Age of Empires 4 Is coming out October 28th, 2021. Very soon. With 8 playable civs and the civs being more asymmetrical than other Age of Empires titles it should be pretty exciting. Having played the closed beta I found the gameplay to be a lot more like Starcraft+ Show Spoiler +
, and if anyone wants to try there is a technical stress test coming this weekend. September 17th 10 AM PST to September 20th 10 AM PST. Free for anyone install instructions here: + Show Spoiler +
Considering Blizzard hasn't been updating Starcraft 2 i'm thinking there could be a lot of hope in this coming RTS title. It's a free weekend trial/stess test so I'd recommend everyone to try it out.
They will have access to 4/8 Civs in this stress test
Microsoft has been supporting Age of Empires 2 DE with huge tournaments lately (100k prize pool tournament this weekend actually) and also released AoE 3 Definitive Edition recently too. It seems they're going to support the Age of games once again and since frost giant is years away I know what I'll be trying.
Unfortunately all the content available for the game up until now has been NDA so I cannot share much more about the game until this Friday, and the devs for their game have been awful with marketing and shown literally 0 gameplay. So if you haven't heard much about the game that would be why so far.
Has anyone else looked into Age of Empires 4? Any thoughts?
SO Stress Test ended for now, As soon as there is another coming I will update here. I assume there will be soon.
Overall the game still needs a lot of work, and I expected bigger changes by now from the beta.
Yes, I have looked at the footage and it looked cool if unpolished. As a Terran player I'm interested in playing the Mongols. My current computer won't be able to run the game, but I'm considering upgrading. Currently, BW is the only game I play, so I have little incentive to do so. :<
Open Beta / Stress Test coming this weekend! You can opt in via Steam or Xbox something-something and you'll get in as long as you meet the system requirement.
Click on apply on Age of Empires IV Technical Stress Test tab.
I have VERY high hopes for this game. Practically the only RTS on the horizon until Frostgiant spits something out... or CoH 3 happens in like 2-3 years
On September 15 2021 18:46 Latham wrote: Open Beta / Stress Test coming this weekend! You can opt in via Steam or Xbox something-something and you'll get in as long as you meet the system requirement.
Click on apply on Age of Empires IV Technical Stress Test tab.
I have VERY high hopes for this game. Practically the only RTS on the horizon until Frostgiant spits something out... or CoH 3 happens in like 2-3 years
Thanks for the info! I just signed up for the stresstest "raffle".
I played the closed beta testing and my favourite to play was Mongols they felt a lot like Zerg in Starcarft 2 to me, but sadly they wont be in this next test and mongols are still under NDA
If people wonder it feels a lot faster than AoE2, but not as fast as starcraft 2. Maybe a little closer to brood wars speeds, but games were often hard to close out since you dont get the spell casters and such.
On September 16 2021 08:51 Highwinds wrote: I played the closed beta testing and my favourite to play was Mongols they felt a lot like Zerg in Starcarft 2 to me, but sadly they wont be in this next test and mongols are still under NDA
If people wonder it feels a lot faster than AoE2, but not as fast as starcraft 2. Maybe a little closer to brood wars speeds, but games were often hard to close out since you dont get the spell casters and such.
I wouldn't necessarily say it's faster than AoE 2? I mean, there are aspects that feel faster, but overall it seems equally slow, imo.
How is dps/splash to health? Is it more like AoE2 where you have a few seconds to react before critical damage gets done or more like Sc2 where you blink and missed the fight?
On September 17 2021 10:33 Archeon wrote: How is dps/splash to health? Is it more like AoE2 where you have a few seconds to react before critical damage gets done or more like Sc2 where you blink and missed the fight?
I was in the closed beta and siege units were bugged and acted like u are saying, but it sounds like they got changed so I am not sure yet. We will all find out tomorrow together
Well I'm downloading the Stress Test but the catch is that it seems the Steam keys have been delayed or not sent out yet and you have to sign up as an "AoE Insider" and download it through their Microsoft Store. Pretty scummy move but it is what it is...
Currently, there is no telling when Steam will send out notifications and it's getting late in Europe so... I signed up so I could try it before going to bed for the night.
On September 18 2021 02:53 Latham wrote: Well I'm downloading the Stress Test but the catch is that it seems the Steam keys have been delayed or not sent out yet and you have to sign up as an "AoE Insider" and download it through their Microsoft Store. Pretty scummy move but it is what it is...
Currently, there is no telling when Steam will send out notifications and it's getting late in Europe so... I signed up so I could try it before going to bed for the night.
I know it's not helpful for you Europeans since it's so late for you now, but I'm in the US and am just now able to download the stress test on Steam.
+ I think the civs are pretty unique, instead of copy pasted like in AoE2 with 1 unique unit and 3 boosts in total to eco/military. They have a unique playstyle from the get-go. + No bullshit cards, no call ins from home city etc. This is basically what AoE3 should’ve been. + Pretty faithful to AoE2 but unique enough to not feel like the same game remade in a different engine (feels like this is made in the same engine as AoE3 DE was made in) + Really like that you can put archers and all ranged units (but not siege equipment) in general, on stone walls. You build a gate inside a stone wall and they just go up there. + You DO need a varied army. I tried to mass Elite Longbowmen in my 1st game and they surprisingly uneffective even in 100+ numbers. It seems like they not only nerfed ranged damage, archer HP but also implemented a counter system like in Warcraft 3 (you got light armor, heavy armor, pierce damage, shock etc.) Pretty cool and works well. If you watch AoE2 at all nowadays, you know archery civs reign supreme. Not in this game. Archers feel like a backline unit (as they should) that supports the frontline of melee and cav. Very happy about this. + UNIQUE SKINS for every civilization for the same units. Everyone has access to a basic “archer” unit, even England where Longbowmen are strictly better, but they can make basic archers. This same archer has a different look in every civ, in every age. Very cool. + Pace is a little funky, a bit quicker than AoE2 but not the zoom-zoom-blink-and-you’ll-miss-it of SC2. + Scouts now are a hybrid of scouts from AoE2 and explorers from AoE3. Excellent change. You explore the map with them, gather sheep to your TC and in Age II (Feudal) you can upgrade them so they’ll hunt deer or boars and bring them to your workers. + Optimized surprisingly well + Only a select few buildings can train 5-units at a time, and it’s usually a cultural defensive landmark. Everything else trains 1 by 1. + Actually easy to wall. Very clear distinctions where you can build your palisades/stone walls. No more guesswork for “but is it actually walled off or just optical illusion?”
- I CANNOT tell the buildings apart… like, at all. No fucking clue what is a barracks what is a stable and what is an archery range. Just a jumbled mess inside the base. Also, they look fucking TINY, only the cultural landmarks stand out and are big enough IMO. - gunpowder is retardedly overpowered. I thought it would be a chore to pack/unpack trebs and cannons (and other smaller siege support weapons) but they really pack/unpack in 1 second flat. And oooh boy do they delete walls, castles (called keeps in this game) and every other siege. Handcannoneers also just delete units. If you played AoE2 you know gunpowder units were very situational at best, and underpowered at worst in that game. The accuracy sucked, reload time sucked, and the further you were from the enemy, the worse were your results with gunpowder. I wish they could find the middle ground. - graphics sadly do look like they belong in a 2010 MOBA or phone game. - the units cluster and blob like a MFker and you cant click for shit on what you want. (Can you find the sheep carcass in the middle of workers harvesting it? I can’t… not even in full zoom) Maybe collision size should be increased? IDK. - the units blend in with their environment, be it on the battlefield or in towns. They should make them pop a little so you can recognize what is a part of the foreground and what is background. - The camera angle is weird as hell… maybe I have to get used to it. - The UI is overall crap. The icons for units / upgrades / buildings are so uninspired.
I'm pleasantly surprised with the game. Very fun! Graphics / artstyle works well.
I agree with you on some visibility problems. Rly hard to find my allies market, note which enemy buildings to kill, etc. Maybe it'll get easier over time I dunno
The micro also feels very sticky. Maybe its a skill issue but it doesn't feel great. Still I like the game
Micro is better in AOE4. If you micro back an injured archer the units behind it get out of the way. The units are more responsive than AOE2 but less responsive than Starcraft 2. My games were lasting aboit 25 minutes.
Longbows have 3 spells. They can setup a campbto heal or they have a DPS boost and they can quick wall. It really makes the micro aspect interesting.
bad.Insane that is 2021 and that is the best product that they could deliver ? just by looking at graphics AOE 3 looks better. AOE noy gonna be the game to revive RTS.Sc2 is way better. Brood War is a galaxy ahead.
I caught some streams of it yesterday, and thought it looked nice overall. Nothing unexpected whatsoever, visually or mechanically, which I guess is a bit unexpected in a way. Like a very well-measured progression from both AoE 2 and 3, designed very safely, with just a couple of adaptations from other RTS.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I have shared the struggle of assessing what units are on screen at a glance. 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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
God bless the Starcraft 2 Developer and the love for Art they put in the game. Crazy how bad a game can look like. What was their Goal with this game?
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.
Maybe it just looks more bizarre in 3D. I think of the SC units like pieces we move on a 2D battlefield. But in 3D you have some expectation of scale in line with other games (for example, other space games - compare 2D to 3D in many of them). Descent Freespace or Eve Online versus functional representation-of-pieces type 2D games.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Had a lot of fun during the brief stress test. Fortunately, I have xbox ultimate game pass, so it will be free for me day 1.
Lots of potential to upgrade visuals, though. I couldn't tell half my buildings apart from each other and had to regularly click units to see if they had been upgraded from hardened to veteran to elite. Units need to be much more easily discernable from one another.
EDIT: Latham on prior page already gave feedback on all of this with visuals, so essentially just repeating his sentiments here.
Hey guys The game has a very old AOE2 matchmaking system, it's sad for a potentials AOE4 E-sport. We need to push things out about the AOE4 matchmaking where you can see the Map before choosing your civ this is not good for balancing the game and competitive play overall.
I made a thread on Reddit about the ranking matchmaking, trying to push Dev in this direction to not be able to choose your civ after seeing the map but before! Here the thread on Reddit
Was a fun match definitely, however, I would like to see the civs I couldn't test out in the beta myself. French, Mongols, Delhi Sultanate and more of Rus.
On October 01 2021 21:34 _SSSylas wrote: Hey guys The game has a very old AOE2 matchmaking system, it's sad for a potentials AOE4 E-sport. We need to push things out about the AOE4 matchmaking where you can see the Map before choosing your civ this is not good for balancing the game and competitive play overall.
I made a thread on Reddit about the ranking matchmaking, trying to push Dev in this direction to not be able to choose your civ after seeing the map but before! Here the thread on Reddit
Hey Sylas! I saw ur posts in other places already, but Ill reply here curious about it.
I get ur point about seeing the map and being able to change it, but in AoE it might be necessary because of the imbalances of the civs. For Example Mongols will be heavily disadvantaged on a map like Black Forest that is so easily wallable. Being forced to play as certain civs on every map in that game would kinda suck. The game isnt like Starcraft where the maps are always the same and tried to be balanced for every civ. Some civs are gonna be just the best on water and others will be the best on open land and others will be the best in maps with lots of choke points. To me it will make players better because they have to change their civ based on maps and be more diverse. The weaker players who just play 1 civ constantly will be disadvantaged by the map though.
More the Game will be competitive on the ladder and more you will see mirror matches on the ladder if people want to reach the top.
It's better when players/data want to play one civ/race because they like the uniqueness of the civ/race and try their best on every map and ask for balance change/data prove than play the best civ on each map.
Also if some tournament wants to seed some top player from the ladder it will be the same as AOE4 Genesis tournament
if it stays like this it will not be good for the game. overall on twitch, or for players in the Ranked matchmaking system
AOE4 is not AOE2 and will never be
1 - AOE2 has 39 symmetric civ with bonus who make it impossible to balance because they have the same mechanic its 20years game with no different mechanic to compensate.
2 - AOE4 have 8 Asymmetric civs, who make tools to make it more balanced than AOE4 has some units who have different stats and have completely different Eco mechanic.
In AOE3 AOM AOE:O SC1 SC2 have are played like this because they have asymmetric civs design.
Sorry but I am pretty sure it will change in the future but I don’t want to wait for 3-6 months before it comes because I think they gonna be slow as I remember AOE3 and AOM release
Mongols look extremely unique and fun, too bad they were up against Camel Archer civ, which directly counters their Mangudai, so the Mongol player didn't even bother to make any.
Mongols look extremely unique and fun, too bad they were up against Camel Archer civ, which directly counters their Mangudai, so the Mongol player didn't even bother to make any.
The player didnt show mongols very well sadly. I'd say mongols should feel very similiar to Zerg, but this player was doing so many things wrong it just looked bad. It's the most different of the civs so I don't blame him for not getting it very well. It's by far my favourite civ to play and It felt very strong to me. Here's a guide for Mongols if anyone is interested in some better info on Mongols.
The game is awesome. There a lot of things that needs to be improved upon post launch but since SC2 is not patched any more and left in in Protoss Air meta I will switch to Age of Empires 4.
It was a long time I had this much fun with a RTS. SC2 has started to feel like more a chore than fun so the timing could not have been better.
And yet another showmatch, this time featuring the Delhi Sultanate and the Rus. A pretty good one, with lots of back and forth action. On top of that, we get to see ELEPHANTOS, Battle Monks and Strelski.
The next showmatch is on Wednesday the 27th and it will be a 2v2. Just before the global release on the 28th.
On October 24 2021 14:50 blade55555 wrote: Rus are definitely going to be one of my main civilizations. They look really fun. 5 more days until release and I can't wait!
Oh hey I see you here too blade! Yeah It's crazy the wait is almost over. Wish I was a part of the super secret beta that is probably starting in a few hours. Lots of people gonna be streaming AoE4 and I just have to watch
On October 24 2021 14:50 blade55555 wrote: Rus are definitely going to be one of my main civilizations. They look really fun. 5 more days until release and I can't wait!
Oh hey I see you here too blade! Yeah It's crazy the wait is almost over. Wish I was a part of the super secret beta that is probably starting in a few hours. Lots of people gonna be streaming AoE4 and I just have to watch
Yes I am :D. I am with you. Just get to watch and wish I could play
I am not sure. The gameplay both fun, deep and varied but it takes time knowing exactly how good a game is. There are also some things that are in the pipeline like fully custom hotkeys and global production queue that I think should have been ready at launch.
Personally I would give it 95/100 and I think it has potential to one of my favorite games of all time alongside SC2, AOE2 and Civilization.
Let‘s put it that way: if you think StarCraft II had „issues“ at launch in 2010 - think again. I would argue that SCII was not even remotely perfect, but the UI was functional. For AoE IV, that‘s just not the case, imo. Some of the biggest issue are imo:
- the missing global queues - the horrendeously bad icons, that make absolutely no sense. - the horrendeously bad control groups, that are just not functional at all - the fixed hotkeys, while at the same time having no hotkeys for some elements at all (canceling units?) - the freaking Chinese clickable!! huge ass icon in the middle of the freaking screen that - if you accidentally click on it - literally covers 80 % of the screen.
That‘s just bad imo, and there‘s no excuse for most of it to be in the game, even at launch. The sad part is that I think the game would be pretty good gameplay wise, but if you have to keep clicking on screen, can‘t select single units, constantly have to navigate through dogshit menus, can hardly macro and this idiotic Chinese Icon just keeps popping up, it‘s really hard to enjoy it. And at this point, I can‘t even give a score, because the UI is among the worst I have ever seen in a game, but I don‘t want to give a low score - because once these things are fixed - and I sincerely hope they‘ll completely redesign the entire UI - the game will be awesome.
Of course there is still some stuff that does not work the way I want it to, but that AoE units move weirdly has to be expected by now and I think that‘s fine. It‘s really just the UI that annoys me.
I think winter put it quote nicely: the UI seems to be designed by someone who never does anything in his base while attacking. Because that‘s what it feels like.
Let‘s put it that way: if you think StarCraft II had „issues“ at launch in 2010 - think again. I would argue that SCII was not even remotely perfect, but the UI was functional. For AoE IV, that‘s just not the case, imo. Some of the biggest issue are imo:
- the missing global queues - the horrendeously bad icons, that make absolutely no sense. - the horrendeously bad control groups, that are just not functional at all - the fixed hotkeys, while at the same time having no hotkeys for some elements at all (canceling units?) - the freaking Chinese clickable!! huge ass icon in the middle of the freaking screen that - if you accidentally click on it - literally covers 80 % of the screen.
That‘s just bad imo, and there‘s no excuse for most of it to be in the game, even at launch. The sad part is that I think the game would be pretty good gameplay wise, but if you have to keep clicking on screen, can‘t select single units, constantly have to navigate through dogshit menus, can hardly macro and this idiotic Chinese Icon just keeps popping up, it‘s really hard to enjoy it. And at this point, I can‘t even give a score, because the UI is among the worst I have ever seen in a game, but I don‘t want to give a low score - because once these things are fixed - and I sincerely hope they‘ll completely redesign the entire UI - the game will be awesome.
Of course there is still some stuff that does not work the way I want it to, but that AoE units move weirdly has to be expected by now and I think that‘s fine. It‘s really just the UI that annoys me.
I think winter put it quote nicely: the UI seems to be designed by someone who never does anything in his base while attacking. Because that‘s what it feels like.
So basically what you are saying: It's a great RTS for having fun, playing casually solo and/or with friends. But it's miles away from beeing esport material?
Minus SC2, which game succeeded while designed with esports in mind?
It looks fun at all levels of play atm, which is all that matters, the rest will follow. The biggest worry is how they will fix the game for the highest level of play when the best players abuse whatever they found, I remember Relic did an extremely poor job at balancing dawn of war 1.
On October 28 2021 20:06 nojok wrote: Minus SC2, which game succeeded while designed with esports in mind?
It looks fun at all levels of play atm, which is all that matters, the rest will follow. The biggest worry is how they will fix the game for the highest level of play when the best players abuse whatever they found, I remember Relic did an extremely poor job at balancing dawn of war 1.
RTS or in general? Quite a few had decent success and were build exclusively for multiplayer and esport like Apex, Valorant, Fortnite and so on
And just to clarify: I don't expect Aoe4 to come out the gates esport ready and fully balanced. But what swisslink wrote are aspects of the game (or UI) that need to be better before even considering stuff like balance
Haven't seen that review before, I just checked Winter's stream at the end of the last Stress Test. The review covers most of the UI stuff he said there. Even if he apparently left out a few ridiculous things (Chinese Dynasty button, focus control group, etc.). Compared to the other reviews out there, he at least brings up the bigger issues. I scrolled through some Metacritic Reviews and most of them simply overlooked the UI issues that are hard to ignore, imo.
On October 28 2021 18:11 Harris1st wrote: So basically what you are saying: It's a great RTS for having fun, playing casually solo and/or with friends. But it's miles away from beeing esport material?
I would say it's a fun game for some casual rounds. I wouldn't say it's only bad for esports though. I think even on a decent ladder level, these issues are going to be annoying to most players. I would not consider myself a good SC2 player and even I was annoyed that the entire UI was just barely functional.
On October 28 2021 20:06 nojok wrote: Minus SC2, which game succeeded while designed with esports in mind?
It looks fun at all levels of play atm, which is all that matters, the rest will follow. The biggest worry is how they will fix the game for the highest level of play when the best players abuse whatever they found, I remember Relic did an extremely poor job at balancing dawn of war 1.
RTS or in general? Quite a few had decent success and were build exclusively for multiplayer and esport like Apex, Valorant, Fortnite and so on
And just to clarify: I don't expect Aoe4 to come out the gates esport ready and fully balanced. But what swisslink wrote are aspects of the game (or UI) that need to be better before even considering stuff like balance
That's the point. These are not balance issues. These are not issues that break the game at a higher level due to unexpected synergies between different aspects of the game. These are just elements that actively prevent you from playing fast.
On October 29 2021 17:08 GTR wrote: feels like a meme at this point what are considered "top" rts releases don't come with a ranked ladder on release (first wc3:r and now aoe4)
I don't get it. It can't be that hard to make a working ladder with some MMR/ ELO Just make it transparent enough for people to understand whats happening
Maybe they are afraid of making a non-perfect system and then get shitstormed for stupid matchmaking? Dunno
On October 29 2021 17:08 GTR wrote: feels like a meme at this point what are considered "top" rts releases don't come with a ranked ladder on release (first wc3:r and now aoe4)
I don't get it. It can't be that hard to make a working ladder with some MMR/ ELO Just make it transparent enough for people to understand whats happening
Maybe they are afraid of making a non-perfect system and then get shitstormed for stupid matchmaking? Dunno
I'm fine with not adding Ranked from the start. Mainly because it's better to let the players experiment a bit before the season starts. However, if you do it, you at least have to give a clear schedule when it's going to be added. And it should not be longer than maybe 10-15 days. Afaik that's not the case here.
There is already an ELO system in place for the matchmaking and a leaderboard. I think they want to patch in more custom hotkeys, fix some bugs and do the first balance update, before activating the official ranked section.
So far it is just really fun, feels like there is so many ways you can build your economy, and after each game I want to jump straight.into another one.
Not sure I'd be as excited for the esports side though.
Been watching Lirik play this and I wanna give it a go. Never played AOE before (not seriously anyways).
Is something like playing the campaign a good way to learn the basic fundamentals? Or do I go straight into 1v1 and cookie cutter build orders via online guides?
On October 30 2021 01:36 Emnjay808 wrote: Been watching Lirik play this and I wanna give it a go. Never played AOE before (not seriously anyways).
Is something like playing the campaign a good way to learn the basic fundamentals? Or do I go straight into 1v1 and cookie cutter build orders via online guides?
There's a series of challenges inside the game called "Art of War" do these for a starter. You don't need to get gold medals, but just familiarize yourself with the concepts inside like milling deer or unit counters.
After that I suggest playing 1v1 against the AI to try out the civs and then picking one, and finding a BO online for early game. The civs here are pretty unique and some want to be on food early, others on wood, and yet another wants early gold etc. depending on where their strengths lie.
I'd not put any weight on the campaign, they seem like fluff honestly, at least the Norman one. Cutesy way to learn history through an interactive game, but nowhere even near the ballpark of what you'll be doing in multiplayer. Also not very challenging so far.
Maybe watch some real pros play like Marinelord, TheMista or Vortix and try to get a general idea of the overall strategy and what to aim for during a match.
Aside from that? Grind, grind, GRIND games against players I guess?
The strategic possibilities are rich enough and the battles can be quite engaging. The graphics are fine, it is intended for multiplayer mainly so those will never be as impressive as other games, no matter who makes them.
The room for edge in the micro department doesn't seem to be something that developers put much work into and I have to admit that's probably a good thing since Westerners don't really have the work ethic to master that difficult part of any rts game, as opposed to Koreans/Chinese who will exploit that as much as possible to gain an edge.
I hope we get a decent competitive scene as people start learning the game and Relic supports the game at a standard opposite to what Blizzard would do today.
The first tournament (Genesis) is you can't re-use a civ you win with. So anyone who qualifies will have had to win with 2 civs. In the ro8, you'll have to win with 3 civs to make the finals and win with 4 civs to win the tournament.
One thing I really dislike is unit control. It feels clunky and unresponsive. Otherwise, this looks like a decent game. Definitely gonna play it more once I've got more time.
On October 30 2021 07:06 oxKnu wrote: ...I have to admit that's probably a good thing since Westerners don't really have the work ethic to master that difficult part of any rts game, as opposed to Koreans/Chinese who will exploit that as much as possible to gain an edge.
You're right. But the Chinese are known cheaters and Koreans are always match fixers trying to make money via gambling, so they won't be good at the game either.
Really the only people who will be good are the Aussies.
Anyone else want to make sweeping racist statements?
Yeah that's a really odd statement by oxKnu. Esp coming from AoE background - it's no Starcraft, but in AoE 2 quick walls / arrow dodge micro is pretty common from "western" players.
I would argue oxKnu is not entirely wrong in regard to the outcome, but the reason is not the work ethic. It's much more to do with the eSports structures that are still far superior in Korea (and maybe China? no idea). And of course these structures help with the training environment and the acceptance in society.
yeah i got game pass for $1 to try it out this month and while the game certainly has its flaws i have faith relic will patch it to the level it needs to be in due course
really do hope they fix observing because both the interface and system are elementary in terms of balance, i think the french and russians are the best; delhi are by far the worst.
Playing through game pass too - i never was a huge fan of AoE (i do enjoy it, but i do get bored of it quite quickly), and i'm not a "fan" (in the true sense of the word) of AoE 4 either. But there's one thing that AoE 4 does, that makes me come back every day for a mission or two, and that's the "history lessons" between missions.
I love those, they're what keep me playing. I can't really judge the game itself, as i said i find it okay - it's not really my setting, nor my pace - but those videos are great. The superimposed images over real life locations are awesome.
Are you listening to those historical briefs in English or German? I like the original VO but the voice actress for German I saw/heard in a review (Gamestar) was terrible.
English, while being german i stopped watching german stuff altogether. Somehow it's easier for me to follow english nowadays than it is german. So, no idea about the VO - but if it sucks, well.. Often the case, imho.
Really enjoying the game so far. It has some problems. Battle micro and unit responsiveness feels a bit off, late game is quite sludgy once players are near-maxed. But the overall thing that the game tries to do is really fun and engaging. The civs really feel unique and different from each other. The thing that I haven't seen people mention but is huge in this game is how well they did the resource allocation and strategy around expanding. Early you have the Sheep and Deer game, in mid-game you have to take risks mining gold until you get more Town Centers, balancing defense vs. greed, late game you have some huge gold/stone patches where naturally you will want to get Keeps/TCs/walls around. It just feels really nice in that regard.
That brings me to my next point which is the civs and map control. I've been playing mostly France. They excel at map control because their main unit is so fast. Their economic bonus (faster villager production) is also great, and less wood req for dropoff buildings means you don't need wood until Feudal Age. In Feudal their most important unit, knight, becomes active, and you should be guaranteed to get map control. If you get pushed you can always counter. They are great at sniping villagers. They are great defensively because you can always choose where to fight thanks to their speed, and if the opponent overextends you are guaranteed to kill off their army. Knights are tanky, and can even heal up after those early/mid-game scuffles. I haven't played vs. a great Rus yet, which is the only other civ that seems to be able to do this type of play by going mass horse archers (they are super cheap).
France feels great to play in this game because they really can utilize the big map size and force people to stay home while you can do greedy eco stuff. They control the game really well.
And the sound design! It's absolutely amazing. The game has gotten a lot of flack for the graphics which is understandable as they are a bit dull, but the sounds are extremely crispy and lifelike. Also quite useful in a gameplay aspect. Units whistling when they spot enemy armies, whispering while they are sneaking in woods etc.
Looking forward to explore the other civs and more strategies as well. I think the game has great potential.
---
Also I'll share the France build I use atm. Spent some time in custom to optimize it to get a knight to their base as fast as possible. The game plan is to rush knights, harass a bit, then constant knight production for map control while getting a second TC in feudal. It's like Parting PvT, essentially. Get units out on the map while being greedy at home.
- 8 on sheep - Build house - Build mining camp, go for the gold patch towards the opponent's base - 5 on gold 2:30 build Landmark with 5 gold miners (Horse School) - Rally gold (you want 6 for 200gpm which sustains constant Knights production) - Build house - Landmark builders build a mill at Deers (you are now out of wood) - After 6 on gold you should rally to the tree closest to TC for wood. - First knight will be out at around 4:24 and should go directly to their forwardmost resource. Usually gold/deers or sometimes wood. Pick a few villagers or even just deny mining is worth the investment.
Apply pressure with knight and bring your scout. If you get attacked you can usually use 3 knights to snipe some villagers. Keeping your scout alive is huge, it provides a huge line of sight which helps spotting tech and their army movements. Second TC should protect a gold patch. You have a great advantage here usually because the map should be yours, you can get greedy deers/gold patches etc. while denying the same for your opponent. Knights are super strong and can even fight spears. Adding archers is a good transition no matter what comp they go for.
On November 01 2021 21:18 m4ini wrote: English, while being german i stopped watching german stuff altogether. Somehow it's easier for me to follow english nowadays than it is german. So, no idea about the VO - but if it sucks, well.. Often the case, imho.
haha I had to tinker with the windows language settings for a while to get the game in english. German is unbearable.
edit: well no, I got the xbox app to be in English, but game's still German, wow. what a horribad feature. 2 reboots later and it works. nice
Serral was streaming AOE4 today! Despite being pretty new to the game he has over an 80% winrate and is in the top 75 players on the leaderboard. Number one is MarineLord and number three is PandaBearMe! Lots of really awesome SC talent jumping into this game in a big way right now.
On November 01 2021 21:18 m4ini wrote: English, while being german i stopped watching german stuff altogether. Somehow it's easier for me to follow english nowadays than it is german. So, no idea about the VO - but if it sucks, well.. Often the case, imho.
haha I had to tinker with the windows language settings for a while to get the game in english. German is unbearable.
edit: well no, I got the xbox app to be in English, but game's still German, wow. what a horribad feature. 2 reboots later and it works. nice
Well, i guess there is one upside to living in the UK lol, didn't need to faff with any settings, was english from the get-go.
What i will say, the pathfinding in the game is horrid. Maybe not as bad as dragoons in BW, but not that much better. Also, something annoying in the first campaign, when you get the wololos, it tells you with a rather big box to select him, press Q for heal and then heal a unit.
Sucks if you don't have a unit to heal/everything max health already, and until you heal one, that box is constantly on the screen. I remember being rather annoyed at that. Even worse: autoheal doesn't count, so by the time i'm done with whatever i'm doing most if not all my units were already healed.
Very interesting looking game but in terms of e-sports some very weird design decisions which I'm not sure are great for competitiveness. #1: What is up with the random maps? I am all for some sort of asymmetric randomness to have the players adapt and keep the game fresh but I've seen games where one side starts with two large gold nodes nearby and other guy has nothing. Imagine in SC2 if one person started with their natural as a gold base, just not fair at all. #2: As some others have mentioned unit control and pathing is very wonky. Sometimes you click and click and the unit just doesn't do what you are commanding - most evident when you're trying to get your villagers in a building or to repair something. This may seem minor but this type of frustration isn't good for high level competitive play. #3: Balance seems quite wild especially on water maps, appears to be almost mandatory to go French. #4: Find it a weird choice to display opponent's age timings, seems like it is just taking a lot of surprise/strategy out of the game. Maybe they can disable this in competitive matches?
I am also not feeling quite the same hype as everyone else as when I look back recently I remember Relic for Company of Heroes 2 and Dawn of War 3. CoH2 was a great game but never very competitive and DoW3 was a complete disaster which had all support pulled for it within a year(even took online servers down). So not really a great track record to build a scene around. Additionally Relic is already working on Company of Heroes 3, and while they probably do have different teams for different games they're both RTS games so they probably have some dev overlap.
#1 Randomly generated maps based on a loose template have been a part of AoE from the start. Every AoE2 tournament is being played like this, even current ones. It adds a little bit of chaos here and there. Someone has an exposed forward gold, another person's woodline is further away. You simply deal with it and accept it as a challenge.
#2 I agree, pathing and unit delay is annoying. Should be fixed asap
#3 Did you seriously expect balance upon release? And on top of that on niche water maps? AoE2 has 39 civilizations... can you guess how many are competitive on water maps? Hint: your fingers on 1 hand should suffice to count how many... Usually in AoE2 (and I expect AoE4) people will be playing on complete land maps like Dry Arabia or hybrid maps where there are lakes to fish in, to kick-start the economy faster (especially with infinitely respawning Deep Water Fish). Even professional players in AoE2 usually ban the water maps in big tournaments (see Redbull WOLOLOs or Hidden Cup or King of the Desert) simply because waterplay has never been a fan favourite.
#4 Again, this is a leftover from AoE2 I feel. It lets you at least attempt to counter what you think might be coming. Feudal Age (Age II) you should be hitting at about the same time as your opponent so it shouldn't be a concern. The civs are unqiue so you pretty much know what's coming your way, anyhow. French will be pushing with royal knights, Rus will be poaching your deer, English will send hordes of longbowmen... After that I think it just shows you how far ahead or behind you are. In AoE2 this would indicate timings for you. For example if someone just advanced to Imperial (Age IV) and you were in Castle (Age III) you'd have to make a choice: Either tech up now and follow your opponent into Imperial, or try a Castle Age all-in push to end it, before your opponent can get the upgrades from Imperial and crush you (about 5-8 minutes) On paper it sounds wierd but it creates a good, fun dynamic where just seeing the message puts you in a tought spots and makes you choose your course of actions for the remainder of the game.
Keep in mind you have no flying units in AoE, unlike you do in StarCraft. Scouting is much harder here because you literally can't get into someone's base if they don't want you to. Can't sacrifice an overlord in or zoom an oracle in. Or scan. If someone hits Castle Age before you, you damn well better have that 1 minute or 2 of prep time to spam pikes before your economy evaporates to cycle-charging knights.
On September 20 2021 00:27 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote: bad.Insane that is 2021 and that is the best product that they could deliver ? just by looking at graphics AOE 3 looks better. AOE noy gonna be the game to revive RTS.Sc2 is way better. Brood War is a galaxy ahead.
In terms of professional tournaments, I‘m interested to see how well the (former) SC2 pros will do next week. On the unofficial ladder, MarineLorD, VortiX and LucifroN do insanely well. Although I could see the AoE II professionals testing around more.
I'm surprised so many people commenting on pathfinding. I don't find it bad, just different (in the sense you group units together and it interacts with their movement speed, which is different from SC2 by quite a bit). Very similar to AoE2, which always seemed intentional design to me.
What I do hate is the UI & the aesthetics. Things look way too similar. Huge downgrade from AoE2 where you could clearly tell the difference between units and buildings. This has been some pretty common feedback, I imagine it must be addressed sometime sooner or later.
I'm just happy that they didn't just release ranked mode. THey are already planning to do a balance patch based on feedback before it goes live. I like all the QOL things in it that aoe2 didn't have.
I've been having a ton of fun with the game, at least with multiplayer (been playing team games until I get confortable enough for 1v1s).
I couldn't stand the singleplayer campaign though, especially the narration. I get that they were going for an interactive history story lesson but it felt more like a children's storybook. If you want a RTS with a fun single player campaign, go back to last year's Iron Harvest (or just replay SC2, because story aside no one will ever outdo SC2 in term of SP mission and map design)
There are some UI/unit selection things that just feel odd, like rallying villager/boats on tiny resources for example, or deer disappearing from the minimap if you killed them but did not harvest their corpses (relevant as Rus) or (worst of all) the fact that double clicking a hotkey puts you in the centroid of a unit, which can be in the middle of nowhere.
Thanks for the tip with Xbox Game Pass! Downloaded it yesterday and played the first mission (introduction). Really need to find the option to change language. German is unbearable. Do you guys hotkey your town center? Because pressing "H" you always jump there and I just want to produce workers mid combat like I'm used to with Starcraft
On November 03 2021 21:19 Harris1st wrote: Thanks for the tip with Xbox Game Pass! Downloaded it yesterday and played the first mission (introduction). Really need to find the option to change language. German is unbearable. Do you guys hotkey your town center? Because pressing "H" you always jump there and I just want to produce workers mid combat like I'm used to with Starcraft
I set "cycle through TCs" to tilde ( ` )... it's IMO one of the most important hotkeys in the game. you HAVE TO constantly make workers especially in the early/mid game when you're on only 1 TC, maybe making a 2nd. Once you're up to 3+ some lapse in macro can be permitted, because with 3 you'll catch up either way.
On November 03 2021 21:19 Harris1st wrote: Thanks for the tip with Xbox Game Pass! Downloaded it yesterday and played the first mission (introduction). Really need to find the option to change language. German is unbearable. Do you guys hotkey your town center? Because pressing "H" you always jump there and I just want to produce workers mid combat like I'm used to with Starcraft
I set "cycle through TCs" to tilde ( ` )... it's IMO one of the most important hotkeys in the game. you HAVE TO constantly make workers especially in the early/mid game when you're on only 1 TC, maybe making a 2nd. Once you're up to 3+ some lapse in macro can be permitted, because with 3 you'll catch up either way.
Cool, I don't think I know half the hotkeys available. I was just binding TCs to 5.
On November 03 2021 21:19 Harris1st wrote: Thanks for the tip with Xbox Game Pass! Downloaded it yesterday and played the first mission (introduction). Really need to find the option to change language. German is unbearable. Do you guys hotkey your town center? Because pressing "H" you always jump there and I just want to produce workers mid combat like I'm used to with Starcraft
I use a single hotkey for all production. Either 1 or 0.
For English language, you have to go to the windows language settings and set APPs to English. If you play it via windows store (game pass) like I do, that is the only option I have found yet.
I needed to restart 2-3 times to have English as my game language, xbox app and microsoft store were faster to switch in that regard.
On November 03 2021 21:19 Harris1st wrote: Thanks for the tip with Xbox Game Pass! Downloaded it yesterday and played the first mission (introduction). Really need to find the option to change language. German is unbearable. Do you guys hotkey your town center? Because pressing "H" you always jump there and I just want to produce workers mid combat like I'm used to with Starcraft
I set "cycle through TCs" to tilde ( ` )... it's IMO one of the most important hotkeys in the game. you HAVE TO constantly make workers especially in the early/mid game when you're on only 1 TC, maybe making a 2nd. Once you're up to 3+ some lapse in macro can be permitted, because with 3 you'll catch up either way.
What's the logic on cycling as opposed to keeping them in a cycle ctrl group?
Ive only watched a few streams and the only thing that really irritates is me is the same thing that bothers me with other newer games, graphics style. I am not a fan at all of the cartoony/clash of clans style art. I noticed this in Civ 6 so I went back to Civ 5. Starcraft 2 has this as well and it drives me crazy. I absolutely hate the graphics/art style used in these newer games.
On November 05 2021 00:56 DyEnasTy wrote: Ive only watched a few streams and the only thing that really irritates is me is the same thing that bothers me with other newer games, graphics style. I am not a fan at all of the cartoony/clash of clans style art. I noticed this in Civ 6 so I went back to Civ 5. Starcraft 2 has this as well and it drives me crazy. I absolutely hate the graphics/art style used in these newer games.
I am exactly like you, but I actually enjoy AoE4 artstyle. Also a problem for me with the games you mentioned is screen readability, which I always think is awful on any RTS that is not SC:BW, but in AoE4, again, I feel like it's quite easy to decipher what's happening on the screen. I am just loving the game all around so far, it's refreshing.
On November 05 2021 00:56 DyEnasTy wrote: Ive only watched a few streams and the only thing that really irritates is me is the same thing that bothers me with other newer games, graphics style. I am not a fan at all of the cartoony/clash of clans style art. I noticed this in Civ 6 so I went back to Civ 5. Starcraft 2 has this as well and it drives me crazy. I absolutely hate the graphics/art style used in these newer games.
i dont find it cartoony at all personally. is it hyper realism? no. but i think the colors help with unit clarity/distinction.
On November 03 2021 12:44 FabledIntegral wrote: I'm surprised so many people commenting on pathfinding. I don't find it bad, just different (in the sense you group units together and it interacts with their movement speed, which is different from SC2 by quite a bit). Very similar to AoE2, which always seemed intentional design to me.
What I do hate is the UI & the aesthetics. Things look way too similar. Huge downgrade from AoE2 where you could clearly tell the difference between units and buildings. This has been some pretty common feedback, I imagine it must be addressed sometime sooner or later.
My main issue with the pathfinding is the interaction with walls I have not scouted yet. The units just seem to avoid them (?). I have lost so many units, because I tried to run away with them, but apparently clicked on a spot that was blocked by a Wall - and all the units turned around and suicided into the army.
And then there‘s this weird thing I‘m not sure why it happens. Sometimes my units, if I control specific parts of a control group, just seem to stop moving and just wait somewhere out on the map.
I‘m not sure why both these things happen, but with first one I‘m quite sure it‘s because of blocked paths.
The more i watch streams of AoE4 the more i want it. I'm in dire need of a new RTS experience and the impressions seems positive and people are having fun
Yeah I do not think I have had this much fun with a game in very long time. SC2 became too stressful, AOE4 is just a pleasure to play, win or lose.
I also like that the game is more focused and macro, strategy and tactics and less on micro and reaction speed. It also feels like it is easier to comeback from mistakes compared to SC2.
I think the pace of the game is the thing that they got right. Pretty much everything else is decent to good with room for improvements. Think it has a lot of potential if they make good choices going forward, it is already fun. Though I've only played the Norman campaign and the Art of War segments that teaches you mechanics.
Watched ~10h of high level play and apart from early game that is also enjoyable. Rus seems the most fun to watch since they have mechanics that kick in from the start.
the 3 non-aoe players to qualify were marinelord, vortix and lucifron. while vortix and lucifron aren't active in sc2/wc3 anymore, marinelord is in the dreamhack finals this season which is insane.
Watched a couple of games and was fun but France looks really strong. They're able to put on early pressure with the knights without their macro suffering due to the eco bonusses. The early pressure is very strong too because the knights heal up and they kill workers easily.
On November 05 2021 21:13 MockHamill wrote: Yeah I do not think I have had this much fun with a game in very long time. SC2 became too stressful, AOE4 is just a pleasure to play, win or lose.
I also like that the game is more focused and macro, strategy and tactics and less on micro and reaction speed. It also feels like it is easier to comeback from mistakes compared to SC2.
I definitely get the appeal of some of the QoL changes and simplifications. It certainly feels like it caters to a modern gaming audience, both veteran and newbies, for different reasons.
At the same time, the production speed and lack of projectile mechanics makes it feel like too great a departure from AoE2 for my liking, much like SC2 felt compared to BW. I think I'm biased because I may be addicted to the RT aspect of RTS more than the S, and AoE4 balanced the two elements in a way that doesn't appeal to me as much as 2 but it's still a solid release and hats off to Microsoft for continuing to support DE in a way that outshines Blizzard and RM.
if there are any aussie/nz'ers lurking here, zero effort (ANZ wc3 community i'm a part of) are running a $200 cup this sunday afternoon. i'll be helping out with casting and admin so the more numbers for it the more we're willing to put money in for future tournaments.
I think the game could be just a bit faster and the average game time a bit shorter. Less RNG with the resources would be nice as well.
But overall I really enjoy the game and it's a blast playing with friends right now, as well as seeing people from all RTS communities coming together to play and stream this game .
boring citadel map into huge lategame clash for the rest of the game
Can't find links though, you'll probably have to browse twitch
The tournament was fun, even if the balancing issues got quite obvious rather early on. With Bo5 coming up, the tournament should be even better. I hope to see some other match-ups soon enough. And maybe even some neglected Civs.
Watching the tournament I was wondering though: Koreans are (for some people in)famous for dominating the RTS scene. Is there even such a thing as a Korean AoE scene?
boring citadel map into huge lategame clash for the rest of the game
Can't find links though, you'll probably have to browse twitch
The tournament was fun, even if the balancing issues got quite obvious rather early on. With Bo5 coming up, the tournament should be even better. I hope to see some other match-ups soon enough. And maybe even some neglected Civs.
Watching the tournament I was wondering though: Koreans are (for some people in)famous for dominating the RTS scene. Is there even such a thing as a Korean AoE scene?
Koreans were very strong in the early AoE2 scene, back when almost no one knew what they were doing, but AFAIK the scene died out rather quickly. Brood War was far more popular, and there were many options for RTS games over there that we didn't really dive into in the West.
boring citadel map into huge lategame clash for the rest of the game
Can't find links though, you'll probably have to browse twitch
The tournament was fun, even if the balancing issues got quite obvious rather early on. With Bo5 coming up, the tournament should be even better. I hope to see some other match-ups soon enough. And maybe even some neglected Civs.
Watching the tournament I was wondering though: Koreans are (for some people in)famous for dominating the RTS scene. Is there even such a thing as a Korean AoE scene?
Not for a long time. I do remember in AOE3, the best player was a korean player named iamgrunt, but that was between 2005-2008. Don't think any Koreans have popped up since then that I know of.
boring citadel map into huge lategame clash for the rest of the game
Can't find links though, you'll probably have to browse twitch
The tournament was fun, even if the balancing issues got quite obvious rather early on. With Bo5 coming up, the tournament should be even better. I hope to see some other match-ups soon enough. And maybe even some neglected Civs.
Watching the tournament I was wondering though: Koreans are (for some people in)famous for dominating the RTS scene. Is there even such a thing as a Korean AoE scene?
Not for a long time. I do remember in AOE3, the best player was a korean player named iamgrunt, but that was between 2005-2008. Don't think any Koreans have popped up since then that I know of.
He also won the huge pot at Microsoft's AoE2 tournament in 2001:
On November 03 2021 21:19 Harris1st wrote: Thanks for the tip with Xbox Game Pass! Downloaded it yesterday and played the first mission (introduction). Really need to find the option to change language. German is unbearable. Do you guys hotkey your town center? Because pressing "H" you always jump there and I just want to produce workers mid combat like I'm used to with Starcraft
I set "cycle through TCs" to tilde ( ` )... it's IMO one of the most important hotkeys in the game. you HAVE TO constantly make workers especially in the early/mid game when you're on only 1 TC, maybe making a 2nd. Once you're up to 3+ some lapse in macro can be permitted, because with 3 you'll catch up either way.
Cool, I don't think I know half the hotkeys available. I was just binding TCs to 5.
Should keep grouping them to 5, I use to bind key to cycle through TC to make workers, that was not a great idea at all.
On November 07 2021 13:21 GTR wrote: if anyone hasn't been following competitive aoe4, the qualifiers for the first big tournament (online, 20k total prize) just finished
the 3 non-aoe players to qualify were marinelord, vortix and lucifron. while vortix and lucifron aren't active in sc2/wc3 anymore, marinelord is in the dreamhack finals this season which is insane.
On November 05 2021 21:13 MockHamill wrote: Yeah I do not think I have had this much fun with a game in very long time. SC2 became too stressful, AOE4 is just a pleasure to play, win or lose.
I also like that the game is more focused and macro, strategy and tactics and less on micro and reaction speed. It also feels like it is easier to comeback from mistakes compared to SC2.
I definitely get the appeal of some of the QoL changes and simplifications. It certainly feels like it caters to a modern gaming audience, both veteran and newbies, for different reasons.
At the same time, the production speed and lack of projectile mechanics makes it feel like too great a departure from AoE2 for my liking, much like SC2 felt compared to BW. I think I'm biased because I may be addicted to the RT aspect of RTS more than the S, and AoE4 balanced the two elements in a way that doesn't appeal to me as much as 2 but it's still a solid release and hats off to Microsoft for continuing to support DE in a way that outshines Blizzard and RM.
Curious what you mean here, don’t think I’ve seen it mentioned elsewhere. Things like miss percentages affected by terrain and the likes?
For clarity’s sake I’m a complete AoE noob, think I played some of the campaigns about 15 years ago and that’s it.
Seems to be getting pretty positive press though, do want to sink my teeth into something new. For a pretty much total noob what would you fine folks recommend I look out for? Is the UI pretty similar to Blizz games? Anything weird or wonky or just totally different in how AoE feels in general, that kind of thing?
I’m sure the learning curve is steep enough, but no doubt there’s a million tutorials out there in the YouTube era, anyone worth listening to in particular?
Then basics like constant worker production, scouting and spending your money. Maybe stay away from Delhi/HRE at first.
I've yet to find a good place to learn builds as I don't like watching videos for it. I planned to try a bit harder at first but I'm just enjoying hoping between civs, actually I'm in no rush to improve my gameplay. The matchmaking is working and providing me similarly skilled opponents.
Imo the learning curve is smooth atm given the game is new, just hope in!
I think I like this game Still can't be sure though, need another 500 hours to investigate further.
Any tips on how you achieved this without wasting too much time facing the AI? xD
Just made a start on English mastery and the first 3 quests are 1) kill a scout in dark age 2) produce 30 longbowmen from council hall in feudal age 3) win a game vs Easy AI
So naturally I load up a game vs Easy AI and completed all 3 objectives but only the first 1 got ticked off
I'm guessing the best way to go about this is to do one of your current mastery tasks in a multiplayer game and only face the AI when you're explicitly told to? Otherwise it's quite the grind...
I like spirit of the law yt channel. But I'd also say that currently the best bet for learning seems to be watching the top player's perspective. Apart from playing lots yourself that is.
The likes of Hera and viper have their own twitch and YouTube channels and do explain their thoughts at times. Regarding the civ's own specialisations I think experience beats everything but there are some videos as well as tier lists about that.
I think I like this game Still can't be sure though, need another 500 hours to investigate further.
Any tips on how you achieved this without wasting too much time facing the AI? xD
Just made a start on English mastery and the first 3 quests are 1) kill a scout in dark age 2) produce 30 longbowmen from council hall in feudal age 3) win a game vs Easy AI
So naturally I load up a game vs Easy AI and completed all 3 objectives but only the first 1 got ticked off
I'm guessing the best way to go about this is to do one of your current mastery tasks in a multiplayer game and only face the AI when you're explicitly told to? Otherwise it's quite the grind...
You can only do 1 challenge at a time, unfortunately. However, you can set the AI to Easy and resources to High and even starting age to whatever you like it to, to not waste time. If it tells you to make King's Palace landmark (economic, age III landmark) and produce 10 workers from it, play vs easy AI, set resources to High (10K of each resource), set age to Age II and map to revealed. With 5 of your starting workers make that landmark, with 6th start building 10 barracks. Queue up like 3-4 more vils in your TC, 1st one makes houses all the others go help make barracks. Once King's Palace is built, queue up 10 workers in it and focus on making men-at-arms or spearmen. Once you have a nice blob (30-40) rush the AI and keep rallying more into his base. Burn everything down except his landmarks. Once you make sure you built 10 or 11 vills from King's Palace landmark, just burn down his TC and/or whatever he built to advance to Castle Age.
Btw rushing the AI from 10 rax works on all AI difficulties. From easy to hardest.
There are some weird challenges like "kill 20 enemy units with Trebs that have researched Scatter Shot technology" ... because Trebs are fucking terrible at killing units. I shit you not, I had 30 trebs and 50 pikes in front and was trying to kill 20 units for over 40 minutes. Out of 30 shots maybe 1-2 hit every time.
Other hard challenges are the ones that require you to heal units. There is no friendly fire in this game so you cant mangonel your own units to half HP and then heal them. In best case, the enemy will be building mangos and you can bait them into shooting your units and retreating to heal them. In wost case, you gotta burn the AI down to the TC and move 1 unit at a time into and out of the TCs range. Rinse and Repeat for like 30 units, then move them into a mosque's range and get them healed... pain in the ass and takes a long time, but doable.
It would be great if we could "pin" these challenges to the dashboard inside the game to remind ourselves of what we have to do in-game. Also a counter for that challenge would be nice (ex. 0/3000 HP healed on units) but looking at the absolute shit state of the UI upon release, I'm not at all surprised even these basic functions are missing.
On November 05 2021 21:13 MockHamill wrote: Yeah I do not think I have had this much fun with a game in very long time. SC2 became too stressful, AOE4 is just a pleasure to play, win or lose.
I also like that the game is more focused and macro, strategy and tactics and less on micro and reaction speed. It also feels like it is easier to comeback from mistakes compared to SC2.
I definitely get the appeal of some of the QoL changes and simplifications. It certainly feels like it caters to a modern gaming audience, both veteran and newbies, for different reasons.
At the same time, the production speed and lack of projectile mechanics makes it feel like too great a departure from AoE2 for my liking, much like SC2 felt compared to BW. I think I'm biased because I may be addicted to the RT aspect of RTS more than the S, and AoE4 balanced the two elements in a way that doesn't appeal to me as much as 2 but it's still a solid release and hats off to Microsoft for continuing to support DE in a way that outshines Blizzard and RM.
Curious what you mean here, don’t think I’ve seen it mentioned elsewhere. Things like miss percentages affected by terrain and the likes?
For clarity’s sake I’m a complete AoE noob, think I played some of the campaigns about 15 years ago and that’s it.
Seems to be getting pretty positive press though, do want to sink my teeth into something new. For a pretty much total noob what would you fine folks recommend I look out for? Is the UI pretty similar to Blizz games? Anything weird or wonky or just totally different in how AoE feels in general, that kind of thing?
I’m sure the learning curve is steep enough, but no doubt there’s a million tutorials out there in the YouTube era, anyone worth listening to in particular?
AoE2 has an interesting mechanic where projectiles are not guaranteed to hit their target - even if you research the techs that supposedly make the units never miss. Once the projectile is fired, you can tell your units to move before it hits, making combat more micro-intensive. From what I've seen of AoE4, this is no longer the case. There are other projectile things that got changed, like walls blocking at least some projectiles if you are too close, but that is less common/less of a factor, though I do think they made walls too strong.
I'd still definitely recommend jumping into this game if you like RTS. The above are just grumbles from someone who wants the things they've grown used to and enjoy, and wants the kids off the lawn. You will still enjoy the game, I am sure
On November 05 2021 21:13 MockHamill wrote: Yeah I do not think I have had this much fun with a game in very long time. SC2 became too stressful, AOE4 is just a pleasure to play, win or lose.
I also like that the game is more focused and macro, strategy and tactics and less on micro and reaction speed. It also feels like it is easier to comeback from mistakes compared to SC2.
I definitely get the appeal of some of the QoL changes and simplifications. It certainly feels like it caters to a modern gaming audience, both veteran and newbies, for different reasons.
At the same time, the production speed and lack of projectile mechanics makes it feel like too great a departure from AoE2 for my liking, much like SC2 felt compared to BW. I think I'm biased because I may be addicted to the RT aspect of RTS more than the S, and AoE4 balanced the two elements in a way that doesn't appeal to me as much as 2 but it's still a solid release and hats off to Microsoft for continuing to support DE in a way that outshines Blizzard and RM.
Curious what you mean here, don’t think I’ve seen it mentioned elsewhere. Things like miss percentages affected by terrain and the likes?
For clarity’s sake I’m a complete AoE noob, think I played some of the campaigns about 15 years ago and that’s it.
Seems to be getting pretty positive press though, do want to sink my teeth into something new. For a pretty much total noob what would you fine folks recommend I look out for? Is the UI pretty similar to Blizz games? Anything weird or wonky or just totally different in how AoE feels in general, that kind of thing?
I’m sure the learning curve is steep enough, but no doubt there’s a million tutorials out there in the YouTube era, anyone worth listening to in particular?
AoE2 has an interesting mechanic where projectiles are not guaranteed to hit their target - even if you research the techs that supposedly make the units never miss. Once the projectile is fired, you can tell your units to move before it hits, making combat more micro-intensive. From what I've seen of AoE4, this is no longer the case. There are other projectile things that got changed, like walls blocking at least some projectiles if you are too close, but that is less common/less of a factor, though I do think they made walls too strong.
I'd still definitely recommend jumping into this game if you like RTS. The above are just grumbles from someone who wants the things they've grown used to and enjoy, and wants the kids off the lawn. You will still enjoy the game, I am sure
Wait they changed that?
I’m a complete noob, but I love micro stuff and I do recall seeing a lot of interesting micro and counter micro to dodge big volleys from archers etc. Having watched a small amount of competitive AoE.
They got rid of that? Seems a pity as it was interesting to me. Introduces an interesting dynamic where you could dodge things, but equally some staggered fire patterns could make that trickier etc. AoE to my layman’s eye looks to have less funky micro than the SCS or WC so having less microability again isn’t ideal.
Regardless I think it looks really fun so I’ll definitely dip my toes in. Cheers for the responses everyone
I've been enjoying this game (my first AoE experience). Feel like being a zerg player doesn't transfer as well as protoss or terran player though.
Am I the only one that sometimes gets distracted and not remember/see what map your on in the lobby and would appreciate it being shown during the loading screen as well?
Zerg are abbasid, you have this big building to change tier, you can outproduce your production building thanks to infantry being able to create siege weapons on the battlefield like if you were morphing, you want your buildings to be connected like creep.
Terrans are Mongols, they have reactor, don't need much stone/vespene gas compared to other races, free mules/cheap traders for that sweet money, they have bunkers acting like stim packs with towers, their dropships are mangudai who can shoot while moving and of course they can move their buildings around, they don't want to go late game on even footing.
Protoss are French, perma chronoboosted worker production, strong a click and you're dirty if you play them.
I just realized the worst thing in the unit control: why on earth can you not target with your buildings? That makes holding these ram pushed infinitely more difficult, because you can‘t focus the units that would actually die to arrows and instead you‘re forced to tickle the rams.
I would think that this is a deliberate design choice? Baterring ram / knights go in first to draw the aggro from the squishy units. In that regard I kind of like it. But I've stumbled over that fact as well and wanted to switch tower aggro, so kinda torn.
Considering that I've seen castle attack castle for idk how many minutes, this does appear to need some fine tuning at the least.
The French are definitely protoss. Yeah I think it would be nicer if we could select targets instead, even would be nice when no ram is involved. Might be a choice or an oversight who knows. At least using workers to pop the rams with load/unload is pretty consistent. Still wish you could select exactly where they come out at. Which is probably my favorite micro thing in the game so far.
Starcraft 2 players are really hitting the leaderboard hard. Marinelord is #1 right now, serral's up there too. I haven't really played or watched very much at all though. I feel like i'm too old and busy to learn all the ins and outs of another rts lol
On November 13 2021 04:07 Swisslink wrote: I just realized the worst thing in the unit control: why on earth can you not target with your buildings? That makes holding these ram pushed infinitely more difficult, because you can‘t focus the units that would actually die to arrows and instead you‘re forced to tickle the rams.
You can target fire with towers but not the Town Center.
On November 13 2021 16:20 Jockmcplop wrote: Starcraft 2 players are really hitting the leaderboard hard. Marinelord is #1 right now, serral's up there too. I haven't really played or watched very much at all though. I feel like i'm too old and busy to learn all the ins and outs of another rts lol
Don't worry I only play with old people (> 27 gross!!!!) and they're doing just fine.
Hey, just wanted to remind everyone today is the day that the MAIN BRACKET of the Genesis Tournament starts. Today it's Ro8, tomorrow semis and final. Might be a cool watch o/
On November 13 2021 04:07 Swisslink wrote: I just realized the worst thing in the unit control: why on earth can you not target with your buildings? That makes holding these ram pushed infinitely more difficult, because you can‘t focus the units that would actually die to arrows and instead you‘re forced to tickle the rams.
It was my first reaction too but now I like the rams/TC interaction, TCs are super strong and destroy early units and rams are the only answer. Walls are cheap and super durable. On top of that rams are very expensive and they need an actual army to support them, I would even go as far as saying a superior army. So if you have the superior army + expensive rams, you kinda deserve to win, unless it's against 2 TCs which can survive after a bad trade.
On November 14 2021 00:26 Laurens wrote: Gotta love it.
After the open qualifier of Genesis: "French are OP" - "Delhi was picked 0 times" - "Balance is shit".
Game 1 of RO8: Lucifron trashes Kasva with Delhi vs French :D
Don't mistake the two spainiards. It's Vortix trashing Kasva. And I'm wondering whether that's a seriously strong build or just strong because of the surprise effect.
It looked good, very smart play to take to the map and wrestle map control from the French and secure 2/3 sacred sites. Then pump M@A that trade OK vs Royal Knights (without cycle charging) and crush archers.
Looking at this tournament, the French don't seem OP at all lol. Just a lot of shitters on ladder that can't exploit their disadvantages (including me)
in reality they probably need to be toned down a little on the Eco side like vil production and maybe water.
Hera didn't push his advantage when he had imperial and upgrades. He made only one bombard at first and didn't make anymore for quite a while. I am betting Hera doesn't have a lot of experience in long games like that, which was unfortunate as I was hoping for a game 5.
Not the Lucifron I remember from SC2, still a bit new to the game I guess Lots of mistakes in that French mirror. Constantly losing both ships and knights whilst gaining nothing.
On November 14 2021 09:03 CicadaSC wrote: still having a hard time finding build orders for this game. Every game I watch people are playing differently except maybe french
that's a good sign imo, means game has higher strategic potential, no clear always-working/always-optimal recipes. I'd even say that's kind of #1 quality for a RTS now.
On November 14 2021 09:03 CicadaSC wrote: still having a hard time finding build orders for this game. Every game I watch people are playing differently except maybe french
that's a good sign imo, means game has higher strategic potential, no clear always-working/always-optimal recipes. I'd even say that's kind of #1 quality for a RTS now.
That's how every good RTS starts, at least; StarCraft was the same way Eventually a clearer meta was distilled and then that meta evolved. THAT is the best possible quality of an RTS IMO.
On November 14 2021 09:03 CicadaSC wrote: still having a hard time finding build orders for this game. Every game I watch people are playing differently except maybe french
that's a good sign imo, means game has higher strategic potential, no clear always-working/always-optimal recipes. I'd even say that's kind of #1 quality for a RTS now.
That's how every good RTS starts, at least; StarCraft was the same way Eventually a clearer meta was distilled and then that meta evolved. THAT is the best possible quality of an RTS IMO.
Yeah but AO4 macro is deeper than SC2. You have to adapt your build not only to your opponent but to the map itself. The random map generator means that you need to adapt on the fly to various map conditions, so a player that just blindly follows a build order will be behind.
I think I like this game Still can't be sure though, need another 500 hours to investigate further.
Any tips on how you achieved this without wasting too much time facing the AI? xD
Just made a start on English mastery and the first 3 quests are 1) kill a scout in dark age 2) produce 30 longbowmen from council hall in feudal age 3) win a game vs Easy AI
So naturally I load up a game vs Easy AI and completed all 3 objectives but only the first 1 got ticked off
I'm guessing the best way to go about this is to do one of your current mastery tasks in a multiplayer game and only face the AI when you're explicitly told to? Otherwise it's quite the grind...
You can only do 1 challenge at a time, unfortunately. However, you can set the AI to Easy and resources to High and even starting age to whatever you like it to, to not waste time. If it tells you to make King's Palace landmark (economic, age III landmark) and produce 10 workers from it, play vs easy AI, set resources to High (10K of each resource), set age to Age II and map to revealed. With 5 of your starting workers make that landmark, with 6th start building 10 barracks. Queue up like 3-4 more vils in your TC, 1st one makes houses all the others go help make barracks. Once King's Palace is built, queue up 10 workers in it and focus on making men-at-arms or spearmen. Once you have a nice blob (30-40) rush the AI and keep rallying more into his base. Burn everything down except his landmarks. Once you make sure you built 10 or 11 vills from King's Palace landmark, just burn down his TC and/or whatever he built to advance to Castle Age.
Btw rushing the AI from 10 rax works on all AI difficulties. From easy to hardest.
There are some weird challenges like "kill 20 enemy units with Trebs that have researched Scatter Shot technology" ... because Trebs are fucking terrible at killing units. I shit you not, I had 30 trebs and 50 pikes in front and was trying to kill 20 units for over 40 minutes. Out of 30 shots maybe 1-2 hit every time.
Other hard challenges are the ones that require you to heal units. There is no friendly fire in this game so you cant mangonel your own units to half HP and then heal them. In best case, the enemy will be building mangos and you can bait them into shooting your units and retreating to heal them. In wost case, you gotta burn the AI down to the TC and move 1 unit at a time into and out of the TCs range. Rinse and Repeat for like 30 units, then move them into a mosque's range and get them healed... pain in the ass and takes a long time, but doable.
It would be great if we could "pin" these challenges to the dashboard inside the game to remind ourselves of what we have to do in-game. Also a counter for that challenge would be nice (ex. 0/3000 HP healed on units) but looking at the absolute shit state of the UI upon release, I'm not at all surprised even these basic functions are missing.
Do you remember how you did the "Kill 50 units with Landsknechte" mastery? Struggling a bit with that one, mainly because my AI opponent never makes more than 50 units it seems like. Against multiple AI opponents Mangonels make quick work of my Landsknechte.
e: nvm, just have to put the AI on higher difficulty and he puts out some more units to kill.
I think I like this game Still can't be sure though, need another 500 hours to investigate further.
Any tips on how you achieved this without wasting too much time facing the AI? xD
Just made a start on English mastery and the first 3 quests are 1) kill a scout in dark age 2) produce 30 longbowmen from council hall in feudal age 3) win a game vs Easy AI
So naturally I load up a game vs Easy AI and completed all 3 objectives but only the first 1 got ticked off
I'm guessing the best way to go about this is to do one of your current mastery tasks in a multiplayer game and only face the AI when you're explicitly told to? Otherwise it's quite the grind...
You can only do 1 challenge at a time, unfortunately. However, you can set the AI to Easy and resources to High and even starting age to whatever you like it to, to not waste time. If it tells you to make King's Palace landmark (economic, age III landmark) and produce 10 workers from it, play vs easy AI, set resources to High (10K of each resource), set age to Age II and map to revealed. With 5 of your starting workers make that landmark, with 6th start building 10 barracks. Queue up like 3-4 more vils in your TC, 1st one makes houses all the others go help make barracks. Once King's Palace is built, queue up 10 workers in it and focus on making men-at-arms or spearmen. Once you have a nice blob (30-40) rush the AI and keep rallying more into his base. Burn everything down except his landmarks. Once you make sure you built 10 or 11 vills from King's Palace landmark, just burn down his TC and/or whatever he built to advance to Castle Age.
Btw rushing the AI from 10 rax works on all AI difficulties. From easy to hardest.
There are some weird challenges like "kill 20 enemy units with Trebs that have researched Scatter Shot technology" ... because Trebs are fucking terrible at killing units. I shit you not, I had 30 trebs and 50 pikes in front and was trying to kill 20 units for over 40 minutes. Out of 30 shots maybe 1-2 hit every time.
Other hard challenges are the ones that require you to heal units. There is no friendly fire in this game so you cant mangonel your own units to half HP and then heal them. In best case, the enemy will be building mangos and you can bait them into shooting your units and retreating to heal them. In wost case, you gotta burn the AI down to the TC and move 1 unit at a time into and out of the TCs range. Rinse and Repeat for like 30 units, then move them into a mosque's range and get them healed... pain in the ass and takes a long time, but doable.
It would be great if we could "pin" these challenges to the dashboard inside the game to remind ourselves of what we have to do in-game. Also a counter for that challenge would be nice (ex. 0/3000 HP healed on units) but looking at the absolute shit state of the UI upon release, I'm not at all surprised even these basic functions are missing.
Do you remember how you did the "Kill 50 units with Landsknechte" mastery? Struggling a bit with that one, mainly because my AI opponent never makes more than 50 units it seems like. Against multiple AI opponents Mangonels make quick work of my Landsknechte.
I played against medium AI and started in Age I and low resources, but map revealed. It was Hills & Vale map. I stole like 90% of the sheep from the map and walled myself in with stone walls in age II. I boomed with a 2nd TC and got to age III and started making Landsknechte. !!!! MAKE SURE TO STAY AGE III AND NOT GO IMPERIAL AGE !!!! Stupidly enough, you have to kill 50 units with Landsknechte and you CANNOT upgrade them to Elite Landsknechte or their kills won't count any longer.
Make some 30-50 Landsknechte (blacksmith and barracks upgrades are fine, just not Elite upgrade) and then send them to the AI. If it already has stone wallks, send some rams as well. Kill his army and retreat, let him build it up again. The AI usually comes out when you attack one of the buildings on the edge of its base. If he's gonna camp his forces near the TC and refuses to move out, just go in there and massacre his army near the TC, just make sure to leave the workers intact so he can rebuild his army. Do this 2x or 3x to make sure you killed enough units, and just go in for the final time and kill all the workers as well (villagers count towards that 50 kills you need).
You can try playing against the Mongols, from what I've seen they're pretty aggressive on Hard and Hardest AI if you want to.
For yesterday's games, it was mostly about which player had the better plan. Execution did not play a huge role. And tbh, the game is not that fun to spectate (and I'm a sucker for RTS esports).
Concerning different civs, French are not as strong as expected (or no one practiced any strat on them as they had to learn other civs and they thought the vanilla French build was enough [it wasn't]), Mongols are actually the top tier civ and we were shown how Delhi were meant to be played. HRE and Chinese MIA, I hope tomorrow's patch fix their prelates and officers, it would change a lot of things for them.
Carrying deers will probably disappear or be nerfed, it's just too much food right under the TC.
!!!! MAKE SURE TO STAY AGE III AND NOT GO IMPERIAL AGE !!!! Stupidly enough, you have to kill 50 units with Landsknechte and you CANNOT upgrade them to Elite Landsknechte or their kills won't count any longer.
Hahaha wow, what an oversight.
Cheers I did get the mastery eventually, putting the AI on Hard did the trick though it was still a bit of a slog, had to get some trebs out to snipe the landmarks from afar.
Concerning different civs, French are not as strong as expected (or no one practiced any strat on them as they had to learn other civs and they thought the vanilla French build was enough [it wasn't]),
I was really surprised by Lucifron in the French mirror. He got the sea control and then didn't really seem to know what to do. It's like you said, he probably practiced other civs. He built the economy landmark instead of school of cavalry and then made Knights all the time without doing any trading?! Kept running knights into his opponent's base to try and snipe villagers but trading 5 knights for 5 villagers just doesn't seem like the play. I also don't see much point in attempting to snipe villagers when your opponent is already at 100+ but maybe I'm wrong there. He looked to have 0 lategame plan and just rolled over.
I'm not playing AoE4 at all, just watching. I saw that French mirror between Lucifron and TheViper yesterday and IIRC TheViper had a better map starting point, but somehow Lucifron still won the battle over the water. It was like Laurens said. Lucifron did have a good advantage but then threw it away pretty hard. His small Knight attacks did basically nothing and TheViper outteched him hard just to roll him over. Was painful to see when TheViper reached Age IV lol.
Both SC2 and AOE4 have a major tournament going on right now. The difference is that AOE4 has twice as many viewers. Not bad for game that was not even made for e-sports.
On November 15 2021 01:11 MockHamill wrote: Both SC2 and AOE4 have a major tournament going on right now. The difference is that AOE4 has twice as many viewers. Not bad for game that was not even made for e-sports.
Sure about that? I would assume the viewer numbers for the tournament numbers are about equal. There are just more streamers streaming AoE 4 without any reference to the tournament. Which is to be expected because of how new the game is.
On November 15 2021 01:11 MockHamill wrote: Both SC2 and AOE4 have a major tournament going on right now. The difference is that AOE4 has twice as many viewers. Not bad for game that was not even made for e-sports.
Sure about that? I would assume the viewer numbers for the tournament numbers are about equal. There are just more streamers streaming AoE 4 without any reference to the tournament. Which is to be expected because of how new the game is.
On November 15 2021 02:17 nojok wrote: The AoE scene is filled with Fantasy's gg timing enjoyers.
I think that in general it is easier to make a comeback in AoE than it is in StarCraft so it's not entirely without merit. There are also fewer ways to determine your current position vs. your opponent's because of fewer scouting mechanics/units (and a bit less scouting done in the lategame overall from what I've seen, save for when in AoE2 people go mass cav harassment).
On November 15 2021 02:17 nojok wrote: The AoE scene is filled with Fantasy's gg timing enjoyers.
I think that in general it is easier to make a comeback in AoE than it is in StarCraft so it's not entirely without merit. There are also fewer ways to determine your current position vs. your opponent's because of fewer scouting mechanics/units (and a bit less scouting done in the lategame overall from what I've seen, save for when in AoE2 people go mass cav harassment).
It can happen in case the disparity in late game knowledge between the 2 players is huge, which is still the case like shown in + Show Spoiler +
Hera vs Recon
. The gg timings should become better later.
Springals, and artillery in general, should not get the bonus movespeed from mongols' towers. I also hope springals' efficiency against non artillery units is greatly reduced. Mongols already 4 0 today.
On November 15 2021 03:42 Harris1st wrote: Some things in this game seem just stupid.
I mean Reapers kill a queen slowly but they will do it eventually. But having 1000 archers and not even scratching a Ram seems ... just bad
That is more or less what would happen in real life. Arrows do nothing against Rams. It is like 100 guys with knifes trying to take down a tank. Does not work.
On November 15 2021 04:13 Artisreal wrote: there's incendiary rounds or whatever it's called for amping the damage
That's a university tech, needs Imperial Age (Age IV) at which point, rams are a non-factor, it will be all cannons as far as siege goes.
In AoE2 rams were very simular, in fact they had a staggering 180 ranged armor. What you needed to deal with them were melee units or mangonels. They were however also, very much slower than their AoE4 counterparts. Here they are a threat from Feudal (Age II) onwards and well into Castle Age (age III)
Definitely agree they're the most entertaining match-up, Mongols are my favourite by a mile. Also I think we need another word for OP-ness...it just sounds like...uhem wrong to me. xD
On November 15 2021 01:11 MockHamill wrote: Both SC2 and AOE4 have a major tournament going on right now. The difference is that AOE4 has twice as many viewers. Not bad for game that was not even made for e-sports.
Sure about that? I would assume the viewer numbers for the tournament numbers are about equal. There are just more streamers streaming AoE 4 without any reference to the tournament. Which is to be expected because of how new the game is.
I believe the largest stream was unrelated to the tournament. I didn't look at it closely but it was showing matches with multiple players, not 1v1, and it ended before the finals.
On November 15 2021 01:11 MockHamill wrote: Both SC2 and AOE4 have a major tournament going on right now. The difference is that AOE4 has twice as many viewers. Not bad for game that was not even made for e-sports.
Sure about that? I would assume the viewer numbers for the tournament numbers are about equal. There are just more streamers streaming AoE 4 without any reference to the tournament. Which is to be expected because of how new the game is.
I believe the largest stream was unrelated to the tournament. I didn't look at it closely but it was showing matches with multiple players, not 1v1, and it ended before the finals.
E: It was a french streamer named "ZeratoR".
Yeah he is the biggest "twitcher" in France and he had a showmatch going on at Grand Rex, Paris. Mlord was supposed to be there but couldn't because of DH in sc2 and Genesis in AoE4. There were SC2 french streamers Koka and Funka participating though. Also since the game is brand new, there is the novelty factor that brings viewers, I doubt it will be the same in a few months
I enjoyed the finals but it seemed like TheViper was playing at a different level. Knowing all the counters and adapting perfectly to the evolving game state in realtime.
P.S: Is there not going to be a dedicated forum for AoE4 on tl? The game is booming.
Another thing as an AoE noob, there seems to be, least in AoE2 a lot more damage/armour modifiers across types of specific units than in SC with its damage types like light/armoured etc
Is that still a thing or has it been streamlined? Or indeed was my perception wrong to begin with?
On November 15 2021 10:38 WombaT wrote: Another thing as an AoE noob, there seems to be, least in AoE2 a lot more damage/armour modifiers across types of specific units than in SC with its damage types like light/armoured etc
Is that still a thing or has it been streamlined? Or indeed was my perception wrong to begin with?
There are only two armor types, melee and piercing. However, certain units get bonus damage in certain interactions, which is what leads to counters. I don't remember the exact numbers but just for argument's sake let's say a Knight has 1 melee armor and a Swordsman does 5 melee damage; the Swordsman will do 4 damage to the knight. The Halberdier does 4 melee damage, so you would think that he would do 3 melee damage to the knight, but because he has +48 bonus damage against cavalry, he will actually do 51 melee damage to the knight. There are a ton of interactions with bonus damage of that nature, and it's sort of hard to put it all in one recognizable chart, not to mention the fact that some units counter other units without actually having bonus damage but simply due to their nature (mobility, range, high pierce armor, etc.) or only in certain scenarios (Bombard Cannons pretty much one shot nearly everything but if you run up close to it then it dies, plus you can dodge the cannonball). Here's a chart I found online:
On November 15 2021 03:42 Harris1st wrote: Some things in this game seem just stupid.
I mean Reapers kill a queen slowly but they will do it eventually. But having 1000 archers and not even scratching a Ram seems ... just bad
That is more or less what would happen in real life. Arrows do nothing against Rams. It is like 100 guys with knifes trying to take down a tank. Does not work.
Not knowing anything about the game except how good French are. I watched several games from the genesis tournament and never caught one where France won, so I checked the results and French were 3/9 in non mirrors xD
On November 15 2021 18:36 M2 wrote: Not knowing anything about the game except how good French are. I watched several games from the genesis tournament and never caught one where France won, so I checked the results and French were 3/9 in non mirrors xD
It is true that the overall OP-ness of the French was overblown before this tournament, however, I do still think their Hulks (springald ships in age II) and The Guild (age III landmark) both need to be nerfed. Hulks just dominate and crush any opposition on water and The Guild magically produces a resource of your choosing out of thin air without any cap. In one game TheViper got 3500 gold out of it in a single click. That's almost as much as a small gold deposit on the map (4000), and he didn't actually have to mine it or dedicate workers to it. Just free.
Aside from that Mongols obviously were the dominating force during this tournament. Nerfing them is a lot harder, because they looked overall strong across the board. Maybe a springald nerf globally would indirectly nerf mongols? Add a cooldown to springald production in the field? IDK
Chinese and HRE were being avoided like the plague. One problem is probably both Prelates and Tax Collectors costing a lot at the start amongst other things... both factions need some buffs.
Delhi / Rus / Abbasid were pretty OK, surprisingly.
On November 15 2021 18:36 M2 wrote: Not knowing anything about the game except how good French are. I watched several games from the genesis tournament and never caught one where France won, so I checked the results and French were 3/9 in non mirrors xD
It is true that the overall OP-ness of the French was overblown before this tournament, however, I do still think their Hulks (springald ships in age II) and The Guild (age III landmark) both need to be nerfed. Hulks just dominate and crush any opposition on water and The Guild magically produces a resource of your choosing out of thin air without any cap. In one game TheViper got 3500 gold out of it in a single click. That's almost as much as a small gold deposit on the map (4000), and he didn't actually have to mine it or dedicate workers to it. Just free.
Aside from that Mongols obviously were the dominating force during this tournament. Nerfing them is a lot harder, because they looked overall strong across the board. Maybe a springald nerf globally would indirectly nerf mongols? Add a cooldown to springald production in the field? IDK
Chinese and HRE were being avoided like the plague. One problem is probably both Prelates and Tax Collectors costing a lot at the start amongst other things... both factions need some buffs.
Delhi / Rus / Abbasid were pretty OK, surprisingly.
The guild's hall tick caps at 200 every 20 seconds and it takes a long time to reach that cap, it's in line with other stuff, like 3 relic in HRE's cathedral is the same gain as a maxed out French guild's hall which takes like 20 minutes. It's a boring landmark though. The hulk is an abomination which should have never made it to release day. All the good French maps were removed by the organisers btw, so they appeared weaker than are.
Now to speak about truely broken age 3 landmark, look at the Mongol's one, +50% gold income right when it's up. Then for nerf, you could repay for the Khan, don't apply the bonus speed from their T2 landmark to artillery and nerf springals.
Even if not built on the field, springalds are just too good at dealing with basicly everything and they're so fast. It's the unit I hate the most atm.
Players and organisers are discussing the possibility to only be able to pick each civ once during a boX, that would be better and bring some more diversity.
I believe today's patch should fix some issues with prelates and officers who are idling way too much, maybe it's other bugs though, devs did not explicitly tell us, that would be a direct buff to Chinese and HRE.
Welp, that's LELic for you... if you know anything about Company of Heroes, then you know just how lethargic Relic is when it comes to patches and balance issues. CoH2 nowadays receives maybe 1 balance patch per year, maybe 2, and it's all minor changes.
On November 15 2021 10:38 WombaT wrote: Another thing as an AoE noob, there seems to be, least in AoE2 a lot more damage/armour modifiers across types of specific units than in SC with its damage types like light/armoured etc
Is that still a thing or has it been streamlined? Or indeed was my perception wrong to begin with?
There are only two armor types, melee and piercing. However, certain units get bonus damage in certain interactions, which is what leads to counters. I don't remember the exact numbers but just for argument's sake let's say a Knight has 1 melee armor and a Swordsman does 5 melee damage; the Swordsman will do 4 damage to the knight. The Halberdier does 4 melee damage, so you would think that he would do 3 melee damage to the knight, but because he has +48 bonus damage against cavalry, he will actually do 51 melee damage to the knight. There are a ton of interactions with bonus damage of that nature, and it's sort of hard to put it all in one recognizable chart, not to mention the fact that some units counter other units without actually having bonus damage but simply due to their nature (mobility, range, high pierce armor, etc.) or only in certain scenarios (Bombard Cannons pretty much one shot nearly everything but if you run up close to it then it dies, plus you can dodge the cannonball). Here's a chart I found online:
AoE4 operates in a similar way AFAIK.
I’m assuming with exposure that all becomes second nature, it seems a little unwieldy to the layman, but yeah I imagine with exposure it’s not super complicated
On November 15 2021 10:38 WombaT wrote: Another thing as an AoE noob, there seems to be, least in AoE2 a lot more damage/armour modifiers across types of specific units than in SC with its damage types like light/armoured etc
Is that still a thing or has it been streamlined? Or indeed was my perception wrong to begin with?
There are only two armor types, melee and piercing. However, certain units get bonus damage in certain interactions, which is what leads to counters. I don't remember the exact numbers but just for argument's sake let's say a Knight has 1 melee armor and a Swordsman does 5 melee damage; the Swordsman will do 4 damage to the knight. The Halberdier does 4 melee damage, so you would think that he would do 3 melee damage to the knight, but because he has +48 bonus damage against cavalry, he will actually do 51 melee damage to the knight. There are a ton of interactions with bonus damage of that nature, and it's sort of hard to put it all in one recognizable chart, not to mention the fact that some units counter other units without actually having bonus damage but simply due to their nature (mobility, range, high pierce armor, etc.) or only in certain scenarios (Bombard Cannons pretty much one shot nearly everything but if you run up close to it then it dies, plus you can dodge the cannonball). Here's a chart I found online:
AoE4 operates in a similar way AFAIK.
I’m assuming with exposure that all becomes second nature, it seems a little unwieldy to the layman, but yeah I imagine with exposure it’s not super complicated
Cheers for the rather comprehensive reply
It's definitely something that you start realizing with more time spent watching/playing, even if no one tells you. When I first started playing AoE as a kid, I thought that I could just make Spearmen and skirmishers because why spend gold if you don't have to? I made Eagle Warriors thinking they would be like super-Spearmen because they carried spears, lmao. But over time you definitely get the hang of the unit interactions and it starts to feel intuitive rather than arbitrary. Instead of trying to take in that whole chart, you can think of simple triangles such as Archers beat Spearmen, Spearmen beat Knights, Knights beat Archers, for example. Or, Skirmishers beat Archers, Archers beat Swordsmen, Swordsmen beat Skirmishers. So on and so forth.
EDIT: It also helps that there is some real life logic to it, as opposed to Sci Fi units like in StarCraft. It makes sense that an Archer can kill a Spearman from a distance, and that Spearmen are good against Knights because, well, that's what was used against mounted units in antiquity and beyond lol. If you can grasp StarCraft interactions, AoE ones should be just as easy if not easier to get a grasp of, is what I'm trying to say I guess.
I agree. I am more excited for QOL changes anyway and fixing some annoying bugs and hopefully hitboxes. The only balance change I do think needs to happen is French on water maps, but otherwise I think things need to settle as civs get figured out (Mongols was considered meh until slightly before the tourney and is now considered the best civ in the game for example).
Although I did not expect any nerfs to the French and Mongols (or buffs to HRE/Chinese for that matter) quite yet, I am disappointed that HRE Prelates, Mongol rocket-powered buildings and Rus Relic bugs were all documented just as "seen - will investigate further" and not actually fixed yet. Same with resources getting randomly deleted when you put down buildings. AFAIK all of these were communicated to them from closed beta & the public stress test.
The balances changes can wait, I agree, but bug fixes should be a priority.
I fear that the numbers of AOEIV in terms of online players based on steamapps, arent that big to sustain a healthy community it peaks on 40k~~ players online. SC2 numbers are hidden nowadays, but that number we still can probably hit.
On November 16 2021 18:32 DreamOen wrote: I fear that the numbers of AOEIV in terms of online players based on steamapps, arent that big to sustain a healthy community it peaks on 40k~~ players online. SC2 numbers are hidden nowadays, but that number we still can probably hit.
Don't forget that you can get AoE 4 in Game Pass for 1$. I imagine quite a lot of people are playing over Microsoft store/ Game pass.
On November 16 2021 18:32 DreamOen wrote: I fear that the numbers of AOEIV in terms of online players based on steamapps, arent that big to sustain a healthy community it peaks on 40k~~ players online. SC2 numbers are hidden nowadays, but that number we still can probably hit.
Don't forget that you can get AoE 4 in Game Pass for 1$. I imagine quite a lot of people are playing over Microsoft store/ Game pass.
On November 16 2021 18:32 DreamOen wrote: I fear that the numbers of AOEIV in terms of online players based on steamapps, arent that big to sustain a healthy community it peaks on 40k~~ players online. SC2 numbers are hidden nowadays, but that number we still can probably hit.
Don't forget that you can get AoE 4 in Game Pass for 1$. I imagine quite a lot of people are playing over Microsoft store/ Game pass.
This, have friends I regularly play and all 8 of us have it on game pass. IMO the steam numbers are lower than the game pass numbers.
On November 16 2021 07:23 GTR wrote: its crazy how people are expecting dramatic balance changes only 3 weeks into the games retail lifespan.
for reference, sc2 had its first balance patch after retail release after 2 months. Patch 1.1.0
and yes while there was beta testing and the like, it wasn't as extensive as sc2 and was very limited in terms of competitive multiplayer
I think you are nailing the issue in your own comment though. SC2 had very extensive beta testing with patches at least once a week, while AoE IV had a short beta, but then as well didn't fix a lot of the bugs/balance issues that were brought up. They could have had a longer beta if they wanted, or they could be more aggressive with patching with the retail launch, but they are not doing either.
I myself don't really mind the balances issues too much, I think it's good to let the playerbase have time to figure things out but there are some bugs that have been around beta that really should have been fixed.
There are a couple coming in December from the same people who organized Genesis. They're smaller tourney's and invitationals. The next big one is planned for early next year I believe and will be an open tournament.
They are also organizing a weekly show match series where the winner will get 500$ and continue on for each win. If a player wins 10 in a row, they'll get an extra 2500$ and that starts on Tuesday, with Probe vs Marinelord.
I'm sure some other tournaments are being planned behind the scenes (at least I hope!). I don't expect any big tourney's though until next year.
Edit: Right after posting this, the showmatch winner stays on series was changed since Viper has a major AOE2 tournament (King of the Desert 4) going on.
Only this one I believe. But I don't care as much about it since there are no SC2/BW/W3 players that I know of in it.
For anyone who cares about narratives and hometown heroes and such, jumping into a new scene where they don't know anyone can be tough. I've been following competitive AoE2 on and off for quite a few years now, so I figured I'll give a brief introduction to the players here; I will mostly try to stick to the facts but impressions of people are always through the lens of whose story about them you're hearing and etc. I'll try to mention any rivalries/narratives which I think are potentially interesting as they come up. Of course, most of this will be based on the AoE2 scene, so stuff concerning playstyles may not transfer 1:1 but hopefully my descriptions give a sense of personality/gaming style to the names.
Any corrections/additional comments welcome!
Invited
ACCM = One of the two best Vietnamese players that consistently make it into top 16s of tournaments, has been an up-and-comer over the past few years. dogao = Strong overall player, also good at team games. He was on the rise a few years ago to get to this level. MbL = Jokingly known as "Master Boar Lamer," he has a reputation for stealing other people's gaia resources. Was competing at the very top level a few years ago, has since fallen off a bit, but made a surprising run at the most recent Wololo. Also known for making comebacks from the brink of death, and for always being "housed" (supply blocked) and throwing down three houses at once, even in the early game. TheViper = The most dominant player of the past 10 years, known for being a solid all-around player and somewhat of an innovator, coming up with and utilizing quirky strats and techniques that then become adopted by the rest of the playing field. Considered by most to be the best player of all time. Recently won a Redbull Wololo (explained a bit more in detail later) which could be seen as a sign of his resurgence. His dominance had been fading over the past 1-2 years as more people caught up to his level; up until that point, he always seemed to be a full year ahead of the competition in terms of skill.
BacT = Another of the two best Vietnamese players, has also been making strides in the past few years. Hera = One of the youngest players in the scene, he spent years hovering around that top 20 level relying heavily on his mechanics, in the past year or two has really come into his own by shoring up his weaknesses. Used to be, and may still be, an incredibly consistent practice partner of MbL - playing for a dozen hours in a row type thing. Known for spamming Hussars (non-gold cavalry) in the late game, backed by an insane amount of farms (70+). Probably one of the biggest rivalries in the scene is him vs. Liereyy as both are young, both are "micro nerds" especially with their Archers, and both seem particularly well-suited for the "Empire Wars" format of Redbull Wololo tournaments, where you start the game with a few initial buildings like a Barracks, houses, farms, mines etc. Liereyy has knocked Hera out repeatedly in both Redbull and other tournaments, especially over the past year; has been the biggest obstacle to his tournament successes. Mr_Yo = Also known as "Mr. 7-0" because of his trouncing of TheViper in a tournament not too long ago, Mr_Yo is one of the strongest players in AoE2 currently. Unfortunately could not participate in the most recent Wololo because it was in-person and it is difficult for him to travel from China IIRC. Villese = Finnish players have a reputation for being a bit wacky in terms of strategy choice, and are known to be exceptionally strong as a team (they call themselves Suomi and consistently place high in team leagues despite facing off against mixed nation sponsored teams). Villese is the best and perhaps most standard player of them all, consistently in the top 10 or top 20. Strong mechanics and fundamentals.
Capoch = Old school player who came back not too long ago, made a crazy upset run at the most recent Redbull Wololo. Is not the most mechanically sound player, but still gets the job done. JorDan_AoE = Another old school player that came back a couple of years ago, used to be #1-#2 in the world, took a bit of time for him to climb back up into the top ~10 active players but has recently had some great performances, particularly in the most recent Hidden Cup. Is known for being exceptionally nice and polite. Nicov = Known for their water play and for his complaints about various topics such as maps, civs, brackets vs. other players, etc. It's not like, perpetual whining, but is just more vocal than others about his beliefs about the game I guess. Running meme is that he always gets knocked out of tournaments by TheViper or another top player in the early rounds. Vinchester = Might be the youngest currently active player, he is super technical and harassment-oriented. Had been known to over-micro and over-commit for a while, but has since balanced out his play a bit and has started posting strong results more recently.
DauT = Known as "The Lord", of the people in this list he is perhaps the one who makes the strongest case for being #1 instead of TheViper because not only was he a consistent #1-#2 player in the mid-00s to mid-teens, but has never dropped off in terms of tournament placement too heavily - recently won a Wololo despite his age and the format being more favoring of mechanical-oriented players. Is known for his "DauT Castles" which is that he always seems to undercommit villagers to constructing castles, or places them in very suspect locations, leading them to be denied at least temporarily. Is also an innovator, known to be the first to experiment with new settings/civs while being a more strategically-oriented player, so if I were to look for new and interesting ideas in AoE4, he is a name to follow IMO. He is also known for his personality/matter-of-fact way of talking to/about people and in general being a bit of a troll. Might be the oldest player currently active at the top level. Liereyy = Discussed a bit about him above when discussing Hera, who followed the same path. Young, mechanically-oriented player who balanced out his playstyle a bit less recently than Hera and has posted strong top 4 results since. Known for not practicing that much and for consistently falling to TheViper, resulting in a ton of Top 4 finishes but not many tournament wins outside of the Wololo series where he is the undisputed champion (multiple titles). However, TheViper won the most recent one. TaToH = Strong water map player, known for using fairly niche/unique water map strategies, but a strong player overall as well. Vivi = AKA "The Fat Dragon" due to a previous alias, Vivi is one of the most entertaining players to watch because of his propensity for off-beat strategies like Tower rush (similar to Cannon rush), proxy production buildings, and not having the greatest mechanics to back them up but succeeding anyway. Has definitely fallen off in terms of skill over the past few years as he has been playing less and mechanical approaches to the game have become more favored, Towers were nerfed, etc.
Open Qualifier
BadBoy = Strong Vietnamese player known for playing aggressively in the early game, similar to Vivi, with stuff like Tower rushes. Up-and-comer. Daniel = Another former top top old school player who came back relatively recently to the game. Kasva = I don't know much about this player but he is a consistent top 16-32 participant in tournaments. slam = Vocal veteran player who sometimes also does casting, also seems to have terrible bracket luck and also seems to be the victim of many come-backs and unfortunate situations in-game.
Barles = I don't know much about this player either but he has only recently started showing up in top tournament brackets AFAIK. Dark = I believe he is another relatively young Russian player, perhaps could be even younger than Vinchester, may be his student/practice partner but I might be getting him confused for someone else. Only recently came into the upper echelons of the competitive scene. miguel = Consistently high-performing player. Is perhaps better known as part of the dogao - miguel team where he plays a strong supporting role, perhaps a better 2v2 player than 1v1, relatively speaking. Has a very lax attitude about the game, saying stuff like "as long as I can help dogao win we're fine" or "I'm not that great and that's okay" IIRC. SongSong = I don't know much about this player but he has only started making high tier tournament brackets somewhat recently AFAIK.
bruh = I really don't know/remember much about this player. F1Re = Strong water map player, has had solid performances over the past few years in high level tournaments but always seems to fall at or before the top 8 at most. saymyname = AKA Yellow, this Vietnamese player has been around longer than some of the others AFAIK, also consistently gets into top tournament brackets. TheMax = Veteran player who is known for his strategic play, utilizing map awareness and off-beat proxy strategies to throw his opponents off-balance. Kind of like a mix between DauT and Vivi in some regards. Made a deep tournament run in one of the Hidden Cup tournaments in the past few years, hasn't reached that level of performance since, but is a consistently interesting player to follow/watch. Plays well as part of Suomi in team competitions.
classicpro = I don't know much about this player but IIRC he is young and a relative newcomer to the scene, I believe he first started qualifying for high level tournaments/making it to the Ro32 in the past year or two at most. Fish = I know nothing about this player, he is outside the usual cast of ACCM/BacT/BadBoy/SongSong/saymyname when it comes to Vietnamese players. Sitaux = I know nothing about this player, do recall hearing his name once or twice over the past year or two but I don't think I've ever seen him have a strong tournament performance. Zuppi = Another member of Finnish Team Suomi, he embodies the off-beat strategies less than some from Finland (looking at you Jupi) but he is more consistent and mechanically sound, though not as overall successful as TheMax IIRC.
Hope this was interesting to someone
EDIT: Just realized that they are organized alphabetically on TLPD from L->R and T->B and I totally fucked that up but hopefully y'all can follow lol ;;
That’s a pretty damn solid write-up Jealous, I mean as I know nout about the AoE you could be making it all up, but gave me a good idea of the flavour of the various players.
It sounds an interesting scene, one thing that came up pretty consistently were descriptions of players falling into categories esp mechanical and strategic
Does AoE’s gameplay enable these various strengths to shine, or is it more a case that it’s not Brood War in terms of scene and exploration? I.e to be competitive you basically had to have the whole package
It sounds a really interesting dynamic to see the wily fox vs the robotic mechanical machine, one we don’t really have in Starcraft(s), as mostly the top players are super strong in both domains.
I'll be honest, even I know TheViper and DauT, they're both names that have been at old WCG tournaments (and similar ones where multiple games where being played at) I believe. Hera I know as well, also heard of Jordan_AoE I believe. And Capoch is tbh a name that I remember as well, I guess from Wc3 or SC2 maybe even... Liquipedia said he played both for a while, I probably remember him more from Wc3? The others I didn't know at all, so thanks for that.
On November 18 2021 02:52 WombaT wrote: That’s a pretty damn solid write-up Jealous, I mean as I know nout about the AoE you could be making it all up, but gave me a good idea of the flavour of the various players.
It sounds an interesting scene, one thing that came up pretty consistently were descriptions of players falling into categories esp mechanical and strategic
Does AoE’s gameplay enable these various strengths to shine, or is it more a case that it’s not Brood War in terms of scene and exploration? I.e to be competitive you basically had to have the whole package
It sounds a really interesting dynamic to see the wily fox vs the robotic mechanical machine, one we don’t really have in Starcraft(s), as mostly the top players are super strong in both domains.
Obviously there is a minimum of both necessary in order to succeed at the top 16 - top 32 level, and the difference between the most mechanical and least mechanical is, arguably, similar to that of the top BW scene (Stork vs. Bisu for example). The extreme examples would be DauT who regularly goofs basic micro things like splitting Archers and pushing deer towards his TC, but in the end he still wins because of superior map awareness and greater experience, while someone like Hera or Liereyy may Archer micro you to death but might make less obvious tactical/strategic flubs (though, obviously, not that many since they are top 5 players at the moment). It's not the difference between, say, a professional runner and a middle schooler in terms of speed, or a physics professor and a middle schooler in terms of smarts.
In the end, one can think of it more as what players choose to invest time and effort to, both in the moment and in terms of their practice. DauT might split his Archers fewer times but he spends more time adding Outposts and managing his eco, or something. Liereyy and Hera might be microing two groups of Archers at once somewhere, but in the meantime they let some other factor of the game slip a little, or at least don't try to gain an advantage in some other way. The tide has been shifting somewhat slowly to more mechanical play, as more and more people start using "quick walls" (building wall foundations to block enemies out of your base, or to save a villager being harassed) and other tactics whereas a few years ago it was only TheViper and maybe a handful of other people.
The people who lean more heavily on the wily fox type plays are Vivi and BadBoy, and they of course still take games and can probably take a game off of anyone else given the right circumstances, so it is still true but perhaps not to the absolute extent you may be imagining. I'd say it's definitely more similar to StarCraft more than it is not, but I will say that it is an interesting scene regardless.
With AoE4's QoL, tactical, and production changes - who knows? From what I've seen so far, the game doesn't seem to reward mechanics as much as AoE2 does right now, but that too can change. It'll be interesting to see how it develops.
On November 18 2021 02:54 HolydaKing wrote: I'll be honest, even I know TheViper and DauT, they're both names that have been at old WCG tournaments (and similar ones where multiple games where being played at) I believe. Hera I know as well, also heard of Jordan_AoE I believe. And Capoch is tbh a name that I remember as well, I guess from Wc3 or SC2 maybe even... Liquipedia said he played both for a while, I probably remember him more from Wc3? The others I didn't know at all, so thanks for that.
I think Capoch played protoss in sc2, I remember playing against him in WoL and/or LotV
@Latham what civ/difficulty did you play against for the "kill 30 enemy cavalry units with your camel riders"? Don't really want to hunt down 30 scouts, I'm gonna try my luck with playing against French I guess.
On November 18 2021 21:37 Laurens wrote: Cheers for that write-up that's amazing!
@Latham what civ/difficulty did you play against for the "kill 30 enemy cavalry units with your camel riders"? Don't really want to hunt down 30 scouts, I'm gonna try my luck with playing against French I guess.
I did an Abbasid mirror on hard. At some point, it devolved into mass camel rider vs mass camel rider (its a cavalry unit that counters other cavalry units so the AI tries to rock-paper-scissor you) but France would be a good pick as well, since they always add some royals knights to the mix.
Now after getting all the achievements I would suggest Mongols as well, early on they rely on horsemen and later get a nice mix of lancers and mangudai.
Cheers, I went for Mongols. It wasn't perfect, AI made pure infantry after the first ~10 cavalry units. Seems like the AI is coded to always have 3 scouts on the map though so I just repeatedly slaughtered those to get it done. Just 5 left now and none of them are challenging/annoying, will be done tomorrow, thx for the pointers
Some really good news out of the devs yesterday! https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2021/11/17/age-of-empires-iv-content-roadmap/ Looks like the next Winter 2021 patch will be quite expansive. 100 balance changes in a single patch might be a bit excessive but we'll see when it comes out. The changes they do highlight in the blog update all seem nice, Hulk with a minor nerf tweak, prelate inspire bug fix and spearman slight buff against cavalry are all things I can get behind. I'm not quite sure about crossbow buff, I was under the impression that they are already very strong enmasse against knights but can't judge until the patch is out. The most important thing is that it seems like the devs are on top of things after all and have a strong roadmap for the future.
On November 19 2021 00:59 WombaT wrote: Hopefully they can both keep this level of support up, and with a bit of refinement require less sweeping patches over time.
If AoE2:DE is anything that would give us an idea on how they're going to handle AoE4, it's usually a big balance/tweak patch every other month with additional content - maps, mods, civs once in a while, and fixes and small updates the other month.
One big patch every season with some stuff here and there seems to hit the same spot.
Having played a good hundred games or so now I've gotta say as far as balance goes:
- Not a fan of siege, please make different categories of units have different "anti-siege attacks". I.E., if my knights or m@a reach your siege, you should lose it, not be able to walk it away casually lol. Also a lot of games seem to devolve into who can get springalds first which is so boring ;_; - This is siege again, but castles feel so useless due to things like bombards. They definitely do not feel at all like they have the presence of AOE2 castles... - Also siege, but on another track, anyone else think trebs are useless? I play exclusively English but I was sad to see even Warwulf (or whatever they call it now) is crappy now. I see no point in making them. If u wanna do a timing push just make rams, cost no gold and do just as much damage - The maps outside of 1v1 are WAY TOO BIG, seriously there's 2 size categories of 2v2 map and they chose the larger one. I mean the same goes for closed maps in AOE2 as well but please just take everything besides Arabia/Mongolia out of the pool and go from there...or give us like 4 downvotes so I can mark down all the BF clones. And shrink the map size by at least 20%
Fast 2TC builds are probably the future, fastest I've seen is 5:00 but maybe someone will get even faster, idk though might be the ceiling. English fast 2TC into LB/spear (potential ram push) feels very consistent, can do a 3TC castle knight push follow-up that usually wins most games. If not you've usually lost unless you can transition into springald spam behind and then things get stupid ;_;
Pocket water builds are a lot of fun and can get you a ridiculous castle age timing, unfortunately that just means mass springald for now...I do a lot of xbow/archer/springald/spear and it's a super lean & mean comp that while not as flashy as knights does get the job done.
Outside of siege being waaaaaay too OP all my complaints are just to do with UI. There's a lot of hotkeys that are missing from SC2 that the game desperately needs.
The most important, critical, day one, ASAP, very next patch change is to add wireframe cloning. I cannot function without it! You use it for so many things. Scouting/deselect 1, farm splitting (not as important now), managing eco...
Not a fan of siege, please make different categories of units have different "anti-siege attacks". I.E., if my knights or m@a reach your siege, you should lose it, not be able to walk it away casually lol. Also a lot of games seem to devolve into who can get springalds first which is so boring ;_;
Agreed, siege is a bit too quick now, and maybe a bit too potent as well, especially springalds. It is hard to believe that workers are just as effective against it as M@A and Knights. Would like to see it toned down as well.
- This is siege again, but castles feel so useless due to things like bombards. They definitely do not feel at all like they have the presence of AOE2 castles... - Also siege, but on another track, anyone else think trebs are useless? I play exclusively English but I was sad to see even Warwulf (or whatever they call it now) is crappy now. I see no point in making them. If u wanna do a timing push just make rams, cost no gold and do just as much damage
That's because bombards are just absurd against buildings. And bombards are Age IV units which a lot of games should already be decided by that time, I feel. Coincidentally that's why trebs feel bad. Bombards power crept them way too hard. If you'd be sieging castles with just 2-3 trebs and bombards wouldn't exist (like Age III) castles feel much more imposing. Warwulf has been replaced by "Shattering Projectiles" that indeed is completely useless. It's supposed to help trebs kill units and clumps of units but with treb's piss-poor accuracy and reload times just about the only thing they can hit is a castle or a wall.
I feel like Imperial Age (Age IV) kinda throws away any semblance of balance and game flow this game had prior to it. Bombards, culverins, organ guns, hand cannoneers, capital ships on water etc.
i don't fully agree, siege should not be a support units only like in the previous aoe, i like siege to be good alone like in BW, i like this approach, in BW you can go full mech, which is kinda full siege here, i don't want to be forced to build always infantry to win, both strategy should be viable
On November 20 2021 19:52 Amphok wrote: i don't fully agree, siege should not be a support units only like in the previous aoe, i like siege to be good alone like in BW, i like this approach, in BW you can go full mech, which is kinda full siege here, i don't want to be forced to build always infantry to win, both strategy should be viable
Going full siege just doesn't make sense in a historical context whatsoever, it should not be an option in an AoE game. Full siege should rightfully be rolled by full Knight. In AoE2 it is possible to go proxy Siege/Monk all-in but even then you usually have a few support units if the all-in doesn't win outright. Siege is dangerous and important enough already that it needs exploitable weaknesses, like any unit in any RTS.
Mech is not like siege only at all, only the siege tank is a siege unit, the rest of the kit surrounding the tank is normal units. Siege units are reavers, lurkers, guardians and siege tanks and they require support and more micro than the regular fighting units, if anything it's a good exemple of how siege units should work, ie not on their own. On top of that BW has stuff like dark swarm, stasis, air units and drops to keep siege units in check.
But tbf, in aoe4 the most skilled players trade blow for blow, whereas at my elo we suck and eventually stockpile ressources which lead to age 4 and mass artillery, pros don't go age 4 that often or won't be able to support the switch to full artillery when they do. On the other hand the springald reigns supreme at their level.
I agree with the suggestion of letting a few units be anti siege. Triple the current damage on lancers/knights or man at arms would put it roughly where it should be.
The Chinese have this with Fire Lancers. Maybe the counter to mass Springald games is playing Chinese? XD Haven't been able to try this out yet so idk how effective they actually are.
In the developer interview, they talked about how they dont' like how the springald is being used, but are going to look into it in the future. I think this patch was pretty much completed before the springald's started being so dominant. Hopefully we get it before Spring though...
After farming all the achievements I can reasonably get on my own I've started dabbling in 1v1 multiplayer. I picked up a Knights + Springalds castle age push build and it's just filthy. People make spearman in response but they can't do shit vs my Springalds. A mongol did a great job at holding off Knight damage with his Mangudai but again it was all over as soon as the Springalds came out. Is there actually a counter to Springald that isn't your own Springald?
Cannons seem to own them from what I've seen on BeastyQTs stream, but then again he's using China, which are the best late game. And to be fair he usually has some Springalds too. ^^
On November 25 2021 04:31 HolydaKing wrote: Cannons seem to own them from what I've seen on BeastyQTs stream, but then again he's using China, which are the best late game. And to be fair he usually has some Springalds too. ^^
But cannons are imperial units. You need something castle because you won't survive to imperial age typically from that push.
On November 25 2021 04:31 HolydaKing wrote: Cannons seem to own them from what I've seen on BeastyQTs stream, but then again he's using China, which are the best late game. And to be fair he usually has some Springalds too. ^^
But cannons are imperial units. You need something castle because you won't survive to imperial age typically from that push.
exactly. Sadly right now the counter to springalds is your own springalds. They were advertised as anti-siege units, probably meant to counter mangonels and rams somehow? Maybe even trebs, but they're anti-everything.
I'd be tempted to say just make more trash units like horsemen or pikes and swarm the enemy like with zerglings, but with good positioning, springalds are nigh untouchable with melee. You'll lose too much approaching them and every enemy unit will get free hits on your units when you're trying to run past to reach the springalds.
edit: BTW does anyone else think horsemen need 1 base piercing armor? In very low numbers they counter archers, but already in moderate numbers, archers, let alone longbowmen, absolutely decimate horsemen before they can get on top of em with micro.
Fine at the highest level of play perhaps, where the pros can use the smallest bit of scouting info to know exactly what's going on and prepare accordingly. But for the average Joe on the ladder it seems too oppressive. Perhaps they should keep their damage vs Siege/Cavalry and do reduced damage to Infantry or something idk.
All the pro's dislike how strong the springald is. It makes games boring and forces you to go Springalds yourself. I haven't seen any pro player/stream of a player saying they love the unit. It's pretty universal among the community, at least right now.
In 1998, progaming was in its infancy. It took years to understand and develop how we think and approach RTS, and yes, old biases and false beliefs were scrapped in the process.
In 2021, most of the players at the top of AoE4 have been playing RTS at a high level for a decade or more. The approach to the game is professional from the start. I find it highly unlikely that they could all be fundamentally wrong about the problematic nature of a single unit. Tweaking is not only expected in a new release, but needed, in response to what progamers find to be detracting from high level gameplay.
also siege tanks weren't even an issue. the biggest issue in vanilla was, by far, mutalisks - which explain why each race got a bevvy of anti-air units to compensate (corsair/valkyrie) as well as goliath's air range upgrade being added.
With only 1100ish elo and not playing AoE before this I don't have much of an opinion on balance but as a casual I don't always catch the map (saw this happen to TheViper so it's not just me though lol) and this feels like one of those things that just got lost in the release rush.
On November 26 2021 05:27 GTR wrote: also siege tanks weren't even an issue. the biggest issue in vanilla was, by far, mutalisks - which explain why each race got a bevvy of anti-air units to compensate (corsair/valkyrie) as well as goliath's air range upgrade being added.
To be fair, Reavers dropping from the shuttle with no cd before firing their scarabs was hilarious and incredibly broken.
Anyone facing differently skilled opponents depending on the hour they play? I feel like I'm getting spanked during day but once it's peak European time, the matches are way easier.
On November 26 2021 22:10 nojok wrote: Anyone facing differently skilled opponents depending on the hour they play? I feel like I'm getting spanked during day but once it's peak European time, the matches are way easier.
I haven't been able to nail it down to a specific time of the day, but the variance is large at the moment. Part of it may be my own lack of game understanding at the moment.
I haven't played multiplayer yet, but from spectating it looks to me like Springalds needs to have an accuracy reduction, or be like in aoe2 with set trajectories and slower projectiles.
And torch damage should obviously slow siege a lot.
On November 29 2021 05:59 Duvon wrote: I haven't played multiplayer yet, but from spectating it looks to me like Springalds needs to have an accuracy reduction, or be like in aoe2 with set trajectories and slower projectiles.
And torch damage should obviously slow siege a lot.
I doubt that's the kind of change we're gonna see, it's too fundamental. More likely we'll see some torch damage buff, or reduced springald speed (if anything)
Since they already have the slowed from attacks state on some units, I hope they can just make siege suffer more from it. Torch damage seems fine when units connect, but if it's only mass scouts that can do that it's silly.
(I was really surprised to learn that most projectiles track in age4 to be honest. To me it's really one of the coolest features of age2.)
Can someone explain these changes? Why would they reduce the population cost? And why would they increase ranged armor even further? Overall it should be fine though. Their health is reduced, which makes it easier to just kill them. The other changes just do not seem entirely necessary to me.
Battering Ram movement speed reduced from 3.5 to 3 Battering Ram health reduced from 900 to 700 Battering Ram population cost reduced from 3 to 1 Battering Ram ranged armor increased from 15 to 30
Tbh, this patch is quite devastating, it's not only that it's a bad patch, it can happen, it's that it's a clear sign of incompetency from the balance team.
On top of that they added new bugs all over the place.
Huge nerf to horsemen when they were already the weakest feudal unit... Spearmen second worst feudal unit even more asymetrical. Don't know what the answer to feudal MAA will be with those shit horsemen for civ that don't have early knights or MAA.
Mangonel buff when they were already strong, which is an indirect buff to springalds as it becomes even more important to win the springalds battle to keep your mangos alive.
Delhi's most interesting mechanic nerfed to the ground but I can understand it needs to be this way to buff stuff elsewhere.
Chinese buffs when they're unanimously the best civ on defensive maps already.
The fishing nerf seems too little.
Mongols untouched, even buffed with that outpost buff as they're the only ones who can reliably have that stone ready for the outpost upgrade when hitting feudal...
French water nerf seems over the top, will see, I dodge water maps anyway.
On November 30 2021 18:23 Swisslink wrote: Can someone explain these changes? Why would they reduce the population cost? And why would they increase ranged armor even further? Overall it should be fine though. Their health is reduced, which makes it easier to just kill them. The other changes just do not seem entirely necessary to me.
Battering Ram movement speed reduced from 3.5 to 3 Battering Ram health reduced from 900 to 700
Early game nerf Battering Ram population cost reduced from 3 to 1 Battering Ram ranged armor increased from 15 to 30[/QUOTE] So springalds take the same amount of shots to kill them.
On November 30 2021 19:13 nojok wrote: Tbh, this patch is quite devastating, it's not only that it's a bad patch, it can happen, it's that it's a clear sign of incompetency from the balance team.
On top of that they added new bugs all over the place.
Huge nerf to horsemen when they were already the weakest feudal unit... Spearmen second worst feudal unit even more asymetrical. Don't know what the answer to feudal MAA will be with those shit horsemen for civ that don't have early knights or MAA.
I was wondering that as well. MMA appear to be unstoppable with this patch for some civs.
Mangonel buff when they were already strong, which is an indirect buff to springalds as it becomes even more important to win the springalds battle to keep your mangos alive.
Delhi's most interesting mechanic nerfed to the ground but I can understand it needs to be this way to buff stuff elsewhere.
Chinese buffs when they're unanimously the best civ on defensive maps already.
The fishing nerf seems too little.
Mongols untouched, even buffed with that outpost buff as they're the only ones who can reliably have that stone ready for the outpost upgrade when hitting feudal...
The patch seems to address the issues players 3 weeks ago, imo. Which is weird, considering a lot has changed since and new issues have appeared. We‘ll probably have those things addressed in 3 weeks, when everyone has found a way how to deal with it. :-P
French water nerf seems over the top, will see, I dodge water maps anyway.
Here I disagree. This nerf was necessary. French on water was ridiculous.
On November 30 2021 18:23 Swisslink wrote: Can someone explain these changes? Why would they reduce the population cost? And why would they increase ranged armor even further? Overall it should be fine though. Their health is reduced, which makes it easier to just kill them. The other changes just do not seem entirely necessary to me.
Battering Ram movement speed reduced from 3.5 to 3 Battering Ram health reduced from 900 to 700
I think there's a bit too much doom and gloom about the patch.
Nerfing of Delhi (by taking away their most interesting characteristic, which was forcing a fight around sacred site from the get-go) was a bummer, and the addition of game-breaking bug is, I agree, unnaceptable, but besides that I thought it was an ok patch. Some bugs fixed, French water dominance reduced, stats shuffled around, nothing to get up in arms about.
Just looking at it, and knowing little of the game it seems there’s been too much patched in one go.
That’s a lot of change in one go, not to mention it makes it more likely to introduce unintended bugs.
I’d argue Blizzard sometimes are too cautious in SC2’s history, but at least they make a few changes at a time and leave it to settle so the impacts of those changes and potential other issues that introduce can be properly played out.
If you’re changing a ton at once and letting players get their hands on it, you’re basically resetting a lot of the current meta and starting it again from scratch
This can be a good approach if the meta actually needs radically reset, with wholesale changes.
Especially in any modern RTS games, in this era. You have both a ton of great RTS veteran players figuring stuff out, with a lot of visibility and sharing of information that any developer can’t realistically predict before it happens.
I'm not playing the game but watching players like BeastyQT and Leenock made me feel Chinese were the strongest faction before the patch, especially non water maps. I'm not sure they needed buffs.
Delhi didn't need nerfs for sure either. Otherwise, I'm in line with most people thinking that the Springalds are too good and shouldn't get massed as much as they currently are, but I'm also thinking Bombards are too dominant in Age IV even if the opponent doesn't use Springalds they're still too good imo.
On November 30 2021 23:34 HolydaKing wrote: I'm not playing the game but watching players like BeastyQT and Leenock made me feel Chinese were the strongest faction before the patch, especially non water maps. I'm not sure they needed buffs.
Delhi didn't need nerfs for sure either. Otherwise, I'm in line with most people thinking that the Springalds are too good and shouldn't get massed as much as they currently are, but I'm also thinking Bombards are too dominant in Age IV even if the opponent doesn't use Springalds they're still too good imo.
The consensus overall was that Chinese were bottom tier, but again, the game is new and things are being still figured out. I don't have strong opinions on the issue, but on the few pre-patch tournaments China was almost never picked, less even than HRE and Abbasid.
I agree that Delhi nerfs weren't necessary, but I've been playing mostly Delhi and been having a grand time, so I'm suspect in that reguard. I do think it's universally agreed upon that they're more boring to play without the tension of dark age sacred sites.
At least it's a good impetus to play other factions. I feel like learning English now, or maybe Abbasid.
On November 30 2021 23:34 HolydaKing wrote: I'm not playing the game but watching players like BeastyQT and Leenock made me feel Chinese were the strongest faction before the patch, especially non water maps. I'm not sure they needed buffs.
Delhi didn't need nerfs for sure either. Otherwise, I'm in line with most people thinking that the Springalds are too good and shouldn't get massed as much as they currently are, but I'm also thinking Bombards are too dominant in Age IV even if the opponent doesn't use Springalds they're still too good imo.
The consensus overall was that Chinese were bottom tier, but again, the game is new and things are being still figured out. I don't have strong opinions on the issue, but on the few pre-patch tournaments China was almost never picked, less even than HRE and Abbasid.
I agree that Delhi nerfs weren't necessary, but I've been playing mostly Delhi and been having a grand time, so I'm suspect in that reguard. I do think it's universally agreed upon that they're more boring to play without the tension of dark age sacred sites.
At least it's a good impetus to play other factions. I feel like learning English now, or maybe Abbasid.
Chinese was considered one of the top civs, if not the top, on choke maps like Black Forest and Mountain Pass due to their ability to get up walls quick and mass siege with high HP. Outside of map specific, I'd agree with your statements.
Springald cost increased from 200 Gold/200 Wood to 250 Gold/250 Wood Springald bonus damage vs. Siege engines increased from 20 to 90 Springald base damage reduced from 60 to 30 Springald move speed decreased from 4 to 3.75
Personally I thought the biggest problem with springalds was their attack range, taking shots at your army from super far forces you to choose between unfavourable engagements or backing off and losing buildings.
Looks like they chose to keep the attack range and nerf everything else, hopefully it's enough
Springald cost increased from 200 Gold/200 Wood to 250 Gold/250 Wood Springald bonus damage vs. Siege engines increased from 20 to 90 Springald base damage reduced from 60 to 30 Springald move speed decreased from 4 to 3.75
Personally I thought the biggest problem with springalds was their attack range, taking shots at your army from super far forces you to choose between unfavourable engagements or backing off and losing buildings.
Looks like they chose to keep the attack range and nerf everything else, hopefully it's enough
60 to 30 is pretty big, though maybe not as big as it might appear since at high enough numbers overkilling is a thing.
Maybe it's enough of a nerf that you can now get just enough springs to suicide them to kill the enemy mangos and win the battle on the back of the rest of your army. The spring player will still kite, but maybe it won't be as painful
Springald cost increased from 200 Gold/200 Wood to 250 Gold/250 Wood Springald bonus damage vs. Siege engines increased from 20 to 90 Springald base damage reduced from 60 to 30 Springald move speed decreased from 4 to 3.75
Personally I thought the biggest problem with springalds was their attack range, taking shots at your army from super far forces you to choose between unfavourable engagements or backing off and losing buildings.
Looks like they chose to keep the attack range and nerf everything else, hopefully it's enough
They need their range or they won't do what they were intended for (countering siege). I do think the attack nerf will be enough and the cost increase will also help. I don't think we'll be seeing the patch today. Hoping for tomorrow!
Right now even tho I'm looking at streams and stuff I don't grasp what I am aiming for in my games .
There is obv a lot of talk a out the springald but I don't face this in my games yet .
I just started playing French and I usually just get 1-2 royal knight in the early game to scout harass and then I get lost . Il keep producing villager and go to late game but my army comp is like all over the place. If I see walls and defensive position I'll try to add some siege but that it . Is there anything I should try to get ? What is a good general comp ?
In AoE 2 you should make your strongest unit (French - Knights) and a counter to the unit that counters your strongest unit, so in this case, archers that deal extremely well with spearmen, if that makes any sense. AoE4 is really similar to AoE2 in that aspect. Play to your strengths as a civilization, and try to cover your weaknesses and/or think 1 step ahead of your opponent. After hitting Age III (Castle Age) start adding siege, mangonels (2-3) and then springalds to counter the enemy springalds that will try to snipe your mangonels. In Age 4 you have access to the royal artillery academy or whatever its called, and then just pump 2-3 cannons and culverins (both extremely expensive). Maybe leave out the organ guns, not sure how legitimate they are right now.
Just keep upgrading your units lines (Knights, archers, arbelests) to veteran and elite as you age up and don't forget blacksmith upgrades that are vital and important.
If you don't know how to play aggressively and push your advantages you could always go for the control play and starve the opponent out. The games will be long and you'll feel like a boa constrictor but it's quite effective. Don't go for game-winning plays, instead make your opponent make mistakes and quit the game ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Yea there is no answer to "what comp should I make" and having a random mix of units is considered a "noob comp" in AoE and in RTS in general to some extent. The reasoning is that if you are producing a mix of units there is no way that you have the opportunity to upgrade all of them without wasting a lot of resources and delaying your age up, and while nothing may directly counter your entire army, a person who specializes in a few key units will almost always outperform you because they will have better upgrades and numbers due to streamlining and only a small fraction of your mixed army will counter that unit.
The right answer is that it depends; in general, you should either be making a unit that takes the initiative and forces them to counter you and then you counter that, or you make that which counters your opponent's expected comp. The way you can see what comp they are making is by scouting what production facilities they invested in, what initial units you see being made, and of course considering their civ into the equation will help point you in a direction.
An AoE2 example is that you open Scouts, which are fast harassing units so this puts the enemy on the defensive (usually) and that means that they will often go for Spearmen. While they are making Spearmen, you transition into Archers. So, once they finally have a number of Spearmen that can stop you from harassing with your Scouts, you already have the counter to their Spearmen and can do even more damage. Now they are forced to make Skirmishers to counter your Archers, but by then you are already ahead and should be going up to the next age which allows you to make Knights. There are many different variations on what could happen of course.
Going straight for your civ's boosted unit is very predictable and an easy way to get countered. That's why controlling the flow of the game and forcing your opponent into what turns out to be a bad decision in the end is the goal. Sometimes you will get away with this and sometimes you will not. But, in general and as always, I feel like focusing on your fundamentals like not getting housed, not floating too many resources unless you're saving for post-age-up upgrades, keeping TC idle time low, etc. is the surest course to improvement and victory. As you win games and get better, you will encounter stronger players that will do novel things against you and then you can learn from what they do.
Or, maybe even better yet, you can just watch pro games and actually analyze what they do and why. Instead of watching purely for entertainment, ask yourself "why did X pro do Y at this moment" and use that logic in your own play, much like any other RTS IMO.
On December 09 2021 23:57 Jealous wrote: Going straight for your civ's boosted unit is very predictable and an easy way to get countered.
Horse archers disagree!
I'm struggling the most against Rus and Mongols atm, this stupid horse archer rush and being overwhelmed by mongols' free units. Happily I'm low enough MMR that people play about everything, the community is not very tryhard.
It does support both 1v1 and team games, streaming overlay, civ/map randomizer, and provides some stats. API calls are done through https://aoeiv.net/ right now.
Anyone watched some of that steel series? Leenock vs TheViper game 3 was great.
Overall, once you remove Rus, Mongol, water maps and the fact that players don't pick turtly maps too often, the game really shines, which is the feeling I get from my own games as well. I would love being able to ban half of the maps.
It really feels like the game is close to greatness, it only really needs an UI rework, some better maps, nerf siege and some more minor balance tweaks. It looks like a lot but some games happen to not be impacted by all those issues, no broken civs, open land map, not reaching siege war, and those games are epic.
On December 16 2021 23:42 FluffyMaguro wrote: Hi, I created this overlay for displaying information about your allies and opponents.
It does support both 1v1 and team games, streaming overlay, civ/map randomizer, and provides some stats. API calls are done through https://aoeiv.net/ right now.
Come on, triple Chinese in team game? Respect your opponents.
Congrats to Marinelord to his first AoE IV win. Looks to me he quit SC2 considering he dropped out of Dreamhack. Not a bad choice considering how good he is in AoE IV and it might have a brighter future tbh... I have like zero faith in Blizzard anymore and they kind of dropped SC2 esports and balancing from what I remember.
I personally think the most blatant imbalance currently is Rus Horse Archers...
Mlord was commentating his games before his internet dropped, it's a great viewer experience
T90 and Dave are some of the few English casters I will listen to in any game and they make a great team, kind of a "sum of their parts" kind of thing, and Nili as not-too-distant third wheel. T90 seems to be more focused on AOE2 still so that would explain his lack of participation as a commentator here as he was commentating an AOE2 tour at around the same time (which also probably impacted a fair amount of AOE2 players in the tour but I won't conjecture too much). Do give the T90 + Dave or Nili combo a try some time if you have the chance in AOE4!
I watched that tournament the past 2 days and the games were great. Glad to see that springalds are finally fulfilling their original role of being anti-siege. I'm sad Viper got knocked out in the semis, but the finals were great nonetheless.
as far as casters go, T90 and Viper both went to Facebook gaming, so you won't hear them on Twitch, even as co-casters I think. Recently (1 week ago) there was a BIG AoE2 tournament called "King of the Desert IV" and the main caster & organizer MembTV didn't collab with T90, probably because both Facebook & Twitch wouldn't like that very much, so T90 was casting the big tournament separately to his viewers on Facebook while MembTV & a variety of co-casters to people on Twitch. This contract will last ~2 years so your chances of hearing T90 cast outside of Facebook & maybe YouTube vods are slim to none, sadly.
But a lot of AoE2 pros (and I'm told SC2) like to commentate on their own games as they're playing so it should be fine.
as far as casters go, T90 and Viper both went to Facebook gaming, so you won't hear them on Twitch, even as co-casters I think. Recently (1 week ago) there was a BIG AoE2 tournament called "King of the Desert IV" and the main caster & organizer MembTV didn't collab with T90, probably because both Facebook & Twitch wouldn't like that very much, so T90 was casting the big tournament separately to his viewers on Facebook while MembTV & a variety of co-casters to people on Twitch. This contract will last ~2 years so your chances of hearing T90 cast outside of Facebook & maybe YouTube vods are slim to none, sadly.
T90 was co-casting with Dave the 2nd semifinal and he co-casted with Nili the whole final day. So he is allowed to appear on Twitch channels. Would also be awkward if Viper was playing TGs with his GL boys and they couldn't stream them because of a "non-Twitch clause". They must have spoken about this when they were negotiating the contract and there is no reason for me to believe such a clause is in the contract.
Well then, I stand corrected. I just remember when he announced his decision on Twitch, it was pretty emotional and controversial. T90 later went on to do a YT video explaining it in more detail and the AoE2 reddit blew up in discussion about this topic. Later he didn't co-cast with Memb, who gave a kind of vague answer as to why so I assumed it was a clause in someone's contract (either Memb's with twitch or T90's with Facebook). But if that's the case that he CAN co-cast on twitch, please enjoy T90, he's an amazing caster with years of experience and a lot of passion.
On December 17 2021 07:56 HolydaKing wrote: I personally think the most blatant imbalance currently is Rus Horse Archers...
chinese fire lancers are ridiculously overtuned right now with their charge attack (see vortix vs mlord on confluence) also delhi still have a myriad of bugs that aren't fixed yet, as well as HRE + delhi spears still not bracing leaving them effectively useless defensively against cavalry.
also a lot of the top oceania players (hut, iaguz etc) are saying that professional scouts has pretty much ruined how food is managed in the game and they feel it needs to be either removed or nerfed hard.
Professional scouts does need a nerf. A simple nerf would make scouts move slower with deer on their backs. That would allow counter play, because currently it's very hard to stop someone from getting hunts and putting them under their TC.
On December 18 2021 07:41 blade55555 wrote: Professional scouts does need a nerf. A simple nerf would make scouts move slower with deer on their backs. That would allow counter play, because currently it's very hard to stop someone from getting hunts and putting them under their TC.
Balance is saved by tournament formats, a one civ format would show its terrible state. Their balance team is bad and don't even talk to top players, who are a way better source of information than starcraft pros who play only one race.
At my level it's fine though, sure autoloss to mongols on hybrid maps or Chinese/Rus lategame are very annoying but the rest I feel like I lose because my opponent played better.
On December 18 2021 08:48 nojok wrote: Balance is saved by tournament formats, a one civ format would show its terrible state. Their balance team is bad and don't even talk to top players, who are a way better source of information than starcraft pros who play only one race.
At my level it's fine though, sure autoloss to mongols on hybrid maps or Chinese/Rus lategame are very annoying but the rest I feel like I lose because my opponent played better.
I mean it kind of has to be that way, there are too many civs to balance it well. Also, I'm guessing they will add even more in the future which will make it even more impossible.
On December 18 2021 08:48 nojok wrote: Balance is saved by tournament formats, a one civ format would show its terrible state. Their balance team is bad and don't even talk to top players, who are a way better source of information than starcraft pros who play only one race.
At my level it's fine though, sure autoloss to mongols on hybrid maps or Chinese/Rus lategame are very annoying but the rest I feel like I lose because my opponent played better.
I mean it kind of has to be that way, there are too many civs to balance it well. Also, I'm guessing they will add even more in the future which will make it even more impossible.
I don't expect the level of balance of SC2 or BW, but they should at least keep the obviously broken stuff in check.
On December 18 2021 08:48 nojok wrote: Balance is saved by tournament formats, a one civ format would show its terrible state. Their balance team is bad and don't even talk to top players, who are a way better source of information than starcraft pros who play only one race.
At my level it's fine though, sure autoloss to mongols on hybrid maps or Chinese/Rus lategame are very annoying but the rest I feel like I lose because my opponent played better.
I mean it kind of has to be that way, there are too many civs to balance it well. Also, I'm guessing they will add even more in the future which will make it even more impossible.
I don't expect the level of balance of SC2 or BW, but they should at least keep the obviously broken stuff in check.
I do agree with that of course. There are a lot of bugs still (as mentioned by others above) and some things are too strong that can and should be tuned down. But even after that, there will always be some civs that counter other civs (if only on certain maps) and players will need to either be lucky, play extraordinary strategies or "just" play better than their opponent to win with unfavored civs. That's the nature of games with so many civs though. Which one I do prefer depends on how the balance is, so far AoE IV esports is pretty fun to watch but it's also really new and with time it could change to the better or worse.
AoE2 had a much smaller pro scene. Also game allowed players to play with "a little less" apm. Daut will always be a fan favourite but even himself probably realized this is going to happen eventually.
On December 20 2021 01:24 Aceace wrote: That was actually expected.
AoE2 had a much smaller pro scene. Also game allowed players to play with "a little less" apm. Daut will always be a fan favourite but even himself probably realized this is going to happen eventually.
Oddly enough I feel that due to the numerous QoL additions and changes, AoE4 should have a lower mechanical requirement for success. Reading into one-off results this early into game development/balancing, especially with many of these players investing only part of their time into the game, doesn't make sense.
On December 20 2021 01:24 Aceace wrote: That was actually expected.
AoE2 had a much smaller pro scene. Also game allowed players to play with "a little less" apm. Daut will always be a fan favourite but even himself probably realized this is going to happen eventually.
Oddly enough I feel that due to the numerous QoL additions and changes, AoE4 should have a lower mechanical requirement for success. Reading into one-off results this early into game development/balancing, especially with many of these players investing only part of their time into the game, doesn't make sense.
And brutal map generation too, bo1s are scary. Some tourneys checked maps and gave seeds to players, it's a necessity atm imo.
Wow grats to DeMuslim for winning that D: That HRE build order is just insane, early Aachen for eco boost, into Regnitz with relics for easy 900 gold income per minute, into Palace of Swabia which just pumps out villagers like crazy.
it's interesting how HRE meta has evolved from release - from the top of my head it was fast feudal MAA push -> fast castle Knight timing and now fast imperial swabia boom. i also noticed theviper doing a variation where he delays fast castle and booms off 2 TC in feudal which i've been messing around with in my games.
also its a shame a lot of players are neglecting the landschnekt - i feel like it is one of the more underrated units in the game.
Landschnekts are so fragile and costly. I expect they will be buffed soon. HRE is great vs boomy Chinese as witnessed! I wish the grand finals were on a separate day though. It's clear both players were exhausted from the generally poor quality games (like Hill&Dale & Mongolian heights)
On December 20 2021 05:41 Latham wrote: Wow grats to DeMuslim for winning that D: That HRE build order is just insane, early Aachen for eco boost, into Regnitz with relics for easy 900 gold income per minute, into Palace of Swabia which just pumps out villagers like crazy.
I switched my BO to this about a few weeks ago (not original by me), and my ELO has since spiked. I know there's some ELO inflation, but it feels particualrly strong vs most civs, except for perhaps Rus (can't seem to ever get castle before Rus, they get all the deer first, and then their cav archers prevent all prelates from getting relics and overwhelm you).
Not to mention the warrior monk takes all the relics before you can generally get them.
On December 20 2021 01:24 Aceace wrote: That was actually expected.
AoE2 had a much smaller pro scene. Also game allowed players to play with "a little less" apm. Daut will always be a fan favourite but even himself probably realized this is going to happen eventually.
Oddly enough I feel that due to the numerous QoL additions and changes, AoE4 should have a lower mechanical requirement for success. Reading into one-off results this early into game development/balancing, especially with many of these players investing only part of their time into the game, doesn't make sense.
Dunno. SC2 has a lot of QoL compared to BW. Still every top player has incredible high APM and makes use of it. I guess in AoE it will be the same. APM allows you to control multiple raid parties to destroy your enemies eco for example
On December 20 2021 05:41 Latham wrote: Wow grats to DeMuslim for winning that D: That HRE build order is just insane, early Aachen for eco boost, into Regnitz with relics for easy 900 gold income per minute, into Palace of Swabia which just pumps out villagers like crazy.
I switched my BO to this about a few weeks ago (not original by me), and my ELO has since spiked. I know there's some ELO inflation, but it feels particualrly strong vs most civs, except for perhaps Rus (can't seem to ever get castle before Rus, they get all the deer first, and then their cav archers prevent all prelates from getting relics and overwhelm you).
Not to mention the warrior monk takes all the relics before you can generally get them.
(I have played HRE since release).
Is there any other build for HRE though? The prelate fix was a huge buff and some maps can reliably offer a good chapel placement hitting all 3 ressources.
I play a lot of abbasid, I don't know how to counter HRE at all. The MAA rush is easily handled with a few camel archers because their high damage ignore the early maa's high armor, but they're way too slow and expensive on the offensive. I don't know how to deny the fast castle though, the HRE player will usually have a stable for proscout and a barrack for safety ready, both produce counters to archers
I tried 2nd TC rush, the eco difference was not close, Aachen chapel + pro scout means a fuck ton of ressources, then Reignitz then gg.
I hope proscout is removed sooner rather than later, deers need a higher gather rate because they scatter but when they're dropped right under the delivery camp with one of chapel/imperial officer/Rus bonus, it becomes insanity.
I'd personally prefer other types of nerfs rather than the complete removal of the tech from the game. Maybe give them a move speed penalty of -50/-75% when carrying deer on their backs? IDK. Or make them take more damage, or have a chance to drop the carcass when they're being attacked? Really, anything but deleting the tech from the game... that just feels like an absolutely last resort.
On December 20 2021 01:24 Aceace wrote: That was actually expected.
AoE2 had a much smaller pro scene. Also game allowed players to play with "a little less" apm. Daut will always be a fan favourite but even himself probably realized this is going to happen eventually.
Oddly enough I feel that due to the numerous QoL additions and changes, AoE4 should have a lower mechanical requirement for success. Reading into one-off results this early into game development/balancing, especially with many of these players investing only part of their time into the game, doesn't make sense.
Dunno. SC2 has a lot of QoL compared to BW. Still every top player has incredible high APM and makes use of it. I guess in AoE it will be the same. APM allows you to control multiple raid parties to destroy your enemies eco for example
QoL mechanics were indeed added in SC2 and thus require less APM in some areas, but at the same time Blizzard added in other mechanics such as injection, chrono, etc. to make up the difference. However, it wasn't until a series of changes and expansions that SC2 became** so fast-paced, and IMO it has to do with the discrepancy between harassing unit DPS and worker HP, but that's a different discussion. So, while I do agree with your point concerning SC2, I don't think it applies to AoE4 to the same extent, simply because of the nature of the units involved. Either way, there is still a lot of development ahead of us, so let's see what's in store
On December 20 2021 01:24 Aceace wrote: That was actually expected.
AoE2 had a much smaller pro scene. Also game allowed players to play with "a little less" apm. Daut will always be a fan favourite but even himself probably realized this is going to happen eventually.
Oddly enough I feel that due to the numerous QoL additions and changes, AoE4 should have a lower mechanical requirement for success. Reading into one-off results this early into game development/balancing, especially with many of these players investing only part of their time into the game, doesn't make sense.
Dunno. SC2 has a lot of QoL compared to BW. Still every top player has incredible high APM and makes use of it. I guess in AoE it will be the same. APM allows you to control multiple raid parties to destroy your enemies eco for example
QoL mechanics were indeed added in SC2 and thus require less APM in some areas, but at the same time Blizzard added in other mechanics such as injection, chrono, etc. to make up the difference. However, it wasn't until a series of changes and expansions that SC2 because so fast-paced, and IMO it has to do with the discrepancy between harassing unit DPS and worker HP, but that's a different discussion. So, while I do agree with your point concerning SC2, I don't think it applies to AoE4 to the same extent, simply because of the nature of the units involved. Either way, there is still a lot of development ahead of us, so let's see what's in store
That's exactly the point in time I stopped playing SC2. When it turned into insane twitch-reaction gameplay, and EVERYBODY had a way to evaporate worker lines within seconds. That was early Legacy of the Void for me, when the meta devolved back into 1-base all-ins designed to wreck worker lines with all the cool new toys...
On December 20 2021 05:41 Latham wrote: Wow grats to DeMuslim for winning that D: That HRE build order is just insane, early Aachen for eco boost, into Regnitz with relics for easy 900 gold income per minute, into Palace of Swabia which just pumps out villagers like crazy.
I switched my BO to this about a few weeks ago (not original by me), and my ELO has since spiked. I know there's some ELO inflation, but it feels particualrly strong vs most civs, except for perhaps Rus (can't seem to ever get castle before Rus, they get all the deer first, and then their cav archers prevent all prelates from getting relics and overwhelm you).
Not to mention the warrior monk takes all the relics before you can generally get them.
(I have played HRE since release).
Is there any other build for HRE though? The prelate fix was a huge buff and some maps can reliably offer a good chapel placement hitting all 3 ressources.
I play a lot of abbasid, I don't know how to counter HRE at all. The MAA rush is easily handled with a few camel archers because their high damage ignore the early maa's high armor, but they're way too slow and expensive on the offensive. I don't know how to deny the fast castle though, the HRE player will usually have a stable for proscout and a barrack for safety ready, both produce counters to archers
I tried 2nd TC rush, the eco difference was not close, Aachen chapel + pro scout means a fuck ton of ressources, then Reignitz then gg.
I hope proscout is removed sooner rather than later, deers need a higher gather rate because they scatter but when they're dropped right under the delivery camp with one of chapel/imperial officer/Rus bonus, it becomes insanity.
Assuming no water, its dependent what civ you play. Rus just seem to counter the strat altogether to me. Mongols have a fairly easy time as well. It's really Abbasid and Dehli that have no good answer. I imagine as Abbasid you could try to post some archers or camel archers at the relics? I play Abbasid rarely and often play archer ram rush allin when I do, so hard to know too well.
really disliking this fire lancer meta right now - you feel like the biggest dumbass losing to a flood of imperial-produced fire lancers out of nowhere right clicking your landmarks
On December 23 2021 16:09 GTR wrote: really disliking this fire lancer meta right now - you feel like the biggest dumbass losing to a flood of imperial-produced fire lancers out of nowhere right clicking your landmarks
I heard about this problem but I never have it. I attack non-stop starting in feudal and either win or lose there, or in castle. Very few games goes to imperial if you are aggressive.
But I can imagine it is is a problem in team games though.
On December 23 2021 16:09 GTR wrote: really disliking this fire lancer meta right now - you feel like the biggest dumbass losing to a flood of imperial-produced fire lancers out of nowhere right clicking your landmarks
I heard about this problem but I never have it. I attack non-stop starting in feudal and either win or lose there, or in castle. Very few games goes to imperial if you are aggressive.
But I can imagine it is is a problem in team games though.
This is the way a lot of RTS develop, historically, IMO. At first, early aggression is strong because builds are unoptimized and transitions can be clunky. We saw this with BW, AoE2, SC2, etc. Eventually as the meta develops and the dedicated player base improves on average, people are more likely to have less success with early aggression strategies. That is why it is important to nip OP mid- and late-game strategies in the bud early on in the development of an RTS, to pre-empt the eventual decline of early aggression approaches.
We don't see this as much at the pro level now because:
1. Players are already bringing a wealth of RTS experience to AoE4, so they are already exploring these later strategies 2. Top players aren't casuals like you or me, they are already better at holding overly aggressive builds
So, in short, while I don't doubt that your approach works for you, I do think that this potential problem is worth looking at objectively and not through the lens of what happens in your games.
Is the fire lancer stuff not mainly a team game problem? Maybe also on lower ELO. Haven't seen them being an issue on high rank players yet, but then again I haven't watched too much the past 2 days. Before that a lot of Demuslim, BeastyQT and Marinelord.
I imagine the only band-aid solution to this right now is making 1 of your landmarks in a corner and then stonewalling it in so no unit can get to it... if you're lucky you only need to make an L-shaped wall. If unlucky a whole rectangle or square.
I wish they would fix the map pool first, so many bad maps, choke points maps and water maps are like half of the maps and are all terrible. Then hybrid maps are hit & miss, sometimes good games, sometimes not. And finally open land maps are great, there is room for different angles, setting up a defense takes some improvisation, it feels like each time you want a new ressource you have to expose your workers.
On December 23 2021 16:09 GTR wrote: really disliking this fire lancer meta right now - you feel like the biggest dumbass losing to a flood of imperial-produced fire lancers out of nowhere right clicking your landmarks
I heard about this problem but I never have it. I attack non-stop starting in feudal and either win or lose there, or in castle. Very few games goes to imperial if you are aggressive.
But I can imagine it is is a problem in team games though.
This is the way a lot of RTS develop, historically, IMO. At first, early aggression is strong because builds are unoptimized and transitions can be clunky. We saw this with BW, AoE2, SC2, etc. Eventually as the meta develops and the dedicated player base improves on average, people are more likely to have less success with early aggression strategies. That is why it is important to nip OP mid- and late-game strategies in the bud early on in the development of an RTS, to pre-empt the eventual decline of early aggression approaches.
We don't see this as much at the pro level now because:
1. Players are already bringing a wealth of RTS experience to AoE4, so they are already exploring these later strategies 2. Top players aren't casuals like you or me, they are already better at holding overly aggressive builds
So, in short, while I don't doubt that your approach works for you, I do think that this potential problem is worth looking at objectively and not through the lens of what happens in your games.
It's not just that, subsequent patches almost always nerf early aggression. This also happened in BW, SC2, AoE4, etc.
On January 23 2022 12:20 FabledIntegral wrote: Feels like patches take forever, but then I need to remind myself the game has been out less than 3 months.
Really enjoying this tournament - so many good games, and just a general cool atmosphere, where you get to hear a lot about the thinking of the top players.
SC2 Players are aparently pretty strong in AoE4 as well According to Liquipedia TheViper is regarded as the best AoE2 Play, so he s like the Maru of their game and he gets bullied by some A-C Tier SC2 (Ex-) Pros. Anyone with some insight on this? Is the AoE scene so much smaller and less competitiv? Or is the gameplay so different, that the skillset isn t translating good into the new game? This is literaly the very first time, I m watching AoE
You're being too hard on TheViper. He's split on AoE 2 and AoE 4, with still playing a lot of AoE 2. Who knows how good he would be if he dropped AoE 2.
the aoe2 scene is definately smaller than sc2, but theviper is definately up there with the bests. aoe2 and aoe4 are quite different games, so while there are carryovers, they wont mean everything.
On March 10 2022 08:25 WombaT wrote: Where’s a good place to find the VoDs of some of these recent high level AoE4 tournaments?
lots of stuff can be found on youtube. nili_aoe was hosting the recent tourney and is uploading on his channel, EGCTV is a small organisation doing weekly bouts with top players, lidakor is an aoe2/aoe4 caster doing quite a bit of content. liquipedia is up to date with tournaments, so you can often search for specific games or sets of that tournament on youtube and get good results.
On March 10 2022 07:18 HolydaKing wrote: You're being too hard on TheViper. He's split on AoE 2 and AoE 4, with still playing a lot of AoE 2. Who knows how good he would be if he dropped AoE 2.
Ah ok, that makes sense then. When MLord was concentrating on AoE, he dropped in Sc2 rather quickly and was pretty bad in the DH Season Finals, he qualified for. Still the Top 4 after the Groups are the 4 SC2 Players, wich I find pretty remarkable
On March 10 2022 07:00 dbRic1203 wrote: SC2 Players are aparently pretty strong in AoE4 as well According to Liquipedia TheViper is regarded as the best AoE2 Play, so he s like the Maru of their game and he gets bullied by some A-C Tier SC2 (Ex-) Pros. Anyone with some insight on this? Is the AoE scene so much smaller and less competitiv? Or is the gameplay so different, that the skillset isn t translating good into the new game? This is literaly the very first time, I m watching AoE
TheViper ist the only player in the tournament who is not exclusively playing aoe4. As a matter of fact, he has been playing a ton of aoe2. Since the release of aoe4, there have been 3 S-tier tournaments in aoe2. Viper won 2 and reached the semis in the third one. He also missed most of the aoe4 beta due to another S-tier aoe2 tournament, which he won. Basically, he has been playing waaaaay less aoe4 than the other 7 players in the N4C. If anything, I'd say it is rather remarkable that he is able to keep up with the other top aoe4 players.
On March 10 2022 07:00 dbRic1203 wrote: SC2 Players are aparently pretty strong in AoE4 as well According to Liquipedia TheViper is regarded as the best AoE2 Play, so he s like the Maru of their game and he gets bullied by some A-C Tier SC2 (Ex-) Pros. Anyone with some insight on this? Is the AoE scene so much smaller and less competitiv? Or is the gameplay so different, that the skillset isn t translating good into the new game? This is literaly the very first time, I m watching AoE
TheViper ist the only player in the tournament who is not exclusively playing aoe4. As a matter of fact, he has been playing a ton of aoe2. Since the release of aoe4, there have been 3 S-tier tournaments in aoe2. Viper won 2 and reached the semis in the third one. He also missed most of the aoe4 beta due to another S-tier aoe2 tournament, which he won. Basically, he has been playing waaaaay less aoe4 than the other 7 players in the N4C. If anything, I'd say it is rather remarkable that he is able to keep up with the other top aoe4 players.
So he tried to Play competitiv in both games? Thats pretty impressive. Is he the only AoE2 player, whos also playing AoE4 though? Or is it the same with SC:BW and SC2 where most players want to stick with their game ?
I have read that after the initial hype AoE 4 development, patching, bug fixes has slowed down considerably. How is the balance these days? How is the community? Is this going to be in for the long ride?
On March 10 2022 07:00 dbRic1203 wrote: SC2 Players are aparently pretty strong in AoE4 as well According to Liquipedia TheViper is regarded as the best AoE2 Play, so he s like the Maru of their game and he gets bullied by some A-C Tier SC2 (Ex-) Pros. Anyone with some insight on this? Is the AoE scene so much smaller and less competitiv? Or is the gameplay so different, that the skillset isn t translating good into the new game? This is literaly the very first time, I m watching AoE
TheViper ist the only player in the tournament who is not exclusively playing aoe4. As a matter of fact, he has been playing a ton of aoe2. Since the release of aoe4, there have been 3 S-tier tournaments in aoe2. Viper won 2 and reached the semis in the third one. He also missed most of the aoe4 beta due to another S-tier aoe2 tournament, which he won. Basically, he has been playing waaaaay less aoe4 than the other 7 players in the N4C. If anything, I'd say it is rather remarkable that he is able to keep up with the other top aoe4 players.
So he tried to Play competitiv in both games? Thats pretty impressive. Is he the only AoE2 player, whos also playing AoE4 though? Or is it the same with SC:BW and SC2 where most players want to stick with their game ?
Some have tried it, you can check the last huge AoE 2 tournaments and compare with AoE 4 tournaments on liquipedia. There are definitely some players that have competed in both games. For TheViper it's perfectly understandable that he still plays AoE 2 as long as there's good money on the line, as he seems to be the best at it. Serral also tried AoE 4 and appeared in like top 20 ladder in December/January, but it was understandable that he went back to focus on SC2 only.
Not sure if any of the other good AoE 2 players focused on AoE 4 yet. I think HerA might be one of those and he probably would have qualified for Nilis AoE 4 Cup, but he did not want to travel to Germany for 10 days (apparently lost motivation? seen people say he's playing LoL).
Anyway I'm hyped for today. Cheering for Leenock and Demuslim.
On March 10 2022 07:00 dbRic1203 wrote: SC2 Players are aparently pretty strong in AoE4 as well According to Liquipedia TheViper is regarded as the best AoE2 Play, so he s like the Maru of their game and he gets bullied by some A-C Tier SC2 (Ex-) Pros. Anyone with some insight on this? Is the AoE scene so much smaller and less competitiv? Or is the gameplay so different, that the skillset isn t translating good into the new game? This is literaly the very first time, I m watching AoE
TheViper ist the only player in the tournament who is not exclusively playing aoe4. As a matter of fact, he has been playing a ton of aoe2. Since the release of aoe4, there have been 3 S-tier tournaments in aoe2. Viper won 2 and reached the semis in the third one. He also missed most of the aoe4 beta due to another S-tier aoe2 tournament, which he won. Basically, he has been playing waaaaay less aoe4 than the other 7 players in the N4C. If anything, I'd say it is rather remarkable that he is able to keep up with the other top aoe4 players.
So he tried to Play competitiv in both games? Thats pretty impressive. Is he the only AoE2 player, whos also playing AoE4 though? Or is it the same with SC:BW and SC2 where most players want to stick with their game ?
Most of the former aoe2 pro's want to stick with aoe2. There are some who are trying to balance both but haven't had much success. The only player who has had pretty good results in both games has been Viper. Hera has as well, though he initially played only aoe4 with very little aoe2 on the side, compared to Viper who was splitting his time.
Hera no longer streams either game and switched to league.
On March 11 2022 17:09 Harris1st wrote: I have read that after the initial hype AoE 4 development, patching, bug fixes has slowed down considerably. How is the balance these days? How is the community? Is this going to be in for the long ride?
I think right now it is in a difficult spot for "normal" players and for eSports. For normal players, the patching is just insanely slow and frustrating. Even bug fixes stay in the game forever and even after 5 months we still have no ranked mode. That's not... good.
As for competitive play, the game seems decent, but the organizers have to come up with specific rules to make the games interesting. Which is kinda weird, in my opinion. And I am a bit shocked that Microsoft does not seem to give a shit about competitive play. I would have expected them to push it quite a bit, tbh.
I love the tournaments that are there, but the viewer numbers are frustratingly low. I still enjoy it for what it is though. And _I am happy how well Leenock does there right now.
Wow, I think Marinelord was too tilted after game 1. Leenock played like a beast but it was also clearly visible that he Marinelord could not believe how these games are going.
God awful first map, probably the worst game I've seen this tournament. Hope this gets better and there is no finals curse.
That said, I fully expected it. No way Rus loses that map against the English and Beasty made it even more brutal.
edit: Yeah ok, BeastyQT knows Leenock very well from ladder and beat him in the round robin before quite handily. Doesn't seem different so far. Seems to counter him fairly well. Not ideal civilization picks add to that.
Holy shit BeastyQT even winning the "free win" game 3 where Leenock picks the best civ and Beasty outdrafts by picking arguably the worst. Was an EZ win for Leenock but why no walls? Awful.
On March 14 2022 01:54 HolydaKing wrote: God awful first map, probably the worst game I've seen this tournament. Hope this gets better and there is no finals curse.
That said, I fully expected it. No way Rus loses that map against the English and Beasty made it even more brutal.
edit: Yeah ok, BeastyQT knows Leenock very well from ladder and beat him in the round robin before quite handily. Doesn't seem different so far. Seems to counter him fairly well. Not ideal civilization picks add to that.
Holy shit BeastyQT even winning the "free win" game 3 where Leenock picks the best civ and Beasty outdrafts by picking arguably the worst. Was an EZ win for Leenock but why no walls? Awful.
Beasty is playing so solid. Its leenock bashing his head against a brick wall so far. I have to go to work I hope the rest of the games are good.
On March 14 2022 01:54 HolydaKing wrote: God awful first map, probably the worst game I've seen this tournament. Hope this gets better and there is no finals curse.
That said, I fully expected it. No way Rus loses that map against the English and Beasty made it even more brutal.
edit: Yeah ok, BeastyQT knows Leenock very well from ladder and beat him in the round robin before quite handily. Doesn't seem different so far. Seems to counter him fairly well. Not ideal civilization picks add to that.
Holy shit BeastyQT even winning the "free win" game 3 where Leenock picks the best civ and Beasty outdrafts by picking arguably the worst. Was an EZ win for Leenock but why no walls? Awful.
Beasty is playing so solid. Its leenock bashing his head against a brick wall so far. I have to go to work I hope the rest of the games are good.
If games from game 5 onwards are not going to be better, you didn't miss much - BeastyQT completely owns him.
Game 4 at one point "seemed" more even but Beasty was always ahead by a quite huge margin. At one point Leenock killed lots of villagers and was ahead in vills, it was like ~80 to 50 in favour of Leenock. But don't be fooled, he was an age higher, had A LOT better military (it was like 60 to 20 military pop) and map control while controlling sacred sites as Delhi...
On March 14 2022 04:19 Swisslink wrote: wow, HRE in Imperial is insane. Was a fun game though, with Beasty trying to prevent Leenock from reaching Imperial.
Yeah, I think Beasty already knew he was in a rough spot when he let Leenock get 3 relics... Think there was some reaction in his face. He actually managed to do really well but then HRE imperial saved Leenock.
Last game was another ez win for Beasty.... sad. A lot better, more entertaining games yesterday - the games today were not even. But I can't blame Leenock, he outplayed Marinelord. Might just be that Marinelord is bad against Leenock, but I think he would have had a much better shot against Beasty.
Beastyqt absolutely has Leenocks numbers, as previous matches already showed. My only gripe is, that split maps absolutely need to be removed (meaning Mongolian hights) And Leenocks inexperience really showed
Disappointing final the semis were so much better. It just shows that beasty has a tonne more experience with the civs and brought it all to bear against Leenock. This was shown most extremely in their Delhi performance. I know Delhi is the most banned civ now but its a bit naive to think you'll win the whole thing without a) playing delhi yourself and not preparing to play them at all, and b) not training against them because it will just be banned all tournament long lol...
Yeah the finals were disappointing. Leenock didn't play as well today like yesterday. Leenock was playing incredible versus marinelord, but he seemed sloppy against Beasty.
I know Beasty has Leenock's number, so mind games might have been part of it but man was it disappointing. Great semi finals to a lackluster finals, reminds me of plenty of sc2 tourney's back in the day lol.
What’s the deal with the special rules like no stone towers allowed? Is that an accepted principle in the AOE scene like Smash banning stuff or is it just a special tournament rule?
On March 14 2022 15:36 lestye wrote: What’s the deal with the special rules like no stone towers allowed? Is that an accepted principle in the AOE scene like Smash banning stuff or is it just a special tournament rule?
For now it's a special rule, but seems Golden League has already adapted those rules. It just makes the game more interesting to watch - and probably to play. The tournament was just great to watch and Beasty is a well deserved champion.
Unfortunately what remains is that the viewer numbers were abysmal. I just figured that Microsoft was involved in regard to the sponsoring and I am just shocked that they apparently did not do jackshit to push it in any meaningful way. I hope they can somehow push the eSports scene a bit, because I actually think it could be a decent game in competitive play (especially with the new rules that just make the game much faster) but right now they just do not do enough to promote it.
Great tournament! As everyone already said, the final was less fun than every other part, but it was still good - some cool mind games, and nice to see some Delhi allowed at last.
On March 14 2022 15:36 lestye wrote: What’s the deal with the special rules like no stone towers allowed? Is that an accepted principle in the AOE scene like Smash banning stuff or is it just a special tournament rule?
For now it's a special rule, but seems Golden League has already adapted those rules. It just makes the game more interesting to watch - and probably to play. The tournament was just great to watch and Beasty is a well deserved champion.
Unfortunately what remains is that the viewer numbers were abysmal. I just figured that Microsoft was involved in regard to the sponsoring and I am just shocked that they apparently did not do jackshit to push it in any meaningful way. I hope they can somehow push the eSports scene a bit, because I actually think it could be a decent game in competitive play (especially with the new rules that just make the game much faster) but right now they just do not do enough to promote it.
How abysmal we talking?
And ya, looking at Twitter, it looks like someone from the office tweeted about it once on Friday and then no one was at the office on the weekend. I get giving workers the weekend off but u gotta have someone man the social media on the weekend for esports. C'mon you're a trillion dollar company!!
realistic: my channel 20k, other 6-7k dream: my channel 35k, others 10k with a front page allignement it could get 50k, but I think the chances are way below 1%
At the end of the event, he expressed his disappointment with the viewer numbers. While I really appreciate his honesty, gotta feel a little bad for Beasty sitting there and hearing that downer. But thats just nitpicking. https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1424365786?t=6h58m31s
Ah dayum I feel bad for not tuning in. I wasn't a big fan of watching AoE2 because the Age of games didn't have the interesting asymmetrical races. I hope he doesn't get discouraged because I think they need to cultivate the audience for competitive AoE. I don't think most lay people associate AoE with esports, and its still a new game.
Don't think he should have said that during the event, even if its after.... that seems more appropriate for a post-mortum kind of blog/stream.
We can talk about whether the end of the stream was the right time to make this statement. I personally like it. Viewers knew all along that the numbers were pretty darn bad and they know it with many other streams as well.Usually hosts just keep it quiet, which always seems a bit absurd in my opinion. That's where I prefer Nili's honesty.
And at the same time he made it more than clear how satisfied he was with the spectators who were there and how satisfied he was with the players and the organization. The average spectator was there for almost 2 hours, the players played great games and there were hardly any problems despite the endless streams. That he emphasized that was important, especially after the words of disappointment.
But it's even more disappointing when you reach so few viewers despite these positive aspects. I can hardly see an Age of Empires IV tournament with better games, organization and players. And it still failed. And I still believe that this is to a large extent the fault of Microsoft and Relic. Because the game has potential. And initial difficulties are not really a problem, as long as the player/viewer recognizes that progress is being made. It's just that with Age of Empires IV, you always feel like you're waiting half an eternity for anything to happen. And the tournaments may be financially supported, but the simplest measures to cause a stir are simply ignored.
I hope the Golden League will be a success. And I HOPE Microsoft/Relic will get off their asses and do something to make the tournament a success. Because if the two biggest tournaments within a short time both fail despite - hopefully - good quality and good organization, it will be difficult.
Problem isn't the advertising it's more likely that the game has lost 9/10 players since launch and moved on? So the game has issues keeping people interested
Big part of this might be that there is not a real "community" for it yet. If didn't see this by chance here on TL.net I would have completely missed it
On March 15 2022 19:26 dudeee wrote: Problem isn't the advertising it's more likely that the game has lost 9/10 players since launch and moved on? So the game has issues keeping people interested
i am definitely one of those people. amidst the numerous bugs, lack of ladder, weird balance direction and most importantly poor observing interface was enough for me to stop caring about the game.
it's unfortunate because like many others have said, this game has a lot of potential, but i don't think it'll ever get fulfilled.
edit: might also just be a personal thing that i'm at that age i don't feel like committing to competitive games anymore
On March 16 2022 13:07 lestye wrote: Has the game been well received with the higher echelon pros or are certain pros still sticking with aoe2?
Some are definitely sticking with AoE2. It's a nice niche game to be good at. There are tournaments regularly for AoE2 like King of the Desert, RedBull WOLOLO, Hidden Cup and many weekly/monthly cups and showmatches.
Besides that, I TRULY believe at this point AoE2 is the better game. More polished, better balanced, more tools to use for mappers and organizers to fine-tune the experience they and the viewers want. It's insane to think that AoE4 barely after release is a better game than AoE2 that has been polished over 20 years.
Some people are staying with AoE2 because they're too old to move over, others because they are the top dogs that win money routinely there, and there are also people that just don't like AoE4 and prefer AoE2. People like Viper are trying their hand in both games, but as you can see its hard to be good at both since they're not the same game... just in the same setting.
It would help if Microsoft and/or Relic promoted the game and tournaments more, but also the release of modding tools so we get custom map pools on top of a decent observer overlay and caster/viewer tools.
On March 15 2022 19:26 dudeee wrote: Problem isn't the advertising it's more likely that the game has lost 9/10 players since launch and moved on? So the game has issues keeping people interested
i am definitely one of those people. amidst the numerous bugs, lack of ladder, weird balance direction and most importantly poor observing interface was enough for me to stop caring about the game.
it's unfortunate because like many others have said, this game has a lot of potential, but i don't think it'll ever get fulfilled.
edit: might also just be a personal thing that i'm at that age i don't feel like committing to competitive games anymore
There is also the personal getting old thing.
That said, would be nice to have another big RTS game to at least follow and watch.
I’ve checked a bit out, it does seem to have potential for sure, and thanks to those in the thread who have directed me to resources.
Was AoE4 just pushed out too early is the impression I’m getting? You get the AoE vets and other RTS fans almost by default, but balance aside if it’s missing certain features people’s enthusiasm wanes even if the base game is solid.
Halo Infinite seems to have similar problems, the core gameplay is really enjoyable, but it really needs more modes and maps.
It’s way harder to get those who aren’t hardcore committed fans back after the fact once they’ve drifted away than to keep them engaged early on, IMO anyway
What I learned from Nili's tournament is that I definitely prefer watching AoE 4 over SC2 on average. Most games were really fun. And no, it's not really because I haven't watched it before. I have watched some hundred ours of Beasty and Demuslim.
On March 15 2022 19:26 dudeee wrote: Problem isn't the advertising it's more likely that the game has lost 9/10 players since launch and moved on? So the game has issues keeping people interested
i am definitely one of those people. amidst the numerous bugs, lack of ladder, weird balance direction and most importantly poor observing interface was enough for me to stop caring about the game.
it's unfortunate because like many others have said, this game has a lot of potential, but i don't think it'll ever get fulfilled.
edit: might also just be a personal thing that i'm at that age i don't feel like committing to competitive games anymore
There is also the personal getting old thing.
That said, would be nice to have another big RTS game to at least follow and watch.
I’ve checked a bit out, it does seem to have potential for sure, and thanks to those in the thread who have directed me to resources.
Was AoE4 just pushed out too early is the impression I’m getting? You get the AoE vets and other RTS fans almost by default, but balance aside if it’s missing certain features people’s enthusiasm wanes even if the base game is solid.
Halo Infinite seems to have similar problems, the core gameplay is really enjoyable, but it really needs more modes and maps.
It’s way harder to get those who aren’t hardcore committed fans back after the fact once they’ve drifted away than to keep them engaged early on, IMO anyway
Yeah it was released too early. No ranked mode, no editor, no map veto's, not fully customizable hotkeys and so on. There were basic features that should have been there at launch and has hurt the game. The no editor being one of the biggest mistakes as that is what keeps people playing. As we all know, most people don't play competitively or 1v1's, but all the casuals can do is play vs AI, campaign or play team games.
On March 15 2022 19:26 dudeee wrote: Problem isn't the advertising it's more likely that the game has lost 9/10 players since launch and moved on? So the game has issues keeping people interested
i am definitely one of those people. amidst the numerous bugs, lack of ladder, weird balance direction and most importantly poor observing interface was enough for me to stop caring about the game.
it's unfortunate because like many others have said, this game has a lot of potential, but i don't think it'll ever get fulfilled.
edit: might also just be a personal thing that i'm at that age i don't feel like committing to competitive games anymore
There is also the personal getting old thing.
That said, would be nice to have another big RTS game to at least follow and watch.
I’ve checked a bit out, it does seem to have potential for sure, and thanks to those in the thread who have directed me to resources.
Was AoE4 just pushed out too early is the impression I’m getting? You get the AoE vets and other RTS fans almost by default, but balance aside if it’s missing certain features people’s enthusiasm wanes even if the base game is solid.
Halo Infinite seems to have similar problems, the core gameplay is really enjoyable, but it really needs more modes and maps.
It’s way harder to get those who aren’t hardcore committed fans back after the fact once they’ve drifted away than to keep them engaged early on, IMO anyway
Yeah it was released too early. No ranked mode, no editor, no map veto's, not fully customizable hotkeys and so on. There were basic features that should have been there at launch and has hurt the game. The no editor being one of the biggest mistakes as that is what keeps people playing. As we all know, most people don't play competitively or 1v1's, but all the casuals can do is play vs AI, campaign or play team games.
Welcome to modern game development where game studios implement all the same agile methodologies you would implement at a software company, like a minimum viable product (MVP), without actually considering the disconnect between what the stakeholder (the publisher) considers the MVP and what the user (the players) consider the MVP. It leads to these half-baked games with tons of potential that are missing what the community consider to be key features. Now, AoE4 has a fraction of the playerbase it could have had if they just delayed releasing the game by a year and focused on delivering all the features the RTS playerbase expects to be present in a game on launch.
The first 2 invites for Golden League are on Liquipedia: https://liquipedia.net/ageofempires/Golden_League I think they are like the best AoE2 and AoE3 Players respectivly? So that might draw in some more viewers from those two games at least.
On March 15 2022 19:26 dudeee wrote: Problem isn't the advertising it's more likely that the game has lost 9/10 players since launch and moved on? So the game has issues keeping people interested
i am definitely one of those people. amidst the numerous bugs, lack of ladder, weird balance direction and most importantly poor observing interface was enough for me to stop caring about the game.
it's unfortunate because like many others have said, this game has a lot of potential, but i don't think it'll ever get fulfilled.
edit: might also just be a personal thing that i'm at that age i don't feel like committing to competitive games anymore
There is also the personal getting old thing.
That said, would be nice to have another big RTS game to at least follow and watch.
I’ve checked a bit out, it does seem to have potential for sure, and thanks to those in the thread who have directed me to resources.
Was AoE4 just pushed out too early is the impression I’m getting? You get the AoE vets and other RTS fans almost by default, but balance aside if it’s missing certain features people’s enthusiasm wanes even if the base game is solid.
Halo Infinite seems to have similar problems, the core gameplay is really enjoyable, but it really needs more modes and maps.
It’s way harder to get those who aren’t hardcore committed fans back after the fact once they’ve drifted away than to keep them engaged early on, IMO anyway
Yeah it was released too early. No ranked mode, no editor, no map veto's, not fully customizable hotkeys and so on. There were basic features that should have been there at launch and has hurt the game. The no editor being one of the biggest mistakes as that is what keeps people playing. As we all know, most people don't play competitively or 1v1's, but all the casuals can do is play vs AI, campaign or play team games.
I actually liked that there was no ranked at release because balance changes in the first few weeks of a game release. But they should have treated this as a kind of pre season and have a fixed time for the first season and ladder start for poeple to look forward to
On March 15 2022 19:26 dudeee wrote: Problem isn't the advertising it's more likely that the game has lost 9/10 players since launch and moved on? So the game has issues keeping people interested
i am definitely one of those people. amidst the numerous bugs, lack of ladder, weird balance direction and most importantly poor observing interface was enough for me to stop caring about the game.
it's unfortunate because like many others have said, this game has a lot of potential, but i don't think it'll ever get fulfilled.
edit: might also just be a personal thing that i'm at that age i don't feel like committing to competitive games anymore
There is also the personal getting old thing.
That said, would be nice to have another big RTS game to at least follow and watch.
I’ve checked a bit out, it does seem to have potential for sure, and thanks to those in the thread who have directed me to resources.
Was AoE4 just pushed out too early is the impression I’m getting? You get the AoE vets and other RTS fans almost by default, but balance aside if it’s missing certain features people’s enthusiasm wanes even if the base game is solid.
Halo Infinite seems to have similar problems, the core gameplay is really enjoyable, but it really needs more modes and maps.
It’s way harder to get those who aren’t hardcore committed fans back after the fact once they’ve drifted away than to keep them engaged early on, IMO anyway
Yeah it was released too early. No ranked mode, no editor, no map veto's, not fully customizable hotkeys and so on. There were basic features that should have been there at launch and has hurt the game. The no editor being one of the biggest mistakes as that is what keeps people playing. As we all know, most people don't play competitively or 1v1's, but all the casuals can do is play vs AI, campaign or play team games.
I actually liked that there was no ranked at release because balance changes in the first few weeks of a game release. But they should have treated this as a kind of pre season and have a fixed time for the first season and ladder start for poeple to look forward to
Eh, whats the harm of having a wonky unbalanced season 1? I think a ladder would have people put more scrutiny on balance. Not having it serves as more of a detriment to the game.
On March 15 2022 19:26 dudeee wrote: Problem isn't the advertising it's more likely that the game has lost 9/10 players since launch and moved on? So the game has issues keeping people interested
i am definitely one of those people. amidst the numerous bugs, lack of ladder, weird balance direction and most importantly poor observing interface was enough for me to stop caring about the game.
it's unfortunate because like many others have said, this game has a lot of potential, but i don't think it'll ever get fulfilled.
edit: might also just be a personal thing that i'm at that age i don't feel like committing to competitive games anymore
There is also the personal getting old thing.
That said, would be nice to have another big RTS game to at least follow and watch.
I’ve checked a bit out, it does seem to have potential for sure, and thanks to those in the thread who have directed me to resources.
Was AoE4 just pushed out too early is the impression I’m getting? You get the AoE vets and other RTS fans almost by default, but balance aside if it’s missing certain features people’s enthusiasm wanes even if the base game is solid.
Halo Infinite seems to have similar problems, the core gameplay is really enjoyable, but it really needs more modes and maps.
It’s way harder to get those who aren’t hardcore committed fans back after the fact once they’ve drifted away than to keep them engaged early on, IMO anyway
Yeah it was released too early. No ranked mode, no editor, no map veto's, not fully customizable hotkeys and so on. There were basic features that should have been there at launch and has hurt the game. The no editor being one of the biggest mistakes as that is what keeps people playing. As we all know, most people don't play competitively or 1v1's, but all the casuals can do is play vs AI, campaign or play team games.
I actually liked that there was no ranked at release because balance changes in the first few weeks of a game release. But they should have treated this as a kind of pre season and have a fixed time for the first season and ladder start for poeple to look forward to
But the balance is still going to be bad on the next update. We've seen the patch notes, Delhi is still going to be insanely broken and balance will be wonky still. Doesn't make a difference in delaying the ranked mode when the problems will still remain (which is to be expected, balance is very hard to do and nearly impossible to achieve in a few short months).
On March 15 2022 19:26 dudeee wrote: Problem isn't the advertising it's more likely that the game has lost 9/10 players since launch and moved on? So the game has issues keeping people interested
i am definitely one of those people. amidst the numerous bugs, lack of ladder, weird balance direction and most importantly poor observing interface was enough for me to stop caring about the game.
it's unfortunate because like many others have said, this game has a lot of potential, but i don't think it'll ever get fulfilled.
edit: might also just be a personal thing that i'm at that age i don't feel like committing to competitive games anymore
There is also the personal getting old thing.
That said, would be nice to have another big RTS game to at least follow and watch.
I’ve checked a bit out, it does seem to have potential for sure, and thanks to those in the thread who have directed me to resources.
Was AoE4 just pushed out too early is the impression I’m getting? You get the AoE vets and other RTS fans almost by default, but balance aside if it’s missing certain features people’s enthusiasm wanes even if the base game is solid.
Halo Infinite seems to have similar problems, the core gameplay is really enjoyable, but it really needs more modes and maps.
It’s way harder to get those who aren’t hardcore committed fans back after the fact once they’ve drifted away than to keep them engaged early on, IMO anyway
Yeah it was released too early. No ranked mode, no editor, no map veto's, not fully customizable hotkeys and so on. There were basic features that should have been there at launch and has hurt the game. The no editor being one of the biggest mistakes as that is what keeps people playing. As we all know, most people don't play competitively or 1v1's, but all the casuals can do is play vs AI, campaign or play team games.
I actually liked that there was no ranked at release because balance changes in the first few weeks of a game release. But they should have treated this as a kind of pre season and have a fixed time for the first season and ladder start for poeple to look forward to
But the balance is still going to be bad on the next update. We've seen the patch notes, Delhi is still going to be insanely broken and balance will be wonky still. Doesn't make a difference in delaying the ranked mode when the problems will still remain (which is to be expected, balance is very hard to do and nearly impossible to achieve in a few short months).
Are the current beta branch patch notes locked in? I thought they were subject to further change before ranked launches. Would basically just need a Delhi nerf and I'd be quite happy with balance overall.
On March 19 2022 18:18 Copymizer wrote: When the new patch goes live and there's another sale i'll be purchasing this game in a heart beat. I'm longing for a new RTS!
Have you looked into gamepass? I assumed thats how most people got it.
On March 19 2022 18:18 Copymizer wrote: When the new patch goes live and there's another sale i'll be purchasing this game in a heart beat. I'm longing for a new RTS!
Have you looked into gamepass? I assumed thats how most people got it.
Oh yea, i will buy the 1 month Xbox game pass for 1,5€ first and see how it is, It's a nice trial offer anyways. After that i can decide if i want to buy it permanently or not
There is a new tourney ongoing. Golden league for 125k. Viewer numbers on day 1 are again abysmal. But first game wsa good. Have a look here: https://www.twitch.tv/egctv
On March 27 2022 02:24 RolleMcKnolle wrote: There is a new tourney ongoing. Golden league for 125k. Viewer numbers on day 1 are again abysmal. But first game wsa good. Have a look here: https://www.twitch.tv/egctv
To be fair, this feels more like a giant qualifier than the actual tournament. Views probably going to be way higher in the groupstage
Yeah I personally find these huge bracket tournaments daunting to watch and often completely lose interest until the top ~16 is revealed. It just dilutes the viewer experience overall. I care about the names that I know like AoE2 pros - Viper, Liereyy, Hera, Daut, Tatoh etc. I can also watch the SC2 names like Beasty, Marinelord, Demuslim etc.
The other people just serve to dilute my viewing experience between the matches I want to see, personally.
The other thing is the runtime of the tournament... who has the time to follow 2 MONTHS worth of matches as a viewer? (From end of March, to end of May for the whole thing) The tournaments I liked to watch the most were smaller, either 1 weekend things (FRI-SAT-SUN) like Hidden Cup organized by T90 in AoE2 or Redbull WOLOLOs that ran for ~6 days total I think. Both had qualifiers and I didnt watch qualifiers for both, just the main event / main bracket.
Another tournament that had a horrible viewing experience because it was so long was King of the Desert with (again) MONTHS of qualifiers before the main event.
I'm just wondering if these organizers even take viewers into account while planning these tournaments out. I know you want to make them as grand, as fair and diverse and as bombastic as possible but as I viewer I am not going to plan a month or two of my life around watching your tournament play out. I can dedicate a weekend, sure. I'll buy beer and junk food and pig out for a weekend or even a whole week, but asking for any more of my attention is just plain misguided.
Depends of the tournament really, you were speaking of Hidden Cup, and I watched the entire qualifier for the remaining 8 (or 16?) spots. Some others not so much yeah. There is an over abundance of games and even if some big ones were played, they will be singled out on videos or something, so not much to miss really.
Yeah I am super pumped for the patch. Hope there are no big bugs/issues that come with it as from what I tested, it was a major improvement to the game.
Tournament games between Marinelord and BeastyQT have been fantastic. The finals should be good as well.
On April 04 2022 04:11 blade55555 wrote: Yeah I am super pumped for the patch. Hope there are no big bugs/issues that come with it as from what I tested, it was a major improvement to the game.
Tournament games between Marinelord and BeastyQT have been fantastic. The finals should be good as well.
Seems like VortiX is - at least with this format - a level above the rest.
Edit: okay, I don‘t understand VortiX now, but we‘ll see.
Edit 2: VortiX completely fell apart after Game 2. After that tournament, that was surprising.
On April 09 2022 18:38 GTR wrote: have they added map vetoing and improved the observer ui? those were my main two gripes with the game
They haven't. In tournaments, there is a really good observer interface people have hacked together, but nothing accessible to normal players. Map veto is less important now that they fixed many maps and removed the worst water from the pool, but still missing.
mmmm Japanese sounds yummy, Byzantines is pretty nice but I was honestly hoping for Celts, Vikings or Spanish.
“We’re also adding re-imagined variants of four existing civilizations, with exciting new heroes, units, and strategies. The Abbasid Dynasty, Chinese, French and Holy Roman Empire will receive these new Variant Civilizations and players will have new ways to play as seasoned favorite civilizations.”
They said the French will be Franks in the trailer so I'm guessing more of a focus on defending France from the Berber invasion during the 9th century during the reign of Charlemagne and glorifying Roland in a song ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Song_of_Roland ). HRE should also be more about some Knightly Order (hopefully Teutonic) and Abbasids will turn into... Saracens + Saladin if they're going for a AoE2 equivalent. China I have literally no idea.
Might be worth reinstalling for me if the DLC turns out to be good.
New campaign. Might be worth playing again then. Enjoyed the campaigns and the multiplayer was nice, though I seem to be done with competitive RTS games.
On February 21 2025 14:01 CicadaSC wrote: What does AOE 2 have that AOE4 doesn't? Besides the nostalgia what makes people prefer AO2>4?
Played AOE4, had fun. Never played AOE2.
AoE2 basically simulates projectiles in a lot of scenarios. AoE4 just hits things so no counter play possible.
A lot of people prefer the look of AoE 2 over AoE 4. AoE 4 of course has objectively more advanced graphics, if that makes it better is a separate question.
AoE 2 is a little slower paced which some people enjoy. While economy is harder to do well, meaning higher skill ceiling.
AoE 2 also has something like 5x as much single player content to bring people into the game and perhaps over to multiplayer. (Though I think AoE 4 has higher quality single player campaigns, especially the original game.)
On February 21 2025 14:01 CicadaSC wrote: What does AOE 2 have that AOE4 doesn't? Besides the nostalgia what makes people prefer AO2>4?
Played AOE4, had fun. Never played AOE2.
From the competitive side, AOE 2 is more mechanically focused. You can dodge more attacks, you can quickly block paths with buildings, and generally it is more about micro and mechanics.
For me, this is actually exactly what makes me prefer 4 - as I'd rather focus on macro and strategy. But for players who are already used to 2, I understand why they wouldn't switch - it's genuinely a pretty different game.
Non-competitive reasons are the art style which some prefer, for similar (valid) reasons that some prefer BW over SC2 art. Also the huge amount of single player and modded content AOE2 has.
AoE 2 definitely has more of a Brood War vibe, while AoE 4 is... more Starcraft 2, I guess? In AoE4 you get to the action much quicker, and I think the competitive maps are smaller (or at least I feel they are smaller). AoE 2 has a pretty slow start (just like Brood War with only 4 workers) and people mostly focus on their build orders and minmaxing or cutting corners, trying to get ahead of the opponent economy-wise. I personally really dig the vibe, game pace and game flow of AoE2. The graphics are also so clear and beautiful in my opinion. With the Enhanced Graphics pack, the game looks absolutely gorgeous. While AoE 4 uses 3D models in full that look very blocky and mobile game-esque, AoE2 devs opted to go a different route by making 3D models of their units and then turning them into very high quality, high definition 8-directional sprites like in Warcraft 1/2, Brood War etc. This improves the visual clarity overall tremendously. You can immediately tell the units and the buildings in the foreground, form the map texture and trees/water in the background. Everything looks crisp, neat and is immediately identifiable at glance value.
EPT
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/4uJpvCu.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/GxwlU1c.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/kZghKng.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/H5Z24b6.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/G3etltK.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/CTqRAPB.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/1WoFu0X.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/dpo0bUE.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/vBUTNw5.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/hUV62Oi.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/IO4TAzx.jpg)
.![[image loading]](https://i.redd.it/wr5wsotq08w71.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.redd.it/srcimqiw7m4z.jpg)
Patch 1.1.0![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/o9ZHAvf.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.postimg.cc/XJWZ9g0d/ezgif-3-26d971867eae.gif)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/b5FpYhS.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/pthWYr8.jpg)
