Yes, indeed this game is terrible. Released years later with great graphics and voice acting, AOE4 is unfortunately a disappointment. When you look at it today, even the streams of the world’s best players are watched by only 300–400 people. Not only that, even high-prize tournaments fail to get more than 500 viewers. What makes a game a game is not its graphics, but its gameplay. Playing this game has become almost impossible due to certain issues, such as the unique traits possessed by only a few civilizations, the unevenly distributed military unit variety, civilizations that can build keeps as early as the 2nd Age (not just in 2, but in every age), the ability to produce Men-at-Arms in the very first and second ages while being able to counter the military combinations of all other civilizations, and the untouchable horse archers of the Mongols. This is a game of guys who pull off a Man-at-Arms rush in the 1st Age, or show up at your base in the 7–8 minute mark before you’ve even managed to gather 10 military units, drop the White Tower right next to your Town Center, and spam rams—or people who pick Romans and try a Burgrave rush.
It’s not just casual players anymore; this disgrace has reached the pro level. Even in tournaments right in front of viewers, we see players acting like children by going to their opponent’s base, building a few walls, supporting them with a tower, and leaving the opponent helpless.
The reason AOE2 is so beloved is that in the 2nd Age, all civilizations have the same type of units, they can’t throw up ridiculous keeps right in the 2nd minute, and fairness is at a very acceptable level. Say what you will… there is no such thing as professionalism in a game where you can reach the Conqueror rank by doing a Burgrave rush. If the player executing this follows all the steps correctly, it is a completely unpreventable tactic.
The developers of this game care so much about realism. Every civilization’s language changes and modernizes as they age up, etc., etc. Since you cared about realism so much, why do you deprive almost all civilizations of the “sword”—a weapon they’ve had since the Iron Age—as if they never invented it? Please don’t lecture me with tactics like “just go fast castle and spam crossbows.” Excuse me, but the value you get from a swordsman is 10 times higher than the value you get from a crossbowman. You need almost a minimum of 5 crossbowmen to kill a single swordsman, not to mention the world of APM and kiting required on top of that. If you can produce units 400% faster from a ridiculous landmark like the Burgrave Palace, then this game loses its meaning. And don’t come at me with things like having to chase down Mongol horse archers that move faster than (correct me if I’m wrong) all other cavalry units in the game.
Lancaster—yes, their units are supposedly weak, but in the current meta, there is not a single civilization that can handle a 2-TC Lancaster. You are forced to watch the opponent comfortably hang out in your base with a combination of a Lancaster castle + White Tower between 2 TCs. This is unfair.
If you like playing Delhi, you also have to wait 5 days for an upgrade. Meanwhile, look at Tughlaq, where upgrades happen instantly for a fee. In short, Microsoft should immediately fire whoever brought the ability to build keeps and their derivatives in the 2nd Age to this game. They did such a terrible job that shortly after the game was released, the entire player base went back to AOE2.
I am not a professional. I can say that I’ve climbed up to Diamond I. I never resorted to such cheese tactics to reach these ranks. But I am tired of going fast castle or getting holed up in my base all day against people who use these tactics. Honestly, I’m sure the player count will drop significantly soon. I protest the ability to dominate the game by giving Christian civilizations extreme advantages. Giving all civilizations that once ruled the world equal units up to the 3rd Age would have made this game much more playable.
Many players have quit this game simply because of the absurd cavalry of the Franks. Unnecessary. Unstoppable? It can be stopped. But it is absurd for a guy with an IQ of 35 to start with an advantage against someone playing their heart out. If there is a civilization that forces you to produce a specific unit, your opponent is in control. The Guild Hall landmark, for instance. Waiting 5 minutes and pocketing 1k food all at once is genuinely bizarre. While these can somehow be overcome, as long as there are civilizations in this game that can’t produce Men-at-Arms and build keeps in the 2nd and 3rd Ages, the player count will continue to shrink. Considering the wood and stone I need to gather for a 2nd TC, and the villagers required to harvest those resources, having a civilization that can build a TC as a landmark is also a turn-off. Fairness is very important. No one will tolerate certain civilizations being favored this much. Shame on you if you made people wait years for this just to play a new game like this.
I’m sure many players have complained about these issues and abandoned this game. Excuse me, but if you can reach Conq 3 with cheese tactics learned from a few YouTube videos, there is no point in being here. It’s nothing more than a waste of money. There is nothing to recommend about it.
As for those who say, “These tactics have solutions”—just because a solution exists doesn’t mean it can always be pulled off. I guarantee that in any match between two players of equal Elo, these can easily be executed. These absurdities have now moved out of casual matches and into high-prize tournaments. I am finally quitting this game, which gets worse with every new civilization added. Hello again, AOE2.
Especially when there are still countless bugs, balance issues, and other things that actually need attention.
I wouldn’t surprise either
