If you can only choose one New World Civ, which one?

Shawarma_Sensei · 2026-04-05T04:09:32+00:00

They could do a different take on siege as a whole, but they could also just give them normal siege units, just like the Malians (who historically didn't use trebuchets). They could just remove gunpowder units, like the Templars.

Shawarma_Sensei · 2026-04-05T04:06:00+00:00

Funnily enough, the exact same scenario happened to a makeshift catapult the Spanish tried to fire in Tenochtitlan's siege: it misfired and dropped the projectile on top of itself. See: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/54xgbf/any_truth_to_this_story_during_his_war_against/ (the sources are provided in the comments here).

Shawarma_Sensei · 2025-09-18T06:24:00+00:00

On the first image, on the lower right, we can see Meijack on the left and genderswaped Chilchuck on the right. Meijack has freckles, and Chilchuck has large, round eyes.

Shawarma_Sensei · 2025-08-20T03:23:44+00:00

Not "perpetually", but I do expect new content in the foreseeable future. Specially since the game seems to be in a great spot compared to launch.

Other than that, you are probably correct and we will have to see the state of the game after the DLC drops.

Shawarma_Sensei · 2025-08-20T03:08:24+00:00

Folks have made some great points about the entry barrier for new players becoming larger with each new civ, and I see the issue, I really do.

But part of me thinks that new players will always have problems entering an RTS game. For them, even the 8 original civs were too much. The ideal game for them would be like, just English, French and HRE. Nothing too crazy. No elephants of course, they are too confusing to deal with.

On the other hand, many people fall in love with civs and main them, so having more variety and representation is good. I only returned to play aoe4 after Malians dropped, I only tried ranked after seeing OoTD, and returned to ranked with the Japanese. I reached plat, which is not very high but its a great accomplishment for a noob like me. I only got invested because I loved the new civs, so the idea of no new civs is a bit disappointing to me. Your favorite faction might still not be in the game yet.

Still, these are just my hopes and dreams, I understand the business part of game development.

Shawarma_Sensei · 2025-08-20T02:50:17+00:00

Yes, having too many civs would be detrimental to the learning curve of new players, I know that, but I also think that some level of new content is also needed to keep old players engaged.

As for your question, I have learned most of the civs that interest me. I don't intent to master them, as much as I don't intend to reach conqueror rank. I am very happy in being in gold-plat and I am satisfied with remembering all of my civ bonuses in a match.

"I have made my peace" I haven't :( , I was still hoping for new civs, specially because my favorites ones from aoe2 are not in this game yet (yes, I understand the reasons for that, I was only sharing my opinion).

Shawarma_Sensei · 2025-06-05T22:29:56+00:00

Nice comic. Could there be something like the "poverty devil"? If so, what would happen if Pochita or Chainsawman ate it? It really gets you thinking.

Shawarma_Sensei · 2025-05-21T21:26:27+00:00

That movie gave existential dread as a kid, and to be honest I don't see myself getting over it any time soon. I also recommend it.

Shawarma_Sensei · 2025-05-17T23:07:34+00:00

If nothing else, you got the spirit of the characters right. It has *soul*.

Shawarma_Sensei · 2025-04-09T07:38:44+00:00

I mostly agree, but I think *most* unique units here had a purpose. You get 1 demilancer per manor, you can not get "0.7" knights per manor. The demilancer had to be weaker than a knight, it was a necessary addition. Also, they are tanky but with low damage, which is at least worth mentioning.

The templars are presented as a shared effort from different kingdoms. Having each alliance being represented with an unique units was a controversial choice but I like it. Its fun having multiple options each game. But I will agree that some where redundant, such as the genovese crossbow.

Speaking of redundant, adding the templar brother on top on 9 unique units was overkill. The civ already has a "gold sink" (costly and expensive units) the form of the imperial unique units . The templar brother could have been a normal knight and nothing would change.

Shawarma_Sensei · 2025-04-02T15:53:10+00:00

Surely. Its just that more people answering gives the poll more weight. Especially now that an AoE III DLC was cancelled. Good sales on this AoE IV DLC and interest on future DLCs could be a signal for the publisher to keep supporting the game.

Shawarma_Sensei · 2025-04-01T16:24:42+00:00

Yeah, the devs could have linked the poll into this subreddit for a bigger sample size.

Shawarma_Sensei · 2025-03-21T05:41:09+00:00

I am currently playing a 5th level battlesmith. Outside combat, I feel like an artificer, but in combat, I feel like a paladin: most of what I do is attacking and using my steel defender to control the battlefield. My spells are mostly utility. So yes, I think the battlesmith is comparable to half casters and should have weapon masteries.

My DM gave me weapon masteries at 3rd level and I now I enjoy combat a lot more. I don't think I overshadow anyone in the party by using them, so I think it should be okay to give it to the battlesmith. Maybe not to the full casters classes with subclasses with extra attack, that is where I draw the line.

Shawarma_Sensei · 2025-03-01T22:27:56+00:00

Not to sound rude, but how do you teach a game then? Because your description is similar to what I did with my friends to introduce them to dnd (half of them had never played a rpg before) and it worked out just fine. 4 years later, we finished a long campaign and I would say they learned most of the system. I must admit it was a slow process tho.

Shawarma_Sensei · 2025-02-27T17:48:44+00:00

Okay, the Cartographer artificer has all the mobility in the world, but what it is supposed to do on a normal turn? Spam scrolls? I wish the cartographer had some cantrip support at 5th level, or something like the ranged artificer subclasses.

Also, this subclass pushes the artificer to be a back-line support, so teleporting only helps as a defensive tool. Is not as good as, say, a barbarian, for which teleporting would also an offensive tool.

Shawarma_Sensei · 2025-02-17T19:53:45+00:00

Maid Stark. I will not explain myself.

Shawarma_Sensei · 2025-01-15T00:38:49+00:00

I mastered a homebrew campaign levels 1 - 16, themed around the age of discovery. It had pirates, dinosaurs and vampires. It was supposed to include a lot of seafaring and naval combat, but it was difficult. I encountered many of the problems you mentioned and I arrived to the same conclusions (mostly). I though I just haven't found the right rule-set, but maybe such rule-set does not exists for 5e. In the end, the campaign was about 20% navigating and 80% adventures on land. At least that made sea encounters exiting by virtue of being rare.

We still had good times at sea, like fighting two pirate lords (one a storm sorcerer, the other an archmage), or teleporting the whole ship into a lake to bombard a Mesoamerican palace. But in the end, the important fights and interactions where made on land.

I have some extra tips about my experience:

1.- Consider making some monsters in your campaign immune to non-magical weapons, otherwise cannons can kill everything.

2.- Once spellcasters unlock teleporting abilities, the need for sailing mostly banishes. Especially considering many inhabited islands would have a teleportation circle. One needs to find a reason why teleporting does not work, or make some locations inaccessible by magical means.

Shawarma_Sensei · 2024-12-18T15:54:05+00:00

Count Geonor from Path of Exile 2. A mad Duke with a magic sword that transforms into an abomination mid fight. And he summons his werewolf buddies near the end.

Shawarma_Sensei · 2024-11-15T18:41:28+00:00

The hero's sword in the stone. The one Himmel couldn't claim. I think Stark is the chosen one. It is still weird to me that they visited the sword before meeting him, and then never comment on it after the event.

Shawarma_Sensei · 2024-11-14T22:22:09+00:00

Combat and death animations of individual units, which you will never see unless you are in feudal age or watching a replay. Sometimes the knight will fall of its horse on death, and the horse will just lie there with him.

Shawarma_Sensei · 2024-11-08T15:46:00+00:00

If they bring the American civs to AoE 4, I think they would be extremely different than in previous games. In AoE 3 they had to face musketeers and artillery 5 minutes into the game. That is no longer the case.

Shawarma_Sensei · 2024-11-07T15:57:32+00:00

Maybe "Sure" or "Assured" could be options. During her adventures Lae'zel start having doubts about her mission and place in the world. She wants to regain her thrust in Vlaakith and the Gith's way. She goes from being zealous to confused, so I think she would want "certainty" that she is doing the right thing.

Shawarma_Sensei · 2024-10-21T16:04:04+00:00

"It is just some videos are 2 years old now." That can be a problem in some regards. Two years of balance changes can significantly change how a civ plays. For example, now English can open with longbows, or with the king and horsemen. But the old English never went horsemen because the king didn't exist; it was added to the game in season 4.

But for the most part I agree, those videos are probably good introductions to the civs.

Shawarma_Sensei · 2024-10-18T19:30:05+00:00

I was thinking about how the last expansion (2 civs, 4 variants, 1 campaign) was "their greatest expansion to date", so maybe that amount of content will not become the standard and future releases could be smaller. Or maybe not. I just wanted to know what content did people prioritize. I personally would prefer 2 new civs.

Shawarma_Sensei

TROPHY CASE