I bounced back to AoE4. It just feels a lot cleaner to play, and I feel like I'm able to track things that are going on a lot easier. I still really like AoM, I'll probably end up bouncing back and forth between the two tbh
Very interesting video bro, HOWEVER i really think you lack A LOT of knowledge about AoM to give a decent opinion about it, I got here because aoe4 content and i like may of your guides and specially short videos, BUT i think you have to decide wich way you go at the end, because i felt this video kind of forced to make some content... regards.
@ChillyEmpire your point about unit counters is fundamentally flawed. You're acting as if each civ's anti-cavalry is the same unit with different stats when they are different units entirely. They come out of different buildings at different ages and have entirely different techs. It's not AOE4 where each civ has their own men at arms or knights. The real change of note in AOM is that it's paradoxically more 'modern' in having distinct civilizations, with major gods effectively being subfactions. Nostalgia has nothing to do with it, AOM just has 4 distinct races that each work their own way. You obviously understand this but the video presents it as if AOE4 is somehow tighter designed because unit counters are more unified.
@@ChillyEmpire no p`roblem with your opinion i respect it and i gave a like to this video also :3 ji just said, that its so clear you need to learn more about the game SO ALL YOU FOLLOWERS CAN RECEEIVE BETTER INFORMATION IN THE FUTURE AND NOT JUST OPINIONS... I like your channel and i wont go, i really respect your effort and content bro NO HATE TRUST ME :) regards.
@hani0 nah, only a fraction of the player base plays multiplayer. Most AoE2 players play the campaigns (there's 25 years' worth at this stage, so a lot of content to get through). I used to play a lot of the multiplayer. Had a fortnightly games night where we played diplomacy free for all.
@@hani0not all. It's more half and half, AoE 2 is the most popular game of all, has a strong PvP scene, but also has the most campaigns of all the saga
I have played both AoE2 and AoE4 but have yet to try AoM. Looking at the gameplays, I feel like AoM resembles AoE2 mechanics (Please correct me if I 'm wrong). I guess if you really like AoE2 style then AoM is the choice. However, even though I really like AoE2, I actually enjoyed AoE4, just feels much refreshing. Now, most of my playing time is spent in AoE4 than AoE2.
The original AoM was mechanically very similar to AoE2. And Retold is very similar to the OG save for some tweeks and updates and putting it on the AoE3 DE engine. Battles are essentially a rock paper scissor match and there's a lot of unique upgrades depending which gods you select
When the video discussed unit balance I thought that was much closer to AoE2. Once knights are out on the field, Feudal units are a bit irrelevant. Same with crossbows.
Love u chilly Edit: I play every AOE game casually because i dont have time to actually learn the deep mechanics of each game, for me is the best approach, and AOM is the most compatible with the fun and casual mindset.
Man I disagree with so much of this video (including the stuff about AoE2 but I won't talk about that here). Will have to write up some proper thoughts about specific points some other time but I can tell that you've not played or watched much competitive AoMR. You dismiss the games unique mechanics and complexity, claiming it's frustrating for competitive play, but also claim it's better suited for casual players that want to mess around with god powers and cool units. I say the opposite. I play A LOT of competitive RTS and the uniqueness and gameplay depth is what makes AoMR so rewarding. An asymetrical RTS is going to be diffcult to balance, especially when there are so many mechanics, but the same complexity that creates unique gameplay also provides space for a really high skill ceiling. With regards to balance, the game is still teething, but it will improve over the next year and the meta will stabilize. I hope you give AoMR some more time in competitve and develop a better understanding of the nuances about the game :)
AOM its fun but it makes no sense that you could be winning a fight and your oponent suddently spawn an op earthquake and turn the game upside down with no merit just 1 f click
Wanna push back on the AOE 2 comment more constructively than what I'm seeing in these comments. Cause I totally get why someone would view it that way from an outside perspective, but there's multiple aspects of the game that leave the rest of the Age of series in the dust imo. For one, very important to remember, a genuinely disgusting amount of content. The games been fairly consistently updated for 2 decades by both fans and official teams and it shows. No other Age game can compete with the matchup variety of 45 distinct civilizations, or with 20 years of map designs to choose from. For campaign lovers there's dozens of historical stories to experience, hundreds of individual missions within those campaigns, and by far the healthiest custom mod scene to experience countless additional ones. You get pretty much all of that for the price of a single triple A game, it's one of the best deals on the gaming market. On a gameplay level, there's so many aspects that have been fine tuned to perfection (20 years of development will do that), but if I had to point to one individual aspect that makes this game the most engaging to play and watch, it's how projectiles work. Nothing across the series matches the anxiety of trying to dodge mangonel shots, trying to predict how your opponent will dodge by attacking where you think they'll be, of watching pro players dance ranged units around dodging individual arrows. It's the most responsive Age game due to this factor because the individual movement is so intense, scratches that perfect RTS itch of having an aspect of gameplay that you can never play perfectly, but it's SO impressive watching those who have gotten close to mastery. It's also the game that has T90 backing it. It's genuinely insane how much that man has done for the game. Great commentator goes without saying, but to take casual play, the modding scene, fuse all those aspects together in some environments (Sometimes with pros involved!) and approach it all with the same gusto, it's been amazing for keeping every level of the game alive. To show a wide audience that there's just as much fun to be had with every skill level of these games. As a side effect I'd also argue Age 2 has the best diplomacy/custom game environment because of the culture T90 has nurtured with his content. Everyone wants to be the next legend, ya know? Absolutely not saying this to disparage other Age games, I think it's one of the most consistently high quality game series out there. Just felt the need to point out that Age 2 has absolutely earned it's crown of popularity.
Also want to say, again as constructively as possible, i've never been able to get a SINGLE person who didn't play aoe2 as a kid to enjoy it. And vice versa ive never talked to a player who does enjoy that didn't play it as a kid.
I think I have written an essay twice and deleted it trying to argue against that flippant remark. I agree with everything you said here. Would also highlight spirit of the law as he is the gateway to aoe 2 on RUclips. AOE 4 for competitive play? All of the money is in AOE 2 be it prize pool streaming or casting. It's not driven by nostalgia, it's holistically the most complete game and most taxing on micro, macro and strategy. AOE 2 is by far the most balanced, with the healthiest eSports seen, it's just a monumental task to actually become competitive in the game. I love AOM it's really fun, I totally disagree though that it's hard to get into. With the current maps it's really easy to play. Ie. Just good mechanics got me to a similar point in the AOM ladder in 90 games Vs the 2500 it has taken on aoe 2. So much natural Res on the map just makes the game so much more aggressive and detracts from the economy balance some games require. It's mad that pro play farm transition is just float 2k wood and drop 15 farms! Also disagree that you can be god powered from nowhere. After about 10 games you know if your opponent is going up by army numbers and blacksmith/market.
For me when it comes to historical RTS games I usually prefer Total War given the deeper systems both in managing your faction and the different ways you can manage a battle. No offense to those who like the AoE way of playing. For me I will have to go with AoM given that it is rather unique in its setting and presentation in terms of a clash of both cultures and of pantheons.
AoM was just too much for me. I had no idea what was attacking me and how to deal with it. I was just too overwhelmed with everything that each god does so I’m gonna stick with AoE4. But maybe I’ll give it a try later but AoE4 makes more sense in my brain
I've got AoE3 and the definitive edition on steam. It's the only of the Age games I never touched (played 1 and 2 and original AoM back in the day) I want to do 3, but would you recommend the original game or the definitive edition?
Hey, I'm thinking about buying AoM Retold, but I'm not sure yet The thing that excites me most in the Age franchise is strategy. Not necessarily very competitive strategy, but definitely thinking about how to minmax build orders, how to beat x civ on x map and also how to think outside the box. For reference, in AoE4, I have the most fun with civs that have a lot of different playstyles and strategies. I also love aoe3 for the crazy amount of variety its gameplay offers. Based on that, do you think I would enjoy AoM? Is it a game where I can be creative? Or does every civ play 1 single strategy every game?
as the game just came out, the "'meta" is focused on a few rush strategies with a few "S-tier" gods, so you won't find many different build orders online and will play half of your games against centaur rushing poseidon. However, this is bound to change as the meta matures a bit, and there are many viable playstyles to discover, with many aging up options/combinations to test. In addition to that, balance patches have been coming out very frequently so no one can really one trick pony reliably at the moment x)
You did not just say 4:06 'every civilization or gods play more or less about the same with some balance tweaks' for Age of Mythology , lol. I have to wonder now if you played more than 1 civ in AoM... It shows that you lack a lot of knowldge for the age of empire series in general. The most COMPETETIVE right now, even in e-sports is AOE2. If you aren't biased, of course.
@@ChillyEmpire I'll just give you 3 examples; 1) Atlantean vills don't need resource stockpiling 2) Units have different pop cost depending on their role (and different civ have different unit focus) 3) And last, I don't know if you realize it, but you contradict yourself in this same video when you say that what changes are that units are named differently and same type of units have different stats from civ to civ. Stop and think about this. I don't think i'll need to answer to a game designer why, then, the play style between the civs is not 'more or less the same'.
@@hellpunch9414 Yes, on the surface level there are a lot of stat and mechanical differences among the units in AOM. I’m not being willfully ignorant when I say none of this matters though. The reason being is, whether your AOM spearman does 4x damage or 1.5x damage to cavalry matters very little. You still treat it as your anti cav in most cases (except at the pro level, where small stats do make a big difference). The reason why it doesn’t matter in AOM though is because god powers and myth units are disproportionately stronger. You don’t win with just one spearman. But one Centaur can make or break a game. In contrast, in AOE4, individual human units and their stats do actually matter. And the effects of those differences are felt even by lower level competitive players (gold-conq). If AOM was a graph you’d see the unit stat differences being so small in importance that they’re practically on the same level. While god powers and myth units are proportionately much higher. You can get very far in the competitive AOM scene by just memorizing a few broken god power builds. Much farther than a build order can get you in AOE4.
I play aoe2 a lot and while i do that i don't even remember i was playing it 15 years ago. What makes the game so enjoyable for me is balance, how good every powerspike is, the fact that almost every strategy is viable even with a civ that's not supposed to do that. For me it's the RTS that succeeds the most at making every game special. You have so many options and very often the best solution is not obvious.
I don t get it, aoe4 is oriented on competition and if you want this go on aoe2 (the player counts don t really lie…). aom is more funny but will be impossible to balance I think. Aom is also way more fast paced and you don t get game where you rush castle age and the one that get knights first auto win.
You cant judge aoe2 so harshly and then say you didn't even play it. If "nostalgia" alone beats every other age game (in player count) than that's an issue, clearly it does something right.
My bad if I came off as judging it too harshly. I don't have strong opinions on AOE2. It's just a very old style of RTS design that isn't my beat but as you said, it's clearly doing something right!
If you watch dudes like Spirit of the Law you would see that AoE2 is made with love to math. Every unit, every civ has a huge coreletion to each other by single numbers, everything was counted and well thought. Relic did ok job but funny enough i did balance for company of heroes 2 and believe game has huge holes and relation between units is destroyed by rng aspect a lot. It has huge unbalance powerspikes that are almost impossible to fix eventhough i still love that game. if you compare it to AoE2 its a different league. Not every new is better than Old.
@@konradpyszniak976 the esports scene is based on player count. Yes AOE2 has a bigger scene. Doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a better esports design. AOE4 is a lot more accessible for newcomers and viewers than AOE2. AOE2 has a lot of hidden numbers and unintuitive mechanics for example.
@@ChillyEmpireyes and no because AoE2 has easier numbers. Values arent so high than in aoe4 and its singular numbers compare to AoM where units can deal 11.4 damage or so. Its simpler math but still so complex that relations between 1 or 2 damage changes everything. Bonus damage is hidden but are mostly obvious at start so you dont need to learn them all. AoE2 has the Best balance and thats make it good for esport. Really you should play it and look into it as red bull is coming.
Yeah i Play both too and aolthough aoe4 is rounder AoM Just simpley makes a Shit Ton of fun. I mean which Game Features fucking Atlantis as a faction ❤
Respectfully, I think aoe4 is superior. Mainly because it has the building influence system, which means that in aoe4, you have to plan ahead and space out your building in order to make the most of your civ bonussen. Bases in AoM are a chaotic mess of buildings scattered around with mostly no consideration behind it.
@@savagecabbage6119 Respectfully, this is really uninformed - I'd suggest you play or even watch some competitve AoMR before casting judgement. Building placement is a HUGE consideration in AoMR and can often win or lose the game in the first 10 minutes. You might see chaos in casual play, but even mid-low elo ranked players make sure to wall off gold and hunt, house their towers, create chokepoints, and place military production close to contested map positions. Thats just the basic stuff, and the higher elo you go the more tactical nuance you find. In Archaic age you can get sniped off gold or hunt in the first 5 minutes if you dont build to protect your vils, and lots of games that don't end in classical are decided by your 2nd gold mine so the way you build after archaic needs to account for this. In pro games, most skirmishes will happen amongst buildings on the outskirts of a players base. Actually, almost every fight will occur this way until hitting late Heroic because you can create combat advantages through proper building placement. To say "bases in AoM are a chaotic mess" is simply a skill issue, because you don't know enough about the game to understand why the bases look the way they do. Why do you feel the need to disparage AoMR when you know nothing about it?
Of all the Age games, AOE2 has the youngest casual player base, people as young as 14 years old are playing the game, not going pro, just for fun, on the pro scene recently Guki became really good, and she just turned 16, I would say she is top 50, Prisma at 18, is better at the moment, but they are both improving. The best in the world right now is Hera with 24, In the top 5, Liereyy and Sebas are both 22 years old, compare that to AOE4 and AOM at the moment. AOE4 Beastyqt 33 and MarineLord 29 AOM Mista 32 and Magic 34 They are new, maybe one day they will have as many young players, but for now, aoe2 is the one that younger players will go for, it's still an RTS game, is not going to be Fortnite, but really solid in comparison to every other RTS game in terms of popularity and growth, if it was all nostalgia, SC2 would be more popular right now, it was way more popular in the past, but now AOE2 has more active players and viewers on stream, and RUclips engagement.
No offense but this video comes across like you acuallty dont wanna play AoM. Alot of your arugments are just complety untrue. You say that the unquieness of AoM is why it cant be comepetive, but that makes 0 sense. Would you rather play a game where everything is the same, or a game where everything is unquie and takes different skills to learn. Aoe 4 has more races, but arent most of them littrely the same expect like a few different units? Why even have them at that point. 'Every civzilation and god plays the same' Boy WHAT. No, no they dont. Norse are offensive in nature, eygtpations have weaker early games, greeks are strong early game, ect. They do NOT play the same. Thats just a bold face lie.
Do you have experience playing AOE4 competitively? Because that might explain the dissonance here. Note that in this vid I'm specifically comparing the two games. Compared to AOE4, AOM's "diversity" is mostly aesthetic. Yes, there is a lot of differences among the pantheons, but it's much more surface level compared to AOE4. Of course I enjoy the diversity. But it's incredibly hard to balance a game when everything's so different. There's a lot more "crags" or "holes" in AOM's design, due to its diversity and undisciplined design philosophy. Exploits and broken units or timings are arising every day. Centaurs are a good example of this. Note that I'm not saying that this is necessarily a bad thing. It just makes AOM less friendly as a competitive game. It's still very enjoyable as a casual experience, which is my main point in this video.
@@ChillyEmpire No, i havent played aoe4 competivly nor aom comptivly. I dont play competive RTS. So prehaps thats where my issue lies. I still disagree the diverety is surface level. From what i know, isnty littrely all the aoe factions the exact same but with sightly dffferent units?
@@typervader ah, it’s a little hard to explain if you haven’t thought about these games competitively. And I don’t blame you. To be honest, AOE4 was the first time I thought about RTS competitively, and it completely changed the way I think about these games. It’s not necessarily intuitive. To give it a light try, here’s what I mean: The purpose of an RTS is to challenge players to make strategic decisions in a high pressure real time environment. From the player’s perspective, at every moment your brain is like an algorithm that goes through the following steps: 1. Assess as much information as possible. 2. Create a list of challenges and a list of solutions. 3. Stack rank those lists based on return-on-investment, time-sensitivity, and long term goals. 4. Execute on your strategic decisions AOM does have a lot of “diversity”. But it’s convoluted and hard to understand. As a player, you’re not thinking “this tech gives me +X poison damage” and that will lead to Y outcome. The reason I know this is because not only are the techs extremely numerous and varied, but the outcomes are extremely unpredictable. Who has the patience to memorize how all of the percentage armor effects work based on different damage types? Add in the type modifiers, and then consider pre-or-post modifier calculations. And that’s just considering one side of the equation. You also have to factor in your opponent’s civ choice, god passives, techs, etc. Who the hell can keep track of all of that? And on top of that - even if you DID memorize everything. The effects are minuscule when you can just cast Curse as Aphrodite and turn your enemy into pigs. Or your opponent goes Thoth and meteors you. Hopefully you can start to see what I mean. What “looks” like diversity on paper, does not actually play out as diversity in your strategic decision making. Instead, what actually matters are the big ticket effects - god powers, myth units, getting the right timing, etc. In AOE4, the design is a lot more streamlined. You CAN memorize all of the techs and their effects. Armor and attack damage values are much easier to understand. You do actually make meaningful strategic decisions when research techs or making units. And so will your opponent. As a result, you and your opponent are playing the game “closer to optimally”, which means that when you go against each other, you’re actually fighting each other, and not the game.
@@ChillyEmpire But see that just sounds so boring to me. Theres no skill expression once you learn everything. Take your posion exmaple. Why cant you think i take this for y effect? I notice they have alot of high hp or high armored units. Well, then i should pick the god to get the damage that lets me ignore armor to deal direct damage. I notice the enemy is rushing alot. Well, then i should foucs on eco and get cheaper units and upgrades. Armor and attack damage in aom is perfectly understandable. Hack is melee, perice is ranged, and dinvie ignores armor. Crush just means how good a unit is agasint buildings. You dont need to know the exact numbers and % vaules of everything. That is franlky a ridlious statement. You just need to understand: Cyclops has alot of peice armor, which means my ranged attacks will do less. So, i could get armor pen upgrades to help get past that, or foucs on another unit type instead. God powers cant win you a game. They can help you win sure, but they still need thought put into them. Still need to plan how to use them, and make use of them. As the oopeent, you can praoibly track the number of god powers, and guess they might be low on favor to reuse them. So no, i feel like you are purposefully misleading an arugment in this case. AoM is not that much more complex and has just as much if not even more choices to make. From what you say, the main thing for aoe4 is just upgrades. Thats it. You dont have anything else to really decide on. But AoM: upgrades, myth units, heroes, god powers, minir gods, ect. While i dont play it competively, i can see that your just not right here man.
@@typervader Hey dude. Cheers. You didn’t get it. That’s fine. From the examples you gave it’s very evident that you don’t understand how to think about the game competitively. I appreciate that you’re willing to admit as much. I can’t really do much more to convince you. I think I’ve presented my argument as effectively as I can. I hope some day you try out ranked and play these games with a more competitive mindset.
I played all aoe games a lot and honestly AoE2 crushes all other games. Visual design of units is so clear and easy to grasp, single player content, 2d graphics is more clear than 3d style we have in AoE4 or AoM, balance is perfect the esport segment and content creators like Spirit of the Law. Its more easy to understand and has perfect balance between macro and micro. It doesnt have wierd sattlement system and late game eco doesnt have huge inflation that leads to have 5k each res. It gets dlcs and the biggest support from devs Those who havent played AoE2 i really recommend trying out. But if you want to nuke enemy base with buring wolf who does huge kabum then AoM is go to game 😅
AOE2 is not running off nostalgia. The gameplay is completely perfected and it has the highest skill ceiling by far. Picked it up 3 years ago and it’s been my favorite game since. Have played all the games and until age of mythology, none of them have been close to as fun as 2. Age 1 is too dated, 3 is so fun but just not as good, 4 is genuinely bad. There’s 0 micro, it feels clunky and it just feels like automated trash. Age 2 and mythology are easily the best. Would encourage to give aoe2 another chance. Takes much longer to learn but it dwarves 4 for a reason.
IMO aoe2 has aged beautifully. And the civs are similar enough that it's like the chess of RTS games (symmetric strategy). Aom and aoe4 are at their core asymmetric strategy games... which are fun, but it feels way less fair when you lose. Especially if you don't know the game/meta well enough to know WHY you lost.... which is super likely in AOM's case given the civ variety.
AoE2 receives many new players regularly as it is been growing massively since DE came out. Definitely has the highest skill ceiling while the games feel mostly fair (no OP abilities, good balance) and also great campaign content and civ variety. And of course it is the most competitive by FAR
Its not a choice of what to buy, its a choice to explicitly decide not to give Relic any money. not to mention AOM was always the best age game until Extended Edition happened. Miss me with the generic units and a glut of near identical civs, thank you. Relic had a shot at fixing this with AOE4 but they fumbled everything else along the way.
@@goochipoochie Are you trolling? I have many reasons as to why AoE 2 is better than AoM, but a lot of it is up for prefference and the steamDB charts give me reason. BUT SAYING AOE 2 DOESNT EVEN COME CLOSE TO STARCRAFT? That's an insult to say SC, which is a basic bitch game with barely any strategy aside from A-Moving, is much better than AoE 2. And Dawn of War, really? Are you really going to say Dawn of War is better when it barely has base building, microing units is bad because they have to stand still to do full DPS, macro is basically non-existant and the better aspects are the story and setting, which is a tough comparison since AoE1, 2 and 4 try to go for historic realism.
Aoe4 is dead. Never get so much players and it is losting like 300 players in 3 weeks all the time. Aom is growing up strong. To be honest. The age franchise is age2 and aom. Age3 and age4 are dead
00:50 "aoe2 is running off of nostalgia" mmhmm it's definitely not because of the amazing game design that plays off of minor upgrades so perfectly that the game still have a thriving comp scene after more than 2 and a half decades. definitely not the amazing custom games nor the solid gameplay and resposivess just pure nostalgia 😑
AOE4 is more live service multiplayer business oriented. AOM Retold is so fun oriented. As a casual gamer, I'd definitely choose AOM Retold.
Absolutely
Aoe4 is a shit of rts. 4 years to make it in a beta version. Aom is the top
Nonsense
Both! Get both games.
Exactly we have a small community to break it even smaller would be less it’s even worse when our own community hates different ages 😅
I bounced back to AoE4. It just feels a lot cleaner to play, and I feel like I'm able to track things that are going on a lot easier.
I still really like AoM, I'll probably end up bouncing back and forth between the two tbh
I felt that way about AoE4, bounced back to AoE2, but none of my friends enjoyed AoE4, so never went back. I'm hoping AoM will be different.
@@whossname4399 I think it will. Seems like they're quick with balance patches and already have 2 expansions planned
Very interesting video bro, HOWEVER i really think you lack A LOT of knowledge about AoM to give a decent opinion about it, I got here because aoe4 content and i like may of your guides and specially short videos, BUT i think you have to decide wich way you go at the end, because i felt this video kind of forced to make some content... regards.
Fair criticism. Admittedly I don’t play AOM competitively but I’m curious, what’s wrong with my opinions here?
@ChillyEmpire your point about unit counters is fundamentally flawed. You're acting as if each civ's anti-cavalry is the same unit with different stats when they are different units entirely. They come out of different buildings at different ages and have entirely different techs. It's not AOE4 where each civ has their own men at arms or knights. The real change of note in AOM is that it's paradoxically more 'modern' in having distinct civilizations, with major gods effectively being subfactions.
Nostalgia has nothing to do with it, AOM just has 4 distinct races that each work their own way. You obviously understand this but the video presents it as if AOE4 is somehow tighter designed because unit counters are more unified.
@@ExValeForI think he means that aoe4 is tighter designed because there are much less different units and those differences have much more impact.
@@ChillyEmpire no p`roblem with your opinion i respect it and i gave a like to this video also :3 ji just said, that its so clear you need to learn more about the game SO ALL YOU FOLLOWERS CAN RECEEIVE BETTER INFORMATION IN THE FUTURE AND NOT JUST OPINIONS... I like your channel and i wont go, i really respect your effort and content bro NO HATE TRUST ME :) regards.
I actally loved AOE3 and AOE2 (more for AOE3 though), but AOE4 was just too multiplayer focused for me. Will get AOMR when more patches are out.
isnt multiplayer what keeps people playing these games?
i thought the 20k players in AoE 2 were mostly playing multiplayer
@hani0 nah, only a fraction of the player base plays multiplayer. Most AoE2 players play the campaigns (there's 25 years' worth at this stage, so a lot of content to get through).
I used to play a lot of the multiplayer. Had a fortnightly games night where we played diplomacy free for all.
@@hani0not all. It's more half and half, AoE 2 is the most popular game of all, has a strong PvP scene, but also has the most campaigns of all the saga
It would be nice if AOE4 has autoqueue like AOM I would def play more!❤
I have played both AoE2 and AoE4 but have yet to try AoM. Looking at the gameplays, I feel like AoM resembles AoE2 mechanics (Please correct me if I 'm wrong).
I guess if you really like AoE2 style then AoM is the choice. However, even though I really like AoE2, I actually enjoyed AoE4, just feels much refreshing. Now, most of my playing time is spent in AoE4 than AoE2.
AoM is the direct successor of AoE2 so yeah.
The original AoM was mechanically very similar to AoE2. And Retold is very similar to the OG save for some tweeks and updates and putting it on the AoE3 DE engine. Battles are essentially a rock paper scissor match and there's a lot of unique upgrades depending which gods you select
When the video discussed unit balance I thought that was much closer to AoE2. Once knights are out on the field, Feudal units are a bit irrelevant. Same with crossbows.
Love u chilly
Edit: I play every AOE game casually because i dont have time to actually learn the deep mechanics of each game, for me is the best approach, and AOM is the most compatible with the fun and casual mindset.
love u
AOE4 is much better for me
Man I disagree with so much of this video (including the stuff about AoE2 but I won't talk about that here). Will have to write up some proper thoughts about specific points some other time but I can tell that you've not played or watched much competitive AoMR. You dismiss the games unique mechanics and complexity, claiming it's frustrating for competitive play, but also claim it's better suited for casual players that want to mess around with god powers and cool units. I say the opposite. I play A LOT of competitive RTS and the uniqueness and gameplay depth is what makes AoMR so rewarding. An asymetrical RTS is going to be diffcult to balance, especially when there are so many mechanics, but the same complexity that creates unique gameplay also provides space for a really high skill ceiling. With regards to balance, the game is still teething, but it will improve over the next year and the meta will stabilize. I hope you give AoMR some more time in competitve and develop a better understanding of the nuances about the game :)
I second that , I was also kinda lost if he is even talking abaout AOM in some moments of the video :D
I really enjoyed your Chinese Faction Build for AoM Retold. Would love to see similar videos for other Faction ideas like Aztecs, Celts or Babylon!
I personally enjoying skirmish in AOM retold. There is too many competitve games in the market already.
AOM its fun but it makes no sense that you could be winning a fight and your oponent suddently spawn an op earthquake and turn the game upside down with no merit just 1 f click
CHILLY PLS WE NEED THE CHINA TRAILER REACTION VIDEO PLS CHILLY MY CHILDREN ARE STARVING PLEASE
I want to say both games, but AoE4 really does need more singleplayer missions. It's been extremely slow with civs and campaigns.
Wanna push back on the AOE 2 comment more constructively than what I'm seeing in these comments. Cause I totally get why someone would view it that way from an outside perspective, but there's multiple aspects of the game that leave the rest of the Age of series in the dust imo.
For one, very important to remember, a genuinely disgusting amount of content. The games been fairly consistently updated for 2 decades by both fans and official teams and it shows. No other Age game can compete with the matchup variety of 45 distinct civilizations, or with 20 years of map designs to choose from. For campaign lovers there's dozens of historical stories to experience, hundreds of individual missions within those campaigns, and by far the healthiest custom mod scene to experience countless additional ones. You get pretty much all of that for the price of a single triple A game, it's one of the best deals on the gaming market.
On a gameplay level, there's so many aspects that have been fine tuned to perfection (20 years of development will do that), but if I had to point to one individual aspect that makes this game the most engaging to play and watch, it's how projectiles work. Nothing across the series matches the anxiety of trying to dodge mangonel shots, trying to predict how your opponent will dodge by attacking where you think they'll be, of watching pro players dance ranged units around dodging individual arrows. It's the most responsive Age game due to this factor because the individual movement is so intense, scratches that perfect RTS itch of having an aspect of gameplay that you can never play perfectly, but it's SO impressive watching those who have gotten close to mastery.
It's also the game that has T90 backing it. It's genuinely insane how much that man has done for the game. Great commentator goes without saying, but to take casual play, the modding scene, fuse all those aspects together in some environments (Sometimes with pros involved!) and approach it all with the same gusto, it's been amazing for keeping every level of the game alive. To show a wide audience that there's just as much fun to be had with every skill level of these games. As a side effect I'd also argue Age 2 has the best diplomacy/custom game environment because of the culture T90 has nurtured with his content. Everyone wants to be the next legend, ya know?
Absolutely not saying this to disparage other Age games, I think it's one of the most consistently high quality game series out there. Just felt the need to point out that Age 2 has absolutely earned it's crown of popularity.
Also want to say, again as constructively as possible, i've never been able to get a SINGLE person who didn't play aoe2 as a kid to enjoy it. And vice versa ive never talked to a player who does enjoy that didn't play it as a kid.
I think I have written an essay twice and deleted it trying to argue against that flippant remark.
I agree with everything you said here. Would also highlight spirit of the law as he is the gateway to aoe 2 on RUclips.
AOE 4 for competitive play? All of the money is in AOE 2 be it prize pool streaming or casting. It's not driven by nostalgia, it's holistically the most complete game and most taxing on micro, macro and strategy.
AOE 2 is by far the most balanced, with the healthiest eSports seen, it's just a monumental task to actually become competitive in the game.
I love AOM it's really fun, I totally disagree though that it's hard to get into. With the current maps it's really easy to play. Ie. Just good mechanics got me to a similar point in the AOM ladder in 90 games Vs the 2500 it has taken on aoe 2. So much natural Res on the map just makes the game so much more aggressive and detracts from the economy balance some games require. It's mad that pro play farm transition is just float 2k wood and drop 15 farms!
Also disagree that you can be god powered from nowhere. After about 10 games you know if your opponent is going up by army numbers and blacksmith/market.
For me when it comes to historical RTS games I usually prefer Total War given the deeper systems both in managing your faction and the different ways you can manage a battle. No offense to those who like the AoE way of playing.
For me I will have to go with AoM given that it is rather unique in its setting and presentation in terms of a clash of both cultures and of pantheons.
retold. I have both and play both. Prefer retold
I would say both but i was more eager for Retold
AoM was just too much for me. I had no idea what was attacking me and how to deal with it. I was just too overwhelmed with everything that each god does so I’m gonna stick with AoE4. But maybe I’ll give it a try later but AoE4 makes more sense in my brain
I've got AoE3 and the definitive edition on steam. It's the only of the Age games I never touched (played 1 and 2 and original AoM back in the day) I want to do 3, but would you recommend the original game or the definitive edition?
Definitely the definitive
Hey, I'm thinking about buying AoM Retold, but I'm not sure yet
The thing that excites me most in the Age franchise is strategy.
Not necessarily very competitive strategy, but definitely thinking about how to minmax build orders, how to beat x civ on x map and also how to think outside the box. For reference, in AoE4, I have the most fun with civs that have a lot of different playstyles and strategies. I also love aoe3 for the crazy amount of variety its gameplay offers. Based on that, do you think I would enjoy AoM?
Is it a game where I can be creative? Or does every civ play 1 single strategy every game?
as the game just came out, the "'meta" is focused on a few rush strategies with a few "S-tier" gods, so you won't find many different build orders online and will play half of your games against centaur rushing poseidon.
However, this is bound to change as the meta matures a bit, and there are many viable playstyles to discover, with many aging up options/combinations to test.
In addition to that, balance patches have been coming out very frequently so no one can really one trick pony reliably at the moment x)
AOM retold purchased❤ thank you❤
Never ever mention Relic without mentioning Dawn of War.
Ill say both, and age 1,2,3 with all the expansions if you dont have them already
You did not just say 4:06 'every civilization or gods play more or less about the same with some balance tweaks' for Age of Mythology , lol. I have to wonder now if you played more than 1 civ in AoM...
It shows that you lack a lot of knowldge for the age of empire series in general.
The most COMPETETIVE right now, even in e-sports is AOE2. If you aren't biased, of course.
Oh it's you hellpunch. I'm down to stand on business here. The civ differences in AOM are mostly aesthetic. Feel free to change my mind.
@@ChillyEmpire I'll just give you 3 examples;
1) Atlantean vills don't need resource stockpiling
2) Units have different pop cost depending on their role (and different civ have different unit focus)
3) And last, I don't know if you realize it, but you contradict yourself in this same video when you say that what changes are that units are named differently and same type of units have different stats from civ to civ. Stop and think about this. I don't think i'll need to answer to a game designer why, then, the play style between the civs is not 'more or less the same'.
@@hellpunch9414 Yes, on the surface level there are a lot of stat and mechanical differences among the units in AOM.
I’m not being willfully ignorant when I say none of this matters though.
The reason being is, whether your AOM spearman does 4x damage or 1.5x damage to cavalry matters very little. You still treat it as your anti cav in most cases (except at the pro level, where small stats do make a big difference).
The reason why it doesn’t matter in AOM though is because god powers and myth units are disproportionately stronger. You don’t win with just one spearman. But one Centaur can make or break a game.
In contrast, in AOE4, individual human units and their stats do actually matter. And the effects of those differences are felt even by lower level competitive players (gold-conq).
If AOM was a graph you’d see the unit stat differences being so small in importance that they’re practically on the same level. While god powers and myth units are proportionately much higher.
You can get very far in the competitive AOM scene by just memorizing a few broken god power builds. Much farther than a build order can get you in AOE4.
I play aoe2 a lot and while i do that i don't even remember i was playing it 15 years ago. What makes the game so enjoyable for me is balance, how good every powerspike is, the fact that almost every strategy is viable even with a civ that's not supposed to do that. For me it's the RTS that succeeds the most at making every game special. You have so many options and very often the best solution is not obvious.
Why always forget to mention Age of Empires 1? 😢
No one plays AoE 1 except vietnamese
AOM Retold. The other doesn't have enough mythology.
I don t get it, aoe4 is oriented on competition and if you want this go on aoe2 (the player counts don t really lie…). aom is more funny but will be impossible to balance I think. Aom is also way more fast paced and you don t get game where you rush castle age and the one that get knights first auto win.
AoM is the best game imo because mythology theme and factions being more different. Also AoE2 is too nostaglic and have same-civ syndrome.
You cant judge aoe2 so harshly and then say you didn't even play it. If "nostalgia" alone beats every other age game (in player count) than that's an issue, clearly it does something right.
My bad if I came off as judging it too harshly. I don't have strong opinions on AOE2. It's just a very old style of RTS design that isn't my beat but as you said, it's clearly doing something right!
If you watch dudes like Spirit of the Law you would see that AoE2 is made with love to math. Every unit, every civ has a huge coreletion to each other by single numbers, everything was counted and well thought. Relic did ok job but funny enough i did balance for company of heroes 2 and believe game has huge holes and relation between units is destroyed by rng aspect a lot. It has huge unbalance powerspikes that are almost impossible to fix eventhough i still love that game. if you compare it to AoE2 its a different league. Not every new is better than Old.
Also you said AoE4 has a competitive esport aspect but AoE2 has redbull and way more turneys. So again win for AoE2
@@konradpyszniak976 the esports scene is based on player count. Yes AOE2 has a bigger scene. Doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a better esports design. AOE4 is a lot more accessible for newcomers and viewers than AOE2. AOE2 has a lot of hidden numbers and unintuitive mechanics for example.
@@ChillyEmpireyes and no because AoE2 has easier numbers. Values arent so high than in aoe4 and its singular numbers compare to AoM where units can deal 11.4 damage or so. Its simpler math but still so complex that relations between 1 or 2 damage changes everything. Bonus damage is hidden but are mostly obvious at start so you dont need to learn them all. AoE2 has the Best balance and thats make it good for esport. Really you should play it and look into it as red bull is coming.
Easy answer: both.
Age of Mythology far far more superior than AoE 4
Yeah i Play both too and aolthough aoe4 is rounder AoM Just simpley makes a Shit Ton of fun. I mean which Game Features fucking Atlantis as a faction ❤
@@seegurke-bd3yr look at the ragdoll physiques when Titan stomp and tornado hurling people. It is a bare minimum but AOE decides to move backwards
Respectfully, I think aoe4 is superior. Mainly because it has the building influence system, which means that in aoe4, you have to plan ahead and space out your building in order to make the most of your civ bonussen. Bases in AoM are a chaotic mess of buildings scattered around with mostly no consideration behind it.
@@savagecabbage6119 Respectfully, this is really uninformed - I'd suggest you play or even watch some competitve AoMR before casting judgement. Building placement is a HUGE consideration in AoMR and can often win or lose the game in the first 10 minutes. You might see chaos in casual play, but even mid-low elo ranked players make sure to wall off gold and hunt, house their towers, create chokepoints, and place military production close to contested map positions. Thats just the basic stuff, and the higher elo you go the more tactical nuance you find. In Archaic age you can get sniped off gold or hunt in the first 5 minutes if you dont build to protect your vils, and lots of games that don't end in classical are decided by your 2nd gold mine so the way you build after archaic needs to account for this.
In pro games, most skirmishes will happen amongst buildings on the outskirts of a players base. Actually, almost every fight will occur this way until hitting late Heroic because you can create combat advantages through proper building placement. To say "bases in AoM are a chaotic mess" is simply a skill issue, because you don't know enough about the game to understand why the bases look the way they do. Why do you feel the need to disparage AoMR when you know nothing about it?
Of all the Age games, AOE2 has the youngest casual player base, people as young as 14 years old are playing the game, not going pro, just for fun, on the pro scene recently Guki became really good, and she just turned 16, I would say she is top 50, Prisma at 18, is better at the moment, but they are both improving.
The best in the world right now is Hera with 24, In the top 5, Liereyy and Sebas are both 22 years old, compare that to AOE4 and AOM at the moment.
AOE4 Beastyqt 33 and MarineLord 29
AOM Mista 32 and Magic 34
They are new, maybe one day they will have as many young players, but for now, aoe2 is the one that younger players will go for, it's still an RTS game, is not going to be Fortnite, but really solid in comparison to every other RTS game in terms of popularity and growth, if it was all nostalgia, SC2 would be more popular right now, it was way more popular in the past, but now AOE2 has more active players and viewers on stream, and RUclips engagement.
No offense but this video comes across like you acuallty dont wanna play AoM. Alot of your arugments are just complety untrue.
You say that the unquieness of AoM is why it cant be comepetive, but that makes 0 sense. Would you rather play a game where everything is the same, or a game where everything is unquie and takes different skills to learn.
Aoe 4 has more races, but arent most of them littrely the same expect like a few different units? Why even have them at that point.
'Every civzilation and god plays the same' Boy WHAT. No, no they dont.
Norse are offensive in nature, eygtpations have weaker early games, greeks are strong early game, ect. They do NOT play the same. Thats just a bold face lie.
Do you have experience playing AOE4 competitively? Because that might explain the dissonance here. Note that in this vid I'm specifically comparing the two games.
Compared to AOE4, AOM's "diversity" is mostly aesthetic. Yes, there is a lot of differences among the pantheons, but it's much more surface level compared to AOE4.
Of course I enjoy the diversity. But it's incredibly hard to balance a game when everything's so different. There's a lot more "crags" or "holes" in AOM's design, due to its diversity and undisciplined design philosophy. Exploits and broken units or timings are arising every day. Centaurs are a good example of this.
Note that I'm not saying that this is necessarily a bad thing. It just makes AOM less friendly as a competitive game. It's still very enjoyable as a casual experience, which is my main point in this video.
@@ChillyEmpire No, i havent played aoe4 competivly nor aom comptivly. I dont play competive RTS. So prehaps thats where my issue lies.
I still disagree the diverety is surface level. From what i know, isnty littrely all the aoe factions the exact same but with sightly dffferent units?
@@typervader ah, it’s a little hard to explain if you haven’t thought about these games competitively.
And I don’t blame you. To be honest, AOE4 was the first time I thought about RTS competitively, and it completely changed the way I think about these games. It’s not necessarily intuitive.
To give it a light try, here’s what I mean:
The purpose of an RTS is to challenge players to make strategic decisions in a high pressure real time environment.
From the player’s perspective, at every moment your brain is like an algorithm that goes through the following steps:
1. Assess as much information as possible.
2. Create a list of challenges and a list of solutions.
3. Stack rank those lists based on return-on-investment, time-sensitivity, and long term goals.
4. Execute on your strategic decisions
AOM does have a lot of “diversity”. But it’s convoluted and hard to understand. As a player, you’re not thinking “this tech gives me +X poison damage” and that will lead to Y outcome. The reason I know this is because not only are the techs extremely numerous and varied, but the outcomes are extremely unpredictable. Who has the patience to memorize how all of the percentage armor effects work based on different damage types? Add in the type modifiers, and then consider pre-or-post modifier calculations. And that’s just considering one side of the equation. You also have to factor in your opponent’s civ choice, god passives, techs, etc. Who the hell can keep track of all of that?
And on top of that - even if you DID memorize everything. The effects are minuscule when you can just cast Curse as Aphrodite and turn your enemy into pigs. Or your opponent goes Thoth and meteors you.
Hopefully you can start to see what I mean. What “looks” like diversity on paper, does not actually play out as diversity in your strategic decision making. Instead, what actually matters are the big ticket effects - god powers, myth units, getting the right timing, etc.
In AOE4, the design is a lot more streamlined. You CAN memorize all of the techs and their effects. Armor and attack damage values are much easier to understand. You do actually make meaningful strategic decisions when research techs or making units. And so will your opponent. As a result, you and your opponent are playing the game “closer to optimally”, which means that when you go against each other, you’re actually fighting each other, and not the game.
@@ChillyEmpire But see that just sounds so boring to me. Theres no skill expression once you learn everything.
Take your posion exmaple. Why cant you think i take this for y effect?
I notice they have alot of high hp or high armored units. Well, then i should pick the god to get the damage that lets me ignore armor to deal direct damage.
I notice the enemy is rushing alot. Well, then i should foucs on eco and get cheaper units and upgrades.
Armor and attack damage in aom is perfectly understandable.
Hack is melee, perice is ranged, and dinvie ignores armor. Crush just means how good a unit is agasint buildings.
You dont need to know the exact numbers and % vaules of everything. That is franlky a ridlious statement. You just need to understand:
Cyclops has alot of peice armor, which means my ranged attacks will do less. So, i could get armor pen upgrades to help get past that, or foucs on another unit type instead.
God powers cant win you a game. They can help you win sure, but they still need thought put into them. Still need to plan how to use them, and make use of them. As the oopeent, you can praoibly track the number of god powers, and guess they might be low on favor to reuse them.
So no, i feel like you are purposefully misleading an arugment in this case. AoM is not that much more complex and has just as much if not even more choices to make.
From what you say, the main thing for aoe4 is just upgrades. Thats it. You dont have anything else to really decide on.
But AoM: upgrades, myth units, heroes, god powers, minir gods, ect.
While i dont play it competively, i can see that your just not right here man.
@@typervader Hey dude. Cheers. You didn’t get it. That’s fine. From the examples you gave it’s very evident that you don’t understand how to think about the game competitively. I appreciate that you’re willing to admit as much. I can’t really do much more to convince you. I think I’ve presented my argument as effectively as I can. I hope some day you try out ranked and play these games with a more competitive mindset.
I played all aoe games a lot and honestly AoE2 crushes all other games. Visual design of units is so clear and easy to grasp, single player content, 2d graphics is more clear than 3d style we have in AoE4 or AoM, balance is perfect the esport segment and content creators like Spirit of the Law. Its more easy to understand and has perfect balance between macro and micro. It doesnt have wierd sattlement system and late game eco doesnt have huge inflation that leads to have 5k each res. It gets dlcs and the biggest support from devs
Those who havent played AoE2 i really recommend trying out.
But if you want to nuke enemy base with buring wolf who does huge kabum then AoM is go to game 😅
AoE2.
AOE2 is not running off nostalgia. The gameplay is completely perfected and it has the highest skill ceiling by far. Picked it up 3 years ago and it’s been my favorite game since. Have played all the games and until age of mythology, none of them have been close to as fun as 2. Age 1 is too dated, 3 is so fun but just not as good, 4 is genuinely bad. There’s 0 micro, it feels clunky and it just feels like automated trash. Age 2 and mythology are easily the best. Would encourage to give aoe2 another chance. Takes much longer to learn but it dwarves 4 for a reason.
IMO aoe2 has aged beautifully. And the civs are similar enough that it's like the chess of RTS games (symmetric strategy). Aom and aoe4 are at their core asymmetric strategy games... which are fun, but it feels way less fair when you lose. Especially if you don't know the game/meta well enough to know WHY you lost.... which is super likely in AOM's case given the civ variety.
Booth😊
AoE2 receives many new players regularly as it is been growing massively since DE came out. Definitely has the highest skill ceiling while the games feel mostly fair (no OP abilities, good balance) and also great campaign content and civ variety. And of course it is the most competitive by FAR
Game pass, simple
Its not a choice of what to buy, its a choice to explicitly decide not to give Relic any money.
not to mention AOM was always the best age game until Extended Edition happened. Miss me with the generic units and a glut of near identical civs, thank you. Relic had a shot at fixing this with AOE4 but they fumbled everything else along the way.
Aoe4 is boring siege war game.
Aoe4 is a failure
Bro did NOT just say AoE2 runs off nostalgia when it's the best one.
Aom was always the best aoe
Aoe 2 doesn't even come close to other rts like starcraft, RoN, SC, DoW, CnC, WBC 3, WC3 etc etc
@@goochipoochie Are you trolling? I have many reasons as to why AoE 2 is better than AoM, but a lot of it is up for prefference and the steamDB charts give me reason.
BUT SAYING AOE 2 DOESNT EVEN COME CLOSE TO STARCRAFT? That's an insult to say SC, which is a basic bitch game with barely any strategy aside from A-Moving, is much better than AoE 2. And Dawn of War, really? Are you really going to say Dawn of War is better when it barely has base building, microing units is bad because they have to stand still to do full DPS, macro is basically non-existant and the better aspects are the story and setting, which is a tough comparison since AoE1, 2 and 4 try to go for historic realism.
@@shahoul1Take your pills and go back to the retirement home
the entire Age franchise is partially carried by nostalgia, this genre is way less popular than before now
@@shahoul1aoe4 is the best lalalabooboo 😂😂😂😂
First 10 secound pretty hot take. Aoe2 is better than aoe4 for comp by far at least by the scene size. Age of myth is the most fun for casual by far
AOE IV for me. Not interested in AOM at all. primarily because its setting.
AOE2 has the most single player content
But not the best
It also has the oldest player base in all aoe franchise XD as far as they dont retire or die for old age, aoe2 is still running :V
AoM has the best campaign in any aoe franchise
@@goochipoochie I won't deny that
Aoe4 is dead. Never get so much players and it is losting like 300 players in 3 weeks all the time. Aom is growing up strong. To be honest. The age franchise is age2 and aom. Age3 and age4 are dead
00:50 "aoe2 is running off of nostalgia" mmhmm it's definitely not because of the amazing game design that plays off of minor upgrades so perfectly that the game still have a thriving comp scene after more than 2 and a half decades. definitely not the amazing custom games nor the solid gameplay and resposivess just pure nostalgia
😑
i didn't even mention the solid campaigns. Never let bro cook again
just get aoe3 .
Wish more people played 3.
3 is great, people dont give it enough credit