Game lacks of content? Suggestions

Age of Empires IV IV - Discussion
1

Hello friends,

I’d like to share with You my thoughts of the game so far and address some alterations that, at least in my opinion, would help AOE 4 to became a worthy successor of what is one of the oldest RTG series at all.

To start with, I’d like to say that I am an enthusiastic player since the very start of AOE I and was eager (as most of You) to see what the 4th. title has to offer.

Now, after playing about some 20 matches and having lvl ~20 I think I got a clue of the basic mechanics, thus can reliable value the content of the game.

The game itself seems to me to fit in its style the classic series genre, however we must note that as like amongst many other games, time is a variable that brings improvement changes to their contents throughout the years, just as computer become stronger and programs more complex. To be fair, AOE I and II reflected the technical possibilities of the 90s PCs and so did AOE III in 2005, all of this games had shown improvements in both - graphic and gameplay (content). Now after 16 years of progressing computing power you may expect an adequate huge impact on the next game’s reveal too but this is the point. The game absolutely lacks of this progression.

Let us assume that the developers wanted to keep this partially odd graphic textures (rather comical) for the series heritage sake and focus only on the gameplay - content. Thinking back in time, putting many infrastructures, units and behaviors was very demanding to pc’s and I believe that AOE I was just as good as the technical limitations allowed. Now in 2021 however the situation has dramatically changed giving developers mind blowing horizons of workspace that just isn’t exploited in AOE IV at all and I ask why that is?

The game feels tremendously like a rip off from AOE II with just improved graphics adopted to somewhere between 2005 and 2010 games.

I really feel the lack of improvements, the gameplay is flat, hell, even trivial and gets after the 10th match uncomfortably … boring. There are 4 ages that cover only some 10 units, with 3-4 upgrades each. All players tend to rush to age IV best skipping all before. You have still only 4 different resources that when mined (gathered) magically turn straight into food, weapons, armors and siege elements – does it has to be really that trivial?

Fortifications are way too useless, palisade walls “poofing” out of existence by sword or arrow hits and heavy stone walls or keeps falling apart after a few shots from a trebuchet…

The ability of stationing troops (archers favorable) on walls is only then useful, if they really can act in any way. As for now they just stand still and wait until the way overpowered siege from behind fog of war bombs them into heaven and what’s left gets raided over by cavalry. Keeps are useless as they don’t even have the farther sight to spot incoming troops with siege weapons and can’t withstand even 25 horse riders…

What I suggest is to detail out the gameplay and add especially following things to tailor this game for the coming years of 2020:

  • Add an intermediate step between the gathering of resources and the processing of them, e.g. when mining for steel or gold, let the blacksmith actually melt it and shape swords, spears etc. and have this as a separate “resource” that is then used by the actually barrack, stable etc. to arm the troops. This would immerse the gameplay, make it more complex and in my opinion – enjoyable.
  • Add more research and items to each age, process technologies and troops. Let every age get the feeling that it is an important playable part of the game and not always an obstacle to the play scene.
  • Make fortifications sturdier and add functionality for an actual usage of it. Let the keeps and towers spot enemies from a far distance – greater than any siege can shoot.
  • Remodel the attack attributes, do not let swords and arrows break keeps, walls or buildings. Incineration would be here appropriate (e.g. foot troops can lay fires to buildings and if they continue to burn for a given amount of time, the building destroys unless they get extinguished)

Those are things that I can think of at the moment that would help out the game to become more attractive and innovative and not a fail in reintroducing a majestic RTS series back to life. The stakes are too high!

For future projects I would have also a private suggestion for the devs to issue a solid beta-phase game that would be accessible for all players and work out the gameplay ideas together as it is eg. in the game Escape from Tarkov, where players put up their ideas and points of view and the makers actually respond with suitable patches. This way, both parties are happy!

Have a nice one mates,

Maczuga39

1 Like
2

What you want is another game. Those suggestions go way too deep into core mechanics of the game. Just go and play Stronghold and hope that they will release a new game as well at some point.

I’m also very confident that those changes would make the game worse for the majority of the players, but that’s another topic.

12 Likes
3

We are talking about mechanics dating back to 1997 that are still unchanged and may have been the main reason of the rather moderate popularity ever since it came out. I would’t be afraid of adapting the game mechanics to modern possibilities, thus by the way ensuring a new player base younger then <30 years to this date. Where would we be today if not the constant develeopment of things?
Again as I mentioned, an open player beta with developer assitance would be the best way to master this game.

Thanks for replying,

Maczuga39

4

It’s always nice to see the passion for games and more specifically Age of Empires and with that being said we also need to be careful for what we wish for as some changes might sound cool on paper but in reality won’t be good gameplay elements or really far from what an Age of Empires game is at It’s core.

We need also to understand the developers vision and then try add ideas surrounding that to not change the game they want to make too much. Just my quick thoughts.

Take care!

5

These are some cool changes and it would be great to apply then in rts games that could be based on age of empires, but not on the game itself.
This game right now is a hit, not because of big innovations or revolutionary mechanics, but because of the familiarity it brings and the fact the game feels just like the old games used to feel back in the day, and it feels like an aoe game.
I love that they respected the core gameplay of the franchise, while expanding on mechanics that were already there

6

You should go to play Stronghold Crusade.

7

play another game, AOE 4 not for you.

3 Likes
8

Hey mates,

I am pleased with your responses but it seems to me that you skip the merit of my deduction. I do not claim the whole game engine had to be reworked, no, but mainly only adjustments made to the existing parameters plus adding additional technology to the builds. Now I do understand that in your opinion the game is flawless and that is great but advising everyone else to shove up and move to another game is not the point of this forum.
Looking forward to valuable comments.

Keep in touch!

Maczuga39

9

This especially is what I meant and what I guess most replies refer to. This is not how this game is supposed to work. Yes, it is about history, but it’s also made for (at least somewhat) fast paced multiplayer games. It’s made to be easy to understand and hard to master. 4 different ressources is already the higher end of competitive RTS games and if you play it competitively you will realize that 4 ress require quite a lot when it comes to economy management (if you want to be be efficient and things like getting a 2nd town center 20 sec earlier matter).
We don’t want it more complicated (and slower). Yes, those different mechanics can also make a great game, but it’s mainly that: Different, but not better. Player numbers in AoE4 right now will likely go down after the hype is gone, but I still think they show that the current direction is not a bad idea. So let’s just continue that way.

Not that big of a deal as your first point, but again: A certain kind of simplicity in AoE4 is a cery nice and healthy thing. You could make a game with 50 technologies per Age and a lot more options, but I think AoE4 has a very healthy amount, you have options, it’s nice to play, but you can also remember everything and every technology has it’s place. If you have way more, it will either get hard to balacne or there will be a lot of useless technologies.
And I heavily disagree with your statement that Ages don’t already feel important to play - I think they did a great job with that and every Age has it’s place and purpose.

Again: Changes mechanics, goes against the fast paced competitive direction of the game and makes games way more about playing defensive. I don’t say that there are no people who would like a defensive games like that - but that’s not AoE4. AoE4 favors aggressive play for map control, raiding the enemy etc. Playing defensive is possible (which is good), but not easy (which is good in the eyes of many players as well). Your suggestion is not better, but only different - and in the eyes of many players (myself included) probably even worse.

I don’t even know what you mean. Units use torches vs buildings and can’t attack stone walls. Arrows can attack keeps, but deal basically no damage.
But even if it was different: The same theme - players like the option for aggressive play and not needing a lot of setup to push an opponents base. I think AoE4 has found a very healthy way fo needing siege weapons for attacking fortified bases, but making them accessible, but giving also the option to destory normal buildings quite fast with regular units.

Not changes to the engine, but changes to the core game machnics, which you hopefully can understand better after my longer response.

It’s not at all flawless. It needs a lot of things.
Ranked mode
Mod support
Scenario editior
Better UI
Improved balance (hard to tell at this point, but very likely, especially for water)
and a lot more

But changes how the game works and is played in general, is surely not one of the things that need to be changed.

1 Like
10

I understand that there are always that die hard players that will buy, play and fanaticly defend no matter how good or bad or how expensive a game from their beloved franchise might be but I will not believe that those are in the majority! It’s furthermore the same player base moving just from one title to another. The mechanics we see right now have been present in many rts games that are more dead than alive. Even those games that seemed to be at their first reveals complex have been simplified over the next series (like Empire Earth from I to III or Supreme Commander that cut over half content from part I to II). What was the outcome of that? They are DEAD. Surely after expiring of the 1$ the X-Box passes we might see a constant drop in player numbers but that hasn’t have to be. I think we all want this game to be a great success ever after we have been waiting all those years for it to come but I personally, and I believe many many more, just do not see at the moment this game as a success in the game series but rather more a coarsely attempt to rip off our money for nothing more than a good name and merchandise. No price of any AOE has been that high. This situation strangely reminds me of a world wide respective company placed in Cupertino that pulls this same kind of airy promises and still, …everybody buys it, lol.

To state my last thought I will repeat again, I do not accept visions of developers that build that game without far reaching consent of the existing player base. I often read on this forum how MANY of us were disappointed during the open beta or stress test because merely a thing from the community got implemented. That is just not the way it should go.

None the less I wish all best to Age Of Empires.

Take care friends!

Maczuga39

11

Bye! We dont need you.

Seeya :smiley:

12

not going to trolling like above, but if you turtle until Imperial Age before fighting anyone, you are asking for a big blob of cannons blasting you back to Stone Age.

It is just not the way you suppose to play this game.

The medieval fortification defence did nothing to Gunpowder technology, just like our history.

13

i mean… thats age of empires. you cant just make an age of empires game and say : Well now you got wood , transform it into a sword , and spend 30 minutes making a sword , that is boring.

14

You want to transform a RTS into a city builder.

1 Like
15

Mates, you are hillarious but I really don’t get your points. We’re literally talking at cross purposes. Adding another one or two buttons to the blacksmith interface as well as the library etc. doesn’t affect the game core at all. Even putting another building like an armory where you would store your weapons is also not big game changer. Noone was talking about producing one sword half an hour, but just adding this intermediate step for filling the logical gaps of this 1997 game mechanics. Adjusting the hit counts of walls buildings to withstand more damage or expand the sight of keeps (castles) is also a simple override of the existinig parameters. Adding more diversed troops at the barracks also doesn’t turn the game into a “city builder”. All those changes I talk about are subtle and cooperate fully with the gameplay.
Please don’t act like people of old age that feel freightened of even the slightlest change to their daily habits. This game has so much more potential then what now is offered and please don’t deny it, the developers have been really cheap so far by delaying the game over and over without any obvious reasons and smashing at the end that absurd price at Steam.

Maczuga39

17

That is a interesting thought. Altough I am afraid that rushing the devs that early into issuing new civilizations (expectingly as extra paid dlc’s) would disadvantage the patching of present problems because they would focus too much on it ( and the incoming $$$). If I remember right, Heroes of Might and Magic V and later delt with this kind of problem, where the basic stuff wasn’t solved at all but the devs kept adding dlc’s altough the game was barely playable.
The match making options will probably patched very soon as I don’t think they degenerated (in relation the previous titles) this game on purpose but of … lack of time? :rofl:

Keep it up,

Maczuga39

18

I actually really like the idea of resource refining. In a competitive standpoint it would probably be seen as an annoying extra step, but as more of a casual player I’d love it.

I wouldn’t say it’d be a game changer or a must have, but it’d be really interesting.