basically rise of nations attrition system mixed with coh resources points, then?
I could go fine with a bit of attrition, or even naval attrition for units in boats. Could make sieges in importants chokepoints historically accurate, where attackers have to cope with diseases and lack of good supply (and then comes ticking damage).
Rise of natio s had supplu trains, basically your supply depots but in whells. I favor these instead of the mechanics of your buildings.
Attrition yes, but only in a very conservative manner, tho.
1 Like
I know about rise of nations, but having units do it will get more micro intensive and disrupt basic âcombat gameplayâ without adding strategic depth to positioning or so. I guess i prefer some kind of what i described to be the same core gameplay in combat like age of empires but with just some more strategy into positions other than where the enemyâs castle is built.
If we are talking about a more complex or realistic system, celtic kings had something simillar, where the resources could actually also be stolen, and you can combine that with warehouses that store it to built an actual supply chain. BUT that is very complex and would become like 90% of your focus to deal with and thus disrupt the game too much.
1 Like
I have thought about attrition concept too, and besides that i would love such feature like that, i believe that would be too much for a game like Age of Empires, and the new players can feel like it would be too complex. Even some veterans can feel it too far away from Age style. They are currently adding a lot of new content and features so i believe that they will be really careful about what to add and what not, so we can have a brand new Age with lot of stuff but still being the same Age style we all love.
2 Likes
In what way does that contradict my suggestion? I donât know how you imagine your attrition concept, but i am fairly certain that the one i describe is the exact opposite of complex and less complex than most other core AoE2 mechanicsâŠ
1 Like
We see multiple units in the trailer,
- Reactive Ploy
Iâd like to see a player able of selecting a âreactiveâ action on a unit, in addition to their ongoing, this means if the condition is met, the army carries out their triggered action.
Some really layered ploys would be enabled. Any unit should only have up to 1 or up to 5 reactive actions to pick from.
-
as a player, having the ability to pierce or scale a wall inplace of breaking it could be handy to get a rapid party within the foeâs encircling-wall.
-
In the Town Center, Arsenal, Academy or similar building, a player would be able, 1 per game to make a âlocalâ adjustment based on either map or Civ options; example, one of their units gets modified modifiers by being equiped now by an optional weapon. This âcustomizationâ would add a unique layer to the gameplay unlike ever before. (Or comparable to adding a training method to a unique unit, resulting in its improvement of speed, endurance, resistence, formation bonus or another aspect etc.
-
Hazardous Environment
Enabling âpathing-shortcutsâ to foes which involves risking the armyâs health, speed or alike could pave way to some legendary battles. (Cold-damage vs hanibal, or a swampy-slow crossing, or a steep-slow hill, or a foggy-sight riverbank.)
1 Like
With every battle fought, various armies hardened and grew from the experience.
What if your army grew slightly stronger, with each battle?
Ability: Battle Veteran
About +10% better attack & Max Hitpoints per 30 troops killed in close-range. Max +30%.
Requirement 1:
A Commander-Hero/Unit.
Requirement 2:
30 enemy units killed by your units within y range of Commander.
Requirement 3:
Your army in x range of your Commander.
Affected: All player-owned units within x range of the Commander gets this boost.
Limits:
Having Multiple Commanders doesnt stack this bonus, but would enable a broader army, eventuallly.
ââââ
The resolvement of the soldiers when cornered could perhaps be more clear with ability on your Town center:
Last Stand
Your Town Center & Religious Building radiates an aura of resolvement, adding +10% attack and Resistence/Max HP while within x range of any of these buildingsâ ranges.
2 Likes
Reminds me of Battle For Middle Earth, where troops actually gain veterancy and gain level while fighting, becoming more strengh and harder to kill. Each troop has his own squad leader, but it was just aestethical only.
1 Like
I seriously believe that dynamic weather and day/night cycle would be awesome.
3 Likes
Oh,idk.But i hope relic add many new things for aoe.
But i want make battles more strategic.i want game let us beat great armies with small armies+strategy
2 Likes
I bet they will, so you can chill about it my friend!
1 Like
Ok 
my friend
Settler colonialism would be beneficial allowing more town centers with an equal population, villager, infrastructure and military count; maybe a requirement could be a specified distance from the original.
2 Likes
I would like to see day/night and season cycles for extra realism. This could also impact the strategies. And OPTIONAL troops moral.
2 Likes
Additions I would enjoy playing in any Age of Empires game:
Rotate buildings 360 degrees before selecting a site for building: Instead of always facing one direction, this feature would allow multiple and various kinds of village and city planning and layouts to enhance the enjoyment a player feels when they utilize their own creativity to build their simulated empire.
Convert every villager to militia: Converting every villager to militia is based upon the premise of AOE III, Act II: Ice; however, my idea expands their premise which is significant because in order to increase military numbers players are forced to delete most if not all of their villagers. Villager to musketeer militia including the women units; hit points would be half of whichever level musketeer the player is utilizing at the time the conversion was selected and paid for. Convert every villager to militia: Paying a specified amount of coin to convert all villagers alive to militia and considering they have 50% the firepower of whichever musketeer level is being produced at the time.
More diplomacy features: such as treaty, ally and declaration of warfare: I noticed how a call to allies does not rally the allies; they donât gather at a certain specified and directed place within the map in AOE I and AOE III after the flare was utilized to call them all, nor did they ever assist when warfare began against enemies (such as during the initial campaign of Bolivairâs Revolt). Similar diplomacy features as, Total War, and Sid Meierâs Civilization I; would be beneficial to this franchise creating a sensation of multiplayer negotiation, but with artificial intelligence during single player mode.
Hunting with dogs: Paying for hunting dogs produces a villager with hunting dogs as a unit; and after selecting the villager with hunting dog(s) > click a beast and it will begin to corral the prey back toward the nearest town center or food storage building unit, but with the exception of wolves, lions, elephants and rhinoceros; animals such as boar would attack once a villager(s) begins to strike them with their spear. The hunting with dogs feature would work well for bovine (boar), cervidae (deer, gazelle, moose, reindeer) and artiodactyla (sheep, mountain sheep).
Colony takeover another mode for victory: Should any opposing town center be attacked until it reaches 5% and the player seeing its depletion bar would know to utilize the special character unit to enter the TC; entering the TC with a special unit becomes optional and selecting the takeover icon would mean instant victory: the TC and remaining monies in its treasury, its units, buildings, soldiers, and villagers would instantly be converted to the winning team!
Improvements containing the various kinds of wall structures to choose from for erecting: More kinds of walls can be built in either stone, brick or wood is always allowable. AOE III would only allow a wood wall to be built until the icon was selected for improvement to a castle type wall structure; but then the wood style of fencing was no longer achievable thereafter.
Improvement icons for fortress styles to choose from for erecting: There are many styles built throughout history which were unique to every civilization.
Greater line of sight from the watch towers: Equal to the line of sight of the Explorer unit plus the hot air balloon unit combined. In each of the AOE versions, I would command warfare each time a watch tower was being destroyed whether during single player or multiplayer because they were historically similar to borderlines; and in most cases guarded boundaries.
Territorial boundary lines: Preventing opposing villagers from crossing its path when theyâve been implemented means players can lay claim to specific resources and create a nation with borders. Forcing villagers to cross opposing boundary lines requires mandatory diplomatic stance of âenemy.â A special unit could place the flags with corresponding national color with the player nation along its directed path. From flag to flag a territorial and apparent line would be highlighted and form connecting each flag from one to another. Opposing teams placing territorial boundary lines over one another and after the land had already been claimed requires a diplomacy stance of enemy. This feature would help to tell a human player which AI player or during multiplayer is most likely to attack first because the changed diplomatic stance means how they are an avowed enemy and want to take their territory. Only the villagers belonging to allied nations may cross a territorial boundary line of their ally to share their resources. Currently during multiplayer online, fencing or walls are being utilized as a type of boundary by many players; but historically, the Great Wall of China proves how immensely difficult it would be to actually achieve because of the cost for stone, other elements; and the sheer amounts of laborers needed to build it during the time period.
The above additions would assist AOE IV or even later versions to compete with, Total War, and for the time being; the title which I believe to be the main competitor of AOE.
1 Like
Converting vills to militar is already an AoE3 feature, with the Revolt option.
Rotating buildings is good suggestion and should be there for any modern base building game, it has been available through the ESOC patch of AoE3 as well.
About diplomacy, they have already said that according to their statistics, it is an underused feature by most players and that it will likely not have a big role outside of the campaigns, no new elements for the multiplayer.
I donât like the âterittorial boundary linesâ, you must have in mind something like Northgard? and the borders at Civ?
Either way it deviates too much from the classic AoE gameplay even as a game mode. Diplomacy is not going to be that enhanced anyway.
I donât think AoE needs to compete with total war or civ, or be anything like them. They are grand strategy games, they lack of base building and the dynamic combat of an RTS. Many people just auto-resolve total warâs combat to just carry on with the campaign map.
1 Like
Their revolt option was included, but within a later expansion pack.
A militia icon only provided about ten militia units with very low hit points to the extent they were easily defeated.
Converting every villager to militia is based upon the premise of AOE III, Act II: Ice; however, my idea expands their premise further which is significant because to increase military numbers meant players are forced to delete most of their own villagers.
Diplomacy: During Age of Empires III; during single-player I utilized every diplomacy feature made available and extensively (thank you Ensemble Studios).
Here is my vote for more diplomacy features!
I hope there are nods to the medieval classic, Defender of the Crown (for C64 / Amiga 500), whether it be in artwork somewhere, gameplay moments, sound, or other.
Im sure there will be a lot of new stuff implemented, but everything that can be done in RTS style like Age more than games like Civilization for example.
I dont like the unique abbilities. If it would be for a small group of units (example explorer AoE III) fine. Unique abbilities make for a more micro extensive gameplay, and i think it would turn away players wo dont really like microing, microing should be small advantages for the players who master it, but not huge wherein players who dont basically lose because of it. (Example avoiding shots in AoE II, it can be done for a small group, but a lot of catapults it is harder to do).
I think an interesting spin on the age up mechanics of AOE3 would be to make AOE4âs aging up system allow the player to choose a new civ each age to reflect how civs that lived in the same geographical region evolved throughout history. This would be specially interesting if they are intending to have fewer civs in the game and allow the players to get more out of those civs so the civ lineup doesnât feel too shallow.
What do I mean by this? For example, a player chooses the dark age civ which is called, letâs say, âThe Gothsâ, in the Dark age you start simply as the âGothsâ, when you get the feudal age upgrade you get to choose to play either as the âVisigothsâ or the âOstrogothsâ, each with their own techs and bonuses, say the player picks the âVisigothsâ when they reach the Castle Age they get to choose between the âAsturiansâ and the âFranksâ, and say if they choose the âAsturiansâ in the Imperial age they get to choose between either the âSpanishâ or the âPortugueseâ while if they choose the âFranksâ in castle age they get to choose between âFranceâ and âThe Holy Roman Empireâ in the Imperial Age.
If on the other hand the player chooses to play as the âOstrogothsâ in the Feudal Age, in the Castle Age they get to choose to play either as the âByzantinesâ or the âLombardsâ in the Castle Age, if they choose to play as the âLombardsâ they choose between the âKingdom of Italyâ or âThe Papal Statesâ in Imperial Age and if they choose the âByzantinesâ they continue to play as the âByzantinesâ into the Imperial Age to reflect the longevity of the Byzantine empire.
Letâs consider another example of how something like this could play out. Lets say you choose to play as âThe Saracenesâ. You simply start the Dark Age as the âArabsâ, in the Fuedal Age you get to choose to play either as the âAbbasidsâ or âCordobaâ, choosing âAbbasidsâ gives the player the ability to choose between âThe Mamlukesâ or âThe Fatimidsâ in Castle Age. If you choose âThe Fatimidsâ, the Imperial Age gives you the choice between the âAyyubidsâ and the âBerbersâ. If on the other hand you choose to play as the âMamlukesâ the Imperial age offers the player the choice between âEgyptâ and âYemenâ.
If in the Feudal Age the player goes down the path of choosing âCordobaâ they, The Castle Age allow them to choose between playing as âHammudidâ or âSevilleâ. Choosing the âHammudidâ gives the player the choice between âThe Moorsâ and âThe Berbersâ in the Imperial Age, and choosing âSevilleâ, gives the player the choice between âSpainâ and âGranadaâ.
That is just two examples but all the civs could get this sort of treatment.
The interesting thing about this system in my opinion is that it will give huge replayability value as people get to experiment with different progressions of the civs and how they play out in different matchups and would allow the developers to get a lot more mileage out of a handful of core civilisations that can then branch out into different late game tech trees through different paths. Also as the two examples I posted shows there is more than one path to unlock different late game civilisations. For example you can start as goths in the dark age and play as the Spanish in the Imperial Age or you can start as The Saracenes and still end up playing with Spanish late game tech in Imperial Age.
One downside of this is that I can imagine balancing will be pretty hard but it could still be lots of fun.
1 Like