Rome DLC sneak peek + civ break down (AoE2)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 13 чер 2024
- Here's an early access look at the new Rise of Rome DLC, featuring a port of Age of Empires 1, as well as a brand new civilization - the Romans!
0:20 Are they playable in ranked?
0:35 Return of Rome (AoE1 remake)
1:35 Romans in AoE2
6:30 Roman death match gameplay
___________________________________________________________
Patreon: / spiritofthelaw
Background music from Epidemic Sound: www.epidemicsound.com
Game: Age of Empires II Definitive Edition - Ігри
The idea of centurions being a sort of "general" unit for your army, applying a bonus to them in a range, is really cool
Similar to how War Chiefs and flags work in aoe 3
@@MrToddino
Yeah, AoE3 had this since the first expansion way back in ye olden days. And they greatly expanded it.
Very similar to the total war games.
@@MrToddino or the chinese general unit in AoM
I agree, at least as long as the buffs don't stack.
What really bothers me as a history fan though is the fact that they're riding a horse. Basically no centurion has ever ridden a horse into battle. They're supposed to fight with the foot soldiers and be an example of bravery. Giving them a horse contradicts the very reason why they are inspiring to their comrades. It doesn't even make any sense in terms of "well, if they had access to a horse, surely they would've used it." No. Ko they wouldn't. Not only does a single horse not give any advantage when fighting in the front lines, it also makes you an easy target for any kind of missile from enemies targeting leaders. Why would you do that when you could fight in the shieldwall covered by your allies?
I get Rome vs Spanish may look weird but let's be real, Spanish vs Goths already looked weird. I mean, you're talking about a 1000 year gap already.
Also, Spanish are direct descendants from the Goths (or Visigoths, in that regard). Huns also aren't particullary medieval enough to justify being in the game, so West Rome is more than an acceptable civ at this point.
And let's not forget the fact that the Aztecs won against the Spanish in the Montezuma campaign, with them staying intact up to AoE 3.
And that in AoE 3 the Aztecs can fight the Mexicans while having technically the same Home City.
To be fair, Goths are a such a diverse civilization that you could argue that there was a Goth civ representative in Crimea up to 1475. Google "Principality of Theodoro" or "Gothia" (I can't share links here).
Do you want to tell me that Vikings didn't fight Aztecs on Arabia's deserts?
Having aoe1 and 2 in the same game is honestly a dream come true for me
Same, even though I love AOE DE, it preserved the jankiness of the old game which did not age well, while AOE2 gameplay is, as we now, timeless. Its the best of both worlds.
Yup. This is gonna finally be what I had hoped the original AOE DE was going to be. Ancient era, but with AOE2’s QOL improvements.
@@theeliteelite1873 they scammed us with AoE 1 DE. The real DE is the DLC in AoE 2
Exactly! I dreamed about this for ages!❤
@@kibathefang6022 nah, looks more like the progress of things.
I like how the lack of good trash units makes them rely on gold, together with not having bbc so their late game suffers, which fits the roman history 11
So you should team with someone with bonsues to trade carts?
Rome with a Spanish Ally would be pretty amazing.
I also like how it thematically contrasts with the Byzantines who are at their best in trash wars.
I don't think their late game actually suffers though. They have cheap and faster firing ballistics scorpions that are better in melee. It's only bad once gold runs out which it doesn't in team games. Militia line and scorpion line with a handful of centurion is already fairly gold light.
It would be cool if they made them the only civ other than Turks to have completely unviable trash.
Finally, a civ with a longsword evolution that doesn't ditch the shield!
They lack the final armor upgrade, they better use well those shields! 11
Historic late mediveal Swordsmen did ditch the shield after the invention of full plate armor, but give that the WRE dies in the first 150 years of AoE2's setting this makes more sense.
@@SirAroace the main reason for dropping the shield was looser formations thanks to smaller scaled battles.
@@LegioXXI well yes and no, it was still mostly that full plate made it so the advantage of a shield was less then that of a longer two-handed sword
@@SirAroace And by "two-handed sword", you mean "polearm".
"Gonna feel a little weird seeing them go up agianst someone like the Spanish"
Yeah... unlike those classic battles between the Inca's and Chinese in Scandinavia. >__>
American civs and east asia did seem to have some contact according to some discovered artifacts, and nords did fight in the americas
@@nemou4985 Bruh.
Also these guys look more like the later Roman Empire which, guess what, was contemporary with the Huns and Goths so....
@@rhel373 It was ONLY contemporary with the Huns, and only for a very short time, and furthermore, Huns were only added to showcase AOE2 begins with the fall and destruction of Rome.
@@nemou4985 yep and the vietnamese fought the italians on socotra /s it's just a game it really doesn't matter
The Dromon is also given to a couple of other civs as well taking away cannon galleon from them.
@@jishb2505 - It’s confirmed. The Huns have them.
I always thought they should be an alternative to the cannon galleon and we finally got it
Byzantines as well would be cool.
@@Geffalrus1984 the byzantines also get them. As well as the goths
good thing they are affected by siege engineers, is not much, but is more than nothing
I really love the flavourful part of how they made sure to avoid giving the Romans anything gunpowder-related, even to the point of replacing the cannon galleon with a more fitting "naval siege" type of unit
You do realise other civs lack cannon galleon? And gunpowder? It's really not that difficult
That being said, all civs still have petards.. holdup!! 😂
@@08vinsterthey use pure determination and loyalty as replacement for gunpowder
I dunno why people get upset about Romans being outside the appropriate time period. We have huns fighting aztecs and loads of other unhistoric match ups already :P.
Yea, I don't blame people for having that quick reflex response since I did too, but it just takes a quick moment to remember what game this is and how unhistorical it is already.
exactly
Karen gotta complain 🤭
There was people upset?
@@Shero1337 there were people raging at an "antiquity" civ being in aoe2 11
Emperor Augustus: "Quintilius Varus, give me back my legions!"
Forgotten Empires Team 2000+ years later: "We got you!"
The Dromon is definitely more than it seems. It’s almost like having an Onager on water where the Cannon Galleon was almost like having a Bombard Cannon on water.
The fact that other civilizations are getting them too is also a nice touch. We got a new unit to start studying for hybrid and water maps.
Agreed, it makes the Dromon potentially much more devastating against land units and other ships than the canon galleon can be.
@@RoulicisThe finally the spanish cannon galleon and korean turtle ship will have a good match!
Wait, so Dromon isnt exclusive only for Romans?
@@konradpyszniak976 Byzantines, goths and huns get them too.
@@vitussvit THE HUNS 😱😱😱
Scorpionbros, it's our time
I really really like the idea of a unique unit replacing a later unit in a line like the legionaries do. makes it so much better to work into a composition and fits the "theme" better for immersion too. wish it was more common.
Cough *Aztec Champions* cough
Completely agree …I’ve been wanting them to replace the vikings men at arms line with the Nordic warrior for a while
@@user-xo9ig8kc3u You have now units like the polish Hussars (heavy cav which famously saved Vienna in 1683) who have by far worse stats than roman cav.... Yup immersion pure. I guess some infinity stones were involved to make this happen. Age of Empire seems refers to a time period over 2000 years. I wonder when they are going to introduce the US and nukes.
@@nostalji75 What a stupid comment, to compare two cavalry units with nuclear weapons
@@TheRubenMar you missed the point. And instead ofasking to clear up your misconception you decleared my example as stupid. Thats stupid. Maybe google the word hyperbole. Gl.
romans look similar to slavs. Good infantry, decent cav with a nice eco bonus on top. The difference is that romans look a lot more gold centric and peak at castle age
Good comparison, and Slavs get significantly better as the game goes by, with the farm bonus + hussars being best late imperial, along with druz champs + siege rams being a late game comp , considering the cost of druZ it kicks in much later than legionaries advantage
One of the pillars of AoE2 content creator! Been following you since 2015 and I'm happy you're still keeping it up with the good content for us AoE2 fans to enjoy.
Glad I have done the Sack of Rome achievement already. I feel like it will be much harder now, with units having more meele armor and a charge attack.
According to the wiki, legionaries also have a +4 against infantry. If that's there on launch, then they are far and above better than champions even with supplies. They'd kill fully upgraded champions in 4-5 hits depending on charge bonus hits while taking 7 hits from champions due to the 2 base armor and +4 armor from upgrades and bonuses.
That may be a mistake left from the scenario unit legionaire, who is just a reskined jaguar warrior
@@prussianblue9316 Thought the same, but the campaign-only Legionary has lower bonuses.
That is an interesting comparison, but you need to compare Vs buffed champs, not generic. How do they fair Vs Slavs (druz doing +5 dmg to everyone) or Vs Japanese with high attack speed
And even then, you don't fight champs with champs, so iaw you actually need to compare Vs the things they will be fighting. iaw Malian champs are better Vs archers, viking champs are significantly better Vs cav.
Maybe combined with centurions they're still the best "champs", but remember they're also more expensive with a weaker eco at that stage, than a number of civs (like Slavs)
If you remake the Roman vs. Barbarians scenario with the new Romans, it will be really cool!
The problem is that... you don't have legionaries in the Romans vs. Barbarians scenario because the ending age is Castle. If he made Barbarians limited to Castle while the romans Imperial and give the latters a leg up by having them start in Feudal or Castle but with less resources I think that could work out.
I really like this idea that the Romans are great for early game and will probably suck in late imperial.
"Honestly, I'm just stoked we have another unit that has a cape."
Totally agree 😂
Celts, Goths and Huns: "Rome, i thought you were dead!?"
Rome: "nope".
i like the little gameplay commentary bit at the end, a nice little change from the more rigid structure you usually do, both are great and its nice to see them in the same video
I love the idea of reskinning the Champion. I was always an advocate of having little more historical accuracy or special units for every civ in Imperial.
Legionary "charge" attack should be a thrown Pilum - short range, low damage and briefly strips armour or short range, moderate damage
This guy gets it.
Late Roman Comitatenses typically no longer used the pilum.
These are late legions.
Love how the Romans don't just have anachronistic paladins, but their unique unit is basically an even beefier heavy cavalry
To preserve a tiny bit of historic accuracy, the Romans should actually be able to build Castras(like donjon) using either villagers or legionaries. A Roman castle simply looks so weird.
The word "castle" comes from "Castra", and big Roman forts were rare because by the time the Romans had enough development they built smaller but more numerous forts (most Castrae you see are like that), but set the basis for castles.
@@rahzoriel2103 yes, so a donjon-style building fits better than castles. And Castrae irl were actually built by the soldiers.
@@rahzoriel2103 so you say that romans should get something more similar to Krepost?
Think donjon, but larger in size, wooden/stone structure, throwing javs instead shooting arrows. ;)
The legionary should definitely have the ability to build palisade walls. Kind of iconic for building quick defensive fortifications after Marius’ reforms.
TV Tropes is gonna gave a field day on this, especially on the "Embedded Precursor" page.
I like this DLC simply because of all the mecanical changes it implies might end up coming later on to the game :
Units that buffs other nearby units.
A lot of mecanics that weren't usable back when the game was first released become available for more content, and just like the burgundian's arrival led to more units with special abilities we can expect more "officer-like" unique units to make their appearance later on.
They ported the AoE1 civs up and the AoE3 abilities down, lol.
This does reminds me that the April patch gave Celtic castle a similar healing aura to nearby friendly units, which works almost the same way as centurions in RoR.
@@Alias_Anybody technically the aom special ability than aoe3 because they automatically trigger when off cooldown.
@@zonetropper i think he meant the auras with the aoe3 abilities
@@Alias_Anybody Remember Empire Earth abilities and auras, too. Especially in second part of series.
Spirit, now we really need an updated version of Romans VS Barbarians.
Romans are already in the campaigns. Of course they should be in the game. Just make their late game tech tree limited. Also pumped for AOE1
With all the space for other potential games, Maybe we'll get a definitive edition of Galactic Battlegrounds...? One can dream.
IP problem with EA and Disney. Unless it's a mod
Not as long as EA got the licence for making SW games I'm afraid >
Wasn't there recently a rumour about a new Star Wars strategy game? I mean, does EA even still have a studio with RTS experience? Because otherwise we can most likely expect some Plants vs Zombies or Clash of Clans ripoff for mobile.
@@Alias_Anybody There is a rumor about EA preparing a remake for the "Empire at war" game, but it's pretty baseless so...
@@RoulicisThe
Last I heard, they lost the exclusivity license for Star Wars.
I can't believe they did not go for a formation bonus here. Testudo formation
or Turtle 🐢 formation for the legionaries should not only look iconic but also provide them with e.g. extra pierce armor. That would be such a cool dimension to add to the game.
I think a comparison between Western Roman Empire (Romans) and Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantines) would be a nice idea.
Also, do they speak latin?
They have different voiceline with byz and italians
I guess that latin
Rogan?
@@steretsjaaj2368 immortal
Erectus sukatah. :v
@@steretsjaaj2368
Yep. Forgot it was AoE1 technically.
👍
They should rename the Italians to the Lombards. It would keep the trend of European civs having their early medieval names (franks, teutons, etc.)
Oh the Comitatenses tech affecting knights is a very on-point history reference to the roman tacit of Hammer and Anvil. Where segie will force the enemy into attacking your infantry (were there charge attack comes from) and while there tide up doing that your Roman Heavy Caverity will loop around and 'hammer' them from behind. I know it wasn't what we called knights that did that but for all intentions it was the roman version of a knight that did do so.
Tbf I won't be surprised if we see a nerf to their cavalry, lose blood lines even. Otherwise it'll just become another knight civ with infantry support
The high food cost on longswords simply prevents them from being overly viable
I would love to see the legionnaire added to the byzantine roster if you did a technology like "the ways of old" where you remplaced champion by legionnaires and skirmishers by velites.
I'm surprised the Romans don't have better skirmishers because of the velites and pila
2v2 Rome and Byzantium vs Goths and Huns
I really like how the Romans all come together as this nice war machine. The cavalry buffing the Legionnaires is great.
Thanks Spirit we always enjoy your gameplay
The original AoE time period is immediately post-Western Roman fall, but there were Roman states that held out past 476ad. Gaul remained extremely Roman-influenced long into the Frankish Kingdom, and of course many Romano-British states survived long into the 500s. And like Spirit said this civ is clearly modelled on the Late Roman Empire, so it’s not as inaccurate as you would think!
And then Huns and Goth campaigns literally involve fighting the pre-fall Western Roman anyway.
Ima be roleplaying Kingdom of Soissons
Not to mention even after the "fall" of the Western Roman Empire a lot of the roman institutions remained intact in Italy for quite a while, even under the rule of the Ostrogoths.
The roman senate for example remained for at least a century longer than the western empire itself.
Ironically, the people complaining about ahistoricity are the ones with the least historical understanding. The dunning-kruger valley of history nerd gamers, basically. These would be the people whose mental model of history is overly simplified and thus think there is a clean boundary between antiquity and the middle ages.
Meanwhile those with a more detailed understanding realize that the rest of the game is already full of ahistorical things already, and the addition of Rome doesn't even make it to the top of the list of ahistorical things in this game. And since you're already enjoying an RTS game with these ahistorical features, there's no reason to pick on the Rome addition in particular.
If you wanna play more historical things there are other games. There's an entire spectrum between arcade games to historical simulators. AoE is not on either extreme.
@@lekhakaananta5864 this guy really doesn't think siege onagers existed in the Aztec Empire
"I thought they might shy away from Romans having knights for historical reasons (citing a focus on the Western Roman Empire)"
This is a representation of late Rome, though, who did have phenomenally well trained and equipped cavalry soldiers, both fully armoured and versatile in fighting style. They're actually a nightmare civ to do right in a game like this because they really are a jack of all trades that is good at pretty much anything from a purely military standpoint.
Whilst the infantry legion was still the main force at least until the middle of the 5th century, the cavalry were absolutely top tier.
Edit: archers as well, come to think of it. I'd guess it's a historical accuracy forefit for the sake of balance?
Having both games in the same client and being able to switch between them at the press of a button on top of being able to play AoE1 in the AoE2 engine is like a perfect dream come true. What an awesome update!
Ranked on 16th will look wholesomely like the meme on cloned spidermen in circle pointing fingers at eachother, color fitting and all - unintentional mirrored
Hi Spirit! You are the best AoE youtuber! Nice sneak peek!
Age of Empires 1+2 Re-Boot Camp
I'm gonna love playing the Romans here. They seem like a versatile Infantry civ to play and will give me the chance to build up mass Scorpions since I haven't done it since the first month I played Civ 2 on the Xbox.
And their Scorpion buff makes sense since they're just Ballistas, like their unique tech, so Romans should have better Scorpions thanks to their famous mass use of them.
Can't wait for the Civ overview of them once they come out, even though this technically could countvas an overview itself.
Yeah, kudos to them on the infantry and scorpion combo. A bit iffy on the cavalry and water fronts though since the Romans were not great on either, especially water.
@@AhaanM War Galley's in the game are based on the roman navy, they beat everyone on the sea with their ballista ships, if their navy was weak they wouldn't have been able to conquer the Mediterranean. They lacked cavalry but they made better ships than everyone else they faced, not at first but they quickly built ships that countered whatever their enemies had in every sea war during their rise.
@@Johan-hm5uc Not sure about the AoE galley but the galley as a ship was a Greek ship, not a Roman one. The Romans relied on the Greeks and Egyptians in their empire for their naval prowess (much like they relied on various tribes and vassals for their cavalry). They expanded under the Republic during and after the war with Carthage but declined with the Empire since the threats faced by them were mostly land based. The Byzantines (Eastern Romans Empire) had a much better navy than the WRE ever did, especially since it survived so much longer and was able to benefit from the tech advances. Anyhow, my point was that the WRE was never as potent as that of most other states in the AoE2 period and it would've been nice to have some sort of acknowledgement of that.
Started the game AoE II over 20 years ago. Then I lost the copy of it by accidentally deleting it and couldn't find it again. Got to play AoE I for the next half a decade before being to play AoE II again. This DLC will be amazing to me for sure
This is the perfect structure for a civ video, review + best moments gameplay
Wouldn't mind seeing Dromon-style ships given to the civs that don't get cannon galleons, would make them feel a bit less useless on water
they literally did that with this dlc lmao
Good info!! Seems like they want people to use infantry and scorpian. Two units that aren't used much. I like it.
Knight line kinda makes sense, late western roman empire saw strong population stratification with the Equites class being kinda protoknights/small nobility.
Thank you for indirectly showcasing the charge attack recharge time. It looks modest for the damage increase provided. I wonder if "Going Above and Beyond" will improve the charge rate and/or damage. Will be fun once this comes out.
Legionary could be a regional unit, shared with the byzantines. They could also share castle skins. They are both Romans, after all.
A better idea. Have the Viking Berserk shared with the Byzantines, & call it the Varangian Guard!
@@Boatswain_Tam If I could give every civ 2 unique units, I would definitely give the Byzantines the Varangians. Another cool idea would be the "Siphonator" or "Cheirosiphon" (it means something like "hand-held-siphon operator"). Supposedly the Eastern Romans had some rare troops with hand held Greek-fire - throwers (there is even a drawing of such a soldier in a manuscript). A walking fireship, total badass.
@@spear-slayer3159 we already have the scenario Editor unit, the flamethrower
Give that to the Byzantines
AoE2 starting to explore more unique affects like Aura's for units seems pretty neat, looking forward to see even more in the future. However I feel like there is a lack of visibility there, people should be able to identify if a unit is buffed. My idea would be a red tint on the unit or maybe red weapons or a symbol/effect above their head.
I dont like that, like the shiny heroes from the campaings, and the voice acting
Or take a page out of Warcraft 3: a blue circle on their feet.
Age of Empires 3 did that nicely with Daimyo or War chief unit
Honestly there should be some buff effect but subtle, not like the whole shining unit (heroes were exxagerated by DE team, "researching" supernatural shine animation also looks immersion breaking, could have been a normal anim
I hope to see you cover the other civs for your next video. Also, is it confirmed that all AOE1 campaigns will be included in this DLC, or just those new three ones?
Thanks Spirit excited for Rome!
They look glorious! Their bonuses seem quite too strong, but I bet they'll be balanced for rank eventually.
It would probably be fun if all the civs get unique looking units despite having the same stats. That would make a better gaming emersion in my opinion. Like its kinda weird having European looking infantry and cavalry in every other civs. Just my take.
regional models? Empire Earth 2 did that, so after several matches you learned to recognize units, even if hadn't the same skin than yours
Yeah it's been my hope since AOE2 got put on steam that we would see something in the form of regional troop reskins
Something very appealing about Japanese yari spearman haha
Starwars Galactic Battlegrounds runs on the Aoe2 engine and does this.
So they can definitely do it too someday.
@@elduquecaradura1468 Im wondering if the devs ever make than happen would they make it a paid DLC or just a free patch. XD
@@Comradcommodore Yeah. Also loved the Chinese and Mongol swordsmen in AOE4. I hope they could do something like that in AOE2. It probably isn't hard?
i like that they got legionnaires in the style of the later roman empire. the classic legionnaires with the square shields and lorica segmentata looks cool, but is definitely over represented since it wasn't the typical look for roman soldiers for a big part of their history. plus it's definitely more fitting for the time period of aoe2, well at least it's closer.
I like the infantry synergy goin on here! I thought at first "isn't this a bit OP", but your demonstration at the end changed my mind, looks like they have a good spread of strengths and weaknesses. I do wonder if it would have been cool to design them so they make a good team with Byzantines so you can represent the west and eastern empire working together, but ah well. Anyway the late antique look of the units does help keep them at least in the same era as the Goths and Huns. I'm glad Byz is getting the Dromon too, since it was kind of their thing (are they keeping cannon galleon too? I hope so, they did actually use gunpoweder a couple times in the 1400s). Though honestly the western Romans having these naval bonuses at all is kinda weird, they were always pretty reluctant to do naval warfare.
If folks are upset that Rome in the medieval era is ahistoric, they should check out the time gap between Sumer and Rome in AoE1
Also I wonder how many of those people are upset about the Huns. lol
@@Nimroc Well, Attila played a big part in the fall of the WRE (which is considered by many the beginning of medieval era). And after his death there were still many Huns even some decades after the fall of the West. Most of them were absorved by other nomads like the Bulgars and Avars, but there were others who survived for centuries, like the North Caucasian Huns
@@DiocletianLarius
You can make similar arguments for the romans though, it isn't as if they ceased to exist in the west just because the western empire fell.
The senate and the roman elite in Italy for example still remained influential under the rule of Odoacer and later the Ostrogoths.
Not saying that there is anything wrong about having the Huns in the game, just that pretty much all of the arguments against the WRE fitting into the timeline applies just as much if not more to the Huns.
@@Nimroc Yeah, but they kinda exist already in the form of the "Byzantines", which like the Franks or the Britons, seems to be a very generic way to call Romans from different periods of "medieval" time (like Romans from Attila's era and also Manzikert ones). I get that WRE and ERE are different, but it's still some kind of stretch.
I too don't mind adding more content to the game, I totally love WRE faction, it's just that I understand why people would complain. I also saw that they added campaigns for Sargon of Akkad and Pyrrhus, but I don't know if it's part of the AoE1 "two-game system" or if we can actually play in AoE2 with 2300 b.C Sumerians😅
@@DiocletianLarius Though you could argue that the Byzantines is just as much a Greek faction as a Roman one.
Personally I see the Italian faction as the best argument against a WRE faction, but there as well the differences are large enough for it to work.
It isn't that I can't see why some people would complain, just that for me it is more of the opposite as for me having the WRE will make both the Huns and Goths feel less out of place.
Though if they had gone for an earlier version of the Romans rather than late empire then I would most likely have complained.
Not being good at trash units really makes sense, historically. Losing in the end because they ran out of gold and simply couldn't keep up with all the trash units the barbarians were throwing at them.
Ah, poetic.
This is EPIC, truly epic! Thanks for sharing :)
Seems like they kind of resurrected the Helepolis from AoE 1, my favorite unit in that game.
I just wish the Legionairs charged attack would have ~5 range and allow them to throw a pillum. Pilla are so iconic for the roman legionair and they already get a charged attack, so why not. Pillum attack could do pierce dmg instead, for balance purposes.
do 5 ranged damage (max) and have 5 rangem probably have the same bonuses than a skirmisher, wich would turn Legionnaires a weird and unexpected soft-counter to crossbows, wich is totally unexpected and can break the usual knight-crossbow combo
Pilum should have been represented in a skirm bonus
@@elduquecaradura1468 well, you only get the legionary in imp, so it's not gonna break the knight-crossbow combo, but I see where you are coming from gameplay-wise.
Imo, since pilla were mainly used for penetration of shields and armor, the attack should pack a punch and soften the enemy frontline.
The pillum is no longer used in the late roman age , they use throwing dart called a plumbata but did little damage instead for it mostly use to disrupt enemy formation.
@@justinkong9954 an infantry version of the Arambai basically would have been pretty cool. The low accuracy projectile idea is kinda fun. If legionaries could do a ratha type thing and switch from plumbata to melee with micro that could have been an interesting mechanic to micro with that would feel like a real Roman army, more than the charge attack idea
Like the idea of unique looking units replacing generic units such as champion. All civs should have unique skins for their units. If people think it would be so bad for competitive just allow it to be toggled, though I reckon people wouldn't have an issue recognising a unit with unique skin, a vill is obviously a vill regardless of what clothes and skin tone they are have.
Aoe3 and 4 already do this and they're both quite readable so I think they should do it.
Ethiopians still using the white unit sprites, or chinese having the arabic looking camel and such have always been weird to me lol
Wait that's really an argument against unique unit models? Christ people r so annoying lol
@@Comradcommodoreno it's not. Being readable for competitive play is seperate to historical immersion. We want unique units to increase our immersion in the world because it's dumb playing as a Chinese faction with European knights.
I love how nobody is talking abouth AoE4 anymore
Legionary also get a little damage bonus against infantry, so they have done some decent damage against bagains
Roman's are a totally fine addition considering we can have huns fighting incas, goths fighting Spanish and bohemians fighting Koreans
On the southpole.
I'm just really looking forward to replaying the AoE1 missions with AoE2 UI
that won't be a thing i think, afaik they only made some new campaigns for it, if you want to play the original aoe1 campaigns you will have to play aoe1
They are now the oldest civ in AoE 2! Also, by the looks of their units, they seem to be based around the very late roman empire, which makes this less weird!
I wish they brought back the original death sounds for the game as well as bringing all the campaigns from the old game to the new one.
Honestly, I hope a mod comes about that allows you to play with both aoe 1 AND aoe 2 civs in the same game. Balance will be a nightmare, but it would still be enjoyable
Yeah would definitely seem fun to do but like you said their respective tech trees are so different that it would be a balance nightmare
it would be funny to have ancient greeks vs byzantines
At that point just throw AoE3 in there too. I want to blast some stone age clubmen with Heavy Canons and Gatling Guns, f*ck balance.
@@Alias_Anybody at that point we're just making a new empire earth game 😂
so, will you update your old east-west roman map? ;P
SOTL does some amazing videos, and fast too!
I'm so excited for AoeI to join the ranks of AoeII !!!
Romans did in fact fight Spanish, but not the helmeted conquistadors we think of. The game covers such a broad era of history... it's an amazing game full of curiosities!
I dont ever make many scorpions, but the Romans having strong scorpions rather than boosted archers is a nice historical touch
Now the man of the apocalypse
Celts
Khemer
Slavs
and Rome
*5 doritos later*
-NERFED-
Did the centurion appearance change cause it used to look different having like golden armor and helmet
Both the Roman units have been changed from the ones we have in the editor.
would have been great to have a cap on the number of centurion you can have at a given time, depending on the number of legionary units alive
Can't wait till we see the same treatment for Galactic Battlegrounds and get the Empire as a new civ for ranked AOE2 multiplayer
3:09 As far as my classics teachings went, Romans came up with the concept of knights in the first place, which Western civilisations later adopted and then adapted. So knights for them feels fine.
How so?
I kind of agree, but I think it's a bit of a stretch. Rome had heavy cavalry mostly by copying Eastern Cataphracts, and thus it was used predominantly in the Eastern Empire. The Western Empire still relied on heavy infantry.
The knight seems to have developed more from heavily armored infantry riding their horses TO battle, but not INTO battle; they'd dismount and fight in a shield wall. As time progressed, however, the strength of a knee-to-knee cavalry charge with heavily armed and armored horsemen became apparent, so the knight we think of emerged. The evolution of the shield is kind of interesting to look at; the round Viking shield morphed into an elongated kite shield, to which straps were added to (probably) make it easier to carry while mounted on horseback. The shield kept getting shorter until the traditional knight's heater shield came into existence. Over the course of 400 years or so, the shield transformed from infantry-first to cavalry-first. It's not like every soldier used the same type of shield, but I like the developmental parallels.
My understanding is rather basic, so I'm sure that I'm missing some of the details.
Scythians, greeks.. all before Rome. Lammelar style..
@@dembro27 I don't know why, but now I'm thinking in an UU that can go in horseback and can be a decent light cavalry, able to dismount (slow animation to prevent exploits) and be able to fight on foot, being a better counterpart to pikeline, and have good melee armor but bad range resist
Not really though. The European high nobility largely goes back to Germanic warlords, starting to grant land and serfs to trusted loyalists which became lower nobility. At first, those proto-knights usually just rode to battle, basically being mounted infantry. Later the Franks started to adopt heavy melee cavalry under the Carolingians, either attributed to being a counter against Muslim cavalry or just due to the spread of stirrups making lances more effective. The concept spread over western and central Europe before Francia was partitioned.
Looks broken. Also, this thing of the charge attack is getting out of hand, it seems that they are trying to use it everywhere. It should not belong to infantry. It did not make sense with Urumis, and it does not make now. I like the idea of centurion as a general though, but given the fact that the infantry is already very good it sounds unbalanced
I appreciate the West Rome vs East Rome fight (red v blue/romans v byzantines) that you showcased :D
The video we’ve all bee waiting for
Honestly they aren't ahistorical here, they're based on the exact same period as the Goths, Huns, Celts, and early Byzantines (which is why all of those civs also get Dromon). Basically this is an early-mid Dark Ages Roman civ which is noticeable from the armour their unique units wear. People don't think about it much, but there were notable pockets of Roman civilization for quite a long time after Rome fell. King Arthur has been speculated to be a late Romano-Briton defending against the Saxon invasions, with his name and title being transliterated over time.
I thought King Arthur was supposed to be a Gaelic hero that the Brits adopted as theirs
Bro the Gaelic people are british
@@adolfhipsteryolocaust3443 I should have said "English" instead of Brit, true.
@@Copperhell144 well again, king Arthur fought against the "English": the angles and the saxons
@@adolfhipsteryolocaust3443 I didn't say otherwise?
Some interesting things in there and once again the devs had some ideas similar to my own, (this is just a weird thing i find neat). But they've gone with much more of a late roman empire style. It makes sense after a fashion. Whilst it's not the Era or style people think of when you say Romans, it's a lot easier to get into AoE2 without things getting super weird and janky. Fitting that classic Roman feel into AoE 2 is much harder than the super late Roman Empire as they had much worse cavalry and archers in that era, and a civ with bad or non-existent cavalry and archer lines is a nightmare to try and do if they're not camel heavy.
Absolutely, they frankly look a lot like what you could imagine 'Rome' becoming if it still was based in Italy with its poor horse terrain situation and its military tradition. I.E. They frankly look like Byzantines without the adoption of light and heavy cavalry and the assembly of anti-heavy cavalry elite units (Menlavions) or the technological inventions of the byzantines. (Ya know, the infantry-based flamethrower infantry that were supposed to be 2 per 100 men.)
@@WereScrib Yea i was like "this feels more like discount Byzantines than classic Romans"
I had actually written up a more classic era Roman Civ a while back when SotL was doing his custom civ videos and the amount of jankiness i had to work in was a real issue when it came to how it would playout. So i'm not surprised tos ee them go some other way. The only real suprise is the naval side, Romans did ok there historically, but it was never a focus for them AFAIK. I guess it's a way to try and give them a bit more identity.
Many bonuses from this civ are especially strong in the mid game to put the Romans close to "standard" civ in the imperial age. I think they should have gone even futher on the "old civ already established but not that much futur" aspect:
-Don't double the armor bonus, but give access to them an age earlier.
-replace the whole militia line with the legionnary with stat increasing each age (like the sergent) with stats almost similar to the militia line (without much researches to do and armor an age earlier for them they would be still be very good, just a bit subpar in imperial without the last armor upgrade).
-Same bonuses for the scorpions, but no heavy scorpions.
-For water, no galeons
8:50
A man after my own heart. Love me some capey bois!
I feel like AOE2 has gotten too big. The basics are awesome and have stood the test of time, but too much content is being added into it.
I like very much what they did with moving AOE to the AOE2 platform. Maybe they could add unique units and techs to that game. Having 18 civs makes sense and seems maneageable.
AOE 2 now has so many civilizations, that they're all overlapping each other, feels like it needs a reboot.
I just hate how the devs probably feel forced to give the civ too many buffs and bonuses to increase sales. Civ clearly has a bit too much going for it in every facet.
I don't think it's to boost sales, it just to make it more interesting to try the new toy
Do you think players think about how strong the civs in an expansion before they buy it? Do you think expansion civs are so OP that players need to buy them to win or have fun?
@@beganfish yes many do. Not everyone is here for fun many just care about winning and numbers.
@@redcastlefan Dude, nobody buys DLCs for AoE because they think they need those civs to win. That doesn't happen. Especially considering the BEST civs in the game have pretty much always been from the base game. If they wanna win, they play Franks, Huns, Mayans. Not DLC civs.
@@beganfish I'm not here to argue with your head cannon buddy.
My hunch is that the aoe2 Western Romans are based on the composition of the Roman military in Late Antiquity by which point heavy cavalry was the backbone of their armies (although not to the exclusion of heavy infantry, etc.)
That is one powerful civ.
Also another contender for usable infantry in castle age. I do wonder if they won't have a nerf coming in the near future, but we'll see soon enough.
Nice touch on making their scorpion line their archer replacement, though.
Finally another civ where that unit, with this name, actually makes sense. ^^
Romans seem waaaaay overtuned to get people to buy it, then nerf them a month/2 down the line. they keep doing this
Romans were my favorite civ back in aoe1, so I'm happy they remain mostly true to form. Having mounted centurians is a weird change though.
I remember playing Age of Empires Rise of Rome from CD in 2003. Friend allowed me to borrow cd disc. It was fun. I remember the blue logo on shortcut. It made my fantasy go wild. And the main menu too. And that music. Old good. Fun.
What an amazing first impression.
But I must admit, I was hoping for a "officialization" of the Rome at War mod, even more thinking that They were not giving updates because they were working with Microsoft (and also indirectly gave me hope of the same for Age of Chivarly: Hegemony). But overall looks like it's gonna be an amazing DLC, and also opens the door for some new content in the future.
PS: This may be kind of a dumb detail, but I was wondering what architecture set would have the romans, because for me was between the AOE1 Roman arch. or the AOE2 Mediterranean style xD
2:00 double the E in effect too! Talk about double the effeect! :P
*Really* strange oversight to me the Legionary charge attack wasn't a pilum ranged attack.
Man i remember that when I was like 10, I noticed that both AoE Rise of Rome and AoE 2 The Conquerors had the same file name for their maps, so I tried to import all the campaign maps onto AoE 2, only for the game to crash. Except for a single one where you stated with Broad Swordsmen while the rest of the terrain was broken with textures on textures (lots and lots of elephant corpses for some reason) , in AoE 2 it was called Heavy Swordsman apart from different stats it was also quirky as only half of the 8 sprites were visible, making him both invisible (to the player) and not selectable if it faced a certain position.
I had quite some fun creating scenarios with "romans" by using them, albeit they were wonky to use (had to create a team selection group to not lose them). Now after almost 2 decades we're finally getting romans in the game (yes I know they added the heavy swordsman in the game for years, but still).
If you still have both the original releases and are curious about it should give it a try.
Everything here makes sense, the implication of them not reaching a full imperial age makes sense historically and the ballistas and "command structure" implied by the Centurion bonus is representing the Romans fine. Personally i would have done something crazy like the more legionaires stand close to each other their armor goes up to simulate a roman shield phalanx formation. Maybe reduced arrow damage while standing still (like they had planed all the way back in the early development of Age 2). But this is more than fine and they pose a great counter to Ballista Elephants now.