Does devs care about chill players or team games? (Request for feedback on improvements for better PvP game quality)

Age of Empires IV IV - Discussion
1

Hello guys, as a fan of Age of Empires for over 15 years, I know the game well and regret certain changes since the release of AoE4. Everything seems designed to increase aggression and annihilate the more chill playstyle (can someone please count the number of nerfs to defenses and buffs to siege units vs structures over the last 3 years?). Especially if the devs want more new players, some balancing changes might be necessary, simply to create a less toxic and often unfair game environment.

In short, I am asking for your opinion on a few ideas. Knowing that aggressive players will obviously be against it, and others will beg the devs to see these changes in the game:

Royal Knights:
-One of the very few unique units priced like a generic one. An additional 10 food wouldn’t hurt them, and we’d see a bit more variety in French armies for a change…
-Health Regeneration Tech: Change from 1 HP/s to 2 HP/s, but only when stationary (this would help avoid the infinite running, as only units that can’t harm them would be able to catch them).

Mangudai:

  • A change unplanned by the devs after the massive nerf to mangonels/nob. Mangudai mass formations are absolutely unstoppable."

  • Tech ‘Siha Bow Limbs’: Change from 1/2 damage to 1/2 damage against infantry (yes, the same treatment as crossbowmen, who had become too strong against their counters).

  • Reduce their speed by 5% or add an optional galloping skill: -5 or -10% speed when firing, +5% speed when the skill is disabled.

For both units, this wouldn’t be a strict nerf, as when used well, it could be a buff. But most importantly, it would prevent the endless runs behind the bases that make us all rage (except, of course, for the player doing it)."

Defensive Structures: A major rework is needed. New players love to hide, so the devs should rethink this if they want more new players. At least at for plat-dimand ELO, many players don’t even try to build defenses… and honestly, given what’s left of them, it’s understandable.

  • (Thanks AoE3) Add a tech in the Castle Age at the Forum: ‘Reinforced Palisade’ 300 wood, 200 stone: doubles the HP, cost, and build time of palisades.
  • (More controversial) Second Imperial Age tech: ‘Fortified Palisade’ (more expensive, no idea on exact cost): REPLACE IN THE BUILDING MENU the previous palisade by ‘Fortified Palisade’. Wich have doubles the HP and build time again, but for 20 wood and 5 stone per segment, with 5 resistance to torches. (so it does not upgrade already existing palisade)

Stone Towers… I think some people have noticed that we can see 10 times more in 2 minutes of trailers than in an entire season of games… (for plat-dimand ELO). Anyway, a rework to make them useful for a change.

  • First of all, the tower is made of stone, just like the walls, so why do torches destroy it???
  • Major rework: increase the cost and build time, but give a passive -50% dmg for the wall surrounding untill its destruction and anti siedge bonus. ( And bring back directional firing. I think I saw that the devs removed it at some point in the past two years—I haven’t seen a single stone tower since.

One last suggestion that might help reduce annoying Chinese tower rushes and similar strategies: give villagers a special ability—their attacks reduce the construction speed of any defensive structure by 7%, stacking up to a maximum of -70% construction speed.
(-85% max for landmarks—no more White Tower or Barbican rushes!)"

Well I know that’s a lot, but even if some idea is retaken for future update, I would be happy. So, let me know what you are thinking about it, and if you can ask devs what they think about it, it s even better. (And yes I know it’s only my point of view on the game state)

2

Idk, I think devs don’t care about team game balance or chill player experience in your words. In the last patch they said they were satisfied with the current game status while team games are heavily dominated by cav civs. Tbh I doubt if devs read these posts, I feel like posting on reddit is more likely to be seen by them than on the official forum xd.

3

yeah I agree, and it’s sad… And don’t worrie I put a big reddit too, months ago… It would be so much better if they send a questionnaire for all players before making sh*t

4

Where did they say anything like that?

5

Don’t even believe it.

Most people who vote on Reddit are like button-pushing Gacha:

"“They generally put LIKE to anything that already has likes, and dislike anything that has a Dislike.”

On the other hand, you won’t find critical replies on Reddit:

  • Anyone who has made long or critical comments, or is even intelectual, is “banned permanently” on Reddit by shoddy AI moderators who can’t distinguish between a discussion and a death threat.

  • Like a example: You can’t even say “Black Sheep” because moderation says it’s racist, and you have to say “African American Sheep”… that’s how stupid and retarded the AI ​​is.

Regarding “Balance” and other things to discuss, it’s better to do it here, in the official forum

Another thing is that the community has already covered several similar topics, and this one doesn’t consider it that relevant, or dont wan to comment 3 or 5 times to the same team in a short time.

6

In the last patch note 14.1.5602

7

image
image1620×438 213 KB

“We are pretty happy with where gameplay is right now, so we aren´t going to be introducing a ton of new balance changes”

Well, it seems the devs are happy with the current state of the game.

I actually agree: I’d say this Season 11 is one of the most balanced seasons in the game. The other most balanced was Season 9.

And we’ve been through a lot: From a rework of the marine system (S3), to the end of Siege Wars (S9), variant balancing (S6, S9), and various bugs; resizing of Landmarks and Wonders (S6), beautifying the EyeCandy maps, etc.

Personally, as a civ player that like to be a Jack of All Trades, the Cavalry Amassment strategy seems valid for Post-T-Imperial Team games, and it actually makes sense if you’re fighting on very open maps.

8

This statement I assume you mean:

We are pretty happy with where gameplay is right now, so we aren’t going to be introducing a ton of new balance changes.

Let’s not take that and extrapolate to:

9

The devs heeded this:

By doing this:

New Tanegashima Ashigaru, FINALLY!

Tanegashima ashigaru
Tanegashima ashigaru1920×629 147 KB

Cavalry with Square Shields, FINALLY!

Cavalry corrected JAPANESE en Sengoku variant
Cavalry corrected JAPANESE en Sengoku variant1271×692 132 KB

That made me happy.

And in fact, that they used several of my ideas from the Japanese concept I did for Sengoku Daimyos, too.

1 Like
10

I agree they’re very broken in Post-Imperial.

The main problem with them, beyond the damage they cause, is that their only current counter in that age is using the same number of mangudais, but as Knights/Lancers, plus 4 or 5 upgraded mangonels.

I had generally suggested creating a counter to Horse Archers. In Age of Empires 3, the counter is Foot Archers and Snipers:

  • In theory, “Shooting on foot” usually gives you better range and accuracy than on horseback, and well-positioned squads of shielded archers were great barriers against horse archers.

Historical Examples:

  • Battle of the Terek River 1395: One of Timur’s regiments, knowing that mounted archers were approaching, positioned itself behind heavy shields and chariots and began shooting accurately at them, withstanding their onslaught.

  • Battle of Dorylaeum 1097: To defeat the Ayyubid mounted archers, the Crusaders defended themselves with heavy spearmen in front, while archers and crossbowmen fired fully equipped from behind.

  • Battle of Parwan 1221: Jalal al-Din defeated the Mongols by forcing his archers to dismount and accurately shooting at the Mongol mounted archers.

I would suggest that the Archer and Crossbowman also have a basic bonus against light cavalry archers.

It can be something basic (+1/+2/+3) or strong (+5/+6/+8).

The only problem with this is in civs where cavalry archers play a special role, such as in Japanese, where the Onna Musha would have a major weakness if the archers dealt extra damage to her, even though they are the Japanese replacement for the crossbowman.

11

(I didn’t see that I had replies!)
I agree with you — and fun fact: French Arbalesters are super strong against Mangudai, but we never see them in-game XD.

As for anti-horseman units, Genitours are crazy good for that!

So for the other 18 civs, maybe give them the same treatment as Crossbowmen got six months ago: less base damage, but more bonus damage could be nice. Do you think adding +1–2 damage against MELEE infantry would be better?

Or maybe it all went sideways the moment they removed the only real balancing factor — range (maybe they added a bit too much of it?). Btw camels archers just melt now, if the y chase mangudai.

Yeah bonus dmg against “ligth cav”/range ones, exactly like in aoe3! (but onna mucha are already good against others cav archers, with their range) They should take more from this game! Like bonus dmg against cav from defensive structure or lower torch dmag form cav compare to inf

12

Yeah but, do you have the infos of the balanced they are looking exactly? Because stong 1vs1 could be trash 4vs4 so what is their balanced on the subject?

And I guess the over power cav civ is more a feeling from the players that lose mostly against than, than for the rest of the game. The simple presence of one french in 4vs4 radically change all the behavior of your team. Than not the case of all the civ, of way lesser