Standardize games to 30 minutes

There are a difference between long game and “long game behind wall where no interaction between players”.

45 min full fight is probably a must kind of game, 45 min of china / abassyd behind wall, not so much.

1 Like

The data is based on 30 ranked samples (must see tournaments), unlike other players who have played much more ranked than him.

He has also faced many lower Top players and it is clear that his game is more turtling and tactical oriented (if the games do not last 1 hour it is because he is Top 1 in late game).

The sooner the action starts, the more likely the games will end sooner (hybrid maps is an example). I prefer 35 intense minutes (with only 5-6 minutes of calm) than 10-15 minutes of boom and the last 5 of action.

1 Like

if it seems too drastic that landmarks be repaired with stone, design that at least 50% or 40% be repaired with stone the rest with wood

putting stone as repair for landmarks now that i think more of it would make sense in shortening game time, but its not ideal, there should always be a comeback opportunity, the 50/50 split tho, that is more logical

Zun Tzu

new bonus list



Vortix: the game is slow, as the game progresses the micro loses importance

Bro really going to the effort of finding longer games, underlining the time and posting it to a thread where the majority disagree with him.

Then double posting for good measure.


read the whole thread, I have mentioned that most of the players are casual, so I have not made extreme proposals, the title is only to attract attention

I’ve read the whole bloody thread as you constantly keep posting in it so it never leaves the front fucking page XD


What I bring is data, after a long time since the patch that shows the slight nerft of the stone walls has come out. A professional should not take so long to win a non-professional

Honestly it seems like spam at this point.


Attaching updated data is not spam. I know that most of you have been very busy discussing the janissay (where nothing was changed) about the game graphics, about the AI, the game icons etc. etc but I will address other issues that do not address; I don’t know what the aoe community did in the past where, it took years to see the number of villagers in each resource or more years to have accumulated actions with the shift.
I know what interests you most is that they offer you more content and that changes in the Meta will not change the 50% winrate of the casuals, but it cannot be that a professional takes 45 - 50 minutes to beat a non-professional , with so many hours and experience in tournaments and all that is minimized by the Meta of the game, very possibly many do not know the forum or simply leave the game, at least there was one who dared to enter the forum and comment because he will leave the game

Dude you just opened two more threads with “data” about essentially this same thing you are beating to death here.


Professionals are just players. AOE4 isn’t a shooter, where you can one tap a player just because you are better, where as newbies keep missing for a few seconds.

It is a game where it takes a combination of efforts to take a player out. If a professional plays ranked, they are likely playing against high tiered players anyways. Are professionals better? sure? But, you can’t headshot enemies in AOE4. You can’t just send in 4 Spearman early on and win the game with micro alone. It isn’t that type of game. It isn’t Starcraft.

In fact, being a franchise about empires–the idea of a battle of attrition is very much real. No one is hiding that. No one is saying “this is a sub 30 min game experience guaranteed”. I think you may be misunderstanding the game you are playing, if you don’t expect games to run on beyond 40 minutes. This is a war game.

And lastly, I wanted to touch upon the person you quoted. That person was angry that you could use Keeps aggressively. Is this something you’re against too? So not only do you dislike Keeps defensively, but also offensively?

It just sounds like you’re advocating for the removal of Walls and Keeps. And honestly, if the developers ever listened to players advocating this, I would be gone from this game for good. These mechanics are one of the few things that makes this game different, along side with its randomly generated maps and heavier economies. So, I’m going to suggest that you try another game if you really dislike these things; because they are what makes Age of Empires the franchise it is.


This game is faster paced, therefore it is absurd that a professional takes 50 minutes to beat a non-professional, instead of taking the fast rate of the game to be offensive instead they are comfortable accumulating resources and villagers with the support of the game’s defenses, then suppress your own villagers; I am also demonstrating the imbalance between the defensive game against the offensive one, to those who speak without substantiation, or because a professional simply wins the game over a non-professional, but no, instead he does 4TC

I think if it depended on any of you, age4 would be age2 with a new graphic engine, what has the community done in the forum! 22 years for this, 1 million stone walls, an hour and a half game that would have lasted longer if the level did not eliminate its own villager (in an official 2023 tournament). I will not be complicit in something similar in age4, thanks to our comments, measures have been gradually taken since the reduction of the amount of stone in the game, higher cost of walls, etc., quality beats quantity!

This is Black Forest, a closed map, so games usually last longer as it’s easier to defend than on an open map like Arabia.
Also, the ingame timer in AoE 2 runs 1.7 times faster, so the actual time was 56 minutes.

Edit: the BF game you mentioned btw was not a tournament game, it was a ranked game.


while i see what hasan is trying to prove here, i ultimately don’t see developers as stupid, they definitely know this suggestion is a no go, as for hasan, he’ll continue ignoring any evidence proving the opposite to his arguement, here’s the thing, i agree the meta, as is, lacks meaningfull aggression early on, it very much is all about booming which is unusual even by aoe standards, from my experience playing this way in aoe2 or 3 on similar type of map, aka not black forest, would be a gg rather quickly, but from what i see, this has nothing to do with keeps, now walls needing siege to take down, thats part of the slowdown i’d say, but the biggest one is the necessity of imperial age to do any significant amount of damage per second to those walls, yk the bombards, they also cost a ton in resources and pop, and pop part is only an issue due to most players pushing 130-140 villagers in typical game, now i want to give some statistics on villager gathering of aoe4 vs 2 and 3 as how many vills you need for comparable resource income, about 120-130 vills of aoe2 = 100 in aoe3 (this game caps the villager pop to 99 cuz balance) = 85-95 in aoe4, and i might be overstating the aoe4 number by a few vills, and at the same time due to no batch training + super long (far too long) training and research times you cannot realisticly spend all those resources as fast as you can gather, especially true when that sweetspot of 85-95 is exceeded, 140 vills in aoe4 is far more than what any amount of military production buildings can handle as a result

1 Like

Perhaps all this threads could be merged into one to save space on the front page? As they all seem to be the same.


100 % agreed. Booming in AoE 2 and 3 is only viable in later stages of the game which probably is also due to the fact that additional Town Centers aren’t available until Castle/Fortress Age, probably leading to be more aggresive early on.

1 Like