Please read my reasons before getting angry:
I always believed this is a terrible idea. But then I thought of COH2, where the factions can be still playable but some commanders (comparable to cards or more accurately decks) need to be purchased. Not all of them are necessarily op, but some are very interesting.
Now I’m not talking about micro-transactions where you can purchase gatcha card packs. That would still be a terrible idea. I mean large content update packs like EU4 where some factions got a few new assets and options, etc. but the faction is still playable in the vanilla game.
Because whenever it comes to update of old contents, it does not (directly) pay off, so it is slow and in small scales. It is basically a choice between free but small updates vs paid but big updates.
Because in AOE3 one civ is not just one civ. It is an infinite amount of civs combined. So if you can buy a new “civ”, why can’t you buy a new build of a civ that is effectively a new civ?
Let me do a small poll: would you buy a DLC where there is ONLY (important):
- Cards
- Campaigns and scenarios
- Skins
EDIT: and it does not mean I support the idea entirely. I’m just doing the devil’s adovate.
I think it only works for coh, because they have few factions and buying a commander is more like having another faction… Like If Aoe had ‘the europeans’ in general and you unlock british or portugese homecities. I think it would be impossible to balance, since the cards would be either broken or not usefull (and just flavor)…
I think the best options would be campains/historical battles, but skins could also work (depending on what they affect)
Yeah that makes sense.
But the other side of the picture is, the workload of adding a new civ to AOE3 is huge, and even with that, I feel that they are overdoing it for the new civs.
Just to mention in coh2 you can also combine several different commanders. Not sure if it is a welcomed design as I’m not very into the community.
I thought something similar, giving another HC to that 2nd view of the civ. My example was about Spain: they have Sevilla as HC but this 2nd version would have Madrid as HC (I know the reason of Sevilla, but what if…??). This 2nd version would be focused on a later era instead first conquerors
1 Like
Considering how Card set-ups and build orders are important to the competitive scene, card packs as DLC would always be rather controversial. I believe it’s better to keep new cards as part of the free monthly updates.
4 Likes
Well if one does not purchase the civ dlc then that civ is not accessible to him/her either.
So not being accessible to a certain build order may not be that much of a problem no?
That’s a fair point. But people are already mostly used to the idea of having some civs as DLC exclusive. Having cards for the base civs behind a paywall would feel unfair to those who choose to not, or couldn’t, buy it.
Imagine a fighting game, let’s use Mortal Kombat as an example. If you’re a Sub-Zero main and they announce Mileena as a DLC character, you can buy it or not, but it’s not going to change how your character fights. But if they suddenly announce that Sub-Zero’s teleport move is now going to be DLC only, it’s going to affect how your character fights. If you don’t buy it, you’re going to be at a disadvantage against another Sub-Zero player who did buy the new moves.
People wouldn’t want to play an “incomplete” character or having an “incomplete” civ.
2 Likes
True. I myself find it hard to get out of this mentality…
1 Like