Yes, the same thing that was corrected with the successive expansions … with The Warchiefs in 2006 came the Native American civs (Iroquois; Hauds in 3 DE),(Sioux; Lakotas in 3 DE) and the Aztecs and the most historic campaigns returned… then with The Asian Dynasties, in 2007, the Asian civs returned (China, India and Japan)… then with the 3 DE, they put the African continents (The African Royals last year) and European (Knights of the Mediterranean last May)…
Well, you can try it now again, it’s a completely different game and it’s super enjoyable, I would say it’s now at the same level as the 2 DE…
Yes, it is understandable, so playing it a few hours to the game does not work … you have to play the campaigns and then experiment with the different civs in skirmish, try different variables of decks … if you play little by simply sight it seems a very simplified game, but the more you get into the game the more complex and diversifies it becomes…
Claro,no lo habría dicho mejor…
Of course, it is actually simple:there are three types of cannons: anti-infantry/anti-building, anti-artillery and anti-building only:Falconets,British and Chinese rockets,Gatlings gun,Napoleon cannon,horse cannon and heavy cannon are the first type of cannon:defeats all infantry and they can also be used against buildings, culebrine (the second cannon) is the second type of cannon:defeats the others cannons and the mortar and its howitzer improvement and its Asian equivalents are the third type of cannon;is like an evolution of the trebuchet of AoE 2 (it only serves as an anti-building unit), and then for the infantry the same or very simillary counters of AoE 2 are applied: archers, crossbowmen and skirmishers are light infantry and defeat the heavy infantry (musketeers and pikemans) but not cavalry, heavy infantry and light cavalry beats heavy cavalry and so on…same in the UI of the units they tell you the type of unit that it is and against that it is effective, so do not make much problem with the counters of the game…
Yo si podría haberlo dicho mejor. Hubiera escrito “a ver” en vez de “haber”
Pero hablando en serio, yo no le encontraba gracia al AoE3 hasta que me pillé con WoL y después DE. DE mejora mucho el juego, además de agregarle batallas históricas.
Claro,WoL es lo que aspira a ser el DE algún día (más balanceado obviamente)…WoL es todo el potencial que puede dar de sí AoE 3,con civs de todo el mundo de lo más diversas y variadas;si no puede alcanzar el competitivo de AoE 2,que al menos nos de civs variadas y divertidas de jugar,es un videojuego después de todo,no todo tiene que ser e-sport porque sí…
A mi en lo personal me gustaría más contenido single player en DE, pero acepto que el juego está más orientado a multiplayer, así que hago mi propio contenido o bajo los escenarios de Troteck
People keep making this point because, for some people at least, it is difficult to distinguish these units. They’re not being disingenuous. It’s not really about being able to tell they’re different when you see them side by side - it’s about knowing which is which, possibly in a situation where you can only see one of them.
AoE2 actually has some similar problems, especially in the case of the Ghulam, a spearman countered by Cavalry. But at least in AoE2, it’s consistently unique units that go against the grain.
Los 2 Primeros son guerrilleros (Infanteria Ligera) y nota su postura y uniformes son mas irregulares que los de las siguientes 2 imagenes los cuales poseen una postura más rigida y que sus mosquetes tienen bayonetas (existian los mosquetes de anima lisa y los rifles de cañon estriado usado por los tiradores)
I used to think like this. In fact, I didn’t really like AoE 3, because of the cards system and the difficulty to distinguish between different guns. But with 3 DE, the card system got a litle rework (all cards unlucked since the beggining) so, having tasted WoL, I thought, why not? And it turns out, after a while you can distinguish the different types of guns and cannons and horse riders.
I only bought AoE 3 DE for the Historical Battles, but I may stay a while longer, after I finish them.
If you look at the pictures long enough, sure - they’ll look different. We’re not talking about looking at pictures though, we’re talking about milliseconds in readability. If you literally had only time to glance at them, will you be able to tell the difference? Poses don’t matter either when you have units that are running and/or shooting, and generally the poses for shooting are very similar, too.
You’re not going to shoot the gun by swinging it around, and you don’t have a gun with a different looking barrel.
Compare that with for example Archers - player colour is contrasted with the white colour. Crossbowman has sound differences, and the white colour is replaced with browns (only the hat is white-ish?). Arbalester has full player colours, with only the hats remaining white, but you could similarly argue that the differences between Crossbowman and Arbalester are small and can be hard to read.
The Militia line all look very different, with perhaps the M@A and Longswords looking the most similar.
Now when you compare these two units to Unique Units, you’ll also see they differentiate from the generic counterparts pretty heavily. Furthermore, in AoE2 due to the symmetric design of the civs, all you really have to worry about are new Unique Units that look different. In AoE3, at some point you’re just going to mix units up with new civs each adding their own gun-wielding similar-posed units.
We’re getting kind off topic here.
AoE3 is definitely not our Ancient Friend.
If you played AoE2 for thousands of hours and then play AoE3 for 2 hours and can’t differentiate those 2 units yet that’s not a fair comparison.
Vanilla AoE3 only had 1 unique Musketeer (Janissary) and 2 unique Skirmishers (Cassador and Strelet). AoE2 had more unique archers at that point (before Forgotten Empires).
Now AoE3 has a lot more units of course and even new unit types.
It’s about being used to the game. You played thousands of hours of AoE2 and then play AoE3 for the first time. You can’t just assume that you will be able to read those units as well as AoE2 units instantly.
I think if you are used to AoE3 and then switch to AoE2 you will have readability issues too.
AoE2 feels more chaotic to me personally because I played more AoE3.
And the fact that the majority of AoE3 unit is ranged makes battles less chaotic because armies are often at a distance to each other.
No, it’s about the objective model differences. AoE2 very often has striking colour or other model contrasts. There’s simply fewer possible when everyone has a gun.
That’s not to say AoE2 does not have its own problems. Another example I can mention is how gray player colour is seen on snowy terrain. Many of the white and player colour contrasts get blurred then, too.
I’m not saying that each AoE3 unit looks similar to the other, there are differences for each, sure. But it’s definitely not as different as AoE2.
Of course,once upon you take one time to learn the basics of the game,you are going to fun more…
I don’t have readability issues the first time i play AoE 2 in 2006,yes it feels different and when i play AoM it feels more natural the change between AoE 2 and AoE 3…
No, since by that logic, when I first played AoE2 (having previously played many hours of StarCraft) I would have had unit recognition problems, but I didn’t. Being used to one game doesn’t make me less able to distinguish things in another game. I think AoE3 is the only game where I’ve had a problem with unit recognition. We’re just going to have to disagree on this, I’m afraid.
pues de buenas a primera yo no podia reconocer las unidades del aoe 2 a la primera en cambio en el aoe 3 DE si pude, eso se debia tambien a que me gusta bastante la historia del renacimiento y siglos posteriores hasta finales del siglo XIX y sabia distinguir los uniformes y unidades emblematicas de los ejercitos.
