DotW: AoE-2 resist in AoE3?
DotW: AoE-2 resist in AoE3?
I'm stealing noel's idea, though he didn't really went with it further and I hope he doesn't mind
Discussion of the Week #2:
If you could, would you change the current units' resist system to the one from Age of Empires 2?
Basically, in the previous release of the game franchise units would have 2 different types of resist: melee and range, expressed by sheer numbers. It would work in a way that the eventual damage done to a unit would equal to total attack of an attacker (including all bonuses), decreased by the resist of a defender — similarly to how it works in Age of Empires 3, with the difference being that in AoE2 subtract a specific number instead of multiplying it by a number <1. For instance, a Huskarl has 0 melee armour and 6 pierce armour, a Samurai 8 attack and an Archer has 4 attack. The Samurai would do 8 + 10 (hidden bonus vs unique units) – 0 (Huskarl's melee armour) = full 18 damage to the Huskarl, whereas the Archer would do 4 – 6 (Huskarl's pierce armour) = –2 => 1, as a hit always takes at least 1 HP from a damaged unit. AoE-2 resists change with upgrades, depend on unit types etc.
Side note: in AoE 2 ranged units have no melee damage — they generally fire their arrows/shots/throw axes/javelins/whatever regardless of the distance (think of Dragoons in regular Stagger Mode in AoE3).
What it does is making units vulnerable to certain damage. The aforementioned Huskarls excel versus ranged units, but are relatively weak to anything in hand combat. Pretty much the same is implied in AoE3, though to a lesser extent. However, in AoE2 troops can have both melee and pierce armour, making them stronger overall and less exposed to particular types of military. The AoE-2 counterpart also scales differently depending on the duration of the game, as it subtracts a certain number from the total damage instead of dividing a given percent. When two soldiers with 10 and 100 ranged attack face 2 units with 4 pierce armour and 10% ranged resist, respectively, the former will take 6 and 96 damage, whereas the latter — 9 and 90 damage.
The idea translates to another question of a similar kind: would you allow units to have 2 types of resist in AoE3?
In my personal opinion it could let the game to be more balanced in certain cases, as two types of resists are more direct stats about units and can be tweaked differently, having a more direct impact in particular circumstances. Imagine giving 10% ranged resist to heavy infantry units on top of their melee resist, hand-combat armour to Yabusame and so on. It would certainly have the potential to make the game more in-depth. In AoE2 a lot of units are being balanced by adding and removing some a couple of points from their armours. On the other hand, this can be done by just giving troops additional HP.
What are your opinions on this matter? Share them below and let the discussion begin!
Discussion of the Week #2:
If you could, would you change the current units' resist system to the one from Age of Empires 2?
Basically, in the previous release of the game franchise units would have 2 different types of resist: melee and range, expressed by sheer numbers. It would work in a way that the eventual damage done to a unit would equal to total attack of an attacker (including all bonuses), decreased by the resist of a defender — similarly to how it works in Age of Empires 3, with the difference being that in AoE2 subtract a specific number instead of multiplying it by a number <1. For instance, a Huskarl has 0 melee armour and 6 pierce armour, a Samurai 8 attack and an Archer has 4 attack. The Samurai would do 8 + 10 (hidden bonus vs unique units) – 0 (Huskarl's melee armour) = full 18 damage to the Huskarl, whereas the Archer would do 4 – 6 (Huskarl's pierce armour) = –2 => 1, as a hit always takes at least 1 HP from a damaged unit. AoE-2 resists change with upgrades, depend on unit types etc.
Side note: in AoE 2 ranged units have no melee damage — they generally fire their arrows/shots/throw axes/javelins/whatever regardless of the distance (think of Dragoons in regular Stagger Mode in AoE3).
What it does is making units vulnerable to certain damage. The aforementioned Huskarls excel versus ranged units, but are relatively weak to anything in hand combat. Pretty much the same is implied in AoE3, though to a lesser extent. However, in AoE2 troops can have both melee and pierce armour, making them stronger overall and less exposed to particular types of military. The AoE-2 counterpart also scales differently depending on the duration of the game, as it subtracts a certain number from the total damage instead of dividing a given percent. When two soldiers with 10 and 100 ranged attack face 2 units with 4 pierce armour and 10% ranged resist, respectively, the former will take 6 and 96 damage, whereas the latter — 9 and 90 damage.
The idea translates to another question of a similar kind: would you allow units to have 2 types of resist in AoE3?
In my personal opinion it could let the game to be more balanced in certain cases, as two types of resists are more direct stats about units and can be tweaked differently, having a more direct impact in particular circumstances. Imagine giving 10% ranged resist to heavy infantry units on top of their melee resist, hand-combat armour to Yabusame and so on. It would certainly have the potential to make the game more in-depth. In AoE2 a lot of units are being balanced by adding and removing some a couple of points from their armours. On the other hand, this can be done by just giving troops additional HP.
What are your opinions on this matter? Share them below and let the discussion begin!
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist?
Makes a more natural role for the arsenal. Blacksmith was a cool way to allow tech diversity even in age 2
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist?
Indeed, in AoE3 the resist stays the same throughout the entire game, whereas in AoE2 it was constantly changed by upgrades. Think of cards adding more resist or changing units' resist types! Bow Riders with RR? No problem!
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist?
Well there's that one Chinese card which makes Cav get more RR.
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist?
That's just an exception from a general rule, unfortunately
-
- Ninja
- Posts: 13004
- Joined: Apr 28, 2020
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist?
Ive thought about this a few years ago, and i think it would be cool to have multiple sorts of resist. Im not sure about percentages or actual numbers, its seems that numbers favor high attack units whereas percentages favor high hp units, but percentages are probably easier to balance.
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist?
Well, if you can add or remove at least 10 percent-points, then it's a rather big change. Goons' nerf wouldn't be so significant had their resist been changed by like 2 points.
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist?
Yeah I think that the arsenal upgrades would be way cooler if they acted on things other than attack and HP, like make resist, range, or rate of fire. Would make the arsenal more interesting imo.
somppukunkku wrote:This is not a fucking discogame.
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist?
I liked the EP 2 meta a lot, when you would build Arsenal every game to get CIR
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 2549
- Joined: Jun 28, 2015
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist?
ranged units do have melee attacks. Mameluks, axemen, gbeto all do melee damage. about the blacksmith in aoe 2.blacksmith ups are kinda overrated with regards to how much diversity they bring. They dont make the game much more diverse because they are so incredible good in aoe 2 that everyone is rushing for them. So usually you just end up fighting against some1 with the exact same upgrades like you have.
breeze wrote: they cant even guess how much f***ing piece of stupid retarded they look they are trying to give lesson to people who are over pr35 and know the best mu. im pretty sure that we need a page that only pr30+ post and then we could have a nice discussins.
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist?
lordraphael wrote:ranged units do have melee attacks. Mameluks, axemen, gbeto all do melee damage. about the blacksmith in aoe 2.blacksmith ups are kinda overrated with regards to how much diversity they bring. They dont make the game much more diverse because they are so incredible good in aoe 2 that everyone is rushing for them. So usually you just end up fighting against some1 with the exact same upgrades like you have.
What makes the difference in aoe2, are the bonuses that each civ gets, for example a MU of Koreans vs Mayans, if both players decide to go for archers, the Mayan player is probably going to win considering the fact that Mayan is an archer civ and koreans not so, mayans get bonuses like cheaper archers, while Koreans doesn't get bonuses for archers, and this all despite having the same updgrades for archers.
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist?
lordraphael wrote:ranged units do have melee attacks. Mameluks, axemen, gbeto all do melee damage. about the blacksmith in aoe 2.blacksmith ups are kinda overrated with regards to how much diversity they bring. They dont make the game much more diverse because they are so incredible good in aoe 2 that everyone is rushing for them. So usually you just end up fighting against some1 with the exact same upgrades like you have.
I wrote: generally, that would be unnecessary to explain in the OP, plus I meant that AoE-2 units don't switch to melee in close combat like their AoE-3 counterparts.
I would disagree — Blacksmith plays a great role throughout the game and especially in later stages of it. Lacking basic upgrades usually leads to losing mirror encounters. Technological tree basically decides about your army composition — with no Bloodlines, for instance, players very rarely go for any stable-based play. Moreover, in the Feudal Age you tend to see players put on a big advantage when they possess an upgrade on their units that their opponents don't have — think about Archery Range wars with one player having Fletching and the other not.
- gamevideo113
- Howdah
- Posts: 1899
- Joined: Apr 26, 2017
- ESO: gamevideo113
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist?
While being mainly an aoe2 player, no, i prefer the aoe3 resist system to the aoe2 armor system. Imo it is just better for the gameplay to have multipliers instead of addition and subtraction and here's why:
Let's say for example that you have an archer with 5 attack hitting a knight with 4 pierce armor. Your damage output is 5-4=1. A single upgrade to your archer can bring its attack to 6, which might seem small at a first glance, but in the previous scenario we would now have 6-4=2, exactly double the damage output compared to the first case. All this is to say that you can't really afford to use unupgraded units, and upgrades are expensive. This is basically why the aoe2 meta is mono army comp based while in aoe3 you can also have 2 or 3 completely different kinds of units in your army. Unit transitions (e.g. from inf to cav) are also way easier in aoe3 for the same reason. I find the aoe3 model way more interesting to see as it gives more possibilities and it is easier to balance.
About the second point: i don't think it is necessary to have two split resistances. If you have a unit with 200 hitpoints and give them 25% melee resist and 50% ranged resist you basically have a unit with 250 melee hitpoints and 300 ranged hitpoints. But at this point you might as well just make the unit's base health 250 and give it a 20% ranged resist to achieve the same result (i'm not taking into consideration the bombard attack of abus guns and artillery since i'm not 100% sure about how that works).
The aoe2 armor system is nice and works fine in aoe2 but i think that it is limiting compared to the aoe3 system.
Let's say for example that you have an archer with 5 attack hitting a knight with 4 pierce armor. Your damage output is 5-4=1. A single upgrade to your archer can bring its attack to 6, which might seem small at a first glance, but in the previous scenario we would now have 6-4=2, exactly double the damage output compared to the first case. All this is to say that you can't really afford to use unupgraded units, and upgrades are expensive. This is basically why the aoe2 meta is mono army comp based while in aoe3 you can also have 2 or 3 completely different kinds of units in your army. Unit transitions (e.g. from inf to cav) are also way easier in aoe3 for the same reason. I find the aoe3 model way more interesting to see as it gives more possibilities and it is easier to balance.
About the second point: i don't think it is necessary to have two split resistances. If you have a unit with 200 hitpoints and give them 25% melee resist and 50% ranged resist you basically have a unit with 250 melee hitpoints and 300 ranged hitpoints. But at this point you might as well just make the unit's base health 250 and give it a 20% ranged resist to achieve the same result (i'm not taking into consideration the bombard attack of abus guns and artillery since i'm not 100% sure about how that works).
The aoe2 armor system is nice and works fine in aoe2 but i think that it is limiting compared to the aoe3 system.
[Some people aspire to be pr30+, some people aspire to have fun, and some people aspire to play 3v3 Deccan.] - vividlyplain - 2019
Who (nationality) rape ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 2549
- Joined: Jun 28, 2015
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist?
pecelot wrote:lordraphael wrote:ranged units do have melee attacks. Mameluks, axemen, gbeto all do melee damage. about the blacksmith in aoe 2.blacksmith ups are kinda overrated with regards to how much diversity they bring. They dont make the game much more diverse because they are so incredible good in aoe 2 that everyone is rushing for them. So usually you just end up fighting against some1 with the exact same upgrades like you have.
I wrote: generally, that would be unnecessary to explain in the OP, plus I meant that AoE-2 units don't switch to melee in close combat like their AoE-3 counterparts.
I would disagree — Blacksmith plays a great role throughout the game and especially in later stages of it. Lacking basic upgrades usually leads to losing mirror encounters. Technological tree basically decides about your army composition — with no Bloodlines, for instance, players very rarely go for any stable-based play. Moreover, in the Feudal Age you tend to see players put on a big advantage when they possess an upgrade on their units that their opponents don't have — think about Archery Range wars with one player having Fletching and the other not.
my point is that because they are so important every player will get them asap resulting in no side having any advantage. Also most 1v1s are mirrors which means same army comp for both players
breeze wrote: they cant even guess how much f***ing piece of stupid retarded they look they are trying to give lesson to people who are over pr35 and know the best mu. im pretty sure that we need a page that only pr30+ post and then we could have a nice discussins.
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist in AoE3?
But it's not like the entire game is a mirror, you get advantages here and there — you skip scouts and make archers sooner, you sacrifice blacksmith upgrades for idk a 3rd archery range, above all you age up to Castle earlier than your opponent (not to mention Imperial) and get all of the upgrades earlier, too
- gamevideo113
- Howdah
- Posts: 1899
- Joined: Apr 26, 2017
- ESO: gamevideo113
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist in AoE3?
pecelot wrote:But it's not like the entire game is a mirror, you get advantages here and there — you skip scouts and make archers sooner, you sacrifice blacksmith upgrades for idk a 3rd archery range, above all you age up to Castle earlier than your opponent (not to mention Imperial) and get all of the upgrades earlier, too
Well, actually you almost never want to skip your blacksmith upgrades, especially if you add a third archery range in feudal (which is unusual), in fact the upgrade would be even more important since you have a bigger number of archers. However lordraphael is right, if the players are playing mirror civ it is also very likely that they are going to have mirror strats (depending on how your map is generated, a wallable map opens up more opportunities)
[Some people aspire to be pr30+, some people aspire to have fun, and some people aspire to play 3v3 Deccan.] - vividlyplain - 2019
Who (nationality) rape ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist in AoE3?
It might have been a bit of an exaggeration, I must admit, though it was just an example. I know there's usually not much difference in time of both players' age-ups, though still, there is — that's the time you abuse your technological advantage — vide trebuchets, crossbowmen etc. — just like in AoE3 — vide Brit mirrors.
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist in AoE3?
Ah, the good old days where the bracer tech would make or break your match. The aoe 2 system allowed for multiple resistances on same unit, and aom had crush damage/resist too.
Error 404: Signature not found
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist in AoE3?
I disagree, most games aren't mirror civs, i watch a lot of streamers of Aoe2 and i rarely see mirror.
- Gichtenlord
- Howdah
- Posts: 1437
- Joined: Nov 15, 2015
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist in AoE3?
Hun mirrors on Arabia Kreygasm
+ in AoC you have the random mirror thing, not present in AoE3
+ in AoC you have the random mirror thing, not present in AoE3
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist in AoE3?
Well that's true, Hun mirrors on Arabia are pretty common. in fact, if i'm not mistaken, in voobly hun mirror on arabia have is own ladder.
- gamevideo113
- Howdah
- Posts: 1899
- Joined: Apr 26, 2017
- ESO: gamevideo113
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist in AoE3?
Jjtuxtron wrote:Well that's true, Hun mirrors on Arabia are pretty common. in fact, if i'm not mistaken, in voobly hun mirror on arabia have is own ladder.
It doesn't
[Some people aspire to be pr30+, some people aspire to have fun, and some people aspire to play 3v3 Deccan.] - vividlyplain - 2019
Who (nationality) rape ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
stupid logic. noob players can say op?
toxic, Insult, Racism ?
Re: DotW: AoE-2 resist in AoE3?
It's different in some cases, which can be considered interesting I suppose, but also can be considered as bringing less balance to the game. If you'd apply the resistances like in aoe2 to aoe3 attack and hp numbers it'd probably be really similair though.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests