Nomads rework

Nomad is a useless tech The Is only useful in a situation where you are already losing at which point you would be better of building more house or focusing the siege rams that are tearing through your base.
I’m fine with the Mongols Current spot in the meta and they don’t need any buff. but still I think it would be interesting to rework it something that is also very situational but allows a much nomadic play style

  • 50% faster build speed excluding stone fortifications.
  • 60-80% refund upon deleting buildings.
  • Towncenters are packable.
    (shouldn’t be hard to program since packed TC’s already exist)
  • 10-20% Wood discount on buildings.
    This would allow Mongols to migrate and set up shop in a new area. I can’t think of many scenarios where I would want to do that in a 1v1, but in 4v4’s where you are losing ground and need to reboom this could be a life savior. This would be Op if given to any civ as an Eco bonus but considering the time that this would be researched it might be hard to effectively utilize. What do you think, is this overpowered? Is it too situational to be used effectively should the wood discount be removed?
1 Like

Mongols is strong enough. Its ok for them to have a situational UT.


The faster build speed and discount are problems. They would let Mongols rapidly ramp up military production to overpower opponents. I think that having it unlock the 200 pop Huns thing could be a good start. Maybe if buildings except farms, houses, and resource camps also returned 40% of their cost that could be good.

1 Like

My idea.
Cost 300 wood and 150 gold. Supply 100 populations or 50% of the population cap directly.
Even if you lose all the houses, TCs and castles, you still have 100 populations for surviving in a 200-populaiton game. It still need to construct houses to reach the cap so the houses could keep their usage meaningful.
That number or percentage is adjustable if it is considered too many or too less.

Look interesting but I am not sure if it is useful. This could be the second effect.

Nomads may need a buff but it doesn’t need anything this big and aoe4 should be left in aoe4. At best I’d let nomads unlock up to the pop cap


or 50% refund from destroyed and deleted buildings

Mongols are in a fine spot and Nomad don’t need much change. I just hope it change back to pre-DE state. Destroying house foundation also provide population cap.

What about Nomads gives houses x4 pop space?
This way you save some wood, for military buildings from late Castle Age

A population related UT is just kind of stupid with Huns around

1 Like

I think it is okay since both 2 civ have the relation. They even share the same sound.

See, there are even boosting the Frankish stable by 40% and the team bonus of the Huns.

1 Like

Too op, that would just give you 325 Stone upon losing a Castle rather than giving the player a conscience choice to packing up your ■■■■, relocate, and rebuild. Maybe if you they were a scavenger CIv but I can’t justify giving that to mongols. Though this does give me an interesting idea what if castle spawned like 150-250 Stone upon being destroyed?

Balance wise Mongols are fine but my problem is that historically nomadic civs play too much like any other Civ but with good mobility options. I also don’t like useless UT’s many of which are remain unchanged because they are given to some of the better Civs. There was is a similar situation with atheism before the devs reworked it. But if this makes mongols Op this could be fixed in any number of ways nerfing Drill, increasing the cost, or removing the wood discount.

Considering they are both nomadic I agree.

I was and still am unsure about the wood discount. The way I justified this was by asking how often you need new building in Imperial age. This could also be remedy by making 50% faster building not affect military buildings.

Here’s the thing. You’re looking at a game that is over 20 years old and has always put gameplay and balance ahead of historical accuracy and wanting them to change that direction with complete disregard for how the game actually works.

This game has always put balance and gameplay before accuracy and that should never change.

Those things are not mutually Exclusive. What’s with wrong Civilization That have unique identity that reflect upon real history. Beside the game has made all kinds of changes since age of kings.

Whats wrong with the clearly working formula? Why does if need to change.

Imo a game called age of Empires 2 should resemble age of Empires 2. And someone who played the game 20 years ago should be able to pick up the game today and play those same civs without having to learn a drastically changed civ.

But nothing like “movable buildings” and the likes of what you’re asking for.

All those exist. In age 4. Age 2 should be age 2.

Is your issue with Civs having a unique idenitites or civs being historically accurate?

Packed TC are a unit that exist already in the Scenario editor and is used in campaign scenarios. Would have said the same thing about Konnik’s Dismounting, Serjeant’s building Donjons, Coustilier’s charge damage, and Obuch’s armor stripping 2 years ago?


With one basically being broken and the other being balanced though

Yeah but you are basically paying for something waaaayyy worse than the Hun bonus who get it for free since dark age. The reason overlaps in the case of Huns and Franks or Aztecs and Burmese is that the bonuses arent just a better version of it since you have to pay for it

1 Like