Why are People Angry About Jeanne d'Arc Concept?

Age of Empires IV IV - Discussion
1

I played a ton of AoE 1, 2, 3, 4, and Myth and I don’t get the backlash from the old guard here. They keep saying things like “This is Age of MOBA now.” What??? Mongol Khan mechanic exists. English King exists as a hero unit to a lsser extent. A hero-centered civ already exists. Hero mechanic was a thing in AoEIII. Gameplaywise, I really don’t see Jeanne d’Arc being too different from using the Khan. It’s only that she levels up not by just aging up, but by gaining experience. What’s the big deal with reinforcing that idea a little? I really don’t get the community backlash.

I for one love the idea of adding variants instead of adding more civilizations with redundant gameplay that add very little to the table while mucking up the balance like most recent expansions to AoE2 (adding four civs that are redundant in how they play from existing civs, forcing new unique units that fit terribly to the existing rock-paper-scissors mechanic, forcing a civ that doesn’t even belong in the timeline, etc.).

As long as they balance the game right, I really don’t care much about it. I like the idea of using great historical figures as a variant type going forward.

There’s also people complaining about the faction being centered around a single character across multiple ages, breaking the historical immersion or whatever. The AoE community let slip historically atrocious stupidities like mounted Spanish musketeer, Hussite Wagons, Korean War Wagons, and [Western] Rome being in Aoe2 (and much more).

We’ll have feudal Japan battling against the Byzantines in the Mongolian steppes soon. I think we can entertain a bit more make believe here.

8 Likes
2

I think the main complaint is that Jeanne is way more “Moba-y” than the king or khan. The king is basically just a monk with aoe healing, pretty much just another unit. The khan has activated abilites, but other units like the sepahi have activated abilities too.

The whole, “central named unit that sticks with you the entire game and has levels” is very different. I mean she has summons, and has an ultimate ability. Jeanne seems to be the central focus of the entire faction, and the playstyle revolves around her. The same can’t be said of the khan, and certainly not the king. I like the idea of variants too, but they’re really going buckwild with these variant designs.

Some people will really like it, others will absolutely HATE it. That’s the risk you run when fundamentally changing the way a competitive game plays, especially an old established franchise like AOE.

9 Likes
3

################## post:1, topic:240017"]
Spanish musketeer, Hussite Wagons, Korean War Wagons
[/quote]

Most of them are made more than 20 years ago, where information was difficult to access, and the developers at that time had no more knowledge than most laypeople nowadays where anyone can gain much more information from the internet.

And don’t think “people” let them slip. They are complained all the time.

If they were to make these now, they can easily do much better. Later additions in AOE2 does not have as many inaccuracies/stereotypes as the earlier ones. Most (emphasis: most) units make more sense than the half made-up “Persian war elephant”, etc. And they announced a Persian rework. AOE3 just got a massive update on unit appearances. All of them are going in the direction of better representations.

In fact AOE4 began with better historical representation than the previous games (and they claimed it was a goal). For example:

  • Diverse unit appearances across civs.
  • Crossbows are no longer upgraded bows (where 90% of earlier “medieval games” get it wrong).
  • Not all civs have the same “knight”, “monk” and “monastery” names.
  • For civs that cannot be properly covered by one demonym, they choose to use more accurate names of political entities with a clearer focus, instead of “Teutons” for all Germanics or “Saracens” for literally all muslims in AOE2 (this is actually breaking the conventions, and I think it is positive, so don’t old guard me)

Etc. And I thought this was a direction that would and should preserve.

I don’t know what’s the problem with Hussite Wagons btw. It is by all means a more authentic representation of the role of war wagons with proper weaponry, in contrast to the completely nonsense Korean war wagon (made in 1999).

################## post:1, topic:240017"]
[Western] Rome
[/quote]
One can still justify it by “assuming” Western Rome lasted longer.
But that definitely does not apply to Jeanne d’Arc.

As a comparison, kings and khans are generic names.

3 Likes
6

I couldn’t agree more with this post, people are simply over reacting and act as if this will change this game into something that it’s not, people need to finally understand this.

I’m all for providing with constructive feedback to the developers, but let’s not over react. It’s one thing if someone doesn’t like X civ, good thing there is soon 16 civs for everyone to enjoy depending on everyone’s style etc.

The name issue can be solved by connecting the variant civs under the original civs, and you can choose them in a pop up menu that appears when selecting those original civs. That way we no longer have the issue to have to name the variant civs to make sense that way along side other original civs.

2 Likes
7

I will say that some people like to get angry and mad over anything so there is that. I personally think having another civ or minor civ based after a civ that is already in the game and completely based around a person who was only around as a leader for a few years seems kinda dumb to me but whatever no sweat of my back.

3 Likes
8

before i ever make any judgement on variants besides names i wanna see them in action to form an opinion

9

Well, get ready to wait until the very end.

They don’t intend on showing their hand too early lest it gives us time to complain and demand them to change anything. Nope, it will all be revealed towards the end, forcing us to accept the awfulness they have cooked up.

And don’t worry. You’ll get the chance to complain for months, years, with completely minimal changes to any of it. Yes, this game, this franchise? it is no longer for you, the player–it is the developer’s play thing.

10

well you seem new here, i’m used to waiting, i survived waiting 16 years for a 4th game, waiting few weeks is nothing, also yes i’m aware aoe4 isn’t MY game per se, but i already have 2 of those, i don’t need 3rd entry there, its an alright extra

1 Like
11

Hey, maybe you don’t have to wait for another game.

In another year, we’ll receive another batch of 4 variant civilizations, ripping off an entirely different genre than MOBAs, and maybe then they’ll hook you in. Who knows, maybe they’ll take from FPS or MMOs next. :slight_smile:

12

ey you never know, not with current communication to be frank, i’m not gonna go mad about any of it, under condition it doesn’t spread to games i do care about, that being aoe2 and 3 DE, after all, if i don’t agree with what relic does i can just not buy the dlc, or wait for a sale to pay 3$ for it

13

If you did, you didn’t tag me. Get lost kid. Mind your manners.

2 Likes
14

################## post:1, topic:240017"]
I really don’t see Jeanne d’Arc being too different from using the Khan
[/quote]

Khan: a tank scout/mangudai with some arrow’s buff
English King: a tank knight that heals not-in-combate units
Jeanne:

  • Level up
  • tank unit
  • ability to heal
  • ability to deal damage
  • mobile as a horse
  • ability to summon units, so a mobile production building
  • ULTIMATE ABILITY

Yep, it’s pretty close the same as English king and Mongols Khan.

Can you play english without a king, yes, most players do.
Can you play mongols without a khan, yes, you’re not using some buffs, but you can win ignoring your khan
Can you play jeanne ignoring her? Well, I don’t know, but it’s too many skills and bonus to ignore.

2 Likes
18

Its simple human nature. They’re upset, because game doesn’t follow their vision and every game out there has ppl who think their vision is better or right than developers. Then they proceed to complain and yet play the game even tho right answer is not to buy the product that u might not like.

AOE4 tells the history in campaign relatively accurately (I assume because I don’t play singleplayers) which variant civs have no impact whats so ever. Also if you play AI games etc then you never have to touch the variant civs if you don’t like them.

Those civs are more catered towards MP

1 Like
19

Khan technically levels up with every age.
King can heal.
Mongol Khan can’t summon units, but they do have mobile production buildings and get units for free (by using resources they can’t otherwise spend on walls/keeps). Free unit mechanic is further reinforced by Ottomans too.
The fact that she will have an ultimate ability doesn’t really matter. It’s called “ultimate ability,” but it’s an ability nonetheless. Khan has abilities.
Mobile as a horse… after level 3, presumably slightly before or at around castle age.

We don’t know if Jeanne d’Arc can do that much damage or tank that much. So I’d hold off on that. But I highly doubt that she will be able to 2v1 knights.

Yeah, kindda close to Khan and King. A better version, yes, but if it is a variant centered on a hero, then yes. It justifies stronger version of traditional hero unit.

20

################## post:19, topic:240017"]
but they do have mobile production buildings and get units for free (by using resources they can’t otherwise spend on walls/keeps). Free unit mechanic is further reinforced by Ottomans too.
[/quote]

Jeanne can summon units at her side, come from nowhere, besides her. Units that counter units that counter her.
You wanna play some spears against her? I have a champion that deals extra damage against spearmans.
You wanna play some crosbrowmen against her? I have a champion that deals extra damage against crosbrowmen

There is no “travel time” or “walk time” from the production building to the target.
The units spawn wherever she is.

She is raiding the woodline.
Now there is an army raiding the woodline.

22

you dont say !

image

2 Likes
23

Since it is a topic to ask about the controversy, I will give my opinion:

1).- Fear that all the new civs will be like her, and this will become a MOBA

It makes sense, knowing that there are other charismatic historical figures, the fear of civs coming out like Genghis Khan, or Richard the Lionheart, would turn the game into a Moba, with preference among players who choose heroes than those who choose civs.

Personally, I don’t think we’ll get to that, hopefully, and Juana will only be the only special case of a civ with fun and novel mechanics.

On the other hand, if they copied the model for other heroes, the joke would be lost, and practically what I think Age IV proposes is to give different mechanics to each new civilization, even the variants.

2).- Fear that Jeanne dArc become very Broken

All of us who have played Warcraft III, Dota, and the following Mobas know how broken some heroes can be and how they can turn armies into mush if they get the max level.

Let’s hope the civ balances well. At least in recent years there have been many changes for stability and balance in competitive, I don’t think that with Juana/Joan/Jeanne would be separate case.

3).- The name and the uncertainty of the civ content

When the teaser-trailer was released, since nothing was known about the civ variants, people feared many things, or did not like the name. The biggest fear is that it was a rewriting of history, or that they would make fun of Juana’s image. With much being revealed about CIV in a recent teaser, some fears have been allayed, but on the other hand, there are still people who don’t like CIV. In general, everyone has is own opinion.

4).- They don’t like the concept and that’s it

That is up to each one. Another thing is that there are people who spam it, or pick fights with people who don’t think the same.

In any case, I say again that everyone has their own opinion, but it is a forum and we must follow certain rules of coexistence if we want the topics not to be closed. Take care.

4 Likes
25

and I can add one more:

5) It’s changing the core gameplay and AoE4 identity!

Why only one civ be THAT different?
Every civ has some influence you have to build your structures.
Every civ has unique units and unique bonuses and then you play around them.

Now you play around a single unit.
That’s changing the core of gameplay!

Imagine a new civ, variant or just new classic one, with another core mechanic change.
Let’s say a deck from AoE3.
Before the match, you choose your pre-selected deck, but it’s only for one civ.

Imagine another new civ, each landmark gives a skill that you can use one time. Like the gods power from AoM.
But just for this one civ.

Where is the line?

2 Likes
26

From what we’ve heard, the Order of Dragons are supposed to similarly stretch the limits of what a civ can do (somethinig about very powerful but limited/expensive units). Mongols already is super unique with their khan and lakc of walls and mobile buildings and pastures too. Mongols frankly might be more unique than Joanne.

27

For me it is Age of Empires game, not Age of One Historical Person…

3 Likes