EPTAge of Empires IV - Page 2
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
swarminfestor
Malaysia2449 Posts
| ||
|
blunderfulguy
United States1415 Posts
Adding different damage/armor types is great, it feels right. The pace of the game and units' move speed seems spot on (more in line with AoE and War3, as it should be), but the firing speed and projectile speed of ranged units feels too fast for this style of RTS. The projectile speed of arrows at the start of the game, in the first age, feels off. The damage of archers and the length of battles with them feels slightly too fast. For firearms, I do wish they would take longer to reload and be less effective in general. I can't remember if miss chance is in the game, but I feel like it'd be better for this game if it was replaced with damage ranges for advantage (damage range bonus, i.e. 10 + 4 damage range for 10-14 damage) and disadvantage (chance for damage to be reduced, or a stat reduction plus small damage range), as well as for firearms (all gunpowder attacks have a damage range which gets raised or lowered if they have high or low ground). It would be less swingy than pure miss chance while still implying missed and glancing blows as well as not being perfectly reliable/consistent every time compared to the more reliable infantry and cavalry. Siege units could also have a range, but because their damage numbers are higher it would not likely matter more than once in a blue moon (such as when only a few units remain to continue an attack after a large battle). If it already also has randomness in attacks (e.g. -1% to +1% to the length of every unit's startup frames during their attack animation), perhaps that should be increased for firearms and also apply to their reload speeds (e.g. instead of -1% to +1% to startup animation time, the startup/"aim" animation and recovery/reload speed for gunpowder units would be +0% to +3%), and for siege units too. Whether or not this would be in combination with damaged ranges is not something I have the energy to think about right now, I'll just cross my fingers for a dev blog about it all and a public test map with one or both. I really loved the Explorer and that first Age of AoE 3 so I really like that this game (as well as Humankind) keeps the explorer unit. I do wish they leaned in to it a little more, but I don't think it needs to be changed at all right now, and I wouldn't want this standard 1v1 mode to have any stronger hero-style units (right now, for this game mode). I think the art direction they went with is also spot on, but there are some minor issues with visual clarity and contrast. Moving/animating doodads (fields and trees) look fantastic if you're just watching workers go about their business, taking in the view, but they can be like a blur of splattered paint when you're moving the around, issuing commands in the middle of a fight. Some buildings and most of the landscapes also seem to lose all of their distinctive features when you're looking at more than one little slice. Building features, environment features, and some units look very flat in general; too much of one color, or entirely dark (only for damaged buildings, but still mediocre by modern standards), not enough at-a-glance detail or contrast for a lot of things. This makes the game look very painterly overall, but at the moment I feel like more contrast (even just in the details) is necessary to have a really great playing and watching experience, as well as a better learning experience (more uniqueness between elements makes it easier to learn). In fewer words: It doesn't need to sacrifice its more realistic art direction to be as visually clear as Warcraft 2 or 3, but even AoE 2 and 3 had realistic art directions with plenty of visual clarity because of contrast in its color hues between teams and in its tones and shading to distinguish individual elements of specific buildings and units as well as diffierent buildings and units from each other in the same team. AoE4, to me, is missing some of the contrast and sharpness that you can see in older games as well as remasters, particularly AoE2:DE. It could be that most of this has to do with the lighting settings for the maps I've seen as many screenshots look very clear, and the game looks great to me overall. But in motion and in certain aspects it looks washed out from using too many of the same tones and colors without any hard lines or distinct textures. Rocks look phenomenal! Except the gold veins, as their art style and being a gray lump of plastic and wed clay mangled and twisted up with a smaller yellow lump of waxy clay clashes with every other thing in the game. It brings to mind War3:R, which stings, although it is literally only this one thing that stings. The UI in-game and out is somewhat modern/minimalist and nice, but also feels very rudimentary/unpolished. I neither like nor dislike it overall, I'd say I'd hope it changes a bit before launch but that's barely over a month away. All the key illustration art is fantastic. I wish some of that was seen in the game somewhere, at least more in the menus and different screens. Hopefully it will be more prominent on release or during a single-player campaign. Not at least showing it on loading screens feels weird though. More specific complaints about the UI, the pings when you give commands or select buildings is visually way too dramatic/overwhelming (I want the pings half their current size), and the mini map needs more clarity in other ways besides its iconography (I want to know where trees are one the map, water, cliffs; it really is just a flat blur of colors with too many dots and too-large icons on it relative to the size of the map). There are also selection/deselection and grouping/ungrouping features missing and it doesn't seem like they're design decisions, just missing functions/utility. It's awesome to see. I hope I can make time to play it, but I'll at least keep a close eye on it through October, and the rest of the year if there are a few official design/development updates and whatnot. Edit: Oh, and I felt I was missing a lot of information at times. I kept wanting there to be buff/debuff icons with tooltips above unit command cards, and building/research and capcacity icons above buildings instead of the tiny little bar. The minimal, immersive, diagetic design is great for a lot of things like workers carrying resources, looking at boats to see if they are carrying cargo or not, and feeling like the music is coming from the people in your city. It isn't so great when I'm trying to see which army units are in which "stance" and which effects are happening during a fight. The observer system is great to see, but no replays is totally bizarre a month-ish out, and the five minute hard delay is understandable but it's a little annoying to wait five minutes after a match starts (maybe three by default and five for ranked specifically would be less awkward). I'd also need to check out how things like grenades are handled in this game, and trampling, and don't have time to check out hotkeys and camera hotkeys myself yet. But I'm excited to do all that soon, which is a good sign. | ||
|
Latham
9568 Posts
+ Show Spoiler [Example 1] + ![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/4uJpvCu.png) Look at those units. At the top you have a post-imperial Camel Archer(Abbasid Caliphate) and below is a post-imperial Camel Rider. They are almost identical. Even looking at them for a longer perioud of time you have trouble seeing any differences. One has a bow, the other a sword... and a bigger rim on his hat... This is just terrible glance value. No way to immediately identify which is which 1s before an engagement happens. + Show Spoiler [How AoE2 DE does it] + ![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/GxwlU1c.png) Look at these units. Different palettes, differently coloured camels, different armor, all of this makes them super easy to differenciate. Even in the case of the Camel Rider --> Heavy Camel Rider ---> Imperial Camel Rider it stays consistent. No way to get them mixed up with Camel Archers and Mamelukes. THIS IS WHAT 80% of the unit roster needs. Visual clarity. Other this is buildings... someone on reddit identified EXACTLY why I feel like I'm playing a bad mobile game. And it's the proportions of units to buildings. + Show Spoiler [example 2] + https://imgur.com/a/0ExUXjp (load this in a separate window, TL refuses to load it due to its size) Meanwhile AoE2 buildings are really unique AND have the same general structure preserved over every civ architecture in-game. There's simply no mistaking them. Glance value at it's finest. + Show Spoiler [AoE2 Buildings example] + ![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/kZghKng.jpg) And this extends to EVERY shared building. Stables look like stables for everyone. Barracks like barracks. Town Centres have the same 3-part scheme for every architecture. This is what makes AoE2 so easy to play and follow. Aside from that if they increase the unit collision for on-foot melee units and fix (because they are aware of it) the lag that accompanies every unit order and makes them actually crisp and responsive instead of feeling like they're being bogged down in mud, I can kinda see this being OK to play. More pics & comparisons: + Show Spoiler [1] + ![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/H5Z24b6.jpg) ![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/G3etltK.png) + Show Spoiler [2] + ![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/CTqRAPB.jpg) ![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/1WoFu0X.jpg) + Show Spoiler [3] + ![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/dpo0bUE.jpg) ![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/vBUTNw5.png) | ||
|
blunderfulguy
United States1415 Posts
On September 20 2021 05:11 Latham wrote: I think I can finally pinpoint what is annoying me in AoE4 graphically: + Show Spoiler [Example 1] + Look at those units. At the top you have a post-imperial Camel Archer(Abbasid Caliphate) and below is a post-imperial Camel Rider. They are almost identical. Even looking at them for a longer perioud of time you have trouble seeing any differences. One has a bow, the other a sword... and a bigger rim on his hat... This is just terrible glance value. No way to immediately identify which is which 1s before an engagement happens. + Show Spoiler [How AoE2 DE does it] + Look at these units. Different palettes, differently coloured camels, different armor, all of this makes them super easy to differenciate. Even in the case of the Camel Rider --> Heavy Camel Rider ---> Imperial Camel Rider it stays consistent. No way to get them mixed up with Camel Archers and Mamelukes. THIS IS WHAT 80% of the unit roster needs. Visual clarity. Other this is buildings... someone on reddit identified EXACTLY why I feel like I'm playing a bad mobile game. And it's the proportions of units to buildings. + Show Spoiler [example 2] + https://imgur.com/a/0ExUXjp (load this in a separate window, TL refuses to load it due to its size) Meanwhile AoE2 buildings are really unique AND have the same general structure preserved over every civ architecture in-game. There's simply no mistaking them. Glance value at it's finest. + Show Spoiler [AoE2 Buildings example] + And this extends to EVERY shared building. Stables look like stables for everyone. Barracks like barracks. Town Centres have the same 3-part scheme for every architecture. This is what makes AoE2 so easy to play and follow. Aside from that if they increase the unit collision for on-foot melee units and fix (because they are aware of it) the lag that accompanies every unit order and makes them actually crisp and responsive instead of feeling like they're being bogged down in mud, I can kinda see this being OK to play. Ah, these are good examples, and I agree with the assessments. I didn't notice the scale inconsistencies at first, but it's an obvious part of why buildings feel slightly "off" or more "wrong." Though I don't think this has a significant impact on gameplay compared to the other visual issues. Buildings and units should have a shared silhouette and distinguishing feature(s) shared across all their equivalents. Each faction should have its own "palette" of materials shared most of its buildings and units in the same Age, with new materials and distinguishing features replacing part of that palette with each new Age, and unit silhouettes and materials changing with tech/upgrades and Ages as well as giving more materials and colors to higher rank/tier units (e.g. hats getting bigger and being made of different materials, and clothing/armor having more details and two or three colors in a pattern instead of one flat color). Just in the camel rider example, if they removed the shield from the archer's mount it could be enough to distinguish between the two much more quickly and consistently at a glance. There are differences in their clothes/armor and where the team color is on the rider, but having the mount be exactly the same negates those distinguishing features. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
The unit UI is terrible and QOL unit management best practices were mentioned already. I actually quite like the building hotkeys, though I'd struggle to remember how previous AoE games did them. Everything is accessible via the left hand side of the keyboard, i.e. with one hand and without moving around. that I found great after being disgruntled that "f" doesn't build a farm  | ||
|
Multivasa
2 Posts
| ||
|
Latham
9568 Posts
Heard they wanted it to simultaneously run on every potato PC out there and create an E-Sport game from the get-go (based on some interview from some magazines and gamescom). I honestly have no idea why Relic/Microsoft could be so coincided in trying to force a game to be an E-sport from the start... usually you just make an honest-to-God good game and it's the passion of the fans and players that makes it into an e-sport... you can't artificially force it. The units zoomed out look OKish, you don't notice it that much in a giant army moving around, but I've noticed people say that even old games like Stronghold II and Totat War: Medieval II had better graphics/physics. Let alone proper RTSes that have been released before like SpellForce 3. The overall color palette is also a bit weird, like looking through a thin fog or a cloud. Just a tiny bit milky and washed out. I would like to see a mod that turns up the saturation on the buildings/player colors a bit, and I think an Enhanced Graphics Pack like (AoE 2:DE) got, will be needed STAT. Honestly, the recently released AoE3: DE looks GORGEOUS compared to this. That, get rid of input lag, and zoom out further are the most common complaints on aoe4/aoe2 reddit that i see. and YT content creators. Maybe something positive for a change: I really like the idea of advancing eras by building these landmark buildings. Most of them look amazingly well designed and done and it's a nice spin on the age advance mechanic on previous games. | ||
|
Archeon
3261 Posts
On September 20 2021 06:55 Latham wrote: Heard they wanted it to simultaneously run on every potato PC out there and create an E-Sport game from the get-go (based on some interview from some magazines and gamescom). I honestly have no idea why Relic/Microsoft could be so coincided in trying to force a game to be an E-sport from the start... usually you just make an honest-to-God good game and it's the passion of the fans and players that makes it into an e-sport... you can't artificially force it. The units zoomed out look OKish, you don't notice it that much in a giant army moving around, but I've noticed people say that even old games like Stronghold II and Totat War: Medieval II had better graphics/physics. Let alone proper RTSes that have been released before like SpellForce 3. The overall color palette is also a bit weird, like looking through a thin fog or a cloud. Just a tiny bit milky and washed out. I would like to see a mod that turns up the saturation on the buildings/player colors a bit, and I think an Enhanced Graphics Pack like (AoE 2:DE) got, will be needed STAT. Honestly, the recently released AoE3: DE looks GORGEOUS compared to this. That, get rid of input lag, and zoom out further are the most common complaints on aoe4/aoe2 reddit that i see. and YT content creators. Maybe something positive for a change: I really like the idea of advancing eras by building these landmark buildings. Most of them look amazingly well designed and done and it's a nice spin on the age advance mechanic on previous games. Imo it's better to develop a game with E-Sports in mind than not if you want it to succeed as such. But E-Sports need a thriving community, so making a game that can draw people and keep them invested comes first. AoE3 always looked decent, especially the water looked phenomenal back then. But I agree that this game doesn't look good when it comes to units/buildings. Overall good looking 3d RTS are few imo, I just prefer them with sprites. Happy to hear it plays well though. | ||
|
Multivasa
2 Posts
| ||
|
TerransHill
Germany572 Posts
On September 20 2021 06:55 Latham wrote: Heard they wanted it to simultaneously run on every potato PC out there and create an E-Sport game from the get-go (based on some interview from some magazines and gamescom). I honestly have no idea why Relic/Microsoft could be so coincided in trying to force a game to be an E-sport from the start... usually you just make an honest-to-God good game and it's the passion of the fans and players that makes it into an e-sport... you can't artificially force it. The units zoomed out look OKish, you don't notice it that much in a giant army moving around, but I've noticed people say that even old games like Stronghold II and Totat War: Medieval II had better graphics/physics. Let alone proper RTSes that have been released before like SpellForce 3. The overall color palette is also a bit weird, like looking through a thin fog or a cloud. Just a tiny bit milky and washed out. I would like to see a mod that turns up the saturation on the buildings/player colors a bit, and I think an Enhanced Graphics Pack like (AoE 2:DE) got, will be needed STAT. Honestly, the recently released AoE3: DE looks GORGEOUS compared to this. That, get rid of input lag, and zoom out further are the most common complaints on aoe4/aoe2 reddit that i see. and YT content creators. Maybe something positive for a change: I really like the idea of advancing eras by building these landmark buildings. Most of them look amazingly well designed and done and it's a nice spin on the age advance mechanic on previous games. The game looks very cheap on some ends. One of the worst things for me about the graphics is that the units lack character completely. No icons and no characteristics that stand out, like for example the paladin in AoE2 with the winged helmet and thick armor. It felt so good to direct an army of these guys into battle. The units in AoE4 completly lack character and unique style, they feel lazy On September 20 2021 09:14 Archeon wrote: Imo it's better to develop a game with E-Sports in mind than not if you want it to succeed as such. But E-Sports need a thriving community, so making a game that can draw people and keep them invested comes first. AoE3 always looked decent, especially the water looked phenomenal back then. But I agree that this game doesn't look good when it comes to units/buildings. Overall good looking 3d RTS are few imo, I just prefer them with sprites. Happy to hear it plays well though. You have to keep Multiplayer & balance in mind, but trying to make it an esport straight - i dont think that it works like that. | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany7021 Posts
| ||
|
gTank
Austria2601 Posts
IMO the graphics are okayish, not top notch unfortunately but sizes are none of my points. | ||
|
NotoriousSCV
27 Posts
Imagine if you were down in first person in AoE4 or SC2 to see why it looks strange, in my opinion. But in 2D games there is no other perspective. | ||
|
Highwinds
Canada955 Posts
| ||
|
BirdBird
34 Posts
On September 20 2021 05:11 Latham wrote: I think I can finally pinpoint what is annoying me in AoE4 graphically: + Show Spoiler [Example 1] + Look at those units. At the top you have a post-imperial Camel Archer(Abbasid Caliphate) and below is a post-imperial Camel Rider. They are almost identical. Even looking at them for a longer perioud of time you have trouble seeing any differences. One has a bow, the other a sword... and a bigger rim on his hat... This is just terrible glance value. No way to immediately identify which is which 1s before an engagement happens. + Show Spoiler [How AoE2 DE does it] + Look at these units. Different palettes, differently coloured camels, different armor, all of this makes them super easy to differenciate. Even in the case of the Camel Rider --> Heavy Camel Rider ---> Imperial Camel Rider it stays consistent. No way to get them mixed up with Camel Archers and Mamelukes. THIS IS WHAT 80% of the unit roster needs. Visual clarity. Other this is buildings... someone on reddit identified EXACTLY why I feel like I'm playing a bad mobile game. And it's the proportions of units to buildings. + Show Spoiler [example 2] + https://imgur.com/a/0ExUXjp (load this in a separate window, TL refuses to load it due to its size) Meanwhile AoE2 buildings are really unique AND have the same general structure preserved over every civ architecture in-game. There's simply no mistaking them. Glance value at it's finest. + Show Spoiler [AoE2 Buildings example] + And this extends to EVERY shared building. Stables look like stables for everyone. Barracks like barracks. Town Centres have the same 3-part scheme for every architecture. This is what makes AoE2 so easy to play and follow. Aside from that if they increase the unit collision for on-foot melee units and fix (because they are aware of it) the lag that accompanies every unit order and makes them actually crisp and responsive instead of feeling like they're being bogged down in mud, I can kinda see this being OK to play. More pics & comparisons: + Show Spoiler [1] + + Show Spoiler [2] + + Show Spoiler [3] + I came here to offload my thoughts only to find that Latham and a few others have already said them almost word for word. I feel disturbed just thinking about the lack of "glance value" design in AOE4... it's so bad I think those developing the game may have never heard of the concept. It gives me a sense of foreboding. =( Minimap is one of the least functional of an RTS too in my memory, using oversized icons to represent things instead of color-coded dots, and when using color-coded dots they are often obscured by each other. The transparent holographic preview of buildings is also hard to see and understand along with everything else already said. I don't know why they dropped the opaque preview building that places a non-obscuring foundation marker style. There's so much visual noise I watched a practiced RTS observer/caster actually be oblivious to an archery range he had his camera over for more than 60 seconds. He noticed 3 archers and said "wait, there's archers, where's the archery range?" True story. I personally feel that rubble looks worse than no rubble at all and adds to already tremendous visual noise that's straining me during play and could be replaced with the AOE2 articulated piles of stone that fade away quickly for great improvement. Lastly the unit collision and unit clumping due to the unit size causing great difficulties in selecting things to me is just the top of the iceberg of a general "scale" issue. The relative size of units is generally too small for how far out the zoom is, but the LoS and range of many units is too far for the how close the camera is. AOE4 is a very interesting RTS and puts that RTS bug in the head easily but my focus gets strained and exhausted due to having to filter and navigate the visuals and the end UI. I liked the game much more than I anticipated but I also hate playing it even as I'm getting that happy brain chemical hit for winning because of the strain the game places on your vision. | ||
|
meadbert
United States681 Posts
| ||
|
CicadaSC
United States1848 Posts
The first ever AoE 4 build order? Honestly this is what got me hyped for the game lol. I love min/maxing and refining builds. | ||
|
Qwyn
United States2779 Posts
I do think that buildings could perhaps use a bit more "definition" around the silhouette, but honestly some of that could just be that it was my first time watching the game. About my only complaints are: - That damn town center bell! I'm sure it will change... - I think icons for units/upgrades need to have unique art. I cannot tell what anything on the control card is at a glance. I watched blade play a bunch of the English and I'm kind of worried that fast 2TC boom will dominate the meta, or that drush/aggro strats won't have a place to shine, but that's a meta concern and so isn't really a big deal. I'm also silently crossing my fingers that 100+ vils won't be the norm as in AOE2 for mid/late game macro play, as it looks like this game is sticking with 200 pop cap. Glad to see blade rolling with the English! :D | ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
On September 29 2021 11:41 Qwyn wrote: I watched blade play a bunch of the English and I'm kind of worried that fast 2TC boom will dominate the meta, or that drush/aggro strats won't have a place to shine, but that's a meta concern and so isn't really a big deal. For me that would be what I place the most importance on for a RTS, that there is a lot of strategic possiblities from the early game on so that you can make your own style and play with many factors, games unpredictable etc. That and how much room you have to play with tactics as well. Of course the rest still matters. | ||
|
blade55555
United States17423 Posts
On September 29 2021 11:41 Qwyn wrote: Lots of people seem to have lots of problems with this game so far but I'm not one of them. Having played a substantial amount of AOE2 I'm actually a huge fan of how the graphics turned out. I think they do a very nice job of making units readable, elegant, and modern. I do think that buildings could perhaps use a bit more "definition" around the silhouette, but honestly some of that could just be that it was my first time watching the game. About my only complaints are: - That damn town center bell! I'm sure it will change... - I think icons for units/upgrades need to have unique art. I cannot tell what anything on the control card is at a glance. I watched blade play a bunch of the English and I'm kind of worried that fast 2TC boom will dominate the meta, or that drush/aggro strats won't have a place to shine, but that's a meta concern and so isn't really a big deal. I'm also silently crossing my fingers that 100+ vils won't be the norm as in AOE2 for mid/late game macro play, as it looks like this game is sticking with 200 pop cap. Glad to see blade rolling with the English! :D Yeah I see that too. When I first saw the trailer a couple of years ago I wasn't a fan of the graphics. I'm not sure what changed from 2019 to now, but I think the graphics look fine. Sure I wouldn't mind some blood but overall, I have no issues with it like I did a couple of years ago. Games very readable and very fun (imo). I do think Buildings could have been made a bit better (Archery Range/Stable) but nothing so bad that it ruins the game or anything, just minor complaints. Also just noticed you talking about me as I was typing this lol, that's funny. Anyway, I wouldn't worry about fast 2TC boom dominating the meta. I think it'll be viable with English because of the council hall and their villagers can shoot as well, but I don't think it'll be as good with other civs. There's ways to punish it and depending on the English nerfs, it may not even be viable for them come release. I do think 100 vills is going to be optimal late game. I like it personally. That might be some aoe2 bias as I have been playing a ton of aoe2 since March and like that aspect of the game for some reason. Played a few games that got to late game where I had 113 villagers and was still low on resources at points. | ||
| ||
