[LONG] AoK civs theoretical modernization and improvements

Age of Empires II: DE II - Discussion
41

Got a source to back up this claim? A legjt source. One legitimately calling aoe2 bland and lacking and how aoe4 was designed from the get go to fix that?

Because this statement seems more like the statement of someone eho isn’t a fan of age 2 trying to make it look bad.

You keep talking about making age 2 “what it could be”. I got a better idea. Lets let age 2 be what it is. One of the most beloved rts games that has withstood the test of time like few games ever have.

Age 2 doesnt need your “personality and flair” as you put it. Ive seen whar happens to games that go for that. Look at all the failed rts out there.

1 Like
42

Instead of randomly applying aoe4 ideas to aoe2, I would rather look at playrates and then winrates over time and work out what the civ might need to help make it more diverse or encourage players to use them

For example byz already have one of the highest counts of defensive bonuses. If anything I would give them something offensive so they don’t only turtle into imperial. Even then byz have a fair play rate and aren’t that boring. So if anything newer civs like portuguese or Koreans could do with some spicing up instead

Or for example celts need better advantages against and/or for raiding in open maps, so they aren’t only played as Hoang or semi Hoang (and changes can be done without breaking their identity).

So just as a rough example, their UT Stronghold could affect TCs as the bare minimum. And/or Elite woads could go from 1 to 2 PA on at least a trial basis.

I wonder even if they had their infantry speed bonus buffed and staggered. +15% feudal and castle and +20% imperial(adjust woads if required)

43

Castles, Towers, Donjons, Kreposts are used as offensive buildings a lot more often.

Just because something is called defensive, doesn’t mean it actually is, and can often times be leveraged for a forward aggressive position. This is much more known important in AoE3 where map control is key and forward production with Towers around it has been one of the best ways to consolidate a push.

Much like a castle drop in AoE2.

1 Like
44

You’re utterly confused.

I said aoe4 initially had incredible 60-80k players mainly because of asymmetric civs with actual personality, depth, uniqueness, feeling real, authentic. Not reskin copycats.

Numbers later plunged when people started realizing Relic fumbled the implementation of the game and published it flawed and unfinished.

I’m an old aoe2 fan but I’m not slavishly praising it. Civs have no personality at all and UUs are mostly useless and rare.

2 Likes
45

This only comes from someone who probably never seen Mangudai, Plumed Archer, Conquistador, Ghilman, Camel Archer, and some others.

1 Like
46

If you don’t like AoE2 for whatever reason, there is nothing keeping you either here on the forums, or even playing the game at all. You don’t need to be unkind about it just because it doesn’t match your ideals, if you don’t accept it, or think one of the other age games (Or any other game) is better by a large enough margin, you can go play that instead.

4 Likes
47

The UUs in AoE2 are “archer but faster”, “knight but stronger”, “champion but has more armor”.

The UUs in AoE3 are “musketeer, but has 5 different stances with different stats, multipliers and use cases”, “skirmisher, but fires twice as fast, has longer range, and sieges buildings from a distance at the cost of hit and run capabilities”, “dragoon, but actually also heavy cavalry and counters heavy infantry too”.

I mean, AoE2 is great and all, but the UUs mostly feel like stronger reskins. The game is dated. Everyone who thinks AoE2 would be praised for complexity if it was released in 2022 is dead wrong and living in some fairy tale universe.

Asymmetric civs is nice, AoE4’s approach was completely flopped though and crashed and burned immediately due to incompetence. Still, considering out of 42 civs here in 1 on 1 you can play 35 of them with the same archers into crossbows (for 30 minutes, most games have ended by then), another selection of 25 on scouts into knights, and it’s 2 unit lines that dominate the meta on all levels and they are all we see, I don’t think one can put out any solid argument for civs having “flavor” in AoE2.

When I play Persians I play Franks. And Lithuanians. And Sicilians. And Teutons. And Burgundians. And Poles. And Burmese. And Khmer. And Malians. And I haven’t even changed my civ.

Because Civs in AoE2 play out exactly the same for the first 45 minutes of the game, or in other words, in 90% of games. Every time, over and over.

Oh, and for “b-but if people agreed with you AoE2 wouldn’t be the most popular”.

AoE2 is popular because of the much better campaign approach compared to both AoE3 and AoE4, because of the more sim-city style of spending the first 15 mins building and designing your base, and because of the more defensive, passive and slow-paced approach it uses. Not because the civilizations are fun to play. The replayability is ensured by the maps, the engine, and the action, not by the units, civilizations and balance.

And why not have even more replayability?

2 Likes
48

Go back to aoe4 side of the forum and spam there vinfriss.

3 Likes
49

Nor is anyone else. But we have seen whats on the other side of the fence.
Ive seen whar happens when you try to go for uniqueness over balance and gameplay and im not impressed.

1 Like
50

Is it? Only one game i know has done this with any sort of success and it only has 3 civs to balance their game around.

If its so easy to do what YOU and others want, why has no one succeeded with it recently?

Furthermore, i bought aoe2 de because it was aoe2. I didnt want aoe2 modernized, aoe2 that is aoe2 in name only, etc

I wanted aoe2.

If i wanted something different age 4 exists. And it, as you pointed out, has not succeeded.

Why would I want to change up a game that has MASSIVELY succeeded, when all the recent examples of what you want to change it into, have failed?

4 Likes
51

If that’s what you think I’m afraid that AoE4 and half of AoE3 are still too symmetric for you

2 Likes
52

That’s true.

In hindsight thinking of the healing monument in aoe4 used as a proxy healing building during MAA rushing.

Your idea would actually fit well with the lower hp byz cavalry and trash spam bolstered by the healing buildings

2 Likes
53

Someone else that can’t be bothered to read or bothered to understand what someone else is saying… It’s a well known fact UUs are generally not used by MOST civs in competitive Matches.

As Eliza pointed out, on top of that most of them are just buffed versions of existing units. Of course there are exceptions but the word MOST was used.

MOST.

I’m also a huge aoe2 fan and spend most of my game time playing it(at least 3+ matches every day).but that doesn’t mean I can’t see the forest for the trees. And that there are many areas where units could be modified to improve diversity.

Why do Brits almost never go longbows? Even in closed maps! How often do you see a war elephant? Or a karambit outside of arena? Bulgarian knights are almost unanimously used over konniks? How often do we see TK, samurai, jags? How often do we see most UU infantry? I literally cannot remember the last time I saw a leitis.

Do we even mention the arambai? It’s so unused that it’s pointless talking about it

Civs with cavalry UU are almost unanimously played as knight civs. Plumed archers are maybe one of the best archers in the game if we consider their speed, and durability, without the weaknesses of CA, but Mayans still go xbow/arbs in the vast majority of games.

Theres balance reasons behind all of this, but it doesn’t mean @PowerAnimal39 was wrong

2 Likes
54

That may be true but power animal is Vinfress so his arguments are mostly worthless and bad faith.

55

the vast majority certainly isn’t useless. the only ones i can think of which i dont think i would make in most games are Longbowman (arb is basically as good), War Elephant (can’t afford in 1v1), Missionary (meh), Genitour (skirm is usually better) and Arambai. Oh and flaming camel…but i dont think that one counts.

I think it’s good that not all games boil down to smashing UUs into each other. not all civs need to be defined by their UUs like Spanish are by Conquistadors, because most UUs have a place in their civ’s tech tree.

56

That’s the point. The only unique unit civs have in AoE2 is, well, the “Unique Unit”.
If this lone Unique Unit nowhere to be seen, then AoE2 civs truly become total reskin copycats.

1 Like
57

except for regional units (eagles, elephants, camels), so not even the ‘unique units’ stuff is true
even civs with the same tech tree (and i dont think there are any), are still distinguished by their bonuses and Unique Techs. At lastly civs are distinguished by their architectural styles, voice lines and music

2 Likes
58

If you dont like how the game works just go play something else. Theres plenty of assymetric RTS games

We like ghat the civs arent diferent in every way amd appreciate the unique stuff each civ provides

2 Likes
59

Just thought I’d mention this. For Vikings, I would rework the Berserk totally. I’d start by renaming them to Berserkers. I would remove the healing entirely, and instead make them actually go Berserk. When they drop below a certain HP% or value, it activates a Berserk state, in which they would use a different graphic, likely without a shield and a tattered cloak, and their stats would be different. Probably hit faster, have low/no melee armor, high pierce armor, high damage, faster movement, and maybe do an area of effect attack. In exchange though, any damage they do receive is doubled. It’s just a concept, but it’s kind of how I always wish the Berserk had been created. I’m not sure if I would change it like this from a balance perspective, but from a changes to the civ to make them more distinct it’s something I might consider.

3 Likes
60

Like it or not that’s the concept of aoe2. What makes civs unique in most circumstance is the availability from a more or less standard set of units and the bonuses associated with these. UUs complement that. And this design is what makes the game so well balanced and in turn probably why it has been so successful.

3 Likes