Only 2 unique units per civ?

Age of Empires IV IV - Discussion
201

Every unit in aoe IV has a different model corresponding to their civ. This means each shared unit has around 8 different models. Their look also seems to change per age upgrade. So on top of having 8 different models we have around 3-4 variations per model.
This is ignoring civ specific bonuses and stats.

We can list every unit with corresponding clickable abilities and buffs but I feel that would be ultimately fruitless. I also literally can’t because of NDA.
My point isn’t to place one of the Aoes over another.
I just wish to say that judging Aoe IV rn on units is premature. As none of us have access to the full game. Perhaps a little after the open beta or official launch we can have a proper discussion about this.

3 Likes
202

The thing is I was hoping AoEIV to be placed in my list above what I have already been playing and experiencing for decades and I ain’t seeing that. Did I have too high expectations? Maybe.
Agreed however that I only judge what I have seen so far. If what I have seen is totally misguided or so badly interpreted from my side is yet to be seen. I highly doubt it though. And what I’m expressing is obviously a preference here. If you guys are happy with a bunch of generic and dull units that’s great for you.

5 Likes
203

Yeah just wait for official release and then you can decide on whether you want to get aoe IV.
Aoe IV will probably never replace Aoe3 as they are literally different games and settings.
So I don’t think the Aoe IV vs Aoe 3 debate is very meaningful. Maybe if Aoe V is set in the colonial era this divide would make more sense.

The most comparable game to Aoe IV rn is Aoe2 imo.

To you they may seem generic but I personally feel there’s enough variation. They all look different and have different stats. They are just unified by easy to learn unit classes. Like “man-at-arms” or “spearman”.

2 Likes
204

Yes, the diversity in AoE3DE is bigger than this in AoE4. Its like AoE4 is in the middle between diversity of civs. But at the same time the AoE3 diversity before any of the expansions, was not a lot bigger than this in AoE4. The European civs before expansions, where they didn’t had the taverns/saloon also, was similar to this AoE4 at start had. And I read that in the extra dlc they will make civs with even more diversity. Like what they did in AoE3. So, all these who complain about the diversity of the game, I think that they will be very satisfied with the extra development of the game. AoE3 at start in my opinion wasn’t so great game. But as the game continued development, now in my opinion it is the most fun game in the AoE series for sure. ( and I tell it although for 3-4 years when I was younger I was playing AoE2 every day.

3 Likes
205

@UrbanizedGem684 I’ll try to point some things you missed in you post about AoE4, that may give the impression that you were biased on your analysis. I just want to contribute to the discussion here, not to antagonize you in any way. I won’t say you missed anything on purpose, like others implied.

But first, some disclaimers: (i) AoE3 is by far my favorite game in the series. I’m the last person here who will try to speak ill of the game. But it has flaws and a lot of fluff that arguably adds to asymmetry, but doesn’t really add much to gameplay (this is subjective, I know); (ii) It is very hard to do this comparison, because of NDA and also because we don’t really know every aspect of half the civs in AoE4.

Now to the list of unique military units:

English

  • Longbowman

Delhi

  • War elephant
  • Tower elephant

Mongols

  • Mangudai

Chinese

  • Fire lancer
  • Nest of bees
  • Zhuge Nu
  • Granadier

French (you pointed theese as “upgraded versions of common units”, but that is applicable to many unique units. By the same logic, longbowmen - both in AoE3 and AoE4 - are just upgraded crossbowmen/archers. We don’t know if the French UUs actually are upgrades, substitutive units to their common counterparts, or additional units, like we see with the Chinese, who have 2 different crossbow units. I’d count them as unique regardless.)

  • Royal knight
  • Arbalétrier
  • Cannon

Abbasids

  • Camel Archer
  • Camel Rider

HRE

  • Landsknecht

Rus

  • Horse rider
  • Warrior monk
  • Streltsy

Naval units: I won’t go into details here because of the NDA, but I feel AoE4 offers more diversity in this regard. As shown in the game’s booklet, AoE3 vanilla had 2 unique ships. We already know the Rus have their unique ship, with an interesting ability.

Not counting ships and whatever I may have left out of the list due to the NDA, we have 17 unique units in AoE4, opposed to the 12+3 you pointed. Closer to the 20 you counted for AoE3.

Buildings:

AoE3 Vanilla had:

  • Blockhouse
  • Bank
  • Mosque
  • Manor

AoE4 (there are probably more):

  • 42 landmarks of the Chinese, Mongols, English, Delhi, Rus, HRE and French (assuming each of them has 6, and the Abbasids don’t have any.)
  • House of Wisdom
  • Hunting Cabin
  • Ovoo
  • Ger
  • Mosque

Economic units in AoE4 (you listed 3 unique vills for AoE3):

  • Imperial official
  • Scholar
  • Prelate
  • English villager, who attacks with a bow

Scouts in AoE4:

  • Khan - I’m going to list this as a scout, as you listed thhe explorer this way, and they seem equivalent.

Game-changing mechanics (I’m referring to unique traits of the civs that alter the fundamentals of the game, so that are not just bonuses):

AoE3:

  • Russian block training
  • Dutch gold economy with banks and villagers produced with gold
  • Ottoman villager production system

AoE4:

  • Chinese dynasty system
  • Mongol nomad system
  • Delhi free technology system
  • Rus hunting system
  • Abbasid different age up system

Now to the other ones you just mentioned:

Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t these all skins of the same unit, with different means of obtaining them?

This doesn’t add to civ diversity.

Mercenaries in vanilla AoE3 are an extention to the shipment mechanic. Since they are a common roster, I wouldn’t call them unique, regardless of fact that each civ only has access to a selection of them.

To conclude, the shipment system.

This is the gem of AoE3. It’s a major reason for many people to love or hate the game. I personally don’t like it very much, but it doesn’t matter.

The shipment system adds incredible levels of asymmetry, even though parts of it are comparable to mere civ bonuses. Regardless, it is the only reason I’ll agree with you that vanilla AoE3 is more asymmetric than AoE4. By the tech tree alone, I strongly believe AoE4 is more asymmetric.

6 Likes
206

Tbh it’s a not fair to put wonder in building list and compare them with aoe3 where aoe3 have different politicians instead of different wonders and it work mostly in the same way.

As a top aoe3 play and i played quite a lot the aoe4 beta, the asymetri in both game are pretty equivalent (bewteen aoe4 and aoe3 vanilla). The big difference is, in aoe3 vanilla all civ come from the same area, so it was easy to had very different mecanic later, in aoe4 we should have more asymetry in civ than aoe3 just because the roster are suppose to be more asmyetric (and that’s not the case).

I think aom2 is a better material for a few but very asymetric game

2 Likes
207

I disagree, because the landmarks provide aura bonuses, train units, research technologies, act like upgraded common buildings, and probably there are other benefits not disclosed in the videos/website. In other words, they act like unique buildings.

Politicians in AoE3 vanilla only give you a choice for resources and/or free units.

The same can be said for AoE4. I hope American and African cvis bring more divertity in the future, just like what happened to AoE3.

2 Likes
208

No because there are already a lot of different civ with different potential mecanic, and they wasn’t exploid at full potential, so no reason to belive that it will be better later.

209

Thank you for your perspective. I disagree however with several points. Some, like the civilian, priest, economy units or the ‘unique’ Lodya ship were discussed above. The surgeons for example is another unique healer that can build Field Hospitals. It doesn’t really matter if the Mercenaries are card units, the card system is integral part of AoEIII’s identity, if we are to count the Khan, the Scholar, the Chinese Officer or the dynasty-unique chinese units, then those count as well.
I’ll briefly explain myself in regards to some of the rest of your points.

Longbowmen are not upgraded crossbows. There are no other kind of archers in AoEIII vanilla. Longbows are a truly unique unit that functions differently than crossbowmen.

The relevant analogy here with the French units would be units like the Besteiros which are upgraded crossbowmen or other stronger version of the common units that bear a different name and better stats such as the Royal Guard. I understand that AoEIV seems to give them a couple of extra abilities but in my eyes they are facial don’t make a difference. All civs have knights, crossbows and cannons. But only 1 civ has each of the truly unique AoEIII units.

And as you guys, I can’t elaborate more on what I experienced in the Beta but this horrible ‘Zhuge Nu’ unit falls in the same or in an even worse category as a ‘unique’ unit for me.
The Camel Rider is completely unknown, can you help me a bit here? I don’t think I have anywhere seen this unit besides being mentioned somewhere.

In any case, I can even do all these huge favors to AoEIV, no matter how unfair and exaggerated they look to me, and AoEIV would still end up with less unique units than AoEIII.

AOEIV-UNIQUE
AOEIV-UNIQUE1116×351 12.2 KB

On buildings, I consciously did not touch them because it looks like AoEIV tries to take a lot of inspiration from AoEIII’s expansions like aging up with a unique building and I’m aware that it may have more than the base AoEIII game, although of still unknown usability.

Edit: I should add here that although buildings and mechanics are not directly related to this discussion that was about unique units (so it really cannot be argued that the unit comparison is biased based on any of that) AoEIII has a wide variety of eco buildings itself -even if not necessarily unique to each civ- like the livestock pens, the factories, plantations, banks, the capitol or trade posts that I haven’t seen or heard anywhere in AoEIV. Let alone a fifth whole age. It really shouldn’t come as a surprise how poor AoEIV looks in comparison.

Civ mechanics and asymmetry is where I disagree the most. And they really can’t be thought separately from the deck system. I think you missed a ton of them. Portuguese get free town center wagons which makes an ideal booming civ. Germans get free Uhlans with each shipment and send mercenaries earlier, British generate free settlers with each new house, Russians can train settlers and vills in groups as you mentioned but they also have this unique blockhouse buildings which makes them an ideal rushing civ. They also start off with extra resources and less vills. Spanish get faster shipments, have more royal guard units and more upgrade cards, French’s play revolves around their unique soldier-villager and they can form stronger alliances with the Native Settlements due to several unique cards. The Dutch and the Ottomans offer the most uniqueness in that regard and alters their gameplay immeasurably compared to the rest of the civs. Then all of that can be buffed or change through unique cards that I wouldn’t ever be able to fully explain in a single post. I suggest you guys to try out the game and check all these things thoroughly yourself. I don’t know what else I’m missing as AoEIII world is actually vast and complex. On top of all of that, AoEIII civs become truly asymmetric by lacking several core generic units that other civs may have.
I could go on how these mechanics feel more coherent and asymmetric to me than AoEIV’'s and how each civ shines in a specific strategy and at the same time has great versatility and replayability value through the card system and its age-up politician system that adds great variety but one has to actually play both games to see all these things and do the comparisons by themselves. They cannot be discussed here but we can get back to this when the game releases I guess.

Finally, I am not saying that AoEIV does a horrible at trying to imitate some AoEIII mechanics. It does indeed try to take some pieces from here and there and does some things in a different way than AoEII. But imo it fails to feel fresh and to be viewed as a noteworthy advancement to a 2005 game. And it definitely fails when compared to what I have in my hands right now, and thats a fully developed and remastered AoEIII:DE that is ages ahead of AoEIV.

4 Likes
210

image
image1113×348 12.2 KB

Are you only counting military units?
Here’s what I think this list is missing:
Dehli Scholar, Chinese Imperial Official, Chinese Guandao infantry, English Man-at-arms, HRE Prelate, HRE Macemen, Rus Lodya Trade ship & Lodya Attack Ship.

And thats what we can confirm.

3 Likes
211

This list of Unique Units looks terribly poor. I hope that the creators have not disclosed the entire content of each of the civs - hopefully.

PS: English, Mongols and HRE - the disclosed Unique Units for these civs are a total scandal - only one UU, really?

3 Likes
212

:zipper_mouth_face: NDA

2 Likes
213

Yes, that was the premise to begin with. AoEIII has twenty unique military units that can be created from your respective military buildings. That excludes cards, scouts, unique vills, natives, explorers and priests. If I am to count the units that you mentioned then it’s only fair to also count all of that as well.

2 Likes
214

you need to add what i’ve listed then. Forgot to mention the Mongols have the Khan and that english have unique vills.

You also need to take into account that there are only 8 civs in the game atm whearas Aoe 3 has 19.

A more fair comparison would be only the 8 starting aoe 3 civs.

image

1 Like
215

Yeah.
But with such a poor content they do not encourage pre-ordering their product.

2 Likes
216

yeah i wouldn’t support pre-ordering in general. I hope you get the product you actually paid for. So i strongly suggest only purchasing when the game is out and there are gameplay videos.

I preordered but thats because i’ve had the opportunity to test the game already.

217

Agreed. I always thought it was a mistake how every new civ in AOE3 were overly unique. Completely unnecessary and messes with balance.

2 Likes
218

Overall, the opinions here seem to be that everyone commenting who have played the CB (me included here) have no problem with the amount of civ diversity and UUs compared to aoe3… maybe consider that?

Ships: no info = all shared

that’s not what no info means. No info = disregard for now, and can’t be compared to aoe3 cos there’s no info

3 Likes
219

In my opinion, this game is not bad (the gameplay is nice and the graphics are not that “comic” during the game), but in terms of marketing it is terrible - overpriced as if they were not influenced by markets in poorer countries and poor advertising method - lecture about trebuchets is not an attractive advertisement, especially at a gaming event. In addition, AoE 4 Deluxe Edition has been forcibly added to Age of Empires Anthology, which increases the price of the set. Maybe it’s better to create a second such set, but with the Standard Edition? - the first may be called Anthology Gold and the second Anthology Silver.

2 Likes
220

True. I forgot that.

I guess my example was not the best, but I think you understood what I meant. Besides, we don’t know the unique traits of the French knight (if there are any, other than stats). The arbalest has a shield ability, and the cannon doesn’t have to pack/unpack, so they are definetly unique.

There isn’t much info on this. It’s a guy with a sword mounted on a camel. Seems similar to the camel rider from AoE2.

That’s fair, but I think this is where a lot of the asymmetry in AoE4 lies, so it’s worth mentioning. The official website shows the traits related to some of them, so it’s possible to imagine how they are used.

I know this very well, and I did not mention these on purspose. That’s because all of them are what I consider “just bonuses”, not “game-changing traits”. There are many traits unique to civs in AoE2, AoE3 (even beyond those you mentioned), and AoE4. These bonuses are what make the civs better or worse in determined strategies or gameplans, as you mentioned.

In AoE4, some civs are more geared towards rushes, others towards booming, just the same as AoE3. Even AoE2 has this, and that game lacks a lot in asymmetry. This is much more a product of the bonuses of the civs, rather than a prduct of the unique units.

I agree, and as I said, the shipment system single handedly makes AoE3 more asymmetric than AoE4, arguably more asymmetric than any other game in the series.

Again, I put the mercenaries inside it because they are common roster and are not acessible by other means in vanilla, so they trully are an extent of the shipment system. I doesn’t erase their value, and it only adds to the importance of this system to the game.

I didn’t mention this on purpose because of the NDA, but yes, it is very important and something present in AoE3’s common and mercenary rosters, also present and super important in AoE2.

3 Likes