Discussion about Economy in AOE2

there is plenty of focus on military on good aoe2 maps (as opposed to farmville maps like arabia/arena/blackforest)

anyways, if you are losing vils it’s probably because you didn’t focus enough on military

I don’t know if you understood what I said or you just dodging it.

You are claiming that aoe2 eco is very vulnerable to losing villagers. This is true.

I am claiming that this is only bad design if you ignore the proactive steps that can be taken to ensure every villager kill actually consumes a decent amount of resources from the enemy.

Defenses, counter units, future eco bonuses, etc. They all help make sure villager kills are not free to the point of being game ending (in expectation)

1 Like

Hahahah I like your style, indeed playing Arabia/Arena 24/7 is not a funny thing all the time, I agee. But man, my idea was to give the game like more focusing on military side, the economy takes the biggest part in the game, no one can deny that.

No it is not, you can even see a pro resign if he lost a vill early to scout while he was walling or even lost a vill to boar, why in your opinion did he do that?! Because he knows now that his enemy have 1 more vill a head and it is hard to catch up then he gg and resign. If the game have like a more smoothy eco system, or some way of come back, you will not see a player resign after 5 mins in the game because he lost a vill to scout or whatever.

i don’t see many people proposing completely new, game breaking techs.

welcome to RTS games in general. even the most early aggro games there are put emphasis on economy.

but do you see him complain about it? or does he accept that he made a mistake and learn from it?
literally every RTS game out there you are far more punished for losing workers earlier on then you are for losing them later.

and fyi - if you lost a villager to a scout that means you weren’t prepared to defend that villager from that scout. which means you failed to focus on what your opponent was doing and didn’t have a military response to it. if you’re seriously losing your villagers to a single scout, that is a heavy mistake on your part, and you should be punished for that.

1 Like

What is the problem with having something in the game will make focusing on military better or make the economy more smoothy? Why people keep asking about eco buffs about some civs in the game? Because they know that there is no back up system, losing a vill with Magyars or Spanish or Saracens is not like losing a vill with Mayans and Chinese and Vikings, why?! Because they have good eco, they have what we call it a BACK UP.

are you kidding me? almost every game i literally see a focus on military and eco the moment they hit feudal.

or because its quite clear that all the best civs in the game have some form of good, normally early, economy bonus. meanwhile civs that have great tech trees, but almost no economy bonus (like magyars) tend to flounder. if you looked strictly at tech trees Japanese should be better then Vikings on land maps - but they aren’t. why? because Vikings have a great early eco bonus, while Japanese is only fairly mediocre in the grand scheme of things.

except yours isn’t a back up. it’s literally an all in tactic, that has far reaching consequences that you aren’t considering.

“hit castle age, throw down 2 TC, have 1 tc research your tech and be idle, meanwhile the other two tc are free to pump out villagers that go zoom zoom zoom and have huge production rates and i’m pumping out more then my opponent can keep up with”.

1 Like

like i said, this is a land-map problem. it is not an aoe2 problem

other maps have way more opportunities for swings. they aren’t defined by these random events and small edges. they are about big plays

Yeah maybe who knows how the things will go, you can’t judge until you try.

and again, you still haven’t told us which civs would get this tech and which wouldn’t. which seriously makes me consider how much thought you actually put into this. seems to me you more came up with a slap dash answer to a perceived problem but want others to do the actual work making it actually work.

What are you favourite maps if I may ask? I am not kidding, I really like your style since you too got bored from Arabia kids 24/7 same for Arena. I like new things too.

Ok I can give you 10 names for example:

5 Civs that can get this tech:

  • Magyars
  • Saracens
  • Spanish
  • Burmese
  • Turks

5 civs can’t get this tech:

  • Vikings
  • Burgundians
  • Chinese
  • Mayans
  • Aztecs

I can give you more, but the main conscept is, the civ with strong eco will not need this, the civ with bad eco will need it.

yes lets give a civ that has an absolutely supreme late game, and super cheap scouts either the option to

  1. all in with super cheap free +1 scouts in feudal with a super charged economy.
  2. hit castle age, idle 1 tc to super charge their economy while they boom for imperial age.

oh because you know, there isn’t a ton of ways for them to abuse this bonus, while also wrecking the market economy too.

hey let’s give one of the best castle age civs a way to make their castle age even better.

same as Spanish.

fact is there is so many ways to abuse this bonus of yours that it doesn’t even seem practical.

This tech can be busted by the devs if they introduced it I am not a designer I only give hints and suggestions.

I disagree with the premise the game is too focused on econ. I think meta plays are much important than just econ - that is, when to go econ, when to go all-in, what to go for etc. Insta resign for 1 vills is incredibly rare (can you give example at least), and if you lose 3 to 4 vills your metagame / unit positioning is to blame instead of the econ.


Well what I see is totally that the game and the players focus on eco more than military. I watched pro games ended in 5-10mins after they lose some vills early or even getting lamed.

Not really - in particular there are moments where you focus on military and forget about econ, for example in archer wars. Actually, “focus” is a resources that you must spend wisely too. And I believe that current situation is good that you cannot focus too much on either military and/or econ.

I watched a lot of games and there are a lot of times people got lamed / vill killed won the game. I personally killed three vills for two consecutive games and still lose regardless. (I am around 1800 ELO, not pro but at least decent).

I know but it depends more on civs, for example if you are Chinese, Mayans or Vikings, losing a vill is not that much comparing to Magyars, Spanish and Saracens who none of them have good eco. My suggestion was to give the game or some civs a new tech that works like a back up eco system and help the players to focus more on military or all-on pushes.

Well after thinking, I think just buff the civs that have bad eco, but this tech seems interesting to have TBF, a tech that make your vills for example work 100% faster but make your TC not able to make vills for a while, or somehow like Fetoria building system but introduced early, like having it in feudal or castle age, which will make focusing on military much better.

I think it’s too weird for such a tech - I dont like that I can get a sudden boost for almost no reason. If I get the boost, I would prefer that I at least did something to get such massive boost.

Again I disagree that players can ignore the econ and go all-focus on military - I think it’s too dramatic change and I personally prefer a more strategic / planning game than an action / fast-paced game.

1 Like

Btw for your tech change, I would instead make vills harder to kill - e.g +1atk, +1 melee armor. Then early vill kills will become much harder and snowballing would be much preferred instead.