That’s because steppe lancer is barely used by most players. Of course it doesn’t cause an issue if it doesn’t see play much.
So， if there is any balance issues，just change some stats.
I dont think it could cause more balance issues than other already released dlcs.
You’re fixing problems that don’t exist, making changes for no purpose other than change for the sake of change. It’s not a good way to design a game.
8 Likes
I said before，for historical flavors.
It’s going to mess with the balance, and it just isn’t actually needed.
4 Likes
Please keep the classic civs as they are, except perhaps for stat adjustments here and there for the sake of game balance.
They don’t need any additional gimmicks. In fact, the lack of weird/unusual mechanics is what makes them fun to play in my opinion.
1 Like
OP Paladins and cheap castles, longbow snipers; 3 siege bonus with OP lumberjacks???
Excuse me, but if those civs were released with new DLC now, all the people on these forums would be complaining like crazy
Besides, new gimmicks are a must if devs don’t want to copy old bonus to new civs
1 Like
You get the point. People think those classical civs fun, only because they get used to them, but not because those civs are well designed.
They lack unique features, have simple but rough buffs, and are unhistorical.
For example, Chinese are available to plate armors which have never shown in their history, but havent bombard which they rely on most in their military forces. Vikings have almost no land military buff, despite their cavalries had once been a nightmare for most Europeans.
They say these are for balance, I dont understand at all. Will giving a civ more unique features, more reasonable tech tree must damage the banlance? If yes, why they created many new civs with many uniqueness wont damage the balance?
You should stop. None of your post in this thread got like by anyone else.
2 Likes
Actually, this is something that would be interesting to see.
1 Like
how do you add new stuff to existing civs and maintain balance? like i could see maybe celts, goth, and persians getting someting, but a lot of the aok civs are already either well balanced or causing balance issues.
furthermore, really not a fan of multipop units.
1 Like
I would like more campaigns for civs that’s don’t have one.
6 Likes
In my opinion, an RTS game is not only to keep balance, but also to provide interesting contents to players.
Indeed, a game with fewer contents is easier to balance, like an army with fewer soldiers is easier to manage. However a game is meant to be played for fun, like an army is meant to be used for win.
It need more.
2 Likes
Maybe you are right. I will stop replying and listen to what others say.
this game would not have survived for 20 years+ if it wasn’t fun.
when you can balance your “new content” you can have it.
2 Likes
@SameCylinder301, ignore the post from @NeatRapier90432, they are an alt account of a known ban evader, and don’t represent the community to any real capacity. (It looks like there’s nothing wrong with this post, but if you check the AoE4 forums, you’ll see that the next posts they start making are all the same ones that have been spammed for weeks now.)
3 Likes
calling him a ban evader is like calling Evel Knievel a motorcyclists with a slight penchant for doing stunts.
Sure, it doesn’t really quite do justice to the > 100 alts, but I can’t think of a better term.
2 Likes
Okay, I see, but I really don’t know why people all believes new contents would destroy balance.
Every new civ since DE all have lots of new contents, twice or even more times than civs from AOR, and nobody worries such contents will ruin the balance.
It causes a problem that major civs in human history got less mechanics, less units than minor civs, which were even some branche civs of the former ones.
Like we see, Poles have folwarks. Yes, they actually have, but don’t Franks or Chinese have more of such things? Why this building is only given to Poles who already have two other unique units? Such questions trouble me a lot, and I can’t understand after long time thinking. Same as many other designs.
1 Like
its not that new content would destroy balance.
It’s that adding new stuff has balance implications. and seeing as civs like Britons, Franks, Mongols, and Turks are all very strong in certain situations, adding stuff to these civs is not really a good idea.
actually it is something people worry about, and balance is very much an active concern for new civs, look at the talk about Dravidians and Bengalis needing love, and civs like Poles, Gurjaras and Hindustanis needing nerfs.
Franks and Chinese have their own bonuses to show off their excellent economy. are they fancy and flashy like the folwark? no, but the folwark also comes with its own downsides.
1 Like