Oppose the abuse of unique units

Age of Empires IV IV - Discussion
42

About other Byzantine “Mercenary” siege weapons

So far, the only one revealed was the Neest of Bees, which as I theorize is of Mongolian origin and is from Mongolian mercenaries. But in theory I don’t think it’s the only one. What other unique siege units could be shared as mercenary siege unique units?

Possibly Siege Weapons of Bizantine Landmark
Possibly Siege Weapons of Bizantine Landmark1165×590 113 KB

Situational

  • Ribauldoquin.- It could be, considering that the Italians used it, let’s say as Italian Mercenaries.
  • Culverin.- It could be, considering that the Italians and many European mercenaries owned them.

Unique Units

  • Cannon.- Of the French, there were also French mercenaries in the Byzantine army.

  • Tower of the Sultan.- From the Ayubid (DLC), it would be to represent Arab mercenaries I suppose.

  • Manjaniq.- From the Ayubid (DLC), it would be to represent Arab Mercenaries I suppose.

  • Traction Trebushet.- Lighter version of the Counterweight trebushet. I doubt it, if you already have the improved version, why buy one with a lower range and cost?

  • Huihui Pao.- This could be it, considering “Mongol Mercenaries.”

  • Great Bombard.- I find it difficult, and I hope they can’t create them. It wouldn’t make much logical sense for them to have them, especially considering that the Great Bombard was created by the Ottomans solely to destroy the walls of Constantinople. It is a weapon that appeared after its destruction and not before. The only possibility of obtaining them would be under the historical premise of engineer Orban but that under another name:

  • Orban’s Great Bombard.- In 1452, during the Ottoman siege, the Hungarian engineer Orban proposed to King Constantine XI the plans to build the largest cannon ever seen. However, the king had to decline to begin construction of the weapon because it cost too much, and they did not have the materials or money (especially considering that they were under siege). Orban then left the city to the Ottoman flank and sold the plans to Mehmed, who then built the Basilica to destroy the city walls. This, and not the Ottoman bombard, would be a good idea as a siege weapon, under the theory that what would have happened if it were finished. It would cost 2000 or 3000 gold, well, it’s my concept, we’ll see what results in the DLC.

  • Order of the Dragon Siegue Unit? - Due to lack of information, we do not know if this new civ has unique siege units, but in theory, the Byzantines also had mercenary allies from Wallachia.

  • Another new siege units? - As a spoiler or Hints of future civilizations, maybe there is a unique siege unit from some civ that has not been released.

Let’s hope that they only choose some mercenary siege units, and not all, especially since there are many nations that did give mercenaries to the Byzantines so that those who did not are chosen (such as Ottomans, Japanese, Incas or Mali) .

Of course, also consider that since they are unique mercenary units, if they had their unique civ technologies, they probably do not have them, just as happens with the foreign Mongol subjects (Khaganate Palace Guard lacks Battle Hardened and Khaganate Warrior Monk lacks Divine Light , Fervor and Saint Veneration).

2 Likes
43

Pretty sure this will give them access to culverin and Ribauldequin. School of artillery does it for french, so having byzantine with neither of these 2 by default, but give them access through mercenary would make sense.

I can imagine the great bombard also being available there.

But no I don’t think they will have access to huipao and to sultan towers as they are super specific.

Maybe they get access to cannon and manjiniq

2 Likes
44

I don’t think the Great Bombard will be accessible to the Byzantines because there would be balancing problems considering that the Byzantines are already going to be strong without the Great Bombard.

45

Maybe War Elephant Because the left side of the building has a Chinese design, and the left side of the building has the design of the Sultans of Delhi, and now why is it a war elephant, because it is considered a kind of siege weapon.

46

To be honest, I hope the Byzantines don’t get the hui hui pao. I just think it should be a Mongol only thing.

I mean, the Mongols brought those muslim engineers to make the hui hui pao for a specific purpose to sige Xiangyang. For those specific engineers to be “mercenaries” and go back to then be used to the Byzantines is a historical longshot for me.

47

Lol.
If the Nest of Bees isn’t safe, then no siege equipment is safe. This is such a bad idea for a landmark, and so is the entire mercenary mechanic that introduces no new content to the game.

48

Yeah mercenaries are highly likely to break things. What I am concerning is if some units are better as mercenary than in their original civ, then the game is going to become Age of Byzantium. For example, if Byzantium can go for age 2 royal knight with longbow, then England and France can simply be removed. I don`t know much about history but I know mercenary has to be assistive, otherwise the gameplay will be broken.

And I really love the criticize from other replies that blaming Chinese is not designed unique enough. The dynasty concept is great but it is just not designed to be viable in games as they are way too expensive, and for the gunpowder feature I would say it is outperformed in every aspect by Ottoman`s Jans-Sipahi. It is even more ironic that the firelancer, who wields a lance with explosive on its tip, does not even have a gunpowder tag. What makes Chinese bad is exactly those under-addressed uniqueness.

49

True, that unit is very special for that Civ.

In fact, I remember the encouragement I had when I learned that the Mongols went from 2 to 3 unique units, precisely because of the Hui Hui Pao as the main course due to the change they made to the Khaganate Palace.

If they take away that special unit, as difficult as it is for the Mongols to invoke it, and make it common to the Byzantines, it would lose that touch that makes it “special.” (Just now I understand what Chinese users feel about the Nest of Bees.)

I just want to think that with 1 unique Mongol siege unit (Khaganate Nest of Bees) that is the only thing they will build of them as a mercenary.

I also don’t think the Landmark will give them all the siege weapons in the game, because otherwise they would be too “broken” as user38 mentioned. Hopefully they only choose Civ weapons with which the Byzantine Empire really used mercenaries, otherwise this topic will be the same as “The Japanese walls that use the Chinese model” or the “Round Japanese shield”, an aspect to criticize for its un-historical content until it would be corrected.

From what I understand, in AoE III the mercenaries were balanced by making them “more expensive” than the base units, limiting them to specific shipments and with a high population cost, so that you wouldn’t amass too many.

In fact, I think that the Order of the Dragon will also revolve around mercenary troops. If we consider the Black Army of Corvinus, and when they reported that in theory they would be “less numerous contingents” than other civs; I suppose that means that like Age III, for Age IV the mercenaries will cost more population per balance.

It could easily even be that the Byzantines are not as broken as we think (weak in feudal or I don’t know) and then they are going to have to make balance adjustments.

I guess when Zhu Xi Legacy comes out, if this civ is more comfortable than the basic civ, maybe the devs will add changes to the Original Chinese civ. I didn’t know that the firelancer didn’t have the gunpowder subtype, I guess for balance it’s so that its area damage doesn’t benefit from Chemistry.

On the other hand, something worrying must be said:

  • It has not been confirmed whether the Ghulam that appears in the Ayubid civ images counts as Ghulam or as a man-at-arms with Ghulam’s design. Nor if the Civ Juana will have the Royal Knight and the Arbalester. Zhu Xi legacy will also have Zhu ge nu?

  • If the civ variants have many unique units of their “parent” civ, it would be a bigger problem, because then France would literally be left without “unique unit”, being surpassed by its variant version. The most affected will really be the HRE, since apparently its variant will have about 6 or more unique units, including a powered version of Landsknetch, and HRE still only 2.

In fact, with the absurd amount of unique units that the Byzantines have, and also that the Ayuubid will have, perhaps it is worth thinking that the original Civ could also have more unique units in the future or changes to balance the variation in power.

It Appears Only one Variant can Coexist with the Originals
50

Comparison beetwen Byzantine Landmark and Indian Towers

Comparison beetwen Byzantine Landmark and Indian Towers
Comparison beetwen Byzantine Landmark and Indian Towers1321×641 143 KB

Well yes, the Foreign Engineering Company’s tower looks very similar to the towers of several Rajput forts and shrines in India. But of course, the Delhi Sultanate, the only civ in India at the moment, does not have a unique siege unit. But if we count the elephants, it could be.

The thing is that as far as I remember, there are no records of Hindu or Delhi Sultanate mercenaries fighting for the Byzantine army. There are fewer records of the use of war elephants by the Romans after 0 AD. Let’s hope that the Devs are historic and don’t give them random siege units just to fill in the Landmark, because if not at this rate they will also be able to have Tlaxcala mercenaries or Chimu troops when the Incas and Aztecs come out.

Trying to justify the elephants I only see the following ideas:

  • Turko-Persian Ghasnavid Elephant Mercenaries? - Doing a little research, the only strange possibility would be to represent the Ghaznavids (Delhi Sultanate Age I), and the Turkic mercenaries they sometimes hired, although in general they hired them as Horse Archers , but perhaps some Syrian elephant before they became extinct. If not, perhaps the Khorazmian Empire, who also used Persian elephants and were the closest ones that would justify their use. I’m just theorizing by the way.

  • Ilkhanate Mercenaries? - They would count as Mongol mercenary elephants, who in that khanate became “Persianized”. Since they had the Persians as ######## I suppose we could say that they had elephants in their army. The Rajput design of the tower would be because there are not many designs of Mongol fortresses or towers from the time of the Ilkhanate or the Timurid Empire. Again, I’m just theorizing.

Another posibilities:

  • Islamic design? - The other possibility is that they looked for an Islamic arquitecturen to represent that they were given some unit of some Islamic civilization, such as the Ayuubid, and perhaps the Manjaniq. Otherwise, it is probably a design that sought to be exotic, so they choose the indian arquitecture of Delhi.

  • New unique siege unit for Delhi or Rajput Theoric Civ? - Otherwise I don’t know, I’m just theorizing because the Indian design, unless they use the Rajput Rocketeer, since the architecture of the tower looks more like towers from the area of the Rajput Kingdoms than specifically from Delhi.

1 Like
52

image
image817×781 97.3 KB

The tower is ripped from Imperial Delhi’s Barracks. The Chinese part of the building is also ripped of Chinese Barracks. They just reskinned the models to use the same textures as other Byzantine buildings.

4 Likes
53

Well basically the Legacy has the same unit set as their basic civ. The imperial guard and yuan raiders are what the Legacy has above the basic civ, but it looks like the Legacy trades them with firelancers, as both Zhuge Nu and grenadier appears in the announcement but firelancers do not. Beside of that the Legacy does not have imperial academy, meaning that they will have less tax gold, and probably they have to train imperial officals from TCs. They will not have a strong economy as the basic civ but potentially a better military and esaier playing

1 Like
54

Moreover, since it is possible to give Nest of Bees, which Byzantium had never encountered before, why cannot China also produce “Greek fire”? (Also known as the “Flame Thrower” of AOE3) At least the latter is an exact existence in history.

image
image800×1065 168 KB

2 Likes
55

True, and the Chinese were technically the civ with the most unique units in the game (6), and now the Japanese have 12 or 11:

  • 1- Shinobi_ 2- Onna Musha_ 3- Shintoist Priest_4- Sohei (warrior Buddhist monk)_ 5- Katana Samurai_
    6- Samurai Bannermen Katana_ 7- Samurai Bannermen Archer_ 8- Samurai Bannermen Cavalry
    9- Ozutzu gunner_ 10- Red Seal Ship (THe amphibious trader)_ 11- Ship with Bo-Hiya 12.- Buddhist monk (don’t know if it would be a different unit from the normal monk)

This is serious, and is something that should be discussed for balance: In general, both Byzantine mercenaries and various Japanese unique units are going to give them a certain advantage for “Optimal Build” and versatility over classic civs with fewer unique units or landmarks with less use and possibilities.

As since the 3rd season, the option has never been to eliminate unique and special content, in the future, as I mentioned in another recent topic:

  • Probably the most optimal solution is to increase, if possible, the unique units available by other civs, either by unlocking in Landmarks (improving versatility of options), or as part of a new roster. Let’s hope that new models are used, and not recycled from campaigns, unless obviously they are very good at discarding them (crusader knights of various orders for example). I just assume that if we want new designs, it will take a little extra time.

  • More unique technologies for base units of the classic civ common roster.

Let’s also hope that due to the profits from the DLC, the developers will feel more motivated to generate new content, if that is the real limitation to improving the balance.

2 Likes
56

Yes, this game is a satire and self contradiction. The Chinese in the game possess powerful gunpowder weapons and are the inventors of gunpowder weapons. They then discover that all civilizations in the game possess powerful gunpowder weapons, and those who understand weapon knowledge know that almost every civilization has more advanced gunpowder weapons than the Chinese. In the end, they discover that China’s weapons are actually the oldest and most backward. Mali, Japan, Byzantium, and other regions that were far away from developed civilizations in the Middle Ages, or were closed island countries, or had never seen artillery, all had more advanced artillery than China. If that’s the case, please change the characteristic labels of the Chinese in the game, it’s too embarrassing. As a typical conflict area between farming and nomadic peoples in the world, with two different styles of confrontation, the Chinese in the game do not even have cavalry archers, which is not in line with history, because in the conflict between two different combat methods, there will definitely be mutual learning and imitation. Those who understand Chinese history know that Chinese cavalry is also very powerful. Defeating the Xiongnu, Rouran, Turks, and Mongols, as well as expanding into the western territories, all rely on the strong combat power of Chinese cavalry.

1 Like
57

I am very glad to get your approval. My previous DIY design was mainly based on my personal interest in Byzantine history and my creative summary of game experience.
Now to see the Byzantine camp officially in the game, I was also very surprised.
I recently participated in a folk MOD of Age of Empires 3 Decision Edition, responsible for UI art work, and welcome to share the discussion when it is completed. :smile:

3 Likes
58

China is already one of the strongest civ in late game. The reason China gets the “gunpowder” trait is because it has handcannon slits instead of arrowslit in tower and tc. It also has the most unique tech related to gunpowder and get chemistry for free. Handcannoner with better range (the only one that outrange archer and crossbow in the game), and don’t forget the clocktower that give all siege more hp.

The number of unique units doesn’t make a civ stronger. For japan most of unique units are just regular units with slightly different stats. And the banner is something you add to a unit doesn’t count as +3 unique units. The ones really unique are shinobi, samourai, onna musha and otzutzu. That’s 4. And Japanese won’t have access to crossbow or MAA so they don’t really have more versatility. They are a bit like Malians.

1 Like
59

Among all the excuses my favorite one as always is “NEW PLAYERS CANNOT RECOGNIZE NEW SKINS”.

Especially after the announcement of a whole civ that is basically reskinned HRE.

I wonder why people always like portraying “new players” as mentally *****ed who cannot remember this or distinguish that, while it is the “veteran elite competitive players” who oppose anything aesthetic.
Still remember how you got into ANY game?

7 Likes
60

About Japan civ unique units:

  • Only because it was one of the most isolated countries during the late Middle Ages, as well as the development of various unique types of weapons, it was expected that the Japanese would have a large number of unique units.

  • Of course, although the quantity is high (13 or 14?), many of them are substitutes for the basic rooster units (Onnamusha → crossbowmen), and many extra ones have an economic or support nature (Buddhist monk, Shinto Priest, Treasure trader We’ll see if in any case it is balanced or not.

  • Finally, I hope that the Tan3g1sh1ma musketer is added, even if it is as a weapon technology for the handcanonner (as happens with the axes of the Rus knight, or the honey-blade of the Delhi Sultanate), mainly I say this for historical reasons, Since it was the representative firearm of this civ, they even have a Landmark that refers to them, it would be shameful if they did not manufacture it.

NEW CIVS THAT COULD DESERVE SO MANY UNIQUE UNITS:

The good thing about this civ (Japan) is that in the future, if they roll "Aztecs, or Incas", in the same way as in AoE3 with the native or Asian civs, there are no longer excuses not to give them a complete rooster of unique units , as long as it respects a certain balance of counterunits that we already know:

  • Archer < horseman < spearman < HeavyInfantry < HeavyCavalry < spearman < archers < mangonels < cavalry

At least for the Aztecs I calculated even fewer unique units than the Japanese receive, and that because some would replace siege weapons:

  • Jaguar warrior (1), Eagle warrior (2), otomitl warrior (3), Cuachicqueh (4), aztec priest (5), celestial priest (6), sun priest (7), coyote priest (8), obsidian swordman (9), Tlacateccatl (10), tlacochcalcatl (11), Atlat spear-thrower (12)

Now I dare say how easy they could even have an archer or spearman weaker than the basic one (to compensate for their non-steel weapons) but with some special ability or cost discount; and names like “Nahuatl archer” (13), “Nahuatl spearman” (14).

2 Likes
62

I don’t think people really argue we shouldn’t add new unique units with that argument, just reskinning units while keeping the same base stats.

However we don’t need every civ to have their own skin for their generic knight unit with the same stats, it would get easily confusing, particularly in large FFA or team games. You can see this kind of issue in other games like League of Legends where even experienced players can confuse different champions or abilities because there are just so many different skins that some end up looking like other characters/abilities. Granted different order of magnitude.

This gets even worse for colourblind players or players with less acute eyesight.

We already are going up to 16 civs. If every civ had their own skin on a knight and a horseman, plus some unique mounted units, it gets can get very confusing in a hectic game what unit has what stats, especially in larger games.

It’s much easier on the player (particularly new, but even experienced) if units with the same stats have the same look.

63

They have their own skin for each generic unit but their equipment matches. Heavy armor, lance, sword, and shield for the lancer/knight unit. Light armor, spear, and small shield for the horseman. light armor and bow for the archer.
The few exceptions to generic units not matching this convention are those with techs that change their weapons like the HRE man-at-arms and the Rus knight.
if each civ didn’t get a civ or culture specific skin for generic units it would be immersion breaking. I would hate to have my Chinese Crossbowman look like they came all the way from France to fight in my army.

1 Like