That would greatly extend the length of a game, and building a wonder would become an optimal solution in most maps. People in 4v4 do not need to protect landmarks anymore, and just need to put one Mongolian landmark near the wonder in the conner and protect them with thousands of walls and castles.
Who wants a game like this?
Stealing home is risky but rewardable, and I don’t want it become useless.
14 Likes
I agree. This would be a change that results in team matches focussed solely on the wonder. Basically the teams would have a single minded focus on building a wonder first before the other team does.
Build a wonder first, and hold one sacred site for long enough to take a retaliatory SS win out of the equation, then all allies retreat to defend that wonder, and it’s gg. There was absolutely no sound rationale for this change.
2 Likes
Yes, there is a solid reason: Most of the feedback asked for it.
That thing that you are clearly winning and for sniping 3 buildings you are thrown out of the team game is very frustrating and not very fun for many, it is the reality.
6 Likes
Agree to disagree, but all allies abandoning base and concentrating on defending one single building is way more unfun.
If your army is elsewhere and your base gets obliterated, then you are clearly not “clearly winning”. Having the strategic sense to defend both your base as well as the wonder needs to be rewarded. This change simplifies it far too much and makes it an uninteresting race to a wonder.
6 Likes
Totally agree, tho I’m not a big fan of landmark snipe, it is anyway a strategy. But this change will totally ruin the team game. Any aggression in the early-middle game trying to take out a player will be totally gone. And every game will become a booming race, leaving only a boring strategy viable.
Not to mention a hide-and-seek landmark when the losing team (especially mongol) start to hide their landmarks to waste more time.
2 Likes
Couldn’t agree more, it is a strategy game, feudal all-in, rushing, semi-rushing, booming 3tc, landmark sniping, fast castle, fast imp, and wonder should all be viable options. If this change is implemented, it will make the only the last 1-2 options left.
I mean if you want to play this new landmark victory condition, you can just create the custom game and leave only wonder victory condition available, it is essentially the same. This mode allows player to comeback as long as a villager is alive.
Pls reconsider it, this will totally scares most people from playing the team game.
3 Likes
I do not agree. In the other AoE there are team rushes, there is no Landmark snipe and almost no fan gets bored in that mode.
Perhaps it should be removed that it is won by Wonder.
1 Like
Seems like a good change to me.
5 Likes
I agree with you.
At least there should be a debuff for people who lose all their landmark, such as decreasing move speed, decreasing gathering rate, unable to build other buildings any more.
1 Like
I dont know abt how AOE2 functionalizes, so I can’t say it works there so it gonna work on AOE 4,the mechanic is different. For AOE4, I think the feudal rush gonna be gone IMO, becuz ram is too expensive and when it can’t knock out the enemy, why would you even make it when making rams is as costly as 2nd TC or rush fast castle, you might be able to destroy half of a player base, but he aint ded as he saves most of the vills. Meanwhile, his teammate rushes castle with royal inst. and get cheap knight with 310 HP, and cost reduction, and it can easily overwhelm your combined feudal army ofc your harden spearman will be a paper for them to cut thru. If this is the cases, then every game will be just booming or rushing castle/imp then later wonder. Some find it fun I understand, but imo it lacks of strategy, making fewer dimentional, and inspires a non-aggressive play.
1 Like
While I haven’t tested this yet to fully see how it works I agree with your concerns and it should be at least considered by the developers that this might be the “new” way to play team games.
A player should try and master both attacking and defending as it’s not that hard to do it. Stone walls, keeps, outposts put in strategic places and you have more than enough time to react to an assault on your base. Plus your teammates might be there to help you out as well.
I think it’s a pretty smart change tbh. Maybe raise the timing on a wonder victory to accommodate the reasonable concerns, but overall I think it is silly that you can just snipe one player and magically get this insane advantage.
I agree with the change, many players myself included have requested this due to the lack of comeback options. You couldn’t retreat behind allied lines, rebuild and retake your base.
Sniping players out of a team game even though economy and military are intact should never have been a thing.
4 Likes
I can understand your points and while I can agree to that on a certain level, I also believe that while it’s a team game each player has to have a certain level of responsibility to defend it’s and his allies base and not leave it 100% undefended for a sudden attack.
The developers in my opinion should encourage players to learn how to attack & defend their bases and find a balance there. Of course, you can never be good on both as you have to divide your resources but that’s where team work comes in to fill out the missing places.
Right now it feels as if no one will take responsibility and even more care less of their base when they know they are “safe” and not try and protect their landmarks. I feel it’s a step in the wrong direction but will test it out to fully see how it is, might surprise me who knows!
Edit: I also want to point out that I believe that the majority of the team games would play out much better if people would simply work together as a team more often and communicate their strategies etc and not just play “solo” play with team mates because that will not do it.
2 Likes
That will still be true, especially when you have weaker players behind their allies lines trying to support by disturbing enemy trade, raid or launch a sneak attack on another front.
AOE2 had this dynamic, I don’t see how AOE4 should not.
We will see.
I would agree if sniping landmarks also legitimately eliminated your capabilities to play the game without them; If they were all attached to production or eco for example.
As it sits, a lot of civs can definitely still be useful without any landmarks, and while in a 1v1 sniping can still be done, you are always defending against one other player who is only as strong as they are good.
You could put 4 mediocre players against BeastyQT and there is def no way they lose without some strict conditions put against them.
And in a 4v4 system where it can be 4 strangers vs 4 friends, the coordination/communication can be devastating, especially where sniping off one player is involved. Creating an even more severe discrepancy.
So the solutions to this are:
-Remove landmark Victory entirely
-Allow surviving players control over the “lost” players stuff
-Create an artificial eco boost when one is defeated to keep it balanced
-Or do what Relic did.
I find option 4 to be the most engaging as it allows all players to stay playing Until they ALL lose together.
I agree with you, but there should be some debuffs as punishment to those who lost all their landmarks.
I think prohibiting them from constructing any building or units will be a reasonable debuff.
1 Like
If your economy and military are intact and you still get sniped out, then that’s entirely your fault, isn’t it? The point is that you should have had troops held back to defend your base.
Or even just stop them from rebuilding the landmarks so they never get those boosts again.
In other team games (league of legends for example) there are inherent disadvantages to having a weakened player on your team, but never so much, unless the weakness is extended over a large portion of the game, that one team can not make a come back. and no landmarks or their bonus’ i feel would be enough of an equivalent to justify the change.
In dota-like game, you can’t win by defending a building for a certain amount of time.
I think the biggest problem with this change is that it will cause people to favor wonder victories, in which case they won’t want to rebuild the landmarks, they’ll just want to build more armies, outposts, and keeps to guard the wonder.
Restricting them from making new military units or buildings would prevent this game from turning into a tower defence game, (of cource they could regain this ability after repairing their landmarks).