I want wonders to be less expensive.
2 Likes
Wonder has always been this expensive in the AoE games. It is not meant to be the very viable route to victory, as otherwise, it would be too easy to just fortify and wait for victory. It is just meant as another possible way to achieve victory. Conquest has always been to direct way.
at the release it cost 3000 3000 3000 3000 so it has been cheaper in this version (aoe4), to cheap i agree but 6000 6000 6000 6000 is to much i like to play ass English a defense-if civ, i think wonders should be less stone and wood these resources deplete and in the late game it wont be a strategy because you need an army and there is no more stone on the map wood gets finished ass well so ass English you get some gold and food. When do you ever build a wonder in ranked matches?. many you agree that after 1,5 hours 2hours when map resources are depleted you should at least still be Abel to build wonders and retread and try to defense you wonder i liked this strategy and won a few times… lost more i think… but those where one of the games i liked most since the cost went up its not really a strategy anymore maby in coop but not 1v1…
They said a while ago they’d scale it based on number of players, but they still haven’t. No idea why, we’ve had a bunch of patches since then.
3 Likes
i think that will be a good solution
Wonders are still far too cheap and easy to pull off in team games
I don’t want to see Wonders becoming cheaper, they are quite easy to build as it is now.
1 Like
Not in 1v1 they aren’t.
1 Like
No one builds Wonder in 1v1, those games are played differently and don’t last very long either.
1 Like
Umm that’s kind of the point. They aren’t viable at all in 1v1 with their current price.
Maybe they should be a niche situation in 1v1, but they aren’t even that currently.
1 Like
I wish they would either allow us to search with wonders disabled or introduce greater counter play to them. Make building your own wonder pause or extend the timer perhaps?
As it stands, wonders are the bane of team games as they are simply too easy to pull off and defend for 15 minutes.
you also have to defend sacred sites
tbh, i don’t see the issue with scaling the price of wonders.
I find the wonder be far to cheap in 4v4 as you can just sink resources to 1 guy quickly and immidietly build a wonder on maps where its easy to force a stalemate.
Make it about equally obtainable regardless if you play 1v1 2v2 3v3 4v4.
It’s key is to force break a stalemate that would otherwise make the game last hours.
It should be that if you play your econ game correctly, then you should be able to obtain a wonder within around 40 minute game mark.
wrong, you have to decap ONE sacred site in the 5 minutes the enemy team has to cap them lol
1 Like
This was one of the reasons that I took a break from Age of Empires IV. I play 1v1, not team games.
I was getting frustrated with late game stalemates where you just mash buttons to make units in an endless line until somebody forgets to make units and things hiccup.
Wonders are the way to end the stalemate. At their current cost of 6k per resource, they are too expensive to build and they are not viable. In 1v1 they should be reduced down to 2k per resource in my view. This means that not only is the person making the wonder spending 8k resources that they otherwise would have used on units and defenses, but they are also giving up the resources of the villagers building the wonder. This means the real cost of the wonder would probably be somethin like 9k resources taking into account build time. This is enough to cause a swing in the amount of units being produced to cause a change in the stalemated battle line or it creates a time limit to end the game.
I also think that wonder rushing should be a viable 1v1 strategy for defensive civs. It can be exciting to see if the wonder can be created and held on some occasions, but it should not be a regular thing. It should be rare, but possible. Right now, the cost is too high for that to happen.
2 Likes
I think in 1v1 it should cost 3000 stone. Other resources are fine.
I don’t even know if there is even 6000 stone available on your side of the map.
In my view, the cost reduction of wonders should be accompanied by some truly neutral sacred sites (be they 2 or 3).
Sacred sites are a good option to force the opponent to leave their base when you have more map control, and that player plays excessively defensively, or as a response to a wonder they might build.
I see wonders as normal in a stalemate situation where players are not clearly dominating each other on the map, although it should be a risky endeavor to construct them.
1 Like
My idea for Wonders cost would be a base price plus the number of teammates:
so, let’s say 3000 each plus 1000 for each teammate.
That’s fair for 1v1, Team games, FFA and asymmetric teams
Examples:
1v1 = wonder cost for any player 3k each res
2v2 = wonder cost for any player 4k each res
3v3 = wonder cost for any player 5k each res
4v4 = wonder cost for any player 6k each res ( AS IS right now)
FFA = like 1v1v1v1 or 1v1v1v1v1v1v1v1 = wonder cost for any player 3k each res
FFA in pairs = 2v2v2v2 = wonder cost for any player 4k each res
And for 2v3 or 4v1
- if you’re a team of 2: 4k each res
- if you’re a team of 4: 6k each res
- if you’re solo: 3k each res
I think that’s very balanced.
But it’s waaay complicated to explain xD
The wonder cost would be there, but many players wouldn’t understand.
So, another option would be, based on map size.
But that’s not balance for FFA or asymmetric teams in my opinion.
1 Like
The only reason for wonder victory to even exist as a mechanic is to be the emergency way out of extremely stale matches in which your opponent have completely walled off spending most of his resources on defences. Its purpose is just to lure turtling opponent from his base bringing dynamics back to such a match.
And your idea actually makes it easier for turtling opponent to go for wonder victory.
Thus it’s completely counterproductive from gameplay point of view.
Don’t forget sacred sites!