If the variants were going to added they should cut the price of dlc to half and make it 2 dlcs which is normal civs and variants.Maybe they can cut variant price to number of variants so we can buy the ones we like.
Imo if weâre not getting a dlc as large as the last. Say 2 or 3 civs only? Give us fully new civs and give us one popular pick then give us something from the less common continents.
If weâre getting more variants then everything is up for grabs, if we can turn an army, a cult, an idea and a woman into EmpiresâŠwe have no limitations.
I feel that while the name Variants is good for civs connected to other civs that derive from them (France â JoanDArc, Abbasid â Ayubid, Spanish â Conquistadors), I think there should also be other terms for civs that share Language, unit models and buildings, but are not derived from each other:
For example:
Tuscany (Florence) and Milan (Lombardy), have too many units in common and similar architecture to be variants, but none of them derive from each other, they would derive from the Romans.
Same goes for Norway, Danish, Sweden, they would have similar units, shared language and architecture, but they do not have to be variants because none of them derive from each other.
ITALIAN CASE
I hope that something like âItalian civâ doesnât come out to summarize Italians, because at least for Italy in the Middle Ages and early modern there would be 4 large civs and 2 very optional ones: Venice, Milan, Tuscany and Genoa; and Papal States with Kingdom of Sicily & Naples.
-
Milan would have its own wonder, Milan Cathedral, Lombard Italian language.
âUU: Provvisionaty, Urban Militia (Spearman), Mounted Crossbowman, Carrocio, Famigliari Armigery (Lancer), Galuppi (Horseman tech), Carrocio, -
Tuscany/Florence its wonder Florence Cathedral, Tuscan Italian language.
âUU: Pavisiere (Crossbowman with Paves), Urban Militia (Spearman), Fante di Palazzo (heavy infantry unique), Carrocio, Monster Ribauld. -
Genoa, Milan Cathedral, Ligurian Italian language.
âUU: Genoese Crossbowmans, Pavise Auxiliar (Spearman with Pavise), Crossbow Militia (Archer), Genoese Gally (Arrow ship, well, Crossbow ship). -
Venice, Venice Cathedral, Venetian Italian.
â Arsenaloti, Marine, Stradiot, Schiavone/Ultramarine (Arquebusier), Galleass, many Ships. -
Papal States, Basilica of St. Peter, Language: Latin
â UU: Papal Guard, Black Band gunner
SHARED UNITS (Milan, Tuscany, Papal States): Condottiero, Condota Men-at-arm, Broken Lance.
- Naples: Here I have it complicated, because the territory was dominated by several powers during the Middle Ages and I donât know if itâs good to take it out as its own civ. First it was under Roman rule, then barbarian, Byzantine, then Islamic of the Rashidun caliphate, Abbasid, Norman (Pre-English), French, Spanish-Aragonese. If someone wants to make a concept of them, bravo, but in general I think that when it comes out in Campaigns, the territory will have buildings of the Civ that controlled it at that time (English, French, Spanish)
On the other hand, both Milan, Florence, Venice and Papal States would be Mercenary Civs (Genoa curiously does not fall into the category, it never used many, except at sea), and for that at least you need MORE CIVS from which to obtain extra unique units. At least you need Spain (Almogavars), and some Balkan, like Hungary, Poland-Lithuania (To represent âGerman mercenary cavalryâ), and maybe Switzerland (Swiss Pikemen).
Therefore I deduce that they will hardly come out in the next DLC, except for Genoa, which does not depend so much on mercenaries.
SCANDINAVIAN CASE
I know that many want Vikings. They could come out, but they would have to be separated from their derived countries, which would technically be 3 variants: Denmark, Norway and Sweden.
The other option is that the 3 medieval kingdoms have their âViking partâ in the Feudal age and evolve from it in the Castle and Imperial Age.
Either option should be taken with caution, since as far as I understand none of the countries had interesting unique units in the Middle Ages between 1100-1400, except for the known bodies of Viking units with large and short axes, or Swedish archers. Between 1400-1550 there were the internal Kalmor wars that could give one or another unique unit (Vasa Guard:halberdier corp), but thatâs the norm.
2 Likes
It was like $15. People would buy it for just the campaign and 2 new civs, but it ALSO came with 4 variants and some maps.
1 Like
In the next DLC they should only bring 3 new Civs and campaigns, if they bring Civ variants they should bring them every 2 or 3 months but 1 by 1 so the game would always have content.
I think it was a mistake to release 2 new Civs and 4 variants at once for more than 1 year without any Civ news.
1 Like
So isnt this make my idea better?
Owning and playing it regularly arenât prerequisites for critiquing. Could watch streamers play, or just check in from time to time to see how things have ânotâ changed in the ways some want. Imo, the UI has looked bad since launch, pop counts are no good, graphics are and have been lackluster since launch, zoom level/FOV is poor, and several other things. I donât need to play daily to validate my critiques daily. My thoughts of the UI being bad are just as relevant today as they were 3 years ago, despite not playing⊠and same with the other stuff.
It should have looked that good 3 years ago. I can maybe understand launching in 2021 with graphics that looked like it ran on Playstation 3 or a PC from 2010 if their heavy focus was on making good gameplay. Itâs 3 years later, though. Theyâve felt no need to bring the graphics into the 2020s? They probably built high-res versions of models and terrains already pre-launch and actually made them low-res for the gameâs launch. Canât release HD versions after 6 or 12 months, let alone 3 years?
If youâre satisfied with mediocrity and are okay with just âgood enoughâ, then the game will continue to stagnate and look pretty bland. (By âyouâ I mean the powers-that-be; not you personally.) Which is too bad, as I see a lot of room for improvement aside from simply adding new civs or doing balance tweaks. At this point, I mainly just hope AoE5 gets made and it will impress more
1 Like
To be considered for reasonable criticism, acting as though no graphical improvements have been made in three years, saying a PS3 had the compute to run something like this, and then saying âthey made assets low-res for launchâ are possibly the least convincing claims to rest the argument on 
2 Likes
Youâve played much more than my one game a few months ago (the only one played since launch) and few games pre-launch so I value your eye and informed assessment in terms of graphical fidelity and amazingness.
However, I just fired up the game and donât see what you see.
Repeating textures all over:
Just a flat texture for the cliff wall (no bump or displacement):
If this looks high-res modern day to you (a section of the above screenshot), weâll have to agree to disagree. This is a prime example of the smudged look that I remembered and that always reminded me of PS3 graphics.
My screenshots were at max graphics settings. And this is just looking at the first map I opened in months. I didnât have to look very long for examples.
PS: For my PS3 comment before, it was intended to be about the graphical look, not the computations required to run AoE4. I think itâs pretty normal for game devs to create high resolution assets and then bump down the quality when putting them into games, to save on memory and such. I think itâs easier to downscale for release while keeping the original HD assets on-hand for the future than it is to release the best and try to up-res things for a future HD or DE release of some sort. I could be wrong
Oh no, there are repeat textures.
How long did it take you to find that low-res cliff? Because as far as I know they updated the definition of the cliffs and I donât remember seeing one in my games, which means itâs definitely the exception and not the rule. Are you just trying to find excuses to hate the game or what? Also repeat textures are in every RTS game.
Iâll give you some advice. Go outside, take your phone with you, and film the cliffs and the ground (also touch some grass while youâre there). And then when you get back home, just look at it on your phone, because thatâs what you really want. You donât want a game. You probably have no idea about this game either. Youâre just here to find repeated textures on cliffs.
And then thereâs the fact you play and enjoy AoE2, where the ground looks unnaturally bright, the attack animations arenât in sync with the cooldowns, the textures are blurred pixel graphics to hide the roughness, and units move around like robots. Not to mention the color palette is taken straight out of a cartoon and thereâs nothing elegant about it. I asked my 7yo a few weeks ago out of curiosity which game she prefers between 2 and 4, and she said AoE4 because it looks like real life. Those were her words. So get rekt AoE2 fanboy, you have a bias.
AOE-4 may have some aesthetic flaws, but the terrain is not one of them. Maybe to add some more randomness they could add bushes and moss to those cliffs, but itâs not bad.
Wow OperaticShip. Are you ok man? I donât think Iâve ever seen you say something nice about AoE4.
Thanks for the forum code of conduct-breaking ad hominem attacks. You just now decide to be a bully, or you been that way all your life? Canât take even a mild dose of criticism for your favorite game, huh? Lol
If you read my post, youâd see I wrote out explicitly for people like you that it was my very first map launched in months, so I didnât have to look long for examples. (And, spoiler, it was only like my 2nd time launching the game since buying it.) I could probably launch 100 maps and easily find mediocre stuff in all 100.
Have you not played any new games except this one in the past decade or two? Itâs one thing to be biased simply because it is your favorite game ever, quite another to not see mediocre graphics in the year 2024 when it is staring you in the face. Pro tip: Go buy and launch some other games that came out the past decade to get a more-rounded view of what other games look like. But donât buy so many you forget you dose of Vitamin-D sunshine, to make you happier and take some of the bully edge off ya.
If youâre referring to the âget rekt AoE2 fanboyâ, that was more of a tongue-in-cheek comment. Just play the game man and stop obsessing about little details. Games are made to be played you know. I bet you know nothing about AoE4. Iâll tell you my honest opinion, as someone whoâs played WC2, WC3, SC2, AoE2, Empire Earth, and many more at their time. Itâs the best RTS Iâve ever played. Period. I absolutely love it. It looks very good on max settings, which is how I play it, but graphics is obviously not the focus. I mean that little should be obvious. Itâs an RTS game, not something meant to blow you away with graphics or have breathtaking graphical fidelity. If you disagree then you might not know what an RTS is. Maybe youâre used to more idle games like City Builders. Those can have more focus on graphics, because theyâre meant to be taken in (and also because they are less taxing on performance), but even there there are plenty which are quite stylized. Nevertheless, I quite like the graphics of AoE4. I think theyâre nice and elaborate, with plenty attention to detail. If you donât believe me go check other competitive RTS games. Check Stormgate (just kidding donât). Cheers! And if youâre very sensitive, try not to argue with me, because I have a thing with people that are trolling this amazing game. Play what you enjoy. Or watch a movie with some nice cliffs.
I could easily pick apart many things about this game. I canât help it if probably every aspect of your life revolves around mediocrity. Some of us have higher standards in gaming and in life.
I asked my 7yo a few weeks ago out of curiosity which game she prefers between 2 and 4, and she said AoE4 because it looks like real life. Those were her words. So get rekt AoE2 fanboy, you have a bias.
Using a 7 yo to try and make your point doesnât win you any marks, btw. When their point of reference is Peppa Pig, Baby Shark, and Sesame Street, Iâm sorry but you might want to find some adults to evaluate AoE4âs graphics
I bet you know nothing about AoE4.
Troll alert. Troll alert.
Iâll tell you my honest opinion, as someone whoâs played WC2, WC3, SC2, AoE2, Empire Earth, and many more at their time. Itâs the best RTS Iâve ever played. Period.
Lol. 25+ year old games as your points of reference. You just reinforce your lack of contemporary gaming experience and contentness with mediocrity with every sentence you write. Please donât become a dev and make any games. It will look like 1990. If you were going for a stylized, pixelated low-res 8 bit look, great. But itâs clear that is the graphical high bar youâve set for yourself, so it would just be your nature rather than preference or abilities shining through.
If you had actually played any new games that came out after 2005, you might care more about AoE4âs pretty mediocre graphics. Unless, that is, you play games on a potato, in which case all games since 2005 have looked pretty bad from your perspective. So, itâs probably best to leave the graphical analyses of a 2021 game that has had 3 years to get updated to others
PS: I have been talking about graphics not RTS gameplay.
Please stay focused
⊠if youâre very sensitive, try not to argue with me, because I have a thing with people that are trolling this amazing game. Play what you enjoy.
Iâm trying to make the game better for me, you, and everyone. But youâre too busy being overly sensitive to notice that, as you just admitted. Are you getting paid to act as the almighty âAoE4 Defenderâ? If not, try to be a little less sensitive to critiques of a game that could be improved in many ways. If you donât want any graphics improved, then fine. Lower the graphics to Medium or Low if they ever get better, so it makes you feel at home back in 2005 or 2010
letâs goo, new variants 
Adding a few screenshots for my AoE2 friend above, in support of his complaint of mediocre graphics and lack of attention to detail in the game. Lots of cliffs as well to count repetitive textures. Heâll be showing us some better graphics from other RTS games (hopefully not sprites).
The original claims had nothing to do with repeat textures. Every game repeats textures. Every game repeats assets. No game creates every single thing from scratch.
If you zoom in to the extent youâre zooming in to AoE IV, youâll also find issues. The difference is non-RTS games you normally canât zoom in like that (and AoE IV could even do with having more zoom-in compared to other RTS games). Do you have a comparison to other modern games?
That said, if youâve decided the game looks bad and everyone who likes it is settling for mediocrity, Iâm not sure thereâs any point in further discussion. Peace 
While I donât want to get in-between whatever the two of you have going on, letâs not be unfair to kids. I also have a 7yo and he plays Minecraft, watches the Fairly OddParents and Loud House, and has a (kid-safe) tablet that he plays Star Wars games on.
Youâre describing things my 4yo was into . . . Last year 
2 Likes
A crusader state mod i didnt liked the usage of other civs landmark probably they can have unique landmarks their own.I liked their unique units.We still have a missing crusader state from previous dlc.I hope this will inspire devs.Just dont do the landmark thing.
1 Like
Letâs remember not to get too far out of the thread in question and to maintain respect.