I Really Hope This Game Replaces AOE2: It's Just Better

[KG19991380]

@GorbMort

What you seem to want is the Bang engine with the original team who made and maintained it. Only this way can you get the engine you think is best, with the team that has the firsthand knowledge of how it works. Which is kind of a holy grail in games development. And obviously not realistic at this point in time.

true, but to analyze implications of this statement, isn’t relic the case of dev team with inhouse engine (essence) they have firsthand knowledge of how it works, so they shouldn’t have trouble adapting it to make the game run properly with less input lag, or yk, reasonable zoom options

[TheRaff0]

@MadMax8915

I can’t believe this new engine is so bad or unstable.

well, to be fair I a little bit lied.
I do not know, will simple maps be ded or not.

but more complex maps surely crashed cause last DLC.

and on top of that, they are private, so you can not dig up the problem, only recreate from scratch or find original owner.
It’s complicated… but yes, just wanted to highlight this again.

[GorbMort]

@KG19991380

thing is bang has been, as andy points out, and this applies to genie as well, purpose made for aoe games and RTS of this kind first, hence why this kind of game has such great synergy with them, its well known essence wasn’t designed from the ground up for this specific kind of RTS game, i still think relic did well with adapting but quirks that make it feel off are likely not smt that can be harmlessly changed

@KG19991380

true, but to analyze implications of this statement, isn’t relic the case of dev team with inhouse engine (essence) they have firsthand knowledge of how it works, so they shouldn’t have trouble adapting it to make the game run properly with less input lag, or yk, reasonable zoom options

Andy and I were talking about mechanics. I already said the main things I think gave Relic the most trouble.

Engine work is difficult. It’s one of the most specialised (and well paid) gamesdev disciplines. Even with knowhow, it’s difficult. It’s not a straight path.

Bang was made for Age III (and Mythology). Do you see the issues in Definitive? Why do you assume that just because there’s a team and the right engine that magical things can happen?

We’d need another thread to talk about engine implications, this and that. All I’m trying to point out is that the right engine with the right team is a rare combo. Institutional knowledge is hard to preserve in a fast-moving industry (which is, again, why I talked about Definitive).

@KG19991380

if only the editor was actually usable for an average person, not just someone with phd in computer science

Plenty of tutorials out there for folks who want to do stuff with it

If folks don’t want to, there’s nothing wrong with that at all. But I do wish this “needs a phd” thing came from actual interest. Sorry for being blunt, but I am very tired of the line, whoever says it hah.

[TheRaff0]

@GorbMort

Plenty of tutorials out there for folks who want to do stuff with it

go help to create world map. If it’s usable. LOL
these kind maps:

@MadMax8915

Real World style

do not want? ** surprised **
same as others do not want to spend time on shitty editor.

@GorbMort

I am very tired of the line, whoever says it hah

we are very tried of you defending shitty editor.

we just ask some tool easy to use. So we as non-phd can use in 5 minutes and create a map.
but someone knows better how we need to spend our time.
create a map and support it forever, cause new update very likely to break it.

No thx. give US aoe2’s style editor without tutorials.

---

the problem, you defending a product which people do not want to use (for whatever reason).
From you defending there wont magically apear new content.
But with a better version of editor → there is chance(!) for new content.
But you blocking it, saying to devs “it’s fine”
the guilt of aoe4 failure on you.
easy

[FloosWorld]

@GorbMort

@KG19991380

if only the editor was actually usable for an average person, not just someone with phd in computer science

Plenty of tutorials out there for folks who want to do stuff with it

If folks don’t want to, there’s nothing wrong with that at all. But I do wish this “needs a phd” thing came from actual interest. Sorry for being blunt, but I am very tired of the line, whoever says it hah.

I mean “phd” is obviously exaggerated but KG has a point.
The big strengh of the ingame editors from AoE 2 and 3 is that you immediately understand where certain stuff is and what to do with it - triggers for scenarios obviously need some time to get into but the basic terrain editing and unit/building placing works out of the box for the average user:

[Thomas2Tommy]

ignore UGC for now. when aoe4 launch it was not in a good enough state feature-wise and i never play it again and stopped watching it too. it did make a good impression on me still. but one thing i noticed that can never be fixed was on my 1080p monitor i couldn’t see much of the map. it seems unfair to compare it to isometric RTS such as aoe1 and aoe2 but thats what i did at the time.

I will come back to it this year since i am bored of aoe2, but at launch aoe4 you couldn’t even pick color. it felt very incomplete. its been few years, so devs should have finished the game by now

[GorbMort]

@TheRaff0

we just ask some tool easy to use.

That would be, in your words, “shitty”.

@FloosWorld

I mean “phd” is obviously exaggerated but KG has a point.
The big strengh of the ingame editors from AoE 2 and 3 is that you immediately understand where certain stuff is and what to do with it - triggers for scenarios obviously need some time to get into but the basic terrain editing and unit/building placing works out of the box for the average user:

The biggest strength of those games is that they’re 18+ years old.

18 years ago, I was modding Relic games in Notepad. The strength of the editor, as we’re discussing it, is the result of time. The complexity of games likewise.

Like I said. If people were actually interested, I would literally volunteer my time to help. But it’s used as a stick to both bash the tools and the devs, and I don’t really have time for it anymore.

We can give people who want the old Scenario Editor that kind of custom map / game mode, if modding were opened up like myself and other modders want. I don’t want an 18 year old tool with a new lick of paint.

If people want to say what the devs should’ve done during development? Cool, agree to disagree. If people talk about the complexity of tools I never see them reach out and try? Yeah, nah. We’re 18 months past release. I don’t want people telling the devs (in effect) to develop something new and ignore what we already have.

[TheRaff0]

@GorbMort

We’re 18 months past release

you just blind to the numbers\metrics…

18 months nothing changes.

why you do not send people to learn C++ to build their own tools if they want real world map. C++ great, can be used to build binary mod for aoe4.

or why people ask for new hotkeys?
Devs gave them MOUSE… are players dumb? are they can not just use EXCITING tools (mouse)?

and to add more, they already did a paint-like tools.
just fix\improve:

1. make deploy by one button.
2. fix “restart” issue
3. improve density of points (for paint like tool)
4. add paint-like tool into the game(with one button deploy)

it’s a minimum to drastically improve number of map-moders.
amd drastically improve QoL for others.

Having to launch the game each time to see code changes is very time consuming

it’s description from AoE4 Generated Map Debugger on github.
Sorry, but i think this should be fixed.
build a button in editor to run game headlessly. and check if run successful. Do smth, but stop bullshitting with:

@GorbMort

I don’t want people telling the devs

---

as they dropped “editor” (which probably were written in the contract). they dropped it 6 months late, and did nothing further.
If you still do not see any problem - you are blind.

[GorbMort]

@TheRaff0

• make deploy by one button.
• fix “restart” issue
• improve density of points (for paint like tool)
• add paint-like tool into the game(with one button deploy)

There are plenty of things the devs could investigate to improve the current tools. Nobody has to know C++ for anything though (and you can’t make “binary mods” for AoE IV in C++).

Anyhow, none of this is “make a Scenario Editor for AoE IV”. That’s what you were talking about originally. Now you’re saying “improve the tools we already have”.

I agree the devs should improve the tools we have. I keep on saying that they should. But I don’t want a Scenario Editor. That’d be a completely new tool. That’s not improving what we already have.

@TheRaff0

build a button in editor to run game headlessly. and check if run successful

Do you even have any idea what the words you’re using here mean?

[MatM1996]

@TwerDefender

i think one big downside of aoe4 is that there is very little single player content. there are only a few campaigns and they feel very bland compared to aoe2. i know many players who got into aoe2 via the campaigns, they won’t switch to aoe4 because there simply isn’t anything drawing them to it

@FloosWorld

Yep, SP content in shape of campaigns definitely is important. I hope one of the next major updates brings 1-2 new campaigns

I agree…at least they put campaigns for the 4 remaining civs (Abbasids, Delhi, Ottomans and Malians)…or even a section of historical battles…

Abbasids campaign (750-838):

1. Abbasid Revolution (750) (Abbasids vs Abbasids)

2. Battle of Talas (751) (Abbasids vs Chinese)

3. Battle of Bakhamra (762) (Abbasids vs Abbasids)

4. Invasion of Asia Minor (782) (Abbasids vs Byzantines)

5. Battle of Krassos (804) (Abbasids vs Byzantines)

6. Invasion of Asia Minor (806) (Abbasids vs Byzantines)

7. Siege of Baghdad (813) (Abbasids vs Abbasids)

8. Sack of Amorium (838) (Abbasids vs Byzantines)

Delhi campaign (1205-1306):

1. The Khokhar rebels (1205) (Delhi vs Delhi)

2. Dethroning Aram Shah (1211) (Delhi vs Delhi)

3. Restoring authority in Rajasthan (1226) (Delhi vs Delhi)

4. Invading the Indus (1228) (Delhi vs Delhi)

5. The Battle of Jaran (1297) (Delhi vs Mongols)

6. The Siege of Sehwan (1298) (Delhi vs Mongols)

7. The Siege of Delhi (1303) (Delhi vs Mongols)

8. The Battle of Amroha (1305) (Delhi vs Mongols)

9. The Battle of Ravi (1306) (Delhi vs Mongols)

Ottoman campaign (1302-1526)

1. The Battle of Bapheus (1302) (Ottomans vs Byzantines)

2. The Capture of Bursa (1326) (Ottomans vs Byzantines)

3. The Sack of Thessaloniki (1387) (Ottomans vs Byzantines)

4. The Battle of Kosovo (1389) (Ottomans vs Byzantines and HRE)

5. The Batlle of Nicopolis (1396) (Ottomans vs Byzantines and HRE)

6. The Battle of Varna (1444) (Ottomans vs HRE)

7. The Conquest of Constantinople (1453) (Ottomans vs Byzantines)

8. The Battle of Chaldiran (1514) (Ottomans vs Persians -Abbasids-)

9. The Battle of Mohács (1526) (Ottomans vs HRE)

Malian campiagn (1235-1497):

1. The Battle of Kirina (1235) (Malians vs Malians)

2. The Conquest of Takrur (1285) (Malians vs Malians)

3. The Conquest of Gao (1296) (Malians vs Malians)

4. Voyage to Atlantic Ocean (1312) (Malian economic mission)

5. Hajj to Mecca (1324) (Malian version of The Holy Man)

6. The Conquest of Timbuktu and Taghazza (1337) (Malians vs Malians)

7. The Conquest of Djenné (1475) (Songhai -Malians- vs Malians)

8. Hajj of Askia the Great (1497) (Songhai version of The Holy Man)

@GorbMort

But how are they boring for you? Honest question. How would you spice them up?

They are very repetitive (really 3 siege missions in a row in the English campaign?)…the French campaign is a roller coaster (some were good, others like Orleans not so much…I remember it frustrated me so much that it made me quit the game for a month), the Mongolian campaign was good (but they missed the opportunity to put a mission against the Abbasids) and the Rus quite acceptable (simply because there is no other Slavic campaign in the saga, except Dracula and because it connects with AoE 3) …also they are quite limited in factions and very scripted…They would have to put more campaigns and historical battles…

@FloosWorld

Not Twer, but I’m also not that much of a fan of AoE 4’s campaigns. They feel like a modern reimagination of the style from AoE 1 to me with the narrator telling what’s exactly happening. In my opinion, the campaigns of AoE 2 that have a narrower focus with heroes who actually talk or AoE 3 that tells a story spanning several acts feels a bit more engaging even tho the latter is pure historic fiction.

Sure, although the campaigns of the AoE 3 expansions are not historical fiction…

@TwerDefender

basically in all the scenarios i played in there was only one opponent, iirc there was no voice acting except for voice-over lady, they seemed very simplistic with each scenario only having a single way to win.
compare this to aoe2, where you are usually faced with several other factions. depending on the scenario you can usually ally some of them, and victory conditions are varied. many scenarios have even several different ways of completion (eg defeat all opponent or build a wonder). loads of complex triggers, like bringing a hero unit to a certain spot to gain trust, delivering a relic etc
and usually the main characters are fully voiced, it feels way more like an RPG than a documentary.
so basically in aoe2: you are usually playing the story of one person/family there is a narrative going through it and usually the scenarios reflect your current position quite well (eg you can only advance to the castle age while you are playing as a rebel faction, but in the next mission where you are king you can also go to imp)
in aoe3: you are playing the story of the black family. it’s a very personal story
in aoe4: you are some ####### who gets to watch a history documentary
I think this was the intention of those campaigns, and there are probably people who this really appeals to. But i prefer being able to make my own choices in a game

I think ornlu did a great video on the aoe4 campaigns. He brings up some really interesting points as well.

To make the aoe4 campaigns better for me: get rid of the ‘history channel’ voice over and modern videos inbetween, as pretty and high-production value as they might be, they totally break immersion for me. I want to think I am leading an army, not be constantly reminded that I am playing a video game.
Similarly most of the missions are too simplistic, it’s just build a base then wipe the enemy off the map. So anything to break this monotony would be appreciated.

I agree with everything…I call it Age of History Channel 4 for a reason xd…

@ArrivedLeader22

In short:

1. Smaller map and fewer factions to interact with.
2. Maps are pretty restricted. In some scenarios the majority of the map is inaccessible. Exploring the map is not very rewarding.
3. The missions are linear. It’s like someone is “guiding” you through a pre-determined path. Most of the time it’s defend this or attack this. Biggest flexibilities are limited to allying/attacking one of three villages by your choice.

But AOM and AOE3 at least have a clear fictional storyline that stands out. With the documentary style of AOE4 it becomes less impressive. There is little I remember after finishing it.

Narrative is not the main problem imo. Each AOE gane has a different scope and a storytelling style. It’s more on scenario designs. For example AOE1 is closer to AOE4 (no main character or story, jumping from one event to another). But there are scenarios like Rise of Rome 1 where it depicts the entire 500BC central Italy with 5 or 6 different factions. You can find many ways to win. There was no good trigger or objective design in AOE1 due to technical limitations, but the scope itself grants great flexibility already. If it is done in AOE4’s way you’ll have maybe 4 smaller battles facing one enemy (with one base) in each one.

Or a more direct comparison: AOE2 Genghis Khan campaign has unification of the tribes and invading China as two huge scenarios. You can have many ways to win. Your opponents all have different objectives. In AOE4 these are again broken down to a series of smaller scenarios.

I was thinking AOE4 could actually utilize its documentary narratives to make even grander scenarios. But they end up being more linear than AOE3 and AOM.

I couldn’t have said it better…

@GorbMort

I like games that have attempted a “meta” game to the campaign, where you can get benefits that persist between missions.

Well AoE 3 and AoE Online have something similar… in AoE 3 if you explore the maps and do the side quests together, you can gather a lot of experience to unlock cards so you can use them in the next missions… and in the case of AoEO you can explore the maps to recover the treasures that you can use in that mission or in the following ones…

@GorbMort

I did the Battle of Hastings like four times at school, hah. So it’s easy enough for me to remember. The thing I like about the campaigns (which I don’t expect people to agree with) is it really brings the UI design forwards with the gold and the outlines and stuff. I know this is something that is often talked about (not always positively!) but for me, it’s a plus.

The same,the battle of Hastings from AoE 2 feels more epic…and about the UI neither fu nor fa… I don’t care…

@GorbMort

Would you like a fictional storyline in Age IV? Something ahistorical like (just for a simple example) getting Harold to win at Hastings, and a “what if” kind of following scenario?

Well it could be like the what if missions of EE2; the Aztecs defeating the Spanish and reaching the Second World war against the Incas, a different Korean unification or the Germans winning in Normandy…

@ArrivedLeader22

you can’t have a character experiencing 100 years of events.

Morgan Black: Oh yes, no? xd…

@TwerDefender

viking scenario (battle of york? i forgot the name): you play on a gigantic map and need with 7 other factions. you can win by beating 5 of those factions, collecting 10 000 gold or by building a wonder iirc. it’s a huge and complex scenario

Yes, it’s York…

@TwerDefender

one of the bari mission: sneak into the enemy camp at night and weaken the enemy army, afterwards beat them in the field

It is the one from the Siege of Vilnus in the Polish campaign…by day you defend the city from the Teutonic attack and by night you attack the Teutonic camps…

@FloosWorld

they betray you (The Triple Alliance in Montezuma or Henry the Lion in Barbarossa)

Or Toktamish in Tamerlan 3 or Herat in Babur 3…a classic from AoE 2…

@Franknezu11

also remenber that aoe4 used to look diferently and at some point it neede to restart and done again from scratch or relic engine one.so the production time took at least 6 years

@Franknezu11

it was an old pic that was published on a website a few weeks before aoe 4 release. it was an pic of an 3d asset of an building (ruins of it?) on an green plain. It claimed that this one was supposed to be around 2014 or something. unfortunately the pic got lost with the actual aoe 4 news. regardless the veracity of it, it can may shown a reason why it was rushed in the best case.

Yes, it’s in the aoe 4 art book with a super defined knight…

@AndyPXIII

Sounds like a false, speculative rumor. To my knowledge, the closest there was to aoe4 was AoEO, which had originally been developed in mind to be AoE4 before they very early on pivoted. That would have been like 2009 or so — after AoE3:TAD.

That’s true…for me the real AoE 4 is AoEO or an AOE in the 20th century…

[FloosWorld]

@GorbMort

The biggest strength of those games is that they’re 18+ years old.

The age of those games doesn’t have anything to do with it.
It fine that 4’s editor is in theory (and I guess in practice) more powerful than the ones used by the old Age games but if it is too complicated for the average user, it kills the motivation to bother with it more, if you haven’t already worked with an editor of this kind in the past, despite tutorials being available.

[GorbMort]

@FloosWorld

The age of those games doesn’t have anything to do with it.
It fine that 4’s editor is in theory (and I guess in practice) more powerful than the ones used by the old Age games but if it is too complicated for the average user, it kills the motivation to bother with it more, if you haven’t already worked with an editor of this kind in the past, despite tutorials being available.

The age matters a lot. There’s a reason I talked about modding in Notepad eighteen years ago.

I keep repeating myself, but if you think the devs should’ve gone another route during development, that’s fine. I disagree, but it’s fine.

I’m arguing about the here and how. In my opinion, the best thing for any potential modder now is for the current tools to be built on and expanded. Because the folks who have the expertise can thenbuild the playgrounds for people who just want a playground.

For people who actually want to build mods, we have the tools. Yes, the barrier to entry is more than it was nearly two decades ago. That’s inescapable. It happens to every franchise. It happened when games moved from 2D to 3D (and modern games with 2D or “2.5D” art have more complicated pipelines than traditional 2D / sprite-based games).

I get you saying “it’s too complicated”. But likewise, a tool dumbed down to the extent it functions similarly to the Scenario Editor of old would be so restrictive it would also hold the modding scene back.

In my opinion, it’s better to have that potential, because a modding community can make things that are simpler. It’s a lot harder to make something complex if the environment is inherently limited / simplistic.

[FloosWorld]

@GorbMort

Yes, the barrier to entry is more than it was nearly two decades ago. That’s inescapable. It happens to every franchise. It happened when games moved from 2D to 3D

But why do “old” 3D-based games such as Empire Earth 1, Age of Mythology and Age of Empires 3 manage to have an editor that’s way easier to get into than AoE 4? Bang was/is more complex than Genie as it’s 3D, yet the editor still feels accesible and still very powerful.

@GorbMort

I get you saying “it’s too complicated”. But likewise, a tool dumbed down to the extent it functions similarly to the Scenario Editor of old would be so restrictive it would also hold the modding scene back.

It might be restrictive at first but it would actually engage people to get involved in modding and creating custom scenarios/campaigns/game modes.There’s a reason why people say they wish the editor was more accesible.
If the devs found a way to make an “easy” mode for the average user to use that still has about the same level of depth as the normal editor, 4’s modding scene would be much bigger than it is.

[GorbMort]

@FloosWorld

But why do “old” 3D-based games such as Empire Earth 1, Age of Mythology and Age of Empires 3 manage to have an editor that’s way easier to get into than AoE 4? Bang was/is more complex than Genie as it’s 3D, yet the editor still feels accesible and still very powerful.

Because it’s been 15 to 20 years. What kinds of games came out for the PC between 1985 and 1990? Or even earlier, if we go 15 years before the original AoE? Games in the early 80s looked very different to AoE I.

It’s common to assume the biggest tech leaps came in the “old days” but the reality is that’s just when they were the most visible.

Back in the Genie and Bang era, and similar to Warcraft 3 around the same time, driving things with “triggers” was a very common model. Nowadays things are modelled (in terms of the simulation) in a much more complicated manner. I could go into more detail if you’d like.

(relatedly, its the same reason why despite DotA being so big, its creators eventually moved onto new, custom engines to build the successor games)

@FloosWorld

It might be restrictive at first but it would actually engage people to get involved in modding and creating custom scenarios/campaigns/game modes.There’s a reason why people say they wish the editor was more accesible.

I’m saying it would remain restrictive. I’m saying the number of assumptions that would be required to simplify the flow would make complicated things difficult if not impossible to do.

@FloosWorld

If the devs found a way to make an “easy” mode for the average user to use that still has about the same level of depth as the normal editor

But this is what I’m saying. You can’t have “easy” and “depth”.

Let’s imagine a world where the devs took the effort to, instead of providing the tools they did, built a new Scenario Editor. Now, the concept of “triggers” don’t exist, so they’d have to be created. So you’d need a compatibility layer between the game code, and these simple / easy to use “triggers” that abstract game behaviour into a single click.

So they’d have to maintain both. The game code that we modders currently have access to (because that’s what the devs use to make changes themselves), and this new trigger layer.

This is doable! I’m not saying they couldn’t make this. I’m saying it would be its own custom thing that has more limits than even the current tools do. Because game engines don’t work like they used to.

And I haven’t even gotten onto map creation yet. This post is long enough as it is There are things here you can’t really “abstract” (though programmatically the devs have tried their best even though it’s “complex”). They even gave us a “paint your own map” style of map creation. But it’s not the Scenario Editor, so people just assume it’s not worth the effort.

Contrary to what some posters assume, this is something I’ve given a lot of thought. I’ve literally written tools (for DoW III) to make modding easier / more possible / etc. Making things more accessible, sharing knowledge, these are big things I’m into generally.

The problem we have is twofold. One is that the current tools already exist, and would really benefit from attention from the devs. The other is a very understandable lack of understanding about how things were vs. how things are, technically. This is why I keep saying “it’s been 18 years”. Engines don’t work like they used to. They can’t. Stuff like multithreading, multicore architectures, changes to graphics hardware, changes to pipelines (e.g. how to get a single texture rendered ingame), and so on. I could keep going. I don’t expect folks to know or care about this stuff, though.

---

I understand the frustration from folks arguing in good faith (and as tired as I am of the “needs a phd” thing, it often comes from genuine frustration). All I can say is that the technical complexity in the game is real, and exists for valid reasons (in my opinion). And this makes it difficult to make things more accesible to modders who don’t mesh with the current tools.

[SubotaiMGL]

@Thomas2Tommy

I will come back to it this year since i am bored of aoe2, but at launch aoe4 you couldn’t even pick color. it felt very incomplete. its been few years, so devs should have finished the game by now

Nah, it is still lackluster, well you can finally pick the colors, but meh, the game does not offer anything.

[TheRaff0]

@GorbMort

Anyhow, none of this is “make a Scenario Editor for AoE IV”. That’s what you were talking about originally. Now you’re saying “improve the tools we already have”.

there are the maximum of wishlist and the minimum of wishlist.
“what and how to do” - devs will be decide. For now the only task is highlight, that there are problem.
But thx. to you they think everything is perfect.

@GorbMort

Do you even have any idea what the words you’re using here mean?

i do

ChatGPT understands me, the problem in you

Create a button within the editor that enables running the game in headless mode, and subsequently verify whether the execution was successful.

on top of that, why some third party had to build “AoE4 Generated Map Debugger”. Why devs did not make same verification in the first place?

[GorbMort]

@TheRaff0

But thx. to you they think everything is perfect.

Nah. But I’m used to folks deliberately misinterpreting me, so don’t worry about it.

@TheRaff0

i do

ChatGPT understands me, the problem in you

Hahaha, now your post makes a lot more sense.

You didn’t even write it yourself. No wonder you came out with nonsense about C++

@TheRaff0

on top of that, why some third party had to build “AoE4 Generated Map Debugger”. Why devs did not make same verification in the first place?

The devs did. It’s in the game. The game validates this stuff. The custom Map Debugger was made by a (talented) modder who didn’t like restarting the game every time.

Another example of you not knowing what you’re talking about. I eagerly await your next ChatGPT-generated answer!

[TheRaff0]

@GorbMort

You didn’t even write it yourself

no you try to go personally.
If you did not understand the phrase:
<<Create a button within the editor that enables running the game in headless mode, and subsequently verify whether the execution was successful>>

you do not know the meaning of world “headless”? or verification? button? or what?

[GorbMort]

I understand perfectly what headless means. I’m telling you you can’t apply a random word to a piece of software and expect it to make sense.

Tell me, what is headless mode in AoE IV? How is it authenticated? What are the endpoints?

Or do you assume that all software is automatically headless?

[CarryoutData60]

AoEO’s the best game in the series and I can bet half of you don’t even know what that is, followed by AoE3 but it’s too hard for you to build a good deck for your fav civs that works in every matchup… Too busy having a pissing contest about the 2 crap but popular titles lol