Less accurate, sure. But I don’t think calling catapults “far less lethal” is at all accurate here. Killing the horse was often as fatal (to the rider) as anything hitting the rider themselves.
Anyhow, my point was still about strategy. You don’t charge massed siege without expecting to take damage.
And that’s before we start on the fact that OP is floating like, thousands of resources. Whatever nerfs various siege units in this game need, people are justified in criticising how the OP seems to be approaching gameplay. It’s not a good take that should drive balance direction. And neither is “historically accurate”, like the OP was being sarcastic about.
Cannon shots propelled by gunpowder are more lethal than catapult projectiles whose velocity comes from gravity.
If your original argument is “the catapults in this game are so implemented that they function like real world field guns so you should not charge cavalry into them” then I can see your point.
I’d argue to the person or horse it hits, the difference is academic.
My point is “charging any ranged unit head on is a silly idea, unless you’re absolutely sure you can kill all of the target units with whatever you have left in combat”.
Admittedly, so is leaving your siege completely unguarded. So what balance lessons should we take from these two players?
I do not think high trajectory projectiles have a higher chance of hitting the horse than cannons.
If you’re talking about the game that depends on the game design. And it’s very easy to tweak the stats and it becomes the direct opposite.
But in real life that happens all the time. Before bayonets any “ranged” infantry need additional protection. On the other hand if people have the ability to know for sure any strategy is “absolutely” going to work then they will always use the right strategy, but that is not the case.
That’s probably because is aoe 2 gold is more limited and siege are expensive and usually not the best bang for the buck so to speak. In aoe 3 siege or artillery is good but easily countered by building cannons that that are good against artillery. My main problem is the counter system in 4 is bad, especially against siege
The issue here is that you take history and want to apply it on the game-play which doesn’t work for a game like Age of Empires because it’s never been that authentic when it comes to it’s game-play and combat. It always been very chess likely, where spear men counters horsemen, horsemen counters archers etc and that’s how they balance it around that idea.
The history part is true when it comes to how they design each civilization, it’s architecture, it’s campaigns etc etc.
Perhaps total war is better suited for you if you want that kind of battle and combat mechanics.
You are right people get way to into their historically accurate discussions. It’s AoE it’s a game. That being said siege is a major issue and needs a better counter or needs to be nerfed in movement, packing speed and hit points, this is especially true for bombards and nest of bees
Spamming Elephants with ballistas or just a ballist in AoE 2, with which nothing can be done if the player was able to spam enough of them, apparently just some kind of joke…
Its not historical accuracy thats important its capturing the feel. Age of Empires is meant to sell the fantasy of being in command of a medieval army in pitched battles. That means formations of soldiers with pikes, spears and swords with arrows flying through the air and horsemen charging in.
Massive battalions of mangonels trundling along like wooden tanks does not satisfy this fantasy I think thats the main issue.
Historical accurate this, historical accurate that… People keep forgetting it’s a game.
You should be spending your money on a time machine instead of AoE IV if you want historical accurate fights.
Like other said above, make a sh itload of cheap horseman, and sent them in from 2 or 3 angels in a spread formation.
They will shred the mangonals within 5 seconds.
The dude doesn’t even have spears to defend them, so i would be moooore than happy to find an opponent like this ia battle.
Easy win.
Good post; +1 from me. Still a ton of janky stuff going on with siege inexplicably ignoring commands, refusing to target things outside of their personal LOS, and so on that seem under-acknowledged but affect almost every game I play.
The big issue for me is the potentially massive DPS from mangonels—I don’t think it’s good for the game to have situations where hugely consequential swings are possible in a fraction of a moment, which is possible any time a few mangonels can get off a shot at a group of infantry before they’re seen or before a player can react.
Currently sieges are slow and expensive enough. If you just put your 80 horsemen directly rush to them in one direction, there is no surprise how they will be melted. But if u put a couple of them to attack as a feint and put the rest to surround sieges from different directions, the results might be different.
Yeah that’s a great point about how much the game can swing on brief moments. Large battles in Age of Empires IV often take minutes but mangonels can end them in seconds.
To some extent the prevalence of mangonels leads to the prevalence of cavalry. They’re more capable of surviving mangonel fire, more capable of retreating from it, and more capable of destroying the siege equipment.
Personally I’d love to put together armies that are more infantry based, especially given that several civilisations have infantry bonuses, but in the late game having a majority infantry army is asking for trouble. In most scenarios where you enter into a battle and find your opponent has a composition that counters yours you are going to suffer, but if you turn up with a lot of foot units and they have a lot of mangonels you’re going to be annihilated. It will take them a matter of seconds to destroy everything you’ve got and you’ll have done almost no damage in return. You’d be better off sending an army of archers against an army of knights.
The way mangonels counter foot units is so much more extreme than the way any other unit counters any other unit. And given how many units mangonels counter it’s a bit ridiculous.
So if I build the unit that is intended to be a direct counter to mangonels I have to perform a ton of micro so that I don’t get melted? Doesn’t that seem absolutely ridiculous to you? Mangonels are far easier to use to devastating effect than they are to counter. That is the problem in a nutshell.
Composing an army that is predominantly mangonels should be an exceptionally high risk strategy that requires skill to pull off. It doesn’t right now. It’s an easy strategy that can be absolutely devastating unless your opponent happens to turn up with the right units and significantly out micros you.
