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.
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)
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…
@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…
“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.
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.
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.
@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
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
