Don’t make AoE4 become the AoE2+2

When I watched some information in youtube, I’m worried that AoE 4 will become the AoE 2+2.

1. Economic drop-off buildings (drop site) are back.

When I was playing AoE 1 and 2, I didn’t notice any problem about drop sites. However, when I was playing AoM and AoE3, I found some problems there.

Drop sites were improved in AoM. The economic system of the Greeks is more like AoE2, but Storehouse combines the function of Mining Camp and Lumber Camp. The Egyptians have cost-free drop sites. The Norse have Ox Carts (1 pop) which serve as portable drop points for resources. The Chinese have only one drop site, Peasants, instead of multiple drop sites. The Atlantean Villagers, Citizens, don’t need to return to a building to drop off resources.

Villagers in AoE3 don’t need to return to a building to drop off resources and they are just like the Atlantean Citizens in AoM.

In AoE3, we don’t need to spend any resources and time to build drop sites and can focus on producing or controlling the army.

Simplifying the process of gathering resources can speed up the civilization’s growing and decrease average time in one game.

Especially for old fans, we don’t have much time to play a game with more than 30 or 40 mins. (we can play a game for a long time occasionally but not often.)

2. Armor system

When I watched the overview in youtube to introduce the House of Wisdom, I found the one of the techs described to increase the armor of the Camel by 3.

OMG! Is the armor system like AoE2? It will make some situations unbalanced.

For instance, the damage of the Chu Ko Nu is 5*3 (15 total) in AoE3 (In AoE2, the damage of the first arrow is higher than the others)

If Chu Ko Nu hits a unit with 3 armors, the damage will be (5-3) *3 =6.

If the damage of the Archer is 15, the damage will be 12 in the same condition.

We should consider that the diversity of units in AoE4 is more complicated than AoE2, which means AoE4 is more difficult to balance than AoE2.

In AoM or AoE3, the damage is calculated by percentage. If the armor system in AoE4 is like AoM, we can ignore the above situation to balance it.

E.g. Hitting a unit with 20% armors.

Chu Ko Nu: 530.8 = 12

Archer: 15*0.8 = 12

My friend also told me if the armor system is like AoE2, he won’t buy AoE4.

3. Bonus Damage system

Because of the armor system, I’m afraid the bonus damage system is like AoE2 by additive increase.

In AoE2, the units are given too many attack bonuses to deal with different units and the bonus damage system is completely unsystematic.

This will make too much trouble when you balance it.

Multipliers are factors used to determine bonus damage against other units in AoM and AoE3.

In AoM, the bonus damage system is easy to understand.

Infantry against Cavalry. Cavalry against Archer. Archer against Infantry.

Some special counter-units have huge multipliers against atypical type of units.

E.g. Huskarl (infantry) have multipliers against archer by x2.

In AoE3, the system is more complicated than AoM but easier than AoE2.

Archer/Skirmisher (Infantry tag) usually have multipliers against Heavy Infantry and Light Cavalry.

Musketeer/Melee Infantry (Infantry and Heavy Infantry tags) usually have a multiplier against Cavalry.

Ranged Cavalry (Cavalry and Light Cavalry tags) usually have multipliers against Heavy Cavalry and Artillery.

Melee Cavalry (Cavalry and Heavy Cavalry tags) usually have multipliers or high melee damage against Artillery and Archer/Skirmisher.

Artillery (Artillery tag) usually have multipliers against Infantry and Building.

You can find that each type of units can usually fight against two types of units.

If you construct a good bonus damage system in the beginning, you will save a lot of time to adjust and balance the system.

4. Conclusion

It’s not big problem when the era of AoE4 is the Middle Ages, but this game is AoE4 not AoE2+2.

Therefore, AoE4 should learn the strengths in AoE series but don’t imitate the weaknesses in AoE series.

AoE4 is an RTS game. We should always consider how to easily balance this game.

When the RTS game is more balanced, the player will enjoy it more.

I gave a lot of negative feedback, but I also like some designs in AoE4.

For example, the Mongols have the ability to move their bases because they are a nomadic civilization. It’s the first nomadic civilization which can move their building to other location in AoE series.

This ability is like the bonus of Kronos who can time shift buildings to any location within own LOS in AoM.

It will be interesting when we play the Mongols.

The English speak Old English in the Dark Age and evolving to Early Modern English by the Imperial Age. It’s very good detail for a historical game.

I have an advice, but this is not necessary. When I read some Chinese history, I found that the official language in Tang and Song Dynasty is Middle Chinese that is more like the Sinitic languages in South China, especially the languages of Yue, Minnan and Hakka. Because the people who speak these languages ​​are refugees or immigrants from the north where are often invaded by northern nomads. The official language in Yuan and Ming Dynasty is Early Modern Chinese that is like the Sinitic languages in North China. (The Yuan Dynasty was ruled by the Mongols, so the official language is not only Sinitic languages but also Mongolian)

Anyway, it’s just the detail for fun but not necessary for an RTS game.

I’m looking forward to AoE4.


On the contrary, the AoE1 and 2 Armour system is much easier to balance than teh AoM + AoE3 percentage based system.
In fact, more RTS games use the additive, rather than the percentile systems.


Economic drop-of buildings make the game more strategic since deciding where to place them, when to replace them (for wood) makes the game more interesting. I hate when games simplify macro-mechanics just in order to make them easier.

Macro skills should be about making smart decisions (where to place the lumber camp, when to make another etc), not simplifying it or make it just spamming keys (inject for Zerg). Drop-of sites improves the game since it more decisions to be made.

As a SC2 player that spent years playing AOE2 back on the Zone, I prefer the AoE2 version compared to AoE3. If you just use percentages the game will be easier to balance, but always maintaining the exact unit relationship between units makes the game boring. If you have an attack upgrade advantage for your archers, suddenly cavalry can go from being a hard counter to just a soft-counter to archers.

Using numbers instead of percentages can alter unit relationships during a game, making it much more strategic since investing in upgrades can have a higher pay off. It also makes timings more interesting since you can exploit a timing widow where you have an upgrade advantage, in a way that is less impactful if you just use percentages.


@yellowjo3m6 Good points that you are making here. I also hope that AoE IV won’t just be a new version of an old AoE.


This is exactly the point of the armour system. It allows for my diversity in your units.
If you have a percentage based armour system, your Chu Ko Nu is basically just the same thing as an Archer.

Another point of interest that someone pointed out on the reddit is that a 10% damage reduction is really very similar to a 10% health increase. By using a subtractive armour system, you open up some more interesting game decisions.


No offens, but for me all the post look like a crying to implement more stuff from AoE 3 than AoE 2. For me economy, aromor and counter system from AoE is better (its interesting why AoE 2 had a bigger playerbase, isnt?)

and example of coutering from AoM dosent work - just chech greek units from 3 age


So you are mad that they are making it “AoE2+2” instead of AoE3+1? Interesting…


Never. EVER do I want the age 3 resource system back. I am very very happy that the dropoff buildings are back D


So the OP is basically saying he doesn’t want an AoE2 2, but rather wants an AoE3 2.

Hilarious I gotta say :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:

Oh, and drop-off buildings for resources is an absolute must and it’s not something invented by AoE2. I think even most AoE3 fans are happy to have them back, it makes an RTS way more strategic.


i know it is quite personal (and i also feel it very rude to say this) but can you please type your “the” correctly?
it feels a bit strange that you type every other thing correctly but only the “the” is typed wrong if you dont mind

My H key is a bit damaged, as far as I can tell. It also happens with “them”, “other” and similar words.


I much prefer the streamlining of one storehouse in AoEO and find AoE2’s three storehouses very clunky and telling that ensemble simplified it in every game after 1998. It’s really neat to strategically place one building that serves multiple resources.


False. Again, Andy, you are trying to oversell AoEO without knowing enough how all other games work and why they are superior :slight_smile:
AoE2’s lumber/mining camp/mill is superior because if you had a gold mine near forest and you placed a mining camp there, villagers will mine the gold. But if it was multi-purpose, they could as well go and chop trees when you actually wanted them to mine gold.
Also, scouting lets say a lumber camp would immediately tell you woodcutters are nearby or thats where wood has been chopped or thats where wood is going to be chopped. Whereas a drop-off point for all resources is confusing.


It is not confusing, just too convenient.

1 Like

I think aoe4 looks a lot like aoe2, but it doesn’t look completely like aoe2, as long as it has a few new things to keep it fresh ( witch it seems like it does ) then it’s fine if it leans more towards aoe2.


False. You are again overselling AoE2. We just cntrl-click the resource to task vils on the one we want. :smiley:


I personally think AOE 3 eco is the best. But hey we all have a different opinion


Yes, I totally agree. Eco in AoE 3 is awesome.


AOE2+2 is a good nickname for the game, I choose AOE IIII, since it’s a remake of 2 not a sequel to 3.

TBH Econ is so fundamental to the experience I doubt many people would be convinced of anything other than what they are used to until they try it out. I remember the grouchy reaction to reseedable farms coming to aoe1. They hated it until they tried it and now they never look back.