Projectile and ranged units balancing

[Plastic Master]

Currently AOE4 is a game were lots of basic AOE features are missing.
The most crucial feature for ranged units in AOE 1 and 2 were the projectiles actually shot where the target was at the 1st place (without the Upgrade), then with the ballistics upgrade, ranged units were able to hit moving targets by calculating its movements from A to B by shooting to B point. (in simple words "Projectiles missed!".

Now in AOE4 every ranged projectile hits! And this makes some sieges like Culverings, Cannons, Bombards, etc OP. there is no logic. It does not make any sense bcse every projectile hits and there is no penalty or disadvantage for these units. For gods sake, this is medieval era and there is no such technology during this period, but it is given right start from the game...

Archers, Longbowmen, Horse Archers, Mangudai, Camel Archers, handcannoners and crossbowmen have very short range due to 100% hitting projectiles in AOE4. This leads ranged units to have very short range.

-Archers and longbowmen are useless after feaudal,/

-Horse archers, Mangudai and Camel archers are completely useless bcse they have 100% hit rate and to balance it they have too short range,/

-Crossbowmen are useless bcse they are too expensive and have too low range.

-Handcannoners is the unit that gets the most benefit out of all as it will deal high damage without missing any shots.

Now how did AOE2 balance these units properly?
Very simple!
As I mentioned, in AOE 1 and 2, ranged units were not able to hit moving target without "Ballistics" upgrade in Castle Age.

"The longer the range, more difficult to hit" - why? because the other player can dodge the ranged projectile before it reaches. Longer distance means longer traveling time of ranged projectile. This is why many ranged units are so fun to use in AOE2. It needs more micro and calculation. Players in early game with ranged units would need to get closer or hit standing still units or units that are moving forward etc. It demanded way more tactical and strategic decisions.

Units like Horse Archers, Camel Archers, Crossbowmen, Handcannoners are much more balanced and riskier as they have longer range and that also at the same time increase the probability to miss its intended target.

Please devs or anyone from Relic, tell about this feature!
This really needs to be implemented as soon as possible.
@MSPlus2Joe

[Cacomistle]

引用自 Sir Rage A Lot：

引用自 Cacomistle：

"But you still expect a 2021 game to be very similar to 2002 game? That is simply low standard."

I get what you meant but you're more focused on attacking me than making your argument. So you just didn't make that point. You made a point that's more extreme than my point.

My point is that projectile tracking is not a balance problem. Its an immersion problem. I don't even disagree with your point. Aoe4 projectiles should be better, whether its tracking or ballistics. It looks stupid right now. But that's not a balance issue, that's an immersion issue.

I don't think you understand that I don't disagree with aoe2 style ballistics, I just am not letting you frame it as a balance problem when its not. You can frame is an immersion problem all you want, which is what every single post you've responded to me with so far has been.

So let's make something that is worse than not even 2003 game (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaElrycU1qY) but 1998 game feature wise.

And we will have find someone who even if tho "don't disagree and even pretend to like x more" will write everything to deny x right place as being superior product in almost every mentioned in this OP (and not in this topic) way.

Also what balance?

I am sick of these dumb points about things I never said. STOP PUTTING ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ ARGUMENTS IN MY MOUTH.

Aoe2 is better. Projectiles is fine. Its just not a necessity for balance. I'm so sorry that I don't ♥♥♥♥ talk every single thing about the game and go out of my way to never ever say anything that could be remotely interpreted as positive, but that doesn't mean I think the game is perfect. That's the stupidest ♥♥♥♥ ever and I'm so sick of not being able to disagree with a single thing anyone has to say without them thinking I don't even agree that the sky is blue.

I have no idea what castle strike is (I thought you'd be linking brood war which I think is a better game than aoe4, although I never got into playing it only watching it), but I don't really give a ♥♥♥♥ if it has more features. I'm not into these ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ "well objectively the game is better because reasons".

I'm just gonna take it all the way every time now. Fortnite is better than aoe2 and aoe3. It sold more, more people play it, it probably has more features (I'm not really sure on that last one to be fair). If you wanna debate me on which game is better, that's the debate I'm taking now because that's basically the same debate you keep trying to force with me. Not doing aoe4 vs aoe2.

If you wanna discuss specific features and how they related to balance/fun/etc like the OP of this thread, I'll make an exception for that, but don't tell me how much I love a game I haven't played in a month. At least call me stupid for continuing to post on the forums for a game I don't play or something I actually do (but I think you do that too).

[Cacomistle]

引用自 Sir Rage A Lot：

Also what balance?

If you want to get back on topic, aoe4 is inbalanced because the civ bonuses are unequal, the unit stats aren't correct, attack speed doesn't work properly, and some of the decisions (like torch damage to siege) make things hard to balance around. Not because of projectiles. You can balance a game without having aoe 2 style projectiles.

You should agree with that argument because you play aoe3, a game that also has 100% accurate projectiles. Well maybe because aoe3 isn't perfectly balanced either but its more balanced than aoe4 at least.

[Sir Moisty Capybara]

引用自 Cacomistle：

引用自 Sir Rage A Lot：

So let's make something that is worse than not even 2003 game (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaElrycU1qY) but 1998 game feature wise.

And we will have find someone who even if tho "don't disagree and even pretend to like x more" will write everything to deny x right place as being superior product in almost every mentioned in this OP (and not in this topic) way.

Also what balance?

I am sick of these dumb points about things I never said. STOP PUTTING ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ ARGUMENTS IN MY MOUTH.

Aoe2 is better. Projectiles is fine. Its just not a necessity for balance. I'm so sorry that I don't ♥♥♥♥ talk every single thing about the game and go out of my way to never ever say anything that could be remotely interpreted as positive, but that doesn't mean I think the game is perfect. That's the stupidest ♥♥♥♥ ever and I'm so sick of not being able to disagree with a single thing anyone has to say without them thinking I don't even agree that the sky is blue.

I have no idea what castle strike is (I thought you'd be linking brood war which I think is a better game than aoe4, although I never got into playing it only watching it), but I don't really give a ♥♥♥♥ if it has more features. I'm not into these ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ "well objectively the game is better because reasons".

I'm just gonna take it all the way every time now. Fortnite is better than aoe2 and aoe3. It sold more, more people play it, it probably has more features (I'm not really sure on that last one to be fair). If you wanna debate me on which game is better, that's the debate I'm taking now. Not doing aoe4 vs aoe2.

I am sick of these dumb points about things I never said. STOP PUTTING ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ ARGUMENTS IN MY MOUTH.

So you made entire 3 post saga defending crappy system that is justified by nothing but laziness to say that. Also you didn't told people who clearly said to you that the game is inferior for those reasons "just it is not aoe2". So no, lol, eat your words or stop posting on this forums on threads pretending like you like one game or another. No one cares.

I'm not into these ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ "well objectively the game is better because reasons"

Because you can't justify your points besides constantly making contradicting points about stuff that you are talking about.

Not doing aoe4 vs aoe2.

Mostly it was you doing you vs oh my god im so hurt someone is calling me out on my bs.

[Cacomistle]

引用自 Sir Rage A Lot：

引用自 Cacomistle：

I am sick of these dumb points about things I never said. STOP PUTTING ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ ARGUMENTS IN MY MOUTH.

Aoe2 is better. Projectiles is fine. Its just not a necessity for balance. I'm so sorry that I don't ♥♥♥♥ talk every single thing about the game and go out of my way to never ever say anything that could be remotely interpreted as positive, but that doesn't mean I think the game is perfect. That's the stupidest ♥♥♥♥ ever and I'm so sick of not being able to disagree with a single thing anyone has to say without them thinking I don't even agree that the sky is blue.

I have no idea what castle strike is (I thought you'd be linking brood war which I think is a better game than aoe4, although I never got into playing it only watching it), but I don't really give a ♥♥♥♥ if it has more features. I'm not into these ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ "well objectively the game is better because reasons".

I'm just gonna take it all the way every time now. Fortnite is better than aoe2 and aoe3. It sold more, more people play it, it probably has more features (I'm not really sure on that last one to be fair). If you wanna debate me on which game is better, that's the debate I'm taking now. Not doing aoe4 vs aoe2.

I am sick of these dumb points about things I never said. STOP PUTTING ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ ARGUMENTS IN MY MOUTH.

So you made entire 3 post saga defending crappy system that is justified by nothing but laziness to say that. Also you didn't told people who clearly said to you that the game is inferior for those reasons "just it is not aoe2". So no, lol, eat your words or stop posting on this forums on threads pretending like you like one game or another. No one cares.

I'm not into these ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ "well objectively the game is better because reasons"

Because you can't justify your points besides constantly making contradicting points about stuff that you are talking about.

Not doing aoe4 vs aoe2.

Mostly it was you doing you vs oh my god im so hurt someone is calling me out on my bs.

Didn't ask. Don't post to me if its not about projectiles because that's the thread topic.

[Sir Moisty Capybara]

引用自 Cacomistle：

引用自 Sir Rage A Lot：

Also what balance?

If you want to get back on topic, aoe4 is inbalanced because the civ bonuses are unequal, the unit stats aren't correct, attack speed doesn't work properly, and some of the decisions (like torch damage to siege) make things hard to balance around. Not because of projectiles. You can balance a game without having aoe 2 style projectiles.

You should agree with that argument because you play aoe3, a game that also has 100% accurate projectiles.

Actually AoE3 has a reason for have not accurate projectiles, neverminding multiple other features on top, that actually justifies having said projectiles being 100% accurate.

But I digress.

[Sir Moisty Capybara]

引用自 Cacomistle：

引用自 Sir Rage A Lot：

So you made entire 3 post saga defending crappy system that is justified by nothing but laziness to say that. Also you didn't told people who clearly said to you that the game is inferior for those reasons "just it is not aoe2". So no, lol, eat your words or stop posting on this forums on threads pretending like you like one game or another. No one cares.



Because you can't justify your points besides constantly making contradicting points about stuff that you are talking about.



Mostly it was you doing you vs oh my god im so hurt someone is calling me out on my bs.

Didn't ask.

Me neither about you didn't asking. It's not your phone, but public forums so you are free to leave in any time and give space to people actually wanting to hold their opinion with something more but "why you dare compare it".

[Cacomistle]

引用自 Sir Rage A Lot：

引用自 Cacomistle：

If you want to get back on topic, aoe4 is inbalanced because the civ bonuses are unequal, the unit stats aren't correct, attack speed doesn't work properly, and some of the decisions (like torch damage to siege) make things hard to balance around. Not because of projectiles. You can balance a game without having aoe 2 style projectiles.

You should agree with that argument because you play aoe3, a game that also has 100% accurate projectiles.

Actually AoE3 has a reason for have not accurate projectiles, neverminding multiple other features on top, that actually justifies them.

Yes, immersion. Not balance. Aoe 3 has guns so ofc they're not projectiles.

This is my whole point. Its just about projectiles not being balance. Projectiles that don't auto track is better from an immersion/realism perspective. Balance perspective works out either way. I can disagree with a premise while agreeing with the overall conclusion (mostly, I think its too late to balance around inaccurate projectiles by now).

[Sir Moisty Capybara]

引用自 Cacomistle：

引用自 Sir Rage A Lot：

Actually AoE3 has a reason for have not accurate projectiles, neverminding multiple other features on top, that actually justifies them.

Yes, immersion. Not balance.

This is my whole point. Its just about balance. Projectiles that don't auto track is better from an immersion/realism perspective. Balance perspective works out either way. I can disagree with a premise while agreeing with the overall conclusion.

the balance of AoE4 does not justify projectiles being 100% accurate, technology being so slow, resource being so abundant. Unless you want to create ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ time sink of the game instead of valid multiplayer (and singleplayer) experience.

I was literally playing 1 hour game against Jackk in AoE4, while I'm way worse compared to him in AoE2. Does it that ring a bell how time sinky it is on mid level?

And you can compare all you like AoE3 to AoE4. But things like different civ balance in campaigns and multiplayer actually mostly made sense (as it was more feature rich and planning oriented experience) than lazy one narrator one way with some artificial branches leading to the same goal campaigns of AoE4.

So yes, both inaccurate siege, bows as a accuracy modifiers would make more sense in AoE4, especially considering how they made it in CoH2. AoE3 is fine with 100% accuracy, because it is way more complex in other aspects that people like you wouldn't be dreaming off.

[Cacomistle]

引用自 Sir Rage A Lot：

引用自 Cacomistle：

Yes, immersion. Not balance.

This is my whole point. Its just about balance. Projectiles that don't auto track is better from an immersion/realism perspective. Balance perspective works out either way. I can disagree with a premise while agreeing with the overall conclusion.

the balance of AoE4 does not justify projectiles being 100% accurate, technology being so slow, resource being so abundant. Unless you want to create ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ time sink of the game instead of valid multiplayer (and singleplayer) experience.

I was literally playing 1 hour game against Jackk in AoE4, while I'm way worse compared to him in AoE2. Does it that ring a bell how time sinky it is on mid level?

And you can compare all you like AoE3 to AoE4. But things like different civ balance in campaigns and multiplayer actually mostly made sense (as it was more feature rich and planning oriented experience) than lazy one narrator one way with some artificial branches leading to the same goal campaigns of AoE4.

So yes, both inaccurate siege, bows as a accuracy modifiers would make more sense in AoE4, especially considering how they made it in CoH2. AoE3 is fine with 100% accuracy, because it is way more complex in other aspects that people like you wouldn't be dreaming off.

Ok, sure. I don't disagree with a single thing you said.

I've explained it over and over again, but my point is that units being able to miss is not a necessary feature for an rts game to be balanced.

The game could be balanced with 100% accurate projectiles. Its not, and if it were balanced that way it wouldn't magically make it good. I don't feel I should have to explain this, but every time I don't say something negative about aoe4, you assume that I must believe the positive. I don't think aoe4 balance justifies 100% accurate projectiles because aoe4 isn't even balanced, so don't assume some positive opinions about aoe4 that I don't hold please. Just use the points I've actually defended (which is not much, I found the game fun early on but I actually can't really explain why, so I don't really have anything positive to say about the game tbh).

I do think it shouldn't be changed, but not because I don't think inaccurate projectiles would be better. Its because I think they'd probably break the game trying to change it and it'd be dead by the 3 months later when it finally got fixed.

[Subtle Butt ( >ω<)っ ♡]

引用自 Sir Rage A Lot：

That's why archer players makes everything to get to the university and thumb ring as soon as possible. That's why people literally tries attack move around archer fire in feudal age and almost ignores that aspect in castle age (as not only is not viable, but also macro is bigger thing).

Not like good placement would make knights inferior to archers in Age 2, as many pros and not pros are showing. Yea, that same aspect that Relic devs w/ WE tried to emulate in AoE4 with one active ability.

But no, hard counter AoE4 is the best because I said so, even tho devs are constantly change values in their probably still buggy mess of a game. Good to know that guys. Next time at least try watching some mid-elo and high-elo games before trying to making your opinion on game that you clearly didn't played.

Thumb Ring is rushed mostly because it just gives your Xbows/Skirms a general DPS increase on top of accuracy. I guess you can probably tell that Xbows with thumb ring beats those without. Unless its English then even with Thumb Ring, most of the times an English players beats your Xbow mass, showing that Thumb Ring is not as decisive as a civ bonus. You can take out the accuracy component of Thumb Ring and it will still be picked up 100% of the time.

You mention University and its funny since ballistics isn't even the first techs prioritized. People eventually pick up ballistics since it overall boosts the effective damage output of a unit.

Knights are clearly meta and slaughter Xbows caught out of position you can keep arguing the Xbows can beat knights. Yes with sufficient mass and the proper positioning like I already addressed. Heres the thing, Knights don't have to engage such a mass however.

Also I like how you're deliberately mincing words. Never said AoE 4 had the best hard counter system. Xbows vs Knight dynamic isn't set in stone just like the Knight/Xbow in AoE 2. They're supposed to be good vs Knights yet Knights can still win depending on their mass and location.

Accuracy or not, I really couldn't care as it barely affects ranged units. You can replace it with extra range, fire rate, armor, damage and they would make more of a difference.

[Cacomistle]

引用自 Subtle Butt：

引用自 Sir Rage A Lot：

That's why archer players makes everything to get to the university and thumb ring as soon as possible. That's why people literally tries attack move around archer fire in feudal age and almost ignores that aspect in castle age (as not only is not viable, but also macro is bigger thing).

Not like good placement would make knights inferior to archers in Age 2, as many pros and not pros are showing. Yea, that same aspect that Relic devs w/ WE tried to emulate in AoE4 with one active ability.

But no, hard counter AoE4 is the best because I said so, even tho devs are constantly change values in their probably still buggy mess of a game. Good to know that guys. Next time at least try watching some mid-elo and high-elo games before trying to making your opinion on game that you clearly didn't played.

Thumb Ring is rushed mostly because it just gives your Xbows/Skirms a general DPS increase on top of accuracy.

I don't think it gives skirms attack speed. Its rushed for xbow and cav archers, not for skirms.

[Subtle Butt ( >ω<)っ ♡]

引用自 Cacomistle：

引用自 Subtle Butt：

Thumb Ring is rushed mostly because it just gives your Xbows/Skirms a general DPS increase on top of accuracy.

I don't think it gives skirms attack speed. Its rushed for xbow and cav archers, not for skirms.

Well comes to show that its taken more for its attack speed than its accuracy benefit, though it is still a bonus

[Plastic Master]

引用自 Subtle Butt：

引用自 Cacomistle：

I don't think it gives skirms attack speed. Its rushed for xbow and cav archers, not for skirms.

Well comes to show that its taken more for its attack speed than its accuracy benefit, though it is still a bonus

Yep, if we compare it to FPS (1st person shooter games like COD), it can be a player with Aimbot xD. It will only shoot head and will end up dealing much more damage min/sec compare to other players that are not using Aimbot.

[Cacomistle]

引用自 Plastic iZ Da wAe!：

引用自 Subtle Butt：

Well comes to show that its taken more for its attack speed than its accuracy benefit, though it is still a bonus

Yep, if we compare it to FPS (1st person shooter games like COD), it can be a player with Aimbot xD. It will only shoot head and will end up dealing much more damage min/sec compare to other players that are not using Aimbot.

Its more like you're playing a single player fps and just came up to some giant boss that takes up half the screen. If you had an aimbot, you wouldn't do much more dps because you're hitting 90% of your shots anyways.

That's what happens in aoe2 when knights are fighting archers. Archers hit almost all their shots against knights in their face anyways.

[Plastic Master]

引用自 Cacomistle：

引用自 Plastic iZ Da wAe!：

Yep, if we compare it to FPS (1st person shooter games like COD), it can be a player with Aimbot xD. It will only shoot head and will end up dealing much more damage min/sec compare to other players that are not using Aimbot.

Its more like you're playing a single player fps and just came up to some giant boss that takes up half the screen. If you had an aimbot, you wouldn't do much more dps because you're hitting 90% of your shots anyways.

That's what happens in aoe2 when knights are fighting archers. Archers hit almost all their shots against knights in their face anyways.

But xbos cannot hit 100% of its shots when the knights are just passing them through with high speed in aoe 2. Only when knights get closer xbows would start hitting 100% of its damage. And that is a huge difference, when knights just pass around and raid eco in the back or at distance.