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

[MatM1996]

@M00Z1LLA

Starting in 1914 skips a lot of very pivotal history and has the issue of how to contend with all the empires that existed in 1914 but we’re dissolved by 1918.

@cucuct

= Some period materials are primary: the devs consider their representation to be essential selling points, and put in some efforts in approximating them systematically. For AoE3, this primary range pretty much ends at Napoleonic warfare.

@cucuct

The latter half of the 1880s was when technology thoroughly left AoE3 behind, as the War of Electricity started, and ironclads were replaced by steel hull warships.

Yes, that’s why I said to fill in the gaps in AoE 3 from 1820 to 1870 (remember that the game already includes the Greek revolution of the fanariotes, the Hungarian revolution of the Germans, the Mexican revolutions of the 1840s, the War of Crimea, the end of the era of the princes in 1855 in Ethiopia, the Indian campaign in 1857 and the Lakota campaign of 1866-1876;the US Civil War would just be missing)…

AoE 3 Timeline (post-Napoleonic Wars and Steel campaign of 1817):

1821: Plan de Iguala (Mexican upgrade of the Cathedral)

1821-1830: Greek Revolution Phanariot ability

1823: Central American Revolution of Mexico

1825-1830: Indonesian Revolution

1830: Dutch card of Belgian Revolution

1835-1836: Texas Revolution

1839-1876: Tanzimat (Ottoman religious upgrade)

1840: Mexican Revolution of Río Grande

1846: California Revolution

1847: Mayan Revolution of Yucatan

1848: Albertino Statute (Italian Church Card)

1848-1871: Risorgimento (Italian religious upgrade)

1848-1849: Hungarian Revolution

1852: South African Revolution

1853-1856: Historical map of the Russo-Turkish Wars (Crimean War)

1855: Historic Battle of the Era of Princes

1857: TAD Campaign Act III: India (Sepoy Rebellion of 1857 and end of the Mughal Empire)

1863: American Card of Pickett’s Charge

1866-1876: TWC Campaign Act II: Shadows (Wars of the Red Cloud and the Black Hills)

1867: Canadian Revolution

1868: Meiji Restoration (Upgrade of the Japanese consulate)

1876-1911: Mexican Card of “Porfiriato”

1878: Romanian Revolution

1882: Egyptian Revolution

1899-1901: Chinese Card of the Boxer Rebellion

Twentieth century:

1917: Finnish Revolution

And then the period after 1870 leaving it for AoE 5…

@Josh1Axel

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 . 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

@Josh1Axel

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).

Yes, I agree, the same thing the Cold War ended in 1991, not in 1961 (the American campaign of EE2 had missions in the Cold War for example, one in 1952, in Germany, where you had to control a German scientist who wanted to defect to the West and you had to avoid being captured by East German patrols and the other in 1988 where you had to hijack a jet plane that had been developed by the Soviets in Siberia and you had to avoid killing many soldiers because otherwise the Soviets would start a counteroffensive nuclear power and start WW3)…

@Josh1Axel

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.

And then you have the Indian campaign…

@OrthoSkate01994

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

Me neither…

@SirBarnzy1

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.

But none of them cover the entire 20th century like EE and RoN did and they are already games from 20 years ago…

@SoullessHeathen

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

Exact…

@SirBarnzy1

actualy looks like a later one a M16 is in his hands

He is a Marine from the Vietnam War (1955/1964-1973/1975)…The AOE 4 artwork might look like Vietnam, but I think that it’ll just be laid out in the same way as the other Age games. I’m guessing that the typical game would start out with primitive rifle units and cavalrymen. Once you age up, you get gas and basic machine guns. You age up again, and you get tanks (which would be sort of like a combination of the monster truck cheat and a cannon.) That age is kind of like WWII. Finally, the 4th age would be the Cold War, with nukes and stuff. Then the fifth age would be kind of “preview” age, like bombard cannons and conquistadors in AOE II and repeating rifles in AOE III. It would probably have the “space race” and modern armored tanks.

@BaphometSLM

The core gameplay couldn’t be reproduced in a contemporary or futuristic setting. This would result in a “AOE-in-name-only” game.

Breakdown:

• You start with engineers not civilians.(cause you on front lines)

• Population increased by gathering wealth or researching war techs.

• build war structures only.

• the home city would ship you food every 24 hours.

• stuff like this

Anyways here the list of things I think AoE5 or whatever the title is should have:
-More trade and sending resources to bases
-More of an air aspect (paratroopers)
-Completly different races/civs as in AoM/AoE3 (American, British, Russian, German, Italian…maybe more)
-Reduce melee game (obviously)
-When building, be able to build it at any angle for a more custom building experience
-Reloading weapons, accuracy system
-A very good editor (Take tips from Blizzard)
-Get rid of the ‘Home City’ (or improves this mechanic)
-Make a science-based system (inventing new weapons for your troops to gain an edge on battle)
-To put money into different aspects of the game (one player might want to put a large % into weapons design, another might want to spend more on training the troops better)
-Units can also gain exp, and carry out into other battles (though still never get as powerful as a real hero)
-Have a system where you can dig up terrain, and make trenchs etc in real-time gameplay
-Make mining metals for making weapons/bullets
-Add more strategy to the game by being able to hold down cities, then explode some buildings to cut off routes, then set down booby traps, barbed wire and barracades to stop the enemy from flanking your city routes
-A new population system (determined by the size of your opposition, how successful you are at that point in the game etc)
Oh sorry, and about the whole ‘You can’t start with a base’ thing…I think at the begining, you should have a huge main city/area…then the expansion part of the game will be getting your civilization to expand…Oh crap, I guess that wouldn’t fit in with WW2 =| Thats for the future then =)

@SchwarzeGarde49

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

@SchwarzeGarde49

What other time in history is marked with so many empires?

Antiquity and partly the Middle Ages… the only thing that the modern empires (1492-1997) covered the entire globe…

@SchwarzeGarde49

how aging up should work for the modern age?

Maybe like Empire Earth or with landmarks like AoE 3 and 4…

@BaphometSLM

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.

Sure…

@BaphometSLM

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.

As long as the game has empires and is historical (although I wouldn’t rule out an AoE in the future, Relic has experience with that) I don’t see a problem with that…

Change the 1918 to 1991 and voila…

@SchwarzeGarde49

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

the special forces have knives that they can use to lower a soldier from behind like in CoD… it could be a special ability of that kind of soldiers…

@ArrivedLeader22

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.

@Josh1Axel

A reality that must be accepted is that times have changed, AoE 3 DE could easily have followed the same path as AoE 2 DE (don’t make big changes, and make changes that really have historical or mechanical justification like changing the architecture of the Byzantines ), but AoE 3 DE decided to go the hard way and make radical changes to be more consistent with the real story: rework of Native Americans, redesign of some civilizations like the Ottomans, etc. And whether you like it or not, you must respect the “Principium aequitatis” (principle of equity) for which you must give the same treatment of historical love for all civilizations.

Exactly, I couldn’t have said it better…

@Josh1Axel

the cold war period.

The cold war would be the last age or the penultimate age, the last age being the first third of the 21st century (2000-2035)…

@MUTYLATOR5553

After the release of AoE 4, this series is already clearly turning back - in terms of the eras discussed.

Yes, at least the saga has the present and not the past, never better said…

@MUTYLATOR5553

from the fall of Napoleon to the present day)

from the fall of Napoleon III… the entire post-Napoleonic period is already in AoE 3 since TWC…

@MUTYLATOR5553

so it’s very good that it wasn’t made.

I did want it… an AoE covering the entire 20th century was a guaranteed success, or at least to attract CoH and CNC players, especially the latter that have not had a main game since 2010…

@ArrivedLeader22

Maybe 1820s to ww1. Tanks and aircrafts as some sort of ultimate weapon. Then warfare changes so much that makes all previous tactics obsolete. That’s already a huge gap. I can’t imagine adding jet fighters alongside rifled muskets.

That is why I say to start in 1870 or 1914, otherwise there would be many complications of adapting Napoleonic combat to modern warfare with tanks and planes… the chronological gap between 1820 and 1870 can easily be filled by AoE 3, as American Conquest did with Divided Nation with battles from The Alamo to Gettysburg (battles that could easily appear in AoE 3)…

@Josh1Axel

But well, as I said, AoE 2 DE was a remaster so it only copied the formula of AoE 2 from the 90’s and improved the gameplay and graphics (and with some well justified historical changes), but with AoE 3 DE, in addition to treating a period closer to ours, the decision was made to make the game more historical (it is something that I personally appreciate).

Exactly, in addition to the fact that AoE 3 players are more open to aesthetic and even mechanical changes…

@ArrivedLeader22

Yeah the original theme of AOE2 (at least for the European civs) was to found new kingdoms on the ruins of Rome as migrating barbarians. And Romans were a huge empire on the collapse. Maybe that’s why some people oppose it.

Although the Romans (as Byzantines) already appear in Attila’s campaign, that’s why they were included…

@ArrivedLeader22

So the theme becomes building a new military base like in many ww2 and modern/near future warfare games, but then that’s neglecting aspects of city building and technological advancements, and people may expect more detailed and authentic combat…and problems.

Yes, it’s a whole subject, how would we differentiate a modern AoE from a CoH…

@MUTYLATOR5553

Thus, the emergence of a completely new settlement in the 19th century can be justified in various ways, e.g. the importance for industry.

Maybe you can fight in the field or in the combat line…

@pwaopwao

-The devs would have to invent a lot of things that don’t exist yet (AOE games are supposed to be set in a historical period).
-Gameplay can deviate a lot from what players are used to, which can result in rejection by a good part of the community.

Yes, that’s true, or do as EE AoC and base yourself on the Chinese campaign, using civs that already exist (China, Korea, Japan, Russia, USA, European Union, India, Mexico, Brazil, etc etc etc)…

[SirBarnzy1]

@MatM1996

Breakdown:

• You start with engineers not civilians.(cause you on front lines)
• Population increased by gathering wealth or researching war techs.
• build war structures only.

Whilst they all sound great for a war game this is not the blue print of an age of empires game, surely?

The AOE series conjures up a grandiose game of building your civ, providing your population with houses, sending your villagers out to procure resources, building a military and researching to next age. These suggestions would be great as part of a different game or spin-off, however I can’t imagine a release of an empires game that does away with most of the traits would go down well.

I personally I’d like a Early Modern Era to Victorian Era re-tread.

In this iteration I’d love to be able to have combat from the earliest age with a proper renaissance age! I want to see the weird mix of armoured men-at-arms, curissasiers, riders, targeters, demilancers and Arquebusiers which would be available to almost all Euro civs and these were all commonly used. To end in the final age having progressed to mining facilities, Maxim guns, ironclad pre-dreadnaughts and torpedo boats would be the icing on the cake.

[CagierNebula24]

I am absolutely opposed to any AOE game that takes place later than AOE3.

The heart and soul of this series is ancient, not modern, history.

[MatM1996]

@SirBarnzy1

The AOE series conjures up a grandiose game of building your civ, providing your population with houses, sending your villagers out to procure resources, building a military and researching to next age. These suggestions would be great as part of a different game or spin-off, however I can’t imagine a release of an empires game that does away with most of the traits would go down well.

Yes, or last, so that it doesn’t feel so CoH, leave the citizens away of the frontline collecting resources, building/repairing houses and in the front the engineers build military factories and campaign tents that also give you population, but instead of 10 pop, they give you 5…It would be like playing with the Norse from AoM but with all the civs, with two different types of “villagers”…the citizens collect resources and build economic buildings and the military units build military buildings and fight in the frontlines…

@SirBarnzy1

In this iteration I’d love to be able to have combat from the earliest age with a proper renaissance age! I want to see the weird mix of armoured men-at-arms, curissasiers, riders, targeters, demilancers and Arquebusiers which would be available to almost all Euro civs and these were all commonly used. To end in the final age having progressed to mining facilities, Maxim guns, ironclad pre-dreadnaughts and torpedo boats would be the icing on the cake.

Sure, it can be too…

@CagierNebula24

I am absolutely opposed to any AOE game that takes place later than AOE3.

And I, that they repeat ages as if there were no others… Ancient (AoE 1), Medieval (AoE 2), Colonial/Industrial (AoE 3), Ancient again (AoEO) and Medieval again (AoE Castle Siege, AoE World Domination, AoE 4 and the future AoE Mobile)…Microsoft stops the hand a little…

[jonasnee4671]

it has been stated multiple times that people should stop going offtopic in this thread, further violations will result in thread being closed.

[jansotak007]

Denmark and Poland are only to be added as revolutions not as new DLC! and no more DLC will be added, you dream in vain

[BaphometSLM]

@jansotak007

no more DLC will be added, you dream in vain

And how could you possibly know that?

[DrMaxy4142]

I rather expect no dlc, and then be more happy to be wrong sometimes

[GwentMaster2163]

Sorry I realized I was off topic and deleted the relevant content

[7yundao]

better hope youre wrong or we wont get any dlc

[MatM1996]

@jonasnee4671

it has been stated multiple times that people should stop going offtopic in this thread, further violations will result in thread being closed.

Yes, just answer those 3 comments anyway, the thing is that there is nothing new so no one can comment on anything…

[Etarm369]

Yes, in AoE 3 a limit should have been implemented in terms of unit statistics such as: speed, damage, HP, etc. For example, no matter what happened, no musketeer had more than 5 speed, more than 400 HP or more than 60 ranged damage, etc. Same for all types of units; say “this is the maximum of such a stat for this type of unit and no unit can have all of its stats maxed out at the same time”. But it’s too late for that for a long time, maybe since WC. I like the game and it’s one of my favorites, but with such exaggerated units sometimes I feel like I’m playing a mod. Now at least the developers should avoid creating more and more exaggerated units.

[anon69503411]

I am referring more about auras, deflection and absorption, promotion, charged area attack (like the mexico outlaws), stupid revolts (like mexico getting essentially age 3 for a very cheap price), and euro native big buttons and techs which does all sort of absurd things. Those things break the game.

[MatM1996]

Well, at least they try new things, right?..they can always balance it later…

[anon69503411]

Those are stupid things in the first place. Impossible to balance. It feels like AoM not aoe3. For example. How do you balance malta teleporting everything?

[Tetsuryu]

Personnellement je ne trouve pas que c’est stupide, le principal souci que j’avais avec la version vanilla de aoe3 était le fait que les civilisations Européennes étaient trop ressemblantes entre elles et de plus à cette époque aussi il y avait des déséquilibres et ce n’est que certes mon avis, mais je trouve bien l’équilibrage et les ajouts fréquents vont, n’en déplaise à certaines personnes, dans un sens que j’apprécie même si je ne dirais pas non à un DLC d’extension avec pas mal d’ajout comme par exemple des civs

[Nevonidas]

Agree, excessive mechanics are usually not fun to deal with and are very difficult to balance, teleport (malta), stealth (pre nerf), fortress garrison (pre nerf incas), daymio (japan)…

In AoM it was also excessive, I hope that in Retold they will be more careful with the balance of the god powers.

[Osprey23103109]

Other RTS games have also had teleporting factions you know.

[MatM1996]

@anon69503411

How do you balance malta teleporting everything?

Making it a skill with recharge like now…

@Tetsuryu

Personnellement je ne trouve pas que c’est stupide, le principal souci que j’avais avec la version vanilla de aoe3 était le fait que les civilisations Européennes étaient trop ressemblantes entre elles et de plus à cette époque aussi il y avait des déséquilibres et ce n’est que certes mon avis, mais je trouve bien l’équilibrage et les ajouts fréquents vont, n’en déplaise à certaines personnes, dans un sens que j’apprécie même si je ne dirais pas non à un DLC d’extension avec pas mal d’ajout comme par exemple des civs

Justement, je n’aurais pas pu dire mieux…

@Nevonidas

In AoM it was also excessive, I hope that in Retold they will be more careful with the balance of the god powers.

They will do it, calm down…