Hello
This mechanic from AoE3 would be step forward to better game balance + “immersion”
What do You think?
12 Likes
That’s what I was expecting from a modern RTS… If cav have charge why archers keep firing when engaged in melee? It will be good for balance but also it looks cool, archers don’t even miss like in aoe2.
6 Likes
Also would be cool if they give english more unique archer, because I think everyone had longbows
If there are 2 kind of archers one for close combat and one for siege would be cool.
Ill give MAA sprint like the Delhi one to each civ and stance with raised shiled, they move 80% slower but they can soak arrows.
Knight charge will have bonus against them.
HRE MAA unique ability - Swing , aoe dmg but have to be casted.
Not sure about landsknight, they fill somehow useless to me.
Big like to your idea OP!
It would also be amazing, if cav pathing could be fixed and cav would midly snare single archers.
Also, archers should not attack buildings anymore when using attackmove and enemies are nearby.
2 Likes
Well, this is step back from AoE3,
With a balancing, this is also problem in AoE2, where archers and knights dominate and infantry is using by players only with specific focused civilisation - Goths or Aztecs. The missile units are too effective, and one reason is that they can shoot in any (close) disstance with full attack value
longbowmen are superior to regular archer and have 2 active abilities - palings and arrow volley, it is far superior and unique than regular archer, but still fit same role
Thank You! Glad to see, that I am not alone in this thought
1 Like
This mechanic is actually in game already
In skirmish and multiplayer, the delphi tower elephant and rus strelet have both melee and missile attack
BUT, In single player campaign, where the campaign civilisations use the “original” tech tree, the missile units have melee attack in close combat
Well, this is how it should be, why the hell the developers removed this feature? 
it is real stepback from AoE3, please implement it back
2 Likes
Those are the kind of deep mechanics that game is missing… If it looks cool why remove it? I just hope the change was not due to a "pro"feedback
2 Likes
AoE2 fans complaint about something being like AoE3 so they had to remove it.
spoilers, thats how it was done initially, in closed beta, then the esports whiners especially wanted it gone and got their wish
1 Like
well, it was, specifically SC2 pros
1 Like
So where is the truth? AoE2 fans or SC2 pros?
Anyway, melee mode for missile units in close combat is good for general gameplay and multiplayer too, it adds a balance (missile units are not OP) and tactics
In the case of AoE2, this is where AoE3 is mechanicaly superior to AoE2
Dear Developers , just put it back please, it is part of game already
1 Like
Those two are not mutually exclusive.
But I hope that AoE2 fans had a bigger impact on the design of AoE4 then SC2 ones.
Maybe AoE2 fans mixed up the fact that AoE3 has a snaring system with just having meele attacks on ranged units.
The other reason people might not want it is because this way ranged units have a away to get around pierce armour.
But they could at last add a melee attack with exactly the same damage and attack speed doing pierce damage at melee range.
So it’s technically the same attack but at last it doesn’t look stupid.
A lot of AoE3 units have roughly the same DPS and the same attack modifiers in ranged and melee with the big exception being Musketeer type units.
nah, it is the Pros didn’t like it and they made it removed from the game…
And those pros are mostly SC2 players lol
3 Likes
For pretty simple reasons.
AOE3 “failed” because it had separate melee mode, artillery crews, siege with torches, wildlife and other assets as pure decorations, moving animals in buildings, round maps, cannonballs hitting people into the air…
We should learn from the lessons and do our best to avoid those and also avoid reminding the players of any association with that game.
4 Likes
It would be interesting if this was a poll to see if AoEIV players would like this.
4 Likes
This you?
Because I’ve got to say, I am finding the irony very ironic.
Hardly. I lurk the III: DE subforum a fair amount now since the game went F2P and I picked it up.
But it surprises me to learn you play IV. The amount you go on about it, I would’ve thought you wouldn’t touch it.
I know you were. Again, I read the thread. I wasn’t commenting on the back-and-forth with some other poster that apparently has a bee in their bonnet about Chinese cannons. I personally do not judge people for playing or not playing the game. I just found it ironic that you pulled out the “what are you doing it if you don’t play it” card, because from everything you post r.e. AoE IV, it really doesn’t seem like you play it regularly, if at all.
@GorbMort Before this turns into a 20-comment argument I’m genuinely curious if you’d like this mechanic reinstituted into the game.
1 Like
I have no strong feelings either way. I’m not a guy who’s super-invested in balance, except for believing in the concept of trickle-down balancing (i.e. top-down balancing benefits the entire playerbase). If it comes back, I’m all for it, because it’s flavoursome, but if there’s a reason why it went away, I’ll likely understand it.
None of this has anything to do with how much you play the game. If I’m wrong, I’m wrong. If you play the game despite your frequent, loud and vocal objections to it, more power to you. It’s a lesson learned for me in that case.
What parts of the game do you like? What keeps you playing? In all honesty, you seem to complain about every aspect of it, from the polish, to the graphics, to the gameplay, so I genuinely want to know. Much like your image of me as the “patron and guardian angel” (sarcasm) of the game, so do I have an image of you.
2 Likes
It’s a decent game. It’s playable. It has an interesting setting and it’s different from other games with the same setting. What other reasons do I need? Or do you need?
Will it help improve anything if I don’t say what I think needs improvement, but write a million “praise posts” instead?
That’s every aspect of the game?
According to you, iirc, those are not important at all.
Where?
I even praised the last-last patch of adding more unique units.
If you count color selection, well definitely I dislike it before they implemented it. Just like I dislike it before they added more unique units, fearing they were going for the “safe, standardized, perfectly balanced, pvp heavy, esports” design ideology.
I objected those because I wanted the game to be better.
I would not spend time “criticizing” the game if some people had not constantly come and taught me they were either brilliant design choices or technically impossible.
But of course, if I can be called hating AOE3 because I dislike the representation of some civs, then I definitely hate AOE4 so much that I cannot sleep at night by the mere thought of its existence.
Tbh, now I only have frequent, loud and vocal objections to how whoever is in charge handles the series and especially “some other game” in their advertising and social media, and the esports-dominated perspective advocated by some people (not necessarily the devs themselves. If the devs appear to follow that then I’ll equally object it). That somewhat ties with certain design choices in this game and I still object those as well.
4 Likes