1. The map consists of four unique zones that players can actively choose:
-
Narrow Mountain Area: Serves as a barrier for defensive/economic-focused players.
-
Grassland Area Rich in Deer: For nomadic players; after gathering resources, you must relocate, truly leveraging the Mongol advantage.
-
Tropical Rainforest Area: Suitable for large-scale infantry engagements.
-
Desert Area: Rich in gold mines and berries, with only one forest.
2. Gameplay Change: Victory is achieved simply by destroying all four players’ Age I Landmarks.
3. There is only one Sacred Site, located at the center of the map, which is also a river region.
If designed this way, would new players adapt more quickly because there’s only one map?
1 Like
Worst idea ever
This is an RTS not a MOBA game
If you want to play a MOBA game then play LOL or DOTA!
1 Like
This is the worst take. It completely misses my point. Different players have different preferences. The idea is to have all these terrains appear simultaneously on one map, catering to all playstyles. There are deeper implications here that I won’t elaborate on.
If you want team matches to be more understandable and competitive, a good 3v3/4v4 map in AoE4 should reduce chaos by limiting fronts and paths, prioritizing a few clear lanes and a center with real strategic weight (a couple of sacred sites, some relics and resources…), with a neutral market in a position of greater conflict, some points of interest on the map, and establishing a clear hierarchy of resources and objectives. This way, the map can suggest certain roles by zone, concentrate the action in more recognizable points, and allow both players and spectators to quickly and better understand where the game is decided and why, transforming many simultaneous actions into a clear and easy-to-follow spatial narrative. Not to mention that the caster mode needs to be further refined in this mode.
It is not necessary to change a genre, but rather to take the best while maintaining the identity of an RTS.
I would say that it would even solve the cavalry problem.
It’s difficult, but I wouldn’t rule it out as a separate mode…
Perhaps they could incorporate it as some kind of “Game Mode,” like the ones available between seasons.
They tried it with Giant Wolf Attack, the Three Kings’ Day Gift mode, and Chart a Course, which ultimately allowed for mechanics that would later be used in Crucible (Bandit Attacks, resource packs, Choosing Bonuses).
That said, as far as I remember, the original MOBA, “DOTA,” was a custom Warcraft III map made by a fan, using heroes or flashy characters from the campaign and scenario editor.
In our case, there aren’t enough heroes or campaigns. The editor doesn’t allow for customizing unit textures, so there’s little we can edit to create a hero for each civilization.
To answer the question in the OP:
Single map type would be easier for people to learn, at least the map. The gamemode itself would be a bit more of a learning curve from the rest of the game, as it wouldn’t simply by a change in map but in gameplay entirely. I think single map is also easier to design, but if we can pull it off once why not add variety by giving several options!
Adding a MOBA mode would also give the game a good space for hero type units. I think it’s worth exploring in modded first because of the large roster of new units that need to be added. Clearly we can have a custom unit on the map that can be claimed by players, that’s the basis for the original MOBA from the Starcraft Broodwar days: having a unit selector in the corner of the map that moves into a “circle of power” that triggers the selection of a unit. Totally feasible with the available modding tools.
It also adds another conundrum, which would be existing player response. Personally, don’t think they should bother appeasing people who wouldn’t be interested anyways. I’d like it just for the extra variety in gameplay, but it would be a passing interest for me.