Aoe5 should be followed aoe3

age of empire 5 should be modern


imo, it should push timeline forward, industrial to world wars
smt aoe4 should’ve done


I fully agree. All games in the WWs are not global like AOE. It would have a lot of potential.
Age1 could be starting 1890s
Age2 WW1 (first tanks and planes)
Age2 WW2 (first rockets)
Age3 cold war (first nukes)
and age4 in the 2000s (first drones)

Many say that this would be to little time between the ages but the technological development was also mutch bigger.

Civs would be

With a DLC


i think i understand why aoe4 didn’t do it tho, hint: look at who developed it, last thing relic would want is aoe going blow for blow vs their own ip
based on og art on back of aoe3 box, ensemble had willingness to take on COH with aoe4, and then starcraft II with aoe5


Yes I understand it too, nut I think this is the biggest reason why aoe4 is not so succsefull. It compeats with aoe2.


ye that was a key mistake, flying too close to aoe2 sun while failing to match it in any meaningfull way
and ofc commiting every single modern RTS mistake of the last decade in the process, its actually suprising the game still lingers on

1 Like

if i decided i would have liked a modern AOE game, 1820 to 1920, split this way:

age of industry (till about 1840)

age of nations (1840-1870) first military units

age of innovation (1870-1900) first machineguns

age of vehicles (1900-1915) first armored cars, planes etc.

age of empires (1915-1920) improvements from what came before, big tic up in economy.

i think going beyond this we arent really talking AOE anymore, nukes are beyond the games scope, by that point you are playing command and conquer not AOE. i also think more than enough games portray WW2 and with the light skinned nature of WW1 vehicle you can still have some semblance of balance between infantry with guns and vehicles even if vehicles counters them.

as for factions:







United states


those would be the 8 most important factions to portray.

1 Like

Relic makes no decisions about AoE4 afaik.

Worlds edge decided to make AoE2 2.0. So there you go.

1 Like

Very Eurocentric choices.

I agree that most action was here during these times but I would not buy a game that was just Europe europe europe like a broken record.

I strongly believe that in order to be a civ in AoE games you don’t necessarily have to be historically very relevant during the time. Like Italy and Malta.


I would prefer Age of Mythology 2, or the definitive edition of AOM.

If an AoE game is to be a sequel to AoE3, then it would probably take place during the second half of the 19th century up to the end of World War 1.


china and the ottomans are the only major powers im lacking i think, but they were in strong decline, century of humiliation and all.

i wouldnt be against adding ethiopia etc. as DLC content, but the point was finding great powers first. you cant really make such a game without france, britain and germany, and very quickly the others seem obvious as well.

also my idea was a “into africa” style game.


I semi disagree.

War technology and doctrine changed so fast between the 19th and 20th centuries that it would cause way too many gameplay difference between the ages if we went all the way from end of AoE3 to the contemporary era.

A game that advances the timeline should instead do something along the lines of 1818 to 1918. Then maybe have a game set from the start of WW2 to 1999, since while technology also advanced a lot then, warfare doctrine didn’t change much between WW2 and the 90s, with aircraft, automatic weapons, and tanks all being mainstays throughout.

And then probably no more. Since the are no more empires, not counting Morocco technically being the only Empire left in the world.

(I have a mechanic suggestion at the end of my rant)

Could the following civs also qualify?

South Africa

And if you’d be including Koreans and Iraq, what would you think of other nations that showed promise in their briefer time as an ambitious world player?


And on a third note, what could be done with countries that had capacity but did not expand in territory or influence?


it all becomes a bit cumbersome. Might I suggest a proxy-war mechanic. As a general idea, you go into a game with a “major” and “minor” civ. Say you have the USA as a major civ and you have Finland as the minor civ. A basic pallet of USA abilities (like a fast growing capitalist economy or something) complimented by Finland’s specialized functions/units/mechanics. (like strong defense, ski snipers, and Molotovs)

Maybe you CAN go into a round as a major civ with your own functions/units/mechanics, but you’re incentivized use the benefits of fighting under the flag of a proxy-country?

What are your thoughts?

1 Like

unless the number of aoe3 players grow up to 10 times

yeah i do agree that aoe5 should be modern since if we continue with the trend of going back aoe6 will be aoe1 2.0 ,(which i do understand people wanting to go back to the classical/ancient era but in my opinion it has been done to death) which will be a bit dissapointing, though i do agree that for this to not be a command and conguer/coh game we need for the maximum age to be ww1 or a bit after ww1 (though i wouldn’t mind a sci-fi aoe game were you build “colonies” on a new unexplored planet that or making an age of mythology 2 after retold)

1 Like

For a chronological successor I’d shift it a bit later with a start just after the Spanish American wars of independence (~1820s) to ~1922. WW1 didn’t really conclude in 1918, and conflicts like the Greco-Turkish war and Russian civil war continued until 1922. It would also capture the conclusion of the Mexican civil war.

The next iteration could go from the 1920s until the fall of the Soviet Union in 1989. The world order was dramatically changed after the USSR ceased to be a word power and the conflicts after that have a more modern context.

But for Age 5 they should follow off from AoE4 and revisit the AoE3 timeframe before going into later periods with subsequent games.

1 Like

revisiting aoe3 timeline would only really work if aoe5 was vastly superior, which given modern trends you can probably rule out completely
also people are too goddamn sensitive these days for anyone to even think of setting a game in colonial period

1 Like

Unfortunately you’re almost certainly right. If it was done today it would probably be hot garbage. Hopefully the trends of conforming to woke bs and pumping out unfinished low quality games end soon.

If they actually did it right a new game set in this era could be phenomenal.

One improvement could be integrating the card/shipment system into the game instead of just being a meta system on top of the game. That would make the game more streamlined and accessible to a much wider player base.

Cards could be available to be researched from appropriate buildings at the cost of a resource functionally identical to experience (I’d call it “Prestige”). Instead of going into a deck to ship some villagers after accumulating experience, you could leverage your reputation to attract immigrants by spending Prestige for an “entice immigrants” tech at the Town Center. Crates could come from the market in a similar manner, etc.

1 Like

The “woke” stuff in AoE3DE don’t really seem that out of place for me. It’s just nostalgia for some people I feel.

And I’ve been playing AoE3 since 2005.

Plantations are estates and Colonial age is commerce age. So what? It doesn’t affect the game at all. And it’s probably good to not use terms that can be triggering for some.

Also its good to get rid of the firepit. Because you know, dances can be historically accurate but people dancing is a culture thing that doesnt necessarily do things like improve fertility etc.

Staying away from touchy terms is Good for business too if they want more people to play. It’s not just history buffs playing this game.