The latests patches of AoE2 and AoE4 reworked how siege works.
AoE4 siege was already reworked in the first year after release, following similar philosophies as AoE3: An anti-siege siege unit, a unit focused on dealing splash damage and another one specialized on bringing down buildings from long range.
The latest patch however marked a departure from the AoE3 philosophy, after players criticised the lategame siege wars, in which siege units could destroy large chunks of armies while only efficiently countered by other siege units (Springards and Culverins).
Thus, they ditched the idea of an anti-siege siege unit and reworked the springard into an antimelee unit whose projectile goes through units along its path dealing extra damage to melee units. In the case of the Culverin it was reworked as a cannon variant (along with the bombard), an archetype that now focuses on dealing with masses of infantry (both melee and ranged) as well as bringing down buildings. Each civilization has only one of the three Cannon variants. The culverin in particular has less raw damage and more range and rate of fire compared to the other two units in the same cathegory. The rework includes other units whose profiles are not present or not changed in any way that could do much for the AoE3 setting to even draw a comparison.
So, following this trend, Could AoE3 be in for a rework of its Foundry units?
Front and center would be the anti-artillery Culverin, whose role would have to change according to the new trend. Maybe they could try another shot profile?
I find the idea of a unit whose projectiles goes through unit instead of dealing just splash damage could be an interesting addition to the way cannons work (provided the engine could support such feature in the first place) and I feel the later artillery options (horse artillery and heavy cannons) have too much overlap between them. Actually it’s kinda similar to the Culverin/Cannon/Bombard situation of AoE4, just in this case every European civ has access to the three of them instead of just one.
Then there is the issue with how to deal with artillery now that the more direct counter unit is gone. There are already some creative ways in which some civs solve the issue of dealing with artillery, such as the Japanese Yabusame with its whooping x7 bonus against artillery or the Ottoman Humbaraci, the later kinda solving the issue of grenadier units not having a well defined and valued role in the game.
What do you think about a possible rework of the artillery units? Is it an issue in-game? Do you have any ideas of your own?
I mostly just hate that the lategame is broken into two factions, the glorious and favoured civs blessed with the almighty 34 range european culverin… and the vile and despised civs not worthy of such a powerful asset.
Kinda! The projectile can produce multiple instances of splash damages if it bounces.
As far as I noticed, the projectile hits the target unit and produces splash damage. Depending on the trajectory, the cannonball may bounce and produce a smaller splash damage when it hits the ground again ( but it usually loses all momentum on the first impact). This is more noticeable when targeting buildings and the cannonball comes out on the other side.
I don’t think would fit into what cannons are in the AoE3 timeline.
I mean, the current artillery is already somewhat a stretch, but I see some kind of logic behind “early cannon replaced by late cannon that do the same but better”. If any, I would replace culverin with civ per civ units that do the same: I.E: change the rocket to be british culverin, now the oto bombard do anti siege damage, something along those lines.
Standard European Artillery
Falconet = Anti-Infantry, Anti-Buildings and Anti-Ships
Culverin = Anti-Artillery and Anti-Ships
Mortar = Anti-Buildings
Horse Artillery = Faster moving Anti-Infantry, Anti-Buildings and Anti-Ships
Heavy Cannon = Stronger Anti-Infantry, Anti-Buildings and Anti-Ships
AoE III is a different game then AoE IV we don’t need to try to copy or change things because of other games changing things especially when they involves changes to how things have worked all the way back to legacy AoE III. Springald have been made to be more like Scorpions from AoE II and AoE III doesn’t have that kind of siege unit. Some people think the change in AoE IV isn’t good.
The only change to Artillery I would make it so they don’t pack up unless you specially tell them to because it gets annoying that you can try to use them to shoot something but then they pack up because the thing is just outside of a certain range.
Field artillery generally shot straight lines through infantry squares - as a consequence, infantry would arrange in many columns and few rows while fighting it. Then THAT formation would be vulnerable to cavalry flanks so they would have to form denser squares while marching.
Not much later though, canister shot became a thing to counter formations - that essentially functioned the same as current artillery does. And then there’s multipliers and resistances bring the interactions between units closer to IRL models.
All in all, its hard to see where a major rework could fit.
Artillery in aoe3 works fine. Aoe4 had deeper design issues that led to the late game artillery war and i doubt the rework will fix the problem at large.
Is there an actual problem in AoE3 with artillery? Personally I think AoE3 has the best artillery in the series, so I don’t even understand what the issue is, let alone what the solution would be.
I feel it’s been real wonky ever since they made mortars be able to attack regular units and culverings get a multiplier against buildings.
Like sure their role isn’t as narrow anymore, but at the cost of intended behavior. You really need to micromanage them now so they don’t attack things you didn’t intend to.
Dansil’s also got a point with how civs without access to Euro artillery getting left severely behind since they are missing crucial tools in their arsenal.
Artillery in AOE-3 needs some tweaking, but not a major rework. For example:
Mortars should prioritize buildings over units unless you tell them to.They should also attack walls automatically, and not select each segment. However, they should always prioritize other buildings, unless you choose to attack the wall.
Cannons should not switch from siege mode to transport mode every time you want to attack an enemy out of range.
Artillery should fire on command. I don’t know how to explain this, but sometimes it gets bogged down and doesn’t attack when you tell it to.
Perhaps the artillery quadrant upgrade should give +2 range to artillery, however it starts by default at -2 range. It makes FF with cannons not as strong, and at the same time gives more opportunity to adapt to civilizations without artillery.
Siege tolerance for culverins and equivalents.
We could give new formations to artillery, like this one that appears in a cinematic of the campaign.
Would be nice if they gave them a stance that’s buildings only and a stance that can hit units. Then everyone could just ignore the unit attacking stance.
Although even that would probably get bungled like how Sebastopols have the splashy stance that’s completely useless because it only does 1/5th the DPS.
Another minor tweak that would definetively improve artillery experience is to make them stand their ground by default. IIRC Napoleonic era added stances to artillery, but I find it quite convoluted when simply making the guns don’t move unless told otherwise would do the trick. Sometimes you are fighting a defensive battle and out of the blue your guns move to chasse a stray skirmisher and now are in range for the enemy cavalry to cut them down.
This is actually a great idea. In my ideal world, Artillery should be a game changer but with the conundrum that it need to be babysited, much like Trebuchets were back in the Conquerors: This gun could potentially cripple your enemy, but you have to move around and protect it until the catapult is unpacked an ready to fire; you are being successful in your offensive, now, limber those guns and take it where you want it, or risk it moving so slowly your enemy will form a new fighting possition when you get there. I mean, you can see a lot of tactical deep in how you proceed and the need for the player to be involved in what it’s happening.
