Kinda opposite when skirmishers can deny cavalry archers even they have hussars in front. Xbow+pikes will have more trouble when facing knight+ skirm besides mobility problem.
1 Like
I also don’t like rams losing one of its iconic function. Rams also cannot tank skirmishers and protect arbalest from the back.
1 Like
It does not really do that. I would call this an extreme version of ballistics. Either you fight and tell every skirmisher to target what and win like that, or you manage to hold on with waay less of an army, get the tech, and get a better position in the long run, but more risky in the short term. I imagine this as the next upgrade of ballistics in the imperial age.
It is exactly like ballistics, it does not remove micro, it makes it harder. You could just put meatshields in front, now you have to micro the ranged behind it. In a way it would make the micro skill gap bigger.
I like the idea of having rams not hitting farms by default (or getting extra damage to farms).
I dislike the idea of making rams useless in impetial by allowing ranged unitd to ignore them.
I dislike the idea of auto micro in general because it makes many compositions useless. I think it is good to add halberdiers or champions to a cavalry army to disturb the halberdiers/camels damage, or add hussars to an infantry army to soak up handcannons/archer fire. Some civs have poor backline and are reliant on such a double melee composition. Some civs focussing on counter units would be instantly too strong with auto-micro.
It is a myth that micro intensive players get +500 Elo only by microing the army properly. Micro weak players have ways to work around fire not focusing their ideal target.
1 Like
I agree with everything you said, that is why I edited the post, starting with this from the start will make the game worse, but having it as a technology seeems so good, like ballistics, if you are good enough to notice the resources the enemy is not using, you can anticipate the research of this tech, and act accordingly. This has to be an imp technology, maybe the next tier of ballistics, that makes micro even harder, instead of being able to add just rams in front, now you have to micro the ranged behind it as well. I would say 1500 wood and 1000 gold is a good price, maybe too much. If the enemy throws that many resources just randomly, it’s a lost battle, even if the enemy does not have the tech.
1. If we started with this, Rams would lose one of their functions, but if we made it an expensive technology, they would not. Let’s say the opponent anticipated you bringing out rams, they could try to save up for the technology, and beat you because you were too predictable, or you switch it up completely, and now appear with cavalry, the opponent has a smaller army and a researched technology that does nothing in the moment, as they still have to take care of the unexpected cavalry.
I see why giving it out for free is a stupid idea, but making it expensive technology, would be like ballistics but stronger, makes micro harder, as just putting meatshields in front does not work, you have to micro the ranged too, and if we had the option one, that would be even better, telling half of the ranged to take care of the forward army, while the other half focuses on the ranged behind.
I do not like the automatic version as well, if it is coded, creating something like the first option is not far off. In my original text, I just proposed it, but now adding it as an expensive tech brings out the drawbacks the technology needs.
Yes, just auto micro is bad, so this has to have some kind of a drawback, like ballistics, but stronger.
The thing is, this does not destroy micro, first of all, the battles would go normally, and the technology would not be cheap, so we would not see it researched at all on high levels, as they can already tell their soldiers where to fire. And it is like ballistics, it does not make micro easier, it makes it harder, you now have to micro your ranged to dodge the volleys as well.
On low levels, it would make the game so much fun, they would not get destroyed by one-two rams, 11.
On the mid-level, and I would argue on the high as well, it would bring much more strategy to the game, seeing your opponent lacking army already tells you enough for what they are going for, so you can either start changing your composition, or hit even harder, not allowing them to mass up and use the technology to their advantage. Or the opponent just tricked you and was not going for the tech at all, they were just hiding the army behind, and once you decided to go all in, they appear.
Yes, but that’s just option 2 (which I just put there so it seems like there is an option 11). Via option 1, you could just tell your units what to focus on yourself.
All this was for ranged btw, but it could be done for melee too if we really want it. Melee would just choose the enemy to chase, and via stances, we could control what they would do if their pathing got interrupted by another enemy unit.
So skirmishers ignore pikes and target xbow behind or hussar and target HCA behind? Wouldn’t knight+skirm become stronger?
1 Like
I meant all ranged units, including skirmishers.
This would noticeably disturb the balance.
Yes, that’s the point, realistically skirmisher + knight should be very strong if the soldiers have “brain”.
But the cost of the technology is the same as getting 9 more onagers, 42 skirms, or 18-19 knights. On a high level, this would be nearly pointless (only useful if getting this tech hard counters the enemy), on a low level, it would make the game more fun.
Let’s say it is a 30v30 fight, already in the end game, one guy gets this tech, remains on 30, while the other is on at least 50. The tech would make the ranged stronger, yes, but at a price, like Ballistics, but stronger.
In idea, exactly this can be done for melee, but it would be more useful for ranged.
Still, this would make the game “Range of Empires”.
Ranged would not really get stronger, it’s giving beginners helper micro.
It’s like saying auto-farm made eco stronger (and this is expensive tech too, not a free one). Pros can already do what this tech does up to 90%(just a random number. They can already “tell” their ranged what to target).
reply to the main topic: no. rams being repurposed as moving shields is part of the game balance (moving shields are highly historically accurate btw)
we don’t need massive gameplay overhauls.
UI dictating gameplay or balance decisions makes no sense. It has lead to the disaster that was the water rework.
2 Likes
1, moving shields and rams were used to block volleys historically (like in the Crusades). However, they worked because they physically blocked the arrows from hitting the soldiers behind them. They didn’t work because enemy archers were magically compelled to aim at the thick wood instead of the soldiers. In AoE2, Rams act as meatshields purely due to an accidental limitation of the engine’s proximity targeting logic. If we want Rams to be true shields, they should physically block stray arrows. Relying on “dumb” targeting AI to make a strategy work is not a deliberate balance.
This wouldn’t overhaul the core game because of the Imperial Age price tag.
The main problem this solves is new and mid-level players dropping the game because they get trapped in ridiculous engagements without pro-level micro. Think about auto farms. That was technically a “gameplay overhaul” that automated a core macro mechanic, but it kept thousands of players from quitting out of pure APM frustration. Pros likely won’t even use this tech in standard 1v1s because their manual micro is already faster and the tech is expensive, but for the rest of the player base, it’s a massive QoL improvement.
I do not get it? The UI is literally how we communicate with our army. Stances and Formations are existing UI elements that dictate how units behave in combat. Adding a “Priority” toggle to that exact same command card is just expanding an interface that has been in the game for two decades.
I will stop replying with the following messages, as I do not have much time. The main goal is to make the game more welcoming to players, while not changing already existing logic too much. Introducing this as a very expensive technology merely expands the strategic depth.
1 Like
they already do to some extent.
This is not a simulation, but a game. This approximation has been fine for 25 years, why completely revamp the combat system now?
while I disagree with your proposal to add this, I found Thire7’s reason for disagreeing with you non-sensical. I don’t think “it doesn’t fit on the UI” is a good reason in favour or against anything.
The UI should be changed to accommodate the game, not the other way around.
2 Likes
Yes, but it needs to be the main reason why they work, not because archers decided closer = more important. Just make the collision taller (not sure how their code works here, but a lot of rams in front would work as a wall)
That’s the point, it does not need to be revamped at all. I am a developer as well, and it would take a day of honest work of one developer at max.
They already use a tile system to find the closest enemy, now the code would simply become like this:
Gather all targets, get a list of all enemy units within the soldier’s Line of Sight (LoS). (Which already happens in the code)
Filter for the selected class first, scan that list for units matching the selected class.
The conditional branch:
If the selected class units are found, ignore all other units. Filter targets down only to those units, and use the old standard targeting logic on this new list (like only seeing that unit type specifically)
If no units are found, use the old standard targeting logic (closest enemy or the one with the highest general threat level)
It is a grossly oversimplified explanation. I am searching for a simple solution to the problems, which are:
The fight micro is too hard for beginners, so they drop fast.
The logic of the game does not make sense.
And I believe this new tech could fix these.
1 Like
I am afraid that this may favor the knight civs a lot. How about siege? Scorpions and bombard also target range units behind? They will be super OP imo.
1 Like