Biggest AOE 2 DE PUP changes

[Zbyszek]

I think the devs arent listening to the plebs from reddit. I think they are the the plebs from reddit!

Elo calculation is completeley broken,
Lobby browser lacks features and is buggy af,
Restoring also buggy af,
Performance is ass,
Disconnects,
ballancing is a lottery,
The matchmaker doesnt even consider map bans,
Units and vills still idle all the time for no reason,
AI is still worse than barbarian even tho it was promised to be a huge step forward on release,
no spec chat,
archers cant shoot after canceling attacks and hitboxes are way too tiny making their shots too easy to dodge,

So what do they do?
Release Empire wars, a completely unballanced gamemode that has received no attention since RBW
Release Age Royale, which is also a completely unballanced meme mode
release new civs which are obviously broken. you can see that they cant come up with any half decent unique ideas anymore.

The HD-Vibes are huge...
And after all its the same people that ****ed up that **** already. I would like to say i am not surprised anymore. But these guys manage to disappoint you harder and harder every time.

At least there is a safespace called voobly for this game where you can play a flawed but sane version.

 

[Paint]

I'm still sad for the TURKS. No little buff, and their trash units in imp (not counting the scout-line) is so underwhelming.

Turks have literally the best trash unit in the game and people still complain. If it comes to late game trash wars Turks are actually insane.

 

[Paint]

I don't like most of the changes they made to nomad in DE. If you want to actually make nomad better go back to original balance and map script. Then give all civs 50 extra wood on nomad maps so everyone has the Persian start and it would be great. Maybe reduce the Spanish extra building speed in dark age also. Chinese would get back there iconic nomad start but couldn't get the pre TC dock + fish and Huns would still be trash and everything would be as it is meant to be.

 

[Tiekel]

Top nomad civs are also kinda fixed and I didn't see it mentioned here yet:


If that's the case, I am not sure if I like it, those civs had an identity on nomad specific maps.

I don't mind this at all, gets so tiring always seeing the same 3 civs. Would it be far fetched to say they were the most OP civs out of any one map type? At least annoying as hell

 

[Vossn]

Not sure how they will be affected at high level, but they needed a lil change, having +2vill and cheaper techs is just busted. Also the idea that it makes easier for lower elo is nice too, as chinese had the biggest difference in win rate between low and high level players.

I mean, theys still have +2 vills and cheaper techs, now you'll just be able to maintain tc production. Essentially it made the civ a whole lot easier to play, whilst nerfing it only slightly at the top level(perhaps like 5 second behind in tc working time.

On the changes themselves, Spanish seem very interesting, though I don't think they needed changing, I think they were fine as they were. Malay seem very nice as well. If I get back into the game, first thing I'll do probably will be renewing my spanish builds, I think extended feudal scout-skirm could be quite interesting. Especially when you have a very open gold, which you can't defend.

One civ in particular I'm disappointed with is Koreans. They gave the bonus they should (in my opinion) give to them, namely cheaper wood costs for siege, which is a logical extension of their discount bonus, to another civ. Whilst it's one of the worst performing civs in the game, and they often just feel a bit rough to play. Other civs might have needed changes as well, but I don't know those as well.
Other changes just don't seem like they will matter enough, like the heavy scorp price reduction. The new greek fire bonus also seems a bit oddly small, etc.

Don't particularly know what to think of the patch, many changes, but not always on the places where I would have wanted them, or I feel large enough to be impactful.

 

[slothismysin]

According to TriRem there are some changes not covered in the video:

All of April’s PUP changes are previewed in Ornlu’s video!

Posted in r/aoe2 by u/alexshu97 • 121 points and 45 comments

old.reddit.com

What are they? I have seen:

• cannon galleons also now have attack ground
• Greek Fire now adds a cool animation to the cannonball!

I'm sure there are more.

@hellhammer it would be great if you could update the OP with the missing changes

 

[arizonatears]

It'll be fun to see how these changes actually play out, reading about it is one thing, actually playing is another. I remember when everyone thought Bohemian trash monks would break the game 11. Slavs seem like they could be a real force with longswords in early castle age.

 

[SouFire]

It'll be fun to see how these changes actually play out, reading about it is one thing, actually playing is another. I remember when everyone thought Bohemian trash monks would break the game 11. Slavs seem like they could be a real force with longswords in early castle age.

That argument applies to new games, aoe2 is a +24 years old game, units like arambai, organ guns and such were broken without even testing, cause high DPS and cost based on wood and gold only is really easy to abuse with no eco behind, there is no need to test at this point such things, hidden data provides all we need to know to know, the same happened to shrivamsha rider and steppe lancer at their release.

Bohemians trash monks are broken, there is no doubt about it, problem is the civ had those houfnices breaking the whole siege balance and post imp army compositions, make no mistake bohemian trash monks are as broken as aztecs monks, they just need the perfect conditions to be noticed, we don't need to wait another big final like nac4 to see the game being defined by some awful balance design.

Some infantry civs will be broken at early imperial age, take obuch as an example but now multiply it by barracks production and lots of civ bonuses.

 

[USC_kiky]

Boosting the militia line and nerfing eagles at the same time is indeed a risky move. Eagles were designed to counter only ranged units. However, with the extra pierce armor for champions, maybe it's preferrable to go for champions instead of eagles now even for Aztecs when the enemy masses ranged units.

 

[Ariota]

Turks have literally the best trash unit in the game and people still complain. If it comes to late game trash wars Turks are actually insane.

No, Turks don't have the best trash unit in the game (their Hussar just have 1 extra pierce armor and that's it; only helps vs ranged units and when destroying TCs, but still dies hard vs halbs). It's completely unfair to Turks only having spearman and regular skirms in imperial age. Not a single civ has that, only Turks. Besides, giving to them the elite skirm upgrade in imperial age wouldn't make them super damn strong. They still have problems vs strong arba + halbs civs such as Mayans and Ethiopians, not to mention many strong archers civs also have good eco bonuses.

 

[kalpit00]

Boosting the militia line and nerfing eagles at the same time is indeed a risky move. Eagles were designed to counter only ranged units. However, with the extra pierce armor for champions, maybe it's preferrable to go for champions instead of eagles now even for Aztecs when the enemy masses ranged units.

no 11, champs will still always die to ranged units the later the game goes. Eagles are 1000 times better than champs vs Ranged units, and its not only due to their pierce armor, its due to their speed and cheap food cost. 40f champ vs 25f eagle still is a significant difference when it comes to massing units.

 

[USC_kiky]

Lol you are ignoring the big difference in gold cost and discussing like eagle is a gold-free unit. If one goes for champ he still has the gold for arbelest or monks, but if you go for eagles, you can only follow up with skirmishers or pikes as you probably have run out of gold 11

 

[kalpit00]

However, with the extra pierce armor for champions, maybe it's preferrable to go for champions instead of eagles now even for Aztecs when the enemy masses ranged units.

If one goes for champ he still has the gold for arbelest or monks

Look at the argument my friend. Your opponent is massing Ranged Units and you are going Champions? First of all, you will die in castle age. If you have the option of EWs as a meso civ, why exactly are you trying to go Longswords?

Don't know what you are smoking, but the way Eagles works is that they are a counter to mass ranged units, like xbows and arb. And Champs are not. They are the last unit you want as Aztecs in this situation.

but if you go for eagles, you can only follow up with skirmishers or pikes as you probably have run out of gold 11

really now? I wonder what is more scary vs massed xbows : 30 EWs Aztec player hitting imp, or for some weird reason, an Aztec player who has 30 longswords and has survived till imp against mass xbows.

Elite Eagle +4 are two clicks away and the game is over. -100 vils, - all the massed xbows (and arbs if he is also imp). all extra golds + more eagles.

 

[USC_kiky]

I was talking about Champion, so I don't know why you are still hallucinating about an castle age fight with longswords. No one uses longswords in this game dude 11

40f champ vs 25f eagle still is a significant difference when it comes to massing units.

And why did you ignore the gold cost? 11 Gold is not infinite in a 1v1 fight. If you are talking about team games where trading is available, in fact arbeslest or xbow is usually the preferred unit for meso civs in team games as they are often the flanks.

With the faster upgrade of militia line, if one side started with ranged units while the other side messes eagles, it's very easy and intuitive for the ranged unit player to add some champs as the meat field, but it's very hard for the eagle player to switch its unit once they run out of gold. You see the difference now? It may be even safer to go with skirmishers + Champ if the whole point of messing eagles is to counter the ranged units with this new patch. That's what I am saying.

 

[Paint]

No, Turks don't have the best trash unit in the game (their Hussar just have 1 extra pierce armor and that's it; only helps vs ranged units and when destroying TCs, but still dies hard vs halbs).

It's almost like you can use all that gold you saved from not having to pay for Hussar upgrade to make HC.

 

[kalpit00]

I was talking about Champion, so I don't know why you are still hallucinating about an castle age fight with longswords. No one uses longswords in this game dude 11



And why did you ignore the gold cost? 11 Gold is not infinite in a 1v1 fight. If you are talking about team games where trading is available, in fact arbeslest or xbow is usually the preferred unit for meso civs in team games as they are often the flanks.

With the faster upgrade of militia line, if one side started with ranged units while the other side messes eagles, it's very easy and intuitive for the ranged unit player to add some champs as the meat field, but it's very hard for the eagle player to switch its unit once they run out of gold. You see the difference now? It may be even safer to go with skirmishers + Champ if the whole point of messing eagles is to counter the ranged units with this new patch. That's what I am saying.

I am lost at how disillusioned you are at how this game works. So you say it is "easy" for someone who is massing ranged units to add Champs as their meat shield vs a player who is going eagles as counter for the ranged units to switch their comp because gold will run out?

I still don't know what you are smoking but i'd like a hit of that.

Let me give you 5 reasons to try and clarify because that thing you are smoking seems to have clouded your understanding of this situation

1) As someone who is massing ranged units in castle age, there is an entire "age" which they need to survive until they can get to imp and make Champions.
2) As someone who is making EWs to counter the massed ranged units, well first of all, they are 1 cleanup away from snowballing and raiding to victory. I don't know how you perceive the xbow player can survive an entire castle age vs pure eagle mass without making knights or longswords

Since you already said the ranged player is stubborn and going to make only Champions in imperial age, I am gonna go ahead and bribe the EW player nicely to let you survive the entirety of castle age. Peace treaty. Go on, both players just boom to imp
Come imperial age, both players have like a good mass of 30 EWs and 30 xbows (still not sure how the xbows survive in a real game but hey the bribe must be good money)

3) After an entire age of fear, finally the time comes when he can make Champions to save himself. But wait, he needs to upgrade MAA, Longsword, THS and then Champion. Not only that, he needs to make 5-6 barracks, and get all the infantry blacksmith upgrades. Oh I wonder if the Peace Treaty lasts long enough for that to happen
4) Meanwhile, the Eagle player lost his patience. Sadge the bribe wasn't enough, he decided to click 2 buttons : Elite Eagle Warrior and +4 Plate Mail and SENDS IT. Well what do you know, the opponent is down to 50 vils, 0 army and is getting raided everywhere. But hey, the Champion Tech kicked in!! Entire eco idle, no working farmers or map control but the Champion Tech is here. He makes 1 Champion and is waiting for the Eagle player to run out of gold
5) Meanwhile the Eagle player has all map control in the world, all the extra gold and wonders why his opponent is not calling gg. Oh, he knows it. While he was raiding with Elite Eagles, he was also clicking MAA, Longsword, THS and then Champion in one of his barracks. When the opponent made that 1 champion to prove his point, the Eagle player brought forward his FU Champions with all infantry upgrades, because apparently "he was going to run out of gold to transition into something else".

My dear friend, it was more easier for the Eagle player to show up with a FU Champion before the guy massing ranged units 11

I hope this is enough humor for you to understand

 

[RobChang]

Ugh, the pros performed so badly with Hindustanis in nac and devs left it alone

They didnt. The better player just won with the meta civ on the map in most cases.

If you remove influence of better opponent with better civ then the winrate becomes pretty much around 50/50 with sample size below 5.

 

[Davion]

Twas a joke but thanks Rob for being mini Nerfox and making a sheet for me

 

[Tocaraca]

With my testing, it seems that organ guns with only 7 attack (9 for elite) even with each projectile dealing full damage and extra projectiles added are extremely weak. They were given +1 vs infantry but they still get shredded by karambits and champions even with micro. The DPS is simply too low

 

[JayGould]

Does anyone know which day the patch becomes official? Is it this Saturday (April 1st)?

 

[Lokalo]

Btw, don't think I heard in any other video it mentioned, they finally added small trees into the game. Also idle pointers.

Credits to Iron Kaiser Gaming, took pics from his UT video.

 

[Socksyy]

They've heard of small trees yes but have they heard of smol trees

 

[oozkan]

Like every balance change, they manage to nerf Turks even more.

I guess these devs are all based in Vienna...

 

[Tocaraca]

Like every balance change, they manage to nerf Turks even more.

I guess these devs are all based in Vienna...

Turks have been extremely oppressive on arena. The nerf to the cost of Artillery will not affect their performance on open maps where they are weaker, it just nerfs them at the stage of the game where they are strongest and will kill you

 

[oakaoe]

Am I the only one who's not a fan of trying to balance all civs for 1v1 (pro) Arabia?
Imho it was always the charm that certain civs are very good on closed maps, water maps, fast open maps, some only perform well in team games, etc... Of course, since 90% of the tourneys are (pro) 1v1s that skews public perception a bit, and I am dreading KOTD5 in this regard, but I always was fine with Spanish being a go to Civ for 4v4 Pocket and useless for 1v1 Arabia, or Turks being super strong on Arena but probably not the best choice for other maps.
Not necessarily related to these changes, just a general question how people feel..