Why StarCraft 2 players excel in Age of Empires IV
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 тра 2024
- Win Conditions in Different RTS - • THE BEST MOMENT FROM E...
Check out Our new Project FGC Storyteller - / @fgcstoryteller
& My personal SC2 Channel - / @gaming_essays
🔹 Support the channel - www.donationalerts.com/r/espo...
🔹Reddit page - / bassetyt
🔹Twitter page - / bassetsc2
🔹 Discord server - / discord
🔹 PSISTORM Patreon - / membership
Timecodes:
00:00 Intro
00:24 StarCraft 2 vs Age of Empires IV esports
02:20 How did the first AoE 4 tournament go
04:50 How SC2 players started to take hold in AoE 4 esports
08:00 The reasons for SC2 players dominance in AoE 4
Sources:
1. Castle Rush mention - • How to Castle Rush wit...
2. Castle Rush in AoE + some general cool footage - • AOE2 How To Economy Bo...
3. StarCraft 2 APM showcase - • FP POV of Sound - Fast...
4. Serral POV - • StarCraft 2: SUPER HIG...
5. Lucifron - TheViper - • Age of Empires 4 - $20...
6. Vortex - Kasva - • Age of Empires 4 - $20...
7. TheMista vs Vortix - • Age of Empires 4 - $20...
8. TheMista vs MarineLord - • Age of Empires 4 - $20...
9. TheViper vs TheMista - • Age of Empires 4 - $20...
10. Lucifron vs TheViper - • TheViper vs LucifroN7 ...
11. Vortix vs TheViper - • TheViper vs Vortix - $...
12. VortiX vs Demuslim - • Grand Finals w/ Drongo...
13. Artosis Flash cast - • StarCraft 1: FLASH RET...
14. AoE 4 trailer - Age of Empires IV: The Sultans Ascend - Official Launch Trailer
15. Hera vs Vinchester - • Lithuanians vs Berbers...
16 Sarace vs Vikings AoE 2- • Absolute BANGER of an ...
17. Demu vs Vortix - • Age of Empires - Vorti...
18. Leenock vs BeastyQT - • N4C Tournament $100k -...
19. Proleague highlights - • sc2 proleague highlights
20. StarCraft Documentary about Korean Teamhouses - Inside look (3/3) - • StarCraft Documentary ...
#sc2
#aoe4 - Ігри
Check out our video about different Win Conditions in RTS games - ua-cam.com/video/6E44vKXD2XQ/v-deo.htmlsi=SITDiJ-jBqcLLMan
Check out Our new Project FGC Storyteller - www.youtube.com/@fgcstoryteller
& My personal SC2 Channel - www.youtube.com/@Gaming_Essays
Timecodes:
00:00 Intro
00:24 StarCraft 2 vs Age of Empires IV esports
02:20 How did the first AoE 4 tournament go
04:50 How SC2 players started to take hold in AoE 4 esports
08:00 The reasons for SC2 players dominance in AoE 4
Microsoft now owns the only relevant RTSs so it doesn't matter if it's AOE2, AOE4, SC:BW, WC3, or SC2 it's all in the Microsoft family.
This is probably a good thing because somehow Microsoft does support niche games to a frankly bizarre extent.
they abandonned aoe 2 in 2002 closing down the servers, and before that they fired the team who created age of empires 1 and 2. They don't support niche game, they just take the money from the community, all the expensions were gonna be free otherwise, because microsoft abandonned age of empires 2 very long time ago while there was still many players. they should not even have any right on this game.
@@robertcarhiboux3164 no.
My dude, 2002 was over 20 years ago. People change, companies change.
Many times they change for the worse. Just look at Activision and its subsidiary, Blizzard.
This dude is stuck in the 2000s
I play both sc2 and aoe4 I find them both extremely fun for different reasons both amazing games
People who are good at a demanding RTS are good at a slightly less demanding RTS, shocker
I'd say both are equally demaning. SC is mainly about mechanical execution whereas AoE puts a lot more emphasis on Eco.
viper actually won the first big tournament for aoe4, however most aoe2 pros usually juggle on both games tournament during those times, while the starcraft 2 pros usually left their old games already. I wouldnt deny that SC 2 micro is more demanding tho (didnt finish video when posting this comment, turns out the video poster already mentioned similar observation after)
other than kasva, i dont think i have heard any aoe2 pros switching over to aoe4 entirely
I do find it interesting everyone talks about the micro and multitasking being a good deal harder in sc2, and it's probably not an accident perhaps the best of the sc2 people to go over, beasty and marinelord were the best at such micro in sc2 out of them too. But I still wonder if the best sc2 players at micro actually came over, because I'd rate a beasty for instance only a C, but Byun or Serral an A+. And I also wonder if the Viper and co fully transitioned. Tbh, I find it an interesting comparison of possibilities, because it seems both sides are handicapped, so thus people who wanted it to be a situation where they get do see who's the better class of rts player will never get it.
@@adrianbundy3249 serral actually played team games for quite some times in aoe4, however he never play in any tournament. The closest he was from aoe4 tournament was when he entered a team game tournament as a reserve for beasty team but the opportunity never come where one of the main player cant play so we never get to see him play :(. (one of the caster even joked about having someone to kill off one of the player of that team electricity so we can see serral play). I guess serral only play aoe4 as a relaxation game rather than playing it for competitive game (as of now)
yep he won every 512 players of the tournament without loosing.
@@nopurposeposting1548 Kasva seems to be back in AoE 2 tho
Just went from SC2 to AOE4 and can appreciate the latter. The learning curve is lower and it's easier to learn the historical rock-paper-scissor of the units. I enjoy the simcity aspect of AOE4 with proper walls and such.
I do like how you're snapshotting things as they were. At that time Viper was pretty widely uncontested for greatest ever, even with a few noteworthy people showing some real promise. As of 2024 Hera has really made that an open question again, he has been crushing it.
Very interesting - I had no idea that the AoE4 scene was filled with SC2 pros! Thank you for sharing. I'm a big fan of StarCraft and Age of Empires 😎😎
Couple of Points. Im an AOE 2 player for disclosure.
1)AOE4 is not (in most AOE2 Players View ) a very good game. Most AOE2 players tried it and promptly dropped it.
2) Viper and a few others tried to pick it up and committed early days , but their Fan base didn't care for it so they were still flitting between both, so im not sure how committed they really were to AOE4.
3) the differences that do exist between Aoe2 and AOE4 that may seem small to someone without great experience in both are actually massive, and impact Micro so much at the top level that it really does translate into huge differences when playing at a high level
4) SC2 had a much larger community, and more competition I agree, so the Very good players there could probably reasonably be considered very top tier in AOE 2 if they has committed in AOE2 at any stage.. but the competition (and money) simply was not there for a long period of time, so they didn't.
I'm not sure why you're counting TheMista as starcraft 2, even his starcraft 2 liquipedia says he came from AoE2/AoM
Because the comparison is between SC2 pros and AOE pros in an AOE game, meaning the counted variable is "have they played SC2 professionally" so if someone has SC2 experience you count them as that.
Its like the classic example of shapes. A square is both a rectangle and a square but you would designate it as a square because that's the most noteworthy quality it has despite ticking another box.
I remember playing AOE2 again after DE came out and I had a few years of SC2 under my belt. My micro was so much better than what others could do, even though I didn't think it was especially demanding to split and stutter step to dodge projectiles etc, target fire and so on.
Even low level AoE2 pros do all of that, it's not special anymore. AoE2 requires a vastly different skillset than SC or SC2. Micro in AoE2 is almost completely useless except for edge cases. The one or two times an SC2 pro tried AoE2, they got their ass handed to them because it's a completely different game with different requirements. Apples and oranges.
@@premiumfruits3528 I'm sure pros do lol, I'm not a pro. I was just talking about normal games.
@@premiumfruits3528 they get their asses handed to them because they don't know what units do....
but as this video clearly shows, if they do know the game they rapidly dominate it
a 1900 in aok, reach top rank in one week of playing sc 2 and says it's an easy game.
@@premiumfruits3528 Micro in AoE2 is almost completely useless? This is the kind of reasoning that will lose you games. I am teaching my friend to play AoE2 and so far, despite being able to stay scorewise with me, he still has won 0 games against me because, shocker, i'm a veteran in SC2. The brutal campaign was easy for me, as a context. Archer micro is the REASON why archers can hard counter cavalry. And in archer duels, if you don't have +1 range over your opponent, then micro can win you a horribly unfavored fight. I consider normal archers to hard counter cavalry archers too because of the fact that cavalry archers can barely be micro'd while normal archers can, easily dodging a huge majority of their damage in the process. Onagers can be good, but onagers you micro go from good to game changing. The fact you can realistically ALWAYS hit your onager shot turns the unit from a liability to assured profit. Naval battles are almost entirely based on micro, the amount of damage you can dodge can quickly spiral up to thousands of hit points in a normal sized naval fight.
Do i need to explain quickwalling too? The ability to close off an entire woodline in seconds when you see a militia rush?
Yes, usually it's what leads up to the fight that makes you win it, but don't even for a second think the fight itself doesn't matter. Case and point, my friend keeps practicing how to fast castle, how to scout rush. And yes, sometimes he is ahead of me. Sometimes, according to the game, he should win. But every single time, i simply outperform in the battles, and every single time, i win. And i will keep winning until he starts to value and practice micro.
Imo both SC and AoE are excellent platforms, each unique in their own way… I prefer AoE4 due to the historical relevance and the multiple strategies that can be used depending on each unique landmark selection. No doubt, Micro ability is night and day and Aoe4 , albeit, requires micro, it’s not in the same universe as SC. My $.02
"It's the most complex, the fastest and hardest esports game that has ever been made in the whole world...."
"... well, maybe except for brood war...."
I was gonna say it.
Is it though?
It is certainly the fastest and when it comes to micro probably also the hardest. The extremely low time to kill makes split second decisions in combat much more demanding than in pretty much any other game. WC3, which is similarly micro focussed has a much higher time to kill and is therefore much more forgiving.
However SC2 and SC:BW are certainly not the most complex. Not even close. Sc2 is really easy to understand, there are not too man units and you get a good understanding of every unit and mechanic within a few days of playing (which is a good thing!). AoE2 however is so much more complex and demanding when it comes to this. With almost 50 factions, each with it's own bonuses and unique units, so many different mechanics and especially hidden damage bonuses, this game is much more complex, it's hard to compare. Also it is much slower in combat but also much more focussed on macro than micro. Macro game is alot harder here than in other RTS like SC or wc3.
Overall I would say sc2 is by far more demanding when it comes to high APM and awesome micro, while AoE2 has much more strategic depths, a much bigger variety in maps and factions and is therefore a game, you can also win by being the smarter player, not just the faster one.
@@4everdex BW is head and shoulders above
@@4everdex I was gonna post something like this. SC2 is a shallow puddle compared to AoE2 in terms of depth. It's not even remotely close and such a statement just shows extreme ignorance. And if you want to talk about speed and mechanical skill, yeah, I can agree...if you're going to ignore entire genres, like FPS and the FGC.
AoE4 was pretty fun for a week but I haven't played it in a couple years. I'll have to give it a go again
once you get the core mechanics down, AOE4 is just not as fast, and there are less game ending punishment that sc2 has. Personally I haven't been bothered to learn any build and just play whatever way I like, it doesn't push me to be extremely competitive the way sc2 does.
Hi, is there a 2v2 or 3v3 games popular in aoe4? Im thinking of buying it but only for those games
Yes. I play AoE4 regularly, mostly team games, and I never have trouble finding a 2v2 or 3v3 or even 4v4
@@CloudCuckooCountry just bought it on steam after ur review. glhf
I recall (from the early days of AoE4) there being games where AoE2 pros out-microed SC2 pros. I haven't played much SC2, so I don't really know how much multitasking it requires, but I can confidently say that AoE2 requires a good amount of multi-tasking. Even during an aggressive push, you still need to take some time to manage your economy (in things like building new farms, moving villagers to new gold/stone deposits, refreshing lumbercamps, etc.). I don't think SC2 has ever required that much time investment in economy, so while it may be faster-paced and more demanding in military management, I'm not so confident that it's more demanding overall. I also sometimes see some excellent micro from AoE2 players (with quick-walls, dodging mangonel/archer shots, managing 10+ monks, etc), so AoE2 pros are perfectly capable of micro as well.
In any case though, I suspect that if BeastyQT (or other aoE4 pros) were to drop AoE4 and switch to AoE2 that he'd quickly rise to a top spot (similar to their AoE4 spot). Likewise, if Viper or Hera (or other AoE2 pros) were to drop AoE2 and switch to AoE4, they'd also quickly rise to a top spot (similar to their AoE2 spot). But playing both games professionally isn't really practical - the amount of practice it takes to be a tournament winner in one of them is too much to allow a person to spend enough time to compete effectively in both. And while the games are similar, they're still different enough that a player would need to practice both if they were to try to compete in both.
Both games are well-established at this point, and it isn't really practical for the players to switch games (at this point). But I don't think that the set of players for one RTS game are necessarily more capable than the set of players for another. It's just that it isn't practical to split time between two games, and the SC2 players were more incentivized to make a switch than the AoE2 players were. So a good number of AoE2 players tried out AoE4, made a good showing for themselves, but ultimately remained with AoE2 (which is still going strong). Meanwhile, SC2 pros left their old game completely and so were fully committed to playing AoE4.
you have more ressources and you have to micro the villagers in order to get the best incomes from it, while at the same time guessing ennemy manuver which requires very tight economy and adjustments depending on the need of the game, and fights requires you to be at the same time on the fights and economy otherwise you won't be able to stand very long. And if you don't watch out the fights, one small army lost generally = defeat. Forgetting your economy=defeat. It's much more complexe than sc2 even if it's not as fast paced, sc2 is a very simple basic game compared to ao2.
@@robertcarhiboux3164 Well, just as you say that SC might be a simpler game because villagers take more effort to manage. The complexity of combat goes off the roof in SC2 compared to AoE2. Most games are decided by 1-3 different units in aoe2, while in SC2, the average of units made goes between 4-8. Not to mention spellcasters, army wipes, hardcore counter damage. An army of spearmen doesn't exactly kill an army of cavalry in 2 seconds flat. But an army of zerglings do disappear in seconds against a sizeable force of blueflame hellions. Your control needs to be incredibly tight at all times, you need to use a large host of units to their best ability. While in AoE2, it's crossbows against knights. It's not about the fight really, it's just about when the fight happens.
SC2 is such a crazy game that you can lose 3 minutes into the game even though the match ends at 15 minutes because you had a 'build order loss'. So saying that you have to 'guess the enemy manouver' like that's a point in AoE2's favor is incorrect. In SC2, you need to play your opponent way more than you need in AoE2. Knowing your frank opponent is going to go scout rush doesn't really help you. Knowing your opponent is fast expanding into mutalisks will WIN you the game.
And even then, i'd argue that the economy side in SC2 is more complex to understand than AoE2. Because most of the games are made or broken by who expands and why loses their expands. A bad player expands too much, focusing too hard on eco and loses. Another one doesn't expand at all and gets overrun. You don't really ever lose by going for a new gold mine in AoE2. But you will lose by placing down a command center in Sc2.
sorry bro, but the points you used, clearly shows you know nothing about aoe2. Because it's completly the opposite of the exemple you picked up @@starcraft2own
age of empires 2 and age of empires 4 are very different due to a micromanagement issue, in aoe2 a skilled player with few units, let's say 14 crossbowmen, can destroy a much superior army or cause absurd casualties in the civilian population just by moving the units, in Aoe4 these always fight in the most optimal way possible, the arrows, for example, never miss the target, so the complete experience is based on the macro, on having a greater amount of economy and winning by numbers
The AoE2 pros only played AoE4 at launch and TheViper won the first big tournament, yet they prefer the older game wich is in a very healthy state right now, maybe if he and some more Age2 pros had stuck with 4 I believe they would be doing quite well, at the end of the day AoE2, AoE4, SCR and SC2 are different games and as long the best players can make money playing the one they prefer there is no reason to change to the more recent version
It’s all about tempo and different playstile.
@4:03: hey look it's the vehicle the russians used to model their new Blyat Mobile
Let’s watch it with Beastyqt today
Same reason some nba players were football 🏈 prospects as well . Skills tend to translate really well
But not the same for Michael Jordan playing baseball
AoE2 being "more popular" than AoE4 is a bit misleading. While it's true that AoE2 has more active monthly players than AoE4 it's important to note that a huge portion of the AoE2 players are doing co-op campaigns and custom games. AoE4 actually has more players on its ranked ladder than AoE2 and is the far better option for competitive 1's and team games.
I also wouldn't call SC2 the "most demanding" rts, thats a bit egotistical imo. SC2 is more micro intensive than AoE but AoE is WAY more macro intensive. Good players are burning at least 100-150APM the whole game on macro in AoE. Don't believe me? Go watch a high level AoE stream. Anyways if we are going by micro alone than brood war is more intensive than SC2.
At the end of the day all these games are RTS masterpieces and tearing each others games down is childish.
AoE 4's ranked ladder gets "inflated" by being season based. In AoE 2, you get removed from the ladder after 28 days of inactivity whereas in AoE 4, this won't happen.
melee is best game, bw is second best, sc2 is way behind but still good
sc2 micro speed demand much faster than aoe4
Perfection is demanded in sc2
to be frank it´s not important what background players have ... what matters is that said rts game has reasonable balance and a healthy playerbase in general
if somebody told me someone like f.e. TLO plays supreme commander or AoE 4 or act of war ... neat i guess ... but they are not what make the RTS games interesting at least imo
even video games have invasive species nowadays
because its slower took me an entire .3s to figure that one out
starcraft players are f1 drivers
they go easy mode
Meh at the end of the day Beoodwar and Warcraft 3 are still the best rts being played today.
AOE2 attracts more audience than AOE4, so there has been no reason for AOE2 pros to commit to AOE4. SC2 pros have the motivation to fully switch to AOE4, because the alternative is to grind the grueling Korean pro scene.
*correction* SC1 is far harder than SC2
but it was theviper who beat every 512 players in a row before to return to the better age of empires aka age of empires 2. Back in early 2000's when there was World Cyber Game, RD_Champion was the only starcraft player who performed on age of empires 2. Majority of 2 players who played age 4, returned to age 2. Age 4 and age 2 are quite different, despite they look good. A friend of mine that was 1900 elo on ao2, when he played starcraft 2 for first time, it took him 1 week to be top 1 of the league straight away, and he said sc2 is an easy game compared to aok. so I think starcraft is not more complexe that aoe2. Isometric 2D is the best for any RTS. I have tried all on them and I always return to age 2, it looks even better despite being 2D.
What is 'the league'? A 1900 elo player can not compete in grandmasters SC2 league. Not even theviper(who is 2800elo) could reach that league in a year. The people in that league have spent well over 10 years just trying to get there, some even longer. You're friend is lying to you, or you simply misunderstood, being top of bronze league is not even remotely impressive. On average, a 1900 elo player is about Plat league in SC2, and that's about 50% of the playerbase. Maybe low diamond if he is gifted.
But there is absolutely no way he got top 1 in grandmaster league as that's legitimately impossible. I can go on and give you a massive list of reasons as to why he physically wouldn't be able to. Not only is one week way too short, even for the best SC2 players in the world to even get first place. And i will go on if you dare to challenge me on this.
So what you're talking about is the lowest league of bronze. Which is where all the other people who are new to the game are in, again, not impressive in the slightest especially if he is 1900 elo. That's like a strong man fighting toddlers. He doesn't need to know SC2 to be able to beat people who doesn't know RTS games in general.
I mean if you want impressive, i taught one of my friend who's never played RTS games in two month to get good enough to be able to beat over 50% of the AoE2 community, as he reached 1200 elo. Could never do the same even if i had over half a year with SC2. Getting a completely new rts player to low plat wouldn't be possible unless they're a prodigy.
the ranking of the league table does not matter unless it's grandmaster league. It's about the MMR. I bet your friend reach top 1 in 100 diamond/plat players. Well it's not the top of the diamond/plat rank and there are many 100 players tables like that across the rank. It's about the MMR, the 4 digit number that's matter.
Master league it was, he was not lying as he dropped a screenshot on facebook back then; saying "easy game" it was like 12 years ago. I'm just saying sc2 is nowhere near as complexe as age2. It's mainly based on mechanical skills, and of course experience. I'm not saying age 2 is better because of that, it's just a very different STR game. @@starcraft2own
@@robertcarhiboux3164 Alright i'll give you that. It would be possible to reach master league 12 years ago. It was the wild west back then. Not to mention a 1900 rated player would've been more skilled than todays 1900 rated. But if he tried the same thing today, he'd barely reach high plat.
I just don't simply agree with you at all about complexity. The reason i prefer playing AoE2 is actually for it's simplicity. Although it's more complex than almost all other RTS games because of how it handles certain upgrades and how the counter system works in the game. But SC1/2 are not the games it's more complex than. When you relegate stone to being only for defensive buildings, wood for buildings, gold for expensive units and food as a general resource. You'd quickly realise that the resources in the game are not as complex as they first appear. In fact, they take on pretty much almost the same roles as minerals and gas do. The only thing that would make them virtually the same was if SC had a defensive resource equivalent of stone.
The only areas where age 2 is genuinely more complex is base building and random maps. Every other area is equivalent or easier in AoE2. And even if we can't agree on this point, which is fine. Combat alone places SC2 as the most complex RTS game. Almost every unit in SC2 has a special ability, upgrades that drastically change it, unique interaction with tonnes of other units. The three factions play extremely different. While in AoE2, there is no tangible difference between most factions outside stat changes. In most meta plays, you'll face three main units. Knights, crossbows and scouts, usually faction doesn't even matter on this front.
You literally only need to learn how to fast castle into knights to beat 50% of the playerbase.
LIke i get it, i feel like you haven't played a lot of SC2 so you think it's simple. Or that the campaign was simple. But SC2 is more akin to chess with how wild the unit interactions are. You literally need to know how over 50+ units work and their upgrades to even stand a chance at a relatively decent rank. While in AoE2, you need to know knights and crossbows to reach the top 5%. That's not complex. And before you mention unique units, if you play the game properly. You can deny castles unless they play full defensive, which gives you the advantage anyways, so unique units are not impactful in a huge amount of matches.
It's complex, but you're comparing it to one of the literally best designed competitive games on the market. When you compare the best player in starcraft history, you're talking about a guy that was considered a literal machine, he reached a level no one thought possible for a human. While in AoE2 you have viper, who is good, like really good. But he isn't really considered a demigod able to break the game. People like Flash and Jaedong will be considered some of the best ESPORT players ever, even outside the game.
It doesn't take a lot to reach Vipers level as most Pro's today can match him and very often surpass him now. While the same can not be said for the greatest SC players, because the game is just too complex, and it requires a different kind of person to master such a game.
On the ressource, it's not as simple, you are supposed to micro every villagers so that you don't loose ressource when they go the deposit, you have to watch out every path of every vill, so they don't walk and deposit straight ahead this way you increase your eco by 30%, but it's just a tiny aspect, and sometime you don't even have the time to do the micro, because you have be fighting at the same time as dispatching your economy accordingly with the situation all the time, it's not like i put 3 on stone or something like that, you reallocatenon stop. I said sc2 is more simple on the approach, but the combat is clearly something else. I also disagree with the faction you wrote about, and knights + fc only work on unexperimented players, few camels and you lost all your cav, and probably the game if this was that easy... I agree sc is all about battle and micro, it's like adreline high reflexe, very mechanical game, but not the same depth as aoe2 imo. Although the level recently on aoe improved so much, that you can see now players are pretty quick and manage so many stuff at the same time, including giving multiple order to a same unit... probably stuff you don't even see or realize when watching a game. Doing a perfect build order already is not so easy, and missing a dear, or not defending a boar can cause you a lost. You have no room to forget anything or mess up the build order unlike in the beginning in early 2000's where you could overcome those things. And the builds were a lot easier than today. Weird cause there are not sc pro on aoe, it should be easy for them, if this game and viper level was that easy to reach. There are not many game where a player rule the ladder for more than 10 years @@starcraft2own
The conclusions are wrong. It is not because SC2 players are faster or Age IV is more complex, it is because Age IV micro is more similar to SC2 than it is to Age II. Also, Age II civilizations are more balanced, they have a triangle that each unit counter the other, the same for every civilization, and military units attack are not 100% precise by choice from the devs, making that in a war you need to be controling your units and choosing which enemy unit they must attack to get a good advantage, look at how it is different to micro archers wars in both games. Maybe because of this, Age of Empires IV has less players playing online than Age of Empires II. Most Pros from Age II quitted too fast from Age IV because they knew that was a completely different game. Age IV choosing to be between SC2 and Age II just made the game be forgotten by both.
APM AOE is slow as heck
I agree that aoe4 is a realy slow game. Tbh the response time of units and slowness of the game made me quit game after a week
If you are comparing it to starcraft, then yes it definitely is. But to Age of empires 2? Absolutely not. Age of empires 4 on average are shorter, you can hit feudal at like 4:30 mins whereas in aoe 2 you hit around 9-10 mins if im not wrong and thats around the time you hit castle or even Imperial depending on the civ. Just because of that fact alone Aoe 4 is undisputably faster.
@@aaabatteries9948 I compared it to sc2 but again still if you compare it with aoe2, all of the unit movements and response time in aoe 4 is much worse. Also the micro capability of aoe4 is lower than the aoe2.
90% of very demanding mechanics of sc2, constant micro/macro at his best, transfer to aoe4, thats' all
8:00 uhm, yes. SC2 scene >> AoE scene. Don't you see that even mid GMs from SC2 own AoE now?
a 1800/1900 on ao2 will be reach max rank within one week of sc2. Because sc2 is a simple game compared to aoe2. Although maybe he won't have the level to play s-tier tournament against the top sc2 player, it tells enough of the game. 1800 is not 2800... Sc2 is a simple game, it's just more popular and has bigger playerbase. Age 2 is a bit like quake, it's a niche game that is very skilled. Quake players dominated overwatch, when it got released and returned to quake as soon as quake champions came out. They also dominated every single fast fps that got released in the meanwhile like shootmania, xonotic, warsow, diabotical... and every other fast paced fps. Despite they have some of the smallest player base of FPS games. Game were not easy and unforgiving back in early 2000's. But both sc and age of empires are great game. They are different.
I've played AoE II a bit, though only single-player. Same for SC and SC2. I've watched a lot of PvP SC2 games, so I have a decent feel for how that works, but not any AoE.
So my opinion isn't especially well-grounded. That out of the way, my guess for the reason so many SC2 players are doing well in AoE 4 is simply that the game is designed to be slower, mechanically speaking, so they have an intrinsic advantage from their SC2 training. Simply making it into the top 50 or maybe even 100 in SC2 means you're mechanically more than fast enough for a game like AoE. That means the bottleneck isn't how fast you are anymore, but how well you strategize. And you have more time to do that, since you aren't as frantic in the game just to keep up with what needs to be done.
AoE players have never had to develop the insane speed of SC2 players to rank high. They've had to be good strategically, and merely competent mechanically.
So the upshot is that basically any SC2 player who has reached GM has all the mechanical skill required for AoE, and it's down to their ability to adapt to the different strategies of the game, which several have managed to do quite well.
Beastyqt is probably the best example. He's never been particularly great in SC2, but definitely had the ability to beat top 50 players on a semi-regular basis. That skill level, from a mechanical standpoint, is more than enough for AoE, so the game simply lets his abilities in formulating strategies come to the forefront. Which is something he also trained in SC2 with his YT content.
Marines, SCAN ,Tank range in siege and so on… are IMBA
Is chess easy because it's a turn based game? AOE2 requires a different set of skills than SC2 and none of them is easier than the other. MarineLorD himself has been an AOE2 player for quite a while and he haven't been able to reach pro level. AOE4 requires less game knowledge and APM is more rewareded and that's why SC2 players excel in the game, that's all.
Yeah and Beasty when he tried AoE 2 DE 4 years ago only managed to get to 1.2k Elo.
So let's be honest here , if aoe4 was selled to valve theywould maake millions out of it . The game is simple to watch but hard to play , easily everyone could get hooked by it .
SC2 is just boring to watch. Only mechanical gameplay with no real strats. AOE4 is mechanicaly slower (lot faster than AOE2) but strategicaly demanding, giving space for many different approaches and playstyles. This is much better to watch.
Dota 2 is more complex and harder than SC2, not even close. SC2 is the most complex and hardest of rts games
Because no other pros are playing this shit ass game.
aoe players are lazy bums, sc players are professionals, thats why they rule aoe4 scene
they did not rule aoe scene, viper from aoe2 ruled every 512players of the tournament may they come from starcraft or another game and he returned to age 2, simply because it is the better game. Age 4 does not interest age 2 players. Maybe old stacraft player found this game and said, hey look maybe we can have a second carrier on a small not popular game.
I dont get the apeal of aoe2s multiplayer over aoe4. Aoe4 just feels better to me
AoE 2 is extremely boring to watch as an esport in my opinión. AoE 4 is slightly better but still cant compare to SC2. And about the skills, well having played the three games, I think SC2 is the most challenging. Its normal that the most challenging game created the best pros at RTS. And specially the terrans. Most top AoE 4 pros were terran SC2 players. Terran is the most difficult race to master in SC2.
AoE2 is boring because of the early game, dark and feudal age are very tedious and boring. It gets only interesting with lots of variable strategies at late castle age
It would need a rework and it would be amazing
I have to admit watching aoe2 games is Hella boring. The formula of the ages doest help the viewing experience. That's why starcraft2 still had a bigger audience since there are alot of people watching games instead of playing them
For me SC2 is very boring to watch, the game is all about who has faster fingers to spam the keyboard, which over shadows the strategy aspect of the game. Not to mention one spell cast will end the entire match in a few seconds, which is boring and ridiculous to watch. And the game balancing is absolute laughable due to how OP zerg is.
Aoe are slower pace game allowing players to spend more time on actual strategy rather than trying to spam the keyboard.
AoE2 is just a slower game that is more about siege of strategic positions. Battles cannot end instantly. Counterattacks don’t happen immediately. There is a lot more room for tech-switching and unit counters because you have the time to do so. SC2 definitely demands some strategy, but to say it isn’t a game of speed is a lie. That speed is what makes is conducive towards esports though.
In the end, I think the successes of these two franchises really demonstrates the room for innovation in RTS. You have two games with similar mechanics that play entirely differently that appeal to different people.
Zerg is by far the most difficult race to play bro…
AOE2 and SC1 are milion times better then AOE4 and SC2.
wrong
OK boomer.
the only sane take in this comment section
@@flyingsteaks you mean stupid, right?
@@Amoeby nope, I don't mean stupid at all, I think a lot of choices made by sc2 dev team were shit
Lol. This game looks like ass.
Why would any pro want to be a Age 4 pro? The game honestly blows. Age 2 DE is a million times better.
age 2 is better competitive but "million times" you are coping hard.
@@HenriqueRJchikino it is exactly 1 million times better, fact. Heretic!
@@HenriqueRJchiki how is it cope moron? I didn't expect it to be good and it isn't. You're the one coping if you're saying it's good. You don't even know what coping is smh
@@Bagginsess Objectively wrong.
Why is better? Single player content but i thinks aoe 4s multiplayer is just better.
AoE 4 has so much worse aesthetics. It feels like the difference between modern and early 2000s MTG cards. They try to make it more appealing to children, in the end it looks like rounded dull designs.
I don't get the point of Microsoft not shutting down AoE 2 when launching their new game...the AoE2 players wouldn't have left the license...
Eat dirt. You want a repeat of WC3 reforged or the death of CSGO? Why should AOE2 build shutdown when is most played and popular AOE? Even if it was the least played why would it deserve the axe? Why don't we shut down Broodwar for SC2 then?
@@Bagginsess Dont even talk to him man, clearly he has no clue what he talking about.
@@ahuzel I'm pretty he's just a troll looking to bait
@@Bagginsess why not...A lot of people use Windows 10 but they have to switch to Windows 11...And CSGO isn't dead, it's reborn into CS2...and CS2 is alive, with the best players...Nostalgy is for old men...we don't use steamboats anymore...
@@domidel MS isn't deleting windows 10 they are justing stopping support for it. CSGO is dead.