Age 2 Yam Network is insanely op, they can still slow you down enough, so they can age up faster, from which point their springalds literally counter any siege play. Not even clocktower siege can stop it.
Theres no edge over mongols in any regards
5 Likes
The fact that the devs said they would rather buff other civs to the same level of Mongols is concerning to me.
The Yam network is so strong, anyone playing RTS should know by now how powerful speed is. In fact the Undead faction in Warcraft 3 only works because of a 10% movement speed effect for the entire army from their hero. Without this it would be unplayable in competitive mode.
But the YAM buff doesn’t just work while inside tower range, it works even outside tower range, which is unheard of. Imagine if Zerg units would retain their movement speed outside of Zerg creep.
Since we have established that other factions are getting buffed to Mongol levels, lets start with Chinese, since they have mostly the worst Landmarks in the entire game.
We have already established that the Barbican of the Sun is a straight up worse Kremlin
And everyone knows the other Age 2 Landmark which boosts Tax collection has very little use since Tax collection is a gimmick and in almost all cases supervising is more useful.
So how would you buff these two Landmarks? You could add upgrades to the Barbican of the Sun in Age 3 and Age 4 to add springald and cannon emplacements for example and fortify it.
And you would have to buff the Tax collection in general, which we have asked for since Stress test. It did get buffed recently but most of its issues still remain. The 100% Tax boost alone is not strong enough, there need to be some quality of life changes when building the Landmark.
We talked about many of these a long time ago already:
I’m looking forward to buffs for all other civs. It will take a lot of those to get them to Mongol-Tier and we will play a very different game at that point.
I can’t wait until the Great Wall Gatehouse and the Age 3 Imperial Palace will no longer be meme-tier Landmarks with no other purpose than unlocking Dynasties. The Landmark system was already used in Aoe3 but in that game there were no terrible Landmarks like those Chinese has in Aoe4. All of them had its use.
1 Like
The issue is that the Mongols can be played as infantry or cavalry. And they have the cheapest infantry due to “Ovoo” and the fastest movement speed for it due to “Yam Network”.
Now looking at this issue you can clearly see how it does not correlate with the Mongol civilisation.
The civ excels at mobile nomadic structures, aggression, and cavalry.
Here it does not mention infantry. Yet the Mongols have the cheapest and strongest infantry with unique abilities and upgrades. Why?
- Ovoo allows infantries (all foot troops) to be 2x trained using stone.
It should not allow infantries to be 2x trained. - The Mongol infantries have unique upgrades that allow them to build most sieges except cannons and 30% attack and hitpoints unique upgrade.
As a result, the Mongols are the best infantry civ due to speed and low cost. This is why the Mongols are owning the game from the start. Infantries are dirt cheap and too strong for their opponents from the early game.
And sadly, The Mongols have the weakest cavalry in the game. The only unique upgrade is 30% hitpoints which are hardly done in any competitive plays like 90% of pros would never make cavalry as the Mongols…
I have written it earlier as no one is noticing the issue of this civ (including the pros)
The “Yam Network” and “Ovoo” need to focus on cavalry, not infantry.
For example, Yam would give extra bonus speed to mounted units only (which would include traders) and Ovoo would allow only mounted units to be 2x trained.
And for that big nerf the Mongols need some kind of unique upgrade for its cavalry.
30% of hitpoint’s unique upgrade is too expensive and costs too much stone to be researched.
6 Likes
Its pretty much the same with the English.
They say they are DEFFENSIVE, meanwhile they are the most aggressive civ in the entire game.
I think what they meant by the cavalry nature is cause of the mangudai, but its totally trash and therefore never used.
4 Likes
I have to agree on those points about the chinese landmarks.
While idm them being “weaker” cuz dynasty system. They don’t have to be par with other civs but in that case dynasty bonuses need to carry to next dynasty and so forth. Each civ in chinese eyes always good landmark even if the landmark is inferior to another choice but they’re still better than what china has outside of clockwork tower.
All chinas landmarks are fail tier and to get similar bonus we need to build 2 landmarks instead 1 which other civs get as default, but if dynasty bonuses carry to next dynasty then china would be par with other civs even if old dynasty bonus is bit weaker than active one.
Another thing about tax collection is that tax needs to be delivered to building that cannot lose the tax if enemy destroys it and it needs to be delivered from all the buildings because longer game goes on more relevant tax collection becomes meanwhile every other civ bonuses just get stronger longer the game goes on.
1 Like
Yam network is so strong yet the Landmarks that end up giving the permanent 15% speed boost Yuan is weak? Double standard
6 Likes
it’s like giving you a brass knuckles to fight Tyson, or giving Tyson one to fight you, hey it’s the same brass knuckles.
1 Like
Stop trying to spin around the words I said. You are talking nonsense.
First of all, the Chinese Landmarks do not grant 15% movement speed. This is wrong.
The Dynasty grants 15% movement speed but to unlock this you need to pay 1800 ressources.
The Dynasty system is a civilisation feature.
So instead of talking nonsense about Chinese Landmarks how about you compare
civilisation features between Mongols and Chinese? Now that would make sense.
Mongols: Ovoo for constant stone income without using villagers
2x unit training
stronger upgrades
best siege engineering in the game
best springalds in the game due to +1 range and 10% additional attack speed, even better than Rus
What do you need to invest for this? Nothing. You spend some starting wood but you don’t have to build 19 houses like everyone else so your civilisation feature already saves you a ton of wood. A net ressource gain.
No need to argue any further about this. We all know Mongols are the strongest civ in the game by a large margin.
You purpose ignore the IO which gave a ton of extra resource of every kind
No way compareable to Chinese CT siege which can be boosted by IO to mass only these special units
Two age 3 landmarks give that bonus plus their own benefit.
I know you are Chinese main since the CB, so I won’t argue with you further
2 Likes
I hope you see that for that bonus you have to invest 2400 Food and 1200 Gold, in AGE 3!
I see your point, but as an age 2, 400/200 res landmark, it packs way too much power.
1 Like
And speed buff being applied to siege as well is worst thing to happen in AOE. Both yam network and dynasty buff make siege extremely op.
2 Likes
I don’t play competitive at all but I do enjoy playing Mongols vs AI. I’m always curious when I see people complaining that double training is OP, or how they get “free” stone, when I see the Ovoo system as being a limitation rather than a bonus. Stone trickles in at a slow, constant rate. Maybe the “correct” build order would have you getting stone later, or slower, but if I want stone with any other civ I can just throw some villis at it and before you know it I have met my requirement. A more direct comparison might be, if I want to research a tech and it is gated on a big pile of gold, I can prioritize gold gathering over wood or food. With Mongols, I can’t research most of the interesting tech (or add defenses to towers!) until the stone “timer” has counted up far enough, and I set myself back if I spend any of my stone income on double-training. The only chance I have at getting stone faster comes in Age IV when I can finally earn some from raiding.
You can still trade for stone though can’t you?
I think a lot of higher level multiplayer players just go heavy into trade and trade for stone.
Disclaimer: I have not played mongols, nor have I ever complained about them being OP, I actually feel like they’re made pretty well, along with china, and that all other civs are underpowered.
No, Mongols are not allowed to receive stone via trading or tribute. The only way to get it is “timed” Ovoo income, or raiding after researching a (very expensive, Age IV) tech that awards some for setting buildings on fire. (ETA: apparently in Age IV you can also research a tech that grants stone via trade; I didn’t remember that but it’s still late-game-only.)
This is wrong.
Mongols doesn’t have to use villagers. They build an ovoo once which automatically gathers. Feel free to do the math on how many villagers/per second this gather rate is worth.
Why would you delay your additional income? Delaying the ovoo doesn’t make much sense unless you have something better to spend your wood on, for example a Dock.
The comparison between Mongols and other civs doesn’t make sense because
- Other civs cannot turn stone into units
- Even if they could, Mongols double their production buildings because they build 2 units from 1 building. The Stone mechanic is not a limitation.
- Other civs would need to spend 150 wood before they can build 2 units instead of 1
- Other civs do not have access to special Mongol tech
I’m pretty sure you can simply research the normal tech without having to spend stone. Stone is only used for special tech which other civs do not have access to in the first place. The Stone mechanic is not a limitation.
Everyone has to use Stone to add defenses to towers. What exactly is this argument supposed to be?
No you don’t set yourself back. This is nonsense. No other civs can produce the same amount of units in the same timespan like Mongols. Go ahead and try it, you will fail. The double training ensures Mongols will always be ahead in units in the earlygame.
Some of these arguments are very weird. But you already said you do not play competitive at all, which would explain why so many of these arguments are wrong. Play however you like. But if you are interested in how Mongols work, I recommend you watch competitive games.
To clarify, I was never suggesting delaying Ovoo construction. As I commented above, the only way for Mongols to get Stone is via Ovoo or a few very-late-game added options that aren’t relevant to what I’m trying to say. I don’t have updated numbers but as a very rough cut, I found online that the Ovoo gives stone income at 105/min, while villis are around 45/min each. That means you get less income than you would by assigning 3 villis. Yes, this saves me ~130-150 food, but it also takes away my ability to decide to pay more food to get stone faster, especially in the mid-game boom.
That’s not even the point, though. I think it’s actually kind of confusing that they chose to use stone the way they did. The more accurate way to look at it is, pretend they had made up a new resource type. I know it might be an obscure reference, but Northgard has a DLC faction that generates a sort of spell-point resource that lets you cast special abilities, and this works basically the same way. Ovoos might as well generate “magic” that you can spend on faction-unique abilities, like the upgraded version of a technology or double-training. That’s why there’s no point comparing Mongol stone income to other civs, you’re really comparing “magic” income to a completely different resource (ignoring specifically tower upgrades). Does that make more sense?
ETA: when I said “set myself back”, what I meant was, I have a limited “magic” budget, and I can either use it to make units, or buy unique technologies. In theory I can make those same extra units by prioritizing my use of food/wood differently, but “magic” is the only way to get those unique techs.