This is fake news that you keep roling for people who don’t follow Grubby.
He’s ben playing HOTS and Warcraft 3 fo years and now he incorporated Aoe4.
He plays those 3 games regularly every week. And he actually plays more Aoe4 than the other 2.
He never quit Aoe4 and never said that he has any intention of doing it.
I used to play the AofE Conquerors Expansion for hours on end but I could never really get into version III as I found it too complicated. After playing IV and loving it I went back to try III but gave up almost immediately, too stressful, too much going on. I think IV is great and clearly has a lot of mileage in terms of future development. I can see how more experienced gamers would like III, however, because of the complexities…
Same here, I much prefer IV - I also loved II but III put me off for years
I agree with you about AoE3 being complicated.
But I actually couldn’t enjoy AoE4 too much because it feels really simple.
It is definitely beginner friendly as an RTS, but as an AoE fan, I had bigger expectations from it.
The richness of 3 is multi faceted. There are many ways to customize your playstyle. And each expansion added completely new mechanics which adds a learning curve that is rewarding in the long run.
agreeing on all AoE3 points, i’d say AoE2 is still more comparable to 4, as in, that game does everything 4 does (less assymetry but far more polished design wise), but with far superior execution, a lot of this applies to 3 as well, but with added assymetry on top.
imo, 4 left sour taste the moment i saw the controls during stress test, yes, grid isn’t the end of the world, but putting hotkeys in 4 next to even original 2 and 3 is rather telling
Also while playing 4, i noticed quite a few company of heroes influenced elements (super close maxed zoom, even after a patch for it, very shallow camera angle, balancing is also in that vibe, with bombards, and siege in general, being way way too resistant to melee damage, in AoE3 or 2, you’d need lets say 2 knights or any heavy cavalry and about 4-5 hits to take out siege, here its more like 20 knights, and even then its tough cuz of way too fast packing and unpacking). also lack of any kind of hotfixes in 4 isn’t helping its situation, for all the exploits that keep coming up. To explain my conclusions a bit, i started on AoE3 in 2006, only found AoE2 a bit later, and played since, ik what those games did right and in some parts wrong (AoE2’s 1v1 lategame gold problem and AoE3 doing fictional campaigns at first, and ofc home city leveling to unlock cards), it just makes it way worse when 4 releases, and fails to deliver on absolute basics, i choose not to compare it to DEs cause its not the fairest of comparisons (DEs having all of OG releases feedback and whatnot)
because esemble did it before ms commited the mistake of dissolving it.
I dont like “screw you guys im going home” posts… but… I have 200 hours played so far, had much fun an all that but latest changes made the game too frustrating for me to play. I mained chinese after switching from unplayable abba, reached 1200 elo which is mediocre i guess but had some fun. Now its just… they nerfed china to the ground and i dont feel like switching civ another time, i mean whats the point? Everyone gonna play Delhi or mongols? Or i learn the civ to again be butchered… I really REALLY want to like the game, its documentary style SP is perfect, its sound is superb, as a historian i am really entertained playing it. Latest patch had some good changes (fish, water, siege, scout) but they absolutely torched china (not mentioning the absolute mess FL are now), they said they are aware of Abba sucking for MONTHS yet they do nothig, Mongol is on top for what half a year now? Delhi, which currently is kinda op gets buffs, this have shaken my faith in the developers…
Happy to see i’m not alone on balancing being poorly handled, i mean, having a civ with 2 landmarks (as opposed to 4) in a game with landmark victory, not sure what the thought process there was, anyway, i’m not touching this game until spring update drops at the earliest
Yeah, Abba have many problems with HoW. I think its garbage all togather, having onyl 2 landmarks is a huuuuuge disadvantage taking into consideration landmark victory. You cannot buff aging process (got a tiny buff), ageing up dont provide you with insta benefit, you have to spend time and resources to get upgrades from HoW (aside from fresh foodstuffs they are just bad + costly). I think the design at its core is bad. The best thing is, they considered HoW a BOON XD
@Volo1989 I get the frustration with having to switch mains (I picked Abbasid to start, so I feel your pain). It gets complicated when comparing civs because certain maps clearly favor certain civs, team games play vastly different than 1v1.
The Chinese still play well on French pass, while ironically, the French do not play as well on French Pass. Abbasids are tough to play in 1v1 (except seem to do ok in Hill and Dale), but do well in 2v2,3v3, 4v4.
After trying the Ranked Beta, some of the features (e.g. customizable hotkeys, global queue) give me hope the game will become more enjoyable when finally implemented.
there is a solution, but i can already see the backlash
just copy paste what AoE3 asian dynasties did in this situation, and limit how many builders you can put on landmark construction, problem solved
this, and scenario editor has to be good, as well as modding capability
I guess it would have to be tested. this is some idea.I dont see anything bad with speeding the ageing process radically with sacrificing your eco thou putting villager to work. Maybe garrisoning HoW with workers would speed up ageing process i dont know honestly. Or just makeing the upgrades form HoW WORTH it all. I would like the insta upgrades for free with age up, though that could make abba broken.
I am a kind of player that sticks to one civ and try to master it, like beeing faithfull to a wife XD I also dont like team games, when i play 1v1 and get my ■■■ whooped (happens many times) i know it is my fault and i like it 
I don’t this would break the Abbasid if applied only to the first tech from a specific wing. Every other civ landmark (in age 2) instantly provides a benefit upon completion - whether as a faster production building or passive bonus or a boost to your units. There are some age 3 landmarks (Delhi and french) that require additional research.
I woul also consider making HoW an outpost of sorts, kinda like main TC. It would boost early survival of abba which is its main problem.
so basically make it act like agra fort for indians in AoE3, this would be a good boost to add
ig garrisoning vills to speed it up would work too, but ye no instant bonus upon reaching next age isn’t helping, devs could also reduce golden age requirements by third, currently its damn near impossible to get to tier 3, regardless of how well you’re doing, make it 40 buildings instead of 60, and tier 2 20 instead of 30 (not 100% on this one, correct if i’m wrong)