Meta Boom

Whoever does not boom in the same way as your rival has a little margin to do damage to the enemy, which in addition to the fact that it requires more skill to be offensive while managing your economy, on the other hand, how comfortable it is: to make the boom ; After this, if the aggressor was unsuccessful, he already fell behind in economic units and will eventually lose the game.

Vortix was aggressive against someone who did 3TC, he destroyed 1 but the rival repaired it immediately, meanwhile he already surpassed him in economic units, Vortix continued in feudal making another battering ram, but the rival went to the age of castles and improved his units, the end of the game

https://aoe4world.com/players/60328-VortiX/games/78920581?sig=82a880971b9f7b2614a2ae2e13f15efe8c0b1b14



https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1862877183

I have only seen the English succeed in being aggressive since his landmark is a TC and then he will be able to match the amount of economic units, but very hardly with other civs.

I’ve shown before that being aggressive is very risky, and I’ve proposed to fix landmarks and TCs with wood and stone (except Mongol)

And finally I hope your well-deserved nerf to the stone walls and Keeps

Grubby in his last video, he complained about the tower rush, and although that has already been balanced, I suppose he does not return to the game because he knows that he continues with the imbalance between the comfort of playing defensively, and how difficult it is to play offensively


3 Rams will take them right out

The video of grubby you are linking is well over a year old. And I think you completely misjudge his character. I think he understands and enjoys a game with much depth, which is why he sticks with WC3 on top of already being an established legend there.

AoE4 struggles with depth. Each mechanic is inherently created for a singular purpose. Torches exist to separate melee damage with siege damage. Houses, and buildings can not serve as walls. Map height has no real influence besides minorly increasing sight. Walls cannot be connected with buildings and again, as a separate mechanic with a singular purpose.

There are more examples too. Inherently this leads to a design where mechanics lack complete depth. It leads to gameplay that lacks depth. It leads to every civilization feeling like all you do is spam Archer, Spearman and Horseman. While this too rings true for AoE2 (the better gameplay iteration), that game’s mechanics can be utilized in multiple ways. People will build and fight around tall regions to gain an advantage. They will use high-damage units to destroy walls. They will create houses or Blacksmiths to close gaps in walls.

In the end, Grubby did not even like AoE2. All that tells me, is that he couldn’t get into AoE4 for the same reasons. He very much seems to overly prefer WC3 to any RTS, which is completely fine. But, I highly suspect depth is a large reason for why. WC3 was well designed for its day and took into account real traditional designing values of creating differences and making them feel fair. The “civilizations” and units in that game, ACTUALLY feel different, and mechanics can serve hundreds of functions–many of which were never intended.

Tower rushing is one of the things you mentioned he seemed to like. Go watch his WC3 videos to see what he enjoys. He doesn’t enjoy trying to end the game as quickly as possible like you do. He doesn’t enjoy trying to end the game in 0.2 microseconds. This guy enjoys using the mechanics of the game in varied ways, which is why he kept playing China (the civ with the most options). Playing aggressively with buildings is also part of that, which this game has swiftly pruned because of players like you complaining nonstop.

Show me a handful of mechanics in AoE4 that can even be compared? When will you ever use a mechanic for an unintended purpose here? You can’t, because everything is so tightly specifically created for 1 reason only.

4 Likes

Huh, from his streams with Viper, it seems like Grubby actually like AoE 2 and afaik he also responded to a comment on his AoE channel that he likes the gameplay (well apart from dodgable arrows which seems to be everyone’s main gripe with AoE 2)

Which explains why most of his AoE 2 uploads were games on Arena

Let’s be clear, he left AoE4 because he had better numbers in other games. Grubby is a professional.

It is true that he can criticize certain issues of the game such as the depth, the lack of micromanagement, QoL, etc… but the reality is that he left because he did not have good numbers compared to other games.

1 Like

While true, and I speak not only of AoE4, I think he just prefers WC3 over all else. He recently got into a streak of releasing creative WC3 videos and is doing the best he has in a long time, even dropping the DOTA content for it. So I think he is pretty satisfied with where he is currently.

With that said, I think it also shows that AoE4 is not just an echochamber filled with people like @HasanIchess. There is a lot of effort made by very few currently, trying to express that the game is too slow or too defensive oriented, and who are constantly pushing suggestions that would as a repercussion, further prune the only inch tall depth the game currently has.

3 Likes

What I find interesting here is that the few AoE 2 uploads he has on his AoE channel in general got more clicks than his AoE 4 videos. But yep, he overall plays what he likes the most which is WC3 and Dota.

1 Like

You must also understand that AoEIV only has 10 civs for being a game that is not even 2 years old since its launch. We could even determine that AoE2 has more depth, not because it has more strategies or BO, but because it has 40 civs, even though they are similar to each other.

1 Like

but each time we provide new evidence, while you only say that strong walls are fun, in the same way I can say that feudal cannons are fun :wink: :wink:

I’ve been playing Mechabellum recently, and one thing that game has made very obvious to me is just how much I hate the bonus concept in Age of Empires. I never liked the bonus concept, but hadn’t realised just how much I hated it until I played a game that doesn’t have it. I think the bonus concept is a major part of why mechanics are so specific in their purpose, as well as giving units unintuitive behaviour.

Re the main point of the thread, a post above says:
“Vortix was aggressive against someone who did 3TC, he destroyed 1 but the rival repaired it immediately”
You should attack the additional TCs in preference to attacking the starting TC, as the additional TCs are so much weaker and can’t be repaired after full destruction. You might think Vortix knows better than me, but even top players do imperfect things sometimes. I once saw TheViper make archers against skirmishers in AoE2. When he said he was making archers I thought “What?!”. He made his archers, sent them to fight, said “Oh, that’s a lot of skirmishers”, and surrendered. I expect he was just fatigued from streaming and not focused, but you do have to keep in mind that top players don’t always act perfectly at all times in every game.

@StatedOregon5 the 2v2 tournament have been quick games, so having many units in feudal is not the problem

1 Like

I dont get how they had so many!!!

if someone has multiple TCs, most of the time you cant deny it, if it goes up, he can wait at a comfortable position and starts outproducing the attacker.
Even the attacker can do good damage, its hard to finish him, TCs are too strong and the range should be reduced.
at early sesons without autofocus TC fire it was better, because the ram take all the TC shots, but now defender has all the benefits :frowning:

2 Likes

How do they get so many TC so quick?

Gather stone and wood.
No villager seconds being wasted on food and gold.

1 Like

Alright, Ill give it a go next game!

While I think the change of priority seems positive to me and to more players, the automation does not.

1 Like

What does he say? Maybe you can sum it up in a few sentences for the non spanish speaking audience.