Rotating buildings

I’m making this post because I think it would be a great, EASY addition for players who enjoys the visual experience of these types of games. I’ll address the problem many have with this idea at the bottom of the post.

Now, to clarify the title post, I’m not suggesting to dismantle the grid system as that would open a whole can of worms that would need to be explored in another post entirely. But, for now, simply having the ability to scroll while building to place them in one of four directions would be wonderful.

An example of where buildings seem the most jarring, are for instance the Keeps. They kinda look awful and extremely repetitive from this angle (and to be fair, they kind of look bad from other angles). Having the ability to break up the pattern would be great, adding visual variance that would help bring more life to the cities we build.


Outposts, production buildings and religious buildings are kind of bad as well. Think about the Malians whose got this side-bit sticking out in the same direction or the minarets that are featured in the same position in mosques. Now, why does this all matter?

Besides the fact that people enjoy these games for visual experiences as much as there are people who play it for gameplay purposes, there is another reason. Satisfaction. What does this mean? Any seasoned game developer would take satisfaction into mind when making a mechanic. Whether it is a bubbly pop sound in candy crush, a satisfying crush when an enemy delivers an axe blow or, simply the ability for players to arrange things symmetrically or visually pleasing. The lack of this function in AoE4 is halting.

This is a game. It is meant to be fun, no?

Visual readability

So finally to the point that people will bring up. Visual readability. My argument against this is simply thus; really? is it truly an issue that players would be incapable of identifying a rotated Keep? We can click them, read their names, in fact, I challenge you commenters to post a building in a different angle and try me. I’ll tell you exactly which building it is.

image

I don’t buy it. And besides, it is such a minute detail that it honestly does not even get close to weighting out the benefits of being able to rotate buildings. I think in fact it is a shame that players who care not for this, feel so compelled to strip others of their fun just because it makes their ability to identify buildings one microsecond slower than usual.

Again, I don’t buy it. People will commit hours upon hours on finger-skateboarding control groups, yet will aggressively oppose something that can also be easily trained is silly. It was in fact a mistake to not include this in the base game, as people would already have gotten over it and assumed it to be part of the game–those very same people who rave on about readability would have just chalked it up to being another part of the game to master.

So now, we’re left with a difficult hump to get over. And with 2023 finally here, I think it is time that this game finally implements one of many modern features that is seen almost unanimously in this genre.

What do you think? am I mistaken in assuming others would also like this feature?

3 Likes

Yes really.

It’s about readability at a glance. That’s why even between civilizations the buildings maintain similiar silhouettes.

Since all buildings are squares, we build on a grid, and they FINALLY fixed it where units can rally from any side, there is no functional benefit to rotating buildings at all.

1 Like

More than functional, it is an aesthetic question, especially to create custom scenes in the Editor, and to make Eyecandy beautiful.

The wonders that I have seen in the Age of Mythology in custom campaigns by knowing the editor and using well the positioning of buildings in 3D, especially elements such as pillars, small temples, statues, carpets, etc.

Eyecandy - screen5v2

2 Likes

I don’t know if its related but i got trouble get out from garrison building. Sometimes villager get out Infront of the building instead from the back. Thus got hit by arrow from tc. It would be nice if villager get out from door and we can rotate with side door would face.

This has been a complaint even back from the days of the closed beta. Units exit buildings from predefined, unmodifiable spots. The only exception to that rule is the TC.

Even Beasty has complained about this. Rotating buildings would fix this while adding a nice visual variation to the game.

And for those of you who think this hurts readability, read this mind-blowing fact: You can… not rotate them.

1 Like

They fixed this as I mentioned above.

Units exit production buildings from any side depending on your rally. I just tested it to make sure I was not crazy, and it applied to all production buildings including the landmarks I tried.

The issue still exists however with garrisoned units, including in the TC. This still needs fixed.

Rotating buildings is a very poor substitute for letting units exit on any side anyway since once the rotation is set it would be permanent.

But you cannot prevent your opponents/teammates from doing so.

By exit I meant to say ungarrison. Really annoying if you have, say, scholars inside military production buildings.

That was only if the above point was not planned to be fixed ever. I agree having units exit from any point is better than forcing you to rotate and being stuck with whatever placement you chose for the rest of the match.

There are a lot of way more annoying things you can’t prevent your opponents from doing, things that are inherent to any RTS and not just bugs or limitations. Those who complain about being unable to identify a rotated building are the same ones who say that birds flying overhead would distract them. If we go back to Beasty for a second, he plays with shadows disabled, so I guess devs should’ve never bothered to add shadows in the first place? There are way too many kinds of players and options should cater to as many of them as possible. Want shadows? You can enable them. Find them distracting? Turn them off. Same as when we all wanted player colors. Want blue and red? Use just blue and red. Hate rotated buildings? There should be an option for that and it should affect everything you see (including your enemy’s structures) since it has no other practical advantage whatsoever, it’s just eye candy.

I’d say it is the same arguments on zoom:
In many other 3D RTS games like AOM or AOE3, I never see people complaining readability being harmed when they are allowed to rotate/zoom out.
And I don’t think the style or design of AOE4 is so special that the readability will be utterly ruined with a different rotation/zoom.
If so, however, it is a bad design that should be avoided (which again I don’t think is the case with AOE4). Don’t design buildings that are totally unidentifiable from a different angle/zoom. It’s like hard-coding all your values and numbers and only restricts your potential and hinders future changes.
If you can make all units distinct from all directions, you can surely do the same with buildings.

I agree, but I think most players don’t care at all about being able to rotate buildings and most would not bother to ever use such a feature if it did exist. So I don’t know why they would bother adding it in when functionally it shouldn’t matter.

Whether there are more people that actively want it or actively do not I am not sure, but since it does have some small effect on readibiltiy I once again don’t see why they would bother adding it.

That’s a good idea, if they were to add rotating (and fix the ungarrison which they need to do either way), I don’t see it happening though.

Some people who use the max zoom in AoE4 complain all the time about difficulty in clicking on units or sometimes even recognizing units. I suspect it is part of why they were so reluctant to increase the distance, and why they were hesitant to make panoramic mode the default. (Personally I think they need to make some general improvements to clicking on units and the feedback when doing so)

Of course it’s not utterly ruined. The effect is small, but a change typically needs justification of some kind and one for adding rotation seems lacking. Everything is a tradeoff somehow, and a very small negative still outweighs the lack of a positive.