As you have probably seen in the trailer the new Farm look is Barnless and I want to know, how does the community like it. Putting the walkable Farms debate aside, do you think is the new look is better or does it lose to you the retro aoe1 feeling?
For me personally, I would prefer the Farm to keep the barn, even if it means in a walkable Farms scenario that the villager would just ghost through the Walls, it just has a nostalgia feeling attached to it.
Doesn’t make much of a difference to me. I like 'em both.
I like the new looks a lot if farms are made walkable.
If they want to keep farms solid then the new looks are a very bad idea. It will feel unintuitive and clunky if farms look like plain open fields but are also solid.
For solid farms they should keep the farmhouse, and maybe even add a small fence around the farms perimeter - just to drive home the point that these are in fact solid building’s and to make their solidness make sense.
I like more the original farm.
I quote myself from another thread:
@Stryder said:
Seconded. Though there’s also a middle ground option: a 4x4 walkable farm with a 1x1 (or 2x2, or 1x2…) non-walkable barn placed somewhere inside. What do you think?
I’m not sure I see the point of that middle ground option. The argument for keeping farms solid is that you can use them as part of your defensive strategy by blocking off avenues of attack. The argument for making farms walkable is that it’s less clunky to manage and makes more intuitive sense.
If we go for the middle ground option then we might as well go for full on walkable farms - because the benefit of keeping farms solid would be gone by that point anyway.
@GepardenKalle said:
I’m not sure I see the point of that middle ground option. The argument for keeping farms solid is that you can use them as part of your defensive strategy by blocking off avenues of attack. The argument for making farms walkable is that it’s less clunky to manage and makes more intuitive sense.If we go for the middle ground option then we might as well go for full on walkable farms - because the benefit of keeping farms solid would be gone by that point anyway.
A reason might be to stay faithful to the original and keep the barn, without forcing the whole sprite to be non-walkable (and clunky).
Plus, with all the buildings available, using farms as a barrier seems quite silly, so no point in having them completely solid.
@Stryder said:
Plus, with all the buildings available, using farms as a barrier seems quite silly, so no point in having them completely solid.
It wasn’t silly in the original aoe though. In fact it was extremely important to use farms as barriers in order to protect your farmers (from scouts in particular). Remember aoe1 has no loom until Iron Age, no TC to hide in and no gates. The lack of loom in particular makes a huge difference. Farmers are much more vulnerable than in aoe2.
@GepardenKalle said:
@Stryder said:
Plus, with all the buildings available, using farms as a barrier seems quite silly, so no point in having them completely solid.It wasn’t silly in the original aoe though. In fact it was extremely important to use farms as barriers in order to protect your farmers (from scouts in particular). Remember aoe1 has no loom until Iron Age, no TC to hide in and no gates. The lack of loom in particular makes a huge difference. Farmers are much more vulnerable than in aoe2.
It’s still silly to use a building that is in fact, NOT a building (a farm is basically the soil) to stop units from crossing. I get the strategy and the gameplay implications, but we can afford, in 2017, to use actual buildings to block enemies (walls? houses?) and let farms be walkable.
@Stryder said:
@GepardenKalle said:
@Stryder said:
Plus, with all the buildings available, using farms as a barrier seems quite silly, so no point in having them completely solid.It wasn’t silly in the original aoe though. In fact it was extremely important to use farms as barriers in order to protect your farmers (from scouts in particular). Remember aoe1 has no loom until Iron Age, no TC to hide in and no gates. The lack of loom in particular makes a huge difference. Farmers are much more vulnerable than in aoe2.
It’s still silly to use a building that is in fact, NOT a building (a farm is basically the soil) to stop units from crossing. I get the strategy and the gameplay implications, but we can afford, in 2017, to use actual buildings to block enemies (walls? houses?) and let farms be walkable.
I don’t think realism really works as an argument here. Most buildings like markets and town centers have clearly passable areas that any unit could realistically walk over and very few real forests are so thick that they can’t be walked though.
Using a farm as a wall is just as silly as using a market or a thin line of trees as a wall.
@Stryder said:
@GepardenKalle said:
@Stryder said:
Plus, with all the buildings available, using farms as a barrier seems quite silly, so no point in having them completely solid.It wasn’t silly in the original aoe though. In fact it was extremely important to use farms as barriers in order to protect your farmers (from scouts in particular). Remember aoe1 has no loom until Iron Age, no TC to hide in and no gates. The lack of loom in particular makes a huge difference. Farmers are much more vulnerable than in aoe2.
It’s still silly to use a building that is in fact, NOT a building (a farm is basically the soil) to stop units from crossing. I get the strategy and the gameplay implications, but we can afford, in 2017, to use actual buildings to block enemies (walls? houses?) and let farms be walkable.
And that’s the argument for walkable farms. But do you see how your proposed middle ground do not cover the wants of both sides in this issue?
@Stryder
They are not making a new game just ‘remastering’ it. I think they should keep most of the original mechanism like not adding gates and not making farms walkable.
@GepardenKalle said:
@Stryder said:
@GepardenKalle said:
@Stryder said:
Plus, with all the buildings available, using farms as a barrier seems quite silly, so no point in having them completely solid.It wasn’t silly in the original aoe though. In fact it was extremely important to use farms as barriers in order to protect your farmers (from scouts in particular). Remember aoe1 has no loom until Iron Age, no TC to hide in and no gates. The lack of loom in particular makes a huge difference. Farmers are much more vulnerable than in aoe2.
It’s still silly to use a building that is in fact, NOT a building (a farm is basically the soil) to stop units from crossing. I get the strategy and the gameplay implications, but we can afford, in 2017, to use actual buildings to block enemies (walls? houses?) and let farms be walkable.
And that’s the argument for walkable farms. But do you see how your proposed middle ground do not cover the wants of both sides in this issue?
Because it’s the best of both worlds (style and function). But if we are talking about one extreme only - then walkable farms is objectively the least clunky option, which I favor.
Walkable farms were implemented in aoe2 with the other aoe 2 features. That game already got a hd version. if somebody want to play a game with those features then they should play aoe2.
@Stryder said:
@GepardenKalle said:
@Stryder said:
@GepardenKalle said:
@Stryder said:
Plus, with all the buildings available, using farms as a barrier seems quite silly, so no point in having them completely solid.It wasn’t silly in the original aoe though. In fact it was extremely important to use farms as barriers in order to protect your farmers (from scouts in particular). Remember aoe1 has no loom until Iron Age, no TC to hide in and no gates. The lack of loom in particular makes a huge difference. Farmers are much more vulnerable than in aoe2.
It’s still silly to use a building that is in fact, NOT a building (a farm is basically the soil) to stop units from crossing. I get the strategy and the gameplay implications, but we can afford, in 2017, to use actual buildings to block enemies (walls? houses?) and let farms be walkable.
And that’s the argument for walkable farms. But do you see how your proposed middle ground do not cover the wants of both sides in this issue?
Because it’s the best of both worlds (style and function). But if we are talking about one extreme only - then walkable farms is objectively the least clunky option, which I favor.
It’s not the best of both worlds since it looses the main function of the former. A farm that is only half solid is useless for defence and might therefore just as well be entirely walkable
Remains to be seen if it makes sense for a farm to be a defensive structure?
@Stryder said:
Remains to be seen if it makes sense for a farm to be a defensive structure?
I’m happy either way as long as the graphics of the farm reflects it’s function.
If it is walkable it should look like a plain field. If it is solid it should look solid, maybe a thick planted forest of Apple trees or something - or at least be visually fenced.
@GepardenKalle said:
@Stryder said:
Remains to be seen if it makes sense for a farm to be a defensive structure?I’m happy either way as long as the graphics of the farm reflects it’s function.
If it is walkable it should look like a plain field. If it is solid it should look solid, maybe a thick planted forest of Apple trees or something - or at least be visually fenced.
In this case we can agree, coherence between art and gameplay is a fundamental aspect of a game.