I see no reason to play AoE4 over AoE2. Am I the only one?
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
I see no reason to play AoE4 over AoE2. Am I the only one?
I see no reason to play AoE4 over AoE2. Am I the only one?
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
tru dood
I played it recently, is pretty fun, following the AoE 3 style more than 2
Nostalgia
I don't care for AoE4 so little you don't even understand, but AoE2 I can play day in and day out and not get bored (only frustrated sometimes)
AoE4 is a pretty different game where civs are a lot more asimetric so I would say there is a reason to play it over 2.
I'd rather play AoE3 than AoE2 v0.65
Well for one it's 3D. The factions play way different than aoe2. Love running my expensive army around as OTD. Less micro intensive. I don't have to play boar and deer mini-games.
I heckin love controlling 1/3 the units too bro! It's so much cooler seeing the low poly guys fight it out, when it's like 50v50 I can't tell what's going on! Thank g*d Relic came through for us boomers!
im probably the only one but I basically put aoe2 down when aoe4 came out and haven't really returned.
AoE2 has pic related and runs just fine on semi-modern machines (and I have original AoE1 for my old laptop), so yeah, not fricking playing AoE4.
Yeah aoe2 has a wildly unpopular dlc that nobody bought. Great argument lol
I bought it
I have the dlc >:(
They chose eras that overlap too much between both games. They should've made a full on Victorian or WW1 or 2 AoE.
How's the campaigns for 4?
as weak as aoe2's
Way worse
Lower difficulty since you usually only fight 1 opponent at a time instead of 3+. But that's the case in both AoM and AoE3 as well.
Rus campaign was pretty good. French pretty bad. English and Mongol were fine, nothing noteworthy.
Though I probably have a bias for the Rus campaign because I like campaigns that start you off small in the Dark Age and you progress from there. Compared to AoE2's campaigns where 90%+ of the scenarios start you off in the Castle Age since that's when the game starts proper with Knights, Siege and such.
There's a ton of missions where you don't get to macro, on hard some are ball-bustingly brutal. You have to abuse enemy AI like crazy.
You just hate video games, admit it.
AoE4 is just AoE2 with QoL improvements
You're not ready for this or any conversation, though
>QoL improvements
>Can't even select and deselect units
I prefer AoE4 a lot over AoE2. I think the kind of comfort features it has should be in all strategy games.
I'm also surprised that some people don't like the graphics that much. I think it looks pretty and, more importantly, very readable at all times.
Only gripes I have are the lobby UI, actually. It's buggy and cumbersome.
You can, there's an option in the menu.
AoE IV is more streamlined and casual and less competitive which is why I like it. I don't like esports which is what II turned into
They already made AoE III for you people though.
AoE4 plays 10x better, but AoE2 looks 1000x better.
It depends on what you value more.
>AoE2 looks 1000x better
no body decay to skeletons and rags in """definitive""" edition tho
I wont play because devs are a bunch of cowards who went back in time. AoE4 should go from 1700s to 1900s and if you disagree you are a homosexual.
I disagree. It should have been set in ancient times again like AOE1.
That could have worked even if I dont like it, but picking the same time period as AoE2 was an obvious recipe for failure.
both are good. I prefer AoE4 now because every faction plays differently from each other, plus everyone has their own unique unit models instead of fricking Aztecs having man-at-arms with metal swords. It has sovl. The only bad thing is that the game is still in its early years and all the balance bullshit hasn't been ironed out yet.
>The only bad thing is that the game is still in its early years and all the balance bullshit hasn't been ironed out yet.
Like what? im curious
>The only bad thing is that the game is still in its early years and all the balance bullshit hasn't been ironed out yet.
I prefer that a game keeps balancing even years later, optimally as they introduce new features as well.
Warcraft 3 is more than 20 years old now and they're still balancing it, but contrary to Starcraft 1 they even add new stuff (new items). I want them to keep doing the same for AoE4. Perfect balance comes with staleness, I'd rather have evolving gameplay, features and meta.
this, I remember I cringed hard when I first saw that fricking Aztecs fight coming at me with medieval english knights and shit. I really hope we gonna get at least like 12 more factions for aoe4
No anon. You are literally the only person who has ever expressed this extremely unique opinion.
Just curious, what "advanced" graphics options do you guys use or turn off? Do you use 3d water?
I don't see the difference besides the color change.
It offers a rather different gameplay experience. You're not supposed to play it over AOE2, but together with it.
yes you are the only one, you're special
AoE4 is actually better in gameplay
I loved AoE2 and DE is really good but it's still the same game with the same quirks of old. AoE4 has improvements and a great different pacing.
Different games from different companies and eras. AoE4 is RTS for new generations. AoE2 was an RTS in RTS era.
Gameplay: AoE2 micro and macro intensive, Skills like quick walling are important, new strategies till this day. Like playing chess.
AoE4: more casual. Not so heavy on macro, nothing much micro. Good strategies but because theyre asimetric factions theres less space for strategies. Like a Starcraft. You got a couple of ways to play each civ. Like playing checkers.
>AoE4: more casual. Not so heavy on macro, nothing much micro. Good strategies bu
Opinions super discarded
I can taste your salt and disdain across the internet lmao
Elaborate, I'm considering getting AoE 4 because I don't like how samey the civs are in 2, and don't like the autism related to deer and boar hunting; will be playing it mostly for compstomp and skirmishes with friends
NTA, but I personally don't like the compstomp scene, the AI's not as great as Age2 and you don't get the satisfaction of building a pretty looking city at the end of it. Age4's PvP (ranked or otherwise) is pretty good
> but I personally don't like the compstomp scene
lower your tone when speaking to me.
AoE4 is pretty fun. The civs are assymetrical, or at least much more than AoE2. Still feels like AoE2 with QoL improvements, and people always describe it like that because it is.
So civs play different and varying stages. For instance, Rus start is all about hunting wild life ASAP because they gain gold with each kill, so it's a minigame for them awhile building stuff. Other civs are as straightforward as a AoE2 one. Overall, it's pretty fun for skirmishes between friends and casual PvP. PvE is as good as any other RTS i guess, i wouldn't know, never played against the AI actually.
In the last expansion they added 2 civs, the japs and the byzantines, but also added "variants" for existing civs which are French but Jean D'Arc led frenchies, or Roman Empire elite which are tankier but expensive everything.
Seriously it's good. Relic didn't pulled it off, someone else did, but they did a fine game and its gotta be the best RTS in awhile besides maybe Beyond All Reason this last year, or at least until another one comes around.
>or Roman Empire elite which are tankier but expensive everything.
What an absolutely moronic way of describing the Order of the Dragon. it's a Balkan crusading order consisting mainly of Romanians and Hungarians that had frick all to do with Rome.
>inb4 the HRE is Rome!
so are my shoes.
The order of the dragon was a chivalric order of various hre princes which was mostly an anti ottoman alliance. The naming of the new civs is mostly horrible tho wish they just called it teutons or something
>The naming of the new civs is mostly horrible tho wish they just called it teutons or something
I actually like it very much that they do this for the variant civs.
This allows them to add many variations to base civilizations while keeping the normal schemes for the base civilizations. The best of both worlds.
I had actually been very tired of facing the same 10 civilizations in every single historical videogame, so it's good that they do those weird names for the variants.
They can make historically accurate names that aren't completely made up garbage that are still unique for variants. I like ayyubid because its a muslim dynasty that existed in that time and still follows a sort of naming scheme like the abbasid dynasty as an example. Funnily enough they changed ayyubid from 'sultan's army' after a bunch of backlash (at least i think it wasnt just a placeholder, but why would only that name have been a placeholders when the other ones are the current ones we have now.)
Jeanne d'arch makes no sense, naming your faction after 1 woman instead of some sort of entity that actually existed (no dynastic muslim names are not similar to this because these were existing states in history like the ottomans, abbasids ayyubids. Zhu xi's legacy seems completely made up, i mean he was some scholar or something no idea why he would be named after a faction. Order of the dragon was a chivalric order that existed but not at all some sort of unified group so again very weird naming choice. They can do better with the names. They can pick unique names that are more historically accurate, doesnt have to be the same 10. Example of this already exists like the abbasid dynasty and delhi sultanate, both unique names that refer to at least historically accurate entities that actually existed. It's not weird historical names, its just inaccurate ones.
>anne d'arch makes no sense, naming your faction after 1 woman instead of some sort of entity that actually existed
Well it's just because it's frenchies, but MOBA hero Jeanne D'Arc and his bunch of homosexual raiding baguettes
Remainder to wall yourself ASAP and watch the Jeanne player struggle in confusion as to why can't he raid at T2 and insta win.
tbh they way nerfed t2 in feudal since last patch its not that strong anymore. personally had no issues with jeanne even prior patch by just quick castling and holding with spears for the most part.
French knights are the crutch for so many people still today, and people still fall for the early kinght raid. I mean it's strong at any level, but its kinda funny when you shut it down early and they literally cannot grasp what to do after that.
A palisade and some archers/towers shut down the raid, and every fallen knight is a frickton of gold lost. Once they realize they bet everything on that, they simply cannot adapt fast enough.
Pikes actually kinda suck at killing knights, they get kited. They're there to deter, but the real frenchie killer are archers and heavy crossbows.
>Pikes actually kinda suck at killing knights, they get kited. They're there to deter, but the real frenchie killer are archers and heavy crossbows.
Well all you need to do is deter. Of course spears hardcounter knights. u just need the archers to counter their inevitable archers to stop your spears. You open with spears tho against knight civs always. Also im talking about feudal of course, which is the most important part of the game when ur playing against an aggro knight civ like jeanne. Spears dont suck against knights, you just have to realize its a defensive unit that prevents the knights from doing anything. The knight player is the one putting a lot of resources in so if you simply make them not kill your shit you are gaining value. By the time I reach castle the game is basically over at that point if the Jeanne player went for some feudal aggression at least which they do like 99% of the time
>Funnily enough they changed ayyubid from 'sultan's army' after a bunch of backlash (at least i think it wasnt just a placeholder, but why would only that name have been a placeholders when the other ones are the current ones we have now.)
I would've preferred Sultan's Army or something similar over Ayyubids because you can clearly tell that it's a variant.
Been playing with new players and they all thought that the Ayyubids were a standalone base civilization, while for Jeanne, the Order and Zhu Xi they immediately understood that they were based on something.
Aoe4 is fun. All the civs play in a more unique way than especially 2 but mostly other aoe games too. Irs also not as hard to get into for newer rts players so I can actually introduce my friends to it. The new expansion they just released is a great addition too
I'm not ever playing aoe2 again when third worlder pakis potato machines make my game lag out. Frick no.
>make villager
>SHE-HO
what did the makers mean by this
I am playing AoE4 and i'm addicted again
I don't get why you guys are obsessed in not engaging into it, it's pretty good
I just wish it looked better, because the special effects like cannons have no oomph to it. Same as no blood or corpses, just like AoE2DE