Age of Empires 4 Announced (Relic Entertainment)

[Mightygoose]

Looking forward to it though I've haven't been able to stop playing AoE 2 DE since it came out so won't be in a rush.

 

[Osprey]

Looking forward to it though I've haven't been able to stop playing AoE 2 DE since it came out so won't be in a rush.

I still need to play all of the DEs. I should probably start on those now and try to finish them before AoE4 comes out.

 

[Seedtype]

Honestly the fact that the definitive edition of AoE 2 is so well done kinda is dampening any real interest for me in 4... I just think I'm good on medieval times settings for now.

 

[Knave]

I guess the issue I have is they're selling the game on these beautiful bases but how realistic are they? It looks like it could have a completely different feel to Age of Empires 2 but walling rectangular bases seems impractical in a competitive sense if the walls cost any significant resources. Are the walls automatic once you declare a 'base'? The tease about the Mongols is you can pick up their base and move but how practical is this? Wouldn't you be punished massively for having no economy as you move? How big are the maps that moving your base is even an option in a game?

We got a mix of what looks like traditional Age of Empires 1/2 economy but then you are teased with unique stuff in later ages. It's just a mixed bag that I feel could be way to similar to previous iterations despite attempts at larger changes, especially at combat. I was kind of hoping for more change in terms of economy, map, game format/type.

 

[RandV]

I guess the issue I have is they're selling the game on these beautiful bases but how realistic are they? It looks like it could have a completely different feel to Age of Empires 2 but walling rectangular bases seems impractical in a competitive sense if the walls cost any significant resources. Are the walls automatic once you declare a 'base'? The tease about the Mongols is you can pick up their base and move but how practical is this? Wouldn't you be punished massively for having no economy as you move? How big are the maps that moving your base is even an option in a game?

I don't see what the issue is. I mean, all RTS' setup staged encounters for their promo material. When I watched the video the other day I recall seeing a point where on the mini map you can see it's just a big square red and blue blobs right next to each other. You also have to consider what are campaign images, as the campaigns have always done 'town' designs. I would also take a guess that based on historic context the Mongols mobility is an earlier age thing, and as they advance they become more permanent. Mainly because eventually you have to lay down those farms for food, can't hunter/gatherer all the way through the game.

Plus there's a point in the video where you see the frame work off a wall (wooden) being put down as usual, so I'm assuming base construction is business as usual. I never did multiplayer but playing random maps against the AI you're damn right you build a big beautiful wall.

 

[Knave]

I don't see what the issue is. I mean, all RTS' setup staged encounters for their promo material. When I watched the video the other day I recall seeing a point where on the mini map you can see it's just a big square red and blue blobs right next to each other. You also have to consider what are campaign images, as the campaigns have always done 'town' designs. I would also take a guess that based on historic context the Mongols mobility is an earlier age thing, and as they advance they become more permanent. Mainly because eventually you have to lay down those farms for food, can't hunter/gatherer all the way through the game.

Plus there's a point in the video where you see the frame work off a wall (wooden) being put down as usual, so I'm assuming base construction is business as usual. I never did multiplayer but playing random maps against the AI you're damn right you build a big beautiful wall.

But they kept going back to it over and over and it seemed to start with wood walls.

Multiplayer at high speed you would be using production buildings, walls, trees, gold piles and everything as obstacles for your 'base' because it's simply more efficient than sinking in wood or even worse, stone which could be used for better things.

Yeah it might be practical for campaigns where it's already set up or super slow games vs easy AI but Age of Empires has always been about expanding outwards for resources making walling impractical.

I was kind of hoping Age of Empires 4 would move away from that at least somewhat.

They're kind of hinting at the resource thing with the 'tax collectors' being a special Chinese civilization unit for example. I really like the idea of collecting taxes for coins. Otherwise the resources looked sparse but that could simply be a function of wanting to make things look 'pretty' and to highlight units as opposed to trees for wood.

Basically I was hoping for something different but it looks like more of the same with maybe some modifications to the combat. We'll see I guess.

 

[WingsMJN2965]

Computers are gonna be a thing of the past before this damn game comes out lol.

 

[RandV]

But they kept going back to it over and over and it seemed to start with wood walls.

Multiplayer at high speed you would be using production buildings, walls, trees, gold piles and everything as obstacles for your 'base' because it's simply more efficient than sinking in wood or even worse, stone which could be used for better things.

Yeah it might be practical for campaigns where it's already set up or super slow games vs easy AI but Age of Empires has always been about expanding outwards for resources making walling impractical.

I was kind of hoping Age of Empires 4 would move away from that at least somewhat.

They're kind of hinting at the resource thing with the 'tax collectors' being a special Chinese civilization unit for example. I really like the idea of collecting taxes for coins. Otherwise the resources looked sparse but that could simply be a function of wanting to make things look 'pretty' and to highlight units as opposed to trees for wood.

Basically I was hoping for something different but it looks like more of the same with maybe some modifications to the combat. We'll see I guess.

This gets into the area of personal preference but one where I strongly disagree on, looking at it from a perspective of favouring in gaming terms PvE vs PvP. I'm just guessing here but considering how old AoE II is and how primitive multiplayer was when it came out I'm thinking the easy majority of players are/were PvE and it's highly dedicated but smaller community that is into the PvP where you have the fast play that follows the game style you outline.

Again personal preference but I look at a game like Starcraft 2 where in the single player/PvE campaign you have an extensive list of units and branching research techs, but the primary focus of the game is on the PvP where most of the above is stripped away for a much leaner unit and tech roster that makes for more effective and quick PvP matches. Between the two sides I prefer AoE to lean more towards the former, between the lengthy campaigns and the random maps you can drop AI into I treat it more like a RTS Civilization game rather than a multiplayer RTS.

That said, when you're playing the AI and not another human then for the non-multiplayer expert you're not going to be able to keep pace with the AI's building and multitasking speed. What you will notice though is they tend to attack you from the same direction, so the trick is to find and create a funnel point where you can hold off their waives while you build up your strength to take them out. As such you do want to invest in 'base building' throwing up extensive walls so the AI sticks to your kill zone. Here the gameplay is more about exploring the map and figuring out how to best use it to your advantage. From that perspective what they're showing in the video is exactly what you want to see. Again a matter of preference, but there's going to be a significant difference between the people here for the single player play and the multiplayers.

Though I do agree with the last bit that it really does look just a lot like AoE II without any significant gameplay changes. As I've been saying though I do think they can do a lot on the macro level with better pathfinding and unit management. It was a nice touch in AoE II how your units would all gather in formation and march in unison, but once you engaged the enemy the whole thing just broke down and went to shit. It's not going to be exactly the same but the game could do really well with some more Total War type combat tactics.

 

[Knave]

This gets into the area of personal preference but one where I strongly disagree on, looking at it from a perspective of favouring in gaming terms PvE vs PvP. I'm just guessing here but considering how old AoE II is and how primitive multiplayer was when it came out I'm thinking the easy majority of players are/were PvE and it's highly dedicated but smaller community that is into the PvP where you have the fast play that follows the game style you outline.

Again personal preference but I look at a game like Starcraft 2 where in the single player/PvE campaign you have an extensive list of units and branching research techs, but the primary focus of the game is on the PvP where most of the above is stripped away for a much leaner unit and tech roster that makes for more effective and quick PvP matches. Between the two sides I prefer AoE to lean more towards the former, between the lengthy campaigns and the random maps you can drop AI into I treat it more like a RTS Civilization game rather than a multiplayer RTS.

That said, when you're playing the AI and not another human then for the non-multiplayer expert you're not going to be able to keep pace with the AI's building and multitasking speed. What you will notice though is they tend to attack you from the same direction, so the trick is to find and create a funnel point where you can hold off their waives while you build up your strength to take them out. As such you do want to invest in 'base building' throwing up extensive walls so the AI sticks to your kill zone. Here the gameplay is more about exploring the map and figuring out how to best use it to your advantage. From that perspective what they're showing in the video is exactly what you want to see. Again a matter of preference, but there's going to be a significant difference between the people here for the single player play and the multiplayers.

Though I do agree with the last bit that it really does look just a lot like AoE II without any significant gameplay changes. As I've been saying though I do think they can do a lot on the macro level with better pathfinding and unit management. It was a nice touch in AoE II how your units would all gather in formation and march in unison, but once you engaged the enemy the whole thing just broke down and went to shit. It's not going to be exactly the same but the game could do really well with some more Total War type combat tactics.

I'm being negative in some ways. I was hoping for bigger changes and it 's still possible.

Over the last year they've really highlighted the fact Mongols can pick up their base and move. But do you stop all resource generation? How is that compensated for in balance? Are the maps even big enough to make this a practical function?

And are they going to move away from a traditional random map battle in Age of Empires 1, 2? Age of Mythology tried t o change things by forcing players to contest settlements. Age of Empires 3 was much more fast paced to fighting from what I remember and the maps were much smaller. They brought in the 'home city' (something I think would be a great way to keep people playing, especially PVP if they could build up some sort of base as a permanent display for playing).

 

[RandV]

I'm being negative in some ways. I was hoping for bigger changes and it 's still possible.

Over the last year they've really highlighted the fact Mongols can pick up their base and move. But do you stop all resource generation? How is that compensated for in balance? Are the maps even big enough to make this a practical function?

And are they going to move away from a traditional random map battle in Age of Empires 1, 2? Age of Mythology tried t o change things by forcing players to contest settlements. Age of Empires 3 was much more fast paced to fighting from what I remember and the maps were much smaller. They brought in the 'home city' (something I think would be a great way to keep people playing, especially PVP if they could build up some sort of base as a permanent display for playing).

I'm worried about how much they're going to shrink it down for modern efficiency but at this point I would assume resource would work more or less the same. In the video you see the usual resources: hunting/gathering, mills/farms, woodcutting, stone, gold, even a relic. They could play with the amount per unit increasing the resource count per unit and shrinking the maps, but if they have the Mongols whose gameplay is to pack up and move around I can't see it. Game developers/publishers don't really deserve the benefit of the doubt on these things but Relic Entertainment does make good RTS games and everyone knows AoE II was the high point of the series, so I imagine they'll be focused on emulating that.

 

[Osprey]

They probably won't be able to satisfy everyone. Those who want it to be like AoE II may be disappointed if it's not enough like it... and those who want something new may be disappointed if it's too much like AoE II and doesn't add much new to the series. It's a fine balancing act that they have to perform.

 

[SuperScript29]

Age of Empire 1 and 2 were both amazing, the rest were meh. I think a big part of what I loved about the first two was the historical timeline. For games like this I don't want to go beyond the 1400s.

 

[Ducks in a row]

Age of Empire 1 and 2 were both amazing, the rest were meh. I think a big part of what I loved about the first two was the historical timeline. For games like this I don't want to go beyond the 1400s.

I loved Age of Mythology with your age up selection having a big impact on games from god power to myth units and special techs. Also lots of campaign levels too.
Age of Empires 3 you have customization with decks giving you more variety for what you can do with a civ.

Age of Empires I & II civs aren't different enough and I hate how games can result in no more gold causing trash unit (Food and Wood costing) fights at the end of a long game. They had good campaigns which is what I most liked about Age of Empires I & II

Age of Empires III Definitive Edition has a new content coming out in a few days involving 2 new civs I like what I see from it.

 

[TheGreenTBer]

I guess the issue I have is they're selling the game on these beautiful bases but how realistic are they? It looks like it could have a completely different feel to Age of Empires 2 but walling rectangular bases seems impractical in a competitive sense if the walls cost any significant resources. Are the walls automatic once you declare a 'base'? The tease about the Mongols is you can pick up their base and move but how practical is this? Wouldn't you be punished massively for having no economy as you move? How big are the maps that moving your base is even an option in a game?

We got a mix of what looks like traditional Age of Empires 1/2 economy but then you are teased with unique stuff in later ages. It's just a mixed bag that I feel could be way to similar to previous iterations despite attempts at larger changes, especially at combat. I was kind of hoping for more change in terms of economy, map, game format/type.

Does it matter, as long as the game is fun to play?

 

[Osprey]

Age of Empires 4 invites you all to wage war in this weekend's open stress test

It's meant to help the devs, but also seems like a good opportunity for interested gamers to see how well it runs and plays before preordering it or buying it at launch.

 

[Seedtype]

While I still am not too excited about this game, I'll gladly help out by dropping in for the stress test.

 

[PK Cronin]

Age of Empires 4 invites you all to wage war in this weekend's open stress test

It's meant to help the devs, but also seems like a good opportunity for interested gamers to see how well it runs and plays before preordering it or buying it at launch.

It'll likely determine if I'll buy it or not. If it's closer to 3 than 2 I'm likely out.

 

[Jasper]

If you play the stress test I suggest checking the video settings before starting a game. Mine were set to low-medium by default.

 

[Osprey]

Microsoft just updated the system requirements to include AMD CPUs and GPUs and the RX 570 (which is what I have) is their "recommended" GPU. I don't mean to brag or rub it in, but it sucks to be all of you who wasted $500, $1000 and even $1500 on GPUs which aren't even recommended for AoE IV.

 

[RandV]

I've played a couple games and am still neutral at the moment, mostly because AoE multiplayer isn't really for me and that's the focus here.

First game was kind of fun cause neither of us knew what we were doing. I managed to get the jump when we were both in second age attacking their settlement with more troops and clearing their army, before getting repulsed by a random stone wall set up next to the town center so they could stick a stone tower on it where I didn't recognize because I hadn't built any yet... and which I then countered by encircling their settlement in my own stone wall with a bunch of stone towers for the win. I don't think that's the way games are supposed to go

And yeah, next two games I tried the Holy Roman Empire and started building up a balanced economy and army only to get annihilated an all long bowman army in game 2 and then in game 3 where I thought I was doing pretty good got annihilated again by an all camel archer army where the guy was freaking kiting me.

Unless they do some balance changes I suspect this is the way things are going to go in multiplayer. I suspect the key to winning is:

1 - Advance to Age 2
2 - build an army of all Long Bowmen/Camel Archers (I don't know what China has but HRE's Landsknecht aren't going to cut it)
3 - win the army battle then stick to the outskirts of the settlement destroying your opponents economy
4 - if the opponent hasn't quit advance to Age 3 so you can build trebuchets and finish them off.

 

[Seedtype]

I don't think it's a bad game, but I'm definitely not feeling this for 60 dollars.

Things I like:

-Aside from a couple of bugs, the sounds and voice acting are pretty well done.
-Graphics are alright, but there is some weird bug that is muddling the look.
-I do like building a specific building to advance an age.
-Stone walls are cool. Having units on them is neat.

Things I don't like:

-I want to zoom out more so much.
-the UI is modern, but something feels clunky, maybe it's just me.
-RTSs have always had an element of massing units, but it feels like it's more basic and straightforward here as RandV said.
-Where is the cheap hard counter to archers, the skirmishers?
-Surely we can try and move past the 200 pop unit limit at this point?
-Putting peoples on the stone walls is a pointless strategy to develop, because 1)you really need the mobility to fight the enemy effectively, and 2) the unit cap is too small to have a significant defense force anyways.

Now, I can see there is quite a bit of interest in the game, the beta has pretty high participation. I think a lot of us old timers want this game to succeed and bring about a renaissance for the RTS genre. I don't think this is going to happen. I just don't feel this game does enough to move on from AoE II: DE. I think Relic is playing it too safe.

 

[PK Cronin]

I've played a couple games and am still neutral at the moment, mostly because AoE multiplayer isn't really for me and that's the focus here.

First game was kind of fun cause neither of us knew what we were doing. I managed to get the jump when we were both in second age attacking their settlement with more troops and clearing their army, before getting repulsed by a random stone wall set up next to the town center so they could stick a stone tower on it where I didn't recognize because I hadn't built any yet... and which I then countered by encircling their settlement in my own stone wall with a bunch of stone towers for the win. I don't think that's the way games are supposed to go

And yeah, next two games I tried the Holy Roman Empire and started building up a balanced economy and army only to get annihilated an all long bowman army in game 2 and then in game 3 where I thought I was doing pretty good got annihilated again by an all camel archer army where the guy was freaking kiting me.

Unless they do some balance changes I suspect this is the way things are going to go in multiplayer. I suspect the key to winning is:

1 - Advance to Age 2
2 - build an army of all Long Bowmen/Camel Archers (I don't know what China has but HRE's Landsknecht aren't going to cut it)
3 - win the army battle then stick to the outskirts of the settlement destroying your opponents economy
4 - if the opponent hasn't quit advance to Age 3 so you can build trebuchets and finish them off.

I'm sure there will be more balance changes coming, the stress test only included three civilizations too.

I don't think it's a bad game, but I'm definitely not feeling this for 60 dollars.

I agree. Even for $40 I'm not sure.

-I do like building a specific building to advance an age.

It took me a little bit to figure this out, but I think it's a good change. It allows the player to continue making villagers and decide how many they want to dedicate towards advancement. Way better than a simple timer you have to wait on.

-Stone walls are cool. Having units on them is neat.

I didn't get to use the walls yet, but it sure did look cool.

-I want to zoom out more so much.

I had a very similar feeling and was a little annoyed I couldn't. I kept hitting the scroll wheel and nothing would happen. Even zooming in doesn't go in very far.

-the UI is modern, but something feels clunky, maybe it's just me.

I though the UI was the worst part of the game. It wasn't intuitive at all and I struggled with digesting it at first glance, which is really bad considering I've played every AoE game and have hundreds and hundreds of hours on them. I thought it felt better than AoE 3 but was a clunkier version of AoE 2.

-RTSs have always had an element of massing units, but it feels like it's more basic and straightforward here as RandV said.

I'm hoping that's a byproduct of the restrictive nature of the stress test. Less civilizations, few options to set a game up with.

-Surely we can try and move past the 200 pop unit limit at this point?

I was saddened this was still in place, but maybe there will be additional options at launch? I spent so much time building a strong economy in one game that I had nearly no military units and then had to kill off a ton of villagers. Felt like a giant waste of time.

Now, I can see there is quite a bit of interest in the game, the beta has pretty high participation. I think a lot of us old timers want this game to succeed and bring about a renaissance for the RTS genre. I don't think this is going to happen. I just don't feel this game does enough to move on from AoE II: DE. I think Relic is playing it too safe.

This game just feels like a re-structured AoE 2 for me and isn't going to move the needle much. I'm sure I'll pick it up, but I doubt I'll sink a ton of time into it since it's essentially the same thing I've played for the past 25 or whatever years.

 

[Ducks in a row]

I haven't played Age of Empires 4 but I have watched videos of people playing it.

I don't like neutral markets because of randomness of spawn locations that can totally favor 1 player over another. They should let you do market caravan trading like Age of Mythology so no map screws and also harder for enemy to know where your caravans would be moving to and from.

I hate hate hate the UI Icons for techs,units,buildings and so on.

I don't like how there is lack of player information from showing all players civilization flag,current age and score on the side.

 

[Ducks in a row]

Are you ready? Age of Empires IV is coming! - Age of Empires

 

[Ducks in a row]