What should Age of Empires IV improve?

[MatM1996]

@Croissantini

Holy shit. Props to the devs for removing events clutter from main menu!

Now we can appreciate the artworks they make for us for events and seasons.

Yes, the menu now looks cleaner and more like the other Ages…

@GoldenArmorX

More would be a Mongol variant for hereditary reasons:

• The Mughals were practically a subfaction of the Timurid Empire, led by Babur, who moved to India to invade after being expelled from Persia.
• They managed to defeat the Delhi Sultanate and took control of most of India from it. In fact, they were enemies of Delhi.
• Ethnically, they were descendants of Mongols and Turks, hence their name “Mughals” was an informal way of referring to them as “Mongols.”
• In fact, in their early stages, they were nomadic like the Mongols, but as they conquered India, they became sedentary. Even so, they retained certain nomadic aspects, such as the “Wandering Court,” since the capital was not in a city, but in a “mobile city” that constantly moved around India.
• They built quite a few landmarks, many of which are the ones used by the Indian civ in Age of Empires III, including the Taj Mahal and Agra Fort. There’s also the Jama Mosque and the Tomb of Jahangir.

For all these reasons, I see them as a civ, which could be a variant due to its Mongol ancestry, rather than its mechanical origins (similar to the Templars). However, most of their military units may use Persian as their language.

Yes, I would give Delhi the Ghurids and the Mongols the Tatars with the flag they have in AoE 3…Also the Mughals are a bit late for AoE 4…

@GoldenArmorX

– Rocket launcher - Replaces the mangonel. Fires a rocket. Good against ranged units, but weak against other units.

Rockets are good against all infantry and buildings, but weak against cavalry…

@GoldenArmorX

Gajnal Elephant - An elephant with a light breech-loading cannon on top. It can deal siege damage to buildings from a distance and has a lot of HP. As a weakness, it counts as siege, cavalry, elephant, and heavy units, and receives extra damage from all units with a bonus against this (horseman, crossbowman, spearman).

It could also be a Siege Elephant like in AoE 2 and AoE 3…

@Darkness01101

I asked AI to do so… how does this look

There’s no need to use so much AI…

@OperaticShip743

I think it’s an anti-infantry unit, realistically. I’ve looked into it once, and it doesn’t make sense as a siege unit, unless you know something I don’t.

@GoldenArmorX

Well, they had an elephant with a “short” breech-loading cannon, which was more “anti-personnel” than anti-building, so yes, it could have been anti-infantry, although nothing rules out the possibility that it could have been used to destroy simple buildings. Perhaps as a replacement for the springald? Hehe, there are many applications.

The fact that elephants were already “very difficult” to kill, and that one could even “attack at long range” with a cannon, made it even more terrifying; but in theory, the cannon took up so much space that, aside from the howdah and the gunner, it might not have defended itself well, except, of course, for the elephant itself to kick or use its tusks.

Now, the point is that the unit “existed” and was quite useful to the Mughals; its in-game “stats and bonuses” are debatable.

Yes, it can be an anti-building unit at long range and an anti-infantry unit at short range by switching modes, but moving slower…

[BeALy69]

This is so sick!!! Stunning and already ready to pay for this dlc!!!

[TheLiberator236]

Eventually all civs gonna have variants!

[TheLiberator236]

I definitely agree
Yes to all!

[TheLiberator236]

Ehhhm no. More like Delhi Sultanate variant!

[HasanIchess]

Request: Highlight resources in caster mode

A colored line below the highest resource per minute is a subtle and clean way to evaluate the game. [image] I also think it’s better if you can see the number of villagers at the same time. Please implement it.

[Croissantini]

Thanks a lot for fixing Spearman weapons!

Chinese / Mongolian spearmen with deformed weapons?

I am happy to report that this has finally been fixed! Thank you to everyone who kept bringing up the issue, and thanks to the developers for taking the time to sort this out. It might have seemed small, but it means a lot to us. [image] [image] [image] Additionally, there are some changes! Besides Mongol, Delhi, Ottoman, Abbasid now has the Spear with tassel, which feels a lot more appropriate than them using the Guisarme. [image] [image] [image] Maybe the coolest change… Rus spears w…

[_EDCB_Aetise]

Context
The Knights Templar civilization introduces a unique age-up mechanic through the commandery system, offering one of three choices at each age transition. While this adds depth and strategic variety, there’s a significant design issue currently limiting viable strategies.

---

The Problem
At Castle Age (Age III), players are forced to choose the Genoese commandery if they want access to a solid ranged unit in Imperial Age (as the Genoese crossbowmen act as a substitute for handcannoneers).

This results in:

• A lack of viable alternative choices at Castle Age.
• The heavy spearmen and genitor options being rarely used, since skipping Genoese means no effective late-game ranged unit.
• Meanwhile, the Condottieri, unlocked in Imperial Age, are fast gold-only light infantry, but not strong enough to carry the late game — and their utility fits better in midgame raids than endgame battles.

---

Proposed Solution
Swap the positions of the following commanderies:

• Move the Genoese commandery to Imperial Age (Age IV).
• Move the Condottieri commandery to Castle Age (Age III).

---

Why This Makes Sense

• The Genoese only shine with full upgrades in Imperial Age. Unlocking them there aligns better with their power curve.
• The Condottieri are fast raiders that cost only gold — they are a better fit for midgame disruption, not late-game compositions.
• This change allows players to choose heavy spearmen in Castle Age (a strong frontline unit), without sacrificing their only viable ranged option for Imperial.
• It would increase build diversity, reduce the “one forced path” issue, and make the commandery system more flexible and rewarding.

---

Expected Impact

• More viable unit composition paths for Templars.
• Better synergy between commandery timing and unit usefulness.
• A smoother, more intuitive gameplay experience with greater strategic freedom.

---

Conclusion
This is not a balance issue, but a design and timing refinement. The Templars are a fantastic civilization with enormous potential — this small adjustment would greatly enhance their gameplay depth without breaking existing balance.

Thanks to the devs for their creativity with this civ. Looking forward to more iterative improvements!

[AOE4PlsBuffEngland]

Making relics graphically larger on the ground? It really takes me some time to see where is it on my screen. It’s kinda small, and bit hard to clearly see when the map is desert-type for example, due to its color and size. I mean with mini map I know it’s in my screen but just a bit hard to fast spot it.

Although KT teammates make things a bit easier I gotta say.

[MatM1996]

@TheLiberator236

Eventually all civs gonna have variants!

Yes, first finish with the base civs (Rus, Mongols, Delhi), then the anniversary ones (Malians and Ottomans) and then start with the DLC civs (Byzantines, Japanese, Spanish, Incas, Aztecs, etc. etc. etc.)…

@TheLiberator236

Ehhhm no. More like Delhi Sultanate variant!

Of course, the Mongols would have the Tatars and the Mughals would be the successors of Delhi from 1526 until at least the end of the construction of the Taj Mahal in 1653 (the Tatars would be the Mongols but with other unique technologies and the Mughals would be a mix between Tatars and Delhi)…

@_EDCB_Aetise

• Move the Genoese commandery to Imperial Age (Age IV).
• Move the Condottieri commandery to Castle Age (Age III).

Yes, you can simply swap Genoa for Venice…although it’s currently fine as it is in the game, since condottieri were used more in the Renaissance aka Imperial Age…

@_EDCB_Aetise

• More viable unit composition paths for Templars.
• Better synergy between commandery timing and unit usefulness.
• A smoother, more intuitive gameplay experience with greater strategic freedom.

@_EDCB_Aetise

This is not a balance issue, but a design and timing refinement. The Templars are a fantastic civilization with enormous potential — this small adjustment would greatly enhance their gameplay depth without breaking existing balance.

Of course, it makes sense…

[Croissantini]

Maybe I’m wrong here, but aren’t the rails meant to be on the inside of fences? Noticed that most TCs are like this, even Japanese that uses a different fences in Feudal. Seems to me that they’re rotated the wrong direction.

Also, requesting to get the TC walls for China as shown in the original concept art.

[Raion]

so you claim that you don’t care about the concept of variants and civilizations but at the same time you care so much that it bothers you. it’s simply a nomenclature and even more correct since it is actually a variant of the civilization it takes its name from. If it bothers you less they could all be variants and have the nomenclature of which civilization they are part of.
The name of the current English is changed to “English Kingdom”
and above “English Kingdom” and “Lancaster” compare the nomenclature “English Civilization”

[Croissantini]

I claim that I don’t like the concept of variants. When I say I don’t “care” about Zhu Xi Legacy, I’m not referring to whether I’m indifferent to it existing or not. I’m referring to the context in which I am discussing how interesting they are as ideas in this game. As in, who cares for such an insignificant order represented in a game about EMPIRES? I point out the Templars standing out exactly because they have identity. But, I still dislike the idea of variants.