This kind of issues need to be analyzed OUTSIDE the pro/competitive mindset. Its not only about if the strat is too powerfull or not, its about if its enjoyable for the average player and therefore healthy for the game. The pro's are less than 50 people, a multiplayer focused game like this needs a sizeable active playerbase to remain alive, and for that you need to constatly attract new players. Someone whos's new to the genre and when deciding to give a try sees this kind of thing will just disregard the game as a cheesefest and not play it again. I think there's merit on creative playstyles like this, but they really arent good for attracting people, they just dont look cool. Im PLAT 2 and im afraid to keep on climbing cause i dont want to start facing this kind of meta strats.
Best point I’ve seen, lots of people saying Marinelord just misplayed and totally could’ve beat it but to the average player this I’d probably resign from this just to not deal with it, it’s just not fun
Agreed, and not only non-pro multiplayer but also non-pro single player against the AI. How are outposts balanced right now against the AI? For a new solo player, having too strong or too weak outposts would immediately kill the fun as well. In most RTS, the vast majority of players never play against another human.
I say give this time, people will figure out counterplays and learn how to reliably beat it IF they scout it in time, as it is with other cheesy strats.
While I agree with your general point, a lot of us non pro players get strategies from the pros. I guarantee you some people will watch Kasvas build order and start using it at lower ranks after seeing this
That's the point I'm at, if I see an opponent tower rushing, I just tap out. I've only got so much time in the day to game, and I don't want to waste it playing whack a mole. It's just not fun.
Aoe2 gives villagers a huge bonus vs towers I think it is time for aoe4 to match this. That way you keep towers as a defensive option but tower rushing becomes a lot harder.
Aoe3 is even better. Doesnt let you build too close to enemy towncenter (just like drongo mentioned here with the mongol towncenter that cant be put close to enemies towncenter) AND there is an outpost limit of 7
I don’t think that is better at all. I think castle drops and towers on opponents side are fine just should not be a)something you can build with 0 military back up and b) so strong early game.
I don't like that thought process....why give villagers a bonus? It such a weird trait. I like Tevion's idea but more alone the lines that tower cost more/take longer to build the further you make it from a town center. That way tower rushing is still a thing, but a heavier investment. Because that's the main issue, tower rushing should cost the one using strat more risk but it doesn't really, you're causing enough strife on defensive player that you are able to keep and sometime be better economic wise.
@@shadowbandit3975 totally open to other ideas to nerf towers. Your right it is a weird trait to give vills but it has worked pretty well in aoe2 to keep tower rushing in check. I worry that scaling tower cost based on distance will a) be hard to implement b) make towering 2nd berries or deer cost too much. The nerfs in the pup may be enough I don’t think so but we will see.
In AoE2, tower rushes were relatively easy to fend off if you recognized it was coming. The biggest change between 2 and 4 for towers was the removal of minimum range, which previously allowed melee units or villagers to siege down a tower safely when in melee range. It used to be a Castle Age upgrade to allow for them to be able to defend against melee rushes, so maybe a potential solution for dealing with tower rushing in AoE4 would be to implement a minimum range for outposts in the Feudal Age that gets removed when hitting Castle Age. It would nerf outposts as a defensive option though which is already a weak point for them. The AoE2 tactic was also to build multiple towers in range to cover the other one, but it would still significantly reduce the dps the towers do to siegers. If you could combine this change with slowing the build speed for outposts, then it could potentially open up counterplay for players that recognize the tower rush, but also allow the tower rush to occur if the opponent doesn't respond correctly.
Outposts aren't strong enough defensively to incentivize their use at base (and help with pesky early knights/LB). By that same measure though, they're clearly too strong in offensive early game. What makes the issue of "just don't let the enemy build close to the other TC" not work, is that several civs have tower bonuses that apply to their units that makes combat and traversal options more interesting.
@@smnvalex Not explicitly stating that the tower isn't strong defensively (it's decent), I'm saying it's not strong enough defensively relative to the offensive gains. Players would rather use the defensive structure offensively, than defensively, that's the issue.
What about allowing TCs to build rams in feudal age? That way you could shut down these outposts as soon as you age up. Maybe slow down the ram movement speed to limit offensive usage and Siege Engineering brings up the movement speed again as well as allowing rams to b built by units.
Let me start by saying it sucks to play against a tower rush. That being said i do believe it should be part of the game, just needs some sort of counter play. The same way the ram rush needs to be part of the game. They can't keep removing strategies from the game, thats how games die. Give us some sort of counter play, maybe scouts get a big bonus vs towers?
Outpost construction time should increase linearly with distance from A. the starting TC or B. The nearest friendly outpost (or consider both and take the shorter of the two)
if they decrease the range of outposts wouldnt that make early longbowman raids really difficult to deal with> since they may be able to outrange outpost and shoot gold miners>?
Outpost rushing feels bad mannered to me. It's just too cheesy. Your proximity error is an interesting solution. It could also go the other way, to where there's a proximity limit from your town centers that you can place outposts. If you wanted to make a proxy base, or get on some proxy resources, you'd have to first throw down a TC then be able to establish outposts/outpost landmarks.
@@THernane No. My desired platform is @Aussie_Drongo 's comments. He popped my AOE cherry, and I'm fuckin loyal. What forum are you talking about though?
oh please he has been complaining about towers for over a month now. did he simp for china in a game they tower rushed? probably. but he has been more than consistent in saying that towers need a change.
there are a lot of ways to counter tower rushing. do we need to change the game every time someone uses a strategy successfully? what about all the games played where the tower rush is punished? Beasty did a whole video about countering the BBQ rush.
Im so freaking tired of people quoting that stupid ass video Beasty did, if his method was so perfect and effective to counter tower rushes then the pro's wouldnt still use this strats in tournaments.
@@janomoreiraaslan9455 the point is tower rushing isn’t infallible. Taking the boar was meta until people figured out how to counter. Now it is a calculated risk. Should there have been a knee jerk reaction to eliminate boars because some people have success with it?
I think Age of Empires 3 is towers done right. They’re pretty tanky and good for securing map control at a trade post or neutral resource. But outpost in AoE 3 aren’t easy to spam. 250 wood in AoE3 is a fairly big investment. I don't know what outpost should cost in AoE4 exactly but I definitely feel it should be increased. I think I'd actually buff tower up a bit more but I'd make them more expenses .
@@Zaibusa I dunit recently as Abbasid doing an all villager, all TC build. Dropped a keep and 2tc next to the enemy’s TC as my “forward base.” Pretty sure those were my tenth and eleventh tcs. I’ll have to watch the replay.
I think the simplest solution would be to either have outposts count towards population total, or have a separate cap on max outposts allowed per age where dark and feudal only allow less than like five or ten total while castle/imperial are unlimited. It's not even fun to watch
Maybe # of outpost = 2 x TC? So that would limit most players to 1 or 2 towers early game, but honestly some of the towers are so strong that even this amount used offensively can prove more than enough to push an enemy off some critical resources. What if, Outposts took longer to build/ slower to repair at max distance away from your TC otherwise the build time doesn't change or is faster (to help with defensive counter builds)?
My main issue with outpost happens to fall within range. When you place a tower it shows the range, you know where it’s at. But after a emplacement, it gets an extended range but doesn’t show you where it has extended to. You can place a tower outside of a tc but almost within range to hit the vils coming out, then get the springalt emplacement and snipe the vils as soon as they spawn. How does a tower receive more range radius than your starting town center? Not only this but the simple fact that you’re required to spend at least 600 resources (easily more because army, plus blacksmith plus the siege upgrade plus the time it takes to make all of this plus the time it takes to make the ram finally) vs 100 resources with a initial tower and then a little more for ridiculous value is crazy. Playing defense in this game hurts you majorly. Especially boomy civs. There needs to be balancing on taking to the offensive. Yes you should be rewarded for going out and being aggressive but why should you be essentially killed off within the first 5 minutes of a game based off of 2 towers?
An easy way is to increae torch damage against constructing buildings by a huge amount. The construction process bar should be reset synchronously with the damaged building HP as well. This will make pulling only a few villigers to defend tower rush possible. But I think the main reason is map sizes. Sure it leads to more intense fights in the middle&late game, but it also made walking villigers across the map before age 2 possible, which makes who gets tower rushed have no effective way to defend against the strategy. The 1v1 map size should be increased, so that walking vills&drop towers at enemy base should not happen until at ~7 minute mark, where the defender typically get some military units out.
An option to adjust the opportunity cost of tower/landmark rushing your opponent would be to increase the building cost by either 1. The distance from a friendly town center or 2. The proximity to an enemy town center. For option 1, you could have a neutral buffer distance from a friendly TC that does not increase the cost but beyond the buffer zone the costs starts to scale up. For option 2, the cost scale would potentially only occur when within a certain distance to the enemy TC. The cost scaling does not outright prevent the tower rush play style but it would delay it and make it a larger investment in time & resources
I'd propose that if aggressive outposts are broken , then they should take more time to build on the enemies side of the map. Make it take like 3x the usual build time if you are close to the enemies base . keep the outposts the same, but make it harder to use them aggressively
If aggressive outposts were broken we would see clearly superior winrates for the civs that use those outposts. But we don't, hence they are not broken. It is really as simple as that.
@@tomrob123 I sorta agree with you, I don't necessarily think outposts are 'broken', just considerably strong but if every civ starts commonly tower rushing, it would probably be better if its slightly more difficult to be that aggressive that early. I and others in this comment section think aggressive build time would be the way to go.
@@gallantk8581 Why should it be even more difficult to be aggressive that early? It is already very difficult due to a very powerfull TC that takes out pretty much everything bar a ram in dark and feudal age. We do not really have aggression in dark age already. Do we really want to have a game with nothing but 1 hour long matches of nutrition where people fight over small spots of the map? This is a strategy game and in a strategy game you need to have options. Also I do not think that every civ can start commonly with towers. It really isn't a promising strategy in most scenarios. I highly rate marinelord but he just threw this game completely.
Watching this game was just painful, this may seem as towers are just too OP but I agree with the fact that MarineLord didn't defend accordingly to a tower rush, the moment he saw the tower rush coming he should have canceled the barbican and placed it defending the resources he hasn't lost yet and yeah, start making archers to defend the other resources. Still, Casva made a great work pushing away villagers with knights to put towers. Anyway, overall I didn't enjoy watching this game, too painful to watch. Also, I've read some of the comments suggesting nerfs to towers, maybe something that could be done with them is that the range they have could decrease the farther they are from another towers or your TC, that slows down a tower rush, doesn't decrease the use of towers to defend and forces the tower rusher to be more careful and to invest more into it.
@@returndislikes6906 Yeah, if I build a tower and abandon it, it's vulnerable, but that's not how tower rushes work, I'm not saying towers are OP as a single building all alone, I'm talking about them as they are used in a tower rush. And again, I'm they are OP even in a tower rush but it is true that is easier to tower rush than defend it, so It might be disbalanced
A solution for this would be to have variable building times. Closer to your town center minimum, farther from it maximum building time. This would be a touch of realism as well, as resources are held in the TC
They could just require a unit inside for emplacements to work which requires a more significant investment. It would mainly effect the early game when every single unit is needed such as having to idle a villager which affects your income, scout affects the Intel coming in, and a Spearman stuck in one spot when you only have 10 is a 10% hit to your combat power
@@202adr this seems like the most logical jump. just remove arrow emplacement from feudal and this stops. its not like outposts help against early knight rushes anyway, they do zero damage to armored units.
for chinese and their faster build times, outpost rushes should be very easy to defend. you just rush to make more than the enemy in order to prevent the enemy from making them all around you
I'd even recommend making each tower cost an additional 50 stone with an increased build time of around 10-15 seconds. No one would really want to exchange stone for a tower over a town center.
The only way I see to try and counter it is to build wooden walls around your base in the beginning to prevent the opponent to tower rush you like that but then again it cost a lot of wood to do that. What about increase the build time whenever an outpost or wooden fortresses is being built close to enemy territory? That way it takes longer time to build and more risky too.
Would a solution not be to simply increase the cost of an outpost as the number on the field increases, so 150 to place 1, 175 to place a second 200 for a 3rd, but an exponential increase rather than a flat amount. Keeps the cheese alive but have to be much more on point with placement. Then remove the increase in castle ?
Because of the cancel building option there is little risk in the tower rush strategy. Removing this option would probably greatly disincentivise this kind of play. Only for the military builings though and only when villagers started building of course.
I still think you can cut outpost attack range by 3 and give them +1 range for each age (emplacements give +2) so you start with 3 tiles range instead of 6 that does go up to 6. A feudal tower with emplacement will have the same range as a basic tower of now. They will be pretty much the same for defense since they should attack what's under them, and will be significantly weaker on offense.
Perhaps it's an idea to limit the amount of implacements per age? Increasing up per age, so the tower rush early game is limited, but as you progress through the ages, you still have enough available to use those properly.
I would halve their health, possibly even more. Make them glass cannons offensively and emergency shelter defensively. Increase vison range to make this their primary role.
Thing about outposts is that they remind me of bunkers in Starcraft (garrison units inside and SCV builds it). There are however multiple differences that make outposts way better offensively than defensively though. AoE RTS health is generally higher than damage. Towers themselves don't do much damage but they have really large amounts of health. This may not seem like a big deal but this makes towers effective against low health units and harder to stop. With Starcraft cannons/bunkers, they are easier to kill while they are being built. The higher health value of towers creates a few major issues. They are harder to kill when with fewer units and will deny large areas. Also killing them will take longer, which is especially problematic with villagers since that means more idle time. 2) You can speed build them with multiple villagers. This makes cheesing easier obviously. 3) AoE's layout is more open and expansive versus Starcraft's pre-determined terrain. This generally means its easier to spot out a tower rush coming and create a defensive style base (also making defensive structures better for... defensive purposes). Building tower and placing arrow emplacements don't feel great because it feels like units can somewhat ignore it once you hit a certain mass. This is especially true with early knights. Arrow-emplacement towers feel more specialized in denying areas versus defending it. If towers had say 500 health and double their damage, they would be more impactful in defending styles and easier to kill (before being built). However, you can argue that you can get punished easier for not spotting it out too. Cannon emplacements are fine with me and springle emplacements are generally fine with me too (or maybe increase stone cost to 75/150/300 with cannon being the same. The Campaign costs for emplacements are way to high which I believe is 100/250/500 stone and no gold). As a side note, I'd like villagers to have higher base damage. To help with actually defending themselves because you can immediately build towers but for military you need a barrack followed by additional resources and time. I always find it painful when 7+ villagers get pulled and their DPS is like 2 because of how long the attack animation + low base damage is. Its just more idle time.
There should be a "logistics bonus" radius around your main TC. Because it focuses on only making your home base stronger and there are endless number of ideas for bonuses and the bonuses can be empire specific and different. one way you can do it is to offer bonuses to towers within it. Like fire arrows that do high damage towards buildings and maybe also deal some extra damage towards siege weapons. The idea being that home towers can kill aggressor towers and perhaps also help against early siege rush. Or maybe the "logistics bonus" radius could give torch damage bonus instead. Or some empire could build immobile trebuchet close to TC. Endless ways it could work and would make the empires even more distinct and help eliminate boring cheese play.
This has always confused me - I never understood why there isn’t a stronger defense system at your home base. It’s difficult to learn from the experience when it’s so easy to exploit that it becomes the meta instead of actual strat play. I’d love if it was a play that required an impressive amount of skill, but it literally only requires a bit of extra wood. And then rams start rolling in from the fog…
I really don't agree with this kind of strategys but when i get tower rushed 4-6 games of 10, i learned to play China only to BBQ and tower rush my opppnent first. I am not proud of this but i suppose this is the new meta "rush or you'll be rushed".
I think you could solve a lot of issues while making the game a bit more realistic simply by making villagers unable to build while combat is going on nearby, or giving them a significant penalty to build speed at least. That'd shut down tower rushing and also stop cheesy quickwalling and a lot of other gamey stuff. They could have solved the Mongol TC issue that way as well, by slowing or stopping its setup while it's being attacked.
Nice point of view, but not achievable. One main issue, is basically I am getting attacked constantly and not allowing me to build outpost. I would constantly keep engaging to disable you from building.
How dose it come, that towers are so good in the offensive but so bad in the deffensiv? Towers are OP in the first ~5 minuts of the game, where there is no mass of units to burnit them down without losing to many units in the process or having the tech to build rams to take them down savely. The best take on would be, to increase the damge take by buildings while under construction even more. Any nerf to construction time and/or cost for outpost will hurt any defensiv usage for them.
You could always make outputs be wifi network like. If not near a resource collection building then their range is reduced. Then have said nerf go away once you're in age 3.
Here's how to fix outposts: outposts get their own simplified influence system, and they must be within your 1st TC's outposts influence to fire arrows or emplacements or provide civ bonuses (Eng, Mong, etc...). The radius would be more than enough to cover your base, so any outpost there works defensively as intended. If you want to expand out for map control, each outpost extends influence too, so you may need to daisy-chain 2 or 3 outposts for boar, sacred sites, etc... Outposts can still be built anywhere and will still provide line of site and garrison protection whether they connect to the 1st TC or not, but they won't do arrows/emplacements/civ bonuses until you get them connected. This reserves outposts for defense, but if you REALLY want to go outpost offense, it requires more of an investment in resources and time, giving room for better counterplay. Right now, you can attack opponents with towers very quickly and with too little investment, forcing your opponent to devote more time/micro/resources to fight it off. The sweet-spot for AoE is expanding outward, fighting for relics/sacred/resources/map control, which you could call "midfield-play". Players then balance base building, midfield, and attack by trade-offs between greed, defense, and production/units. So really, nobody wants to play Age of Outposts.
I like the idea of not being able to build close to the enemy TC in dark and Fudel. BBQ and outpost rushing resources and key areas will still be a viable strat but shouldn't completely shut down the opponent. By the time you're in castle it shouldn't matter.
i have no idea how to fix outpost rushes, because i think they are in a good spot defensively and reducing the range for defenses will hurt it a lot, idk how to fix it but outpost rushing is painful to play against
Maybe increase the time it takes to build and make it so that towers take a lot more damage from villagers? That way they would be used more defensively as it would be a big risk to build offensively and your enemy's villagers could take then out easily.
The main thing that strikes me about watching this game is how much the tower rusher is able to do beyond the rush. Tower rushing has always existed in RTS, but in games where it's less oppressive, like starcraft for example, it's an extremely all or nothing strategy that relies on surprise more than anything. If the rush fails to cause crippling damage the rusher has nothing going on at home to back it up and quickly loses. In this game the rusher is still able to get up military units to back up the rush, which makes it much more oppressive from what I can see. It doesn't help that one of the obvious counters to it-rams-are quite effectively countered by villagers, the units being used to get the rush going. The good thing in my mind is it feels like there are a huge amount of knobs the devs can play with to try and improve the situation. I don't think the towers are necessarily the issue themselves, and it has more to do with the safety and ease of getting them up.
They should increase the outpost range DEFENSIVELY, so if it's in an aura of the original TC maybe? This way you could shut down tower rushes a bit easier so your opponent can't just park on on your resources and shut it down
I wonder if the game had gone different if he had placed the barbican first and in a better defensive position. Maybe a lot of those towers esp covering the early berries etc wouldn't have gone up and allowed him to wall up. I think one little wall on the north side of the trees and one on the west with the barbican covering the center would have changed the game and let him claim that whole corner of the map.
they should block outpost to be built too far from another ally building and create a separate building, foward outpost or something, that would cost more, making it a riskier plan, but not eliminate it completely
I'd say have the towers cost less (75 wood) and build 2x as fast if under the influence of your TC (or either option so as to not incentivize tower spamming). Towers outside the aura cost 125 wood. Also the Chinese don't get the fast build bonus on towers cause you can already see the meme coming ... "Handcanon tower spam across the whole map"
Towers should probably have double build time (so the counter would really just be to scout enough), maybe 1 tile less range or so (remember, it will be unbalance if they become too weak for defence), and vills should perhaps have a bonus against them (aoe2 mentality). But that being said, I have rarely encourtered true tower rushes, and I don't recall ever dying to them. Only Platinum ranked tho.
I would suggest double the building penalties for towers. Ie: Instead of taking 50% more damage they take 100% more damage Their building time should also be twice longer. It should prevent players from building "under the nose" of other players, yet still keep towers viable at home.
Hard to fix tower rushes. The only way I think you could make tower rushes not as bad is increase the damage against unfinished buildings again. It should require a lot less units to destroy an unfinished building then vills to build it, China included.
Adjust your strat to get defensive towers up faster. defend your shit. If you dont, you get punished trying to boom in age 2. in this case, it stopped the chinese rush to age 3
When I first picked AoE4 up, I immediately thought "where are the progressive tower upgrades?". It's not always fun to copy older games, but it could be good to start with weaker Feudal towers across the board (including fortresses), with a University upgrade in Castle and Imperial age to increase stats (also allows for fun visual changes, towers are a bit boring), in the same way AoE2 does. It'll make towers more viable late game too (they go down way too easily). AoE2 still sees tower rushes to this day and I'm fine with that, can't limit players too much!
This cheese has been around forever in rts games…photon cannon rush. The tower is supposed to be a defensive unit. How about tying them to the Town center or unit production buildings…within a certain radius. This would make this nonsense go away, unless a player wants to forward build his stables right outside the enemy base.
Marinelord just got outplayed. The only tower rushes that are hard to deal with are English, Chinese and Mongols. If you get rushed by Rus, you deserve it.
As a solo-HRE all I can say is F*** EARLY AGGRESSION. If they made the Burguer Palace replace all gold cost for food cost, I might actually consider it instead of the Regnitz, and it'd make so much more sence as a situational landmark. I guess a much slower outpost building time would not make that big of a difference on defensive outpost, but absolutely change aggressive ones. Also, please double siege set-up time, and nerf that damn repair speed god damn it.
it's only in AOE4 the defense suffers to offense.. in all other conflicts it's always better to defend but in AOE 4 it's the opposite. makes no sense... some weird dev hang-ups on reality.
I definitely support nerfs to tower, or at least arrow slit range and potentially making springald emplacements less effective against everything. Springald towers could even get the anti-siege, anti-ship tuning like how the springald unit got tuned. I wonder if buildings under construction should take absolutely mad torch damage (3x or 4x!). I know they already take extra damage and I think pushing that bonus damage for all types further would make things like treb hits mad against buildings under construction - but you should easily be able to torch a building going up near you! It also incentivises players to torch a tower/landmark/keep going up with a vill pull rather than always trying to snipe the rushing vills, this causes the rusher to at least loose resources each time they cancel and sometimes even loose the entire cost of the building. P.S. the torch attack animation should be sped up to give less opportunity for the rusher to speed cancel without loosing any resources. ;)
Outposts are missused. I have been vsing this from bronze to gold and I can usually deal with it find but it's not fun to vs or play and I'm sure it's not how the game was intended. I Evan see it in imperial age with cannon tower spam during attacks and just creeping the towers forward. There should be a radius of how close you can build towards you're opponents capital and it should be a large radious to prevent cheese. Just enough so no-one can decline you're initial resources with towers due to them being out of range. The towers themselves don't need a nerf though just where there built dose
I like it. Far more entertaining than a mechanical build order followed by standard set push. These tower rushes are very easily countered by defensive towers. Marine lord could have stopped this with a few walls and one or two towers.
Tower rushes this oppressive are also not fun to play against and very much not fun to watch .I would say such a meta disservice the game on the long term. Keep the casting going Dongo,a lot of fun to watch you. Will you go cast a bit of AOE3 since the new dlc drop a few week ago?
They should make horsemen good at something. Make it so maybe they have like 3x torch damage to towers? I find they're very under utilized. Make outposts count as 2 pop or something. The worst part about this is how micro intensive it gets. Marinelord is tip tier player but anyone who isn't as good of a player struggles against even a slower tower rush as they struggle to just micro so much. If you play a 2v2 you can just assume the opposing team will be french/English and they'll just knight/longbow/outpost rush you. And basically unless you're flawless you're going to lose or have to mirror their civs. It's so annoying. It'd hard right now because towers are being used to deny things from your opponent.. rather than defensively to protect your resources. It also doesn't help some civs get early knights etc which can burn through a tower and be highly mobile. Where as other civs have nothing. Maybe early MAA bit they're clunky and slow and expensive. I really think they should make horsemen more viable in some way. Other than archers or crossbows. They're essentially useless. Up their damage on siege (even more so) and towers so they can specialize in something. It still sucks siege can sit their unprotected and just roll away and kite units lmao.
idk how anybody could think towers aren't overpowered. I'm floating between d2 and d1 and every game I play is either an outright tower rush or people spend half as much on towers as they do on units it seems
it feel like crap to be tower rushed ! The stressful notifications, the feeling that the oponent isn't risking anything, if u go for the outpost, they can just cancel it for free. The felling that yourr own outpost don't defend shit, its AOE4 biggest issue now a days
Outpost is not a problem in this video. Marine Lord didn't countered very well. - He could make archers to prevent more outposts; - A single ram can clean up
The time it will take to build an archery range then train enough archers or setup blacksmith and research siege engineering is way more than building 7 outposts. Also, while you are getting those buildings you wont have LOS on enemy villagers.
@@moridimafea yes, exactly what i just said. wait 20min in game, wait for ~15 outposts in your base to start making some archers and one ram is enough to ~15 outposts (sarcastic mode off) the tower rush starts at ~5min. Immediately you create an archery range and start making archers. Prevent future resources to be towered. And yes, one ram could clean up while there are a few towers.
@@Peatopher90 i know, but it was a friendly match. Not a tournament one. Pros can make mistakes. The best way to counter tower rush is archers and rams
This could have been countered pretty easily tbh. The imperial academy was a total waste here, especially with forward wood and berries. He could have just placed the barbican sooner and spent the extra 600 res on military instead of dynasty. Or towered his own gold and woodline on the other side. Just got outplayed
Its really easy to make this kind of analysis when you (as an observer) have complete map information and dont have to make decisions under pressure. Questioning the skill and decision making of a top 1-2 player is just silly.
@@janomoreiraaslan9455 never said I'm as good as him. what's silly is pretending that top players never make mistakes. early imperial academy is not a normal play especially with forward resources on an open map like that and it got punished here.
@@janomoreiraaslan9455 Questioning top players is silly? What on earth? You can clearly see he's made crucial mistakes. Im quite sure he would say so too if asked that he just threw this game away.
Not everyone can be as good as the top 10 players in the world, if the game ONLY caters to the pro scene it will eventually die as no game can stay alive with 100 active players.
I prefered what they had done in the AOE3 where you just cant build too close to enemy first TC. But I guess it affect the mechanics of Mongols that way.
I think you could just make A) A limit on how many outpost you can have at once, which could increase with each age up. (like 1 at dark age, 3 at feudal, 15 at castle, 30 at imperial (or unlimited at imp), something like that) or B) Reduce their effectiveness by conditional logic, for instance they can't get any upgrades until castle age, they can only shoot while having a garrison, upgrade cost are x5 at dark age and x3 at feudal etc
B won’t work because of super early rush and this would defy the purpose of an outpost. A is very questionable, as some civ like mongols just build outposts to speed their trades / also possibly their units.. soo yeah non of them work
Am i the only one who thinks if8 vil is building outpost, just attack it with 12 vil. Since attacking a building being built has bonus dmg? Sure u lose mining time a bit like 10 seconds. But thats better right?
Hi guys I hope you answer me : My pc is 4 GO Ram , and I want to download age of empires 4 Is there any methods to download it I want to download it so much Pls tell me any method to download And I know the minimum system requires is 8 go ram .
The game was lost when ML allowed the 6 vil to surround and kill his horseman while on their way to build the 2nd aggressive outpost on th other side of his woodline. Also the PUP help nerf this playstyle by reducing the range of arrow slits and extending the time between reoccurring attack notification
i don’t think everyone should be able to shoot arrows out of it why are villager and scouts shooting arrows ? also emplacements should cost more and have alittle less range mb
This kind of issues need to be analyzed OUTSIDE the pro/competitive mindset. Its not only about if the strat is too powerfull or not, its about if its enjoyable for the average player and therefore healthy for the game. The pro's are less than 50 people, a multiplayer focused game like this needs a sizeable active playerbase to remain alive, and for that you need to constatly attract new players.
Someone whos's new to the genre and when deciding to give a try sees this kind of thing will just disregard the game as a cheesefest and not play it again.
I think there's merit on creative playstyles like this, but they really arent good for attracting people, they just dont look cool.
Im PLAT 2 and im afraid to keep on climbing cause i dont want to start facing this kind of meta strats.
Best point I’ve seen, lots of people saying Marinelord just misplayed and totally could’ve beat it but to the average player this I’d probably resign from this just to not deal with it, it’s just not fun
Agreed, and not only non-pro multiplayer but also non-pro single player against the AI. How are outposts balanced right now against the AI? For a new solo player, having too strong or too weak outposts would immediately kill the fun as well. In most RTS, the vast majority of players never play against another human.
I say give this time, people will figure out counterplays and learn how to reliably beat it IF they scout it in time, as it is with other cheesy strats.
While I agree with your general point, a lot of us non pro players get strategies from the pros. I guarantee you some people will watch Kasvas build order and start using it at lower ranks after seeing this
That's the point I'm at, if I see an opponent tower rushing, I just tap out. I've only got so much time in the day to game, and I don't want to waste it playing whack a mole. It's just not fun.
Aoe2 gives villagers a huge bonus vs towers I think it is time for aoe4 to match this. That way you keep towers as a defensive option but tower rushing becomes a lot harder.
Aoe3 is even better. Doesnt let you build too close to enemy towncenter (just like drongo mentioned here with the mongol towncenter that cant be put close to enemies towncenter) AND there is an outpost limit of 7
I don’t think that is better at all. I think castle drops and towers on opponents side are fine just should not be a)something you can build with 0 military back up and b) so strong early game.
I don't like that thought process....why give villagers a bonus? It such a weird trait. I like Tevion's idea but more alone the lines that tower cost more/take longer to build the further you make it from a town center. That way tower rushing is still a thing, but a heavier investment.
Because that's the main issue, tower rushing should cost the one using strat more risk but it doesn't really, you're causing enough strife on defensive player that you are able to keep and sometime be better economic wise.
@@shadowbandit3975 totally open to other ideas to nerf towers. Your right it is a weird trait to give vills but it has worked pretty well in aoe2 to keep tower rushing in check. I worry that scaling tower cost based on distance will a) be hard to implement b) make towering 2nd berries or deer cost too much.
The nerfs in the pup may be enough I don’t think so but we will see.
@@shadowbandit3975 if you play properly you shouldn't get behind against tower rusher so theres nothing wrong. Its not undefendable
In AoE2, tower rushes were relatively easy to fend off if you recognized it was coming. The biggest change between 2 and 4 for towers was the removal of minimum range, which previously allowed melee units or villagers to siege down a tower safely when in melee range. It used to be a Castle Age upgrade to allow for them to be able to defend against melee rushes, so maybe a potential solution for dealing with tower rushing in AoE4 would be to implement a minimum range for outposts in the Feudal Age that gets removed when hitting Castle Age. It would nerf outposts as a defensive option though which is already a weak point for them. The AoE2 tactic was also to build multiple towers in range to cover the other one, but it would still significantly reduce the dps the towers do to siegers. If you could combine this change with slowing the build speed for outposts, then it could potentially open up counterplay for players that recognize the tower rush, but also allow the tower rush to occur if the opponent doesn't respond correctly.
This is the way!
Outposts aren't strong enough defensively to incentivize their use at base (and help with pesky early knights/LB). By that same measure though, they're clearly too strong in offensive early game. What makes the issue of "just don't let the enemy build close to the other TC" not work, is that several civs have tower bonuses that apply to their units that makes combat and traversal options more interesting.
I don't know what world you live in that makes you think they aren't strong defensively
@@smnvalex Not explicitly stating that the tower isn't strong defensively (it's decent), I'm saying it's not strong enough defensively relative to the offensive gains. Players would rather use the defensive structure offensively, than defensively, that's the issue.
@@nguyenphuvinh7064 Or maybe a new building for the vision only. Something like a watchtower in previous AoE games.
What about allowing TCs to build rams in feudal age? That way you could shut down these outposts as soon as you age up.
Maybe slow down the ram movement speed to limit offensive usage and Siege Engineering brings up the movement speed again as well as allowing rams to b built by units.
I really like this idea.
Yep this is it.
Let me start by saying it sucks to play against a tower rush. That being said i do believe it should be part of the game, just needs some sort of counter play. The same way the ram rush needs to be part of the game. They can't keep removing strategies from the game, thats how games die. Give us some sort of counter play, maybe scouts get a big bonus vs towers?
Maybe construction time could increase the farther you get from your main TC.
Or even just distance from any of your TCs. However, this is technically already built in, just in the form of travel time for the villagers.
alternatively, it could cost more instead of take more time. That would incentivize you to place towers close as well.
@@quartino_ A fair point, but yet here we are.
Not a very elegant solution imho 🤷♂️
@@trentwearsfape or cost less if under the influence of your TC like the HRE repair aura
Outpost construction time should increase linearly with distance from A. the starting TC or B. The nearest friendly outpost (or consider both and take the shorter of the two)
If outposts are broken, I'd like to propose a round of FFA (OO) with 8 random civ, vs each other with only outposts and villagers.
if they decrease the range of outposts wouldnt that make early longbowman raids really difficult to deal with> since they may be able to outrange outpost and shoot gold miners>?
There should be a limit on towers per age that doesn't take population. You can have
1 in dark age
4 in feudal
10 in castle
Unlimited in imperial
Outpost rushing feels bad mannered to me. It's just too cheesy. Your proximity error is an interesting solution. It could also go the other way, to where there's a proximity limit from your town centers that you can place outposts. If you wanted to make a proxy base, or get on some proxy resources, you'd have to first throw down a TC then be able to establish outposts/outpost landmarks.
Agreed. I know it's part of the game, but it just feels unsportsman-like to me.
I like this idea. Post in the forums.
@@THernane No. My desired platform is @Aussie_Drongo 's comments. He popped my AOE cherry, and I'm fuckin loyal. What forum are you talking about though?
@@re-dacted. The AOE4 official forums, where the devs (should) read and take into account what is posted.
When China tower rush, Drongo: PogChamp
When China gets tower rushed, Drongo: We need to talk about Outposts.
Dude is a great caster, but so sweaty when it comes to china 😆😂
oh please he has been complaining about towers for over a month now. did he simp for china in a game they tower rushed? probably. but he has been more than consistent in saying that towers need a change.
@@gerbilshower4739
Don't take it so personally, fella.. it's just for grins. 😆
there are a lot of ways to counter tower rushing. do we need to change the game every time someone uses a strategy successfully? what about all the games played where the tower rush is punished? Beasty did a whole video about countering the BBQ rush.
Im so freaking tired of people quoting that stupid ass video Beasty did, if his method was so perfect and effective to counter tower rushes then the pro's wouldnt still use this strats in tournaments.
@@janomoreiraaslan9455 Youve got a great point. Beasty saying how to counter is always going to work.
@@janomoreiraaslan9455 the point is tower rushing isn’t infallible. Taking the boar was meta until people figured out how to counter. Now it is a calculated risk. Should there have been a knee jerk reaction to eliminate boars because some people have success with it?
I think Age of Empires 3 is towers done right. They’re pretty tanky and good for securing map control at a trade post or neutral resource. But outpost in AoE 3 aren’t easy to spam. 250 wood in AoE3 is a fairly big investment. I don't know what outpost should cost in AoE4 exactly but I definitely feel it should be increased.
I think I'd actually buff tower up a bit more but I'd make them more expenses .
Funny thing, the mongols can still TC rush. Just not with their original TC. I saw it happen on a stream about a week ago.
well, if you have a 800 wood town center placed next to your main, you deserve it.
@@Zaibusa I dunit recently as Abbasid doing an all villager, all TC build. Dropped a keep and 2tc next to the enemy’s TC as my “forward base.” Pretty sure those were my tenth and eleventh tcs. I’ll have to watch the replay.
@@Zaibusa 900, isn't it?=)
I think the simplest solution would be to either have outposts count towards population total, or have a separate cap on max outposts allowed per age where dark and feudal only allow less than like five or ten total while castle/imperial are unlimited. It's not even fun to watch
Maybe # of outpost = 2 x TC? So that would limit most players to 1 or 2 towers early game, but honestly some of the towers are so strong that even this amount used offensively can prove more than enough to push an enemy off some critical resources. What if, Outposts took longer to build/ slower to repair at max distance away from your TC otherwise the build time doesn't change or is faster (to help with defensive counter builds)?
Construction should cost (resources and/or time) exponentially more the further you are from your base network.
My main issue with outpost happens to fall within range. When you place a tower it shows the range, you know where it’s at. But after a emplacement, it gets an extended range but doesn’t show you where it has extended to. You can place a tower outside of a tc but almost within range to hit the vils coming out, then get the springalt emplacement and snipe the vils as soon as they spawn. How does a tower receive more range radius than your starting town center? Not only this but the simple fact that you’re required to spend at least 600 resources (easily more because army, plus blacksmith plus the siege upgrade plus the time it takes to make all of this plus the time it takes to make the ram finally) vs 100 resources with a initial tower and then a little more for ridiculous value is crazy. Playing defense in this game hurts you majorly. Especially boomy civs. There needs to be balancing on taking to the offensive. Yes you should be rewarded for going out and being aggressive but why should you be essentially killed off within the first 5 minutes of a game based off of 2 towers?
An easy way is to increae torch damage against constructing buildings by a huge amount. The construction process bar should be reset synchronously with the damaged building HP as well. This will make pulling only a few villigers to defend tower rush possible.
But I think the main reason is map sizes. Sure it leads to more intense fights in the middle&late game, but it also made walking villigers across the map before age 2 possible, which makes who gets tower rushed have no effective way to defend against the strategy. The 1v1 map size should be increased, so that walking vills&drop towers at enemy base should not happen until at ~7 minute mark, where the defender typically get some military units out.
I think a way to fix this could be a maintenance tax on outposts. This could also be increased by the distance to the TC.
An option to adjust the opportunity cost of tower/landmark rushing your opponent would be to increase the building cost by either 1. The distance from a friendly town center or 2. The proximity to an enemy town center.
For option 1, you could have a neutral buffer distance from a friendly TC that does not increase the cost but beyond the buffer zone the costs starts to scale up.
For option 2, the cost scale would potentially only occur when within a certain distance to the enemy TC.
The cost scaling does not outright prevent the tower rush play style but it would delay it and make it a larger investment in time & resources
I'd propose that if aggressive outposts are broken , then they should take more time to build on the enemies side of the map. Make it take like 3x the usual build time if you are close to the enemies base . keep the outposts the same, but make it harder to use them aggressively
If aggressive outposts were broken we would see clearly superior winrates for the civs that use those outposts. But we don't, hence they are not broken. It is really as simple as that.
@@tomrob123 I sorta agree with you, I don't necessarily think outposts are 'broken', just considerably strong but if every civ starts commonly tower rushing, it would probably be better if its slightly more difficult to be that aggressive that early. I and others in this comment section think aggressive build time would be the way to go.
@@gallantk8581 Why should it be even more difficult to be aggressive that early? It is already very difficult due to a very powerfull TC that takes out pretty much everything bar a ram in dark and feudal age. We do not really have aggression in dark age already. Do we really want to have a game with nothing but 1 hour long matches of nutrition where people fight over small spots of the map? This is a strategy game and in a strategy game you need to have options. Also I do not think that every civ can start commonly with towers. It really isn't a promising strategy in most scenarios. I highly rate marinelord but he just threw this game completely.
Watching this game was just painful, this may seem as towers are just too OP but I agree with the fact that MarineLord didn't defend accordingly to a tower rush, the moment he saw the tower rush coming he should have canceled the barbican and placed it defending the resources he hasn't lost yet and yeah, start making archers to defend the other resources. Still, Casva made a great work pushing away villagers with knights to put towers. Anyway, overall I didn't enjoy watching this game, too painful to watch.
Also, I've read some of the comments suggesting nerfs to towers, maybe something that could be done with them is that the range they have could decrease the farther they are from another towers or your TC, that slows down a tower rush, doesn't decrease the use of towers to defend and forces the tower rusher to be more careful and to invest more into it.
A normal tower is not OP. A few villagers can burn in down. Its BBQ and Rus towers that have insane health.
@@returndislikes6906 Yeah, if I build a tower and abandon it, it's vulnerable, but that's not how tower rushes work, I'm not saying towers are OP as a single building all alone, I'm talking about them as they are used in a tower rush. And again, I'm they are OP even in a tower rush but it is true that is easier to tower rush than defend it, so It might be disbalanced
A solution for this would be to have variable building times. Closer to your town center minimum, farther from it maximum building time. This would be a touch of realism as well, as resources are held in the TC
Do walls not help in this scenario? Maybe early in the game before it becomes all over the map
They could just require a unit inside for emplacements to work which requires a more significant investment. It would mainly effect the early game when every single unit is needed such as having to idle a villager which affects your income, scout affects the Intel coming in, and a Spearman stuck in one spot when you only have 10 is a 10% hit to your combat power
That or remove feudal age emplacement from the game
@@202adr this seems like the most logical jump. just remove arrow emplacement from feudal and this stops. its not like outposts help against early knight rushes anyway, they do zero damage to armored units.
The Effect of the way that change would Affect the game, is that towers would be relatively more resource intensive
for chinese and their faster build times, outpost rushes should be very easy to defend. you just rush to make more than the enemy in order to prevent the enemy from making them all around you
I'd even recommend making each tower cost an additional 50 stone with an increased build time of around 10-15 seconds. No one would really want to exchange stone for a tower over a town center.
Proposed solution- make outpost build time longer when not within the line of sight of non-outpost allied buildings
The only way I see to try and counter it is to build wooden walls around your base in the beginning to prevent the opponent to tower rush you like that but then again it cost a lot of wood to do that.
What about increase the build time whenever an outpost or wooden fortresses is being built close to enemy territory? That way it takes longer time to build and more risky too.
Would a solution not be to simply increase the cost of an outpost as the number on the field increases, so 150 to place 1, 175 to place a second 200 for a 3rd, but an exponential increase rather than a flat amount. Keeps the cheese alive but have to be much more on point with placement. Then remove the increase in castle ?
Because of the cancel building option there is little risk in the tower rush strategy. Removing this option would probably greatly disincentivise this kind of play.
Only for the military builings though and only when villagers started building of course.
All you have to do with towers is make each one 5% more expensive than the last. Solves the whole issue and makes it fun.
I still think you can cut outpost attack range by 3 and give them +1 range for each age (emplacements give +2) so you start with 3 tiles range instead of 6 that does go up to 6. A feudal tower with emplacement will have the same range as a basic tower of now. They will be pretty much the same for defense since they should attack what's under them, and will be significantly weaker on offense.
Perhaps it's an idea to limit the amount of implacements per age? Increasing up per age, so the tower rush early game is limited, but as you progress through the ages, you still have enough available to use those properly.
I would halve their health, possibly even more. Make them glass cannons offensively and emergency shelter defensively.
Increase vison range to make this their primary role.
Should have placed the Barbican to secure other resources, no idea why he put it there tbh
Thing about outposts is that they remind me of bunkers in Starcraft (garrison units inside and SCV builds it). There are however multiple differences that make outposts way better offensively than defensively though.
AoE RTS health is generally higher than damage. Towers themselves don't do much damage but they have really large amounts of health. This may not seem like a big deal but this makes towers effective against low health units and harder to stop. With Starcraft cannons/bunkers, they are easier to kill while they are being built. The higher health value of towers creates a few major issues. They are harder to kill when with fewer units and will deny large areas. Also killing them will take longer, which is especially problematic with villagers since that means more idle time.
2) You can speed build them with multiple villagers. This makes cheesing easier obviously.
3) AoE's layout is more open and expansive versus Starcraft's pre-determined terrain. This generally means its easier to spot out a tower rush coming and create a defensive style base (also making defensive structures better for... defensive purposes).
Building tower and placing arrow emplacements don't feel great because it feels like units can somewhat ignore it once you hit a certain mass. This is especially true with early knights. Arrow-emplacement towers feel more specialized in denying areas versus defending it. If towers had say 500 health and double their damage, they would be more impactful in defending styles and easier to kill (before being built). However, you can argue that you can get punished easier for not spotting it out too. Cannon emplacements are fine with me and springle emplacements are generally fine with me too (or maybe increase stone cost to 75/150/300 with cannon being the same. The Campaign costs for emplacements are way to high which I believe is 100/250/500 stone and no gold).
As a side note, I'd like villagers to have higher base damage. To help with actually defending themselves because you can immediately build towers but for military you need a barrack followed by additional resources and time. I always find it painful when 7+ villagers get pulled and their DPS is like 2 because of how long the attack animation + low base damage is. Its just more idle time.
My idea would be to make outposts cost x2 wood but are discounted 50% if you build them within the influence of a building you control.
There should be a "logistics bonus" radius around your main TC.
Because it focuses on only making your home base stronger and there are endless number of ideas for bonuses and the bonuses can be empire specific and different.
one way you can do it is to offer bonuses to towers within it.
Like fire arrows that do high damage towards buildings and maybe also deal some extra damage towards siege weapons.
The idea being that home towers can kill aggressor towers and perhaps also help against early siege rush.
Or maybe the "logistics bonus" radius could give torch damage bonus instead.
Or some empire could build immobile trebuchet close to TC.
Endless ways it could work and would make the empires even more distinct and help eliminate boring cheese play.
This has always confused me - I never understood why there isn’t a stronger defense system at your home base. It’s difficult to learn from the experience when it’s so easy to exploit that it becomes the meta instead of actual strat play.
I’d love if it was a play that required an impressive amount of skill, but it literally only requires a bit of extra wood. And then rams start rolling in from the fog…
I really don't agree with this kind of strategys but when i get tower rushed 4-6 games of 10, i learned to play China only to BBQ and tower rush my opppnent first. I am not proud of this but i suppose this is the new meta "rush or you'll be rushed".
I think you could solve a lot of issues while making the game a bit more realistic simply by making villagers unable to build while combat is going on nearby, or giving them a significant penalty to build speed at least. That'd shut down tower rushing and also stop cheesy quickwalling and a lot of other gamey stuff. They could have solved the Mongol TC issue that way as well, by slowing or stopping its setup while it's being attacked.
Nice point of view, but not achievable. One main issue, is basically I am getting attacked constantly and not allowing me to build outpost. I would constantly keep engaging to disable you from building.
Terrible for defending tho, the amount of times ive beejn saved by a last minute keep drop
How dose it come, that towers are so good in the offensive but so bad in the deffensiv? Towers are OP in the first ~5 minuts of the game, where there is no mass of units to burnit them down without losing to many units in the process or having the tech to build rams to take them down savely.
The best take on would be, to increase the damge take by buildings while under construction even more. Any nerf to construction time and/or cost for outpost will hurt any defensiv usage for them.
Another way is doing like older AOE, tower at start is weak and need to research upgrade (not emplacement) to make it stronger in each age.
You could always make outputs be wifi network like. If not near a resource collection building then their range is reduced. Then have said nerf go away once you're in age 3.
maybe a way to mitigate that is to make that building in construction take 3x more damage and time to be built if they are attacked.
Here's how to fix outposts:
outposts get their own simplified influence system, and they must be within your 1st TC's outposts influence to fire arrows or emplacements or provide civ bonuses (Eng, Mong, etc...). The radius would be more than enough to cover your base, so any outpost there works defensively as intended. If you want to expand out for map control, each outpost extends influence too, so you may need to daisy-chain 2 or 3 outposts for boar, sacred sites, etc...
Outposts can still be built anywhere and will still provide line of site and garrison protection whether they connect to the 1st TC or not, but they won't do arrows/emplacements/civ bonuses until you get them connected. This reserves outposts for defense, but if you REALLY want to go outpost offense, it requires more of an investment in resources and time, giving room for better counterplay.
Right now, you can attack opponents with towers very quickly and with too little investment, forcing your opponent to devote more time/micro/resources to fight it off. The sweet-spot for AoE is expanding outward, fighting for relics/sacred/resources/map control, which you could call "midfield-play". Players then balance base building, midfield, and attack by trade-offs between greed, defense, and production/units. So really, nobody wants to play Age of Outposts.
Thats one of the best suggestions. Maybe combine it with additional TC/Keep having their own influence, so proxy bases are valid possibility
Can we get a first round review of the OO and scoring update???
Could limit number of vils that can build at a time. Prevents the quick drop and opens more counter play, while not affecting (planned) defenses
I like the idea of not being able to build close to the enemy TC in dark and Fudel. BBQ and outpost rushing resources and key areas will still be a viable strat but shouldn't completely shut down the opponent. By the time you're in castle it shouldn't matter.
i have no idea how to fix outpost rushes, because i think they are in a good spot defensively and reducing the range for defenses will hurt it a lot, idk how to fix it but outpost rushing is painful to play against
Maybe increase the time it takes to build and make it so that towers take a lot more damage from villagers?
That way they would be used more defensively as it would be a big risk to build offensively and your enemy's villagers could take then out easily.
The main thing that strikes me about watching this game is how much the tower rusher is able to do beyond the rush. Tower rushing has always existed in RTS, but in games where it's less oppressive, like starcraft for example, it's an extremely all or nothing strategy that relies on surprise more than anything. If the rush fails to cause crippling damage the rusher has nothing going on at home to back it up and quickly loses. In this game the rusher is still able to get up military units to back up the rush, which makes it much more oppressive from what I can see. It doesn't help that one of the obvious counters to it-rams-are quite effectively countered by villagers, the units being used to get the rush going. The good thing in my mind is it feels like there are a huge amount of knobs the devs can play with to try and improve the situation. I don't think the towers are necessarily the issue themselves, and it has more to do with the safety and ease of getting them up.
They should increase the outpost range DEFENSIVELY, so if it's in an aura of the original TC maybe? This way you could shut down tower rushes a bit easier so your opponent can't just park on on your resources and shut it down
I wonder if the game had gone different if he had placed the barbican first and in a better defensive position. Maybe a lot of those towers esp covering the early berries etc wouldn't have gone up and allowed him to wall up. I think one little wall on the north side of the trees and one on the west with the barbican covering the center would have changed the game and let him claim that whole corner of the map.
they should block outpost to be built too far from another ally building and create a separate building, foward outpost or something, that would cost more, making it a riskier plan, but not eliminate it completely
I'd say have the towers cost less (75 wood) and build 2x as fast if under the influence of your TC (or either option so as to not incentivize tower spamming). Towers outside the aura cost 125 wood. Also the Chinese don't get the fast build bonus on towers cause you can already see the meme coming ... "Handcanon tower spam across the whole map"
Increase the health of the outpost while in your own base. But the further you move the outpost from your own TC, it loses health.
Maybe it's time to introduce the good old friend "minimum attsck range" to AoE4 towers. Murder holes as technology in Castle Age.
Towers should probably have double build time (so the counter would really just be to scout enough), maybe 1 tile less range or so (remember, it will be unbalance if they become too weak for defence), and vills should perhaps have a bonus against them (aoe2 mentality). But that being said, I have rarely encourtered true tower rushes, and I don't recall ever dying to them. Only Platinum ranked tho.
ML should have immediately taken the villagers and built the barbican in Kasvas base. Stop rush with rush.
That would have been funny to see
I would suggest double the building penalties for towers.
Ie: Instead of taking 50% more damage they take 100% more damage
Their building time should also be twice longer.
It should prevent players from building "under the nose" of other players, yet still keep towers viable at home.
Hard to fix tower rushes. The only way I think you could make tower rushes not as bad is increase the damage against unfinished buildings again. It should require a lot less units to destroy an unfinished building then vills to build it, China included.
Balance requires creativity and innovation.
Adjust your strat to get defensive towers up faster. defend your shit. If you dont, you get punished trying to boom in age 2. in this case, it stopped the chinese rush to age 3
When I first picked AoE4 up, I immediately thought "where are the progressive tower upgrades?". It's not always fun to copy older games, but it could be good to start with weaker Feudal towers across the board (including fortresses), with a University upgrade in Castle and Imperial age to increase stats (also allows for fun visual changes, towers are a bit boring), in the same way AoE2 does. It'll make towers more viable late game too (they go down way too easily). AoE2 still sees tower rushes to this day and I'm fine with that, can't limit players too much!
This cheese has been around forever in rts games…photon cannon rush. The tower is supposed to be a defensive unit. How about tying them to the Town center or unit production buildings…within a certain radius. This would make this nonsense go away, unless a player wants to forward build his stables right outside the enemy base.
Marinelord just got outplayed. The only tower rushes that are hard to deal with are English, Chinese and Mongols. If you get rushed by Rus, you deserve it.
I wonder how many Grand finals you played, Yeah definetly MarineLord needs to learn from Willie fucking nobody Fungo.
I don’t agree. I think the fortresses give a lot of variety to the game. Archers on a tower so they can fire far this is not weird for me.
at the least, move emplacemets to age 3. or make it so that it is not possible to build outpost near enemy base untill age 3 or 4.
ALL CIVS SHOULD BE THE SAME DIFFICULTY ONE CIV SHOULD NOT! BE BETTER THEN THE OTHER!!!!!!
As a solo-HRE all I can say is F*** EARLY AGGRESSION. If they made the Burguer Palace replace all gold cost for food cost, I might actually consider it instead of the Regnitz, and it'd make so much more sence as a situational landmark.
I guess a much slower outpost building time would not make that big of a difference on defensive outpost, but absolutely change aggressive ones.
Also, please double siege set-up time, and nerf that damn repair speed god damn it.
it's only in AOE4 the defense suffers to offense.. in all other conflicts it's always better to defend but in AOE 4 it's the opposite. makes no sense... some weird dev hang-ups on reality.
This is so satisfying to see China getting tower rushed.
I definitely support nerfs to tower, or at least arrow slit range and potentially making springald emplacements less effective against everything. Springald towers could even get the anti-siege, anti-ship tuning like how the springald unit got tuned.
I wonder if buildings under construction should take absolutely mad torch damage (3x or 4x!). I know they already take extra damage and I think pushing that bonus damage for all types further would make things like treb hits mad against buildings under construction - but you should easily be able to torch a building going up near you! It also incentivises players to torch a tower/landmark/keep going up with a vill pull rather than always trying to snipe the rushing vills, this causes the rusher to at least loose resources each time they cancel and sometimes even loose the entire cost of the building.
P.S. the torch attack animation should be sped up to give less opportunity for the rusher to speed cancel without loosing any resources. ;)
probably a little bit more time added to outpost construction will balance that
make each additional outpost more expensive (or after 3/4 they get more expensive), or make them weaker the further they are from a home TC
Maybe no out post too close to enemy base in feudal and dark age would be a good idea.
Maybe no emplacement upgrades on towers until castle age
Outposts are missused. I have been vsing this from bronze to gold and I can usually deal with it find but it's not fun to vs or play and I'm sure it's not how the game was intended. I Evan see it in imperial age with cannon tower spam during attacks and just creeping the towers forward. There should be a radius of how close you can build towards you're opponents capital and it should be a large radious to prevent cheese. Just enough so no-one can decline you're initial resources with towers due to them being out of range. The towers themselves don't need a nerf though just where there built dose
I like it. Far more entertaining than a mechanical build order followed by standard set push. These tower rushes are very easily countered by defensive towers. Marine lord could have stopped this with a few walls and one or two towers.
When a game ends up having only one way to win, it will be boring. Every empire is supposed to have its way of winning. The balance is over.
Outpost rushing with Rus shows that even increasing the cost of outposts won't deter them.
Outpost rushing is frustrating. By the time you get rid off threm you are so far behind
A simple wall in the strategic location could have prevented all those northeastern wooden fortresses from going up.
@@qkchen57 no, kasva just chops to get past wall.
which unit is better against horses/knights ... spearmen or MAA?
Playing against a tower rush is such a pain.
6:05 but can’t the player go into siege engineering and remove the tower ?
Tower rushes this oppressive are also not fun to play against and very much not fun to watch .I would say such a meta disservice the game on the long term.
Keep the casting going Dongo,a lot of fun to watch you.
Will you go cast a bit of AOE3 since the new dlc drop a few week ago?
to stop a tower rush, build your own towers and use scouts to burn them down.
archers to hunt down the villis are useless
They should make horsemen good at something. Make it so maybe they have like 3x torch damage to towers? I find they're very under utilized.
Make outposts count as 2 pop or something. The worst part about this is how micro intensive it gets. Marinelord is tip tier player but anyone who isn't as good of a player struggles against even a slower tower rush as they struggle to just micro so much. If you play a 2v2 you can just assume the opposing team will be french/English and they'll just knight/longbow/outpost rush you. And basically unless you're flawless you're going to lose or have to mirror their civs. It's so annoying.
It'd hard right now because towers are being used to deny things from your opponent.. rather than defensively to protect your resources. It also doesn't help some civs get early knights etc which can burn through a tower and be highly mobile. Where as other civs have nothing. Maybe early MAA bit they're clunky and slow and expensive. I really think they should make horsemen more viable in some way. Other than archers or crossbows. They're essentially useless. Up their damage on siege (even more so) and towers so they can specialize in something. It still sucks siege can sit their unprotected and just roll away and kite units lmao.
AOE3 had limits. You were limited to the number that could be built. I think it was 6 or 7??
Error messages don’t seem natural. There must be some strategy to stop barbican from going up.
idk how anybody could think towers aren't overpowered. I'm floating between d2 and d1 and every game I play is either an outright tower rush or people spend half as much on towers as they do on units it seems
it feel like crap to be tower rushed ! The stressful notifications, the feeling that the oponent isn't risking anything, if u go for the outpost, they can just cancel it for free. The felling that yourr own outpost don't defend shit, its AOE4 biggest issue now a days
Outpost is not a problem in this video. Marine Lord didn't countered very well.
- He could make archers to prevent more outposts;
- A single ram can clean up
The time it will take to build an archery range then train enough archers or setup blacksmith and research siege engineering is way more than building 7 outposts. Also, while you are getting those buildings you wont have LOS on enemy villagers.
@@Gr8VKS a few archers would prevent some towers. Look how many the game ended. Marinelord was surrounded because he couldn't prevent more towers
Agree. Kasva spent 2k on wood and stone on those outposts. Epl wood and one ram would clean it all up
@@moridimafea yes, exactly what i just said. wait 20min in game, wait for ~15 outposts in your base to start making some archers and one ram is enough to ~15 outposts
(sarcastic mode off) the tower rush starts at ~5min. Immediately you create an archery range and start making archers. Prevent future resources to be towered. And yes, one ram could clean up while there are a few towers.
@@Peatopher90 i know, but it was a friendly match. Not a tournament one. Pros can make mistakes. The best way to counter tower rush is archers and rams
This could have been countered pretty easily tbh. The imperial academy was a total waste here, especially with forward wood and berries. He could have just placed the barbican sooner and spent the extra 600 res on military instead of dynasty. Or towered his own gold and woodline on the other side. Just got outplayed
Its really easy to make this kind of analysis when you (as an observer) have complete map information and dont have to make decisions under pressure.
Questioning the skill and decision making of a top 1-2 player is just silly.
@@janomoreiraaslan9455 never said I'm as good as him. what's silly is pretending that top players never make mistakes. early imperial academy is not a normal play especially with forward resources on an open map like that and it got punished here.
@@janomoreiraaslan9455 Questioning top players is silly? What on earth? You can clearly see he's made crucial mistakes. Im quite sure he would say so too if asked that he just threw this game away.
Beastyqt has no trouble with outposts or bbq rushes.
Not everyone can be as good as the top 10 players in the world, if the game ONLY caters to the pro scene it will eventually die as no game can stay alive with 100 active players.
I prefered what they had done in the AOE3 where you just cant build too close to enemy first TC. But I guess it affect the mechanics of Mongols that way.
Restricting what you can do is going to make experience worse. Its better to have a counter for this creep.
I think you could just make A) A limit on how many outpost you can have at once, which could increase with each age up. (like 1 at dark age, 3 at feudal, 15 at castle, 30 at imperial (or unlimited at imp), something like that) or B) Reduce their effectiveness by conditional logic, for instance they can't get any upgrades until castle age, they can only shoot while having a garrison, upgrade cost are x5 at dark age and x3 at feudal etc
B won’t work because of super early rush and this would defy the purpose of an outpost.
A is very questionable, as some civ like mongols just build outposts to speed their trades / also possibly their units.. soo yeah non of them work
Am i the only one who thinks if8 vil is building outpost, just attack it with 12 vil. Since attacking a building being built has bonus dmg? Sure u lose mining time a bit like 10 seconds. But thats better right?
Hi guys I hope you answer me :
My pc is 4 GO Ram , and I want to download age of empires 4
Is there any methods to download it
I want to download it so much
Pls tell me any method to download
And I know the minimum system requires is 8 go ram .
The game was lost when ML allowed the 6 vil to surround and kill his horseman while on their way to build the 2nd aggressive outpost on th other side of his woodline. Also the PUP help nerf this playstyle by reducing the range of arrow slits and extending the time between reoccurring attack notification
i don’t think everyone should be able to shoot arrows out of it why are villager and scouts shooting arrows ? also emplacements should cost more and have alittle less range mb