Normal view is 6 mouse wheel notches away from min zoom, while Panoramic is 9 notches, so the difference is significant.
Check out the Starcraft 2 screenshot I posted in my above post. The UI is considered by many to be the industry gold standard. It also has icons btw.
That’s fine, you have your preference. Someone coming from Total Annihilation or Beyond All Reason might find AoE2 zoom to be claustrophobic. It’s great there are games for all preferences. That doesn’t mean AoE4 should allow you to zoom out to impractical levels. If players can play games like Starcraft 2, which is insanely intensive, that zoomed in, they can play AoE4 just fine. For a modern RTS game, it’s more than fine, without causing imbalances by requiring exaggerated system specs to be able to play on an equal field.
EDIT: Also, question for you. Why doesn’t the Enhanced Graphics Pack in AoE2 allow you to have the same zoomed out level? It’s for bigger monitors after all.
Just admit AoE4 wouldn’t satisfy you no matter how good it would be.
We got way off topic btw, so I’m gonna stop this here.
How much is one notch, though? Since you have to restart the game when you change the setting, I’m not going to spend time evaluating that today. It could be a 100 notch difference, but if each not is a nanometer, it won’t be much difference
Haha, yeah, that zoom doesn’t look good to me. If that’s how it looked when it launched, though, looks good. Probably about the same as AoEs and AoM CD/DVD versions at the time. But games made in the '90s and early '00s were still feeling UIs out, experimenting, and being restrained by PC and low resolutions. Times have changed since then and playing games on what looks like the same screen real estate as an old 640x480 or 800x600 is a ‘no thanks’ for me.
But, hey, that’s why game “options” exist. The competitive scene can play their games on what’s probably equivalent to a 1280x720 viewport if they think they’re better/faster with that… and I’ll play way zoomed out in comparison. Everyone happy. But when the devs, essentially, say, “No, everyone must play as though it looks like it’s 1999 or on a 1280x720 screen, even if you never play ranked or MP against any humans,” then you might understand how I’d feel.
As for SC2 icons, they were being futuristic/sci-fi. Fits the game fine, and works for the year it came out. (It’s funny, though, looks like they actually predicted the ridiculous future of iconography.)
Someone coming from Total Annihilation or Beyond All Reason might find AoE2 zoom to be claustrophobic
I highly doubt they’d feel claustrophobic. They’d probably see it as a refreshing breath of fresh air. And if they hate it, they can mousewheel zoom is considerably
It’s great there are games for all preferences.
Too bad AoE4 isn’t one of those games
If players can play games like Starcraft 2, which is insanely intensive, that zoomed in, they can play AoE4 just fine
Don’t get me wrong… I can play AoE4 or any AoE game at the bad zoom level, it’s just annoying to do so. That’s the main reason why I’ve only played AoE4 once since buying it. I’ve helped fund the game and franchise, and if they can’t spend 10 minutes adding a higher zoom level for those who want it, then so be it. I know the game can have a farther out zoom, and it would be easy.
And my single-player, unranked, and MP-with-friends vs. AI wouldn’t impact you or anyone if my zoom was higher than you’re able or wanting to go.
EDIT: Also, question for you. Why doesn’t the Enhanced Graphics Pack in AoE2 allow you to have the same zoomed out level? It’s for bigger monitors after all.
… and since I don’t have a 4K+ monitor – as I said before I have 1440p – I don’t use EGP
In its current state and with the upcoming PUP simply adding a bunch of balance tweaks? You’re right. The problem is I see the potential, but MS doesn’t seem to be fueling much dev work on it to improve/enhance it in the ways I would do
Ok, this is more on topic, so I can comment. It hasn’t even been a year since they released a huge DLC with 2 completely new civs, and 4 AoE2-type civs. It’s been 10 months since then, and the game has received countless improvements, not just balance tweaks.
This update is not a balance tweak, it’s a complete rework of siege, which was a point of annoyance for a lot of people, i.e. a design patch. It also has both new and reworked University techs, new units for Malians, a Pause feature, and much better arrow trajectories. And it’s coming not even 2 months after they reworked Rus and added a new unit to Mongols, and so on. They’re doing all this while working on the next DLC.
I really appreciate that they keep improving the game and not just cashing in on half-arsed DLC. How many games do that nowadays?
Btw, when has AoE2 received its last DLC? Not the one from 6 months ago that only added a few scenarios that already existed. When has it received its last civ? I’ll tell you, it’s before AoE4 received its last civ. And creating new civs for AoE2 is trivial, you add 1 unique unit, 1-2 building models, a few stat modifiers and call it a day. The DLC in question contained 2 such civs. What AoE4 added in its DLC is the equivalent of 4 such civs, and 2 new architecture sets (AoE2 received its last architecture set in 2019 for reference).
I’d love it if the pacing of new content was quicker, while maintaining the same level of quality. But let’s not pretend there are 1 million people playing the game. It’s not League of Legends to warrant an army of devs.
Not the type of DLC that grabs my attention, personally, but I’m glad you’ve enjoyed it
Btw, when has AoE2 received its last DLC? … When has it received its last civ? I’ll tell you, it’s before AoE4 received its last civ.
And I care, why? I merely pointed out AoE2:DE has farther out zoom I like better than AoE4, and a less intrusive UI. It’s not a competition regarding everything about the games. No need to try and throw shade at AoE2 to prop AoE4 up on some pedestal. AoE4 also has arguably better audio (though I hate all the highly chatty units). Do we need to talk about that, too?
I haven’t been too thrilled with AoE2 DLCs either, for years and years going back to the last DLC for HD. So you won’t win any battles with me by bringing up DLC release dates and frequencies. I could care less if AoE2 or AoE4 get more civs or more balance tweaks for a very long while. I’m way over-saturated on that stuff. I want other things to come in DLCs for a while
It’s the game you play, which is even more popular, more easy to make DLC for, and still it receives it at a slower or similar pace. I think that’s a valid point with regards to your disappointment with AoE4’s DLC pacing. Starcraft 2 doesn’t even receive anything, and it’s the most popular RTS. So maybe we should be more realistic in our expectations for AoE4.
What would you like to receive in a DLC, apart from zooming out all the way to the moon?
That’d be sweet
Aside from that, maybe better graphics, weather packs, lighting packs, tree packs, gaia packs, dynamic FX packs, environment packs, water packs, 4 seasons packs, time of day packs, audio packs, new map objects and features, animated chickens in TC, more player color options, revamped UI option to be more like older AoE games, higher pop caps, bigger maps, true Conquest mode, various QoL options related to repetitive or annoying audio, etc.
It will update the overall game and enhance the experience for everyone at once, with the new flavors being possible on any and all maps, some or a lot of it selectable in the lobby and options screens. But I guess adding more civs snd balance tweaks every time are what everyone else wants, or all that the devs/MS want to do
I’d love some of those too, but I have a feeling a lot of people would want those to be free updates, and would get annoyed if other people get more Gaia, while they don’t because it’s gated behind DLC. Maybe they could add some of them to the Deluxe Edition.
I really like the graphics, with the exception of unit textures, which I’d like to be higher definition as an option in the menu for people who have enough RAM for that.
Weather would be sweet, and more fauna and flora. But packs implies microtransactions, which I’m not a fan of. I’d rather have those as part of content DLC.
Not sure what dynamic FX and true Conquest mode means though.
Animated buildings might be too costly for some systems, you already have a huge fps drop when looking at your base, but I’d love them as an option.
I don’t mind the current UI, but I wouldn’t mind another one added as an option. I just don’t want them to add MTX because when a game’s content is split into little pieces they usually take advantage of it to overprice every item. That would definitely make me switch to another game.
Audio is a bit too shouty for me too, but I have the volume set to 35% for them, so I still hear the Scout whistling when it sees my opponent.
I’m sure they will add most of those in time. They didn’t redesign Rus bounty for no reason, they’re definitely working on Gaia. They’ll probably also have to figure out how more fauna interacts with Pro Scouts and Islamic civs Boar restriction.
Edit: Btw, they did revamp the graphics once with the last DLC, improved the water significantly, the foliage, removed the fog when zooming out, added HD cliff and mines textures etc. So it’s not unthinkable for them to continue doing this and I really hope they do.
Throw in a new map or two showing off the new coolness, call it a Map Pack, and sell that then. Without more $ funding it, it’ll probobly never get made. By gated DLC, it can get done.
Putting new civs and campaigns behind gated DLC is no different than putting new graphics behind gated DLC, imo. I want civs as free updates, as would everyone, but that doesn’t usually happen. Why would a full-fledged graphics expansion pack be any different, I wonder
I’m going to guess a lot of these changes are aimed at competitive multiplayer balance? As someone who mainly plays vs. bots and friends, most of these changes are not particularly fun and I hope some of this is reconsidered.
I really like playing Chinese but why would I build gunpowder units now? What justifies their cost? I just personally don’t like the springald changes as exclusively a cheap anti-infantry unit. It seems like they are trying to make it more like the scorpion in AoE2. What is the purpose of the Mangonel? I always thought of it as a counter to large groups of ranged units but now I don’t even know what it’s supposed to be. Palisade wall build time doubled? So many wall nerfs over time. Are they trying to encourage open bases and constant raiding?
Overall it feels like these changes really screw over melee infantry while benefiting cavalry quite a bit. English Longbows are going to be interesting. I can’t see how they aren’t going to be kind of absurd.
This is all from the perspective of someone who doesn’t play competitive multiplayer. I can imagine the impact can be very different for those players/matches.
Yes this is something they fail to understand. I don’t know if it’s Microsoft or Relic, but they’re only catering to the competitive players, which is a huge mistake if they want to grow this game. There are so many more people who enjoy PvE and Co-op.
That said, if you ever get to play against your friends, you have to trust them that most of these changes are for the better. To give you an example, Chinese was very different at launch. Among other things, you could supervise the Astronomical Clocktower. They already reworked it heavily once, and at first it felt that it lost a lot of its character. But as you get used to the changes, you realize that impression is mostly due to shock of too many changes coming in at once.
I think it is time to leave AOEIV for once and for all.
Age of Mythology Retold is way better. AOEIIDE is much better than this game.
They will never give enough focus to PvE and PVP players, but only to competitive players.
Most players already left this boring game just because of this simple issue.
I guess they will never understand the problem and will end up like “UBISOFT” and cry like little babies.
Yes. For me this Is the main problem. Terrains are good and in 4k resolutions but unit textures are not detailed when you zoom in on them.
So, improve the unit textures would be very appreciated and i Hope developers are working on them for the next DLC.
More diversity about fauna and flora would be great and It could improve the immersion.
About “Conquest mode” i think he means something similar to the “map conquest in Warhammer Dark crusade” or Dynamic Campaign seen on COMPANY of Heroes 3
But i think these new Gameplay mode could be included in the next main AOE title.
Developers can improve animations for different buildings without impact on Fps supporting DLSS (Nvidia) and FSR (for AMD videocards and Xbox console). AOE4 doesn’t support this fundamental feature and developers have to include It.
Maybe my mistake. I think AoE4 lacked for a while the ability to have an AoE2-like Conquest as the victory condition. In AoE4, seems like Landmarks (or whatever those fixed locationz on the map are that you have to take over) were always involved eith victory conditions for a while? Maybe I’m wrong, sorry. I’m not a fan of those fixed locations there for takeover, and hope I can play games without them they remind me of trade posts and such in AoE3, which I did not like.
I fired AoE4 up the other day, and it seems possible now, though?
I’ll take a look, but if it’s not like AoE2 conquest mode, then nope, that isn’t what I meant
I am glad that you have a disruptive mindset, but for me, an experienced player who has worked over 1000 hours, this is devastating. With the update of the test server, I am no longer playing the game. I think there were too many hasty actions in this update, and it did not test as expected. Next, I will list a few questions
1: The weakening of infantry and the increase in university costs
This is a very serious issue because you are essentially cutting down a system and gameplay directly. Although they have little impact before the third tier, they cannot have enough ability to end battles in the fourth tier’s grind or under the crushing of the first tier. More infantry players will switch to the Golden Horse after upgrading to the fourth tier, because the biological bonus of the Golden Horse is much stronger than the tactics of elite armies. I don’t think reducing health and increasing melee armor is the right thing to do. We should continue to increase damage, health, and armor. The armor here should not be melee but ranged armor, which can gain resistance when facing more ranged units
2: Golden Horse Issue
Some Jinma civilizations can activate biology in the third tier, which will give them enough destructive power, even to counter forks or other units that can counteract them. This is abnormal, absolutely abnormal. I believe that the original strength of Jinma was already sufficient, and adjusting some values excessively may lead to serious deformities in the game. Some ethnic groups are simply not worthy of playing, while others must be selected, otherwise they will lose, which is very unhealthy‘
3: Camel Archer
As you can see, the current Camel Shooter can produce 2 to 4 books. The strengthening of biology and rockets has enabled them to overcome the final problem. They can now shoot anything. Is this really your will? We are losing the last few ways to defeat them, with extremely high maneuverability and basic damage, as well as rockets and shock to the Golden Horse. Do you want to see only a battle between Camel Shooter and the Golden Horse?
4: Rocket
I think this university technology should not be able to cause too much damage to buildings, as it undermines the fundamental design framework
5: Siege device
The change in the siege device is extremely foolish. You have dismantled the confrontation between the original anti equipment and cancelled the seizure of siege device rights, but you have not given anyone any other way to handle the siege device, just like stone scissors and paper. After directly removing one of the three, you are still complacent. This is the best update. Although the original system has been criticized to some extent, it is still sound enough to have a part of the game. In the new version of the siege device, I did not see any place for game. Everyone just needs to accumulate catapults and equip them with spearmen. Other civilization characteristics and special units are not very important because if you don’t do this, you will lose and you cannot handle the opponent’s siege. I don’t think this is a healthy match, as the other party is no exception
summary
I would like to add a few words. I am truly sorry that some of the statements in the article may have been incorrect. My original intention was not so extreme, but due to issues with the translation software, I apologize for any inconvenience caused. In fact, I am very willing for you to improve
I can also provide some ideas if you are willing to listen, but for me, this test server is a bit difficult to understand. If you think your update is correct, then that’s okay
My opinion is to revise the content of this update back,do you understand the changes？Can you understand what kind of shit you’re making？
This is my friend’s idea. Compared to me, he is even more disappointed
You are wrong, I have not seen any more mangonels in the pup games, now it is a risk to make them and lose them.
It is only true that the trebuchet will be more profitable and it was about time that the game was more aggressive.
