My honest opinion of the new units is... plz not in retold. --- Patreon: www.patreon.com/user?u=32363240 --- Discord: / discord --- Twitch: / iamboit --- Merch: streamlabs.com/iamboit/merch
I also think what some people are missing is that Greek in Vanilla was a traditionally playing RTS civ, and Norse and Egypt were asymmetrical compliments to Greek in a true rock/paper/scissors RTS relationship. That's were the balance came from. The minute the game departed from that perfect balance, i.e. Atlanteans and then Chinese, it became like every other RTS in history, the newest "expansion" civ was always gonna be OP.
Atlanteans weren't actually better than Greek, Norse, Egypt at all, Atlanteans was the weakest Civ. The only thing about the Atlanteans that made them strong, was the Early game, in which you could gather resources everywhere, but so could the Norse, for cheaper, Atlanteans sure could turn all their units into Heros, but it was costly, and so they were good against myth units, but they could easily get bent by normal infantry/ranged/cavalry units. Atlantean Myth Units weren't that great either, the Argus, the Lampades, and Satyrs were the best Myth units they had, the rest albeit somewhat unique they weren't really that good at what they did, the Caladria and the Servant were decent support units, but incredibly weak on their own. The Egyptians shat on the other Civs pretty hard, easy favor generation, cheap buildings, kind of expensive units, but many different strategies to choose from. The Greeks were very balanced, and despite not being that cheap, and favor generation was shite, they had a very diverse cast of myth units that could supplement their armies, and if it went far enough, could roll over most enemies, destroying their gameplan etc. Because if you send 15 colossi to your enemy, and you wreak havoc, and then you heal up them by eating up your opponent's raw resources, yeah, the Greeks had massive BM opportunities.
great video boyit. what made aom amazing was the fact that every civ was unique and had certain advantages and disadvantages but these stupid EE Devs just made everything similar and destroyed the character of the different civs
Basically the greeks were powerful and expensive. The units generally cost more because they were stronger. Norse units and buildings were weaker but the units were cheaper. Like were like ants and could spread fast with military that could build. Eggy was the medium. The vills built slower but they had ways to compensate and the towers upgraded for free upon age up. They could boom and be deadly in heroic age. A turtle civ
I love your opinions here Boit. The asymmetry really allows people to gravitate towards their preferred, unique Civ, that feels special to them-- and that they are good at playing. I love the idea of new units and playstyles being introduced. However I would love if these new units and mechanics only further boosted the civs strengths and kept the civs unique weaknesses as you say.
I wholehartedly disagreed with your stance on the autoqueue but here I find myself kinda on board with your opinion. However, I can hear an argument that "all civs should have a correct choice in any situation, at any point in a game" and the idea that some civs HAVE TO win at a certain point in the game and should just accept a 0% winrate in mythic age still bothers me a little and that's exactly the argument presented here. The idea of asymetric civs and intentional weaknesses can be executed properly in the AoE saga IMO, but I'm confident that it should never involve power spikes at certain stages of the game and should be done differently
I think a lot of people can agree with this. There’s a reason even on low rating EE you see people avoiding these units: they suck fun out of the game by removing flavor and stick out like sore thumbs from the “theme” of a civ
Ensemble Studios had a long development phase including balancing. I doubt that SkyBox did the same. Modern day balancing should include the pro players. I think Norse, especially Thor has a too big weakness against early Roc attacks, massed stymp. Birds and the TA does not well against egyptian Infantry and Myrmidon. The Archer seems to be a big over the top thought. I recommended since many years to give the TA 0.5 base damage more, like it was in 2002. I saw records from brickhead using TA and RC losing to eggy classic army. There is probably a way around it wirh Trolls but they are so immobile compared to centaur.
Agreed,also they should really improve some unique features in the game that kinda feel useless rn for exemple make some viable but not broken strat of Set making animals to fight in the early game to defend or maybe in the late game for big fights that would be interesting for the game
I agree 100%. I do think there need to be some way for Norse to better handle flying units other than towers, axemen, trolls and firegiants. My solution is to give the Hersir a special attack that is range. Give the special a long enough recharge rate as to not make them a replacement for throwing axemen and I think it could be made balanced.
The Chinese just need to be completely rebuilt from the ground up. Between the (lack of) balance, and the poor quality of assets, they really did that expansion dirty. Also, it would be nice for them to add some Japanese, Slavic, Mesopotamian and Native American gods/spirits.I want to play as Ashur, God damnit!
Other RTS games grow boring very quickly without AOM's asymmetry. Without it I would have forgotten about AOM a long time ago. I don't know what the dev's are thinking adding these units
I like Norse archer but should not have the myth unit bonus and should have weaker stats. I hate the onager it looks horrible and does feel out of place with the civ, the Swordmen I don't care much for and am kinda indifferent to. As for the Greek healer the only reason I like it is cause it can heal hydras which for some reason can't heal themselves despite that being the problem Hercules had wen righting them, if they give them a tech to have the hydras heal than ya remove it. My other problem with the healer is it makes Apollos temple upgrade redundant
It would be cool if the hydra would have a health regen, but only if it has more heads. During the health regen it heads get slowly reduced to 1. Stopping the regen. The more heads the more increased health regen. For instance: Hydra with 1 head and low hp will not regen.
Omg you made a video about this after we had a discussion about it in the discord I love you man, ty for all your contribution to aom and i hope the devs see this video Its actually very important
AGREE! Hope the devs see this video. I'm not even sure if the Titans expansion added anything meaningful. They decided to give the Zeus unique Myrmidons to every Atty gods through their Fanatics. Also Heka Gigantes gets to use special on heroes? Like wtf
I think it was an interesting idea they had in ‘balancing’ the civs, but 100% agree that it entirely removes the unique aspects each one has in multiplayer or vs AI. Maybe keep the units for campaign and ditch them elsewhere?
It doesn't help Greeks Already had a way to heal their units. If your opponent goes Apollo he has access to the Temple of Healing Technology... But only IF they go Apollo.
when everything is op, none of them is op. JK I agree with you, different civ should have different strengths and weaknesses, and they should be unique.
Extending the sea tech tree would be nice though. The "Age of" games have always had a weak naval game, I hope they have learnt a few tricks through the years that they could use to improve it in AoM
True. Especially when the one mechanic that should've come standard to all civs in AoMEE was some form of air transport like the roc, but baked into each civ regardless of god (Hathor would still give petsuchos, and could now get a unique upgrade for a now egy-maintechtree-roc). Instead all the cool civ flavour was done away with like pure melee Norse or no healing (sans resto) Greeks as you say.
i cant tell what comps you are talking about when your listing the strongest comps in the game and what they counter. i cant even tell if that pixelated tower is a tower or seige weapon. can you post comp in description or make a video on it?
I don't have a strong opinion on the units mentioned in the video, i agree on Chinese though. If aom retold Is to be successful then we must accept that some form of change to some specific matchups/situations has to be made, especially if the devs want to make the game more appealing to new players. Nobody likes chasing a Roc with throwing axemen. Nobody likes spawning as Norse with a forward gold against a Greek/Zeus. Nobody likes grinding through waves and waves of autoqueued mercs to take down a tc. Nobody likes losing 20 villagers in 10 seconds against a locust. Nobody likes getting wiped out by rag. Chronojj mentioned that autoqueue is a fundamental part of AOM, because it's a casual RTS with insanely strong power spikes and i agree with his statement. But if some of these crutches are not resolved by adding new units or by some other way, I don't see myself returning to AOM let alone trying to convince my teammates to switch to AOM. Just my 2 cents
I agree 100%, but I still think that Norse need a few tweaks. Let's be honest, in vanilla, against Greek and Eggy, Norse only has one strategy: overwhelm the opponent in the Classical Age. If this does not happen the Norse player will be easily dealt with by the better army and counter units of their opponent in teh Heroic Age. I understand that this is part of what makes Norse unique (I am a Thor main), but this really means that Norse strats are repetitive and predictable. All other civs, accounting for their weaknesses, have a better adaptation than Norse. I agree Bogsveigir is not the answer. Maybe make Norse better in the late game, instead, by indulging in their uniqueness. Give them stronger Jarl and Huskarl, for example, or give them expansive infantry upgrades that make units stronger in the very late game. The only real alternative for Norse late game, as of now, is to go Rag, which is often a cheap way to end a battle, imo.
Norse is bonkers in the heroic age, Skadi is such a good heroic god, with the best heroic mythic unit and one of the best heroic GPs. Norse is also pretty good in the late game, with fire giant + ballista. I think norse was misunderstood back in the day. People thought Skadi was bad for f***'s sake
@@Gabriel-mf7wh Whether these strategies can work as anything more than granting you a slower death is still dependent on how big of a damage you managed to inflict in the Classical Age. Even with dwarves and Skadi's farms, you cant boom at all with Norse, for example, because you really cant spend that extra resource on anyhting of value, since other civs have counter units for each of your units and you don't.
They should just include a archer but they make the best broken archer of the game, those broken bonus vs MU was completely desnecessary,maybe the best is to remove them
Yes! Norse shouldn't be able to compete in late game with eggys! Nor in heroic... or clasic also if eggys decide to clasic fight! :D Rag heroes should get reduced hp by half too bcs rag is broken gp!
Not including the Chinese Shite, is all one needs to do. Basegame was solid, each Pantheon had their advantage and disadvantage, some units were pretty useless in most scenarios but excelled in others, *cough* *cough* trolls.. Now I would say that while The Titans, added the Atlantean civs, they weren't as fun to play as, but in general allowed for other diverse gameplay strategies. Still the best way to play was as Norse Major God, Loki. For lategame Myth Unit Spam. What's that all myth units take less than a second to train...well except for the Fire Giant who was 1.2 seconds, but still, having a decent Gold economy, as Loki, Forseti, Bragi, Hel, gave you basically infinite Favor, to just spam units in the enemies face. Loki's 10% favor cost reduction for myth units, Forseti's Trolls, Bragi's Thurisaz Rune for 12% movement speed for Myth units, Hel's Granite Blood to strengthen the Giants, and of course Hel's Rampage for the 95% training reduction speed. So a 800 hp Fire Giant that takes 1.2 seconds to train and moves 3.5ft/s.
I didn't take apolo for his myth units or his Godpower I took for the temple healing for my army's since that was huge for a failed attack since I can retreat then to my temple and try again. With the healer unit I could just sit there and heal and still do dmg so yeah I agree
Absolutely agree. This was the best RTS ever made, by the original developers. It should be a remake of the game where the original development stopped. The newer expansion and changes are not legitimate.
I've been playing a lot of Age of Empires 2 lately. At its core it's a good game so you can keep playing it, but the near perfect symmetry of every single civ really gets boring after a while. The EE units bring this problem into AoM. They may not be symmetrical cookie cutter for 90% of play, but if you turn every civ into a well rounded powerhouse then it's either going to get boring, frustrating, or both.
The only disagreement I have is the rather weak onager given to Atlantean is actually good, and an example of what Egypt's catapults should be nerfed to. As an example, 3-5 Onagers uses up same pop anyway, but will take almost a whole minute taking down tower and buildings. 3-5 Catapults do more than 2x damage, more durable in health, and can take down a building in seconds, with no counter, and is about the same when considering Egypt's excess resources they will gather; they are definitely too strong in population. Catapults thus need to be nerfed in more than one way: health, dps, or both. Onagers are a nice ranged and fragile unit that is easy to defeat, and if they stay alive you can finally stay out of building defenses that Atlantean armies can't counter, yet it isn't so OP at the level where it can be abused. I think catapult should be nerfed to resemble more like the new Atlantean onager or whatever it is, a weak, over-time damage unit that needs protection, that is fragile but gives it that 'actual' ability to sit back and attack unbeatable towers/fortifications from range; it actually takes more time to demolish even simple things like towers. An onager is so fragile it can be taken out, a catapult is like a 200 hp 'tank' in comparison, might need like a 2 or 3 unit squad to take out. Fire Siphons are quite weak and eventually even get taken out even by the building itself, but yet Catapults have about the same DPS and can stay out of range of the building. Destroyers use up precious pop and only have a power spike until later where even Norse Huskarl becomes sort of like a better anti-building unit that costs only wood/gold and defeats Destroyer directly in combat, for example, and loses vs most things directly, so Atlanteans quickly run out of lategame options, and you can't always win in an early game against pro players. It becomes evident as the Siphon/Destroyer had to run closer and be very vulnerable, while usually wasting pop space, they simply suck when attacking fortified locations (mainly because, dedicated anti-siege units that lose to everything else, is not as strong as other civs that can mix in better units that also can attack buildings just fine). Others have confident unit combos that can just plow through buildings, but Atlanteans had to resort to titans (which, other civs can simply make as well anyway). Onagers cannot be used even in the capacity that Catapults,Petrobolos, and Ballistas can, it's literally still the weakest of the group. Yet I feel like it was one of the only 'good' changes, because Atlantean is the only one who sort of lacks a unit like that, and has nothing at all like a Ballista/Petrobolos/Catapult of the other civs. It's almost like you are complaining that it got the 'weakest' unit type possible and yet at least now it has something that is available. Atlantean had nothing to do except lose if you had two semi-fortified positions with towers and buildings before if one can just sit back with catapults and the other one can't. Onager is an example of 1 thing that is required and good to be added for balancing. Roc with catapults meanwhile have shown why catapults are one of the more broken siege units, and were always abused even by higher players. I believe rocs should become slower when carrying more units up to a point, to avoid abuses such as the Roc/Catapult in lategame. Make it so it's a 1-time drop, or able to be chased down once someone has to devote population space/archers and probably also rebuild their TC/buildings, so it can't just relocate and abused to take out more TC/buildings as easily. It's generally only untouchable as a flying unit anyway but should have a nerf when carrying units. Considering they can do something like that, and the roc doesn't become more vulnerable or slow, it is one of many Egypt advantages that are a bit too strong. Catapults especially with rocs could take out any TC or change the game in a few seconds without any possibility of stopping it. Again catapults have to be one of the biggest DPS siege in the game and I believe they needed a nerf in health and damage. As for the other units I sort of agree they are just OP and not well done. Khopesh/Bogwatevers are beatable but have to be some of the most broken units, clearly added by devs who were throwing something in during the year, and then literally left it that way forever. I agree chinese civ was badly done, it adds throw-in units like Cataphract/Horse Archer which seem more like a Persian civ line of units, and doesn't add some cool unique gameplay, instead it was sort of like a Greek clone with gardens, it is still more usable to win with than the usual chinese dlc disliker claims, but yet lacked the uniqueness of the other civs. To that point, it's not even considered to be used, except as a meme that's considered either overpowered or too weak, and can't be taken seriously anyway. (If it's too much to read use teh strategy of just reading the 1st sentence of each paragraph then supporting details as much as interested)
Was about to say this. I think he included it because he really wanted to mention every single civ here, while making his main point. I still agree with the video
I strongly DISAGREE. The EE units only added to the layers of strategic scope of AOM, not lessened it. The Physician is an EXPENSIVE and challenging to use alternative form of healing to Norse spring/valkpassive, and Egyptian heroes, but they have that option now and now suddenly you have this higher skill ceiling for greek and that's just a great thing. Khopesh just carve just a little bit more option for extended classical Egyptian which was just desperately needed, they've been so locked into fast heroic strategies. They're not even that good. And Norse got an archer that is extremely expensive and difficult to train but that's so good with broadening the scope of unit vs. unit interactions you get see in Norse vs. X games. I love these units, they're literally the best part of EE.
i agree with different civilizations having their own unique identity. look at starcraft, its used as a comparison alot but for good reason. zerg are fast, cheap, and units are weak but make up for it with numbers, protoss are slow and exspensive but each unit is a power house. terran and is balance so requires composition. you could make similar comparisons to AoM.
The only thing that made somewhat sense was the norse archer, maybe they shouldnt be that strong but the norse had absolutely no answer to flying myth units, try taking down a phoenix or nidhoggr with axemen who max out at 8 hack damage and dont survive 3 hits from them
Greek has only one anti flying unit. As soon as there are multiple phoenix they can't defend. Not to mention how hard it is for a Greek to kill a nidhogg. Atty can make hero arcus sure... but they are expensive, cost favor which is finite for them and their archers are incredibly squishy. Eggy is the best at dealing with flying myth units and I think that's fine if you ask me. They have the weakest heroes so having them excel in one area seems reasonable to me. Norse get Throwing Axeman (with an upgrade), and Fire Giants as a response to flying units. Clearly all civs bar Eggy struggle against flying units to some degree, but for some reason Norse got an assist and everyone else still struggles. If we are really honest, the only real thing people complained about was the roc, and the problem was that it was too fast to chase down. Only really Hades had a good time at dealing with it. Voobly nerfed the speed to 4.0 and now everything can chase it down.
@@BoItTV Good argument there. I still think the Norse archer should be kept in, but it definitely does need to get nerfed. I think having it as a longer-range option against flying units would still be a good idea (even with bonus damage removed and a overall damage/cost nerf).
I don't really agree. I don't think its good design that a full civilization only functions well in one particular way. It would be better if this kind of assymetry, that is definitely necessary, would be achieved via gods, rather than be present for all gods.
Let's be honest, original vanilla AoM pre Titans expansion was a perfect game. Greek, Egyptians, and Norse all played completely differently from eachother, and only the best players were good at all three. Plus on the ladder, you'd have a good chance of a super compelling same civ different god matchup,, like Zues vs Poisiedan, or Ra vs Set...truly interesting and engaging battles. Look at how many civs Age of Kings has now, it's ridiculous. Even the open source 0ad rts has too many civs and because of it will remain hopelessly unbalanced. AoM should have never been expanded, it ruined the game. Titans were pure cheese and Atlanteans ruined competitive ladder play. Should have stayed the original three basic civilizations.
Ensemble Studios Online offered to play in AoM Vanilla and AoM The Titans on the same server. A symbol next to the nick showed which version you are at. There were quite a few Vanilla players, who competed.
Disagree all you want, when Atlanteans were added, the ladder was basically Oranos pretty much guarantees in every single matchup. I found it incredibly boring. And say what you want about the Chinese, but that expansion was a huge flop. Voobly basically became the hosting platform of choice specifically to avoid playing AoM Chinese. Gaming studios continue to make this basic mistake because they are out to cash grab. Vanilla had a massive ladder that was highly competitive and a well balanced asymmetrical rts experience. So what do they do? Instead of expanding the existing civs, they add cheesy titans and the Atlanteans, fracturing the community into two separate groups, whilst turning the game into Oranos rushing. Yawn.
Understood, you make compelling argument. But I kinda like having the Greek hero healer to heath up my troops. But then I ONLY play solo and the caretakers of Age of Mythology Retold should listen more to the likes of you. And you made good arguments. A civilisation, class, fighter, whatever gains character and depth by both strengths and weaknesses.
You've got Temple of Healing which Zeus and Hades get through Apollo which is nice but thats a lot to sacrifice for a Manticore. Its better at short range than long range due to the shot spread. Underworld Passage is a sick god power though so I tend to go for that over Dionysus. Hydras need be trained killing units to be usable at all too.
Totally agree Boit ! 100% true ! ONAGRE are broken OP, no way to play against Atlanteans in late game, same as Kopesh and Bogswagr, only the healer is not so broken imo
We went 15 years without these units and it worked because each civ was intentionally designed that way. There's a reason why Greek didn't get a healer unit, unless you went Apollo and dragged your units back to base to sit around a temple. They didn't simply forget to give Greeks a healer unit after giving Eggies pharaoh/priest and Norse healing spring and valkyrie. EE is a glorified fan mod.
I don't think MS had anything to do with the dragon expansion. I would be truly shocked if we saw anything from that expansion included at any point in the development of Retold.
Thanks to the introduction of these new additions, resources cost for many things were reduced to "balance" out. I must say I don't like that at the fundamental level.Why China is OP? It got all weaknesses covered. I suppose this is what the "mod devs" of Tale of Dragon think will make China unique. It feels like they ruined the game with an OP faction and try to patch the problem they created in the first place.
There is a balance with 4 factions, chinese are not only disturbing this balance but don't fit remotely in the context of the campaign and feel of the fictional mythological era established. They feel both in terms of gameplay and aesthetics out of place and time.
I don't agree, I think it's describing the Atlanteans, the Chinese are ancient and have a vast Mythology and are THE progenitors of the Asian peoples who make up more than 60% of the world's population. It's not a minority to be ignored. Ever heard of Dragon ball,Kung fu panda? yea? Chinese Mythology is very popular but you haven't noticed yet.Chinese should be included on vanilla
@@foohfreitas6153 I don't argue about Chinese mythology but how it is presented. The Atlanteans also felt out of line when they came up and still are but it would not be realistic for me to support a case against them in the version.
@@foohfreitas6153 one more thing to add, this is about the direction of an rts, in my view a stronger more competitive game in the tracks of starcraft, with fewer (ideally 3) distinct factions is much more powerful in a lot of ways than a more wide selection that either screams Meh or is all over the place with numerous imbalances.
Age of mythology is not actual game, they dont make sequel because the game dont give money, if we look on the AoE games, the AoM mostly die after retold, or it will be retold remaster after the retold will get over 20 years
Starting with 4 villagers instead of 2 or 3 Having Gardens, which can be used to generate resources. Only the Greeks had access to something like that in earlier editions of the game, and even then, they only got it in the Mythic Age, not the early game. It was the Plenty Vault. Cavalry that cost only 1 or 2 population each. Plus, Mounted Archers (MAs) do bonus damage to cavalry, which are the only unit type that can catch up with them. Infantry are not hard-countered by the MAs, but cannot keep up with them. The 'Uproot' and 'Great Flood' God Powers are a bit too strong. Vermilion Birds are also too strong, or they used to be.
@@fishofgold6553 Well thats true but the heroic age units cost alot, and so do the mythic age units...Gardens also cost which make them only max efficiency at max gardens whichs means u have to be late game, 30 food or wood or gold or 3 favor per minute per garden and they only have 400 hp. Mounted archers are archer/cav unit which can be countered by turma for example. You will probably only destroy houses with uproot or 1,2 barracks.Great flood is strong for sure but u if u get masons and upgrades it still becomes kinda meh...
Next video from Boit will expose it xd. I can write a whole essay on what makes them 'broken' or lets say unfitted and unbalanced in the way it is currently implemented. I am fine with the existence of chinese civ to the game, but not the current implementation of it. Now its a mixture of the other civs, and not a complete standalone civ. (looking at building icons ui design, the random gods match maker (often being chinese), some of the original aom campaign objects are from Nu Wah. These arent focussed on balance, but do show the lack of fixes/development to this civ.
Real OP civ, the Greeks. - Villager that collect faster than any other civs, this makes garden meh only Ra can compete at this aspect. - Better soldiers than any other - All minor god is at least very good and the only not good myth unit is hippo(free). - Strongest Titan - Earliest siege weapon, Zeus's Hoplita. - Best Lategame - One of most opressive early game - No Weakness
@@zhang1750 Greece has a weakness. It's called Egypt. And Egyptians and Atlanteans seem to be able to gather resources faster than Greece. Plus, the Norse can train Dwarves to gather gold faster than a Greek while still advancing through the Ages quickly.
Yea I remember when ee came out it split the community, if this new game comes out and it’s trash like ee then it’s gonna ruin the small community it already has and the game will just be dead at certain times and awful no games to play, and then the game will just be 1v1 only maybe some 2v2
"Supposed to bla bla bla" You are just not willing to learn something new. The new units in TOTD adress fundamental problems that some civs had. It's a FLAW in the design that norse has no ranged heroes, not a game feature. Every civ should be able to have a viable response to any strat in the game. When they have fixed these fundamental problems, they can start tweaking things with balance. Koheps raiding is not at as strong as you suggest. It will leave Eggy with a very weak economy. They are not designed to fight that much early on. In fact, the Oranos player can go for instant farms and still be way ahead in eco.
I am very conflicted about this topic. Generally I would agree with you but… idk i am totally no fan of the doc for the Greeks feels out of place und unnecessary. But for example the Norse unit is unit wise quite cool and fitting since Norse should be that Hunter faction and Norse used more bows than throwing axes xD (even throwing axes are indeed quite badass) it’s just the strengths of the unit which make it feel odd. Why is it strong vs myth units/flying units? Make it strong vs other archers for example. About the Egypt unit I can’t say a lot only that I know it’s strong vs villagers is quite affordable and it’s the only new unit the AI really builds. I think visually it looks really damn fitting to the Egypt flair and all but I really can’t talk about it as much as about the other two. Maybe new units for retold would be better or leave the old ones? I am personally quite open for many things ^_^
I agree with most of this, should remove bogsweiger, khopesh and China is too OP. I disagree with onager and healer. Atleantean is weak in late game and building onager makes it balanced bcz all other civ can wall up and start with seige and archers while Atleantean cant
I would argue that at least Bogsveigr was (originaly) the most necessary of all the units added. Him being a ranged anti-MU unit was done so that Norse could FINALY have an anwser to flying units, specificaly the Stymphalian Birds that would otherwise tear Norse armies appart with, practicaly, almost NO counter. However! After the buffs on Axe of Muspell, making it available a whole Age earlier plus a significant cost and research time decrease, that weakness has been answered. So, yeah, the new units can safely be ignored for the remake
ToD need balance or a rework. Most chinese units are way too close to old units, especially mythical units abilities. And some of the news units for older civs are too broken (norse archer for example). And how the fuck the chinese white tiger is balanced ? One of the best burst/stats of the entiere game. It's just a giant tiger ! I hope we will have news civs like AoE II got but with a lot of balancing and identity.
I think 1 completely new civ and a China overhaul as that will be an entirely new civ in and of itself if it is overhauled to a big extent. Balancing should be a massive focus for AoM. And civ bloat (coining the term) needs to stop for these games now. They are being ruined by Microsoft saying we need an expansion to make more money.
I love the greek healer, the fact that is trains out of the TC often makes it not worth to build and has inherit risk in that you're losing economy for the chance to have more pressure. Everything else I agree with though.
If you think of HP as worth resources. I.e. A Hippikon has 150hp and a cost of 120 resources therefore 1 resources = 1.25 HP. Then you can see that the healer is actually a villager in the purest of forms and in some situations can gather way more effective resources than an actual villager can. Thus there is rarely a time at which I would rather an extra villager than this unit.
greek isnt supposed to be healing their centaurs, thats just straight up broken. theres a reason appollo temple healing is in heroic, and restoration is locked to only one god.
@@KeeNGaming pulling them back to heal isn't even worth it most of the time because centaurs are a time gates strat. Having them idle for so long takes away so much of your pressure
@@KeeNGaming I would say hersir investment is very different than centaur investment and having those idle is considerably different. Also it's a god power not a unit from the TC that heals one at a time
yeah all those new units were ass and I hate all of them, You've got to remember remaster teams don't know how to balance. They should of just made a new civ with all those units.
Basically the greeks were powerful and expensive. The units generally cost more because they were stronger. Norse units and buildings were weaker but the units were cheaper. Like were like ants and could spread fast with military that could build. Eggy was the medium. The vills built slower but they had ways to compensate and the towers upgraded for free upon age up. They could boom and be deadly in heroic age. A turtle civ
I just want more heroes and myth units, and maybe some new buildings. Like a Partenon for Greeks, a big river-like farm for Egyptians (although thats more of a Mesopotamian thing?) and idk what for norse, they werent really known for their building. Mayhaps a runestone building?
No comment for kopesh tho.... seems like kopesh is OK? Come on. EE is OK. A balance patch would fix the problems. The main issue of the EE was the graphics and the lag with this bad p2p connection. The update has improved the graphics enough. If the worked more on the balance it would be pretty fine. The new units should not be removed but be balanced.
I agree totally that Asymmetry is what makes AoM the great game it is, but with the new units, I feel that the genie has escaped the bottle. Rather than simply removing the new units, which is unlikely to happen, I think it would be better to heavenly rework them. .For Hippocrates, make it much more expensive, 250food, 50gold, 20favor, and lock it behind Heroic age. .The Bogsveigir, remove its anti-myth ability or make it a hero and limit its numbers, plus make it more expensive or increase the pop requirement to 3. Another thing to do is make it anti-cav, like towers, but slow, and for goodness sake, LOWER ITS DAMAGE! .Khopesh Swordsman, make it 50 food, 30gold, make it classical age and keep it ONLY good against villagers, oxcarts, and caravans; give it low attack but a bonus against sort of thing, maybe. .Onager, a complete rework here, make it have like 7 small stone projectiles with a massive spread pattern, but it does moderate to little damage to buildings and is instead a scattershot anti-infantry blob weapon, like a defensive later game longer range Cheiroballista but slower and more expensive. .For China, I think that the devs wanted to make them a jack of all trades, master of none faction, which they over-tuned. I would change them so they would maybe have a harmony mechanic similar to the one used for Cathey in TWW3, where all infantry/cav or human units are weak but moderately priced (perhaps overpriced individually) by they get a bonus which makes them equivalent to cost value when in proximity to another human unit type and get a tiny extra bonus if a third human unit type is about, kinda like a forced, combined arms army. It would take a lot of tuning with the bonuses to make it not op, but one thing that could mitigate is medium-priced individual upgrades like Egypt but more expensive per upgrade, forcing you to choose which units in your combined arms army is going to be better but not so cheap as to just enchorage use of one unit. Also, make myth units strong but expensive with monks cheaper and make heroes get progressively more expensive as you buy more. I think these changes, if tuned right, would make china weak in the early and late game but strong mid, jack of all trades in the centre and yin&yan sort of theme.
I agree, that's one of the best balance ideas. Make bogwatever as a stronger archer hero that costs more wood/gold, like Jarl not classified as 'hero', can be made one time, but has a bonus against myth units. It may be only exceptional 3.5x to 5x against flying units. Then like 2x or normal rate similar to Jarl against myth units, so it would be a good help if created, with a higher wood cost like 200-250. Otherwise just take the existing unit, and make it cost absurdly high wood like 110-130 each, so that spamming it is a big mistake but making like a few against birds would be an option.
