I’ve been saying this for ages!
I know, but that’s how the game is designed…
For example in Act 3 you shouldn’t be able to train Regulars because you don’t play the role of the US Army, you play as a private Railway Company.
Amelia does get support from the U.S. Cavalry and, later on, the Navy. Considering Cooper’s involvement, one could argue that the U.S. considered the Amelia’s pursuit of Beaumont to be of enough value to send military support her way.
One thing I’m split about is replacing Falconets with Gatlings, as they would be anachronistic. However, most of the campaigns have worse cases of anachronism.
On a side note, the Military Promotion shipment should have an additional effect, since it’s useless in scenarios where you don’t get Cooper. You literally only get a chance to benefit from it in 2 scenarios.
Yes, in the last it would have to be possible to create units or send cards of units of the war of 1812…
This is a good point, SP campaign civ could be a “demo” with some units and card on that multiplayer civs. But I highly doubt that it will happen.
The issue is that the campaign civs are different from the multiplayer ones, they are prefabricated civs for those campaigns…
Campaign-only civilizations in Age of Empires III are civilizations which do not appear in main gameplay, but only in campaigns. In most cases, they are derived from existing main civilizations.
The same as always, let’s go…
The same?!
Unfortunately this game was not “the same” as what we were offered in the past to buy, but it aligns with the trend of offering trash embellishing it with any lie and then, pretending UI or Online status, or ease to chat with others, or knowing other people name (user name\ nick name of course) and other things like rewinding a rec game, and so much more were things that are not important.
GIVE ME A DAMN BRAKE!
Oh, I got wrong typing I mean that the campaogn civ could be a demo for MP civs
Yes, but you have to modify many things in the campaigns:
- Act 1: Blood: change the knights of Saint John to simply Maltese civ
- Act 3: Steel: change the civs of the United States and Mexico from the campaign to those of the multiplayer…
- TWC campaigns: Put more native units on the Black Family Estate and the Falcon Company (this is more or less done in the DE)…
- Act 2: China: introduce the Aztecs themselves (not simple Aztec natives)…
The campaign of the base game (Blood, Ice and Steel) functions as a big tutorial.
In the first Act you only get access to the Fortress Age and even miss most of the important Fortress Age units.
No Skirmishers, no Dragoons, no Falconets.
The First Act purposely limits you more then later ones. You don’t even have access to your home city for the first 2 missions, in the very first one you can’t even train new villagers.
In the second Act you get access to the Industrial Age and a bigger variety of units.
The last Act you get access to all 5 Ages.
The different civilisations also don’t have any special unique features to make them easier to learn compared to the Skirmisher civilisations that all have their unique systems.
They kinda represent a vertical slice through the 8 Basegame civilisations.
So they should not 1 to 1 be replaced with the Skirmish versions of their civilisations.
Maltese have a lot of complex and unusual features that would confuse new players.
The US is one of the most complex and unique civilisations too and also you are not playing as the US Army itself so it doesn’t really make sense to give you access to everything the US civilisation has.
But the civilisations feel very out of place now.
For example the Hoop Throwers look like Fire Throwers but act pretty differently, that can cause confusion.
The Act 2 civilisation (Jon Black Mercenaries) can’t even build a Tavern, it would be nice if they would have access to the Mercenary camp that was added to the Germans in a recent update.
The US in the campaign is just totally different from the one you will find in Skirmish which just feels wrong.
This also affects the whole campaign of TWC too but it’s a little more complex there since the Skirmisher US does not represent the US during the War of Independence.
Generally speaking:
Don’t change everything about the Campaign civilisations but bring them more in line with Skirmisher.
The enemy civilisations on the other hand can change more.
Mexico has to be Mexico and other newly added things like the Peruvian revolt should appear in the campaign too.
The worst are still the Aztecs in the Chinese campaign but also generally the Natives in the first Campaign.
All the TWC civilisations already appear in the base game campaigns as Minor civilisations. Would be cool to actually see them added in some way.
But you know, I have a great Idea.
What if they rework the whole campaign to be coop?
This would be the perfect opportunity to rework all the missions and civilisations for the Single player version too.
Maybe keep the legacy versions in the game for the people that want the nostalgic experience.
2 Likes
Of course, it seems good to me, perhaps at the end of the game’s life they can rework the campaigns just as they did with the skins of the European civs and put the Aztecs themselves in the Blood and Chinese campaign…
Well, the Chilche character has been removed from one cinematic of Act 1 Blood. A different story was originally developers has planned the Chilche is main character for this Act 1, and the “campaign cover” featured the Morgan and Chilche
This is sad! It is unclear where the old Chilche one came in Act 3 Stell, and he knows so much history.
I want to see the beta draft original outline by Ensemble Studios for the Act 1 Blood
The scenarios here use assets from North American maps, such as Texas. The appropriate thing would be to replace the biome and the terrain with one of a suitable Mediterranean style.