Requested changes to Romans civ (AOE2) and general feedback for AOE 2 DE.

[Kalomax]

Ave!

A sincere thank you for finally adding the Romans to the civ roster of AoE 2. Been wishing for that for such a long time.... I also appreciate that you made a couple AoE 2 style campaigns for the RoR expansion and that even some of the original AoE 1 campaigns are being ported over. Great news!

Now the following are my personal requested changes to Romans as a civ. And before competitive players start jumping down my throat for suggesting them, yes I am a casual player (campaigns & AI skirmishes forever) and no I don't really care for a balanced roster. So here are my requests to the developers for their consideration:

1 - Romans should definitely get the Supplies tech
One of the most distinguishing features of the Roman civilization is that their armies had generally very good supply lines when compared to other strong military powers of the ancient era.
For a gameplay reason why, to counteract the expensiveness of the Centurion. And to my eyes Legionaries are a bit so-so currently so this would make fielding larger groups of them easier.

2 - Romans should definitely get the Treadmill Crane tech
Again the Romans actually did have this ability in the ancient era (apparently called the Polyspaston according to Wikipedia).
For a gameplay reason why, the +5% build speed bonus is so quickly negated by other civs who do get Treadmill crane.

3 - Romans should get the Thumb Ring tech
The fact that Roman archers are equivalent to say Celtic archers is weird to me. The Romans definitely would have drilled their archer legions/warbands to a higher degree than lesser military focused civilizations.
For a gameplay reason why, yes I like that the Romans have immersively strong Scorpions but I think adding this tech their ranged options a lot more versatility and less of a one trick pony.

4 - Romans should get the Gambesons tech
Why am I suggesting this is added to their tech tree? They are an Infantry based civ but a better justification is when you think not just in terms of a padded linen jacket but rather as the famous Testudo/Tortoise formation that Legionaries could perform making them more resistant to missile fire.
For a gameplay reason why, to make Legionaries longer lived since the Romans are so dependent on them.

5 - Romans could get the Arrowslits tech
According to Wikipedia, these were used in latter day armies of the Romans and Byzantines.
For a gameplay reason why, to help them defensively since they don't have Bracer or Heated Shot.

6 - Roman Outposts could have a weak attack and short range
To demonstrate how expansionist Rome was in its heyday. This could be unworkable in the Dark Age but maybe it could be a civ bonus from the Feudal Age on.

Now to "balance" these requested changes, maybe the Romans could also lose Keeps and Heavy Cavalry Archers. The reason why I am suggesting getting rid of Keeps is mainly aesthetic...I don't like the look of stylish medieval Mediterranean towers for a militarist civilization like the Romans, Guard Towers look much better. And why the loss of Heavy Cav Archers? Mainly for what I perceive as historical accuracy. I always picture the Romans as being a foot soldier based army with great siege machines and a domineering navy. In other words, skirmishers, archers, infantry and the only military class who are allowed use horses for combat are the generals, centurions, praetorians, etc.

----------------

Now my general suggestions for AoE 2:
1 - Incorporating officially the 'Create your own civ' designer by Krakenmeister (praise be!). Adding this might help encourage a new style of tournaments for casual players where you are allocated a varying but specific number of civ points for each round. The developers could set themes for the event if they want. Players can then create goofy, lopsided civs which should be fun to spectate on and outside the box civs may even encourage new ways of playing...

2 - Moving one of the Castle Age techs of the Barracks to the Imperial Age, probably Gambesons or Arson.

3 - Replacing Hussar for all civs bar the historical nations which did use them with a unit called Medium Cavalry. Hussars could then be a further upgrade or a regional alternative to Medium Cav at the Stable.

4 - Giving every civ a unique Castle. The standard castles from each architecture set could be given to one specific civ and then every other civ could have their own historical castle.

5 - Reworking events
(a) Less gimmicky rewards. I wish no offence to the particular developers who work on the rewards but I don't really care for the 2 or 3 avatars per event. One avatar would be fine but I mainly do events for the unit skin replacers, sound effects or lighting changes.
(b) Being locked out of old event rewards because you missed them is dumb. Yes I understand you want players to jump in then and there and the event lasts for about 3 weeks which should be enough to obtain the rewards. But then some players purchased AoE 2 a couple years late and so they are permanently locked out of some nice event rewards??
(c) Making some events standard, same time every year. Like the seasonal ones such as spring berry bushes, summer beaches, fall/halloween and then snow events. I know that some of them are already approximately at the same time each year but I haven't seen a spring event despite owning the game the last couple years. Maybe I just missed it the second time though...

6 - Ability to restyle the main menu
Maybe bring back the Age of Kings/Conquerors background in a new fresh style? Allow people to customize the style of the game menus themselves without having to rely on mods e.g. changing the color of buttons from Red to many other colors and making the embers effect toggleable.

Anyway thanks for reading if you got this far!

[Kasbfaäfad]

Originally posted by Kalomax:

Ave! :Birds:

A sincere thank you for finally adding the Romans to the civ roster of AoE 2. Been wishing for that for such a long time.... I also appreciate that you made a couple AoE 2 style campaigns for the RoR expansion and that even some of the original AoE 1 campaigns are being ported over. Great news!

Now the following are my personal requested changes to Romans as a civ. And before competitive players start jumping down my throat for suggesting them, yes I am a casual player (campaigns & AI skirmishes forever) and no I don't really care for a balanced roster. So here are my requests to the developers for their consideration:

1 - Romans should definitely get the Supplies tech
One of the most distinguishing features of the Roman civilization is that their armies had generally very good supply lines when compared to other strong military powers of the ancient era.
For a gameplay reason why, to counteract the expensiveness of the Centurion. And to my eyes Legionaries are a bit so-so currently so this would make fielding larger groups of them easier.

2 - Romans should definitely get the Treadmill Crane tech
Again the Romans actually did have this ability in the ancient era (apparently called the Polyspaston according to Wikipedia).
For a gameplay reason why, the +5% build speed bonus is so quickly negated by other civs who do get Treadmill crane.

3 - Romans should get the Thumb Ring tech
The fact that Roman archers are equivalent to say Celtic archers is weird to me. The Romans definitely would have drilled their archer legions/warbands to a higher degree than lesser military focused civilizations.
For a gameplay reason why, yes I like that the Romans have immersively strong Scorpions but I think adding this tech their ranged options a lot more versatility and less of a one trick pony.

4 - Romans should get the Gambesons tech
Why am I suggesting this is added to their tech tree? They are an Infantry based civ but a better justification is when you think not just in terms of a padded linen jacket but rather as the famous Testudo/Tortoise formation that Legionaries could perform making them more resistant to missile fire.
For a gameplay reason why, to make Legionaries longer lived since the Romans are so dependent on them.

5 - Romans could get the Arrowslits tech
According to Wikipedia, these were used in latter day armies of the Romans and Byzantines.
For a gameplay reason why, to help them defensively since they don't have Bracer or Heated Shot.

6 - Roman Outposts could have a weak attack and short range
To demonstrate how expansionist Rome was in its heyday. This could be unworkable in the Dark Age but maybe it could be a civ bonus from the Feudal Age on.

Now to "balance" these requested changes, maybe the Romans could also lose Keeps and Heavy Cavalry Archers. The reason why I am suggesting getting rid of Keeps is mainly aesthetic...I don't like the look of stylish medieval Mediterranean towers for a militarist civilization like the Romans, Guard Towers look much better. And why the loss of Heavy Cav Archers? Mainly for what I perceive as historical accuracy. I always picture the Romans as being a foot soldier based army with great siege machines and a domineering navy. In other words, skirmishers, archers, infantry and the only military class who are allowed use horses for combat are the generals, centurions, praetorians, etc.

----------------

Now my general suggestions for AoE 2:
1 - Incorporating officially the 'Create your own civ' designer by Krakenmeister (praise be!). Adding this might help encourage a new style of tournaments for casual players where you are allocated a varying but specific number of civ points for each round. The developers could set themes for the event if they want. Players can then create goofy, lopsided civs which should be fun to spectate on and outside the box civs may even encourage new ways of playing...

2 - Moving one of the Castle Age techs of the Barracks to the Imperial Age, probably Gambesons or Arson.

3 - Replacing Hussar for all civs bar the historical nations which did use them with a unit called Medium Cavalry. Hussars could then be a further upgrade or a regional alternative to Medium Cav at the Stable.

4 - Giving every civ a unique Castle. The standard castles from each architecture set could be given to one specific civ and then every other civ could have their own historical castle.

5 - Reworking events
(a) Less gimmicky rewards. I wish no offence to the particular developers who work on the rewards but I don't really care for the 2 or 3 avatars per event. One avatar would be fine but I mainly do events for the unit skin replacers, sound effects or lighting changes.
(b) Being locked out of old event rewards because you missed them is dumb. Yes I understand you want players to jump in then and there and the event lasts for about 3 weeks which should be enough to obtain the rewards. But then some players purchased AoE 2 a couple years late and so they are permanently locked out of some nice event rewards??
(c) Making some events standard, same time every year. Like the seasonal ones such as spring berry bushes, summer beaches, fall/halloween and then snow events. I know that some of them are already approximately at the same time each year but I haven't seen a spring event despite owning the game the last couple years. Maybe I just missed it the second time though...

6 - Ability to restyle the main menu
Maybe bring back the Age of Kings/Conquerors background in a new fresh style? Allow people to customize the style of the game menus themselves without having to rely on mods e.g. changing the color of buttons from Red to many other colors and making the embers effect toggleable.

Anyway thanks for reading if you got this far!

It's not very probable that romans will get buffed... especially not that extensively. Without jumping on you.
Regarding the castles: +1

What I would like for events: regional tournaments every month where you can sign up. It can be moderated by an AI or simply automated, so no mods needed ->Automated tournaments where ppl can sign up.
They could have different flavours for example a yucatan only tourney or something like that.
And you get tournament elo for that...

I would love that

[KingKickAss]

I think I would just remove the naval buffs(Maybe just give them a production speed bonus to their ships if anything?), the charge attack and the build speed on the units. Also give them supplies but not gambisons.
They already get buffed up armor on their infantry so they can miss out on that extra, and if they're an infantry civ that focuses on militia, they really should get supplies at least.

[Leaf_It]

That's a lot of changes you're suggesting.

1. Romans missing Supplies is probably a gameplay decision, and not a historical one. Either way, since this is a representation of the Western Romans that existed after the Fall of the Empire, there's some historical reasoning in taking it away, since they were significantly poorer, and less well managed than before the fall of the Empire.

2. The 5% bonus they start with really makes me indifferent on missing Treadmill Crane. Historically speaking, they were significantly worse at building things at this point, since a lot of their knowledge had been lost during, or before, the fall of the Empire.

3. Yeah, they should probably have Thumb Ring if they want their Heavy Cav Archers to ever be used. Like, what's even the point of giving them Heavy Cav Archer if they're going to miss every relevant tech? Either give them this, or Parthian Tactics. They'll still be subpar since they miss Bracer, but they won't be completely useless in the mid game. Also, Historically speaking, Roman Archers were really good, and the bow was seen as a symbol of power and status.

4. No they should not Have Gambesons. Fully upgraded Legionarys are already really strong with the double bonus from armor upgrades, and they beat the fully upgraded Champions of every single other civ (except Teutons, Slavs with enough numbers for Druzhina to matter, and Dravidians with Woots Steel) because of their melee armor, and +4 bonus attack vs infantry. For gameplay reasons, they need a weakness, and in this case, it's archers/ranged units.

5. Yeah, Arrow Slits would be nice to have. Their defensive buildings, since they are also missing Bracer, are really subpar.

6. I don't think it's necessary to change how their outposts work. What I would love to see though, is a Ballista Tower as a Unique building.

---- ---- ---- ----

1. Eh, I don't care either way.

2. I don't think this is necessary.

3. I would love to see more regional units. I don't want to see civs have the way they play significantly changed by it (with maybe an exception are 2), but any regional unit additions are welcomed by me.

4. Again, I would be very happy to see this. I really hope they decided to give every Civilization their own Castle some day. I was very happy to see them include more unique civ castles with the Dynasties of India DLC.

5. I don't pay much attention to events so I don't have a strong opinion here. I do agree that being locked out rewards because of events is lame.

6. This would be a welcome option. I don't think it's a huge deal, but i would be happy to see it if they did.

[Kalomax]

Originally posted by Leaf_It:

That's a lot of changes you're suggesting.

1. Romans missing Supplies is probably a gameplay decision, and not a historical one. Either way, since this is a representation of the Western Romans that existed after the Fall of the Empire, there's some historical reasoning in taking it away, since they were significantly poorer, and less well managed than before the fall of the Empire.

2. The 5% bonus they start with really makes me indifferent on missing Treadmill Crane. Historically speaking, they were significantly worse at building things at this point, since a lot of their knowledge had been lost during, or before, the fall of the Empire.

3. Yeah, they should probably have Thumb Ring if they want their Heavy Cav Archers to ever be used. Like, what's even the point of giving them Heavy Cav Archer if they're going to miss every relevant tech? Either give them this, or Parthian Tactics. They'll still be subpar since they miss Bracer, but they won't be completely useless in the mid game. Also, Historically speaking, Roman Archers were really good, and the bow was seen as a symbol of power and status.

4. No they should not Have Gambesons. Fully upgraded Legionarys are already really strong with the double bonus from armor upgrades, and they beat the fully upgraded Champions of every single other civ (except Teutons, Slavs with enough numbers for Druzhina to matter, and Dravidians with Woots Steel) because of their melee armor, and +4 bonus attack vs infantry. For gameplay reasons, they need a weakness, and in this case, it's archers/ranged units.

5. Yeah, Arrow Slits would be nice to have. Their defensive buildings, since they are also missing Bracer, are really subpar.

6. I don't think it's necessary to change how their outposts work. What I would love to see though, is a Ballista Tower as a Unique building.

---- ---- ---- ----

1. Eh, I don't care either way.

2. I don't think this is necessary.

3. I would love to see more regional units. I don't want to see civs have the way they play significantly changed by it (with maybe an exception are 2), but any regional unit additions are welcomed by me.

4. Again, I would be very happy to see this. I really hope they decided to give every Civilization their own Castle some day. I was very happy to see them include more unique civ castles with the Dynasties of India DLC.

5. I don't pay much attention to events so I don't have a strong opinion here. I do agree that being locked out rewards because of events is lame.

6. This would be a welcome option. I don't think it's a huge deal, but i would be happy to see it if they did.

Thanks Leaf! The missing Supplies tech has been irked me since I first read about their tech tree but that explanation makes sense in my head canon of these being late stage imperial Roman army and having corrupted/bureaucratic supply lines.

Yes, I also thought they should ditch the Heavy Cavalry Archers in favor of Thumb Ring so they don't have to ignore ranged units entirely until they get a siege workshop up and running.

I didn't know Legionaries have a moderate anti infantry attack bonus. Ok that makes them better in my mind.

Yeah the Outpost was a random idea to try and demonstrate how efficient the Romans were at building roads, defences, Pax Romana etc. A Ballista tower does sound cool, nice idea. It would probably have to have a minimum range though like Scorpions maybe 3 tiles.

Imagine if the developers implemented a "Roads" building which allowed you to draw a road on the ground from point A to point B. A road would cost a fair bit of stone but it would give armies 10% movement boost... And the Roads building for Romans would be built 50% faster than nearly all other civs.
------------

Yes I'm wholeheartedly in favour of regional armies based on their architecture set. Like Asian qiang spearmen instead of Halberdier sprite, Middle Eastern scimitar warriors instead of the Long Swordman sprite or some fearsome brightly coloured Mesoamerican berserker infantry instead of Champions. And the unique castles for every civ would be great too. This would probably be a decent bit of work for the developers but I wouldn't mind paying 5 or 10£$€ for a minor DLC where units and architecture sets are more thematic.

[Quarantined_villager]

Buffs based in historical reason are not good to the game, it should base on play-ability and balance
I think Romans need a nerf, not a buff, where would you nerf them?
From all your suggestions, the only one that I support 100% is to give a unique Castle to each civilization
IMO, the only way to balance the Romans it's to add them to ranked and see how good or bad they perform