RETURN OF ROME -- A History-First AoE2 DLC Redesign (LAVAnilla Episode 3) 

Well, this will be different. Edit: Like the idea of adding unique units and techs to AOE1 civs. Maybe they could be done at the Academy so it isn't just used for Hoplites

Love the video, and I really like the redesign. Oh man Romans are one of those civs where a lot of exciting things could be implemented, like: - Infantry line can build palisades and outposts, including fortified palisades and fort gates. - Castles fire a barrage of scorpion/mangonel projectiles, to sort of exemplify their use of defensive siege. - Replace castle with a unique variant, the War Fort (I'm picturing something Feitoria or Wonder-sized). It can train infantry line and unique units at a faster rate, and any garrisoned unit fires arrows from it. - Can produce an Eagle Standard at the castle, which the unique unit can carry (turns into Standard holding variant), this unit will then have an area buff similar to the current Centurion but stronger. The downside is if the unit dies, the Eagle Standard can be "controlled" by enemies which debuffs Roman units until it's taken back. Also have you considered something like civilization-specific formations?! That's not just Roman related but it would be cool if certain civilizations gained unique formations like: - Testudo formation: available to Romans, Byzantines. Units with shields move slower but have +3 pierce armor. Units in formation form a tight square as they walk. - Shield wall formation: available to Vikings, Slavs, Lithuanians, Sicilians perhaps? Units with shields gain +4 pierce armor when not moving. Units form a wall-like line shape as they move, 2-3 men deep (would be hard pathing through small spaces with this I reckon though) - Pike square formation: available to Burgundians, Spanish, Turks, Bohemians. Groups of spear-line and archer-line units move in a square or rectangle with the pikes surrounding the ranged units, but as opposed to box formation no pikes are placed at the back of the block (non historical but better for gameplay) and the sides have less pikes than the front. I'm picturing 3-4 lines of pikes in front, 1-2 on the sides and 0 behind. In case there are hussite wagons in the mix they are placed on the front behind the pikes but in front of the ranged units. Rams would go on the front and bombard cannons would go dead last. - Battle trance formation: available to Vikings, Celts, Slavs, maybe meso civs and Ethiopians. From Asia perhaps the Malay could get this formation. Infantry units rush to battle in disorganized, semi zig-zag patterns. Ideally this would somewhat neutralize enemies with ballistics. - Cavalry charge formation: available to all groups of heavy and medium cav. The units form a line 2-4 units wide depending on group size, and accelerate until they are moving 20% faster than normal, but changing direction/micro is then harder. While they are running at this speed they automatically attack units in front/to the side with an attack increase (+5?) and ignoring armor. After some time they decelerate back to normal speed at which point they are normally responsive again. - Parthian tactic formation: mounted ranged units move pointing their weapon back rather than front. Increases their range but makes it so they can no longer attack units in front of them while in this formation, they can only fire back. Maybe it could be like backwards charge during which the units are not fully controllable? Probably many more I'm missing cuz I suck at history.

Thank you for mentioning me, I really feel we pushed Romans in some way and they were added sooner than I expected! Although the context of that DLC ironically marked the beggining of the "decline" of this game under many aspects... A Vandal civ addition could be very possible given the lack of dark age civs and a Roman campaign (also Vandals seem very popular, your video of them has a lot of interactions in comments). I'm just gonna nitpick a couple of things: the Vexillarius icon you show looks more like an early pagan one, from the times of Trajan probably, like the Hollywood legionary, mostly because of the lion mantle. After Constantine I think Vexillarii would use more christian images, like the Chi-Ro on the shields replacing ancient pagan idols or animals who were considered primitive and untrendy. You can easily google them to find examples. I think Romans should access at least Camel riders because North Africa was a Western Roman province like I think they did in our first built. Agree that the navy was not good, since the Mediterranean was their "lake" they didn't need to mantain a strong fleet for centuries if not for pirates. The only naval battle that comes to my mind in late western Rome was the one where Crispus defeated Licinius in front of Byzantium (324 ad) so a civil war. The Vandals burned the western fleet in two occasions: one with Majorianus in Spain and the other in 468 near Carthage along with the eastern one (but in both cases they were probably betrayed). They still employed warships a lot, specially on rivers when invading Persia (362), and on the Saxon shore between Gaul and Britain where there was a Comes specifically appointed for that role around the end of the 3rd or 4th century. But that's hardly enough for a bonus. As for the UTs I like both. I think you could add Steppe Lancers to the barbaric recruits to represent Sarmatian, Alan or Hunnish forces but even Genitours, the Armenian composite bowmen or Sogdian Cataphracts (a scenario only unit) could make sense. The late roman army was some kind of "international" confederation loosely united in the name of the emperor or their commander (rather than Rome or any other city, it wasn't in fact very "Roman" anymore, when everything can be X then nothing is...) I think the Ampitheatre is a super lazy and generic wonder for aoe2 Romans... In the 4th century (where I consider the beginning of late Rome and the game as a whole) I don't think Ampitheatres were still built, on the opposite they were either left in ruins or dismantled by Christian zealots or more often by the same Romans who needed material to build new stuff, mostly Basilicas and churches since the empire was transitioning in the Middle ages. This process is known as "Spolia" and was common as early as the 3rd century which is the century were classical art and traditions waned away and the first barbaric invasions devastated roman cities that in some cases were never rebuilt. For this reason I think that the aoe2 Roman Wonder should be the Arch of Constantine (already in game, talking about recycling stuff...) which is the prime example of Spolia (the arch mostly reused images from the Marcus Aurelius' Arch and others) and it's often the first lesson in a course of history of medieval art. It's very iconic. And that's it, sorry for the wall of text, hope it's interesting!

A personal hottake of mine on the whole roman should be a faction thing is that it would be better for there to be a romano-british civilization than an outright roman faction

Nice, I really like the idea of unlocking huskarls, tarkans and throwing axemen (even though I doubt the devs are ever going to do it for the official build). I'd have more to say on AOE1 Return Of Rome: - by and large I agree with you that it is largely irrelevant, and I think it's a shame; - I agree with UU, UT, perhaps (as I've seen in other comments) at the academy (Persians should then receive academy, even if they still don't get hoplites); - I could agree with more civs, and would even suggest make it any even 20, 4 for each architecture style (Yes, I'm OCD like that 11); - wonders for each individual civ would be nice! - for the general balance of the game: once gold runs out, either the civ has scythe chariots and chariot archers and is fine, or it's just falling off a cliff; To fix it I'd propose an iron age upgrade to the following units: * bowman (called "skirmisher bowman"?), with more movement speed, +1 range, and maybe +1 melee armor; * scout (called "light cavalry"?), with +30 HP, +2 attack, increased rate of fire, and potentially + 1 melee armor and pierce armor; * axeman (called "auxilliary infantry"), with +10 HP, +1 attack, +1 pierce armor (and remove the +1 pierce armor they added on the axeman); - to enrich the water balance, I would add a precursor to the fire galley (with 120-140 HP and 12-16 atk), and a counter to it if necessary - Upgrades for the slinger, and the camel would also be nice; - I'm not going to address the balance of each individual civ, but some are absurd (like the AOE1 Romans discount on towers, etc)

A nice comparisson between 3 different approaches to the same civilization, with merits within each one. I too feel the Romans are a nessecary part of the game, however I would personally add (if possible) a civilization that represents both late Roman empire and the Papal states into the game.

Hay man, I like to ask you a question "Do you consider making a rework for the Trading and Diplomacy-Tribute systems in the AoE2? or do you find them fine" I saw "The Temple & Shrine" video and really liked your take on it, that what inspired me to asking if you consider it, you can throw the Market with them, but I find it fine compared to how basic those mechanic are Thank You

If only one thing could be implemented, I'd go hard for the plumbata, makes so much more sense than the weird charged attack they have now.

My ideas for this: 1 make a free client for both games like in AOE 3 with a rotating, civ pool. 2 add also civ dlcs for AOE 1 included in each AOE 2 dlc 3 aoe1 should also have to include Mauryans, Tamils, Funan and Harappans in the base ROR port along with the Lac Viet

Agree with the amendments that you proposed. Especially the UU and UT. Also the Foederati idea i like but in a new direction. So those Civs that are long shots making them like-Foederati (a more appropriate term could be found). So like the Turks or Ottomans if that gets added could have Civs that they subjugated could be an option. Similar to how in AoE3 they have minor civs that you can ally with and get techs from them and UU.

skirmishers change to something like the Hastati and later hastati elite for trash units or velites and elite velites for cavalry units, then the Kontus users like the spearman line, and Plumbata launchers to make damage to the structures... just changing the first steps of each others.... nice video as always bro

I feel like talking a while longer now, so I'll be going a bit wide with this one. - While I imagine that you want to have everything at the same time with this DLC, I personally still feel like having a more measured outlook rather than asking for 3 civs in addition to the entire AoE1 game update. I would've been happy with AoE1 seeing a full-on upgrade with more campaigns, older campaigns reinvented into AoE2- style narrative-consistent campaigns, civs with unique Wonders, UUs and UTs, more profound rebalancing and new generic units. And new civs, of course, but those can wait for longer. - I think the AoE2 Romans should've been a free addition, alongside what was done with AoE1. This baiting with a civ for this DLC feels wrong. Adding Romans as celebration of the event would've still worked fine, with their two UUs and Wonder already made.... oh, I guess they did add unique Castle and the Dromon, huh. Oh well, I would also argue for St Peter's Basilica over the Colosseum as a Wonder. - I still label Victors and Vanquished as worse. Because no Vandal civ with the Vandal scenario. Or would you just say that DLC doesn't exist? - I'm surprised you didn't make Aquilifer's the Castle unit then. Then again, Aquilifer dying would have to afflict a significant penalty, wouldn't it? Legionaries name change to Comitatenses is accurate. - Limitanei could've been a UT, making the Spearman line stronger, offering some alt for trash wars and that's what they were, kinda. Might otherwise make more sense to have the Spearman line have the Plumbata as they're the ones with the ol' stick. Or both. Probably best to make the thrown javelin deal no bonus damage, cause ranged Spearman attacks hurt alot, ask anyone who faced the Incas. Something to give them a last-chance late game holdout. If Foederati are needed, I would surmise Alan foederati unit would make sense as well. - While I get the idea of always going for a story where the civilization in question is rising up, or having a heroic stand, I think that Syagrius' tale of a desparate last stand and the slow but unstoppable arrival of the Dark Ages as Rome literally falls in the distance, feels like a very sombre tale that I'd prefer. Perhaps the most sombre tale this game could make. Covering the Aegidius and Majorian early arrival into Gaul and Syagrius exploits, and the final scenario played as some unknown Roman general in proto-Paris surrounded by barbarians while hoping for a Visigothic relief force obtained by Syagrius only to see him brought forward in chains to Clovis and executed. A true start of the Dark Ages, as the last of the Romans are finally shattered. Aside from that, Majorian for me but that requires Vandals to be proper. - I think the naval stuff might've also been in reference to the Eastern Roman Empire, which would still maintain a Roman character for a while and did have a functional navy. It's not like water matters that much aside from water maps, so having a bonus for fun isn't that bad. - So do I tell you which new Victors and Vanquished scenarios should have Romans in them (yet don't, for some reason) or are you satisfied with not knowing about that DLC at all?

I haven't watched the video yet, but I think the DLC would have done a lot better ratings wise had they done two things: 1) Make the Roman civ in aoe2 free, not requiring the DLC to play it 2) Bundled AoE1:DE with the DLC so that anyone who purchases Return of Rome gets access to AoE1:DE for free and anyone who has AoE1:DE already gets a discount on Return of Rome. This would have resulted in less income, yes. But without actually changing the content of DLC it would have had a much much better reception. People who are only interested in AoE2 would never like this DLC since it's not made for them and it only made them miffed that they had to pay extra to only unlock one civ and people who like AoE1 are unhappy since they have to pay for it a third time, even though it is the best version of the game released to date, many are still sour since this is essentially what AoE1:DE was supposed to be. Oh yeah, and many people were unhappy with the marketing being somewhat misleading and not clear about if they were adding the AoE1 campaigns and were upset that they weren't there upon release.

Love this take on Romans. The castle UU and Foederati tech are my favourite parts about it, is a bit outside of AoE2 but I don't think there is a better way to represent the concept. Personally the only things I dislike are the "Tower TC" concept and the unit spawn of the Foederati technology, as is kind of a thing that ypu either use it when at 200 pop to get 30 extra units (Which I don't find particularly great personally, is the same thing with First Crusade and Flemish Revolution) or it lacks purpose since you generally want to mass units and is not common to commit on all three. Maybe something like "you can train 20 of each for free, and afterwards are still trainable at the barrack/stable"? Would that still respect the tech's identity to you? I guess if Plumbata isn't realistically doable maybe the current charge attack could still be fine? If possible I also wish to assest a few things: The way those "power spike" res bonuses work is that they sinergy a lot with timing plays and not continuous fighting throughout the Age. Example: on Ethiopians they can afford basically Fletching for free (And have the gold for 1 extra archer), in Castle it covers more than half Bodkin etc. They like to play archers which need a small economy and are timing dipendent unit to do great damage so this works to the bonus favor. Romans though have units that require a lot of economy (Infantry, cavarly etc) and the bonus doesn't really sinergize with that (It gives you like 2 knights? Or +2 armor? Not much and it doesn't sinergize with the blacksmith bonus almost at all) and with you giving them Arbalest and Bracer I feel like they might end up suited more towards archer plays instead (Or man at arms archers). In this context I feel like the 5% everything bonus works a lot more in the civ's favor as in any situation your eco is stronger enough to let you afford your big expensive army. I think the current Romans still show very clearly their late game limitations, as they really lack options against gunpowder (I guess fittingly? Not really but you know what I mean) and even to play their Imperial age still really feels awkward as you have only 2/3 good units. Despite the water bonuses (Which I do agree do not make sense) Romans are still fittingly not that good on water, as they miss one unit line and critically Bracer on their Galleons. I assume they did that to push them a bit there as they introduced the Dromons but I think cutting their water bonuses completely is a good call as even with them they are not a good water civ. And yes, this DLC was horribly put toghether. I never played AoE1 before it and it still really feels like an outdated game that you don't want to go back into. At very least they could have made some UTs and a UU for each civ, come on!

First!

Hiya Robby, I gotta say, I really like this new format of yours, although I also kind of miss the good old weird and wonderful of the earlier builds (I know Lavant-garde is there, but it's just not quite the same thing). Overall this one looks nice. I especially like the blacksmith bonus. Simple, yet elegant. Lovely! I'm not too keen on the team bonus, however. It sounds a bit weird. Did you intend for it to be a separate building mashed into the TC or them being fused together into one? Maybe they could have a unique tech instead, one that upgrades the TCs to Fortified Town Centers: stronger and perhaps with some extra bonus also. It could also be "garrisoned villagers fire twice as many arrows". (Because the world needs another douche civ, right..?) If you want something else for the resource bonus, it could also be +5% overall gather rate in both Feudal and Castle (+10% total), but when reaching Imperial it would be removed completely. It'd give a nice boost in Feudal and a very strong boom in Castle, but still leave them without anything in the late game. Which matches the theme you have for the civ nicely. Also, maybe you should just call the unique unit Legionary instead of Comitatensis. I get your reasoning for it, but brand recognition is also something to consider, and (as far as I know) nothing really says "Roman military" to a general audience like the legionary does. Something to consider at least. Thanks for the video! It was fun to watch, as always.

My ideea for romans, was to have a special building where they can train, Auxiliaries, Old World regional units Camels, Stepe Lancers, Battle Elefants and Archer Elefants. I like the Legionary and sword line infantry bonus. I would have loved something for the spear line. Also your Plumbata idea would have been ideal. Centurion is something too much. Either you have an infantrymen that buffs your infantry, either you have a Western Roman Cataphract. I like the scorpion line focus but i would have prefered the romans being able to build siege workshop units in Feudal Age.

They should have let the guys behind Rome at War mod donthe job

I'm not sure if romans fit the time frame. Goths were relevant after the fall of Rome and you can argue european huns kept existing in the VI century as kutrigurs and utrigurs, plus the existence of the asian branches like hephtalits. (West) Romans however fell in 476. The kingdom of Soissons was their last bastion and endured just 10 more years

Okay, as someone with some game design background, I'm going to be honest; the whole "Team watch tower in TC" bonus, is, from a design and programming standpoint, especially as a TEAM BONUS, Horrible, just, What?! I mean, first of all, before we get into anything code-side, How the everloving HELL, would this work in game modes like Nomad? no, just, no. As a team bonus, code side, you'd SOMEHOW have to work out where the TC is, then figure out the placement of the tower, and THEN, place the tower ATOP an already existing building, and HOPE it'd just, not break or delete the TC, or something weird? that'd just be a HEADACHE to program. now, picture that, but add in the haphazardness of the map generation trying to figure out WHO should, or should NOT have it, if you choose to ally BEFORE the game. also, how does this work for in-game alliances. Furthermore, in general AOE2 devs have shied away from anything that makes TC's have longer range, and though this doesn't do that Specifically, the result is the same; you'd have a TC in Dark or Feudal that has longer range and more attack that basically renders anything around the TC unraidable. also because of the tower's placement, chance for vill's to get stuck ungarrisoning. If you're going to make a team bonus, at LEAST try to consider how you'd do that programming wise. also the tech allowing other civ's unique units to be built defeats the point of them being unique units. a BETTER team bonus would be some sort of Mercenary unit, such as the Comitatensis

My ideea for romans, was to have a special building where they can train, Auxiliaries, Old World regional units Camels, Stepe Lancers, Battle Elefants and Archer Elefants. I like the Legionary and sword line infantry bonus. I would have loved something for the spear line. Also your Plumbata idea would have been ideal. Centurion is something too much. Either you have an infantrymen that buffs your infantry, either you have a Western Roman Cataphract. I like the scorpion line focus but i would have prefered the romans being able to build siege workshop units in Feudal Age.

First!