Goodspeed wrote:momuuu wrote:Wait but this isn't really true is it? Many aoe2 unique units fits roles that already exist.
The unique ones often don't. Not always, but often. That you can think of examples where they do fit existing roles of standard units does not invalidate my point because my point is about the comparison between 2 games, I'm not stating in absolute terms that all of AoE2's unique units are better than all of AoE3's unique units. Remember, there are 31 civs in that game.
They just have tiny unique aspects to them that usually simply make them a bit better. In that sense I think aoe3's unique units are similair. Longbows are tweaked xbows/skirms,
Longbows were one of the examples of units that I think are well-designed unique units. They are actually not tweaked xbows/skirms. They are worse against musks and better against tanky units and they have higher range. They actually feel unique.
Dutch has Ruyters which are very similair to goons,
Right, Ruyters are an example of a "pretend unique" unit because they fill the exact same role as goons.
In this there is a significant difference in uniqueness between longbows and ruyters. This has been my point. In AoE3, most unique units are like ruyters in that they fall into an existing type and fill the exact same role as other units of that type, e.g. cuirs, uhlans, lancers, axe riders, cassadors, wakina, yumi, ashi, sepoy, zamburak, sowar, I could go on.
Compare this to aoe2 unique units: Longbows are simply archers with more range (less unique than brit longbows in aoe3 really).
To be fair the range difference in AoE2 is much greater than in AoE3. Longbows outrange just about everything in AoE2, which makes them feel very different than others archers. But I agree that AoE3's longbows are a proper unique unit, like I said.
Cataphracts are like Lancers in a sense.
Cataphracts are pretend-unique. I'm not saying every unique unit in AoE2 is better than every unique unit in AoE3. There is just more uniqueness to be found in AoE2, because it has a more complex counter system which gave them room to design more unique units, and they took more liberty with stats like speed, RoF and range. If not more uniqueness, certainly not less, which is the initial statement that I disagreed with ITT. In AoE3 I can count the number of viable unique units that actually feel unique on 1 hand.
Some of the units feel more unique but thats probably because the counter system is so complex, whereas in aoe3 the units just feel like a variation on skirms/anticav/cav because thats how our game works.
Yep that's my point. There is less variety because in AoE3 the designers have mostly tried to make even the unique units fit into existing unit types and that is significantly limiting the unique "feel" of the units. There are
so many examples of "unique" units that don't feel unique in AoE3.
In general I kind of agree. However, you're too quick to dismiss aoe3's unique units as rare and abnormal and aoe2's units that aren't unique as anomalies. I did actually take a look at the list.
Aoe2:
Longbowman: not very unique, just extra range
Cataphract: reasonably unique, splash + bonus vs infantry
Woad Raider:
Chu ko No: Literally a better xbow
Throwing axeman: Ranged champion
Huskarl: Actually a very unique unit, its a fast anti archer infantry
Samurai: Basically a champion that also counters champions
Mangudai: Basically a cav archer with a bonus against siege engines
War Elephant: Basically an improved ram
Mameluke: Ranged camel
Teutonic knight: Pretty unique unit I think, can't think of anything similair
Janissary: Hand cannoneer
Berserk:
Jaguar Warrior: It's like the samurai
Tarkan: cavalry good against buildings - it's somewhat useless though
War wagon: 'high-armored cavalry archer'
Plumed Archer: Basically a better archer
Conquistador: Basically a variation of a cav archer
And then the most recent expansions I don't actually know any units, plus I left some blanks. But are these units that unique? I see mostly improvements of standard units. The thing that makes them feel more unique is that the counter system is so well designed that changing the strength of one specific unit type has a big impact on the way the game plays. However, the units an sich are not more unique. For comparison, lets look at aoe3:
Brits: Longbows, completely different type of skirmisher, very unique
Dutch: No actual truly unique units, Ruyter is basically a reskin
France: CDB and Cuirs are reasonably unique although simply improved versions of their counterparts
Germany: Dopps are pretty unique with the splash damage, war wagons function very differently from goons
Otto: Abus guns are entirely different units from skirms
Portuguese: Cassadores are skirmishers with more range resist and fewer hp
Russia: Strelets are very unique cannon fodder skirms with low range but good cost efficiency. Oprichniks are completely unique
Spain: Rods are faster pikes, Lancers have a bonus vs Heavy infantry
Iro: Mantlets, Rams and Light cannons are all unique although meh. Aennas are unique archers with more dps, speed and ROF
Sioux: Bow riders are improved versions of ranged cav to the point where they function well against heavy infantry
Aztec: Maces, Coyotes, Eagle runners, arrow knights and JPKs are all rather unique
Japan: Samurais and yabusames are pretty unique, so are flaming arrows
India: Elephants and rajputs are unique, although somewhat bad, same with flail elephants and siege elephants
China: I'd say meteor hammers function differently, with a ranged attack. Flame throwers and hand mortars are quite special however they're both quite weak.
I'd say for aoe2 there are these categories:
Civs whose unique unit is literally just the same but slightly better: CKN, Janissary, Plumed archer, Conquistador, War Wagon (5/16 units I understand)
Civs whose unique unit is a same unit with added range: Longbowman, Throwing axeman, Mameluke (3/16)
Civs whose unique unit has one different small counter more than its counterpart: Cataphract, Samurai, Mangudai, War Elephant, Jaguar warrior, Tarkan (6/16)
Civs with really unique units that function differently: huskarl, teutonic knight (2/16)
You yourself even state that the cataphract is really not unique, yet it's one of the most unique unique units in aoe2.
for aoe3:
Civs whose unique unit is just a slightly improved version: Ruyter, cuirasier, maybe india deserves to be placed here, and of course many civs have units like this (3/14)
Civs whose unique unit functions slightly differently: Aenna, Cassadore, Strelet, Maces, Coyotes, Meteor Hammers (4/14) <- not counting strelets here because russia also has oprichnicks
Civs whose unique unit functions very differently: War wagon (static, slow goon), Longbowman (worse against HI but better all around with a lot of range), Rods (due to being much faster than pikes they are very different from pikes/halbs because they can chase cav and jump on skirms), Lancers (bonus against HI means they can fight musketeers), Oprichnicks (might belong to the other category), Bow riders (because they basically have a bonus against infantry/goons compared to goons), Dopps (deadly close range inf), Samurai, hand mortars. (6/14)
Civs with really unique units that are unlike others: Abus guns (1/14)
This looks pretty similairly doesn't it. I think it's possible to come up with an equivalent unique unit in aoe3 compared to aoe2 ones:
CKN, Janissary, Plumed archer, Conquistador, War Wagon <-> ashigaru, yumi, zamb, sowar, nagi, axe rider, cuirasier, ruyter etc.
Longbowman, Throwing axeman, Mameluke <-> Meteor hammers, Strelets (units with more or less range which changes how they work in the game)
Cataphract <-> Lancer
Samurai, Jaguar warrior <-> JPK
Mangudai <-> Bow rider
Tarkan <-> Oprichnick
The huskarl and teutonic knight are very unique. I'm doubting if war elephant might be 'really unique' instead of what I put it in.
These differences are minimal. The uniqueness of the units an sich is not very different between these two games.