Please no tower rush

Hi, Please don’t make tower rushing a thing. I know pros deal with it easily but the rest of us don’t, its just an annoying mini-game that you either know or you don’t. Same could be said with cannon rushing in sc2.

Leave a Like if you don’t jump for joy when you see a tower being built behind you tree-line. Not to mention its not historic at all lol.

*Yes towers for defenders advantage is good but just know, in any RTS ever people will always use early static defense for evil!


I think it’s very likely that they already have something in place to prevent Tower Rushes. Because everything else would beak the game.

  1. Wooden towers are available in Age 1
  2. Stone towers and menable walls are available in Age 1
  3. Delhi Infantry can build towers and walls
  4. English Villagers have a ranged attack

All those things would make tower rushes extremely strong, stronger than they ever were in AoE2.
English villagers that attack enemy villagers from range and than retreat into a offensive tower.
Delhi Infantry rush that just build towers in your base.
Building small wall sections to station your archers in the enemy base.

Starcraft 2 has multiple things to slow down Tower ruses:

  • Protoss need Pylons to power cannons, making them more expensive and time consuming to build plus making them more vulnerable
  • Zerg need creep to build Towers. Making it very hard to build them offensively.
  • Terran don’t have a tower. There are rocks blocking the position on the bottom of the ramp to reduce the effectiveness of bunker rushes.

Things that AoE4 maybe did:

  • Towers and Walls can only be build close to a Town Centre (or other buildings like Castle) that would explain the shape of towns we saw in the trailers
  • Towers and Walls can not be build close the to the (first) enemy Town Centre

Or less extreme variations of those:

  • Towers and Walls are cheaper/faster to construct closer to the (first) Town Centre (or castle)
  • Towers and Walls are more expensive/slower to construct closer to the (first) enemy Town Centre

Maybe there is a difference between Palisade Walls and Towers compared to stone that makes them easier to construct offensively in later ages.

Hard restrictions are bad, like the no build zone around the first enemy Town Centre in AoE3. Completely removing a strategy is ver limiting. But no limitations would completely break the game and it would be Tower rush in 90% of the games.

1 Like

Tower rushes are rarely seen (atleast in aoe2). Just because people dont learn to defend against them doesnt mean that they are op when they get overwhelmed. Whats next? I cant defend against feudal pressure - lets remove all units from feudal age.

If towers are opressive than nerfing them (stats-wise) would be the better choice than removing this stategy as a whole.

I really hope that they dont take inspiration from the AoE3 building limitations. It just sucks to be not able to build whereever you want and how much you want.


If Towers are nerfed they are also nerfed defensively. If there is no difference between building a tower infront of the enemy base or in your base than it will either be OP in offence or useless in defence.

AoE4 has a lot of mechanics that would make Tower Rushes much stronger than in AoE2. If there were no limitations the Meta would be all Tower Rushes at last in the Mid range skill level.
Yes a pro can defend against a Tower Rush but it would ruin the game for a lot of people that never have the chance to become a Pro because they are stuck getting Tower Rushed every game.

As I sad, hard limitations are not fun.
It would be better to add positive mechanics that improve the defensive usage of towers instead of limiting or removing the offensive potential.

They could give the Town Centre (or later Castle) a buff for near towers, make them cheaper, build faster, more HP, more attack or more range.
Not removing the option for offensive Towers but making them weaker than defensive ones.
Delhi Infantry can build Tower, that clearly shows the Developers want Towers to be used offensively to some extend.

I think the was Strarcraft did it was smart but can’t be applied to AoE4 directly.
Having to build a Pylon first delays your Cannon rush, giving the enemy more time to react, it makes it more expensive and it makes the Cannons more vulnerable. Cannon rush is still (at last back when I played) a viable strategy but not overpowered. If Cannons could just be build everywhere they would be OP.

1 Like

If you don’t like trush. Build an AI to practice against or see if there is one online. Just be on your toes and be prepared to have a second wood line ready or send your villagers to the tower to knock it down cuz they can’t attack when you’re under it!

1 Like

they wouldnt be stuck for long coz if u are facing it every game u learn how to deal with it very fast. More often u do something better u get at it

I agree that limitations about not building things somewhere would be really bad. Probasbly thats why AOE2 is so popular but I cant even look 5 minutes of AOE3 gameplay.

I’m not talking about me being bad against tower rushes, I’m saying that if tower rushes are very efficient, which they will be because of the reasons I listed, than a lot of people will hate the game and won’t have fun playing it.
Balancing is not only done on the top level.
If there a strategy that is easy to pull of but requires very good micro, timing, scouting etc. to counter this strategy will dominate the lower skill levels and lead to a none fun experience for the players.
In AoE2 they made the towers weaker in Feudal Age to reduce the effectiveness of this tactic but that also reduces the defensive value of towers.

Completely blocking the building of towers offensively is not a good game design and I never said that I’d want them to do that.
That’s why I brought up the comparison to Stracraft 2. Without the need Pylons the Protoss would basically Cannon rush every game. And a lot of people already hate how effective the strategy is already with the need of Pylons.

I’m certain the developers of the game are aware of this and already designed something to reduce the effectiveness of offensive towers compared to defensive ones.

U dont have to reduce damage dealt by towers only how fast they can be taken down if this feels too OP. In ur base it will be harder to get close to defensive tower than if this tower is in the middle of enemy base. If u build failed towers and they get taken down easily i dont see how that is OP game breaking mechanic. Game breaking mechanic is to force to only build around ur starting TC. Thats boring and would kill the game.

I would personally like some kind of granary system where all resources are stored. And when something needs to be built u need time to get resources from granary to new building foundation. this way u cant randomly drop castes in the middle of enemy base. U need to bring resources there 1st which can be cut off by enemy. Well u got my point

1 Like

and this is a good way to nerf the tower rushing, you either nerf them by lowering it’s hp in certain age where they can be abused to hell or longer building time for this certain age, and also the defensive value of tower in aoe2 doesn’t matter in feudal age since there is a zero reason to build tower aside from scaring archers.

probably the solution for it is to make the enemy towers build a bit longer in your base compared to anywhere else, but it’s too early to tell since who knows tower rushing might not be a thing in aoe4 or it will be horribly weak

1 Like

the real interesting thing is how to balance some kind of stone wall in enemy base with archers on top of it without hard restrictions where to build stone walls. I already see a nice strat to start building stone wall just a little outside enemy base and slowly build it inside their base. So archers can keep advancing inside enemy city

I would keep the freedom if building anywhere as in AoE II, but with a caveat:

  • Some defensive structures need to be relatively close a TC. You can still tower rush and build anywhere, but you need to invest more resources in building and defending an additional structure. Basically, TCs enable a construction ring around them.
  • Some structures shouldn’t be restricted by this, such as lumber/mining camps, mills, walls.

You can justify the realism of this as towers, castles, etc. need upkeep, food, water, etc, so they can’t be in the middle of nowhere or right next to an enemy base.


if i would have to pick

  1. build anything anywhere
  2. only build things near ur TC

I would for sure pick option number 1. Much more fun game that way.
Maybe thats why in my eyes (AOE2 > AOE3). But ofc not just that

1 Like

To clarify my post, you wouldn’t be limited to only an area around your initial TC. If you want to build something far away from your starting point, simply build another TC first and then tower rush at will. But now you will have to think twice before spending that extra stone and also defend your new TC. If the new TC is destroyed, the towers either go dark or can be retaken by whoever builds another TC in the vicinity (they can be hijacked or retaken by you).

It would work in a similar fashion to Protoss pylons as someone mentioned above, but allowing for some freedoms and strategic mechanics.

hmm i dont know about TC’s and towers going dark if its destroyed but retaking towers would work very well against tower rush. If u dont defend it enemy overtakes it and boom - u made his defense better with ur own resources. That is a good idea. Same maybe could happen to castes. I dont know

Probably there is already a lot of cool stuff we dont know about

I think trush is not more overpowered than any other available strategy and just improves the variety of gameplay.
If there are any balance problem when AOE4 comes out I propose to make towers and walls easier to destroy while under construction or to make the villagers unable to build for some seconds after being attacked.
I really don’t want building placement restrictions as a solution.


Amen to this brother


When Microsoft published Rise of Nations, we could see the measure they took to prevent Tower rushes and forward Castles: National borders. They ensure that it’s impossible to build on another player’s proximity. It does seem that Microsoft took note of people’s frustration back in the 2000’s.

Something like National borders is an interesting mechanic. However, I prefer the way things in Age of Empires are made. I agree with the people who say that if you want to overcome Tower rushes, you have to grow and become better, and not yearn for the developers to forbid it.

I suggested building placement restrictions it but I don’t love it either, to be clear. I just think of that as one solution but I’m sure there are better options out there.

I am honestly not worried about tower rushing because I tend to like campaigns and offline skirmishes more, so things can remain as they are with AoE II and III and it would be fine by me.

Tower rushes in AoE2 are not overpowered (and have never been), and sometimes it’s the only way to have a favourable game in situations where the civ matchup is otherwise really not in your favour.

I don’t expect that tower rushes will be OP in AoE4 (if they will even exist), given how much nerfs they have been slapped with in AoE2.

There will be more strategies and cheesy rushes beside tower rush. Many of them will seem like overpowered but players will figure out how to deal with them.

Rank system makes it easy for you to defend yourself against tower rushes because your opponents will be on your rank. Or custom games with custom rules will prevent rushing for who wants to play calm until mid or late game.

1 Like