiptunes from an old Nokia phone.
AoEO is the only AoE game with a really good OST. Where each civilisation gets its own and decently composed OST like something from SC/WC. The only issue with Online's soundtrack is the single brutally repetitive battle music.
AoM and AoE3 get second place. Their music isn't targeted, but it still works great for the atmosphere and fits the feel of the game, unlike the chiptunes of older ones.
Tale that aoe4gays ur taste is so shit that ms made a game cathering to you also shit as you
Take*
ESL. Stick to aoe2, poorgay developing worlder.
Lol the aoe4gay is seething bcuz the ge sux. Aoe3 is much better
Absolutely cancerous taste, AoE1 has the best soundtrack by a mile.
Trash taste. Aoeo has better soundtrack than 4
>zoomie can't even read
Tiktok really did a number on you guys.
>A.t the troony homosexual aoe4fah
Dont care, still playing aoe2
2 generally has better campaigns (though I’d hesitate to call and AoE campaign “great”) and has a snappier feel
4 has more interesting factions and build variety
I like AoE4 more in almost every way. Only things I like better in AoE2 are the campaigns and the mods/modding community. Both things AoE4 could improve over time.
aoe4 is honestly underrated. I like aoe2 and grew up with it but the factions all play way different in 4 and its just a newer game without all the old jank. Somethings i dont like about 4 like the inability to miss with archers and the missle homing siege but the game is really solid and theyve been improving it a lot over the years. It had a really bad buggy launch which made a lot of people drop the game for good reasons but i think people sohuld give it a second chance
I'm this guy.
In the end, I did buy it, and 0 fricking regrets. This game is great.
told you gay
I like to observe games while I eat, am I a shitter for thinking you should pretty much always build spearmen against French or anyone cav heavy? See so many people sitting at sub 1k gold and 4K plus food/wood and less than half pop cap and not building trash units.
>japanese fem scout's voice
tbh you all should stop hating I am learning to play the game and spiritoflaw said jeanne darc is the most op faction. I'm winning lots of games and having fun against higher ranked players
I know there's a lot of WW1/WW2 RTS games, but I would have aoe5 to atleast take place in 1920s-1960/1990s
how the frick are you supposed to play mongols? you can't even raid anyone, your cavalry is like 0.2% faster than a fricking villager and the maps are huge
>Waiting for trebuchet RNG so they finally land their shots
Lol
just bought the game and this is my first time playing any AoE/RTS game any tips and tricks i should know about and whats a good faction for a newbie?
Play the campaign of a civ that interests you, if you want to focus on mp make sure to set up a few hotkeys (most important imo are select all barracks/archery ranges etc), dont watch Beastyqt if you don't want to be put off the game, you should select 1 civ which you find most interesting and focus on playing it as the civs play different to each other, you can look up some civ-specific build orders but you can also try to figure stuff out at your own pace
newbie civs: english, french, maybe order of the dragon as they can field less yet more powerful units
>Play one or two of the campaigns just to get your feet wet in how it all works. Do note that while the campaigns are decent they aren't the cream of the crop as far as RTS campaigns go
>Learn to use hotkeys. Clicking on the buttons takes so much fricking time with your mouse that its painful.
>Learn to use control groups. It'll make it a lot easier to actually select what you want to select.
>Play the faction that interests you the most. Failing that, play English, they're idiot proof.
>Always be building villagers. More villagers = more resources = more buildings and units. Population cap is 200 and about half of them should be in villagers.
>Understand unit counters. Archers might mow down any lightly armored unit (spearmen, other ranged units) but they'll get dunked on by heavy infantry and cavalry. Cavalry is fast and powerful but gets countered hard by spearmen. Armored units are easily perforated by crossbows and gunpowder. Siege weapons all have different purposes (some are for killing big blobs of units, some are for destroying buildings, some are for destroying other siege weapons, etc...). Of course, civilization specific units throw new wrinkles into this paradigm and understanding those will just come with playing the game.
I'd stick to the easiest civs at first (English/French) to get a feel for the game
Unit counters are a big deal. An spearman will do ~10 damager per hit to a regular unit, but 40 damage to a horseman.
Someone already said it but your starting town centre should be producing villagers for the entire game, until you have atleast 100 villagers.
When building farms hold down shift and just click 8 times on the mill, will auto place and save a bunch of time. Same with every other building if you just want to clump.
I just played my 1st teamgame, I did a nice raid on the enemy, got a few villagers, destroyed most of his army later on but he rebuilt and killed mine, I got mad and quit. Im so sorry to my teammates
I redeemed myself with the 2nd game, picked an easier civ and we dominated our enemies
I'd like to see the Italians, Spanish, Poles, Magyars, Bulgarians and more but realistically Italians and Spanish are the most probable, Persia would be awesome too
How many more civs do you guys want in 4? I’d like 1 American civ I think, then maybe Spanish? I think anymore than that might be too much, except more sub factions would be cool
italians and spanish
they've already done most relevant middle eastern and asian factions, i'd rather they start doing inca/aztec instead of another civ from those regions
Certainly I want poles, then one from central america and one from indonesia. Can't have too many though, balance might be too much to keep ontop of.
Where it is is perfect. I can't really think of any more important civs to add. Byzantines (Eastern Roman Empire) was the biggest one that was missing.
There might be a way to include smaller kingdoms and duchies instead of empires kind of like the variant civ mechanics. Maybe include 4 civs in one. Like during each age you play a different civ. Obviously the civ in the next age has to follow historically.
As an example, for Iberia Dark Age could be represented by Visigoths or the Kingdom of Asturias. From the Dark Age you age you up into the Kingdom of León for the Feudal Age. To go to the Castle age you can choose to age up into the Kingdom of Castile, the Kingdom of Aragon, Kingdom of Portugal or stay as the Kingdom of León. To get to the Imperial Age, if you chose Castile, Aragon, or León, you age up into Spain. If you chose Portugal you stay Portugal.
That would cover all the minor nations into one package that would otherwise be too small to cover individually stretched across 500 AD to 1500 AD under one civ. It would make for a great campaign too. China did this with the dynasties and it was a great idea. I think the devs are interested in this idea with the introduction of the Ayyubid dynasty as a variant to the Abbasid Caliphate. They can lean more that direction to reduce civ bloat, while including all the nations players might want.
arctic marine mammal hunters when...
new player
was playing 3v3 small map and one chinese got a wall around 4 spots of stone and gold, put some construction inside and fricked me bc no door and i couldnt get inside
why they do this?
He was probably chinese IRL too
yea his nick was full anime letters
can't you build gates on allied walls now?
inb4 mongols
i can? idk im noob
>the greatest RTS game of the era
>When AoE2:DE mogs both it and AoE3 in every single regard
Nice try shill
>When AoE2:DE
Lol
Not so fast, chuddie
Go take a bath tubby
Not him, but what makes AoE2, particularly DE (with it's lobotomized pathfinding) better than AoE4?
muh nostalgia, muh sunk cost fallacy
>When AoE2:DE mogs
>When aoeo and aom mogs them. still better than aoe 4 thou
see below
aoeo/aom>=aoe3>>>>>>aoe2
>>>>>aoe1>aoe4
I always liked AOE III way more than AOE II as a kid.
why does aoe4 make aoe2 babies seethe so much?
just play aoe2 if you want lmao
I hate how static some of the buildings are
Like horses in the stables don't neigh, while the chickens just stand in place outside of houses
this game makes no fricking sense. how the frick do people have 90+ villager counts when gold pits and wood zones have enough wood for like 20 villagers for 5 minutes. where are they putting all their fricking villagers? how do they get infinite resources?
>Gold
>Sacred sites, relics, trading.
>Wood
>Trading, just keep cutting down trees anon.
>90+ villagers
>Don't stop producing villagers. If your TC stops then you are doing it wrong.
>aoe4 thread
>Almost no discussion about the actual game just flooded with aoe2 nuggets seething
It's like you nostalgia baited homos want rts to be a dead meme genre only appealing to 30+ year old desperately trying to cling onto their 12 year old selves
newbie here. Where do I learn to play? I want to play OotD
Look up build orders (search on youtube so it's interactive), practice 1v1s against the AI, then jump into ranked and see how you do
You can't learn everything from guides, you have to see what works, what doesn't , and what you could do differently. After every every victory, evaluate what you did right/could've countered your strategy, and, after every loss, evaluate what you should've done differently
?si=Kmfn7U3fuiHDSngx
?si=BfNqj1GWmAPT6rJJ
Don't just become a guide-drilled drone, learn what kind of adaptations you can do. Gain experience and use it
nta but is dlc worth it ?
Yeah it's priced low and the new factions are cool
why do the french get better feudal age cavalry than the mongols when they also get normal defensive options
this game looks like SHIT
It also sounds like shit and plays like shit.
What's good about it?
nothing, that's why it flopped and gets discounted like crazy
>Greatest RTS game of our era.
>AOEIV
>Have you even played another modern RTS?
>Looks on steam
>Sort by top rated
>Only other one is cossacks 3
>It's a remake of cossacks.
I guess this is the only modern RTS. That is sad.
Doesn't help that RTS grognards can't help themselves from trashing it. Instead of giving it a fair chance. Success in a modern RTS might show dev companies that there is a market in the genre.
>Doesn't help that RTS grognards can't help themselves from trashing it
doesn't help that devs' ambition is well below titles released 20 years ago on 100x smaller budgets with a bunch more technical limitations
I'll bite. You're the lead developer for AoE4. How would you change the game?
nta
nerf ottomans
set it during ww1/ww2 instead of making aoe2:2
the rest of the answers will cost you aoe4's lead designers salary for the total time spent on the project
So... Company of Heroes?
yes anon, age of empires is exactly the same game as company of heroes. Same gameplay framework. Age of empires is a game about squads, upgrading squads with equipment, setting up a singular factory and then making siege weapons featuring simulated physics collision, turret rotation, acceleration. In age of empires, the direction your unit is facing matters. In age of empires, you capture strategic points on map that give a trickle of munitions points.
Never post here again.
Tell me exactly how a WW1/WW2 game would work in the context of the Age of Empire series, poindexter.
you gather berries to advance to Aryan Age, build tanks and rush the Nazi villager lines so they can't chop enough wood to get V2 launchers out
pay me aoe4's lead dev's salary and I'll write you a design document.
>set it during ww1/ww2 instead of making aoe2:2
it's a stupid fricking idea and it was from the outset. base building in rts doesn't make any sense in the world war eras and that's why all the successful ww1/2 RTS games don't have it. why would you make an age of empires game that doesn't play like age of empires?
>Successful RTS’s
I guess Company of Heroes is not a successful RTS. I guess that WW1 game where you explicitly are base building will not be a successful RTS.
>I guess Company of Heroes is not a successful RTS.
company of heroes doesn't have base building beyond the barest minimum
>barest minimum
that would be realms of ruin and dow2. CoH has actual base building, no matter your headcanon and feelings.
>CoH has actual base building
haha, no. you build at max 1 of each production building per tier. you have no resource buildings, you don't even have dedicated builder units.
yeah combat engineers dont exist moron
i got warned for this message btw wtf, is r-word banned?
Rehashing middle ages Age of Empires when you already funded AoE2 DE was even more stupid especially when it just comes off as a chinese mobile knock off
>already funded AoE2 DE
AKA adding mods that already existed by in the workshop from AoE2:HD edition game then repackaging it and selling it to chumps. AoE2:DE wasn't funded, it got funded from all the AoE2 simps that actually bought it to fund AoE4.
They didn't just add mods they rebuilt the game from the ground up. This was an old game that wa written in assembly. Even updating the graphics and coding for things like zoom levels and ranked pvp was a massive undertaking. You sound like an 4 fanboy so you emotionally won't accept that it's a fairly generic and uninspired looking mess in comparison to 2 and probably shouldn't have been made, but that's ok. I hope the player count stays high and you enjoy it for years to come. I bet you'll lose interest and move to other games within a year though.
>in comparison to 2
Nostalgia. If AoE2 never existed, and a new RTS game was made that had those graphics, it would have been laughed off /vst/.
>shouldn't have been made
I actually enjoy RTS games and AoE4 brought me back to the genre since there hasn't been a game like it released in a while. AoE3 was released 18 years ago and 13 years ago for SC2. I was done with the series for years and scoffed when AoE2:DE released with its non-canonical civs and obvious nostalgia bait. I want a new RTS game, not an old nostalgia bait RTS game with its obvious shortfalls in gameplay and mechanics. It became lame and stale then, and certainly now.
AoE2DE is beautiful. It looks much better than They Are Billions or Civ 6
BAR is modern but it's not on steam yet.
essentially a 1997 game
I'm sorry for coming here to shit on aoe4. This is the general for aoe4 and you should be able to talk about it without someone trolling in your face cuz they like a different game. My bad folks.
How are you all liking the new empires?
I haven't gone online yet this season
Bros I missed the steam sale. Is there another way to get aoe4 for $20?
probably some gamepass shenanigans but I'm not microsoft employee enough to tell you how
>be Holy Roman Empire
>outpost your gold, wood and food
>reach castle age in 6 mins
>drop 5 knights to raid, the rest into man at arms and archers, add some springalds to counter mangonels
How exactly is the opponent meant to respond? They can't dive your eco for long and the only counter to your man at arms is crossbows which the opponent can neither get and when they do they are murdered by your archer stack
>How exactly is the opponent meant to respond?
spam knights
>make knights
>opponent makes spears and archers
>you run at him and he retreats under his outpost web
>now ur knights do nothing
Wtf is the point of aggro aaaa
>Wtf is the point of aggro aaaa
catch them before they get defenses up or cry
knights + archers counters a basic spearmen defense, and then you just have to hit critical mass knights to start burning outposts
The HRE FC isn't that strong because the only good part of their economy is aachen. There's this English eco build that is much more abusive and once it leaves dark age, you basically can't punish it.
>removed by uploader
E-Englishbros?!
I have always played Rus (even when they were unpopular). It's still the only one I play. When I'm against Japan in Feudal they just build all units which say they are countered by knights and/or archers. I only create knights and archers yet still my army gets mowed down and they even have enough extra resources to build rams to end the game. What should I do when the enemy units say that they're countered by knights but then knights do nothing against them? I'm just a casual gold 2 player.
which units in particular?
Japs all spam samurai (tanky frontline) and women (fast high dps squishies)
I don't think they can fight horse archers but you need good econ
I like warrior monks, the buff is pretty insane plus save some res by healing. Tbh I haven’t played against Jpn much yet so I can’t speak from experience
When is the Byzantine pick rate gonna plummet? People can't play the civ so there is no way its gonna keep a 9% pick rate... right?
90% of players who think byzantines are bad probably don't even realize they can produce mercenary royal knights with no contract for 240 olive oil each. you can produce knights while going for fast castle.
royal knights + some cataphracts for trample + camel riders for the support buff is the strongest cavalry mix you can make in the game
JD does it better
joe biden civ
if you luckbox the melee elephant mercenaries as byzantine you have a 10-0 matchup against pretty much anyone. castle elephants.
There's nothing luck-based about Byzantines, elephants are Imperial and you always get the ranged ones
they get 2 extra merc choices from trading posts. anyway, unplayable shit tier civ. balance is garbage again just like on release and will again take 2 years to fix. if you play anything but jean and ayys you're griefing yourself
>News Civs have been out all of 2 weeks.
>Waaaah, my ranked games are impossible now!
Honestly surprised that bronze players know how to use a keyboard.
you shill coping won't put the game in a playable state
You homosexual, I am not saying the game is balanced nor am I saying that the current state is healthy. I am stating that the DLC has been out for little over 2 weeks and we still are not sure how the things will play out. If this was month 2-3 I could understand your b***hing but since it is week 2 this proves that you belong in bronze. Honestly I am surprised that you can even operate a computer let alone huff air.
>elephants are Imperial
>you always get the ranged ones
get gud scrub I just won a game vs French rushing castle melee elephants.
it's possible to get 6 war elephants for a little over 2,200 olive oil 3 minutes into castle and you never have to buy a mercenary contract.
>unplayable shit tier civ
an elephant never forgets
You can't create formations so it sucks. It's just zerg-lite the game.
In war troops, you know, line up into units and then these maneuver in ways to cover each other's flanks and so forth.
>blob spam
>oh I feinted wow so strategy
>In war troops, you know, line up into units and then
and then the battle starts and everything goes to shit and turns into pure chaos
just wrecked another french player with castle elephants. it's the easiest matchup ever. just produce spearmen in feudal and stockpile all your olive oil til castle then make as many elephants as you can.
absolutely disgusting UI and gameplay gimmicks. How can u people play this over aoe2 is beyond me, like the only thing missing is archers on walls and its more of a cosmetic feature anyway
>absolutely disgu... ACK!
kys contrarian
what's wrong with it?
>still no response
there's nothing wrong with it, just aoe4 tards seething
sorry for not having the thread open 24/7 homosexual
it looks like shit, aoe4 UI looks more modern. it probably looked good on release but it has obviously dated by now
>Beauty, thematic artistry, clarity, flavor, colors, readability and functionality are all outdated concepts
>Modern good because modern simple, colorless, dull, lifeless, simplistic, homogenized
aoe2 is using the most basic font you could think of, im sorry you got a shit taste
aoe2de font was the biggest complaint about the game in beta
>font
lmao
frick icons, interface themes, information being present, let's b***h about fricking FONTS being 'too readable'
Would you not be able to read if it was a different font? It makes the game look like rushed indie garbage
very soulful icons
aoe2 could be a great game if it wasn't fully based around moronic gimmicks like quickwalling, deer pushing and other dumb exploits
Coming over from AoE2 to give things another go since I already bought the game. Currently remapping keys. Anything I should know?
Quickwalling is the only thing keeping melee unit aggression balanced there.
I doubt that, aoe2 has nothing as deadly as a royal knight. On that note, you should know Jeanne D'arc is OP as frick
>I doubt that, aoe2 has nothing as deadly as a royal knight.
Speaking of, how do the civs deal with that? Regenerating knights 5 minutes into the match?
Spears beat knights, it's really the only way
spam enough spears to make it impractical for knights to rush early, if countered properly you can put the French in a bind because their mid game isn't good until they get their trade buffs rolling
It costs about as much as 2 knights and has to be done in the landmark which also serves as your first stable. It's 1 health per second out of combat. French has pretty good WR in the match ups that favor them and 50% or below in everything else.
>Matchups
>In a game that only had 8 civs last year
>Starcraft has 3 civs
>Aoe2 launched with 8 civs
>AoM launched with 3 civs
>Aoe3 launched with 8 civs
Lmao dumbass porn brain riddled zoomer can't comprehend a game without 30+ moronic civs bloat
You're an RTS poser that doesn't know shit about the genre. You're a disgrace to the genre
Go back and play your definitive edition bloatware full of brown third world poorgay sandal-wearing monkeys
13 for AoK, and matchups being a real concern is silly. Your game is silly.
Aoe4 has the most civ asymmetry of the age games bar probably AoM.
Aoe2 civ bloat is infinitely more silly. And despite the civ bloat aoe4 will have more civ diversity no matter how many shithole mod civs aoe2de adds to milk aoe2detard paypiggies dry. Go play your eskimo civ and north sentinelese civs that share the exact same tech tree as every other civ. Top kek.
>Aoe4
>Assymetric
>Aom/aoeo exist
Really? The game has the same units
Everyone has to get a cab with charge or a maa but no actual one like ypu get in those games.
>Aoe4 has the most civ asymmetry of the age games bar probably AoM.
That would be Age of Empires 3. Are you new to this series?
>Aoe2 civ bloat is infinitely more silly.
>Go play your eskimo civ and north sentinelese civs that share the exact same tech tree as every other civ.
I'd like you to expand on this. It sounds like you actually believe the following:
>That tech trees are all uniform, at least moreso than in AoE4
>That the devs have been choosing silly non-civs
Both of these are false, but you're fuming, so tell me all about it.
>That would be Age of Empires 3. Are you new to this series?
Each civ in AoM has different units. There isn't a single thing the same in each civ. Age of Empires 3 civs have a lot of similarities. Dumbass RTS poser.
>I'd like you to expand on this
Aoe2 has the most civ symmetry. If you click on the tech tree and select each civ it's literally the same tech tree copy pasted with X's on a few random icons. It's the same in Aoe4 but there substantial differences between the civs besides 1 unique unit and tech and a shitty ass random modifier. Do you even have the CD ROMs for the prior games you big fat moronic bastard
>Each civ in AoM has different units
You just said "bar AoM".
>Aoe2 has the most civ symmetry. If you click on the tech tree and select each civ it's literally the same tech tree copy pasted with X's on a few random icons.
Look closer, dipshit. If you need, take out a piece of paper and note which civs have which units.
>It's the same in Aoe4 but there substantial differences between the civs besides 1 unique unit and tech and a shitty ass random modifier.
And you don't understand the logic of the bonuses or game. Why complain just for a lack of understanding? You're lazy. AoE4 civs have almost identical tech trees, just getting extra techs on top so players don't get bored too quickly.
>Do you even have the CD ROMs for the prior games you big fat moronic bastard
No, why would I? I can read a chart without them. Can you?
>AoE4 civs have almost identical tech trees
AoE4 has good civ variety. AoE3 is a dead game. AoE2 has bland civs. Simple as. If you can't understand this then we can't help you and you should probably stick to one of the older titles. AoE4 is just simply too high IQ for you.
>No, why would I? I can read a chart without them. Can you?
Confirmed RTS poser lol.
>AoE4 has good civ variety.
It currently has16 gimmick-civs with mostly-identical tech trees, weak identities, and a weak underlying base game.
>Confirmed RTS poser lol.
Buying CDs for games you don't play is the peak of poser behavior.
>mostly-identical tech trees, weak identities
Kek and the other games are better in this regard?
>Buying CDs for games you don't play is the peak of poser behavior.
I played them when they came out, zoomer poser.
>Kek and the other games are better in this regard?
Yes, much better, and you'd realize this if your eyes didn't glaze over whenever you looked at a tech tree.
>I played them when they came out, zoomer poser.
You played Age of Kings. AoE2 DE isn't Age of Kings. You don't play this game now, and have no meaningful connection to it, but still hold onto a physical relic as though it legitimizes you somehow.
You've been filtered to the utmost degree, and you should be utterly embarrassed.
The mechanics for each civ are unique. The civs in AoE4 give me better attachment to them than in any other Age game.
>You played Age of Kings
And Age of Conquerors and the rest of the original Age games.
>AoE2 DE isn't Age of Kings
And AoE2 DE isn't canonical. It's a collection of mods put together and sold to morons. The original AoE2 is the only AoE2 that matters.
>The mechanics for each civ are unique.
Okay? If that floats your boat, go on, but there's much more to a civ than it having a named mechanic to toy around with.
>And Age of Conquerors and the rest of the original Age games.
And you still got filtered.
>And AoE2 DE isn't canonical. It's a collection of mods put together and sold to morons.
I should screenshot this.
>anything I should know?
Infantry can build rams in the field with a blacksmith tech, so there's plenty of early aggression
Castle Age is a huge power spike, with MAA and knights/lancers coming in with high HP and tons of pierce armor.
Mangonels still clear out trash units but have a more targeted area and have some set up time
some empires are pretty funky but they've got a decent amount of variety to them, especially with landmark combinations. see what kind of style you like and what works out for you; unfortunately, the campaigns aren't really good for this, as they're pretty specialized more than 1v1s: try exploring the masteries as you try them out
They gave us garbage AoE3 no think economy in this game but decided to make our farms like anno... so fricking gay
welcome to the serengetti
How do you get melee elephants? Byzantines right? I only have tower ones.
each neutral trading post gives you a random selection of two additional mercenary units if you build your mercenary outpost next to it.
in addition to the standard selection of mercenaries you can also recruit sipahi, camel archer, horse archer, royal knight, mangudai, zhuge nu, and melee elephants.
the melee elephant selection also gives you the ability to buy zhuge nu in feudal, which is insane. i just played a jeanne d'arc player that tried to pre-empt my elephant rush by spamming arbaleiters. but i just made 30 zhuge nu from my outposts and tower and melted through them before they could even get a shot off on my elephants.
against french/jeanne d'arc in particular it's extremely brutal because you can just turtle with spearmen until castle and then dump all your olive oil on elephants that they really have no counter for and which hard counter royal knights.
>New Patch was released!
>Byzantines get nerfs all around.
As a Byzantine main I am ecstatic! Hopefully this pushes people away from the civ so that I don't have to have as many mirrors as I do.
jeanne needed the nerf bat and they gave it to byzantines instead
at least japanese got some much needed ones
Pre-nerf the Japanese sported a win% of 50.1% winrate over all match ups. If you look at Conq only it drops to 46.2% wr. They had some strong timings and the unit that a lot of Higher elo players were crying about were not touched. I doubt the Japs will to much of a drop though since their units are still just good units.
Jeanne doesn't need a big nerf. Her gameplan is really fragile. If Jeanne doesn't take off then the civ just sputters and dies. The problem is that if she takes off that she will single handedly win the game. Some slight nerfing but the reality is that her gameplay is just unfun for this type of game. Even if she hits a perfect 50% winrate people will still cry about her since it doesn't matter how much damage you do to her eco if she is able to get the levels in fast enough she will win.
jeanne needs a nerf because they're playing wc3 while everyone else is playing aoe4 and its annoying as frick to get punished for killing her because she gets xp from the fight
9.1.370 Patch notes
https://www.ageofempires.com/news/age-of-empires-iv-patch-9-1-370/
JD still broken af
Looking through the wiki. Why does Japan have so many unique units? What is this?
Did they translate the entire civilization into Japanese?
Samura are just slightly better men at arms, ashigaru are just cheaper archers, in general theyre a non-standard civ (but not as out there as Malians)
What the hell? AoE4 has espionage?
just some invisible units and a japanese ninja nobody makes
>Nobody makes an invisible raider that can disable unit production, self-heal, and teleport
>I'm supposed to believe this
He only comes from a landmark that competes with a comfy automatic farm factory
They made some balance changes to encourage the shinobi so maybe people will try them out
The wiki is lacking information like villager carry capacity. Is there a place that has all of the info?
https://aoe4world.com/explorer has more detail but still missing some basics
Base is 10 for non-HRE villagers.
What's the "Arabia" of AoE4?
Dry Arabia
Is there a way to de-select units one at a time?
shift+click the unit (the model, in the game world, no way to do it by clicking the ui)
>no way to do it by clicking the ui)
Devs...
>no way to do it by clicking the ui
no wonder the game flopped if it can't get the basics right
Unlike aoe2, in aoe4 there is no limit to the amount of units you can select. In aoe2, you can only select a total number of units up to a limit, after which you cannot select additional units. Due to limitations in the game engine for aoe2. So if you have 100 units selected in aoe4, it doesn't make sense to have an icon on the screen for every individual unit like there is in aoe2. You can even see this in aoe2 when you select a lot of units, it becomes a clusterfrick. Instead, there is an icon for every unit/building type in your selection, which then you can remove that entire unit type group from your selected units, or exclusively select that group and deselected the other groups. You can issue commands for a unit type within your selection, while keeping your selection, unlike in aoe2 which will automatically deselect the other groups whether you want to or not. Coming from aoe2, you come to appreciate the quality of life improvements aoe4 has and questioning how you played aoe2 like that. I don't miss the jank at all.
>t. shill
>pointing out an objectively better feature from a new game compared to the old one somehow makes you a shill
You seriously need to have a nice day. There is no hope for you. Your brain is broken. The only solution is eating a bullet. 2 gays FRICK OFF ALREADY GO BACK TO YOUR CONTAINMENT BOARD ON FRICKING REDDIT
>Unlike aoe2, in aoe4 there is no limit to the amount of units you can select.
In the vast majority of cases, I won't be selecting so many units at once that I'd be able to use your new feature. I most commonly divvy up vills, right clicking to closely control how many go to each area.
>Guy presses you once while I sleep
>"2 gays FRICK OFF ALREADY GO BACK TO YOUR CONTAINMENT BOARD ON FRICKING REDDIT"
...
>I won't be selecting so many units at once that I'd be able to use your new feature
Because your game doesn't have large epic battles lol
It does, and in those battles, I still use control groups and double-clicks to manage my units.
none of this explains or justifies not being able to do it by clicking the UI. It's just laziness and incompetence in a title that can't afford laziness and incompetence.
>not being able to do it by clicking the UI
Do what? You want the UI to display the icon of every unit you have selected?
I want it to do at least what 20 year old games accomplished already, it fails to do that, youre gonna waste more time replying to me arent you?
>what 20 year old games accomplished already
Such as?
aoe2, warcraft 3, brood war. Did you have a stroke or something? we're still talking about deselecting specific units from a control group via UI icons
>deselecting specific units from a control group via UI icons
That's moronic. Being able to deselect groups has greater priority over deselecting individual units.
yeah its so fricking moronic every good RTS has it. Whatever dude, its like arguing with a pajeet about the necessity of washing hands, to them its just a moronic concept when you can shit in the street and wipe with the palm of hand just fine. Keep shitting and stay happy man.
>design decision from 20 year old games
>Innovation=bad
If your big complaint of aoe4 is that it prioritizes displaying unit groups instead of individual units in the UI then I'd say aoe4 is doing pretty damn well for itself
UI is the second worst element of AoE4, the first is music.
Hello 2bab. HRE has amazing age up music
None of them accomplished this without limiting how many units you can select
starcraft 2. Pls keep defending microsoft they are a small indie dev after all
SC2 puts them in tabs you have to dig through, it's not very functional with many units either
starcraft 2 has unit tabs when you select an amount over the number that can be displayed in the ui
That and not having a care in the world.
>Add a winter biome
>Buildings don't have any accumulation of snow
>No footprints in the snow
>Many buildings spawn bright English lawns as a part of their foundation, unchanged on winter maps so you have summer meadows in the middle of a few inch snow.
Frickers are actively devolving wherever they can.
Command & Conquer never had that feature and it worked
and it was always niche compared to sc
c&c games didnt have a unit selection UI at all moron, there is nothing to click
>generals
weird shit game that doesnt have the following or success of red alert and c&c
game launched without custom hotkeys bruh
wdym you can ctrl+click the ui
Yeah and deselect every unit of a type. No way to deselect a single unit
>Sohei's Sutra (with cooldown): Reduces enemy damage by 50% for 60 seconds.
There's no way this is a real thing.
i saw some English mill farm build that kept you safe, is it still good
Is the Sultans Ascend campaign any good? Worth buying if you're just a single player player? Does it still have the stupid documentary style?
>paying to play as shitskins
ngmi
>Does it still have the stupid documentary style?
No, it's closer to an AoE2 campaign imo. The missions are quite good and challenging on hard, although I haven't finished it yet because it kept crashing pre-update for me. Not worth buying only for that though
Thanks.
I preferred them to the original campaigns, they have fun little quirks to them. Theyre presented via an unnamed Muslim chronicler, rather than the documentary style
>1: introduction to civ and the defense of tyre, you have a base on the side and stop the enemy from attacking your ally
>2: saladin introduction, plays as a unit-timed spawn and control-point capture map (i think they could make an MP minigame out of this)
>3 saladin versus reynauld on the red sea; you have to balance map control with traders before a massive naval engagement with 100's of frankish vessels on hard, it's a difficult challenge
>4 horns of hattin, facing several waves of different troops across different routes, a good struggle from your base
>5 defense of mansurah, walled city mission to wait for reinforcements to attack, but you also get assassin spies to run around the map and kill 3 crusader headmasters in the meanwhile
>6 field battle of Ayn Jalut agianst mongols with unit spawns, so it's about matching your counters and preserving guys
>7 siege of acre with a base and a super trebuchet that spends stone to topple frankish keeps
>8 Cyprus plays like an age2 base and invade mission, with emphasis on naval support
>age2 base and invade mission
Isn't the whole campaign basically an AoE2 campaign made in AoE4?
Other than the super treb, it's all missions that sound like something from AoE2 DLCs.
Id you phrase it like that, they feel more Age2 than Age4, where you have a base but mostly do other things with them.
Still, I'd say they try to focus on the theme or mechanics of their mission: 5 has a bit of city defense but I mostly spent it navigating spies. 2 has a contesting ticket value like Company of Heroes or Dawn of War 2's victory points, making it pretty fun. 3's naval battles has an overall "civic unrest" bar you have to balance out, else you'll lose the game. 4 is about these terrain setpieces thar debuff enemies so you can kill knights with spears 1:1, while I have to admit, I turned down the difficulty on 6 from hard because I could never get the proper micro. 7 was an attack/defend with the trebuchet tool, and 8 lacked any unique mechanic besides freeing prisoners
How are you meant to play Order of the Dragon? Fast castle into MAA spam? 2tc? Feudal all in with horsemen and archer?
people usually harass me with horsemen when i play against them
Makes sense their horsemen are bigger than knights
Fast castle is bad with OOTD
I always open with some kind of aggression, horsemen, archer, or spear all are viable to open with
people to tend to expect horsemen so its funny to open archer, then they go horsemen, then I go spear
2tc good, if you cant get ahead enough early on with harassment get a 2nd tc up because their eco sucks otherwise
thing you didn't know about byzantines #327
>byzantines can build mangonels and springalds in the field without building a siege workshop or researching siege engineering
Speaking of things I didn't know - 4 villagers will build something twice as fast as 1 villager
there's a constant optimization you have to try to do. more villagers = faster build time but with an increase in worker inefficiency during that time.
why this is game so shit that the playerbase bleeds since the update which show how shitty this game is. the civs are not very assymetric like aoeo or aom which the first one is confirmed as the true aoe 4 but the cartoonish backslash forced them to changed it to aoeo which show how lazy game it is
AoEO is so extremely polished in a gameplay perspective. Everything feels good to do, scouting around, making units, popping up buildings. It's just nice and extremely responsive, with such great music.
A shame it wasn't made as a traditional RTS and instead got stuck in unit tier equipment bullshit with consumables.
It has everything else but aoe2gays prefer its game and everyone else moved on before it got the real stuff. Same is happening with aoe4
>make worse game with less content
>this is the players fault somehow
Shills love to blame players for everything that's actually the dev's fault.
Truth is Relic hasn't been good since DoW 1 and even then it's debatable because the game is terribly balanced and is carried mostly by voice acting.
>Truth is Relic hasn't been good since DoW 1 and even then it's debatable because the game is terribly balanced and is carried mostly by voice acting.
truth is every relic release has been trash that was made good by patches and expansion packs DoW 1 included and particularly so.
DoW 1 had the benefit of shipping with 4 wildly different factions plus a 5th within a year and a 6th and 7th within two so nobody expected the balance to be good right out the gate.
>DoW 1 had the benefit of shipping with lots of unique content
and that's why it succeeded. And why DoW2 came nowhere near that success
DoW2 was just way too big of a style shift at the start. what sold DoW1 was BIG battles with BIG units. shit like the bloodthirster was so cool compared to smaller end game units in other RTS games. DoW2 was a huge downgrade in scope when people wanted another upgrade.
>big battles
>big units
>unit interactions
>unit melee attack interactions
>12/10 voice acting
>10/10 edgy writing
>zoom in to watch your troops spit out thousands of bullets in chaotic unison looking cool as frick
>tons of influential squad/unit customization and I'm not talking about army painter
yes, DoW2 was very underwhelming compared to this. DoW3 didn't even try reaching that bar. Sucks that we'll probably never get an RTS this good again with this much effort
When it comes to gameplay AoE4 is easily Relic's best game by far. And it's because they didn't really design it, some talented Ensemble people did back in 1997
Filtered and the current game has tons of content but aoe4 and aoe 2 aleays get filtered. Aoe 4also lack of content but apeo did fic and the basic mechanics are unmatched compared to other aoe and aoe4 which is a insult to the whole aoe franchise
>playerbase bleeds
its higher than aoe2s playerbase lmao
sultans ascend is the best selling aoe expansion of all time
Won't last, the game had like 80k on launch a year later it was 5k. AoE2 will keep 20k till the end of time
A year after launch Sep 2022 there were 15k players lol
stay poor
see
as he said is so true that it will Its over aoe 4 gay shiller
Aoe4 has achieved dominance over Aoe2
yes
also with gamepass and xbox the game is like just way more popular than aoe2
aoe2 is now for people who eat bugs and live in the third world, the poor mans game
Never played much RTS but I got this game cheap so I'm going play some French and see if I like it. How's the singleplayer/campaign?
pretty good especially if you're a history gay
I don't give a frick about history so the bores b***h in my ear was a little annoying but the first mission turned me off campaign entirely tbh so I'm just going to play vs AI and check out the art of war stuff. That shit looks cool.
forgot to mention I got instantly turned off because the first mission has me controlling a single knight with an aura buff ability, I find some spearman and a swordsman with an aura buff.
Campaign is fricking awful don't listen to the shills.
It's history channel (literally) narrated by a bored woman, there are no campaign characters, triggers are simple and it has lots of elements removed from the skirmish/pvp gameplay for some reason. It's a shame because a nice campaign could salvage this game but it's the worst part.
I actually owned this game for like three days before the website that sold me it decided they got ripped off somehow and refunded it.
So I have no real opinion on this. I hate whatever website pulled a fricking Indian Giver trick on us, though.
me and my friend just bought the game
havent played rts for a few years, never online not even lans
What am i in for? Also bought the dlc cause eh who cares Japs and Byzantium si a good deal
What's your aim?
The non-DLC campaigns are super tame, they're either about navigating an army in a straight line, building a base while the enemy attacks from one direction (and the narrator warns you when they're attacking), or, like, two maps that give you options. The Sultans campaign has plenty of those, mixes things up with ginmicks, and can be actually difficult, so they're more fun.
Compstomps are pretty boring, it just doesnt feel the same and the "citybuilding" aspect you can do in other RTS doesn't look as good
Online-wise, it's pretty strong. W/L ratios used to be between 40-60% for all empires (I haven't checked with SA), so I would say go with what you like to play. Most empires have their own gimmicks that make them play differently in addition to their unique units, so try arouns and see whar you like
Pick a civ you find fun, don't pay attention to winrates.
1 or 2 tc vs the new civs as french?
I beta tested this game and it was dogshit. I then bought it anyway and never played it again after playing a few scenarios of the Norman campaign. What a shit awful game. I can't believe people play this horseshit. Probably Coh3 fanbois.
I decided to overlook the cartoony graphic design and give it a try in the current steam sale but i just had to refund the game after realizing not only the graphic is cartoony but also the projectile physics. The arrows behave like heatseeker missiles, the town center spits arrows rapidly one by one like a tennisball machine and all hit their target.
they didn't want aoe2 archer micro
AOH NONONO I CANT HABDLE CRITICISM EVEN THOUGH MY GAME WITH BUSTED RANGE WITH NO TERRAIN ADVANTAGE TO MAKE IT MORE BALANCED SUX SO HARD
just go play aoe2 lmao why are you here
archers are way more op in aoe2 u dumb asiatic
OH NNO NONO AOE 2 IS LE BAD BUT AOE 4 LITERALLY homie EVRY META AND MECHANIC FROM AOE 2 AND IT BECAME AOE 2.2
filtered the moron, good riddance homosexual
>NOO ITS NOT IDENTICAL TO THE OTHER GAME
lol
i just wonder how the relatively small developer team from the late 90's were able to build a game with more credible physics and a studio today with more developers, more money, better technology cannot.
something something you're a racist chud, work-life balance! Empowering women developers! The company may be the biggest and richest tech giant in the world, but... UGH CAN SOMEONE CANCEL THIS CHUD. IT'S GOOD! IT JUST IS!!!
lmao @ all the rabid responses for no reason, this is what sunk cost does to a mf. Instead of fixing the arrows they doubled down on the mobile look, and all it did was mindbreak aoe4 fans who have to eat shit all the time for it
>Why isn't this RTS game perfectly realistic
Because realism doesn't always make for good gameplay. And units doing 180 degree dodges to dodge arrow fire like in an anime looks moronic and isn't realistic either. It's a good game design decision because it cuts out that nuisance from prior games and having to cheese projectile fire. And if you don't research two techs your projectile units and buildings are aggravatingly useless. Instead aoe4 says frick that, you can be rest assured units attacked by range will get hit by ranged in the same way units attacked by melee will get hit. It cuts out the annoying bullshit.
no one is arguing with you, the visual feedback is dogshit and that's why everyone complains. It looks and feels like shit. That is the issue
Arrow targeting is one of my complaints (because of how much I lose to my dark age scouts), but it's fine during battles and the rest of the game.
I don't like the aesthetics of the late Euro architectures and their metalled roofs, but the other empires are fine and there's clarity with unit cultural variations.
I enjoy the aggro of feudal age, field access to rams really encourages a lot more creative pushes
How do IU teach my friend to play? He did one art of war but like he seems lost.
We might do replay review
Is me picking Japs unfair?
the civs in this game are super well balanced and nothing is really broken in its current state. Has he ever played any RTS before? If he wants to learn have him watch YouTubers and do a bunch of comp stomps while he learns the mechanics
this, there's a lot of guides on youtube.
t. newbie
he is a 0 exp noob to rts, I barely told him the basics. he is just slow ig and doesnt know WHERE to focus in order to keep up in unit , age and tech.
Echo issues I guess
I am not much for a p[layer myself and i ahve hard time teaching him.
Also he doesnt really wanna atch youtube or play solo this is a group activity. Maybe play more 4 player f4a(with AI)
He's not going to get better without knowing what to do.
>Also he doesnt really wanna atch youtube this is a group activity
back in my day we all played different factions and would read guides/practice and talk to each other about strats and how someone did X or someone else defended Y. getting better a game is fun.
he's not going to get better bumbling about doing random shit. but if all you care about is AI well just put it on a difficulty you two can beat.
he does wanna at least be able to beat me. I guess watching guides is the only way.
Maybe I can also just tell him how I play and he can tr to copy me idkkk
This game looks way too early 2010s, Total War devs have been doing massive detailed armies for a while now, there's no excuse, it just gets mogged hard by AOE2's timeless style
>Total War devs have been doing massive detailed armies for a while now, there's no excuse
Doesn't fit with AoE's scope. If you want something with Total War units, look for Total War games.
>AOEO , AOE3 detailed unit on zoom exist
>Doesnt fit detaile...ACK...
Yeah, TW games have way larger armies on battle maps and they still manage to do it, I'm not praising them, Creative Assembly sucks horse wiener and they STILL manage to look better than AOE4
I'm not asking for le hyperrealism shit, I just want the game to look better than 2010s eurojank
>Yeah, TW games have way larger armies on battle maps and they still manage to do it
That's precisely why it works for them. The appeal of Total War is having animated army soldiers.
>I'm not asking for le hyperrealism shit, I just want the game to look better than 2010s eurojank
And there you run into practical issues.
AoE4's aesthetic was chosen to emphasize readability, at the cost of realism. Total War units don't need that because they have giant banners and a dedicated UI telling you which units are involved in what areas. Doesn't work with Age of Empires.
>Aoe4 aestetic
>Easy to read units
Remenber when players rage about units being so small that they have to readjust sises but the og aestetic was made for a samll scale unit that now it looks crappy?yeah aoe 4 artstyle is a disaster
They failed, but the decision itself was sensible.
Total War devs would have sold each new civ individually as dlc.
>tfw infected my playgroup with this game
We are eating good boys, 4 more players bought the dlc
I got one of my mates to buy it. Hoping to get at least one more, I think 3v3s are more fun than 2v2s and 4v4s.
Can you guys give me some economy tips? My army strategy is always good but my economy is ALWAYS mid at best. I trade, get up to 85 ish villagers, what else do I need to do?
>get up to 85 ish villagers
Try to pump that number up to 110+. Do you get your eco upgrades? Do you rebuild your lumbercamps closer to the woodline? Fish is good too.