But they do have to wait a long time for it, making them a natural tech-based side.
The Delhi Sultanate, meanwhile, never pay for research. "In theory, I love the Mongols, but the truth is I'm far too slow for them, and get on much better with the Abbasid, who get anti-cavalry camels."
You can't trade for it either, but you get free stone whenever you destroy enemy buildings, so you'd better make the most of that mobility. That mine itself is their weakness you can have only one at a time, and its production can't be sped up with villagers like most other gathering. Mongol players can move almost all their buildings freely and quickly, and buildings camped around a stone mine can train two units at once. Raid, raid, skirmish, harass and raid is the order of the Khans. The documentaries help you picture how these civilisations would have approached real-world obstacles.įortunately, the missions themselves are strong enough to carry you through (although I gave up on England - and in the game), with the Mongol one in particular doing a decent job of highlighting their strengths and the mindset necessary to make them work. A conqueror arises, fights a few neighbours, and succeeds for a bit.
It probably doesn't help either that because the campaigns cover such a timescale, the documentaries get condensed - and in the case of the Norman conquest one, presents a duly overfamiliar story to anyone who grew up in England. It wouldn't be fair to slam the game for any of this, though, and I will say in its favour that it's both a novel approach and done with very impressive production values.
By no means bombastic, obnoxious, or patronising, it's still just a little too dramatised for my liking, while also not going full costume drama with it. It's a style of documentary that I personally never quite got on with. Even the narration is a pitch perfect earnest history voice.
Rather than running through Joan of Arc's life with actors or fictionalising the Norman conquest, each campaign is presented exactly like a certain type of TV documentary, complete with footage of modern cities and landscapes superimposed with animated figures waging wars from long ago. Overall, narrative isn't exactly a central concern though. The usual RTS thing of removing more advanced units from earlier missions applies, and here lines up neatly with the eras and timescale - the Mongols don't have their mega-trebuchet until a few generations have passed in the story and it's actually been invented, for example. Each follows one civilisation over a decades long campaign of war and conquest. The natural place to start is the campaigns. Age Of Empires 4 has all of that, across four 9-mission single player campaigns, 17 skirmish maps (which can be slightly modified with seed numbers, and we're told more map options are coming), and 8 playable, well-differentiated and slightly unequal civilisations. They're base building, four-resource-gathering contests between factions based on historical world powers, and progress throughout a match happens in explicitly tiered eras that loosely represent historical ages. Let's not argue about which of its elements is the defining one. Even if you haven't played them, the Age Of Empires games were a pillar of RTS design, and probably the most popular candidate for a comeback since publishers largely abandoned the genre in the 2000s. It's tempting to bang on about the history of Age Of Empires, but let's be real here, you already know it well enough.