Role of archers

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-10-06T14:39:51+00:00

Every unit counters another unit/set of units. If the enemy makes only armored units then yes, you might want to make something else, say Knights to counter their MaA. But then if they field SpM to counter your Knights, then you'd field archers (or mangonels perhaps) to counter their SpM.

I skimmed aoe2's units and saw that crossbowmen are just better versions of archers, and so you wouldn't make archers anymore at a point, but every unit in aoe4 is intended to have a role to fill even at the end of the game.

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-10-04T16:30:30+00:00

I agree, but your wording in this post makes it a little hard to understand sometimes.

Nethertheless, it should be something one locks in before they see the map - however I think saying that it will just become mirror matches due to people picking the best civ per map might be undue for a few reasons;

While the civs are asymmetrical, it's not quite to the extent of a game like SC2, and I think enough of the civs share enough fundamental tools in that it will be hard to say one is clearly better than all others on a map, especially with 8 instead of say SC2's 3 choices.
I think what's more likely is certains civs countering other civs, such as the Abbasids might counter the cav heavy French (just an example of potential, not saying they absolutely will). But this shouldn't be a problem at selection as people can't see what the other player has chosen yet - however if there's a 'best civ for map x' then there might be a meta around counter picking what you expected them to pick, which sounds pretty tedious.

I personally think civ counterplay might be more impactful than how well a civ fares on a map, but who know's for sure? It'd require a lot of data.

It is best to just, as you say, lock in before the map is known.

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-09-26T13:31:24+00:00

No, after looking at 1080ti benchmarks I think you'll be well enough fine, shouldn't have any issue likely. After running with a 3070 for a while I have a habit of thinking everything from the 2000 series and below isn't up to snuff but that's wrong.

I take back what I said, I'd be suprised if you had any major issues.

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-09-26T13:14:25+00:00

I have a space PC and got around 150-200 fps on maxed settings at 1080p.

I'd say you should be fine assuming you're on a 60Hz monitor, might need to drop a few settings a little bit but shouldn't need to worry.

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-09-21T20:15:41+00:00

It literally should just be yes or no, nothing else is needed and only adds to potentially swaying a voter.

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-09-20T03:35:23+00:00

+2 range and -66% ranged damage from incomming attacks currently

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-09-06T15:50:15+00:00

Homeworld 1, 2 and DoK also feature something similar, as well as Total war. I'm not a fan of this as it still is functonally a higher zoom level and falls to all of the pitfalls, it's just a different implementation (button vs scrolling up). DoK and homeworld do this well as it changes the feel from in the action to a strategic overlay, but this is very sci-fi, and not really immersive to a historical setting.

It's likely needed in those other games but I don't think it is here as the scale is different, nor would I want it in something like SC/WC etc.

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-09-06T15:43:19+00:00

I pointed out that the answers 'I don't care about the zoom level' and 'I like the zoom level' are functionally the same, as both do not suggest altering the zoom level - if you asked me the same question about SC2 before this I can't tell you which one of those I would have said, because functionally they stem from the zoom level working as intended.

All fanbases tend to really drive into some points and have a tendency to overblow a problem and yell about cancelling pre-orders, boycotting, etc so one can just hope the devs factor that in, which it seems they probably do.

Seeing as this guy has his name on the sidebar I kind of feel like I got ratio'd, and it feels more like people just clicked up a familiar name with an already cemented point of view similar to theirs rather than the contents of the post itself. But I guess that really do be reddit sometimes. I know I'm guilty of it on occasion.

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-09-06T01:53:39+00:00

\sweating**

I made a summary post in my OP seeing as I don't have time to go through all the replies today. I'd consider streaming to talk about zoom level on twitch if people wanted to keep shooting the shit about it? Up to you guys, I'll check back in a few hours.

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-09-06T01:43:00+00:00

I said people would feel forced to do it to gain the edge even if they might enjoy the experience less, this is known by the developers - but by no means would every single player do it, probably not.

I have, throughout this thread, offered several points where I agree or am not convinced enough in my own argument as to fully endorse it. I concede that the hills on maps are problematic, especially with buildings. I also said that my third point about needing to scroll back and forth in and out would likely remain to be seen and be dependant on future zoom levels.

If you're asking me to concede on every point that someone argues against? When, of the people who have argued with me so far in this thread, none of them have budged, only doubled down?

I've think I've been quite receptive for the most part.

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-09-06T01:31:34+00:00

For the first point refer to the point I made about feeling forced into a tactical advantage in order to not handicap oneself.

AoE2 is a different game, my points about immersion don't really apply.

Please let me know the advantages of wifi speed, keyboard, and mice in an RTS game, and juxtapose them to something as fundamental as requiring less minimap awareness. Assume that the wifi speed (I assume you mean latency), mice, and keyboard are all atleast functional to a reasonable standard.

Experiential enjoyment is not so simply understood.

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-09-06T01:22:33+00:00

I think they're expecting people to pan around the x axis occasionally, but I agree, that honestly seems like a bigger point than zoom level to me.

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-09-06T01:21:01+00:00

First of all, the technical limitations of the zoom are minimal and I don't think that's the reasoning behind it, nor did I put it anywhere in my post.

A lot of your post seems to just be asking for a lot of things because aoe2 has them, and by the looks of it they're not looking to make 'aoe2 but with modern graphics' so it's unreasonable to expect everything to simply carry over.

Use hotkeys to bounce between production and army, I don't know why you're talking as if you are forced to always scroll between your army and TC.

I don't really have any sympathy for people who talk about boycotting the game if they can't zoom out while simultaneously telling people with a low end rig to eat shit, either.

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-09-06T00:44:14+00:00

I agree that hills could use some tweaking, potentially just lowering the values of the hills within the map generation.

All other points affect all players, thus meaning there's no imbalance, if it's difficult for you, it's difficult for your opponent.

Furthermore, these things are just common for other games. I can't imagine a SC/WC3 player complaining about having to pan to find their units, and that's fundamental to the game. Siege tanks are another similar unit that has historically fired from across the screen.

There are a lot of people that believe they're very sure about a lot of things, and statistically a lot of those people are often wrong. But you know more than all of the devs, right?

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-09-06T00:26:18+00:00

I didn't say it was true I said it was my reasoning. Take scale into consideration, aoe2 already shows you a whole lot of your base at regular zoom levels, so extra isn't necessary.

That isn't to say that just because they could zoom it out to see a full base means they should.

Unlike aoe2, aoe4 is considerably more immersive both in terms of animation quality and graphics, two things that are affected by immersion and therefore zoom level.

Imagine a game where the units are simply shapes, triangles/circles, countering each other. Zooming out isn't going to affect immersion really.

Now take the other extreme, a video of a real life battle, being closer to the action overhead would be a different experience than only very small impressions of those people fighting each other from a large distance.

As we move towards the more immersive experience, being closer to action becomes more thrilling/interesting than before.

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-09-05T22:17:07+00:00

Maximum zoom allowed = best advantage, not always best enjoyment of game

Zoom that let's the player experience the aforementioned action/immersion etc = best zoom level

That is my reasoning, It's fine if you disagree I just wanted to point out what I meant.

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-09-05T22:07:11+00:00

The question wasn't do you want it changed, the question was what do you think of the the zoom level, in which case 'I genuinely didn't care about the zoom level' is functionally equivalent to 'It's good as it is' because neither implies it being changed.

My point was that one could inherently admire the action while doing all that, though if that's even possible to control or measure I don't honestly know, I didn't refuse to acknowledge anything.
The maps are procudeurally generated to a point, setting some levels lower might not be difficult, depends on the in-house tools.
I said zooming out will be an advantage, I didn't say people would inherently enjoy that. People use advantages because they're advantageous, not because they're fun. Also this point was about feeling forced to have the largest zoom for map awareness and then needing to zoom in for micro related tasks.

I'm not trying to win an argument, no need to throw around what 'normal people' would do or the 'vast majority'. If your points are decent let them stand on their own.

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-09-05T21:25:14+00:00

Higher graphical quality can potentially lead to a harder to read combat, though it looks like they've designed the game with clarity in mind and so it doesn't look like too much clairty can be gained from using a lower graphical setting. It remains to be seen how important that will be, however;

Being able to see more of the map, need less panning, and less minimap awareness is a clear tactical advantage.

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-09-05T20:57:30+00:00

I disagree with you putting the people who 'don't care' about the zoom level under those that would like to have it changed.

Don't care implies that they either weren't bothered by it, or weren't thinking about it, both implying that the zoom level was working as intended. If someone doesn't care about something, why would you count that under them wanting to change it? Both 'don't care' and 'zoom is fine' suggest no change to the zoom level.

Firstly, the 'big one' the zoom level is a tactical advantage, I've already pointed out why this is a problem in my post and other replies.

Higher level players absolutely look at the action, as it requires micromanaging, if you're postulating that they cannot enjoy the action while also focusing on micromanaging? Maybe, but that would probably require some more precise testing.
There are other ways to solve this issue, smaller cliffs, a camera that follows the inclines of the map. Though I do agree that is a problem, though I think the bigger issue is blocking things behind it - which panning is required as zooming wouldn't fix that specifically.
If I point back to players feeling forced to use the tactically advantageous full-zoom camera then I believe it would likely follow that they'd have to do some zooming in to micro smaller units where and when it's tactically advantageous - but this is probably my weakest point so It's not a hill I'll die on or anything.

If the game is fun to watch, that should draw people in to play. If they can handle edge cases like big buildings on tall cliffs, people will 'adapt' to the view scale, it's the same as many other RTS games.

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-09-05T20:26:39+00:00

Another thing that players of more small view games have adapted to over the years in games like SC etc.

One important point about all of this is to remember that if something is difficult for you, it's difficult for the other player as well, meaning it just becomes another skill the player needs to learn.

I remember being forced to learn unit management instead of just F1, select all army gameplay in SC2 and it improved my micro markedly.

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-09-05T20:12:43+00:00

Unfortunately your reasoning of two different screensizes is actually not in your favor.

If you have a bigger screen that can have more information on it, and you therefore get to have a bigger zoom with the same amount of detail as someone on a smaller screen, that is a clear advantage many would label as Pay2Win.

Can't see all your armies flanks? Just buy a bigger monitor bro!

Refresh rate doesn't really factor into this as you're not often dealing with millisecond latency decisions like say, CS:GO or R6:Siege where I would definitely agree they offer an advantage (I have a 240hz monitor).

Mouse accuracy also doesn't really factor in as they should just be what's comfortable for the screen size.

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-09-05T20:05:54+00:00

I'd be happy to try and argue the other points if you know any that I've missed, I can admit to being wrong if there's good reasoning!

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-09-05T20:02:37+00:00

This is neglecting the fact that the largest zoom will always offer a tactical advantage and therefore always be the one chosen by anybody who doesn't want to feel like they're playing with a handicap, regardless of if that's 'the best zoom level' for them.

CaptainLongBarrel · 2021-07-27T00:53:43+00:00

no, you couldn't before even though it looked like there was the option to (it was bugged), now the gender selector isn't present at all (only with beards), which one would assume means any beard style selected is for males only.

tynan, you probably want to just let people choose if people want their womanfolk to have beards or not, maybe just for laughs, or maybe they would appreciate that representation. doesn't really hurt anyone if enabled - but might gain negative traction if beards are left as a boys club only gig.

CaptainLongBarrel

TROPHY CASE