Such a shallow and ridiculous point. Holds no validity and just makes you sound very immature.
hardly it wil change. its part of the core gameplay as relic designed that everyone gets the same siege with no difference in gameplay or a unit that sustitue siege like aoe 3. aoe 4 is destined to have an bland gameplay in age 3.
Late game never change , specially with stone wall
Relic balance team is just bad. now we have the patch. There is no hope to keep us playing the game
There is no reason to play the game anymore. Except for pro players due to tournaments
100% of aoe2 players went back on aoe2.
is aoe 3 better? Is there a player base and somewhat fun rts play online?
You’ll get all of the above
I think range needs tweaking as well. Anti-Siege Siege (Springalds/Culverins) should do a better job of countering siege, not just in damage bonus against siege, but also outrange other siege. I remember in AoE3, culverins could 2 shot a falconet before the falconet got in range. Culverins should outrange springalds which should outrange all other siege (except maybe trebuchets).
That being said, I found the tweaks to siege to be underwhelming. The speed nerf appear to prevent the fast-moving siege carts and HP reduction do make them easier to counter (in theory - I would argue they should be even lower HP). However, I would argue that their damage needs to be increased. You should be rewarded for taking the time to move and position your siege for battle.
yes because springalds are so slow… its hard to get them to the action if they pop up with 10 mangos…
especially on team maps where the map is huge.
Lol exactly Springalds are useless and are a burden to Pop cap because they don’t damage anything BUT siege… so you can’t build enough springalds to counter the mango onslaught and also build an army that does any damage…
Sweet you counter their mangos coz half your army is Springalds, but the rest of your army just got wiped by the rest of theirs because your springalds can’t do anything else…
I agree that it’s harder to quickly counter your opponent. Maybe the changes to siege will force players to scout more and pick their battles more carefully.
there is a limit to how far the range should be… in the same breath aoe3 anti unit siege doesnt have almost double the range as units do…
whereas in aoe4, BBC have almost double the range of archers, now you want anti siege to have even more range, add the rus UT and you end up with something that fires so far, it becomes increasingly difficult to counter
there always has to be a counter to everything, so what is the counter to a unit that can snipe your siege from this insane range that you propose? extreme flanking? and in choke points? no the range is fine. other stats can be tweaked. if anything anti unit siege can have it’s range reduced.
it brings the targets closer to your own anti siege, as well as increasing the risk in the risk/reward mashup
But the whole point was to make it easier to counter siege…
The main problem is people going entire mango army…thats just lame.
They need to make springalds great again!!!
When springalds were viable to do damage to other things mangos weren’t an issue.
Either buff springalds or pop cap seige to 21 or some so you can have 7 max seige units.
From my point of view the Springald needs +10 against siege more so that he can destroy mangonels in 2 shots, not 3.
I don’t know what to do to fix the problem properly, but I’m going to keep on spamming Mangonel armies in every game until something changes.
I wouldn’t like a pop cap on siege because I like the idea of choice.
Nah, springald has plenty of anti-siege damage - them getting more powerful would make already underpowered trebs and rams even worse than they are.
The answer is simple: reduce Mangonel HP. In every other Age game, ranged siege units were extremely frail and high risk/high reward. AoE4 upset that balance.
I really wouldn’t want to see springalds improved. I honestly thing the main issue now is that Relic haven’t been willing to change the attack strength of bombards and mangonels. They are more vulnerable now than ever — it is their ability to so quickly do so much damage is the problem. The plain fact is that even though it’s much easier to kill these units now, they’ll do so much damage while you’re trying to destroy them that they still seem super OP. If a few mangonels get even ten seconds to attack a group of infantry it is absolutely devastating.
It is important that the siege is used with a similar frequency (or a little more in Late Game) than the rest of the units. Your idea of lowering Mangonel’s HP a bit is an even better idea.
I would further reduce the siege weapons.
How is this in any way historically accurate?
Look I get this is a game, but they’ve completely thrown historical accuracy out the window when it comes to artillery in field battles.
Sure, mangonels and onagers before were quite effective and used on the field in larger engagements to devastating effect, but like all artillery at the time it took hours to set up and get prepared to begin firing.
Bombards were historically categorized as immobile artillery emplacements pointed in one direction without the ability to even rotate without packing back up and redeploying to an entirely new position, they weren’t mounted on wheels like cannons, hence the name difference.
Springalds and scorpions were used more frequently, however they too took a fairly long time to setup and reload as well.
Field artillery wasn’t conceptualized officially until the Napoleonic wars in the way that we consider it in modern war fighting, the way artillery is used in game is more akin to how artillery was used in Napoleonic field battles or even the American Civil War.
The point of my tirade here is that this is supposed to be a historically representative game, and that has been one of the main points of all of the previous games, painstaking detail was given to unit descriptions and their histories in prior age game (partially how I know so much about these weapons and tactics)
The way siege was done in age 4 blows all that to the wind and basically treats the bombards like tanks and everything else like field artillery.
The only actual field artillery should be culverins, and the french cannons.
If they change bombards to cannons and give them appropriate wheelbases I’d be fine with that also, but they’d have to expand the last age to be further into history than I believe they are currently trying to depict. Which I’m guessing is some time around the early 1400s, at which point gunpowder in general was just barely being introduced to warfighting in Europe. China makes sense, but they also had their own types of cannons and whatnot that aren’t represented here, only the hwatcha, or nest of bees as we know it.
Edit to clarify on historical accuracy:
There were smaller cannons that were mounted as early as the 1420s that were mounted and manueverable, however the large bombards that do heavy damage to walls, castles, and buildings as depicted in game, were very hard to re-aim and transport until the early 1600s when cannon technology caught up to the point of being able to produce the same firepower in a smaller chamber.