Civ Units Not Unique

[derMensch]

Compared to AOE2, where the longbow, teutonic knight, etc all felt and acted very unique, in AOE4, particularly later in the game, nearly all the units regardless of Civ seem mostly the same. The exception being things like the Elephant but all the other archers, cavalry, infantry, feel like they more of less have the same capabilities with a different skin. Anyone else feel like this? Maybe im just nostalgic about AOE2

[Sir Moisty Capybara]

Originally posted by Amph:

lmao stop the trolling, in aoe 2 it's all copy past minus that unique unit, here you have nest of bee for example which is unique to chinese, and all civ are more different

AoE2 is subtractive, AoE4 is additive.

This is entire clue about civ design within both games. As for "nest of bees" - it has exactly same role as mangonel and I'm pretty sure that projectiles even works as same as mangonel, but I won't say that for sure.

[Thunder]

Originally posted by Sir Rage A Lot:

Originally posted by lynpinette:

No read the original topic post, that one does not count.

We can link threads here all day but SERIOUSLY are you really going to take the stance that there is not more threads by AoE2 players criticising AoE4 than there are threads by AoE4 players criticising AoE2? I thought sometimes you are reasonable...

Originally posted by Sir Rage A Lot:

Of course, more people who has issue with AoE4 will make threads compared to people who has issue with people having issue about AoE4, but those threads had place.

I edited that after so I give you that but...

Yeah I didn't see that edit.

[Rinky]

Civs in AoE II are not unique. Case closed

[Sir Moisty Capybara]

Originally posted by RINKASHIKACHI:

Civs in AoE II are not unique. Case closed

They are. Case closed. If you wish to talk about it more - go to AoE2 forums.

[Heimdall313]

AoE2, the Vikings, Spanish, and Koreans were odd ones since they had two unique units compared to most other civs which only had one.

China has several unique units, Rus has two, Franks have two, the English are odd to only have one UU.

[Sir Moisty Capybara]

Originally posted by Heimdall313:

AoE2, the Vikings, Spanish, and Koreans were odd ones since they had two unique units compared to most other civs which only had one.

China has several unique units, Rus has two, Franks have two, the English are odd to only have one UU.

I don't like China having multiple unique units honestly compared to other factions. But you have to consider that Britons has that weird organ gun thingy.

[Thunder]

Originally posted by Sir Rage A Lot:

AoE2 is subtractive, AoE4 is additive.

There is some subtraction between civs in AoE4. A few off the top of my head...

Mongols do not have farms, walls, keeps
Rus do not have cannon ships and stone walls
Delhi/Abbasid can not farm boars
English is missing one of the siege equipment

[Sir Moisty Capybara]

Originally posted by lynpinette:

Originally posted by Sir Rage A Lot:

AoE2 is subtractive, AoE4 is additive.

There is some subtraction between civs in AoE4. A few off the top of my head...

Mongols do not have farms, walls, keeps
Rus do not have cannon ships and stone walls
Delhi/Abbasid can not farm boars
English is missing one of the siege equipment

By that I mean entire philosophy in tech tree.

So, you have your basic AoE2 tech tree. All techs. Then civs comes. You subtract those techs, that won't fit civ design, so for example Franks does not get final range upgrade, Mongols does not get final armor upgrades on cavalry archers, no Paladin. etc. If you check tech trees in Age of Empires 2, you will see that every single civ gets just 2 unique techs. Not less, not more.

Now to AoE4. Every single civ has exactly same roster of base techs (all three levels of armor) - so your stuff like Architecture. And then comes civ specific techs. So stuff like Fresh Foodstuffs etc. It adds on top of that existing predetermined base.

As for building not being available -> yes, you can call it subtractive in that sense, but in nature it feels more like building being treated a little bit different compared to tech tree. Some of stuff is still something that prolly in AoE2 or AoE1 would be considered as civ bonus, not tech tree omission, but good point overall.

[Sir Moisty Capybara]

edit: It would be good point if I didn't said it like

Originally posted by Sir Rage A Lot:

Originally posted by Amph:

lmao stop the trolling, in aoe 2 it's all copy past minus that unique unit, here you have nest of bee for example which is unique to chinese, and all civ are more different

AoE2 is subtractive, AoE4 is additive.

This is entire clue about civ design within both games. As for "nest of bees" - it has exactly same role as mangonel and I'm pretty sure that projectiles even works as same as mangonel, but I won't say that for sure.

[Sir Clavius]

AoE2 civs are copy paste. I have nothing against AoE2 - i grow up with this game. But its just copy paste.

[Viscule]

Originally posted by Sir Rage A Lot:

Originally posted by Viscule:

Just judging by a lot of the responses I've seen from you, I'm going to have to agree with everyone else here. You seem extremely biased when it comes to comparing aoe2 to aoe4 unique units. You have yet to successfully convince anyone why aoe2 units are more unique than aoe4.

The funniest part is - I don't have. Why?
Keyword: feels

You can use "but others are right because there is more of them" all you like, I don't care. I gave reasoning why it feels like and I'm pretty sure it is good enough to end this topic.

And I started my AoE2 unique unit features list because people are going to pretend that oh AoE2 so simpleton. It's not, but idgaf at this point.

If all you want to do is shout into the void, that's fine. Since you care about no one elses opinion except for your own, what's the point of responding to anyone else here?

People are going to respond to you no matter how you feel because this is a place where you have discussions about the game. But you don't want to have a discussion it seems like.

[Narcissistic Cannibal]

A clown reward well-deserved.

[Eric]

Originally posted by Sir Rage A Lot:

Originally posted by Amph:

lmao stop the trolling, in aoe 2 it's all copy past minus that unique unit, here you have nest of bee for example which is unique to chinese, and all civ are more different

AoE2 is subtractive, AoE4 is additive.

This is entire clue about civ design within both games. As for "nest of bees" - it has exactly same role as mangonel and I'm pretty sure that projectiles even works as same as mangonel, but I won't say that for sure.

yeah sure that's like ssaying teutonic have same role as other slow melee infatry, stop trolling

[Sir Moisty Capybara]

Originally posted by Amph:

Originally posted by Sir Rage A Lot:

AoE2 is subtractive, AoE4 is additive.

This is entire clue about civ design within both games. As for "nest of bees" - it has exactly same role as mangonel and I'm pretty sure that projectiles even works as same as mangonel, but I won't say that for sure.

yeah sure that's like ssaying teutonic have same role as other slow melee infatry, stop trolling

Slow but heavy armored infantry that is countered costeffectively only by gunpowder, 2 unique units and monks. Also you can use siege towers to move them faster.

You people will say exact same thing like "but this only stats". Thanks capt. obvious, what is most of bonuses in AoE4 if not pernament or periodical stat changes? Oh you can use active ability oh that makes it so unique.

Originally posted by Viscule:

Originally posted by Sir Rage A Lot:

The funniest part is - I don't have. Why?
Keyword: feels

You can use "but others are right because there is more of them" all you like, I don't care. I gave reasoning why it feels like and I'm pretty sure it is good enough to end this topic.

And I started my AoE2 unique unit features list because people are going to pretend that oh AoE2 so simpleton. It's not, but idgaf at this point.

If all you want to do is shout into the void, that's fine. Since you care about no one elses opinion except for your own, what's the point of responding to anyone else here?

People are going to respond to you no matter how you feel because this is a place where you have discussions about the game. But you don't want to have a discussion it seems like.

Its no you argument. I gave my point, you ignored it and moved to comment like that. I'm happy to scream here.

Originally posted by Ulrich:

AoE2 civs are copy paste. I have nothing against AoE2 - i grow up with this game. But its just copy paste.

AoE4 is copy paste, but with skins.

[-SNiGS- JAM]

Originally posted by Moringa:

Originally posted by -SNiGS- EpicSrvrsRdogShit:

Theres a number of abilities and seemingly "unique" upgrades in aoe4 that are actually just other civ upgrades/bonuses, but with x instead of y attached to it.

for example, HRE can get ""camel support"" only with an added damage bonus as well through their prelates

While that's true, there are also limitations in design space for a game such as aoe. In starcraft, you can get go all out and create all kind of interesting alien technologies and creatures. With aoe, something like a monk converting units is already stretching it. I've seen people complaining about buffs in aoe4 as this is too "unrealistic". I would say something like an camel aura and a priest unit providing a single buff are already quite different for the sake of this game.

I dont think its that far to expect some serious differences though. I was genuinely surprised to find out how many effects are shared between the civs. Especially considering "auras" and "camels" are the literal unique features about Abbasid civ, and that at the very least, the effects would be entirely unique as well. How the civs deliver the bonus is fine and dandy, but having nuanced articulations in the combat system that have different mechanical features allow for a multitude of different outcomes away from the competitive trap of hard-counters vs hard-counters.

Considering the fact that most HRE players are already given incentive to train and use prelates, and abbasid players are already given incentive to train and use camels, both effects will be active at any given time in a match where both civs are present.

Even the most simple changes can exemplify uniqueness. Finding a middle ground, If camel support for example, gave all infantry in the aura +1 pierce armor and an Increase to Block Chance in melee, it would be much more unique than the prelates inspiration. The delivery system is unique and the mechanics of how the numbers are calculated are unique, as well as the new outcomes, like abbasid frontlines being able to hold for longer than expected with an RNG element, as opposed to the HRE's more reliable and consistent +1/+1/+damage.