Also too much resources. Converting the goods with a low cut makes the player to sell lots of food and get gold. But in aoe2 gold was limited. So there was a late game strategy both economic and military wise. People tend to produce trash units in the late game. So in aoe4 people can produce expensive and highly effective units instead of cheap ones. This also ruins the paper rock scissors strategy.
Did you run out of gold in 20 minutes in aoe2?
Also I don’t get why aoe4 have to be like aoe2? Aoe2 is not a rulebook for how things must be done. And we all know it was never that popular. Aoe4 beat aoe2 all time peak record already at launch. And you still have to gather gold out on the map later in the game. And having more units to chose from than if you can just build skirms and spears definately adds strategic depth
6 Likes
Don’t get me wrong. I am not a keen fan of aoe2. But too much abundancy of resources ruins the economic strategy aspect of the game. Also abundancy will lead to longer and boring games.
1 Like
Not everybody is a competitive player…
The late game in AoE4 is about siege and elephants and cool expensive stuff.
I don’t want to be creating trash units because trash wars are repetitive and uninteresting to the casual player. Also with no gold, sieges take forever…
So yes. Too much gold is a good thing. Bring on the cannons!
2 Likes
I prefer have gold to train every unit instead that having to use the same trash units. There arent strategy on that. Thats one of the reasons I dont play AoE2 a lot. Why I would use a civ if I will use pikeman at the end.
1 Like
Im competetive player and I also found the trash spam wars boring. Aoe2 is the only game where you get worse units the longer you play. Pretty silly really, giving players sense of stagnation and declining power instead of increasing. For starcraft 2 for example, you tech up and get better and better units. Unless you fam out entire map, but thats like 1 in 200 games. I’m all for having to fight for resources on the map, but you kinda already have to do that. It could be further changed by for example decreasing the gold in base by 1000g. But don’t make it like aoe2 where you instead of playing the rise of an empire play the fall of an empire
2 Likes
Good, trash unit fiesta in late game made aoe2 extremely one dimensional.
1 Like
who said long games are boring ? spaming trash units are more boring
2 Likes
I believe that every Age game after AoE2 has ways to generate resources infinitely. I prefer that system.
The biggest complaint about it seems to come from people familiar only with AoE2 who assume games would go on forever. That is not true and never has been.
5 Likes
Not only this, but in aoe2 most unique units are not viable late game, partly because they cost gold. So essentially you get mirror games, with the civ that has the better wood gathering being the best.
if u thjink game can go longer , build wonder ?? they give u so many ways to end the game , games cant for forever
1 Like
Actually with more gold, games are shorter i feel. You can create expensive units that reduce bases to rubble pretty quickly.
Trash wars need a certain level of skill to win. Not everyone has that.
I remember when I started learning to play AoE2, I entered a trash war phase with the AI and I didn’t have the skill to fight through its base of castles etc and it went on for hours and then I got frustrated and resigned. Of course, I did raids and stuff but enemy always made more vils and reboomed. It got boring very fast.
Even the most basic ram costs gold. I think AoE4 went the right way and even made the ram cost only wood
Wasn’t there recently a guy around these parts complaining he spent 4 hours beating AI on easy? I think long games mostly mean you are a bad/aoe2 player. Its not the game but the player that’s the problem in long games.
Why do we want trash wars in the end game? I dont. This seems like a good thing. And those “trash units” still have a place in the strategy.
I hate the fact that in AoE2 we need to go into trash wars.
More gold is awesome.
2 Likes