AOE3 Forums

1. What are the signature things that you consider to be an essential part of an Age of Empires game?

A good counter system and a variety of usable civs. As of now, there is a great counter system but only Germany, Indian and Japan are being used. 

2. What are the things that you like the most about an Age of Empires game? Why?

I really miss a good blacksmith that was essential to the game.

3. What are the things that you dislike the most about an Age of Empires game? Why?

Lame strats, OP civs, Navy battles (Caneos owning Euro ships and the stupid aim time for Euro ships)

 1. im a treaty player so i consider it to be the most signature part of the game.                                                                                                                                   2 .wide variety of civs to chose from/units a great counter system and clans.                                                                                                                                                                                   3.                                                                                                                                          Treaty games syncing out and the lacking of lrg maps. REALY COULD USE A NEW LRG MAP. not just for treaty players

whats great about aoe3 is that its really fun and it requires strategy. you cant just sit on your butt clicking like you do in many games.

i really like how in aoe3 you made a lot less civs, but their is way more to them. not just 1 unique unit per civ, but like 10. makes the game a lot more interesting. and every civ is fun to play.

i think the counter system needs to be cleared up, and units need to be classified better

for example, is a hussar a light or heavy cav? they are heavy, obviously, but it sais they are light in their description 

1. The historical aspect, the community, and the variety. Things that weren't possible in the past are now (Like the Sioux fighting the Japanese )

2. The thing I like most is the variety of Civs, and the variety of strategies and units within the Civ. Why? Because the possibilities are endless, and thats what keeps people playing this game. Myself included.

3. The people who abuse the strongest units just to win, and forget the fact that this is a game, thus meaning an activity for fun and enjoyment... Why? Because these people spoil it for me, the whole atmosphere of playing the game just goes straight out the window when each game you get Disciple FF'd (for example).

1: A good mixture of fighting and economy in a historic atmosphere. You guys did it best in Age of Kings. In my opinion the best by far of the series.

2: The HC cards which allow different strats are very nice. Lots of different nations of which at least some are pretty unique. A good counter system which makes figting more interesting. Nice historic atmosphere which got a bit worse with the expansions which on the other hand, added more unique civilisations.

3: Lategame (IV and V) is a mess. Eco is to easy to manage on the one and to easy to kill on the other hand and you dont have to actualy take care of your army anymore because u can rebuild your units so fast and easy. Also the economy part is to small/easy in general (steal it from Stronghold ! ;) ). To few maps. Lag. 

 

1) Historical uniqueness/accuracy of the units, building styles, and maps. (The more unique the better)

2) Innovative card system is a great addition. Beautiful to look at, really good countering units, and lots of in game play options. AI is way better than anything before so that is good as well. I love this game!

3) The screen size...the mini-map and controls take up WAY too much of the game play viewing area. This MUST be reworked in future games. Another thing is that elevation means nothing aside from unit speed. Walls don’t protect people on the inside, and having a canon on the side of a hill doesn’t allow it to shoot further. There is no random Civ function or the ability to have more than 2 teams. Even if you make the games unrated for online play, it would be great to have the option to have a 2v2v2v2 or 3v3v2 when playing with friends. Like most, I would enjoy a larger population cap (maybe make this dependant upon the number of players). I still think you should have to pay (upgrade at the TC) to see what your teammate sees. I don’t feel like there are good enough defenses available. The walls cannot be manned and you can only build so many towers. The expansions got lazy with the extras like customizing the HC’s.

Thanks for taking our input on this. AOE3 is great and I can’t wait to buy AOE4 when it comes out!

 

I'm glad you're taking feedback from the community.

1. The gathering of multiple resources by a villager type unit, the building of several types of buildings to train seperate types of units and the various unique upgrades, units and civilisation appearances we see in the games all seem to make up the vital skeleton of an age game.

2. My love of history brought me into the games, and I think that's something I like - being able to play a historical civilisation fighting against another, with different units and appearances, all in a believable, accurate depiction of warfare in the era the game covers

3. There isn't much to dislike with Age of Empires, but the balance issues can be annoying, although it is a clear that they will be resolved eventually. The fact that certain good and importantfeatures from older games that haven't been carried over to Age of Empires III is irritating, but that makes little difference.

1.    What are the signature things that you consider to be an essential part of an Age of Empires game?

 

I would say the gathering of resources.  Like Food, Wood, and Gold.  Most RTS games you gather only 1 resource and don't focus much on resource gathering.  The thing I like about this is its more unique imo for the fact that you gather resources, advance through the ages and all that. 

 

2.    What are the things that you like the most about an Age of Empires game? Why?

 

 I would say the Ranking, Supremacy, and all the unique civs.  Again Age of empires is one of the very few that has more then 3 factions/civs  or whatever you want to call it.  Most games only have 2-4 from what i'v seen (CnC, CoH, Dawn of war, etc).  That is 1 thing I love about this series is there are alot of civs to play.

 

3.    What are the things that you dislike the most about an Age of Empires game? Why?

 

Hmmm i'm not really sure what I dislike the most about any of them.  They were all good fun so this is one I may edit later on if I get an idea :P.

1. An essential part is a wide variety of civs and units. And ofcourse the aging part.

2. I really like the counter-system and the oppurtunity to do certain strats with certain units, like Hit & Run for Skirmishers. That kind of stuff. I think that the Home City was a great improvement and should be integrated in any sequel of this series.

3. I dislike the cheating in the online community. The being able to drop-trick is very annoying. But for the game itself. If 1 civ is a bit better than 1 other, isn't much of a problem... but when it gets to the point that 1 civ is almost undefeatable, that's too much. Like the Japanese are now in Treaty. If 1 civ has a little advantage, it's fun the play the non-advanced civ to win just on skill. But really OP is too bad.

1) A lot of civs and units

2) AOE3: graphic, decks, different unit ...

3) Bugs like shooting through the wall