How to get new people into the game

[MrLordTheOne]

What brings people into the game:

• Enjoying the mythology theme: art, stories, gods, whatching them move and act on screen
• Playing with friends: Build a base together, defend it together and make huge fights.
• For strategy lovers: learning what cards you have, making your own strategies, solving problems, omptimising economy and military for different goals.
• Figthing: deffend your base, watch buildings burn and crumble halfway but still holding, make good tactics and execute them, siege the opponents base, ask the help of the gods.

Now, there are things in this game that can make it really hard to enjoy the points above.

Problems for new players in my oppinion:

1. There is little time to learn the game ingame because after about 10 or 15 minutes so many things can happen at a time that you don’t have time to think or read and the tasks only increase.
2. There is little time to enjoy the fights or the animations of the fighting units because the fights end in 5 or 10 seconds. Units feel too fragile.
3. There is little time to enjoy positions because most of the buildings feel fragile. It’s just too easy to lose positions. Siege destroys buildings too fast. Even units siege fast if there is a lot of them. The more fragile things become, the less mistakes players can make and the less time you have to react to anything, and that is really frustrating.
4. In challenging games, ranked games after 10 or 15 minutes people don’t really have time to think to make good decisions. Too many things are happening. All you can do is to remember what you practiced and hope it will work. It’s like bullet chess. This game has the complexity and potential of an actual chess game if players would have time to think ingame.
5. There is no thrill or anticipation in challenging games because:
   1. Scouts are too fragile. It’s just too hard to keep watching the opponent and anticipate attacks, because you don’t have time to watch or the scout just died because it explored a fortress.
   2. To anticipate something you need time. If you barely have time to think because the many tasks to do to keep yourself up in the economic and military advancement competition, you just can’t anticipate anything.
   3. You barely have time to think about what your opponent is doing and how to act against it. You are too occupied with clicking.
6. Challenging games are very tiring after 30 or 40 minutes because the tasks and number of units to control only increase by time. The only things that decrease are the upgrades and buildings you already made.
   I think most people can’t or don’t even want to click fast for this long at all. And auto queuing doesn’t solve this problem because it kills efficiency, timing and strategy. The game is just too fast and therefore longer games are very tiring.

Possible solutions:

1. New slower game mode (Tactics mode/Slow mode/Relax mode):

   1. Slow down the game (without making it a slow motion): less recource income, longer train time and build time by percentage.
      e.g.:
      resource gather speed -50%
      train time -50%
      build time -50%

   2. Make units and buildings less fragile: decreased all damage by percentage and decrease repair and healing according to it to not break the game. Make buildings even stronger against units, so people can make more mistakes that does not cost the game for them. It gives players time to react to unexpected events and time to think and learn.
      e.g.:
      building hp + 50%
      damage -50% for all, except buildings and godpowers 0% change
      healing speed -50%
      reapair speed -50%

   3. Make it savable: These games would brabobly be longer than normal games so make pvp games savable by pausing and confirmation, and saved games rehostable.

2. Give coop mode for one civ: Share the overwhelmingly many tasks that you need to handle a civ, between two or more players so both can play the game more confortably together.

There is so much complexity and content in this game I think it makes sense to make a slower game mode or share a civ between players or both. It would deffinitely help new people get into the game. A begginer would start playing much easier with a shared civ or alone but slower with more sturdy units and buildings so they can make more mistakes and nothing will crumble under seconds.

Discussions in connection with this:

Poll / Suggestion: Shared Civilization Co-Op Mode

New game mode idea

[Darkness01101]

How to get new people into the game

1. Graphics look pretty neat, but what is needed for me is more work on animations.

• Faster, more realistic animations… more gravity, more weight to heavier items, things like this
• Some animations, like cavalry running, water surf, buildings and towers being destroyed, villagers gathering, and giants swinging clubs feel slow and floaty, or lacking weight
• Having more than one animation cycle for things (especially villagers) would help, too
• The animations remind me of AoE3 and AoE4 too much, making the world “feel” less realistic and less alive than I prefer and that the actual 3D graphical details themselves try to convey

In summary, a polish pass on animations would be great. (Gently swaying trees/branches could be nice, as well, but that’s a minor thing.)

2. The in-game UI and related panels could be made a lot smaller and tighter as an option, too, if it’s not already one. Panels and icons are too big for my tastes, if there’s no option to make them smaller. (No, I don’t mean “collapsible”. I see they can collapse. I’d always want mine open, so just make the UI tighter and smaller. I’m not playing on an 13” screen or mobile device.) Font sizes and vertical padding (leading?) and horizontal padding (kerning?) are way too spacious in parts for my tastes, as well.

Some screengrabs from a gameplay vid on YouTube (“Full Game Archive” channel):

3. I assume it doesn’t have the “too close of zoom” issue as AoE4 does, but if it does, then a way to zoom out a decent amount more would also be needed for me. From the above video, the zoom at least doesn’t seem horrible

4. Is pop max cap for skirmish SP/MP games “200”? If so, higher pop count would be needed

5. I like playing AoE2:DE in Fast mode. Hopefully it has such a mode. Doesn’t mean I want units and buildings to feel fragile – I agree with you that fights probably shouldn’t be over in 5 seconds. It also doesn’t mean I want matches over in 10 minutes. I just don’t like how slow villagers and military move on Normal speed in AoE2:DE. Buildings, walls, castles feel a bit fragile in AoE2:DE now, too, and I don’t like that. It’s one thing I always disliked in AoE3, then AoE4, and now AoE2:DE. Though, it’s more palatable for me in AoE2:DE than the others.

6. Make the battle horn sound quicker, less annoying, and less frequent. This sound plagues each AoE title

I agree with your point about being able to save games. That’s frustrating in AoE4 MP skirmish maps that we can’t save and resume on a different day for matches that are going a long time.

In the end, I think most of my concerns are regarding the packaging of the game… like how it looks, how it feels, and how I interact with it… which are things that would bother me each and every match. The gameplay itself, like the economy building, strategizing, and skirmishes… is probably fine and something I’d like to try, but my strong preferences for the packaging that exists ‘around’ that gameplay would get in the way of my enjoyment, unfortunately. That type of thing got in the way of my AoE3 and AoE4 enjoyment, so I play AoE2 forever. And hopefully AoM:R doesn’t have arbitrary build limits for simple, non-momentous things like towers and forts? Because that bothered me in every AoE3 match

[BornWinter52864]

1. Add an option to disable premade teams.
2. Nerf rush, especially the Kronos rush.
3. Allow the Norse to have a long-range military unit against archers, or turn the Godi into a counter-archer unit.
4. Give all pantheons have at least one Hero ship.
5. Give all pantheons to have ox cart
6. Increase Town Center range.
7. Decrease the cost of tower upgrades and Survival Equipment.
8. Allow huntable animals to respawn over time.
9. Allow all players to start with two gold mine
10. Balance the Egyptians to make them less dependent on gold.
11. Give all Greek heroes special attacks, similar to the Chinese heroes.
12. Put a limit on archer hero spam, because ruins the game

[Cajocu01]

Its always ggood when ideas for niche wants can be made a separate mode of the game or a mod. Helps those that have a very deep detailed set of changes wanted while not removing the aspects people enjoy of the current game.

@MrLordTheOne

There is little time to learn the game ingame because after about 10 or 15 minutes so many things can happen at a time that you don’t have time to think or read and the tasks only increase.

Are you comparing this with other RTS experience? or just on itself? Its common for certain skill levels to want slower/faster paced gameplay depending on their standpoint and preference, just asking.

@MrLordTheOne

There is little time to enjoy the fights or the animations of the fighting units because the fights end in 5 or 10 seconds. Units feel too fragile.

I dont think he think about the same interaction that would the game would becom if all units where more tanky, at least when playing against other people.

@MrLordTheOne

There is little time to enjoy positions because most of the buildings feel fragile. It’s just too easy to lose positions. Siege destroys buildings too fast. Even units siege fast if there is a lot of them. The more fragile things become, the less mistakes players can make and the less time you have to react to anything, and that is really frustrating.

I always find this building talk interesting since on the aom servers its quite vocal that bases seem unstopable and ery hard to deal with, while on more casual communities its the opposite. It seems hard to reach a point where people stand in common ground.

@MrLordTheOne

In challenging games, ranked games after 10 or 15 minutes people don’t really have time to think to make good decisions. Too many things are happening. All you can do is to remember what you practiced and hope it will work. It’s like bullet chess. This game has the complexity and potential of an actual chess game if players would have time to think ingame.

Is this something that doesnt occur in other games or is it just personal preference? Usual in Real time strategy games, multitasking is a big part of the skill involvement and having to adapt on the fly. To have all the time in the world to think of all choices and pick what one wants is what turn based games fit best.

@MrLordTheOne

There is no thrill or anticipation in challenging games because:

1. Scouts are too fragile. It’s just too hard to keep watching the opponent and anticipate attacks, because you don’t have time to watch or the scout just died because it explored a fortress.
2. To anticipate something you need time. If you barely have time to think because the many tasks to do to keep yourself up in the economic and military advancement competition, you just can’t anticipate anything.
3. You barely have time to think about what your opponent is doing and how to act against it. You are too occupied with clicking.

I see where this is coming from. It seems to me like a struggle with the micro part of the game. I wonder if this experience is coming from a couple of games in ranked where since you start at 1000 elo and not 0 you can encounter players that are above your skill level. If thats what happened you could keep playing until you are placed in a braket where you find equals in terms om how fast they play and move.

@MrLordTheOne

Challenging games are very tiring after 30 or 40 minutes because the tasks and number of units to control only increase by time. The only things that decrease are the upgrades and buildings you already made.
I think most people can’t or don’t even want to click fast for this long at all. And auto queuing doesn’t solve this problem because it kills efficiency, timing and strategy. The game is just too fast and therefore longer games are very tiring.

But wait, fast games are not good and slow games arent either? Whats the idea here?

@MrLordTheOne

train time -50%

I dont think this means what you think it does and if it is it doesnt go with the other aspects of your idea. If you reduce trainning time units will come out faster, which leads to faster games. For example, if a hoplite took lets say 10 sec to train, -50% reduction on that would mean they are created every 5 seconds. So you make armies faster so you clash/rush/raid faster.

@MrLordTheOne

Make units and buildings less fragile: decreased all damage by percentage and decrease repair and healing according to it to not break the game. Make buildings even stronger against units, so people can make more mistakes that does not cost the game for them. It gives players time to react to unexpected events and time to think and learn.
e.g.:
building hp + 50%
damage -50% for all, except buildings and godpowers 0% change
healing speed -50%
reapair speed -50%

Same thing with the repair, again it could be what u mean i just want to make sure, -50% repair speed means it takes double the time to repair buildings, so they will fal faster if under attack. Would be interesting to play a game and show you what this type of building changes can lead to. Fort and tower spam slow pushes are not whta most players enjoy from the game from the polls and forums that i have seen and it might not lead to the type on gameplay (in ranked) that you seek.

@MrLordTheOne

Make it savable: These games would brabobly be longer than normal games so make pvp games savable by pausing and confirmation, and saved games rehostable.

This i 100% agre with, its weird they emoved that which was in the previous game version.

@BornWinter52864

• Add an option to disable premade teams.
• Nerf rush, especially the Kronos rush.
• Allow the Norse to have a long-range military unit against archers, or turn the Godi into a counter-archer unit.
• Give all pantheons have at least one Hero ship.
• Give all pantheons to have ox cart
• Increase Town Center range.
• Decrease the cost of tower upgrades and Survival Equipment.
• Allow huntable animals to respawn over time.
• Allow all players to start with two gold mine
• Balance the Egyptians to make them less dependent on gold.
• Give all Greek heroes special attacks, similar to the Chinese heroes.
• Put a limit on archer hero spam, because ruins the game

You want a whole different game all together it seems. which hey, you can do with mods so you can enjoy it.

[MrLordTheOne]

@Cajocu01

Are you comparing this with other RTS experience? or just on itself? Its common for certain skill levels to want slower/faster paced gameplay depending on their standpoint and preference, just asking.

I think my post can fit to other rts games too but I usually play with this one so I am only refering to AoMR.

@Cajocu01

I dont think he think about the same interaction that would the game would becom if all units where more tanky, at least when playing against other people.

I want tankiness to be able to watch the units fighting longer, and to prevent a slower game to become boring by lengthening the fitghts a bit. If you have less resources and longer traintime and you lose your units with the same speed you would get bored of not having enought resources to do anything. Of course I don’t want units to be very tanky because then the fights would become boring, it doesn’t have to be -50% damage. It could also be -30%.

@Cajocu01

I always find this building talk interesting since on the aom servers its quite vocal that bases seem unstopable and ery hard to deal with, while on more casual communities its the opposite. It seems hard to reach a point where people stand in common ground.

I am actually not sure about the building stuff because I don’t want people to be able to go turtle mode all game. And that is why I would set the building time longer so people can discover if their opponent wants to go full turtle.

@Cajocu01

Is this something that doesnt occur in other games or is it just personal preference? Usual in Real time strategy games, multitasking is a big part of the skill involvement and having to adapt on the fly. To have all the time in the world to think of all choices and pick what one wants is what turn based games fit best.

I don’t want all the time in the world. I don’t want to make this game turn based. What I see is an opportunity in slower games to make more well tought decisions and to be able to make more creative tactics. Like you would play a 10 minute chess game instead of a 3 minute. (only its an rts game)

@Cajocu01

I see where this is coming from. It seems to me like a struggle with the micro part of the game. I wonder if this experience is coming from a couple of games in ranked where since you start at 1000 elo and not 0 you can encounter players that are above your skill level. If thats what happened you could keep playing until you are placed in a braket where you find equals in terms om how fast they play and move.

When I started playing ranked a 1000 elo was a bit much but over time as I learned how people play I went up to 1100, 1200 and higher and I feel good on this level. I can manage an economy with an army while harasshing or being harasshed but if it turns into a two front war… I don’t really enjoy the game like that. It gives me a headache and if it goes to 40 minutes even if I win I just don’t want to start another. I have had games like that. I don’t remember If I ever went to age 4 and still enjoyed the game in ranked. Thats why I would like to play a slower game mode.

@Cajocu01

But wait, fast games are not good and slow games arent either? Whats the idea here?

I think you are mixing up long and short game time with playing fast and slow. I have no problem with long games if I don’t have to play it fast. I don’t want to sprint a marathon. I want to be able to play slower not make games shorter.

@Cajocu01

I dont think this means what you think it does and if it is it doesnt go with the other aspects of your idea. If you reduce trainning time units will come out faster, which leads to faster games. For example, if a hoplite took lets say 10 sec to train, -50% reduction on that would mean they are created every 5 seconds. So you make armies faster so you clash/rush/raid faster.

Sorry I messed up. It should be +50% traning time and building time.

@Cajocu01

Same thing with the repair, again it could be what u mean i just want to make sure, -50% repair speed means it takes double the time to repair buildings, so they will fal faster if under attack. Would be interesting to play a game and show you what this type of building changes can lead to. Fort and tower spam slow pushes are not whta most players enjoy from the game from the polls and forums that i have seen and it might not lead to the type on gameplay (in ranked) that you seek.

That’s right. I would waken healing and repair with the same amount I did to the damage because I don’t want buildings and units to become indestructable when repairing or healing.

I don’t want the game to become a tower and fortress push. I don’t like that either. That is why I would increase building time so it can be dicovered and stopped.

I don’t know if these exact percentages would reach the results I want but with minor changes and experiments I think it would work.

[Cajocu01]

@MrLordTheOne

I want tankiness to be able to watch the units fighting longer, and to prevent a slower game to become boring by lengthening the fitghts a bit.

Interesting, would have associated longer fight with more “grind” in the sense of gameplay.

@MrLordTheOne

I am actually not sure about the building stuff because I don’t want people to be able to go turtle mode all game. And that is why I would set the building time longer so people can discover if their opponent wants to go full turtle.

Yea, this seems something i was thinking. Since some civs can do turtling way better than others. Other civs like norse would be quite hindered by slower training times since they need infantry units to build stuff. Im not debaring numbers wise since thats all tunnable and can be ajusted, Just the idea for now.

@MrLordTheOne

I don’t want all the time in the world. I don’t want to make this game turn based. What I see is an opportunity in slower games to make more well tought decisions and to be able to make more creative tactics. Like you would play a 10 minute chess game instead of a 3 minute. (only its an rts game)

Have you tried playing the slow Mode in skirmish? Everything moves slower so the gathering and units also. Which gives toy more real time to make decisions and react.

@MrLordTheOne

I don’t really enjoy the game like that. It gives me a headache and if it goes to 40 minutes even if I win I just don’t want to start another. I have had games like that. I don’t remember If I ever went to age 4 and still enjoyed the game in ranked. Thats why I would like to play a slower game mode.

I see, im curious, have you played the previous aom? Was it more to this that you describe liking?

@MrLordTheOne

I think you are mixing up long and short game time with playing fast and slow. I have no problem with long games if I don’t have to play it fast. I don’t want to sprint a marathon. I want to be able to play slower not make games shorter

They do go hand in hand. Even with your changes. The more Buildings you have and units you are only delaying that point of the game you describe, but units would still move the same speed, so its the same reaction times mid battle.

@MrLordTheOne

I don’t know if these exact percentages would reach the results I want but with minor changes and experiments I think it would work.

Yea numbers wise its not really something to debate, rather talk about the concept and the reasoning. You can always adjust numbers.

[MrLordTheOne]

@Cajocu01

Have you tried playing the slow Mode in skirmish? Everything moves slower so the gathering and units also. Which gives toy more real time to make decisions and react.

Yes I almost fell asleep. I don’t want units to be slower.

@Cajocu01

I see, im curious, have you played the previous aom? Was it more to this that you describe liking?

I played the original a lot but not competitively. Me and my friends wer not really interested in ranked games. (And we did not know english so we barely understood the game mechanics…)

@Cajocu01

They do go hand in hand. Even with your changes. The more Buildings you have and units you are only delaying that point of the game you describe, but units would still move the same speed, so its the same reaction times mid battle.

Mid battle it’s fine if it’s fast because you have a longer preparation time with the resource income decrease and training time increase. Of course you can reach the same situation in the endgame but until then a lot more scouting and planning can happen and I think that would change the experience a lot.

@Cajocu01

Yea numbers wise its not really something to debate, rather talk about the concept and the reasoning. You can always adjust numbers.

Well the base idea was to decrease resource income and increase the hp/damage ratio to slow down the game so you can think more and look around more, but not make it a slow motion and not make it a turtle fight.
Also with this game mode I am not targeting ranked games. It would be a slower game mode where there is more wheight on strategies and ingame tactics than on multitasking and fast clicking. Not like in a turn based strategy game because I like controlling and watching units real time.

[BornWinter52864]

@Cajocu01

You want a whole different game all together it seems. which hey, you can do with mods so you can enjoy it.

Thanks to people like you, the game is a disaster. I suggest solutions, but all you do is contradict all the users. You’re not even interested in debating. In case you didn’t notice, the thread title is: ‘How to get new people into the game.’ If all your responses are going to be ‘if you don’t like the game, just install mods,’ Please do not participate.

We users want the game to be playable for everyone, not just for a few players who only play with pre-made teams and only serve to drive away all other players.

[Danbee]

You get people ionto thios game by making it better and not so cheesy. Think of freyr inferno or tempest or the battle boar. Think of priest and crocodile spam. They make Greeks so bad because their heroes are dog shit.

[Cajocu01]

@MrLordTheOne

Yes I almost fell asleep. I don’t want units to be slower.

Ohh i see, yea the slow units make it quite boring.

@MrLordTheOne

Mid battle it’s fine if it’s fast because you have a longer preparation time with the resource income decrease and training time increase. Of course you can reach the same situation in the endgame but until then a lot more scouting and planning can happen and I think that would change the experience a lot.

Oh ok, so its not the micro in battle but how fast do battles get to happen?

@MrLordTheOne

Well the base idea was to decrease resource income and increase the hp/damage ratio to slow down the game so you can think more and look around more, but not make it a slow motion and not make it a turtle fight.
Also with this game mode I am not targeting ranked games. It would be a slower game mode where there is more wheight on strategies and ingame tactics than on multitasking and fast clicking. Not like in a turn based strategy game because I like controlling and watching units real time.

Ok, same pacing when fighting but more “prearing” time before the big fights?. Thou this might get wonky with things like classic age preassure since you could more easily turtle and jump into heroic with some civs. More time would make economical gods better since they ramp upfaster for longer but all that can be tunned down to make it work numbers wise, dunno if it would for the building spam or turtling.

And for the game mode, yea thats why i said this is very good since its nice to have different game modes, it simply attracts more audiences. Some people have suggested in other posts a game mode to play the game like it was before (no god power recacsts, old wonder mechanic, among other things). Having all this types of ways to play the game on top of a better UI for lobby would encourage more people to play with one another imo.

@BornWinter52864

Thanks to people like you, the game is a disaster.

Sure…….

@BornWinter52864

I suggest solutions, but all you do is contradict all the users

Not really, im having a nice exploration of OP´s idea. You are free to suggest anything you want and im free to have my take on it, werent you the one advocating for free expression on your simulations? A forum is not only for people to support you, you personally know that very well.

@BornWinter52864

the thread title is: ‘How to get new people into the game.’ If all your responses are going to be ‘if you don’t like the game, just install mods,’ Please do not participate.

Mods are the easiest way to implement some of this changes for yourself and see if its something you want. Ignoring you bias takes (hey its your opinion) OP is talking about a game mode, not making it the standard of play. So a mod or combining several could give him something similar to the gameplay he wants before its made and see if it correlates to what he is looking for, which is why i like exploring what is it he looking for.

@BornWinter52864

We users want the game to be playable for everyone, not just for a few players who only play with pre-made teams and only serve to drive away all other players.

im sorry you dont have people to play with and resort to think saying that playing with other people is an insult.

@Danbee

Think of freyr inferno or tempest

i get the tempest part, but isnt inferno a good concept of a god power? Its more skilll shot and less “boom you are dead” Kinda like the japan sword god power, you can react and play around it, unlike things like tornado, meteor, lighting storm, typhoon. tsunami, etc.

[Nordsultan]

I must say that none of what I have read here would encourage new players to take up the game. a new game , balanced is appeal to current players, as well as those who have stopped playing and now have a reason to return.
But why should people who are completely new to the game care about balance? What reason do they have to buy and try this game? Don’t get me wrong — balance and game modes are important, and they must be in a good state to keep new players interested. However, there won’t be any players who haven’t played the game yet who will say, “I’ll play it now because the Norse have something to counter long-range,” before buying and trying the game. Perhaps afterwards, but not beforehand. The most dosent know that the game. Exit. or the have seen it? But They aren’t interested.

Marketing is the only thing that will attract new players to the game.
This should come not only from Microsoft, but also from the community and content creators.
Microsoft will do it to promote the next DLC, but nothing more. The community has to do it via spread the word by telling our friends and family about the game and inviting them to play it together.
Content creators are important, too. They are usually the first thing people see when they search for the game or stumble upon it by chance. Whether they want it or not, they are the best way to bring in new people via the content they create. By content, I don’t mean only showing ranked games. They should be creative with the things the game has to offer: community games, challenges, custom maps, campaigns, but they should also collaborate with other people within or outside the scene. Some examples I can give are Gruppy (a Warcraft 3 player) who hosted a tournament with RTS content creators and players who had never played before, or Hera (an Age of Empires 2 player) who was challenged by a content creator outside of the Age of Empires scene. This will generate interest in AOM among people who have never played it before. Other examples of content creators include Spirit of the Law, who makes interesting, entertaining and well-presented videos about AoE2’s game engine.

What I will say is that new players will come when it is visible outside. Game mechanics, balance and game mode are the reasons to stay. They are important and, when they are not in a good state, the best visibility will achieve nothing. However, for new players, visability and marketing are the key.

[BornWinter52864]

@Nordsultan

I must say that none of what I have read here would encourage new players to take up the game. The new game mode is balanced and will appeal to current players, as well as those who have stopped playing and now have a reason to return.
But why should people who are completely new to the game care about balance? What reason do they have to buy and try this game? Don’t get me wrong — balance and game modes are important, and they must be in a good state to keep new players interested. However, there won’t be any players who haven’t played the game yet who will say, “I’ll play it now because the Norse have something to counter long-range,” before buying and trying the game. Perhaps afterwards, but not beforehand. The most dosent know that the game. Exit. or the have seen it? But They aren’t interested.

Marketing is the only thing that will attract new players to the game.
This should come not only from Microsoft, but also from the community and content creators.
Microsoft will do it to promote the next DLC, but nothing more. The community has to do it via spread the word by telling our friends and family about the game and inviting them to play it together.
Content creators are important, too. They are usually the first thing people see when they search for the game or stumble upon it by chance. Whether they want it or not, they are the best way to bring in new people via the content they create. By content, I don’t mean only showing ranked games. They should be creative with the things the game has to offer: community games, challenges, custom maps, campaigns, but they should also collaborate with other people within or outside the scene. Some examples I can give are Gruppy (a Warcraft 3 player) who hosted a tournament with RTS content creators and players who had never played before, or Hera (an Age of Empires 2 player) who was challenged by a content creator outside of the Age of Empires scene. This will generate interest in AOM among people who have never played it before. Other examples of content creators include Spirit of the Law, who makes interesting, entertaining and well-presented videos about AoE2’s game engine.

What I will say is that new players will come when it is visible outside. Game mechanics, balance and game mode are the reasons to stay. They are important and, when they are not in a good state, the best visibility will achieve nothing. However, for new players, visability and marketing are the key.

The video evidences how premade teams are taking advantage of broken game features, such as the Kronos rush, to drive away new players. As a result, new players are quitting the game. No one enjoys being hindered from playing during their first minutes. Furthermore, this behavior fosters a toxic environment and results in unnecessary bans. I can assure you that most bans in the game are due to premade teams. If AOMR really wants to protect its players, they should add an option to disable premade teams.

[FloosWorld]

@Darkness01101

The animations remind me of AoE3

Makes sense. Both AoM and AoE 3 run on the Bang engine.

@Darkness01101

Is pop max cap for skirmish SP/MP games “200”?

No. In the original game it was 300 and in Retold it’s 1000. You increase your pop limit by building houses and taking Settlements.

[MrLordTheOne]

@Nordsultan

What I will say is that new players will come when it is visible outside. Game mechanics, balance and game mode are the reasons to stay. They are important and, when they are not in a good state, the best visibility will achieve nothing. However, for new players, visability and marketing are the key.

I see your point. It would be hard to advertise a slower game mode. But it can help keep the players who try the game with the next big event/dlc. If new players find it too difficult to start a skirmish (you need some knowledge to be able to handle a civ on your own) with a friend and they find a coop for one civ game mode or a slower game mode, where things don’t speed up that fast, they may stay.

[Darkness01101]

@FloosWorld

Makes sense. Both AoM and AoE 3 run on the Bang engine.

I’m assuming the Bang engine has a setting for Gravity physics force, though? It looks like it’s set to something like 4.9 m/s² , but should be 9.8 m/s² … or whatever Bang engine requires to make destroyed objects and such not gently drift to the ground. A physics engine without the ability to easily modify the gravity force would be odd, imo, so it should be a pretty quick adjustment, in theory

And in a Bang-agnostic sense, I also mean the actual hand-animated (or mo-capped?) animations on characters are often slow, floaty, and lack weight/mass and speed. A polish pass on these animations would be helpful, imo

Also, when units go flying, I don’t know how much of the spinning and flying is hard-coded vs. how much the Bang engine physics take over, but at least with one thing I saw flying back from a giant’s impact looked very odd, slow, deliberate, floaty, and unreal

It’s probably just a design decision to do some of this, though… since AoE4 also does it. (Does AoE4 use Bang engine, too?). I feel it’s a way to try and keep the game looking slightly cartoony and less realistic. Obviously, there’s some charm to it to not be overly realistic, but I think there’s a fair amount of room for shifting a bit more to realistic or lively animations and weights/speeds

[FloosWorld]

@Darkness01101

I’m assuming the Bang engine has a setting for Gravity physics force, though?

Oh, no idea. I’ll leave that to someone more versed in the engine.

@Darkness01101

Does AoE4 use Bang engine, too?

No, AoE 4 uses Relic’s in-house engine called Essence.

[Darkness01101]

I Googled the AoEIII Bang engine, and it says the physics part is handled by Havok middleware:

The Havok engine in Age of Empires III refers to the integration of Havok’s physics middleware into Ensemble Studios’ custom-built Bang Engine, providing realistic destruction, ragdoll physics for fallen units, and dynamic animations, making buildings crumble realistically and units react more naturally.

Same with AoM:R’s updated version of the Bang Engine.

ChatGPT claims there’s a gravity setting in Havok that could be adjusted by the devs (but not by mod authors, unless given the controls by devs someday):

Yes — Havok’s physics engine does include a gravity setting that defines the global gravitational acceleration applied to physics bodies in the simulation. In most Havok integrations you can set a gravity vector (e.g., (0,-9.81,0) for Earth-like gravity if +Y is up) when you initialize the physics world or adjust it later.

Havok Gravity Basics

• In the Havok SDK, gravity is part of the world configuration (e.g., hkpWorldCinfo’s m_gravity vector in native code).

• Gravity can be read/modified through APIs exposed by the Havok wrapper your engine uses — for example havok.gravity in scripting interfaces like Havok Xtra Lingo.

• If your game engine exposes the physics API, that’s where you’d adjust it.

I assume AoE4’s “Essence” engine also has a physics system of some sort, even if internally created, that would have a customizable gravity force to make things like pieces falling from wall- or building-destructions not drift as gently to the ground as they do. Animations like lumberjack axe swings and various other slow animations would likely need to be hand-adjusted, since those are not physics engine-related, pretty sure

[MuteOsprey2768]

Look, I’ve read through this thread, and while others are trying to be polite about “different preferences,” someone needs to give you the reality check you’re desperately missing. I’m not trying to be mean, but your entire post is a manifesto of someone who bought a Race Car and is complaining that it doesn’t drive like a Tractor.

Let’s dismantle your “problems” one by one to show you why what you are asking for isn’t a “new mode”—it’s a completely different genre of video game.

“There is little time to enjoy the fights or the animations… I want to watch them move and act on screen.”

The Reality: You are treating a competitive RTS like it’s a diorama or a cinema screen. This is the “General on the Hill” fantasy. You want to sit back in your armchair, sip tea, and watch your little soldiers clash for 5 minutes like a scene from Lord of the Rings.
The Problem: In an RTS, units are tools, not actors. If fights lasted as long as you want them to, the game would be fundamentally broken. We watch fights to micro-manage focus fire, dodge projectiles, and use abilities. We don’t watch them to “admire the art.” If you have time to zoom in and admire the animations during a ranked match, you are already losing. You want a Replay Viewer, not gameplay.

“There is little time to learn the game ingame… you don’t have time to think or read.”

The Reality: You do not learn during the match. You learn after the match.
The Problem: You are complaining that you can’t read the manual while driving 200km/h on a Formula 1 track. The “thinking” in an RTS happens before the match (build orders, strategy) and after the match (replay analysis). During the game, it is pure execution and instinct. You are asking for the game to pause so you can process information. That exists. It’s called Turn-Based Strategy (Civilization, Heroes of Might & Magic). Age of Mythology is Real-Time. The pressure is the point.

“Siege destroys buildings too fast… It’s just too easy to lose positions.”
“Make buildings even stronger… so people can make more mistakes that does not cost the game.”

The Reality: A “position” in an RTS is only yours as long as you can actively defend it. It is not a permanent property deed.
The Problem: You want SimCity with Swords. You want to build a pretty base and feel safe. If buildings were as tanky as you suggest (+50% HP, -50% damage), the game would devolve into a stalemate where nobody attacks because it’s mathematically impossible to break a defense. Siege exists to end the game. Buildings are meant to crumble. If you are allowed to make endless mistakes without punishment, there is no skill curve. You are basically asking for “participation trophy” mechanics where bad decisions don’t have consequences.

“It’s like bullet chess. This game has the complexity and potential of an actual chess game if players would have time to think ingame.”

The Reality: You hit the nail on the head, but you drew the wrong conclusion. It IS Bullet Chess. That is the genre!
The Problem: You want the complexity of Chess but without the clock. Again, that is Civilization. In AoM, your attention span is a resource just like Gold or Wood. If you can’t think fast enough, that is a skill issue, not a design flaw. You are asking the developers to lower the cognitive ceiling of the game because you are getting a headache from the mental load.

“Possible solutions: resource gather speed -50%, train time -50% (slower), building hp + 50%”

Let’s apply basic math to your “Slow Mode” to show you why it’s a disaster:

1. -50% Income + Slower Train Time: The game becomes a starving slog. You will spend 20 minutes just trying to reach the Classical Age.

2. +50% HP / -50% Damage: Units become sponges. A simple skirmish over a relic will take 5 minutes.

3. The Result: A standard 1v1 match would take 2 to 3 hours.

You claim you don’t want to “sprint a marathon,” but your solution turns the game into a literal marathon where nothing dies, nothing gets built, and the winner is whoever doesn’t fall asleep at the keyboard first.

Now a lesson on what RTS is all about, pay attention:

You need to understand that an RTS is an abstraction of reality, not a simulation of it.

You talk about “holding positions” and “defensive lines” as if you were a General in WWII looking at a topographical map. Wake up. In an RTS, a “position” is nothing but a geometric point that protects a resource node. A “Fortress” isn’t a stronghold where men live and sleep; it is a temporary pile of hitpoints designed to buy you exactly 45 seconds of time.
Real wars take years. Sieges take months. In Age of Mythology, we compress that into seconds because gameplay flow trumps realism. You are complaining that the abstraction breaks your immersion, but the abstraction is the game. You are looking at a math equation and complaining that it doesn’t look like a painting.

And regarding your point on Auto-Queue (AQ):
This is the only part where you accidentally stumbled upon the truth, but—ironically—you are right for the completely wrong reasons.

You think AQ “kills strategy.” Nonsense. AQ saves you.
The reason high-level players despise mechanics like Auto-Queue isn’t because it “kills timing,” but because it removes the Cognitive Overload—which is the entire point of the genre!

The goal of a competitive RTS is to force the opponent into a state of mental collapse. I want to attack you on two fronts not just to kill units, but to overload your brain so you forget to click “Create Villager.” I want to pressure you until you panic and forget to queue your army.
An RTS match is a contest of who cracks under pressure first. By using Auto-Queue, you are asking the computer to handle the mental load for you. It artificially props up players who should be losing because they can’t multitask. It removes the punishment for having a slow brain. You claim it “kills efficiency,” but in reality, it’s a crutch that keeps inefficient players alive when they should have already lost to economic starvation.

So please, stop trying to turn a high-speed game of cognitive endurance into a cozy Sunday afternoon diorama builder.

Aqui está o encerramento (“The Closer”). Mantive o tom de veterano arrogante que sabe do que está falando, inserindo a sua anedota do Age 2 exatamente como pediu, para mostrar que “skill” se constrói com suor, não pedindo patch no fórum.

Pode colar isso no final de tudo.

---

One last thing, just so you don’t think I’m purely a villain (though I’m certainly not here to be your friend):

We all started exactly where you are. We all had that “SimCity phase” where we just wanted to build pretty walls and panic when the red dots appeared on the minimap. But there comes a specific moment in every RTS player’s life where you have to make a choice: Do you want to play the game, or is the game simply not for you?

By the looks of it, you haven’t even tried to play the actual game yet.

Have you sat down and practiced a single Build Order until it was perfect? Have you practiced forcing yourself to be faster?
I remember back in the raw Age of Empires 2 days (the non-patch era, you probably weren’t even born yet), I would sit there for hours just grinding the Britons Boom. Over and over again. Restarting every time I missed a second of idle time.

Why? To make creating villagers and armies under pressure second nature. To move the mechanics from my brain to my muscle memory so I could actually play the game instead of fighting the interface.

You want the thrill of the win without the grind of the practice. You want the game to slow down because you refuse to speed up.

Those are my 2 cents. Take the advice or keep crying for a “Slow Mode” that will never happen. Do what you want. I’m done here.

[ZagorathAus]

@MuteOsprey2768

You do not learn during the match. You learn after the match

This is the only one of your points that I actually disagree with. Everything else was spot on. (Your tone could have used some work, but whatever, that’s not important.)

What I think they are talking about here is the ability to adapt. And there should be ways to adapt to what your opponent is doing. Being able to scout your opponent’s moves and pre-empt them is a valuable skill in RTS, and the difficulty of this in some ways in AoM is one of my criticisms of it. In AoE4 you can scout to see that your opponent is ageing up and what bonus they will get when they’ve aged up. In AoE2 you can’t see your opponent ageing up, but at least the benefits of doing it are kinda modest. In AoM, once you have aged up, you immediately get a new powerful unit and a very powerful god power; with no way to scout that they are ageing up or which god they are going with.

The buildings in AoM often also make scouting their strategy more difficult. With the Greeks it’s not much of a problem, but an Eggy player building a bunch of barracks could be going for counter-infantry, counter-cavalry, or counter-archers, and you won’t have any way of knowing which until they pop out, even though you’ve scouted the building they’re massing up.

On the whole I don’t think it ruins the game, and the unique combinations of units each pantheon gets from their production buildings is part of the charm of Age of Mythology. But it is a slight problem with the game from a nitpicky pure RTS perspective.

[MrLordTheOne]

Good day Sir!

@MuteOsprey2768

The goal of a competitive RTS is to force the opponent into a state of mental collapse

@MuteOsprey2768

But there comes a specific moment in every RTS player’s life where you have to make a choice: Do you want to play the game, or is the game simply not for you?

I think you are viewing rts games from a very hardcore ranked player perspective. Not everyone likes that. In fact the majority does not because they don’t want their brain to feel like scrambled eggs. And so what? They should quit the whole game?

I won’t comment on your deateld explanation of how wrong I am, first because of your manners, and second because you clearly haven’t read half of the answers I wrote to Cajocu01’s questions.

@MrLordTheOne

Also with this game mode I am not targeting ranked games.

So don’t worry about this game mode. If someone creates it, it won’t effect your game experience at all.