Game Requires Better Balance, Not More Civs

[DimSumHouse]

There are many loud voices here screaming for more civs to be added, I strongly disagree.

Remember, Relic has limited resources to develop AoE4. I believe the best step is for Relic to refine the game by continuously perfecting the balance.

An imbalanced game will push players away, a perfectly game draws & retains players.

[Cacomistle]

I think balance has been fine most of the time. Obviously this patch specifically has some issues, but there's a patch coming out which will quite obviously change a lot of that balance around and is putting in effort to fix some of the bad matchups. Before the last patch or two I think the game was quite well balanced, and even now there's just the 1 civ that's breaking balance, and maybe 1-2 others at the pro level but I don't think anyone in gold league is leaving the game because a civ with a 49% win rate at their level has a high win rate in tournaments.

The thing is, a balanced game helps keep players, but it doesn't bring that many players back. If someone reads in the patch notes something like "unit X damage decreased from 10 to 9), they don't think "wow, I gotta try that". Players will however come back to try new units or new civs.

So they need to do both (though it doesn't have to be new civs specifically, new units or other big patches will likely bring players in if implemented well). But I'd say for the average player, cool stuff is more important than balance, and annoying stuff is worse for the game than overpowered stuff, so I don't even think balance is that important as long as there's nothing blatantly stupid.


Unless by balance you mean matchmaking balance including things like drop hackers. That type of stuff will get people to leave. But, that's probably hard to solve.

[FloosWorld]

The game needs both. It isn't as fully asymmetric as AoE 3 where more civs can seriously hurt the balance if they're too strong (looking at you Inca).

[Agravane]

You need to stop obsessing over the perfect balance. The game will never be completely balanced. The worst thing Relic did with this game was solely cater to ranked players, the game desperately needs more civs and singleplayer content.

[TowerRushEnjoyer]

Yeah, some more math adjustments and more clip arts for profile pictures will keep the game afloat for another 12 months for sure

[TowerRushEnjoyer]

Basically hire one guy to adjust the numbers and one graphic designer to design profile pictures. There you go 2 people can manage AOE4 for next 12 months

[Surprise]

Originally posted by DimSumHouse:

There are many loud voices here screaming for more civs to be added, I strongly disagree.

Remember, Relic has limited resources to develop AoE4. I believe the best step is for Relic to refine the game by continuously perfecting the balance.

An imbalanced game will push players away, a perfectly game draws & retains players.

i would also say that i think they are more focussed on COH3 atm too

[Bucherebis]

Remember when Age of Empires games are all about fun and cool historical campaigns? Now it's all about the "perfect balance".

[Bubs]

waa

[DimSumHouse]

Doesn't the RTS data demonstrate that balance is the primary factory in retaining players?

I think of StarCraft, Red Alert, Tiberium, Generals and CoH 1 & 2.

These games also have limited factions to choose from. I'd argue that long-term gameplay is deeply rooted in gameplay balance.

[DimSumHouse]

I believe it's a detriment to AoE4 for this community to constantly scream for more civs.

Recent layoffs at Relic illustrate the scare resources they possess. It's a tough call, but I believe the game is in a great state. Further refinement will polish.

Am I against new civs? Nope. However, I want to voice a differing opinion.

You're welcome to disagree, but consider the legendary titles that had limited factions but overall great balance (relatively speaking; you can certainly point out specific exploits/bugs/abuses)

[SeiFeR]

There is no game with perfect pvp balance, also pvp players in this game are a minority and relic has been very active with the ranking content.

Everyday on every topics people are asking for new civs, so maybe we should consider that its the main concern of the community.
Almost 2 years and only 2 new civs, its a bit ridiculous and even if they have "limited" ressources, we're still talking about a AAA product.

I won't rest until they add the Byzantines.

[Rijsel1789]

Are you a real person. Content please not "balance". And in any case the two aren't opposite

[Rijsel1789]

Also ridiculous to compare this to CoH - yes there are 4-5 factions but with the commanders you get so many options that the number of units is way above AoE. And without even looking at the mods.

[DimSumHouse]

Originally posted by Cacomistle:

I think balance has been fine most of the time. Obviously this patch specifically has some issues, but there's a patch coming out which will quite obviously change a lot of that balance around and is putting in effort to fix some of the bad matchups. Before the last patch or two I think the game was quite well balanced, and even now there's just the 1 civ that's breaking balance, and maybe 1-2 others at the pro level but I don't think anyone in gold league is leaving the game because a civ with a 49% win rate at their level has a high win rate in tournaments.

The thing is, a balanced game helps keep players, but it doesn't bring that many players back. If someone reads in the patch notes something like "unit X damage decreased from 10 to 9), they don't think "wow, I gotta try that". Players will however come back to try new units or new civs.

So they need to do both (though it doesn't have to be new civs specifically, new units or other big patches will likely bring players in if implemented well). But I'd say for the average player, cool stuff is more important than balance, and annoying stuff is worse for the game than overpowered stuff, so I don't even think balance is that important as long as there's nothing blatantly stupid.


Unless by balance you mean matchmaking balance including things like drop hackers. That type of stuff will get people to leave. But, that's probably hard to solve.

You made fair points. New content can help ex-players return back.

However, I think it's not an easy task for Relic to do "both". It's even harder given the recent layoffs, which makes development a scarce resource.

I'm looking to share an empathetic view from Relic. Running a business with competing priorities in these economic conditions will result in somewhat divisive decisions made for the company, its products, and player base.

[votadc]

Just make modding better and allow modders to do full conversion mods and add new civs. Balancing is just changing a couple of numbers and testing.