How long should we wait until we get the next DLC?

Yes, it could be an AoE 5… or perhaps, just maybe, they could do something “basado” and create an AoE 4ever that serves as a chronological successor to AoE 3 :rofl:. Another possibility could be to explore the idea of making a standalone DLC in AoE 3 that covers a later time period (similar to AoE 2’s Return of Rome but in the future)… well, I’m just exploring ideas :smile:

*Reference image, I usually play the current AoE IV, but every AoE player must acknowledge that it was expected for AoE 4 to at least cover World War I.

All of these are interesting ideas. Personally, I would like to see a chronological successor to AoE 3 that covers the period from the Second Industrial Revolution until at least 1948, which is when the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted. I understand that it would be complex to encompass such intricate topics (anything related to “worldwide” is always complex), but from my perspective, it would provide a “positive closure” to much of world history. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights served as the foundation for the current “civilization,” criminalizing racism and eugenics. Personally, I would enjoy a game that explores the Cold War, although I understand there would be significant limitations. It would be interesting to have gameplay similar to Empire Earth, where you can play a complete game in any era (from the earliest to the most advanced) and have the added feature of advancing through the ages within a single game (remember, this is my personal opinion). The distribution of ages could be as follows:

  1. Second Industrial Revolution (1870-1914): This era would address major geopolitical movements in Europe, the partition of Africa, Europe’s “influence” in Asia, and more.
  2. World War I (1914-1929): I know the First World War officially ended in 1918, but it would be interesting to cover a portion of the interwar period, including the Russian Revolution, the rise of totalitarianism, the Great Depression, and more.
  3. World War II (1930-1942): Many consider World War II to be the continuation of the Great War. Significant innovations took place from the 1930s onwards (even one of Italy’s biggest mistakes was “modernizing too early,” as their weaponry became obsolete for much of the conflict). This period could cover topics such as the Spanish Civil War and the Axis powers’ advances worldwide (the Second Sino-Japanese War, Operation Barbarossa, the Second Italo-Ethiopian War, the Greek Campaign, etc.).
  4. Cold War (1943-1961?): While World War II officially ended in 1945, there were significant technological advancements during this period, warranting a division into two ages. This period would encompass the Allied counteroffensive (Battle of Stalingrad, U.S. entry into the war, the Chinese counteroffensive, etc.). Diplomatic tensions among the Allied powers existed even before the end of World War II. Winston Churchill, for political reasons, intervened to delay direct U.S. involvement in the war for several years. Additionally, plans for a massive assault against the USSR were prepared for July 1, 1945 (although it was not executed). This period would lay the foundations for the “current Western society” with the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, marking the beginning of conflicts worldwide due to the Cold War and the decolonization of Africa (which would compensate for the earlier partition of Africa). I suggest ending this period in 1961, the year the Berlin Wall was constructed. It was also during this period that the first assault rifles such as the StG 44, AK-47, and M14 emerged. I also considered 1969 as a possible end year, as it marks the establishment of the first computer connection (the internet).

First of all, thank you for your message. I thoroughly enjoyed reading it :smile:

I agree with this nomenclature of historical elements in AoE 3, as I said before, the initial concept of AoE 3 was the wars that used the musket as the main weapon, its greatest exponent being the Napoleonic wars (like the Risk board game), but, in my opinion it was a mistake to try to force the inclusion of USA history in AoE 3 being added “wild west history” having outlaws like “renegades” that bear no relation to the Napoleonic type lore where AoE tried to build 3.

It is understandable, although although cocoa takes between 5 to 6 years to mature, it must be recognized that they were not “cocoa export power” until a few decades later, but hey, my point was that it could be controversial to take an episode of slavery in africa.

I didn’t know about the patched, I admit I’m not an expert on the subject of African colonization and initially I thought the Dervish were being referenced more for their spiritual role than their military role (like the Rattan Shield). But hey, from this perspective then it is understandable that the less Sudanese civilization is focused from the British vision on the Nile Expedition.

I don’t want to be controversial, but as the story goes the term “dervishes” is often used in a pejorative way by Europeans, even Muḥammad Aḥmad al-Mahdī forbade the use of the term “dervishes” to describe his followers, so it could be said that this unit is a negative stereotype…

Various western historical writers have sometimes used the term dervish rather loosely, linking it to, among other things, the Mahdist War in Sudan and other conflicts by Islamic military leaders. In such cases, the term “dervishes” may have been used as a generic (and often pejorative) term for the opposing Islamic entity and all members of its military, political and religious institutions, including persons who would not be considered “dervishes” in the strict sense.

During the Mahdist War, Muḥammad Aḥmad al-Mahdī decreed that all those who came to join him should be called anṣār, after the Prophet’s earliest followers. He forbade the use of the term ‘dervish’ to describe his followers. Despite this, British soldiers and colonial officials continued to use the term in relation to the anṣār. While some Britons used the term to denigrate the followers of the Mahdī, it was also used with a sense of admiration in accounts by British soldiers which describe the fearlessness and bravery of the lightly armed ‘dervishes’. Thus, the word has become closely associated with the anṣār and is often used inaccurately in relation to the Mahdi’s followers, even today.

For example, a contemporary British drawing of the fighting in Sudan was entitled “The defeat of the dervishes at Toski”

I agree, it could even be said that AoE 3 has some elements that could be considered anachronistic but that could easily be corrected with the change of some name and even the modification of some skin because it does not alter the gameplay or the lore of AoE 3 :smile:

Hey Devs!

See what’s happening here? Give us a little tease of DLC before the topic turns entirely to AoE5 and how it will be WWI!


haha, yeah sorry.

WW1 AOE has to go into offtopic now :slight_smile:


Hehe, duly noted :laughing:

I will never recognize the AOE4 we have right now as the 4th game. It will always be AOE 2.5 in my eyes. KEKs


I made a thread in the off topics forum here with an outline I came up with for a chronological sequel to AoE3 →


Hello everyone, I hope I don’t break any regulations in this post but I feel the need to make this survey related to a possible DLC of AoE 3 DE.

Based on the AoE 2 DE “Return of Rome” DLC, will it be possible to make an AoE 3 DE DLC in a future timeframe of the current game?

  • Yes
  • No
  • Maybe

0 voters

For my part I think it would be difficult to insert dogfights, so I don’t consider it prudent… but the concept intrigues me.

You can always play Microsoft Combat Flight Simulator or Il-2 1946. I’ll recommend the later for the ridiculous amount of mods.

1 Like

Balancince wise… probably yeah.
Being able to do it ? Farley easy

You could just base the fighters out of an airbase and just have them run limited sorties and patrol missions from there. That way you wouldn’t have to deal with trying to zoom out and select loitering aircraft. The only issue is how to deal with aircraft that are on a mission while their airbase is destroyed.

Why does everyone want to shoehorn 20th warfare into the age of empires gameplay style? There’s plenty of rts games that cover that sector well.

Compared to previous AoE games, AOE3 is a lot closer to modernity and because of that and how we have more accurate historical records on tactics, clothing, weapons, etc it’s already very hard to please everyone with historically accuracy at moment - especially with the whole trademark aging up to new eras mechanic.

Imagine a 20th+ game where we are closer and have lots of reference. People will be a million times more eagle eyed on correct uniform for the Ages, the weaponry used, etc.


The natural evolution of the franchise was always intended to go forwards. People want what was promised.

1 Like

It was never promised. Also AoE4 is not going forwards in time.

The loosest, most tenous link was this image:

Before the the current devs, Ensemble Studios employee Sandy Petersen commented on the subject a long time ago.

Q: “the collectors edition on the #### #### of the Art Work book there was a picture of a World War I or II solider (actualy looks like a later one a M16 is in his hands) for AOE IV how will that work”

A: “it was total speculation on our part.


I’m not a fan of this idea. The core gameplay couldn’t be reproduced in a contemporary or futuristic setting. This would result in a “AOE-in-name-only” game. Aoe4 is a good example, even though it is set in medieval times.


You mean “aging up”? I have mixed feelings about this, on the one hand it’s true but on the other - I’d really wish to explore the 19th and 20th century in an age game, and those are prime candidates for “empires”.

The german empire.
The british empire.
The french empire.
The russian empire.
The austrian empire.
The ottoman empire.

What other time in history is marked with so many empires? Now the question should be - how aging up should work for the modern age?


No, aging up wouldn’ be an issue. technological advances have been exponential since the modern era, to the point where each decade was different from the last. The big problem is in contemporary warfare tactics. This era means the end of hand to hand combat. This era means assymetrical war (mines, bacteriological weapons, missiles, etc…) These are only a few examples but I think you get my point.

To a lesser extent, this would mean new ressource types : oil, nuclear energy, etc… (which all could be obtainable through a factory type building.

This is just my opinion, but I personnally don’t like it and I can’t imagine a game like this being called age of empires.


Why should that be a general problem? Other games (c&c) showed that it works in principle and makes for a fun gameplay.

Lack of melee battle

Can be replaced with bayonettes and pistol fights, maybe machine pistols. Maybe knifes.

asymmetrical war

Mines are modern wolf holes. Using deseases as a weapon was a thing in the middle ages, too. Artillery and rockets are modern siege weapons. All of this isn’t in age because age is relatively kid-friendly, but games like “stronghold” feature all of it.

I think you get my point

Yeah i certainly can understand, especially if aoe means primarily aoe1+2 to someone. Me, my curiosity of how such a game would feel like outweights the possibility of me not liking it (as with aoe4 unfortunately). Too bad we can’t have a “pilot episode” for a new game 11
Hence make it an aoe3 dlc would be my suggestion.

Well past AOEs do not represent formation, tactics and morale any better either.
Like skirmishers counter line infantry because the former has more accurate weapons and the latter uses close formation, not because the same bullet hits harder on some people than others.

Maybe people are more familiar with contemporary warfare so they’ll feel odd if it is presented in a very abstract way. That’s why most modern warfare games and some “futuristic” games that are no more than ww2 but in space typically have squad-based systems and emphasize equipments rather than specialized unit roles.

It would be like Empire Earth, or Rise of Nations after the modern age, but with a more detailed tech tree progression.
These games all have AOE-like resource management and classic RTS unit controls but include a modern setting.
CNC-like games have much simplified resources and base building, but these games you still need your villagers to chop trees and hunt deers to…make automatic rifles.

Same people that would be okay when cavalry and chariots, conquistadors and throwing axemen are unlocked at the same “age” XD.

1 Like

Yeah of course c&c works fine, but its completely different to aoe. It’s like day and night.

Yes, but the game has to be restricted to a “certain logic” and the counter system in the game represents it well imo.