Removing springals and in exchange decreasing the damage that trebuchets do to structures would sound awesome. Trebuchets are so cool, but they are quite situational and a keep sieges don't last long if you have multiple ones. If keeps would also have lower attack range and Mangonels would do less crazy unit splash the resulting gameplay would seem much more entertaining and also reaslistic
I agree with most changes here I'm worried about some of the changes. You're making siege less micro dependant and take away options on how to use them. Cannons, english and byz trebs, siege towers and rams, and mangonels become more one dimensional. - Cannons can't target units anymore. I get that we need to make cannons worse without springalds, but I would rather make it worse in damage and range to stop them from sniping siege. Then it's still possible to use them in combat, but worse than other options. - English and byz trebs lose all uniqueness. Instead I would test making the splash damage deal 50% of it's damage to allies as well, and if it leads to a bad experience from players we remove it. - Mangonels can't be dodged anymore. Not letting mangonels be dodged makes a mangonel fight all about presplitting, and while that is a fine thing I still think that dodging in the middle of a fight is such a cool thing to be done as a viewer that we need to keep it. I would test 50% of damage being friendly fire instead as an experiment like with the trebs to see if it's fine. - I don't hate making rams do the attack that the unit inside does, and I like making the siege tower like a ladder. I would add that the siege tower should cost more, and also be able to be attached to wooden walls. My problem with you wanting to do this is the reasoning behind it, with you wanting to remove cheese from the game. I think that having unexpected strategies that punish you from being greedy is a good thing, and transport micro is the only way normal units can dive defensive buildings in the early game and punish people who are not building units. It adds depth to the game. I'd be fine with losing it if it was possible to dive tcs in the early game, but because homing missiles are on them you die outside of range anyways. Even though your changes would fix siege it would take away much depth, it's like taking away the option to build barbican or mongol tc next to the opponent instead of balancing around it, oh wait. This is also coming from the guy that invented the siege tower cheese so I might be biased. Also rebauldequins have aoe damage, it's just very hard to notice because it kills everything except elephants and some siege in one shot.
You raise some good points, thx for the feedback! I think some of my changes could be revised a little bit after testing, but it is important to somehow address the issues. Take the mangonel dodging as an example - is it a "cool" mechanic? Yes, of course - it can feel good when you dodge mangonel shots, and it feels better to hit with mangonels if you know it is not guaranteed. But it also raises the stakes, pulling too much attention to itself. Now, you don't have time to micro units in a fight (focus fire with ranged, surround with melee/cavalry, etc.), and you need to make springalds. With mangonels shooting more quickly and in a smaller area, I think that "skill expression" and coolness of mangonels could be preserved - imagine having to dodge shots that fly quickly and more often. But it would become just one more thing that you could micro in a fight (among spearmen brace baiting, focus firing with multiple groups, surrounds, ...), and not THE thing you need to watch for
I actually would like to see mangonel shots be _easier_ to dodge. If they worked like they do in aoe2 where they don’t require you to actively change direction, but merely keep moving, you could dodge them more easily. This would make them feel less oppressive than they do now, without removing their ability to be an effective counter against large numbers of weak units like the suggestions in the video would do.
Cost for cost siege war is really popular because a lot of landmark in Aoe4 are keep or défensive structure, If somebody think the good way too attack a keep or whatever is to make springal and siege he have wrong, the way is too go melee unit and after siege. We can think anti-siege are too Op but they balanced the game in the good way, make more unit and not siège. I think the only change i will make is the range of the springal, the springal is the counter of mangonnel normaly it's doesn't not deserve to touch so much.
going to have to disagree with these suggestions, or maybe the premise that by making siege less powerful it will create more "dynamic" fights. I think mangonels in their current state work very well as a high risk high reward comeback mechanic. if I fast castle, and I'm getting zhuge nu/spear pushed in feudal, if I manage to build and properly position/micro a mango, I can force my opponent back. but if mangonels are only, as you suggest, able to kill 2 ranged units (and that's before taking into account loose/line formations) per shot, there just flat out is not a way to get back into the game. Like this would all be well and good if the rock-paper-scissors counter system worked as intended, but it as we all know it does not, because once you hit a critical mass of ranged units (~50), horsemen/knights cease to be effective, since they can only attack the outside 10 units at a time, while all 50 archers/xbows can attack at every shot. so in the prior example, there just is no comeback mechanic. if your opponent has 15 spears, and 30 archers/longbows, there is no way to beat that with castle units while you are getting pressured. if you are building knights/MAA two at a time, and your opponent is building archers 4 at a time, you just will never be able to get back in the game. So I strongly disagree that this will make fights more interesting or dynamic. I think it will have the opposite effect. I think it will lead to a lot of 1-1-1 compositions where both players just A-move their big dumb armies at each other much more common, and the player with the slightly better macro wins. just "I have a composition that has counters against every unit type (spear-xbow-horsemen for example), and I have more guys than you, so I win". it will make fast castle as a strategy essentially unplayable, since the feudal all in player will always have more units than you and everything you can build is only a soft counter and comes in too slowly. sure, maybe in post-imperial the "6 springalds and 3 mangos vs 7 springalds and 2 mangos" gameplay is a bit feels-bad, but I actually think the decision making around siege (when to go for first siege unit, do you open mangonel or springald, when do you push with your siege, do you avoid it entirely and try to dive the enemy siege with proper micro/flanking, archer splitting to dodge mango shots) is actually very meaningful and interesting and expresses a lot of skill. idk I'm sure I'm in the minority here, but siege/springald wars are kind of boring, I find archer-ball/MAA-ball a-move gameplay 10x more boring
the one thing I would append to that as *my* only suggestion for fixing the current state of siege, is that there should only be one vil able to repair a siege unit at a time, or it should only be repaired at the rate of one vil no matter how many are on it. That is one part of the current implementation of siege I find incredibly annoying, because now even when you properly micro/flank your horsemen onto a mango, if they have 6 vils repairing it, you can't kill the mango at all, and your units get cleaned up while trying to. that is definitely feels-bad gameplay
Thank you for your critique! I don't fully agree with it, and I will explain why. First of all, I think that mangonels can still be powerful against ranged units, without them being able to destroy whole masses. When the game just launched, springalds (which are single target) used to deal 70 damage to all other units, and each competitive game degraded into springald spam. So, mangonels being less AOE-based wouldn't make them useless, if you properly balance the dps About your example with zhuge nu rush - there are other ways to counterplay it, and I wouldn't say that rushing mangonel is a good way. With 40+ zhuge nu, it is not difficult to snipe a mangonel; and if you have the units to protect it, you could also go for more units to beat zhuge nu. You could even go for a keep if you skip siege workshop + mangonel. (though this whole example shows why zhuge nu need to be changed, not why mangonels are needed) And though I agree that playing springalds + mangonels requires a lot of micro and transitional skill, it doesn't feel fun or interesting to play. In my opinion, there are ways to express skill and have more fun in this game, that are getting downplayed because of siege micro - like microing ranged units, charging/surrounding with cavalry, making forward static defenses, even microing monks if you go for them
@@gijoe3211you’re not alone here. I also think the suggestions in this video miss the point, and I think the examples you gave are exactly _why_ it’s a problem. As far as healing, I think the answer isn’t necessarily to change how healing works, or maybe not to change it as dramatically as you suggest, but actually to increase the damage your horsemen are doing. Two or three horsemen should be able to easily outdamage 6-10 repairing villagers. And even if not being repaired, they should be able to kill it faster than spears can arrive at your horsemen, if those spears were not already properly in position to protect the siege.
Great Video, Most changes are good, but too drastic in my opinion: Remove Springalds and culverins: Yes please (maybe leave some civ unique weaker exeptions if this is somehow balancable) Mangonel dmg and aoe: i Think what u are proposing makes using mangonels feel very bad as an aoe dmg tool. I would just reduce the dmg overall make Bonus dmg vs ranged and lower the aoe Radius and maybe make them slightly more expensive. So that if u invest enough ressources u still can get that big aoe dmg but on a much higher cost. I Think the way u should counter counter mangonels and siege in general should be to try to flank with cavalry which leads to a way more fun expirience, where u have to Position ur spearmen more precisly. At the end all of this doesnt Matter at all because relic doesnt care about this game anyway.
Thanks to vortex everyone from Reddit to twitch to youtube has now been discussing the issues of AoE. I hope the developers consider these suggestions and also be given the chance to Improve this game.
I really appreciate the level of thought you’ve put into this, and I’d like to see more essays like this from you and from others. But with respect, I disagree with almost every point you’ve made. Nerfing mangonels in the way you describe completely undermines their entire purpose. They’re _supposed_ to be for countering large masses of individually-weak units. Your suggestion turns them into counters to strong single units. Big mango shots are major hype moments when spectating; you would remove that dramatic and dynamic change in the state of play. Removing springalds removes an important powerful counter to enemy siege units. I do think springald vs springald gets boring, so maybe reducing the damage they can do to each other somehow would help. But also, make cavalry, especially light cavalry, a much stronger counter to siege of all kinds (including springalds) would be a good change. I do like the idea of rams garrisoning fewer units but being able to shoot out. The change you suggest to the cheirosiphon, though, might be the worst one of all. The defining feature of them is that because they shoot fire rather than hitting with a physical ram, they also cause damage to surrounding units. Removing that removes their unique feature and also breaks verisimilitude. My experience has also been that the damage they do is already far too low to be worthwhile anyway. I would change them to be less effective against buildings, but have their area of effect fire damage be much more noticeable and reliable. Siege towers obviously need a buff, and what you suggest would help, but I think the bigger problem is how little stone walls see use, and how easy they are to destroy with other siege anyway, making the siege tower redundant even if it _did_ work perfectly. Not to mention the difficulty of then climbing down the opposite side. I think along with improving the usability of siege towers, we need a buff to stone walls, and also to the mechanic of placing units _on top_ of stone walls.
Hi you ar so true !!!! I hope developer will see this video. Siege need to not slow down the game and people dont have to turtle under wall/keep and siege !!! Well done
I would start by doubling the pop of the entire siege (Regarding the bombard, trebuchet and battering rams, perhaps not much would be raised) and let's see.
Nest of bees needs a nerf the very worst. In FFA 15 nest of bees can be used as bombards/ magonels and springalds at the same time. It’s become the new great bonbard at this point. There is legitimately no counter to palace guard/nest of bees spam.
Heavy disagree on mangonels. Their role is exactly countering unit masses, its entirely your fault if you mass spears+arbalests but forgot to make some springalds to counter mangos which directly counter your formation. Without mango there's basically no counter to unit spam but another unit spam, not even keeps can kill massed MAA.
You want to have a counter unit to infantry masses, makes sense. But how do you deal with mass siege then? With some protection, it destroys any other unit composition, and counters don't matter anymore. Without going mass siege yourself, you have to stop fighting it and try to raid Besides, even if we let mangonels counter unit masses, right now it is too powerful. One mangonel can take care of 30 crossbowmen. Resource difference is 4:1 here, there is no other counter unit in the game that can be this effective
@@blidge1 I'd honestly prefer it how it was done in aoe2: cavalry counters siege, siege counters ranged, ranged counters spears, spears counter cavalry. Springs are really the issue in aoe4 because they just counter themselves so it often becomes springald micro fest. But that's not the only issue because aoe4 balance is structured way more vertically compared to 2. I just don't really like that in the end you are always basically forced to make army because if you remove siege hard counters will cease to exist for most units.
It's a bold suggestion, bolder than on I think would actually be implemented. You are suggesting a lot of stuff be removed, and really narrowing the scope of seige: im not quite certain how this would be recieved. Id love to know your take on age of empires 3 seige units, where splash was present on most cannon, and culverins existed as they do in age 4. I never got the impression that culverin wars were a thing, but also that cavalry was quite immune to seige units. Setup times for seige were also much longer.
Well, I am trying to preserve the current siege functions. As I see it, these changes preserve the ability to break structures, and also preserve unit-countering capabilities (making them less oppressive). The only function we are getting rid of is countering siege with siege, i.e. springald wars. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think many people enjoy it, and I am sure that right now, making springalds is not a meaningful decision in the game. Can't tell much about aoe3 siege units, sorry. I can assume siege is much slower/more expensive there, but I know that universal siege splash in aoe4 would be a disaster lol
@blidge1 its actually pretty interesting Falconets act as your seige equivalent and perform similarly, and like you suggested, have lower splash. They can take out a few infantry per shot, but are very poor against cav. Mortars act as trebuchets, with the longest range and good damage, but can not target units except with specific upgrades. Culverins act as they do in 4. Heavy cannon/bombard/rockets are capable of doing well against most targets but can only be produced from basically landmarks. All of these seige units have higher population costs and are much slower to pack and set up. There is an added category of horse artillery that has more mobility, but is a weaker falconnet.
@blidge1 my point was I don't think you need to remove sprigalds and culverins: increasing population and toning down mangonel and bombard anti unit damage should be enough. I find sprigalds as an alternative if I lack a good cavalry, for example. It's an option for infantry heavy conpositions. With high pop and lower damage, a seige ball with a ton of mangos and sprigalds can just be smacked with knights or similar.
@@sslarso Kind of. They are a soft counter, in the sense that they can cost-effectively fight handcannons. The OP however seems to envision lategame trade situations that can happen in team games or FFA, where the main limit isn't gold but population cap. In that kind of situation it's really hard to deal with HC. Also people tend to spam horsemen lategame bacause they are effective meatshields and they have bonus damage against DPS units (ranged infantry and siege). And horsemen spam wrecks archers.
I think your take is great. But i believe crossbows/handcannoneers could scale so much better in masses in this case, causing armored melee units to just get butchered. So in addition to your changes i would slightly buff horsemen and light melee units in castle/imp (maybe move speed/attack speed or training time) so they could deal with those in that case.
True, this is why I think there should be two viable options for directly dealing with ranged units - mangonels and cavalry. It will open room for composition switches like that: - The go ranged units, you go cavalry, they need to go ranged + melee units - If they go ranged + melee units, you can go mangonels and they need to go more melee - If they go melee, you go ranged units Instead of crossbow + mangonel + springald, into more of the same
I just hate mass mangos. Just a 0 brain 0 fun strat. I think they should have a much slower setup before they fire. So they are for defending against a mass where you have to position them well and pick the fight there. Rather than now where you can just slow push with them on mass as they crush everything.
Here is one thing i don't understand : they are plenty, and i mean plenty of RTS games with 0 sieges, none, without strong defensive positions, none, and that are not about consolidating positions on the long term at all, but rather about quickly trading positions and surprise your opponent. Yet we play the game with the siege, with the strong defensive positions, that is about securing position long term cause that large gold vein will likely win the game on it's own if you can fully drain it... and yet we complain about what actually makes this game great and different from the others. Like idk guys, if you want a tactical RTS, go play a tactical RTS. If you want a strategic one, sieges and strong defensive positions will be a part of it, or it's no longer a strategic RTS.
Also quick advice : if you don't like siege, interact with your opponent before the siege ball is a thing. If you wait 25 minutes before doing anything, no matter what is strong at that point in the meta for late game, your opponent will do it. If it's not siege it will be horsemen spam because they may be overtuned in 3 seasons, or handcannoners mass because siege was nerf ... etc etc
What does this gradation have to do with anything? The game has a problem (springald wars & mangonel over-fixation), I am suggesting adjustments that would fix it - without overly reducing the importance of siege engines, because you would still need them to push or counter ranged units.
I'm also in the "Remove Springalds" faction. My suggestion was to decrease ranged armor of siege units as a counterbalance, but this would work too I think.
These suggestions are pretty bad ngl. Your solution is to just remove units from the game or make units so bad that people won't use them? Right now, Mangonels are already a high risk high reward unit, if you nerf their "high reward" portion, people will just stop using Mangonels instead of it becoming a situational unit, this has happened before in the previous meta. Anywho, I think the current state of siege in AOE4 is fine, they're very vulnerable and can die if not used carefully. And it's not easy to mass them unless you're playing FFA and just sit in your base the whole game. There are some OP siege units like Great Bombard and Zhuxi's Bombard, but they can be addressed individually. If I have to make any suggestion, it will be to buff cav and infantry's resistance to siege.
@@Adribird Yes, but their dmg against the thing that they're supposed to counter will be the same. E.g Mangonels will still be good vs ranged, Bombards will still be good vs Buildings. For a unit to be used, they have to be good against something. If you just straight up nerf their dmg, then they will be bad against everything, nobody uses a unit that is bad against everything.
Increasing cav/infantry resistance to siege is what I am also suggesting. But mangonels need to be changed too. The problem is not only that they can destroy no ranged, but that they are too good at suddenly destroying ranged. This results in: 1. Springald spam 2. Melee unit + raiding spam (people don't want to fight vs mangonels) 3. Players trying to finish the game early, to not have to deal with siege 4. Slower gameplay Besides this and mangonels, I can see no justification for springald wars. If both players spam springalds, nothing changes; if only one player is spamming springalds, he has an immense advantage because he can push with mangonels + bombards/trebs
@@blidge1 When do you run into this problem tbh? I watch tourney games regularly and I myself play the game (mostly FFA these days). And I haven't run into this problem with Springald spam. Why is melee unit + raid spam a problem? Do you think if you nerf Mangonels, people will just stop spamming raid?
Removing springals and in exchange decreasing the damage that trebuchets do to structures would sound awesome. Trebuchets are so cool, but they are quite situational and a keep sieges don't last long if you have multiple ones. If keeps would also have lower attack range and Mangonels would do less crazy unit splash the resulting gameplay would seem much more entertaining and also reaslistic
I agree with most changes here I'm worried about some of the changes. You're making siege less micro dependant and take away options on how to use them. Cannons, english and byz trebs, siege towers and rams, and mangonels become more one dimensional.
- Cannons can't target units anymore. I get that we need to make cannons worse without springalds, but I would rather make it worse in damage and range to stop them from sniping siege. Then
it's still possible to use them in combat, but worse than other options.
- English and byz trebs lose all uniqueness. Instead I would test making the splash damage deal 50% of it's damage to allies as well, and if it leads to a bad experience from players we remove it.
- Mangonels can't be dodged anymore. Not letting mangonels be dodged makes a mangonel fight all about presplitting, and while that is a fine thing I still think that dodging in the middle of a fight is such a cool thing to be done as a viewer that we need to keep it. I would test 50% of damage being friendly fire instead as an experiment like with the trebs to see if it's fine.
- I don't hate making rams do the attack that the unit inside does, and I like making the siege tower like a ladder. I would add that the siege tower should cost more, and also be able to be attached to wooden walls. My problem with you wanting to do this is the reasoning behind it, with you wanting to remove cheese from the game. I think that having unexpected strategies that punish you from being greedy is a good thing, and transport micro is the only way normal units can dive defensive buildings in the early game and punish people who are not building units. It adds depth to the game. I'd be fine with losing it if it was possible to dive tcs in the early game, but because homing missiles are on them you die outside of range anyways.
Even though your changes would fix siege it would take away much depth, it's like taking away the option to build barbican or mongol tc next to the opponent instead of balancing around it, oh wait.
This is also coming from the guy that invented the siege tower cheese so I might be biased. Also rebauldequins have aoe damage, it's just very hard to notice because it kills everything except elephants and some siege in one shot.
You raise some good points, thx for the feedback! I think some of my changes could be revised a little bit after testing, but it is important to somehow address the issues.
Take the mangonel dodging as an example - is it a "cool" mechanic? Yes, of course - it can feel good when you dodge mangonel shots, and it feels better to hit with mangonels if you know it is not guaranteed. But it also raises the stakes, pulling too much attention to itself. Now, you don't have time to micro units in a fight (focus fire with ranged, surround with melee/cavalry, etc.), and you need to make springalds.
With mangonels shooting more quickly and in a smaller area, I think that "skill expression" and coolness of mangonels could be preserved - imagine having to dodge shots that fly quickly and more often. But it would become just one more thing that you could micro in a fight (among spearmen brace baiting, focus firing with multiple groups, surrounds, ...), and not THE thing you need to watch for
I actually would like to see mangonel shots be _easier_ to dodge. If they worked like they do in aoe2 where they don’t require you to actively change direction, but merely keep moving, you could dodge them more easily. This would make them feel less oppressive than they do now, without removing their ability to be an effective counter against large numbers of weak units like the suggestions in the video would do.
Cost for cost siege war is really popular because a lot of landmark in Aoe4 are keep or défensive structure, If somebody think the good way too attack a keep or whatever is to make springal and siege he have wrong, the way is too go melee unit and after siege. We can think anti-siege are too Op but they balanced the game in the good way, make more unit and not siège. I think the only change i will make is the range of the springal, the springal is the counter of mangonnel normaly it's doesn't not deserve to touch so much.
going to have to disagree with these suggestions, or maybe the premise that by making siege less powerful it will create more "dynamic" fights. I think mangonels in their current state work very well as a high risk high reward comeback mechanic. if I fast castle, and I'm getting zhuge nu/spear pushed in feudal, if I manage to build and properly position/micro a mango, I can force my opponent back. but if mangonels are only, as you suggest, able to kill 2 ranged units (and that's before taking into account loose/line formations) per shot, there just flat out is not a way to get back into the game. Like this would all be well and good if the rock-paper-scissors counter system worked as intended, but it as we all know it does not, because once you hit a critical mass of ranged units (~50), horsemen/knights cease to be effective, since they can only attack the outside 10 units at a time, while all 50 archers/xbows can attack at every shot. so in the prior example, there just is no comeback mechanic. if your opponent has 15 spears, and 30 archers/longbows, there is no way to beat that with castle units while you are getting pressured. if you are building knights/MAA two at a time, and your opponent is building archers 4 at a time, you just will never be able to get back in the game. So I strongly disagree that this will make fights more interesting or dynamic. I think it will have the opposite effect. I think it will lead to a lot of 1-1-1 compositions where both players just A-move their big dumb armies at each other much more common, and the player with the slightly better macro wins. just "I have a composition that has counters against every unit type (spear-xbow-horsemen for example), and I have more guys than you, so I win". it will make fast castle as a strategy essentially unplayable, since the feudal all in player will always have more units than you and everything you can build is only a soft counter and comes in too slowly. sure, maybe in post-imperial the "6 springalds and 3 mangos vs 7 springalds and 2 mangos" gameplay is a bit feels-bad, but I actually think the decision making around siege (when to go for first siege unit, do you open mangonel or springald, when do you push with your siege, do you avoid it entirely and try to dive the enemy siege with proper micro/flanking, archer splitting to dodge mango shots) is actually very meaningful and interesting and expresses a lot of skill. idk I'm sure I'm in the minority here, but siege/springald wars are kind of boring, I find archer-ball/MAA-ball a-move gameplay 10x more boring
the one thing I would append to that as *my* only suggestion for fixing the current state of siege, is that there should only be one vil able to repair a siege unit at a time, or it should only be repaired at the rate of one vil no matter how many are on it. That is one part of the current implementation of siege I find incredibly annoying, because now even when you properly micro/flank your horsemen onto a mango, if they have 6 vils repairing it, you can't kill the mango at all, and your units get cleaned up while trying to. that is definitely feels-bad gameplay
Thank you for your critique! I don't fully agree with it, and I will explain why.
First of all, I think that mangonels can still be powerful against ranged units, without them being able to destroy whole masses. When the game just launched, springalds (which are single target) used to deal 70 damage to all other units, and each competitive game degraded into springald spam. So, mangonels being less AOE-based wouldn't make them useless, if you properly balance the dps
About your example with zhuge nu rush - there are other ways to counterplay it, and I wouldn't say that rushing mangonel is a good way. With 40+ zhuge nu, it is not difficult to snipe a mangonel; and if you have the units to protect it, you could also go for more units to beat zhuge nu. You could even go for a keep if you skip siege workshop + mangonel. (though this whole example shows why zhuge nu need to be changed, not why mangonels are needed)
And though I agree that playing springalds + mangonels requires a lot of micro and transitional skill, it doesn't feel fun or interesting to play. In my opinion, there are ways to express skill and have more fun in this game, that are getting downplayed because of siege micro - like microing ranged units, charging/surrounding with cavalry, making forward static defenses, even microing monks if you go for them
@@gijoe3211you’re not alone here. I also think the suggestions in this video miss the point, and I think the examples you gave are exactly _why_ it’s a problem.
As far as healing, I think the answer isn’t necessarily to change how healing works, or maybe not to change it as dramatically as you suggest, but actually to increase the damage your horsemen are doing. Two or three horsemen should be able to easily outdamage 6-10 repairing villagers. And even if not being repaired, they should be able to kill it faster than spears can arrive at your horsemen, if those spears were not already properly in position to protect the siege.
Great Video,
Most changes are good, but too drastic in my opinion:
Remove Springalds and culverins: Yes please (maybe leave some civ unique weaker exeptions if this is somehow balancable)
Mangonel dmg and aoe: i Think what u are proposing makes using mangonels feel very bad as an aoe dmg tool. I would just reduce the dmg overall make Bonus dmg vs ranged and lower the aoe Radius and maybe make them slightly more expensive.
So that if u invest enough ressources u still can get that big aoe dmg but on a much higher cost.
I Think the way u should counter counter mangonels and siege in general should be to try to flank with cavalry which leads to a way more fun expirience, where u have to Position ur spearmen more precisly.
At the end all of this doesnt Matter at all because relic doesnt care about this game anyway.
Thanks to vortex everyone from Reddit to twitch to youtube has now been discussing the issues of AoE. I hope the developers consider these suggestions and also be given the chance to Improve this game.
Yeah, thanks Vortexed!
my man back at it again with the powerpoint slideshows! keep it up
Because I am here early - keep up the good work man, I like your analytic approach. Looking forward to other civ guides
?
I really appreciate the level of thought you’ve put into this, and I’d like to see more essays like this from you and from others. But with respect, I disagree with almost every point you’ve made. Nerfing mangonels in the way you describe completely undermines their entire purpose. They’re _supposed_ to be for countering large masses of individually-weak units. Your suggestion turns them into counters to strong single units. Big mango shots are major hype moments when spectating; you would remove that dramatic and dynamic change in the state of play.
Removing springalds removes an important powerful counter to enemy siege units. I do think springald vs springald gets boring, so maybe reducing the damage they can do to each other somehow would help. But also, make cavalry, especially light cavalry, a much stronger counter to siege of all kinds (including springalds) would be a good change.
I do like the idea of rams garrisoning fewer units but being able to shoot out. The change you suggest to the cheirosiphon, though, might be the worst one of all. The defining feature of them is that because they shoot fire rather than hitting with a physical ram, they also cause damage to surrounding units. Removing that removes their unique feature and also breaks verisimilitude. My experience has also been that the damage they do is already far too low to be worthwhile anyway. I would change them to be less effective against buildings, but have their area of effect fire damage be much more noticeable and reliable.
Siege towers obviously need a buff, and what you suggest would help, but I think the bigger problem is how little stone walls see use, and how easy they are to destroy with other siege anyway, making the siege tower redundant even if it _did_ work perfectly. Not to mention the difficulty of then climbing down the opposite side. I think along with improving the usability of siege towers, we need a buff to stone walls, and also to the mechanic of placing units _on top_ of stone walls.
Hi you ar so true !!!! I hope developer will see this video. Siege need to not slow down the game and people dont have to turtle under wall/keep and siege !!! Well done
I would start by doubling the pop of the entire siege (Regarding the bombard, trebuchet and battering rams, perhaps not much would be raised) and let's see.
They'd still kill more supply than they make up. Easily. Once you have several.
@@andreicristian9575 But it is a step to follow. There are many ideas.
Nest of bees needs a nerf the very worst. In FFA 15 nest of bees can be used as bombards/ magonels and springalds at the same time.
It’s become the new great bonbard at this point. There is legitimately no counter to palace guard/nest of bees spam.
Heavy disagree on mangonels. Their role is exactly countering unit masses, its entirely your fault if you mass spears+arbalests but forgot to make some springalds to counter mangos which directly counter your formation. Without mango there's basically no counter to unit spam but another unit spam, not even keeps can kill massed MAA.
You want to have a counter unit to infantry masses, makes sense. But how do you deal with mass siege then? With some protection, it destroys any other unit composition, and counters don't matter anymore. Without going mass siege yourself, you have to stop fighting it and try to raid
Besides, even if we let mangonels counter unit masses, right now it is too powerful. One mangonel can take care of 30 crossbowmen. Resource difference is 4:1 here, there is no other counter unit in the game that can be this effective
@@blidge1 I'd honestly prefer it how it was done in aoe2: cavalry counters siege, siege counters ranged, ranged counters spears, spears counter cavalry. Springs are really the issue in aoe4 because they just counter themselves so it often becomes springald micro fest. But that's not the only issue because aoe4 balance is structured way more vertically compared to 2. I just don't really like that in the end you are always basically forced to make army because if you remove siege hard counters will cease to exist for most units.
Good changes, appoint you game balance chief
It's a bold suggestion, bolder than on I think would actually be implemented. You are suggesting a lot of stuff be removed, and really narrowing the scope of seige: im not quite certain how this would be recieved.
Id love to know your take on age of empires 3 seige units, where splash was present on most cannon, and culverins existed as they do in age 4. I never got the impression that culverin wars were a thing, but also that cavalry was quite immune to seige units. Setup times for seige were also much longer.
Well, I am trying to preserve the current siege functions. As I see it, these changes preserve the ability to break structures, and also preserve unit-countering capabilities (making them less oppressive). The only function we are getting rid of is countering siege with siege, i.e. springald wars. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think many people enjoy it, and I am sure that right now, making springalds is not a meaningful decision in the game.
Can't tell much about aoe3 siege units, sorry. I can assume siege is much slower/more expensive there, but I know that universal siege splash in aoe4 would be a disaster lol
@blidge1 its actually pretty interesting
Falconets act as your seige equivalent and perform similarly, and like you suggested, have lower splash. They can take out a few infantry per shot, but are very poor against cav.
Mortars act as trebuchets, with the longest range and good damage, but can not target units except with specific upgrades.
Culverins act as they do in 4.
Heavy cannon/bombard/rockets are capable of doing well against most targets but can only be produced from basically landmarks.
All of these seige units have higher population costs and are much slower to pack and set up.
There is an added category of horse artillery that has more mobility, but is a weaker falconnet.
@@mortalitykitten6786 Interesting, thx! Sounds like a similar system, but more suitable for post-medieval theme for sure
@blidge1 my point was I don't think you need to remove sprigalds and culverins: increasing population and toning down mangonel and bombard anti unit damage should be enough. I find sprigalds as an alternative if I lack a good cavalry, for example. It's an option for infantry heavy conpositions. With high pop and lower damage, a seige ball with a ton of mangos and sprigalds can just be smacked with knights or similar.
Nerf damage and area of effect and increase accuracy/projectile speed with mangos
My main worry would be that hand cannon clumps become uncounter-able, a large ball of streltsy especially in a choked area destroy knights
no, archer counter streltsy
if you are using knights, you will lose
@@sslarso Kind of. They are a soft counter, in the sense that they can cost-effectively fight handcannons. The OP however seems to envision lategame trade situations that can happen in team games or FFA, where the main limit isn't gold but population cap.
In that kind of situation it's really hard to deal with HC.
Also people tend to spam horsemen lategame bacause they are effective meatshields and they have bonus damage against DPS units (ranged infantry and siege). And horsemen spam wrecks archers.
I think your take is great. But i believe crossbows/handcannoneers could scale so much better in masses in this case, causing armored melee units to just get butchered. So in addition to your changes i would slightly buff horsemen and light melee units in castle/imp (maybe move speed/attack speed or training time) so they could deal with those in that case.
True, this is why I think there should be two viable options for directly dealing with ranged units - mangonels and cavalry. It will open room for composition switches like that:
- The go ranged units, you go cavalry, they need to go ranged + melee units
- If they go ranged + melee units, you can go mangonels and they need to go more melee
- If they go melee, you go ranged units
Instead of crossbow + mangonel + springald, into more of the same
Agree with the mangonel changes
Thank you, Dr. Blidge!
I really like the suggestions you have made here. I never make mangos cos it feels too below the belt to use them.
I love these suggestions! I have myself also made a siege rework concept which is very similar to yours. Mangonels need to be nerfed without question.
I like the siege tower idea. Unsure on the rest.
W vid
I just hate mass mangos. Just a 0 brain 0 fun strat. I think they should have a much slower setup before they fire. So they are for defending against a mass where you have to position them well and pick the fight there. Rather than now where you can just slow push with them on mass as they crush everything.
Here is one thing i don't understand : they are plenty, and i mean plenty of RTS games with 0 sieges, none, without strong defensive positions, none, and that are not about consolidating positions on the long term at all, but rather about quickly trading positions and surprise your opponent.
Yet we play the game with the siege, with the strong defensive positions, that is about securing position long term cause that large gold vein will likely win the game on it's own if you can fully drain it... and yet we complain about what actually makes this game great and different from the others.
Like idk guys, if you want a tactical RTS, go play a tactical RTS. If you want a strategic one, sieges and strong defensive positions will be a part of it, or it's no longer a strategic RTS.
It's one thing to suggest tweaks, it's another to ask for the DNA of the game to completly change.
Also quick advice : if you don't like siege, interact with your opponent before the siege ball is a thing.
If you wait 25 minutes before doing anything, no matter what is strong at that point in the meta for late game, your opponent will do it. If it's not siege it will be horsemen spam because they may be overtuned in 3 seasons, or handcannoners mass because siege was nerf ... etc etc
What does this gradation have to do with anything? The game has a problem (springald wars & mangonel over-fixation), I am suggesting adjustments that would fix it - without overly reducing the importance of siege engines, because you would still need them to push or counter ranged units.
Need a proper guide for abbassid players!
Im gonna use this video to become unstoppable 😂😂
I'm also in the "Remove Springalds" faction. My suggestion was to decrease ranged armor of siege units as a counterbalance, but this would work too I think.
no just remove mangonel then its fine
These suggestions are pretty bad ngl. Your solution is to just remove units from the game or make units so bad that people won't use them?
Right now, Mangonels are already a high risk high reward unit, if you nerf their "high reward" portion, people will just stop using Mangonels instead of it becoming a situational unit, this has happened before in the previous meta.
Anywho, I think the current state of siege in AOE4 is fine, they're very vulnerable and can die if not used carefully. And it's not easy to mass them unless you're playing FFA and just sit in your base the whole game. There are some OP siege units like Great Bombard and Zhuxi's Bombard, but they can be addressed individually.
If I have to make any suggestion, it will be to buff cav and infantry's resistance to siege.
When you buff the cav and put siege armor on the infantry you are indirectly nerfing the entire siege...
@@Adribird Yes, but their dmg against the thing that they're supposed to counter will be the same.
E.g Mangonels will still be good vs ranged, Bombards will still be good vs Buildings.
For a unit to be used, they have to be good against something. If you just straight up nerf their dmg, then they will be bad against everything, nobody uses a unit that is bad against everything.
Increasing cav/infantry resistance to siege is what I am also suggesting. But mangonels need to be changed too.
The problem is not only that they can destroy no ranged, but that they are too good at suddenly destroying ranged. This results in:
1. Springald spam
2. Melee unit + raiding spam (people don't want to fight vs mangonels)
3. Players trying to finish the game early, to not have to deal with siege
4. Slower gameplay
Besides this and mangonels, I can see no justification for springald wars. If both players spam springalds, nothing changes; if only one player is spamming springalds, he has an immense advantage because he can push with mangonels + bombards/trebs
@@blidge1 When do you run into this problem tbh?
I watch tourney games regularly and I myself play the game (mostly FFA these days). And I haven't run into this problem with Springald spam.
Why is melee unit + raid spam a problem? Do you think if you nerf Mangonels, people will just stop spamming raid?
@@SleepyGaming-ie9fb Do you know that you can also change the pop or change the base damage but keep the bonuses? There are several ways to balance.
First!
opinion from a shit elo player
you sure about that? =)
@@blidge1 yes.
@@DaJukes well I am top 56 on ladder atm, how high are you?
@@blidge1 weird lie bro.
@@DaJukes aoe4world.com/players/4834058-blidge
come on, just admit you were wrong and dont bm again pls