Return of Rome Discussion

If the design of the AoE 1 civs is kept, I see them at a huge disadvantage in case of a possible crossplay vs AoE 2 civs… like, they don’t have a scout unit, there’s no equivalent to Loom which makes villagers vulnerable to raids, if villagers can garrison in AoE 1’s Towers and TCs with the DLC, will the latters be able to fire back etc?

1’s civs also don’t have an equivalent to the Skirmisher and Spearman, which makes countering cavalry and archers a bit more difficult. The only advantage I see here is advancing to Bronze Age asap which only costs 800 food for AoE 1 civs + then slamming down an Academy and spam Hoplites.

It’d be definitely an interesting experiment to try out.

As a Chinese living in Chinese Mainland, I can tell you that Jurchen, Tanguts, Khitans ,Dali/Nanzhao etc. has not asked any questions. Tibetans and Uyghurs may be sensitive, but as long as the content of the game and the description of civilization are limited to the Middle Ages, it is OK.

3 Likes

According to one screenshot garrison to TC will be possible, but it will have no attack. In crossplay I would imagine they would also get scout (cavalry unit) as starting scout unit.

Hoplites would die vs range units, they are too slow unless you are playing greeks then they will be faster than common infantry. Hoplites would be like teutonic knight with lower pierce armor and slower, if we are talking about bronze age.
Slinger actually is anti range unit, but since it has lower range they wont be very good vs some range units. AoE1 units would have advantage in melee since they get more damage and armor, but they would be in disadvantage in range combat since most units would lack pierce armor and if they do get them their values would be lower. Since aoe1 siege units are effected by ballistics they have some advantage in there, however they total lack of pierce armor makes them vulnerable vs every range unit that gets close enough.

Not sure is crossplay even possible, if aoe1 and aoe2 civs will have totally different tech tree and not a single tech or unit overlaps with each other.

2 Likes

Modding AoE2 sucks.

This mod would brake with every DLC and would be hard to fix.
A new DLC adds new civilisations and units (potentially even buildings) that then take up the same IDs that you used for your mod braking it.
Then you either have to move your modded units to different IDs and brake all the content mode with the mod or you can’t support the new DLC content.

Something that I think the devs should to, that should not affect AoE2 gameplay at all, is adding all AoE1 units to the AoE2 scenario editor. The stats can just be copied from similar AoE2 units. If you want to use them you can use triggers to change their stats.
This would make mods a lot easier.
Reserving IDs for civilisations and technologies would be nice too. I don’t think that would harm AoE2 gameplay at all.
It’s not like adding a new unit brakes existing ones. Else they wouldn’t be adding so many scenario editor elusive units and heroes.

This would be something that the players have to work around.
It’s a clear and obvious weakness but that’s ok. Let players make their own rules for their lobbies or use features like treaty mode.

The Slinger is a Skirmisher equivalent but it costs Stone.
I think the AoE1 civs should get Spearman and Skirmishers in Bronze Age and then Pikeman and Elite Skirmishers in Iron Age.

But some AoE2 civs don’t have much to counter Legions and Centurions (even if their stats get equalised to AoE2 standards) because there is no reliable anti Infantry unit for every civilisation.

I think that’s ok though. People can make mixed AoE1, AoE2 teams, adjust AI difficulty, change team sizes or give players handicap to make matches fair.

I personally mostly care about the potential in custom scenarios.

2 Likes

yep, being doing that for 3 years straight now.

The only things I always hated in aoe1 was its inflated stats & upgrades, the weird bonus of cavalry versus infantry (like cavalry wouldn’t still be superior to infantry without it), the lame composition of its trash units, and the absence of heavy camel rider among other defensive units.

AoE1 cavalry is really bad. Like really. They had to buff it multiple times in AoE1DE and it’s still pretty bad.
Costs more then AoE2 knights while Legions are a lot cheaper then Champions (and also cost half population).
The bonus damage does not apply to the Hoplite line btw.

Yeah it’s crazy.
And tbh it might be better for AoE1 itself to get more AoE2 like stats.
And a more AoE2 like bonus damage system.

AoE2 is an improvement over AoE1 in most regards in my opinion, so it wouldn’t be bad to port back some of those improvements without ruining the overall character of the game.

But maybe it fits the setting better to have more extreme upgrades. You are gong from the Stone Age to the Iron Age after all, while AoE2 has you use Iron from beginning to end, only somewhat increasing the quality of the steel.

2 Likes

Japan did not have the technology and the maritime means to compete with Westerners until the end of the 19th century. They were often coerced under threat into yielding to unequal treaties and unilateral trade demands. A single western ship could terrorize the whole archipelago after a show of force on a few fishing villages, the shogun had no choice but to accept the claims of westerners who had come to trade.

2 Likes

That doesn’t seem like a bad idea

1 Like

If we assume 1 to 1 AoE1 stats then AoE2 civs have basically no chance.

The Legion has:

  • Cost: 35 Food 15 Gold
  • Population: 0.5
  • HP: 140
  • Attack: 13+7
  • Melee Armour: 2+6
  • Pierce Armour: 0+3

That’s basically the cost of Goth Champions but with 2x the HP, more attack and a lot more melee amour.
There would be no way to stop this unit. You can’t just use cavalry archers to shoot them forever when you get flooded by them. And the enemy can have 2x as many units as you because they only cost half population.

But it shouldn’t be hard to tone down AoE1 stats to work in a crossplay mode.
Cut in half Imperial Age HP basically.

1 Like

You do know that AoE1 unit upgrades are more expensive, which means you must get that far. Since AoE1 civs TC can’t attack, AoE2 civs have clear advantage in second age.

1 Like

That is true.
But it depends on how you want to set up your game.
This gamemode would not be played by pros vs pros because it if was they would very quickly figure out if AoE1 or AoE2 civs are better and then never use the other.

Since a lot of people prefer to play slowly and defensive, waiting for Imperial/Iron Age to attack, then AoE1 units would just be unstoppable.
AoE1 resource garter rates are higher though and Tool Age units are already a slightly bit better then Feudal Age ones.

what’s with that 0.5 population stat? It could be a very interesting bonus for a given civ.

1 Like

There is a technology called Logistics that makes all Baracks units cost 0.5 population (that includes Slingers and Axeman too but does not include the Hoplite Line)

But you need to remember that AoE1 was designed to be played with 50 population limit in mind. Even AoE2 was originally designed for a population limit of 75.

2 Likes

Yes, let’s say that now instead of having 0.5 pop for every 25 military units, we’re going to have 0.5 pop for every 100 military units…

1 Like

It could be very very interesting, I wonder how unique theyll make the legionare, maybe like the jaguar warrior kinda? or resistant to archers?

I wonder when the page from this DLC will finally appear on Steam.

6 Likes

Maybe one week before the launch of the dlc…

2 Likes

Afaik by the end of the month

3 Likes

So maybe in next week?

Yesterday would have been good date, since it was the founding date of Rome.