So, how u played if one got eliminated? do you alt-f4?
1 Like
Not to mention these same people donât funnel their cries in to the same topic that addresses this issue.
Instead they flood the forums with endless rinse and repeat threads about the same topic.
Because they feel that THEIR opinion matters more! and want THEM to be heard.
This is however, sadly how modern society has been constructed over the years.
Instead of trying to organise thing into single threads about the same topic.
They donât want to be just another âcommentedâ but the OP, and not really adding to the discussion, nor reading through possible suggestions, solution or criticism about their feelings.
Because, in reality, they are in the minority. Usually whatâs called the loud minority. Who tend to drown out social media, forum platforms and any form of outlet towards whatever it may be.
And this leaves with the consequence that interesting topics that more discusses about other aspects of the game gets drowned out and forgotten.
1 Like
It depends of a lot of situations, itâs not the same to get a player eliminated in feudal than in imperial. If someone got eliminated in feudal you lost the game. But what you have to do is play as a team and defend the allie, if you defended and got eliminated simply do it better next time.
Right now if you are able to destroy the base of a player the most probable is that this player is no longer available to recover the time lost, but the game artificially got prolonged while that player thinks he can come back.
I donât understand the desire of made every game last 40-50 minutes and go through every age. If the game lasts 20 minutes but is intense fight the whole time is fun.
I usually play 3v3 with Friends. You know, those people one usually socialise with day to day basis.
We arenât blind to see a inevitable loss. If we are pressed hard and do not see any chance of winning.
Why prolonged the game? I rather surrender and queue up for a new match having a fresh start, than one that got buggered.
However, sometimes we have prolonged matches that might seem like a loss, But we see a window of opportunity to pull the game over.
Sometime the 3rd party member doesnât need to ârecoverâ He just needs to have either bought enough time / distraction against the opponents to allow teammates exploit the window of opportunity to strike a critical blow.
Heck, as mongolâs, Iâve lost count how many times Iâve had battles where Iâve been pretty much âdefeatedâ.
But at the very RARE situation where Khaganate palace shines. (When your econ is rekt and you literally have nothing).
It allows me to get a few units enough to support my teammates push, or harass the enemies econ enough.
Despite having villager count of 15, close to 0 Resources.
With a Kurultai, Khaganate palace and the Khan, I can still sometime just give enough support to tip the scale into our favor.
Other times its reverse. Especially playing Abbasid, where your econ is immensely strong. but before you get knocked out, you manage to donate most of your resources to your teammate, boosting their offense just enough. Or in rare cases, manage to hold on to a zombie like state with a strong traderoute, and focus on just feeding your teammates extra resources, while trying to slowly recover and block off potential approaches with walls whenever you can.
2 Likes
Yep, but this can happens when you play with friends and you all understand the game is over or you can try to earn time and change the result of the game.
But when you play with random people everyone is selfish.
When I play with friends we also fight till we see that is over. Why lose time when you know that it is over?
It depends, Ive had mixed results with randoms.
Initially everyone is selfish yes.
but with a tiny bit of communication, it quite often comes a long way.
This is why I am most excited for the âtauntsâ that we had in all the AOE predecessors.
Simple things that ease communication such a taunt saying:
Gold Please.
Can be enough to get your teammates to understand that you need some gold.
or before I surrender, I usually always announce that I donât think ill be able to hold on anymore. Or Should I surrender?
Depending on the answer from the randoms, sometimes i get told to Wait, or Iâll help, or rare occasion get extra resources in my bank or teammate army comes into to try save the situation.
But if they are just silent and say nothing I just go ahead and surrender.
Usually when team is 1 man down, it doesnât take much for the rest of the team to surrender.
So I donât think this new feature where all landmarks need to be taken down is problematic. I do think it adds an option that the teammate who gets gimped can still contribute if the battle is already in their favor and they are âwinningâ than getting the KO screen and canât do anything.
1 Like
What makes me question is how this change to landmarks could pass the test realms considering how divided the community is on this subject. Relic should revert it and gather as much data as possible and then come back with a new improved update on the landmark issue because right now itâs totally garbage the way itâs now.
So you are fine that random TG now are garbage and everyone have to play with friends at all times or they cannot enjoy the game, is that what you are applying? Itâs impossible to always have your friends ready and sometime you just want to join random people for faster games so now thatâs not possible. This proves more that the change made to the landmarks are garbage and needs to be adjusted/changed.
I agree with that, but I think there must be some kind of cons to getting your base smashed. Or even, a timer, as I said. Imagine a 5 min counter. This will avoid the famous horse snipe at the same time that rush strategy can be viable again.
My everygame starts with. âhey, my flank whatâs plan?â. Almost every game.
AFK players were in the old patch, but with them you got autolose.
iâve played a few games from the start.
Every time people help. Cause at my ELO players understand, that itâs impossible to win alone even after boom.
4-5 random kts in your Eco and you loose all advantage for not helping.
If they do not understand it, probably they wil just drop in rating.
Reply to those mentioning dark/feudal aggression being useless. Itâs not useless. Early aggression and weakening an opponent early game can make a 4v4 game feel like a 4v3 even though the player is not fully eliminated.
Since patch I havenât encountered issues with long games. Nothing over an hour. Teams resign when they know there is no coming back and the inevitable loss is approaching.
I donât quite understand those that like the feudal game overs. Itâs like they want as many wins in a certain amount of time. A quick dopamine reward with little effort. I donât get it. Youâve just spent 10 minutes waiting for a game to get started and you want to do it all over again? Team games SHOULD take 40-60+ minutes from the time waiting invested.
Before the patch I experienced so many team players quitting early because they lost a few villagers to some early knights. That player drops the match, followed by another because they donât want to commit to a long game thatâs already imbalanced, followed by everyone else on the team quitting. It was such a waste of time. âTime to wait another 10 minutes in a lobby after my 5 minute gameâ. 
1 Like
Is not about win fast, is about fun.
Usually, long games are about who build more stone walls and who spams more siege. This (for me) is not fun, is tedious.
In co-op games against the AI itâs now much harder to win if you have a bad teammate. Teammates never waited till they were eliminated anyway, so I had a teammate last night quit when they still had 90 vills and 50 military. The AI, on the other hand, never quits and gets the full benefit of not being killed off when I wipe out its entire base trying to 1v2/3/4. Basically, the new rule doesnât apply to the human players because they still quit even if all their landmarks are standing and they have a ton of vills and military, just like they did before the change, so itâs a purely one sided change that only helps the AI.
1 Like
Not forgetting anything. Taxes are capped how much player can make per minute from it based on how many IOâs are collecting tax. In perfect situation it would be 4x320g per minute, but its very unrealistic and not possible to achieve in any situation. If you go to skirmish game and try to figure out best way to achieve it, you might be able to do it but you canât plan it on every map seed and hope to achieve it. Also because youâre not actually supervising then so you would lose 20% resource income so most of tax income is not even that relevant and even make things bit worse for your argument its the fact that china still canât utilize taxes from far away buildings. You might have mining camp somewhere which has 200-400gold or something like that and that tax cannot be collected and is left there being wasteful so longer game goes less impactful its from gathering.
Abbasid boom is the best in the game there is no argument for that. 50% reduction on villager cost is most powerful thing one can have. Its same as french being able to produce military units at -20% cost around the keep which is ridiculously powerful. Same was spirit way when dynasty units were used.
And other civs got their own techs that improve their gathering, research, military production. Also this is only available in imperial age and tied to completely to achieved dynasties meanwhile some other civs get flat amount from doing thing x which is more powerful. If you want extra 5% to ancient techs u have to spent 1800/3600 resources. Do you understand how long it would take to pay off? Tens of minutes. So in the end only thing china hopes to achieve is 10% because song is just too strong and rest is irrelevant.
No im not. Im well aware that china has no access to culverin and this is why I say china has no imperial age anti siege. They do not have extra range on springalds or culverin. In past this wasnât the case when bombards were 12 tile range, but now that they removed pyrotechnics affecting bombards it made chinas anti siege imperial age units none existing. 1 culverin or springald is capable of shutting down any number of bombards now.
Top of that with the siege rework that happened player canât hope to keep siege alive anymore against cavalry unless they either sit behind walls, outposts and keeps to stop cavalry diving them or use trebs with 60 spears on top of them.
Best siege right now is trebs its simple as that. Trebs have no counter and you canât do anything against treb line that has 60-100 army supply on top of them other than go trebs yourself and hope to snipe those trebs.
You still donât understand how clockwork works. Yes clockwork units have 50% more hp but clockwork tower can only produce at rate of 1x which is same as one siege workshop. Then ask yourself where is clockwork tower located? Inside the base of chinese player. Now. Ask yourself how long does it take for your clockwork unit to reach location of fighting? 5seconds? 20seconds? 30seconds? 60 seconds? All this affects how fast china can reinforce fight with clockwork units. Opponent can make 2 siege workshop at frontline which results them completely hard countering clockwork tower production. This forces china to make none clockwork siege which are not different anymore from other civs. Yes they got the extra reload speed but thats irrelevant and only comes to play when unit is stationary fighting long periods of time which wonât be the case anymore because siege just dies in nano second
It wont matter how smart you play. Firelancers are shit so is zhuge nu and so is grenadiers. Zhuge nu gets hard countered moment players hit castle age and is not worth of investing and early on they suffer from losing dps if they get kited or have to move. Each volley contains 3 shots and if you move your zhuge nu at middle of animation it cancels it out and effectively lowering their DPS by 33 to 66% which is massive
All dynasty units are too expensive to unlock. Lets add same affect to every civilization. To use french knights, french player has to spent 3600resources to research âroyalâ tech for their knights and their unique crossbows costs 1800. Delhi has to pay 3600 resources on TWE and war elephant 1800.
Lets see how many civs get those unique units after that? Not single civ
By âkeepâ you mean barbican? Glorified outpost. No one is gonna sack their units to BBQ. While its true that landmarks are still repaired with wood while keeps are repaired with stone so thats the difference but the BBQ isnât that great. Its just same as having 2 outposts with more HP. Early on its nice to have place where to hide villagers but its not some big game changer that drops nuclear bombs to opponent.
Imperial Academy adds 100% gold gain to structures under the influence. Sure nice till you realize that TC takes most of the time big chunk of it or just placing tons of farms to it eating up the space while. Early on it helps a lot but longer the game goes on more irrelevant it becomes. Just like some other chinese bonuses. Better early on and shittier later on.
Its not about the speed its about how much resources abbasid saves. China goes 2TC which is equal to abbasid 4 TC production in terms of food cost. Do you understand that? 3 TC = 6TC for abbasid
Abbasid can comfortably get 2 TC without investing any extra food on villager production which results either very similar army size or castle timing. Yes they spent the 700 resources to get 2nd TC but lot of civs get upgrades or other stuff which abbasid can delay.
I would trade song dynasty bonus to abbasid fresh foodstuff any day. I could drop 2 TC song and hit castle comfortably under 9mins
The games take too long to finish. What we need is to speed up the whole thing.
I would argue that villagers should collect twice as fast so we would need twice as less villagers, also cavalry should be 2 pop instead of 1 and buildings should have 50% of current health.
Man you are only seeing the bad things about everything. In the last post you stated that china hasnât any tech that does the villagers collect faster, now you say it exist, but you say itâs trash.
I canât continue arguing with someone that consciously âforgetâ things when they donât help his argument.
In fact Abbasid fresh foodstuffs is very good, but do you really think food is a rare resource? Do you know you can boost your farms with IO? Extracting resources literally from the void? Then collect the taxes and save villagers from gold and destinating them in food?
There are plenty of posibilities, and is a fact that you can boom faster and have a better eco in less time as china than Abbasid.
Iâm not getting in the argue anymore, you clearly barely know how to play china or how to use the IO for the things you are saying lol.
Btw this is offtopic, so iâm out.
No I said they wont collect faster because we were not discussing techs. Ancient tech is based on how many dynasties are achieved up to 20% but you still donât understand that everything has certain amount of time it pays off. Is there point of researching or going for dynasty just to maximize ancient tech if the game ends in 2minutes and youâre losing? No. When going for ancient tech player has to consider is it worth of getting and does it pay off? This same principal applies all the civs, but delhi because techs are free for them.
If player has to invest 1800 resources for extra 5% collection rate then that player has to be SURE it will pay off otherwise its not worth of getting. If abbasid or any other civ had similar tech with similar costs they wouldnât pick it ever, but because dynasties are supposed to bring more than just increase in collection rate, but theyâre not and there is very little to no justification to go any other than song dynasty.
Iâve not forgotten anything at any given point. Dunno where you pull that off. I have played china since release day and I have only played china and I continue only to play it till new civ is released and if its more interesting than china
Food is not rare resource and thats not the issue. Each civilization gathers about same rate the resources. While china gains 20% from supervision, you have to remember there is only up to 4 IOâs available. If you split your food economy like in many scenarios you will there is no way to increase food production by 20%. Also because china needs to build 2x landmarks to achieve similar results as other civs get from building 1 landmark they need something to boost the economy.
Also you have to remember getting IOâs out is not free. First IO is trained from TC usually and it costs 100 food and 50gold which slows down feudal age for china. So this takes time to pay of it also sets china 1 villager behind vs other civs. For example HRE starts with prelate which actually means they start with 7 or 8 villagers instead of 6.
Same with villages and granaries. They save up resources at some point or gain more resources but it takes time to break even for that investment.
Meanwhile abbassid fresh food stuff is essentially you first pay 175 resources and once you have made 7 villagers it has paid off the initial investment and after that its constant 50% food saved. Also as abbasid you donât have to use workers for age up which boosts your economy vs civs that have to build. Yes you build the initial structure but thats only 30second build time.
Also because villagers are cheaper for abbasid they pay off their own initial price much faster. Then if we compare to china it will take around 1 minute to 1 villager pay off the creation. Meanwhile for abbasid this is 50% faster which translates much stronger economy if this benefit is put to economic upgrades or much stronger army when needing it and this is why abbasid boom is better than chinese or other civs.
Sure thing buddy have a nice one. Im by no means pro player but I think I have played enough china to know thing or two after 2k china games and getting my ass kicked by few best AOE4 players but hey what would I know I just play and I noob only 2v2
Feudal ramcels seething rn
1 Like
The current meta of team games doesnât make any sense, I havenât finished any game before fourth age yet, very long games, itâs impossible to be aggressive with expensive and weak rams (not counting the blacksmith and the necessary technology and time), urban centers that look like machine guns against second age troops, everyone doing 3 or 4 town centers every game, games that get so boring, keeps everywhere, there are no battles, just making the opponent dizzy and raiding him to win the game, very big maps⊠Do you really like this meta?
In addition to all this, there are many people using maphack and forcing the synchronization error, it is so easy to find these hacks with a quick google search (absurdly fast it can be found).
I really donât understand the changes that have been introduced, they are making the meta worse and worse and making all games so boring and that all games feel the same.
1 Like
This is not what I said. Sacking a teammate to gain an advantage as a team is a trade strategy and a staple tactic in most team rts games.
1 Like