I want to read this topic not to argue about adding score in age4. But to explain what does that mean. I saw a lot of people talking about it, and there is a lot of misinterpretation about what it does.
“Score gives free informations, you should learn scouting”
This is an understandable argument from people that does not play with score like in aoe2. I want to explain why this sentence is completlety absurd for age4.
Scouting in age4 is the most easiest thing to do. There is no comparison with StarCraft or Age Of Empires 2. After 10 hours, I never lose my scout and I know everytimes what my opponent is doing. And I played a lot of games versus the best players of the beta ladder.
Iam surprised no one talked about this, but in age4 exploration is extremely easy, and there is no skill required. (grp ctrl for the scout maybe).
In age of empires 2, the scout is also your army, he is extremely strong, and you can win games just because you managed to keep your scout alive. So exploration has his risk, you can lose your scout to the ennemy town center, it happens even for the best players, you can sometimes get killed by villagers, and even get trap by fast walls.
This does not exist in age4, for the best or the worst I dont know yet, age4 for any average rts player is almost like playing chess. You see almost everything.
Does score still gives informations that you cant grab with your scout?
Yes, but that’s good for the gameplay, and it will make the games more strategic and more intense.
Islands : You cant scout your opponent, so you will have to check the score to see when your opponent build his landmark. Is that a bad thing?
I truly think, it’s not, losing to random strategies, that you just CANT anticipate because there is no exploration is not good in my opinion.
And the score said only that your opponent started to invest a lot of ressources somewhere, maybe he just started a lot of eco upgrades or he did a lot of fish. So you are never sure, exploration is 1000x better than any information that score will gives you.
Balck Forest : Let’s say your opponent build early walls, if you did not manage to get in with your scout(Wich I easely do 95% of times), you cant explore him.
The score will tell you if your opponent is going ECO approach or Military approach. But not in a way that you will be 100% sure.
You will have to build a tower to check for example, or just boom in a way that you can fast go for military just in case etc…
Is that bad? Do we want a strategic game, or a game where people just hide their strategies, behind walls and water?
I want to explain that the score gives almost zero information compared to active scouting. The score can said “Maybe there is military”, but he does not say if that’s archers, maa or cavalry.
I play aoe2 a lot (top 130 tournament ranking) and I never focus on score for those things, iam always active with my scout, the only thing that score told me is when he click up to the next stage. But this information is free in age4 because you can see the landmark being built, unless water maps and sometimes black forest.
I spoke about informations that score gives. Now let’s talk about why the score can be good.
What’s the score?
Score is the amount of ressources that both players have in bank + buildings+ thechnologies+K/D ratio + exploration.
What’s the good sides of the score?
As a player it will gives me an approximative idea of my strength. And opponent strength. Is that a big information? Does that ruin strategies? Not at all, in real games, you dont even have times to watch that information, and it’s not always true.
But it’s comfortable to have that information, hard to explain, it’s just better to have like a thermometer, like in dragon ball when Bejīta calculate Kakarotto force. That number does not determine his strategy, it’s just a number.
In team games, score is obviously way more needed, otherwise players will just resign if they struggle against their opponent, if they see their allies with a big score, they will have faith that maybe they will win the game. And it’s extremely hard to know in a 4x4 if the situation is complety dead or not, score will help players to end their game or to continue.
In FFA, the score is obviously needed, the winner of the biggest FFA ever in term of viewership in aoe2 was determined by the score (AOE_EVENT by ZeratoR (It was me btw :D))
The last but maybe the most important, age4 has been built in a way to be a streamable game, there is obviously a big focus in that direction, and in 2021, to mesure how a game perform, you will not just calcultate how much games you sold, but also how much viewers you have in twitch/youtube etc…
And the score there, is extremely needed,
In Twitch there is those guys, that plays one game in the whole year, but they love watching others playing, and those kind of active mumbers of age4 community will need the score because they can start watching games randomly from any streamer, and when they arrive in the stream, it’s extremely hard for them to understand what’s going on, unless you have that little information.
Of course iam in favor of the score in age4, but the topic is not about convincing anyone, I just want to explain the whole story about it. And why I truly thing that is a good thing for age4.
Thx for reading the entire post, and Iam sorry for my apromaximative english. This is not my main language.