Why I am hyped for the new DLC

These are not even remotely contradictory. I could list many illustrative examples, but I think this is the clearest.

The xiongnu, which reached it’s height around 200bc is theorized by scholars to likely be the same peoples as the Huns.

Xiongnu being direct ancestors of the Huns, lived, fought, and had a similar culture to the Huns, absolutely 100%, if there ever was a xiongnu player in an aoe2 scenario, could and absolutely SHOULD be represented by the Huns.

There is no universe in which 200bc, is medieval and the Xiongnu should absolutely NOT be in aoe2 as it’s own civ.

If you added xiongnu, it’d absolutely be a hun split.

That which a civ CAN represent is not related whatsoever to what SHOULD be in game.

A people group can have existed before the start of the aoe2 timeline, and then…continued to exist into the aoe2 timeline. To use the civ to represent what is same group makes absolute sense. Non medieval civs don’t belong in aoe2…a medieval game.

China represents the Han people of the Medeival period. But the Han existed before the medieval period. If there are some pre medieval han people, the chinese are…were… the best aoe2 civ to represent them. But now we have specific polity factions to represent that which would have been represented by chinese. But Wu, Shu, and Wei are pre-medieval, and shouldn’t be in the game, even if Chinese would have represented them.

5 Likes

It is you who does not understand what other ppl are saying. You said:
3k is part of dynasties in Chinese history. - True.
3k are not the civs so they all can be considered as the Chinese civ. - True.
Just like there are 4 dynasties in aoe4 Chinese. -True.
So what is the problem? The problem is the “Civ” you said here is a Civ in history. Be we are talking about Civs in game. In this DLC, Wei, Shu, Wu and Chinese are all Civs in game. Let’s read it again:

3k are not the civs so they all can be considered as the Chinese civ IN HISTORY., and now the devs create 4 civs IN GAME to represent them (1 Chinese civ & 3 not-being-the-civ dynasties).

Can you see the contradiction? This is why we dislike the idea of this DLC.

1 Like

The worst part is not just that they chose 3K for New Civs, but that they based them on the novel Romance of the Three Kingdoms.

As you can see from the new Heroes skins, they are not based on historical facts, but on the novel. For example, Kuan Yü has “Ch‛ing-lung-yen-yüeh-tao” (the Azure Dragon Crescent Blade), but in reality, the Yen-yüeh-tao (crescent blade) did not exist during the Three Kingdoms period. The reason Kuan Yü has the weapon in the novel is because the novel was written during the Ming Dynasty, when that weapon was popular.

10 Likes

I think there are like 30 complain Threads already where it feels everybody of the big complainers already has said the same stuff 10 times already.
No need to also spam this thread.

So here are the first 2 things that make me hype:

Hei Guang Cavalry

I think it’s an amazing concept. Knights are way to good in basically any aspect. The Hei Guang instead tries to go to the basics of a cavalry unit. Higher attack and Armor, but way lower HP. This means the counters are way more effective against the Hei Guang. And the unit is more dependent on the upgrades.
Which ofc is a huge downside in addition to the less generalist approach. In theory Hei Guang have basically the same or even in parts better performance against the non-counter units. But only when they have the upgrades on them. Which means, the biggest selling point of Knights - the insane powerspike at the start of castle age - is way less effectively usable for the Hei Guan. Which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but I feel it needs a bit more compensation than just being able to kill a vill in 4 hits without attack upgrades.
Yes Hei Guang also train ever so slightly faster, but as they are so dependent on the upgrades it’s not really possible to leverage this.
I also feel a bit trolled because of the 3 civs that get it 2 miss crucial upgrades in bloodlines and plate barding armor. With the irony that the “cavalry” civ gets a unit in imp that has less HP and pierce Armor than a normal Cavalier. Despite having 30 % HP increase.
And this brings me to the biggest critique. In imp the unit seems really underwhealming. 30 HP and 1 attack seem fine at first glance (Cavalier gives 20 HP and 2 attack), But because of the high dependeny on upgrades this is actually basically the same. Which means the Hei Guang stops at Cavalier power. Even when fully Upgraded. Against the common units. It’s considerably weaker against the counters. Yes, in theory they take the same amount of Hits against fully upgraded Halberdiers. But they take more % of the health per hit. So with any other damage source involved (like cavalry or arbs) they will perform considerably weaker.
I think the imp upgrade could be a bit stronger - ofc not on Paladin level, but something in between with an asoociated higher upgrade cost. This would add an interesting dynamic between Hei Guang and the Knight line.
So all in all the unit atm looks a bit underpowered. So I hope they will tweak it up a bit. I can even see it losing 1 melee armor but instead getting .05 movement Speed. Which would mean they’d lose the matchup with Knights even fully upgraded, but the ever so slightly higher speed would allow to play more with the mobility.
The Imp variant could even get one more Pierce armor Which might look to strong against Archers. But then keep in mind, that at this stage we will have Halberdiers involved which will make this very hard to effectively utilize against the archer civs. This would make the difference between the two lines in Imp even clearer.
But in general I really like the design concept of the unit. It feels way more like how a cavalry should look like in the game. And will probably show when released this way what makes the Knights so dominant in the current meta and what would be needed to compensate their absurd timing and health pool for a cavalry unit.

Rocket Carts

I love the concept of giving all the projectiles the same damage. In fact, I made a proposal for this some time ago here . My concept ofc was a theoretical study. And there are a lot of differences to the current rocket carts.
They to me look mostly just like a reskin of Mangonels. A few little differences in the playout are there, but nothing big. The increased proj speed may have the biggest impact in practical games. Also it seems the rockets don’t land at the same time which might give minimal chances with archer units to survive when moving towards the rocket carts. Though the spread-out and difference in time is so marginal that it probably won’t.
And I feel like it’s a little bit of a missed opportunity. It really looks like it’s basically just a reskin of the Mangos - and I hope that devs will do some incremental changes to make the units more distinct. Maybe it’s even good they start this way around because there will be haters which will claim thes rocket carts would be OP. And sillenced by the fact that’s really just a reskinned Mango, despite it works so different.
I would like when devs would get more bold and instead of the small spread and armor-piercing rockets would switch to a bigger spread of non-armor piercing rockets This ofc needs than to be done in a fixed pattern like I described it as otherwise the overlaps could create unwanted peaks in damage, killing units that should survive a single shot. But it would allow to make your units more resistant to the rocket carts by researching armor and make melee armor units less vulnerable - finally somehing where some melee armor can be really neat on a unit.
Even if it’s basically just a mango reskin I like the rocket carts and I ask myself why the mangos weren’t designed like this from the beginning instead of having these weird massive rocks that only do 1 damage.

3 Likes

The 3 Kingdom civs - the conceptional triangle.
They look like made from one single hand, one civ designers “Masterpiece” - a three-part unit with each of them having a clear identity - but none of them is anything like a one-trick pony. As I will point out, that in my opinion this may even be a bit too versatile on some of them almost to the point that they might be played as different identities than intended. But the general design concepts are great and this can and will surely be fixed with upcoming patches.

Wei

They seem to me the weakest of the Three Kingdom civs. Their eco bonus imo is just worse than Bengals. Which is a solid Bonus especially for slower maps. And this Bonus is even slower. But this migh be intentional as the cavalry (archer) specialisation basically cries for open maps. The strongest is the civ probably in early castle age with their empowered Hei Guang Rush. Similar to Franks. Though I analysed a bit that even with 15 % more HP the Hei Guang without upgrades will actually be minimally inferior to Knights. Only with the upgrades they become stronger, but then the timing advantage can’t be used as effectively anymore.
A lot of the civs tools and Bonusses feel undertuned - they need to pay a lot to get to the sheer strength of their favorite units and then they don’t get Plate Barding Armor. Which means you pay a lot to in the end don’t get the most powerful cavalry upgrade with the best value. It looks almost a bit trolly.
Ofc they get their 30 % HP boost as “compensation” amd the Imp tech to make it more resistant to generic melee units. But this isn’t even nearly as good as the 2 Pierce Armor from Plate Barding, cause it means they actually take 67 % more Damage from Arbalests. And Halbs still eat them almost like Cavaliers. It would only help in pure Cav wars or I guess against Champs. But how often do we see this at that stage? I guess the idea was to make it a specialised cav for this Matchup, but for me it sees it will just fall flat when the Halbs are involved.
In my opinion a cav civ needs Plate Barding or a way, way stronger compensation for missing this tech. Even the Tiger Cavalry only gets to Paladin level of Pierce Armor when needing to be produced from Castles. And initially it has quite low HP - so only when you get the snowball rolling they perform to their full strength.
In total I see way to be a bit too slow going for aggressive open maps and then missing out on essential lategame techs. Even an their strongest in early castle age they need to invest in techs to make the Hei Guang stronger than standard Knights. So all in all just undertuned.
Which becomes even more clear when you look at their UT. Tuntian gives you the equivalent of 3 Farmers whith 60 army . And you pay 250 F 300 G for it. A total troll, only potentially worth picking up when you are pop capped and then you need to consider if it’s actually worth spending Gold on this. If this is supposed to empower full castle age plays it needs to be tuned up massively. Both in terms of effect but also with cost reduction.
Ming Guang Armor seems to be fine - considering that xianbei don’t scale very well and Hussar miss the last Armor upgrade. I would much rather prefer having just the basic Plate Barding here to be honest. Imo having 2 Pierce Armor is way stronger than 3 more Melee armor… Even if they tune it up… I think losing 2 Pierce armor is almost not to compensate here. 1 would be ok, but 2 is just too much, considering that Hei Guang will take 2 and Hussars even 3 Damage from Bracer elite Skirms even. And against Halbs the melee armor also doesn’t do a lot actually.
I think there needs to be something more like adding 1 Pierce Armor to Ming Guang or increasing the HP Bonus to 20 % / 50 % or something like this.
Also missing Heresy for a cav civ seems to me like a big mistake. Especially when they rely so heavily on the expensive Tiger Cavalry. Maybe it felt essential for the design of Wei, but then there needs some form of anti-Monk compensation here, cause this will be a targeted weak point in a lot of matchups - especially with missing Atoomenemt and Redemption aswell.
It also would be nice if the Civ had Arbalest just so it has one other option to go for than the pure Cavalry. The other civs in Shu and Wu also have different Options in Imp whilst having way less glaring weaknesses that could be targeted. Arbs seem to me the perfect strategic fit for the Wei.
The alternative ofc can be to go even more into the cavalry focus. If they get in the end amazing Hussars or so, they can find alternative ways to win games. But then they need way more than the current Bonusses / UTs.

Shu

The Shu are for me the hardest to analyse. The eco bonus seems ok-ish, coming online really in the midgame where you have a lot of lumberjacks and want to turn that into food. Then this Bonus will be amazing. But it will take a while to come on. It’s in general also a slower civ - and seems to scale very well. But it’s hard to estimate how storng it will be really. I think it will still be behind to known lategame powerhouses like Mongols or Byzantines. One key factor ofc will be the performance of the White Feather Guards. The Interesting thing I observed with them is that despite having 3 Pierce Armor they don’t seem to have good matchups vs Archery type units. Probably because they hit so weak. But the snare might make it super annoying to micro against them. Their comparably slow train Speed might become an issue and is probably part of the civ design.
Missing out on Bloodlines will make their Hei Guang almost unusable. Even against Skirms you probably will most likely opt more often for mangos or even White Feather Guards. But it’s at least an option and can surprise opponents potetnially.
The War Chariots look undertuned to me. The main selling point of Scorps is to damage multiple units at once. But maybe I’m underestimating their power.. Ofc it’s a unit when ammassed and the unit doesn’t has enough army it can easily completely snowball. And I seen that in some uncientific testing. Need to be shown in real games without bug abusing. I would like if it had a more specific role like getting bonus Damage against Cavalry (but less base Pierce).
The UTs this time seem fine, maybe a bit too high cost for the Castle Age Tech.
The biggest weakness will probably be BBCs in the lategame - i don’t see a realistic answer, though their Arbs may have better chances to snipe them. We need to see if they will be the first real Archer Civ that gets away with not having BBC themselves.

Wu

They look amazing to me. May be a bit too amazing. They have basically all options, which I really like. Yes they are Infantry focussed, but I think they won’t be played that way a lot of times. And probably show why Infantry sees so little play currently.
Their military Eco Bonus seems to be the strongest of the three civs. Ofc it’s only something you can effectively utilize when you go for army (and on water maps). But getting 195 F for free when you smash down a barracks, Range and Stable is amazing. Maybe a bit too much actually. Also the team eco bonus could be the best in the game actually, as there are currently a lot of civs which only need just a little bit to be able to go up 1 vill earlier.
This strong eco in addition to having basically every important line (escept skirms) playable will be massive and the applications plenty.
The Jian Swordsman is really strong in the Castle Age, even the “weak” version without the shield. In Imp it seems to fall off then actually. So let’s see how much the castle age Powerspike will do here. I can even see it being too strong in early castle age, considering that you can open scouts or archers with this civ and then go full jian. I can see a small elite upgrade for them in imp for some less prowess in castle age. The biggest point against Archer civs is that it really needs to micro target them down - and this might make the combo of them plus pikes super almost unbeatable in low elos.
Fire archers look ineresting but the low reload time might be a huge issue for micro nerds. It will probably be more of a addition to the other Armies you do with this civ that just adds a bit of ranged dps to the composition. The anti-building feature need to be figured out. For me it looks that this won’t be as impactuful as many may think as it’s not really working against fortifications, but let’s see. The civ also gets Arbs and I think if you really want to use Archery you will probably opt for them for the better micro and easier Production.
Interestingly the Civ might have the best Hei Guang Cavalry from the three Kingdom civs. You get exactly the Food you need for one when building a stable, you get tehm fully upgraded with even + 2 Attack in Imp. In my opitnio they are better than the ones of Wei. Which is odd. But it adds an interesting flavour to the civ and a good measure of how good their Infantry actually is. Because if the civ is in the aftermath played as a Cav Civ the INfantry, espeiclla the swordsman line might need further improvement.
Which brings me to the specifci Infantry bonus. And it’s imo quite weak on its own. Yes, i like the bonus - i think it’s great for Infantry to have HP regen to revard keeping individual units alive. But for the swordsman line I doubt it will make the line notably stronger so it becomes viable in the midgame. On the other hand it might turn out OP on the Spearman line, especially in Imp.
And I actually would have hoped for the Infantry civ to get one of the strongest Champs in the game. But in my opitnion they will just clearly fall short to something like Armenians.
In general their Imp looks weak even with the possibly best Halbs in the game. And ofc this is the tradeoff of having great early aggression potential AND a super versatile tech tree.
This is from the design here possibly the most interesting Civ ever released. It might be a bit overtuned and possibly the only one of the new civs that might get a nerf. But I don’t think it needs to be tuned down before release. I think there will be very specific nerfs to the eco bonus and potentially in compensation some buffs to their Chamions, like expanding the attack bonus in Imp to them.

Funnily I like the design of the Three Kingdom Civs even more than those of Jurchens / Khitans. They are not bad by any means, but they seem to have glaring weaknesses and I even think they should get buffs pre-release. Cause otherwise people will probably be dissapointed by them in comparison to the Three Kindom civs, which are more appealing design-wise. But that’s to be analysed on a later post.

I’m neutral to the Heroes and Trebs from Siege Workshops. I’m not sure which gameplay implications they will have. Heroes look way too expensive to me - and the effect of trebs from Siege Workshops needs to be figured out. I don’t exactly understand why devs did this, because I think the amount of people who get hyped by this is very small and competitively irrelevant. It’s a very high risk for a very small potential revard.

1 Like

I think the comparison with Bengalis isnt perfect, I think the Wei eco will be a bit more like Cumans or Burgundiana in the sense that you will be behind in resources to get more villagers/eco, in fact I think they will pick their mining camp techs as soon as they can. By castke age beetwen this and their extra hp I think they will kinda do better than almost every other knight civ even with the weakness to archers until you get all armor techs. Also the Tiger cav will be cheaper to get going than Paladins and not too far apart, better than what many cavalier civs can do.

For Shu I think you are understimating them a lot. Their eco bonus is almost as good as Slavs but available earlier and synergizes with their cheap archer techs. Tbey will be able to benefit from those two bonus all game lomg as long as they make archers. Then in late game you have the best arbs in the game with no real competition in a per unit basis outside of Britons. +2 arrows is a pretty intense bonus, and with a Saracen ally will be better than pre nerf Saracen archers. The Traction trebs and archrrs will be super scary with this civ. You will be able to start making bbc-likw units super early on and upgrade your archers quickly and have a super high power ceiling for those archers.

The Wu seems like the strongest one in early game, but I feel like their late game versatily doesnt seem like anything too scary outside of maybe traction trebs. All these options are good, but thats kinda it, theres no stand out unit for me

I think the Jurchen will be weak and Khitan are okay but weirdly designed, but I still think they are better designed with clear gameplan and straightforward bonuses

Overall I think the balance is off, all civs feel like they have too many good bonuses (except the Wu who simply may need a reduction of their extra food)

I thought that aswell, but after watching Ornlus civ overview I am not so sure about that anymore. On scout rush maps the Jurchens might be top tier actually.
The fighting test results almost look a bit too strong for a 20 % attack speed increase, which should actually be just “on par” in a direct matchup with franks scouts (without bloodlines ofc) in the melee fights. But it looks better for some reason.

Khitans I don’t think will be as good. They have a good early game but don’t have really interesting options in the midgame. I guess devs wanted to make an aggressive, timing oriented civ. But forgot to give them the right powerspikes to work with, so the potential of the Khmer-like food availability is kinda wasted.
In the right hands Khitans can be a strong civ, like I see Yo, Mbl using it to good success. But it’s not a civ that really fits the metaplay.

The classic of an “Infantry” civilisation being played as a Cavalry or Archer civilisation instead. Yeah.

The HP bonus should maybe be applied after Bloodlines.
Both units it’s applied to have very low base HP.

Reminds me of the Mongols and their Hussars.

Might be funny in 500 population games.

It looks like their task is to soak up damage and keep cavalry away from your archers.
Hight HP, decent pierce armour and slowing down cavalry. Perfect to stop cavalry and Skirmishers while your second row of Archers does the DPS.

They are really strange. They look like a fast unit but only move at 0.8 base speed. Somehow they still take anti cavalry bonus damage.

I feel like it’s likely going to be tuned down to like 50 Food.

I don’t think that the regeneration will be all that powerful.

Archers can keep distance and cavalry can run away to regenerate.
Infantry usually has to keep fighting so a flat HP bonus is better in most cases.

I agree here too for then most part.
Jurchans and Khitans have been make a lot less interesting by giving Fire Lance and Rocket Carts to so many other civs.
Not that I think it was a bad thing to give it to those civs, I love the new additions. It just makes me look less forward to playing those two civs.

While their cav bonus is decent, they juast feel like a worse Mongols to me in almost ever stage. Not fast enough to be as dangerous, less versatile during mid game, and with a weaker late game

Khitans I feel like their eco will carry them. They have meh tools, but it seems like their eco is good

Checking the new pictures in the files I think the 3K campaigns will be different. Hope the campaigns put the DLC in a good spot.
I still don’t know how the 3K civs will be added in ranked. When the heroes start to be banned in tournaments is when the devs will realize that they don’t belong to the competitive scene.

The Heroes are about 2x too expensive for competitive games.
Maybe Heroes will be recruited as a flex to tell the opponent to resign.

And seeing that I think devs would have been better off with instead adding a “hero mode” option where all civs can recruit one of their heroes and the treb goes to the Siege Workshop. This way you can avoid any rage and still enable that hero recruitment FOR ALL civs for the parts of the community who asked for that for years.

1 Like

Whatever the heroes are like on release will be frankly irrelevant. As if they are kept in the game, they will be tweaked until they are used.

1 Like

Not if nobody from the competitive scene asks for it. And I don’t see that happening.

That’s not how balancing a game works. The aim is to make everything usable.

If the heroes stay, that will be the case.

Sorry to break your illusion but there isn’t something like a “balancing algorythm” or whatever.
It’s peoples that decide it and if nobody asks for it they won’t move a finger until it’s something they really want to see used themselves.

1 Like

That’s not what I meant at all.

It meant that the entire point of balancing things is so everything sees play. That is the broad concept.

What you meant was “whatever devs do I will be dissapointed”.

OK. But please don’t draw other people in your misery.

For some reason there has developed a culture of “the evil devs can’t do it right” in a very small but vocal part of the community. And tbh I’m sick of having to read this weird complaining all the time.
If you don’t like the game just go. If you still like it - play it goddam.

I’m just telling you how balancing games works.

If you like a game, you have to agree with every bad change that happens to it, just because it was good before?

5 Likes

No. But it is really worse? I think the game is in a great state - there are some issues, some real issues but funnily these aren’t even topic of the complaints…

And the way he set this up was he will be dissapointed with the devs when the heroes see decisive play. And expected them to be balanced this will happen cause that’s how he expects “balance to work”.
So whatever devs will do he will be dissapointed. Either the heroes will see play or the devs won’t do their balacing job “right”.

All just a buildup for the next rage wave on reddit and the forums. Already set up and told the devs, that whatever they do it WILL be wrong.