Every match feels the same. This game is boring as hell

Im an all time AOE fan, lets say veteran. Bought the game from start, insider, closed beta, etc etc, you name it.
I feel like I had enough of this game, it cant show anything new. Every single game feels the same.

Every game is just doing a civ specific deathball:

  • Delhi: Animation cancelling elephants
  • French: Knights + archer rush
  • English: Longbow + tower rush
  • China: Fast castle into Clocktower siege
  • Rus: Horse Archers (still even after the patch)
  • HRE: Fast castle into relics
  • Mongols: Animation cancelled, double produced, yam networked rush.
  • Abbassid: Nobody plays them cause they are so bad atm.


I have watched the pro series on egctv - twitch yesterday. I thought the pros were different. Think again.
If you’re good at animation cancelling, you’re good at this game.

There’s no drama in this game. There’s no tension. Will the last arrow hit? Will the mangonel shot cause tremendous damage or total blank cause I guessed wrong?

Seriously the only skill you need is to know how to kite with ranged units and animation cancel. Thats it.
The only source of drama is basically coming from siege fights, if I manage to repair my siege faster, and can distribute the damage better and win the siegefest.

So keep doing what you’re doing! Turtle up/rush as hard as you can, get as much op stuff as your civ can just pack and sit until you’re 200/200 pop and at least an hour is wasted of everybody’s life.
Its gonna take years for the devs to fix this game anyways. Shame, cause in some aspects its a wonderful game with an enchanting atmosphere (kudos to the sound design team).

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, looking forward to read how you guys feel.


animation cancel removal was done in the first patch for the siege, they will do it for the other units.

yeah, because of the bugs and imbalances, there is not much diversity in the game.

Don’t tell me you’re another of those people that think Relic nerfed them because they’re muslim.


he’s just another bigoted fanboi, ive flagged him as well

You can either innovate yourself, or wait for the devs or others to do it for you.

One solves your problem, the other is what you’re choosing to do.


Respond to their points instead of instantly reporting. It’s bad sportsmanship/unbecoming.

To OP: Yes you have a point the game does feel as though you’re funnelled to a couple (or one) of strategies per civ. Despite AOE2 civs being very similar there seems to be a lot more variety in that game. Maybe BECAUSE of this. The AOE4 civs differ in a way where they each specialise in one thing and if they don’t do that thing they’re at a disadvantage.


It’s sad to see those playing AoE4 feeling limited by its civ design. The unified unit roster always struck me as smothering creativity. There’s not so much you can do with 2-6 unique units. Even in AoM with its limited launch civs the games rarely felt stagnant because each match presented plenty of choices to open up strategies.


I feel like it’s partly due special units and some bonus are really strong instead of above average. If don’t go for royal knights, it’s like handicapping yourself. Same for longbow or clocktower and bombards. I would like to see things more smoothed in their powerlevel, cutting a bit the spikes. That’s at least easier to do than making shared units specialised per civ, even though I would like to see this also happen.

Yes this game is very boring after a while due to every civ having the same units (aoe2 some had access to paladin, some others not for example), siege being ww2 tanks and the general imbalance of the game. The only thing I think AOE4 does better than aoe2 is how all the civs have a unique look for their units. All the units are just way better balanced and have more use in aoe2. Only 8 civs in this game whereas there’s 39 in aoe2 and yes people will say that aoe2 civs are copies of themselves which is true appearance wise (apart from unique units) but they have way more diversity in terms of unit roster. Like I said before some civs have fully upgraded men-at-arms whereas others don’t, some have paladin while others don’t whereas in this game every civ has access to the same unit with full upgrades (apart from unique units of course). This is reflected in the player numbers of the game where aoe4 is on the decline and aoe2 is increasing.

Exactly. And this is just further enhanced by the unbalanced Landmark system, one providing incomparable benefits over the other, rendering the worse obsolete and the whole thing again, repetitive.

I feel you… i saw the egctv match yesterday where TheViper played the english against someone and the tower rush… worked LIKE CHARM! i saw it in action for the first time so I told myself… its time to do it… So I did it today and I won 2 out of 3 matches.

I really thought the pros were different too hahaha every civ has a rush guide… if they had brought treaty mode at least rushing would be forbidden and it would give the match another sense of passion and action after the treaty period. Thats why I love it. rushing affects everything, it only sets the result as: the one who rushes first and better wins.

I am more interested on:

French: Knights + archer rush Vs English: Longbow + tower rush
Delhi: Animation cancelling elephants Vs Mongols: Animation cancelled, double produced, yam networked rush
China: Fast castle into Clocktower siege Vs HRE: Fast castle into relics

Whose deathball is the best? Is your deathball deadly? Or you just suck when any of these deathball is sent to you? Is that’s why you whine in here?

Do you expect your opponent to throw you 200 Villagers on Imperial Age? ROFL.

I firmly believe that the suggestion of more starting villagers should be pursued post haste.
More opening possibilities, less boring starts, and more variety late game. There would be technical rebalances to work out, but if players are finding the game stagnant already that is the worst thing that can happen to a game early on.
I don’t think there is any reason to wait. Increase the action!
Still enjoying the game personally, but I can see it becoming a big problem fast, especially for people who invest allot of time in one game at a time

I’d be down adding an option to increase staring villagers but I would not change it for competitive matches

Thats why I do enjoy playing with the AI , it walls , and it makes combinations of troops , and it’s truly fun to play with them

Big words for someone in invasion distance °_°

We desperately need a laugh react on this forum. Off all the things to complain about, imagine putting this on top :’)


While I don’t give a **** either way about the Mongols having female soldiers, I think a Native American civ would be the best choice for doing what they have with the Mongols in terms of women military units.


Yeah I’m not too familiar with mongol history but female foot soldiers doesn’t feel right, at least with native Americans there’s precedent and pretty widely accepted fact they had female scouts and whatnot

1 Like