Random map doesn’t make the game fair/optimal/whatever
-: Maybe not always in your favor. But you could anticipate on that. That is what makes the game very cool.
You could build your own mirrored maps in scenario, and play those PvP! ← Have some creativity for Priests sake!
And. If you like mirror maps always. There is this game called Dota, or LoL, or SC (as mentioned). Play those.
2.:
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
-: Well. Here is the thing most people disagree on. Some want it to be ‘the next big thing’ or a ‘new old succesfull RTS’. Like AoE II or StarCraft.
But then again. Those games already exist. And there is still a large amount of AoE 1 players who liked the game and still play it. Yes we see its bugs, disbalances, and stupidities as well. And those should be fixed. And yes I see small things from other (successfull RTS games) that could be added here as well (Rallypoints, unit group handling etc.)
But changing the game in a way to become like any new other RTS game because those are successfull, is killing your own niche. This game has a charm of it’s own, and I don’t have that charm with AoE II for example. That game misses the sense simplicity that this game has in my opinion.
And well, I don’t know. Maybe it’s an 90’s thing. Where we were used of thinking about a lot of stuff for yourselves, because computers weren’t that forgiving back then. And yeah, I admit that is nostalgia.
But for the same reason: If you buy a remastered vinyl, you don’t expect the tracks on there to be different, only the atmosphere and sound.
Here is the thing most people disagree on. Some want it to be ‘the next big thing’ or a ‘new old succesfull
RTS’. Like AoE II or StarCraft.
But then again. Those games already exist.
Aoe2 is not successfull like sc2, you can’t compare them (the price pool is as 100 times higher on sc2). And aoe1 already exist, why make this aoe-de ???
But ok, so aoe-de is just for fanbase. Its aoe1 with 2017 graphics. Iam out of that, i dont like the principle of resell a game with new graphics and nothing else.
If you like the same game with all of things. Leave the “original charm” of the army when they move across the map and you lose 15 soldiers or more in every forest of the game because they don’t find the path.
Improve things yes. Like rally point, grouping units, max population. Map size.
Graphics
Pathfinding
Performances
Stability
Animation of units
But dont change anything on the game itself, the time spent to do every little details.
The problematics of not finding your food, is a total part of the game.
You have to improvise, delocalise, get the help of your team.
Who care is AOE1 is not the next big 1v1 Pro Expert Corean game ?
There is already a ton of RTS like that. Go there.
What we want on AOE1 is FUN, CHARM, pleasure to play unpredictives games and have your raw talent expresss, not bullshit excel calculus to tell you what is the best formula to win.
Sometime you will find a ton of Stone, and you will decide to play with a lot of defensive towers.
Sometime you wont, and you will have to be aggressive, unit based stragegy.
And the opponent is the same, so you can’t even know what he’s doing and how he will attack
THIS IS AGE OF EMPIRE !
Its like battleroyal, you don’t know where the others are, you dont know the battleground/map , you don’t even know which weapon you will have to use.
You just improvise ! and that’s what is so good.
To not play against BOT that have just copied a build order over the internet.
@Queope said:
If you like the same game with all of things. Leave the “original charm” of the army when they move across the map and you lose 15 soldiers or more in every forest of the game because they don’t find the path.
No I think such things should be fixed offcourse.
As for the other stuff: automation, gates, garrison, mathematical RTS stuff and such: I opted before (in other discussions) that I hope the game should have a good mod-compatibility so people who miss that can add it to the game. I would play those mods too, just to see if I like it as an addition to this game.
@Queope said:
If you like the same game with all of things. Leave the “original charm” of the army when they move across the map and you lose 15 soldiers or more in every forest of the game because they don’t find the path.
No I think such things should be fixed offcourse.
As for the other stuff: automation, gates, garrison, mathematical RTS stuff and such: I opted before (in other discussions) that I hope the game should have a good mod-compatibility so people who miss that can add it to the game. I would play those mods too, just to see if I like it as an addition to this game.
Hopefully include a good support for mods. Even so, better that the development team do a good job and look for new formulas and improvements that do not leave all the work to the modders.
@Queope said:
If you like the same game with all of things. Leave the “original charm” of the army when they move across the map and you lose 15 soldiers or more in every forest of the game because they don’t find the path.
No I think such things should be fixed offcourse.
As for the other stuff: automation, gates, garrison, mathematical RTS stuff and such: I opted before (in other discussions) that I hope the game should have a good mod-compatibility so people who miss that can add it to the game. I would play those mods too, just to see if I like it as an addition to this game.
Hopefully include a good support for mods. Even so, better that the development team do a good job and look for new formulas and improvements that do not leave all the work to the modders.
Yes. And by how it looks now, they’ll take the Upatch as basis to go from. I hope they stay in touch with the person(s) who made it. Because there is already a better mod-options in the Upatch. And the site even has a ‘subjective improval mod’ with even more balances (like chariot archer having -1 range and slingers being more effective to them (as a late game balance) ) which shouldn’t be overlooked.
When AoE1 was released the game wasn’t perfect especially for multiplayer : lag, wrong balance, many bugs but the idea of this game was so great especially with random map generation that lead to adapt strategies to maps
I think it’s always hard to make everybody happy…
But as far as i know you will be able to switch between the remastered gamemode and a more back to the roots gamemode! So let’s hope they will do both properly. It looks like the devs already thought about this after all…
@Sebmaster961 said:
I think it’s always hard to make everybody happy…
But as far as i know you will be able to switch between the remastered gamemode and a more back to the roots gamemode! So let’s hope they will do both properly. It looks like the devs already thought about this after all…
Its not a good thing to Split the community if we dont want a game that get deserted.
@Tgaud said:
age of empire was a game of economy macro management. not unit micro management
I strongly disagree. AoE is not a profoundly deep game from the viewpoint of economic management, and, provided you have a good ping (ideally LAN), it’s definitely a game of military micro-management, albeit not as intensely as Starcraft.
But, like, the pathfinding is so bad that you’re heavily obligated to micro-manage your units in battle if you want them to perform optimally.
While I loved multiplayer and skirmish, to me what made the Age games were the re-playable campaigns. No matter how many times you played them and knew the map there was a sense of newness to each game…
@Amphiprion6 said:
Its not but its inevitable. Aoe community is splint into aoe1 / aoe2 / aom and aoe3.
Yeah. But hopfully not into:
aoe1/aoe1-ror/aoe-ror-de/aoe-ror-de+forgotten empires/aoe-ror-de-fe+enhancements/aoe2/aoe2hd/aoe2hd-fe/aoe2hd-fe-africanempires/aoe3
and then they say aoe4 is underway…
divide and conquer.
@Sebmaster961 said:
I think it’s always hard to make everybody happy…
But as far as i know you will be able to switch between the remastered gamemode and a more back to the roots gamemode! So let’s hope they will do both properly. It looks like the devs already thought about this after all…
Its not a good thing to Split the community if we dont want a game that get deserted.
I can see your point but it’s not really splitting the communtity as long as the gamemodes are in the same game.
@Tgaud said:
age of empire was a game of economy macro management. not unit micro management
I strongly disagree. AoE is not a profoundly deep game from the viewpoint of economic management, and, provided you have a good ping (ideally LAN), it’s definitely a game of military micro-management, albeit not as intensely as Starcraft.
But, like, the pathfinding is so bad that you’re heavily obligated to micro-manage your units in battle if you want them to perform optimally.
its not a micro management game.
for one simple reason.: its impossible
there was a 1.5second lag beetween order and realisation. So no, age of empire was about economy micro, economy macro, production, but not army micro.
Wow, too much discussion because of wanting to compare and change things in the game.
First of all, every game (not necessarily RTS) have their own game style and community, you can’t just compare Starcraft dynamic with AoE because it is what made them so unique. Yeah, maybe AoE 1 wasn’t so focused to economic management but I am sure it was challenging to micro those units into battlefield as Starcraft 1 did (Yes, I played that too and currently playing SC2).
But keep in mind that there are going to be obvious changes related to UI, graphics, pathfinding, etc, to make a more challenging game, but without lossing its essence. So there is not going to be new buildings or units added to the game neither unique techs or stuff like that.
