So I’m simply wrong, nothing more to it. Appreciate the clarity.
I have more leeway than you for “esports” influencing the game, but that’s neither here nor there.
It is not only because it looks cool it also add some deep to the game, you will have to be more careful with the archers, archers will be affected only on front line unless the other player flank both sides and at the same time pikes will play a major role…
3 Likes
Is this the line to stand in for people who don’t like units throwing torches at buildings? If so, I’d like to join.
1 Like
Why do you dislike it?
The buildings start burning at some point, so it kind of makes sense to throw torches.
If just the physics were as good and aestheic of as in aoe3…
Small pieces of the buildings fall off and get blasted away when being shot with artillery.
It’s a shame aoe4 is lacking so hard in that department, when so many years have gone by (18 years since aoe3) and the technology/engines have improved so much since aoe3.
I was honestly super disappointed to witness how poorly made aoe4 is in that way.
In the BETAs i was still hoping for the “real” game to be revealed at release, though nothing much changed.
4 Likes
Here are my thoughts on how this could be done without effecting game balance and respecting the counter system? Basically, give them a melee weapon that does pierce damage.
The problem is, horsemen have more pierce armor than melee armor. Through the ages, they have 3 less armor than the archer’s attack. So, the archer does 3 damage regardless of age. However, they have no melee armor. So if I attack your horsemen with my archers, my archers do only 3 damage, but once your horsemen make contact, my archers pull out swords and do 5, 7 or 8 attack (depending on the age) to your no melee armor. Suddenly, your horsemen get shredded by archers. One option is to give 3 attack for all ages for their short range weapon. Problem here is elite archers would do only one damage to vanguard MAA, and early knights. The other option would be to give them a short range weapon that somehow gives pierce attack. Maybe like a morning star, military pick or flail (maybe dependent on the civ). So basically, the unit would function the exact same (deal melee attack every 1.5 seconds), just a different attack animation.
These weapons have not been used in game yet, and will likely not be added since they are seldom used in the other Age titles. To my knowledge, the morning star does not appear in AOE 2, 3 or 4 leaving it completely open to be use. The flail only appears in AOE 3. And a pick variant (obuch) is used in AOE 2. The mace appears in AOE 4, but I am not talking about it.
The question now, is rather the time spent on this change would be justified. If the devs could be 1/5 of the way through adding a new civ (say Norse with Viking units) with the same amount of work hours spent, then I personally, would much rather they invest in that instead. I believe this is the real reason we will never see melee attack for archers.
It’s always kinda bugged me viscerally, but I think my reaction boils down to these:
- it was not clear to me what damage fire does – the normal damage for that unit so that big burly tanky units somehow have more damaging fire than weaker units? Or perhaps every unit’s fire damage is the same, since, you know, fire is not related to the size of someone’s sword. This was partly the fault of the aoe4 unit card being horribly vague. (have they improved the UI yet?)
along similar lines, if a swordsman can throw fire at a building, it makes no sense that he can’t also throw fire at anybody else. just kinda sits wrong in my brain
- I also prefer the simplicity of a unit attacking a building physically, even though it is silly to see someone swing a sword at a building. I just kinda like it.
Throwing fire at a building seems like a great mechanic to give to a specific anti-building unit, such as a Sapper or Fire Monkey (both in AoEO). that would be much cleaner. for the same reasons, we don’t give every unit a little battering ram, but the Sapper has one that he pulls out when he attacks a building (again, see AoEO).
1 Like
Yeah, hacking at a building with swords (or the like) is for me the epitome of just doing something because its been done before. The torches are both historically accurate (because that was how you razed buildings), and far more intuitive than chipping your sword on sedimentary rock.
More unique approaches would be welcomed, but the other way around imo. Give a unit giant two-handed hammers or something. A class of weapon (most likely bludgeoning) that’d make sense in terms of taking down a wall (or taking out siege, etc, whatever).
2 Likes
my brain just can’t process why these units would only be able to use fire against a building. it’s age of empires – units say wololo and swing swords at buildings. I rather enjoy the simplicity of it, and it leaves open the ability to add units who are better at this task than normal infantry/cav/ranged units.
agreed. in my little corner of the greater AoE world, we have these units already (in addition to Battering Rams and other siege weapons). Sappers are an underutilized unit in this franchise, and it’s really too bad because they were a huge component of actual, real life medieval warfare.
Everyone sieging a castle had dudes tunneling underneath and messing with the walls. They sure as heck weren’t breaking into a castle by having their swordsmen circle up and toss burning sticks at the wall haha
4 Likes
In AoE3 unit types do differing amounts of seige damage. For instance, a skirmisher does less damage than a pikeman who does less damage than a Doppelsöldner. This is all shown in the UI btw.
I do think it would be cool if AoEIV went the whole way and took that from AoE3 as well. I know AoEIV has a fire arrows tech.
Torch throwing is good but I understand why some folks might like the goofiness of poking away at castles with a spear.
3 Likes
I’d enjoy a unit whose identity was that they threw torches, too. Nothing wrong with the mechanic, I just don’t think it belongs as some kind of standard thing for any old unit.
2 Likes
Stone doesn’t burn bro.
So Castle burning never goes into my mind xD
And it looks stupid too.
It should only be allowed against wooden etc buildings.
Maces are used by the HRE and DElhi Ghazi Riders.
And they do have bonus damage against Heavy units.
1 Like
Yep!
I also prefer it.
Thanks to my old post about units throwing torches to sieges, the devs finally removed it.
Now units use their melee weapon to hit siege units.
Before, units where throwing torches and it was too annoying to see it xD
Stone doesn’t, but the building does. It’s why we still see arson in the modern age. When all’s that’s left is the stone, you no longer have a functional building.
If it’s even standing, with everything inbetween the stones has burned as well (especially in historical terms, where they didn’t have cement like we do now).
3 Likes
And stone easily gets damaged by swinging a sword against it right? 
Castles also used to have lots of wooden parts like roofs, so the burning does make at least SOME sense.
More than swinging weapons against the building imo.
As far as I understand the words castle and keep in the English language, a castle is a keep, surrounded by other structures, which could be houses as well.
Or the other way around.
So, I think from this point of view, throwing torches makes a lot of sense, are you are trying to set the unprotected wooden parts on fire.
Ultimately, most of these thoughts are actually nonsense, as you’d only take a keep down with heavy siege weapons and the devs (rightfully) tried to make troops at least somewhat useful for sieging.
If you look at it from a realistic point of view, they shouldn’t be able to do any damage to stone walls or stone-keeps with melee weapons, torches etc.
But then, regular military units would be powerless against such structures, which would become a gameplay-issue.
Sometimes you just have to sacrifice realism/logics in order to keep the gameplay in check.
Which is perfectly fine imo.
Coming back to topic:
I’d really love archers being forced into melee mode when attacked in close range as well.
Exactly like it was done in aoe3.
1 Like
Question: What would happen if your archer are engaged in melee (lets say by a horseman) but you select them and right click on a spearman that is not next to you. Would the archer start moving like a ####### toward the spearman? If so i think that would be a bad idea to add melee thing.
In aoe3 the archer would attack the enemy spearman (pikemen) in ranged mode then.
This feature there rewards good micro management.
Exactly as @TsudaTumiko said, it is not just “cosmetic” future. Ranged Units like archers are supposed to have strong missile attack and weak in close combat. This is balance.
Good Example is Age of Empires 2, where missile units and fast cavalry dominate the battlefield, and infantry is rarely used, and only by specific civilisations (Goths, Aztecs), because archers are too effective
For example mentioned Starcraft or Command & Conquer use “enviroment” with majority of ranged units, so it does not applied there.
Other “medieval” strategy games also use this mechanic - Total War, Kohan, Heroes of might and magic
The proper strategy game should not be solely based on rock-paper-scissors, but also on the unit roles
1 Like
right, I would make it