Community Forums

dont change what made aoe, aoe.

TgaudTgaud Member, Insider ✭✭✭

please dont change anything to the game. its precisely what create the charm of it.

for example exploring with one villager and encoutering a lion

not knowing where your allies are at the beggining

not seeing them.

sometime u begin beetween two ennemi instead of 3 facing 3.

not finding your berries close to the town center everygames.

not being able to protect your villagers
when someone come with archers

behind thoses "problems" is the real fun of unpredictive games.

dont change the musics. just remaster them..but its so much nostalgia..
at least make an option to put the old ones.

dont put automatic farms.

back in the past there was a natural lag of 1.5seconde beetween order and realization because of network problem.

but it was usefull for balance purpose. not being able to escape from catapults

you should recreate this by putting a slow acceleration to units.
age of empire was a game of economy macro management. not unit micro management

please dont change that.
dont listen to all thoses with great ideas that ends up creating to a tasteless game because all frustrating/random/difficult part have been casualized.

what you can do:

make the forest able to grow again. or last longer.

more late game upgrades

make better graphics (good job on that)
better network code.

«13

Comments

  • HaiCinderellaHaiCinderella Switzerland (Schweiz)Member, Insider ✭✭✭

    I am with you, a better network code need the game so much and the grafic looks now awesome

  • N1qHT4MlTeXN1qHT4MlTeX Member, Insider
    edited June 16

    The devs would not do these beta-testings if they are not willing to change the gameplay. New stuff and changes are the purpose of this beta.
    In my opinion it is a good idea to keep the game updated and fresh (basically to have a reason not to play just the old version)

  • hoyohoyo9hoyohoyo9 Member

    I disagree that these things shouldn't be changed. I think that there should be options to toggle these.

    Besides, even if they do change them, they're including the original RoR game along with the HD version

  • QueopeQueope Member, Insider ✭✭

    I think that is not a bad idea to implement new ideas to the game. Probably the best solution is the possibility to setup the game with new game types and options if you want, and another type of skirmish that are exactly like 1997, without anything new. If you put more options you can choose anything that you want for your skirmish, like total combat, scenario etc...

  • N1qHT4MlTeXN1qHT4MlTeX Member, Insider
    edited June 16

    @Queope said:
    I think that is not a bad idea to implement new ideas to the game. Probably the best solution is the possibility to setup the game with new game types and options if you want, and another type of skirmish that are exactly like 1997, without anything new. If you put more options you can choose anything that you want for your skirmish, like total combat, scenario etc...

    like in AoE 2 choosing base game or expansions :wink:

  • AmphiprionAmphiprion FranceMember, Insider ✭✭✭

    A good rts game is a rts game without (or minimal) random aspect.

  • BoUBoU FranceMember, Insider ✭✭✭

    @Tgaud said:
    please dont change anything to the game. its precisely what create the charm of it.

    not seeing them.

    sometime u begin beetween two ennemi instead of 3 facing 3.

    not finding your berries close to the town center everygames.

    not being able to protect your villagers
    when someone come with archers

    behind thoses "problems" is the real fun of unpredictive games.

    dont change the musics. just remaster them..but its so much nostalgia..
    at least make an option to put the old ones.

    dont put automatic farms.

    >

    you should recreate this by putting a slow acceleration to units.
    age of empire was a game of economy macro management. not unit micro management

    make better graphics (good job on that)
    better network code.

    I valid thoses ideas (i deleted the bad ones)

  • AssyrianAxemanAssyrianAxeman Salt Spring Island B.C.Member, Insider ✭✭✭

    @Tgaud That is it, that's the replay ability that has kept this series alive for so long. ^^ Its a wonderfully mysterious and exhilarating feature.

  • AmphiprionAmphiprion FranceMember, Insider ✭✭✭

    A good RTS game is a part of random so nothing can be planned before the game.
    No static build order like in starcraft where you know precisely where everything is and how much ressource >you have, and where you can code a Bot to play for you.

    No, random is horrible and make the game unbalance, and if the game is unbalance, no pro / semipro, and no tournament. Hight level hate hazard.
    SC2 is not a static game, is more versatil than all aoe franchise (aoe2 is particulary static for exemple)

    A good RTS game is when you have to think. Improvise, adapt.

    Yes, against your oppoenent, if the map is unbalance you can't do that, you die.

    Realy, all pgm of all game (not only rts) are agreement, random is the worst.

  • TgaudTgaud Member, Insider ✭✭✭
    edited June 17

    @Amphiprion6

    You say nonsense.

    Poker has a big place for hazard and chance.
    But, it doesnt prevent it from having pro...
    and it doesnt prevent the pro to win the tournaments.

    If some variable of the game is unsure, just make your gameplay sure.
    the rules of the game are the same for all people. so the game is fully balanced.

    Adaptation is the key. Not pre-determinism.

    that's your way of thinking, influenced by pro that only play with an excel **** of statistics next to them, that make most of the game of nowadays boring. No fun to play. repetitive.

    sc2 is dying..
    despite all the change in the units they make to bring some versatility, and rebalance , its dying.
    Its so determinist that strategy are written by advance.
    The economic part of sc2 is sooooo boring.

    the only intersting part of sc2 is the battle with micromanagement.
    That never happened on Age of empire because of army size and bad network code (too much lag to micro )

    I never played 2 aoe game that looked the same.
    just by the fact the map is different for every game.

    on starcraft, you tell me the time, you tell me what the player see and i can tell you what the guy is doing my eyes closed, at the precise second, for the 6 first minute of the game.

  • BoUBoU FranceMember, Insider ✭✭✭

    @Tgaud said:
    "A good rts game is a rts game without (or minimal) random aspect."

    Not really.
    A good RTS game is a part of random so nothing can be planned before the game.
    No static build order like in starcraft where you know precisely where everything is and how much ressource you have, and where you can code a Bot to play for you.

    A good RTS game is when you have to think. Improvise, adapt.
    When sometime you can wall your base sometime not.
    Sometime find your food right away, sometime having to explore.
    Sometime finding stone, sometime having to conquer the map to secure some.. and sometime to fall back on other strategy without stone.
    Sometime you will be lucky and find water, sometime you will not. And sometime you will build your docks in a little lake (ahahah).

    That's what make the game fun and not repetitive.
    That's why people love Age Of empire so much, because its unpredictive, its raw talents, intuition, instinct, and you cannot copy it.

    This is so true
    Sometimes it can be frustrating to have a bad map but it's like in poker, long term playing reveal best players

  • AmphiprionAmphiprion FranceMember, Insider ✭✭✭
    edited June 17

    Rts =/= poker, you can't bluff in a rts, so all your argumentation is wrong. If you have no ressource, you can't do anything. Why you don't ask pro player?

    SC2 is dying but aoe is dead since 10 years, and sc gold age is incredibly more efficient than aoe gold age (in terme of price pool / number of player).

    on starcraft, you tell me the time, you tell me what the player see and i can tell you what the guy is doing my >eyes closed, at the precise second, for the 6 first minute of the game.

    Its exactly the same in aoe2.......... I watched all aoe2 tournament and is boring to see 99% mirror MU and mirror BO. They are not diversity in aoe, when you are noob you can do as you want, but not in tournament.

  • TgaudTgaud Member, Insider ✭✭✭

    Trust me in age of empire1 back then there was a pro called Elf_Of_Fire/feanor/elfanor, and whatever u do, you couldn't beat him. whatever the map

    If you are a fan of SC2 you can go to sc2 forum you know
    Age of empire is different. Don't try to make age of empire become starcraft plz.

    And btw Age of empire is Mostly fun in 3v3/4v4 , that's the best games ever i can remember.
    Where you could turn 4 time over the map clockwise destroying ennemy base and being destroyed.
    It was very dynamic, not static like sc.

  • AmphiprionAmphiprion FranceMember, Insider ✭✭✭

    I am not fan of sc2, sc2 is just the only rts with true pro-gamer, so i want to understand why.

    And btw Age of empire is Mostly fun in 3v3/4v4

    Its your point of view, i don't like so much 3v3 / 4v4 but its not the most important of this debat, this debat is "what we can do to make the game more attractive", and without hight level community its not possible.

    Sooooo, random aspect is horrible for hight level and change nothing for low level.

    And dont said aoe is more dynamic than sc2, aoe is NOT dynamic (aoe2 is probably the most static of all aoe series). Aoe2 is macro intensive but not dynamic (unit moove slowly, not interaction with your opponenet before 10 min, need to be age 3 for kill building, easy to wall, big map etc..., this is not the definition of dynamic game).

  • TgaudTgaud Member, Insider ✭✭✭

    sorry but you miss it.
    The reason why most of the people here like age of empire1 and didn't find any fun in the game that followed, is precisely for the random reason.

    I'm bored of people that think they have "THE" answer, and that bring their fallacious ideas to all the game since 20years to endup with bullshit RTS and then wondering "why it doesnt work?"

    the game you describe exist. It's called Starcraft, go there.
    But dont come and corrupt the age of empire spirit please.
    Its been so much time waiting for it.

  • AmphiprionAmphiprion FranceMember, Insider ✭✭✭

    I haven't "the" answer, but random aspect is generaly a probleme for strong player and is not my answer but a consensus. Try hard for tournament and loose because bullshit map.

    If this game is just for 10 fan peaple, ok, iam out, but if you want aoe great again, you need too learn how we can do that, and you can't with only the fan base. What is most successfull rts game? why? etc... this is rationnal question.

    But dont come and corrupt the age of empire spirit please.

    That dont exist, it's just your spirit and you want aoe like that. If you want any change, you can play aoe1 ;) .

    So we are disagree about random aspect, my opinion is "if there are lot of random, the game won't grow up" its not your, that okey.

  • CoiledBenisCoiledBenis Member, Insider

    i think random things in rts are important so bad player can beat better one :)

  • LegoVogelLegoVogel Frisia - (Netherlands)Member, Insider ✭✭✭
    edited June 17

    O.k. same things all over again.

    Lets explain some fallacies.
    1. Random map doesn't make the game fair/optimal/whatever
    -: Maybe not always in your favor. But you could anticipate on that. That is what makes the game very cool.
    You could build your own mirrored maps in scenario, and play those PvP! <- Have some creativity for Priests sake!
    And. If you like mirror maps always. There is this game called Dota, or LoL, or SC (as mentioned). Play those.

    2.:

    If this game is just for 10 fan peaple, ok, iam out, but if you want aoe great again, you need too learn how we can do that, and you can't with only the fan base. What is most successfull rts game? why? etc... this is rationnal

    -: Well. Here is the thing most people disagree on. Some want it to be 'the next big thing' or a 'new old succesfull RTS'. Like AoE II or StarCraft.
    But then again. Those games already exist. And there is still a large amount of AoE 1 players who liked the game and still play it. Yes we see its bugs, disbalances, and stupidities as well. And those should be fixed. And yes I see small things from other (successfull RTS games) that could be added here as well (Rallypoints, unit group handling etc.)
    But changing the game in a way to become like any new other RTS game because those are successfull, is killing your own niche. This game has a charm of it's own, and I don't have that charm with AoE II for example. That game misses the sense simplicity that this game has in my opinion.

  • LegoVogelLegoVogel Frisia - (Netherlands)Member, Insider ✭✭✭
    edited June 17

    And well, I don't know. Maybe it's an 90's thing. Where we were used of thinking about a lot of stuff for yourselves, because computers weren't that forgiving back then. And yeah, I admit that is nostalgia.
    But for the same reason: If you buy a remastered vinyl, you don't expect the tracks on there to be different, only the atmosphere and sound.

  • AmphiprionAmphiprion FranceMember, Insider ✭✭✭

    Here is the thing most people disagree on. Some want it to be 'the next big thing' or a 'new old succesfull
    RTS'. Like AoE II or StarCraft.
    But then again. Those games already exist.

    Aoe2 is not successfull like sc2, you can't compare them (the price pool is as 100 times higher on sc2). And aoe1 already exist, why make this aoe-de ???

    But ok, so aoe-de is just for fanbase. Its aoe1 with 2017 graphics. Iam out of that, i dont like the principle of resell a game with new graphics and nothing else.

  • QueopeQueope Member, Insider ✭✭

    If you like the same game with all of things. Leave the "original charm" of the army when they move across the map and you lose 15 soldiers or more in every forest of the game because they don't find the path. :D

  • TgaudTgaud Member, Insider ✭✭✭
    edited June 17

    Agree with legovegel.

    Improve things yes. Like rally point, grouping units, max population. Map size.
    Graphics
    Pathfinding
    Performances
    Stability
    Animation of units

    But dont change anything on the game itself, the time spent to do every little details.
    The problematics of not finding your food, is a total part of the game.
    You have to improvise, delocalise, get the help of your team.

    Who care is AOE1 is not the next big 1v1 Pro Expert Corean game ?
    There is already a ton of RTS like that. Go there.

    What we want on AOE1 is FUN, CHARM, pleasure to play unpredictives games and have your raw talent expresss, not bullshit excel calculus to tell you what is the best formula to win.

    Sometime you will find a ton of Stone, and you will decide to play with a lot of defensive towers.
    Sometime you wont, and you will have to be aggressive, unit based stragegy.

    And the opponent is the same, so you can't even know what he's doing and how he will attack

    THIS IS AGE OF EMPIRE !

    Its like battleroyal, you don't know where the others are, you dont know the battleground/map , you don't even know which weapon you will have to use.
    You just improvise ! and that's what is so good.
    To not play against BOT that have just copied a build order over the internet.

  • LegoVogelLegoVogel Frisia - (Netherlands)Member, Insider ✭✭✭

    @Queope said:
    If you like the same game with all of things. Leave the "original charm" of the army when they move across the map and you lose 15 soldiers or more in every forest of the game because they don't find the path. :D

    No I think such things should be fixed offcourse.

    As for the other stuff: automation, gates, garrison, mathematical RTS stuff and such: I opted before (in other discussions) that I hope the game should have a good mod-compatibility so people who miss that can add it to the game. I would play those mods too, just to see if I like it as an addition to this game.

  • QueopeQueope Member, Insider ✭✭

    @LegoVogel said:

    @Queope said:
    If you like the same game with all of things. Leave the "original charm" of the army when they move across the map and you lose 15 soldiers or more in every forest of the game because they don't find the path. :D

    No I think such things should be fixed offcourse.

    As for the other stuff: automation, gates, garrison, mathematical RTS stuff and such: I opted before (in other discussions) that I hope the game should have a good mod-compatibility so people who miss that can add it to the game. I would play those mods too, just to see if I like it as an addition to this game.

    Hopefully include a good support for mods. Even so, better that the development team do a good job and look for new formulas and improvements that do not leave all the work to the modders.

  • LegoVogelLegoVogel Frisia - (Netherlands)Member, Insider ✭✭✭

    @Queope said:

    @LegoVogel said:

    @Queope said:
    If you like the same game with all of things. Leave the "original charm" of the army when they move across the map and you lose 15 soldiers or more in every forest of the game because they don't find the path. :D

    No I think such things should be fixed offcourse.

    As for the other stuff: automation, gates, garrison, mathematical RTS stuff and such: I opted before (in other discussions) that I hope the game should have a good mod-compatibility so people who miss that can add it to the game. I would play those mods too, just to see if I like it as an addition to this game.

    Hopefully include a good support for mods. Even so, better that the development team do a good job and look for new formulas and improvements that do not leave all the work to the modders.

    Yes. And by how it looks now, they'll take the Upatch as basis to go from. I hope they stay in touch with the person(s) who made it. Because there is already a better mod-options in the Upatch. And the site even has a 'subjective improval mod' with even more balances (like chariot archer having -1 range and slingers being more effective to them (as a late game balance) ) which shouldn't be overlooked.

  • BoUBoU FranceMember, Insider ✭✭✭

    When AoE1 was released the game wasn't perfect especially for multiplayer : lag, wrong balance, many bugs but the idea of this game was so great especially with random map generation that lead to adapt strategies to maps

  • Sebmaster961Sebmaster961 MunichMember, Insider

    I think it's always hard to make everybody happy..
    But as far as i know you will be able to switch between the remastered gamemode and a more back to the roots gamemode! So let's hope they will do both properly. It looks like the devs already thought about this after all...

  • TgaudTgaud Member, Insider ✭✭✭

    @Sebmaster961 said:
    I think it's always hard to make everybody happy..
    But as far as i know you will be able to switch between the remastered gamemode and a more back to the roots gamemode! So let's hope they will do both properly. It looks like the devs already thought about this after all...

    Its not a good thing to Split the community if we dont want a game that get deserted.

«13
Sign In or Register to comment.