If you could include new mechanics, features or functions in AOE-3, what would you implement?

Imperial cards. Age 5 is the only age that is not covered by this function. They would be very useful for the treated mode.

1 Like

i would add icons to see if the unit is mercenary, shock infantery, and not to hover mouse over the unit.

I completely agree, something like this is already present in starcraft II and it makes unit readability much easier, which is a main complaint against the game from rts veterans and new players alike.

These indicators/markings/texts/icons could go anywhere as long they are easy to see and distinct enough.

1 Like

Excellent!. We already have this command for land and naval units.
Captura de pantalla (331)


Other easy to implement would be the formation of the artillery where it cooperates with the formation of the square, and the possibility of maintaining position.

5 Likes

Haiti and Barbary states revolution civs have a lot of bonuses to collecting treasures. I love the idea of a late-game treasure economy but obviously, by industrial, there aren’t many treasures left and they won’t provide many resources. I think it would be awesome if they could get treasure wagons. it’s a covered wagon that works like a prospector wagon except it needs to be a certain distance from your town center and it unpacks into the crashed wagon treasure with random loot and guardians. They would get these wagons from shipments or they might be trained automatically at a slow rate.

I would also love if the loading screen at the beginning of a match let you know which mercs will be available that round. I think mercs would be a lot more fun if you could weigh the pros and cons of investing in a tavern knowing the mercs available instead of just throwing away 200 wood on a gamble. I think it’d also be fairer for the other player to know what mercs they might be running into so they don’t get surprised by something they had no chance to predict the enemy having. Relating to this, I’d also love if natives could train mercenaries from the warhut or native embassy after sending a specific home city card.

1 Like

Automatic… herdable…gathering…

1 Like

This would really be very useful. Well thought!

4 Likes

New cheat code - I need some space : Makes all units cost 1 pop and eliminate local pop cap

5 Likes

Would be cool if they borrow some elements from aoe4 like the charge mechanics for melee units or warships being able to fire while moving.

3 Likes

I would make an “revolution” button for the natives which would be called westernize, which would make your current military units better versions with gunpowder weaponry and give access to still your generic architecture, but also to new ones where you can build uitposts, forts, factories, barracks and maybe even new buildings, while able to train new units which utilize gunpowder and thus also artillery. In your old warhuts you can still train most of the old units, while in the barracks you got the newer ones.

I havent really thought it out yet, but something in that direction.

1 Like
1 Like

No. That drips with racism, and you don’t even realize it - the game itself acknowledges that the Lakota cavalry was the most advanced in the world of its time, there is very little tech the Americans and Europeans had that the Natives did not have access to.
I did have an idea to give the Lakota access to the Paha Sapa Gold Rush, which would do something similar to what you suggest - The Lakota would lose access to their strongest traditional units, like the Tokala Soldier and the Wakinyayanka, but they would gain access to stronger Outlaw-type units, a saloon and mercenaries, and gain the ability to farm and use estates. They would also lose many of the things that make them uniquely Lakota and make them more into a generic Western-outlaw type faction.
(Note - this is specific to my mod.)

That would really work for aztecs and inca, but not for lakota and hauds. It would also fit historically (somewhat).

How is it racist? Where do I discriminate on basis of race? The concept of westernization was a real thing, with Japan being a good example and to an extend Russia. Sure doesnt mean Lakota had it as well, but even if, I dont see how it would be racist. We have the US in ~1492, I dont see how something similar to revolution cant be for natives, what you describe doesnt really sound good, exchanging good units for pure ability to train mercenaries and outlaw when other civs already can.

I deliberatly didnt say modernize, because thats open for interpretation, I said westernize. I think it would be interessting and good for natives to have options to get factories and or (more) artillery.

1 Like

Well. Westernizing would be nothing new, as many current natives use firearms like the Apaches and Cree. In addition, the adoption of horses and cattle comes from Europe.

The Lakota and Haudenosaunee civilizations also use firearms.

Oh well. I hope this does not turn into a debate as it often happens in many forums.

Part of westernalization is also the industry and economy, so factories.

Your initial statement starts of by stating …better versions with gunpowder weaponry…. There’s already a plethora of Native units with gunpowder, there’s not much to add or change in that regards.
The Natives can already build outposts - Warhuts are the same thing as the Russian Blockhouse, and barracks are already there. That’s already two buildings they don’t need to add.
Forts? Not particularly necessary. They wouldn’t change their guerilla style of warfare, the whole reason that was the main form of fighting was because of a numbers disadvantage and because it was the way warfare had worked for time untold before then anyway - Why change what already works extremely well?

Ultimately, the only thing you could really add to the Lakota and Hauds would be more artillery. Otherwise, they already had everything else in the first place. And to be clear, they already had artillery. The Hauds use a light cannon, but the Lakota really couldn’t - what was the feasibility of dragging cannons around the plains?

The maybe refers to natives who do not have firearms or cavalry like the Aztecs and Incas.

Were all the Lakota armed with howitzers, field artillery, gatling guns, winchesters, revolvers, breechloaders in general etcetera?

Not just one or few, but all warriors?

Gunpowder weapons includes artillery.

Plethora? There are a total of 7, I think, major native civilization gunpowder units. This includes one warchief, making it as units basically 6.

Iroqouis have 3 (4 with warchief)
Lakota 2
Inca’s 1
Aztecs 0

Thats not plethora. Plethora would atleast be a half.

Maybe I wasnt clear enough, but the barracks were meant as building for the new style gunpowder units, similar to units of the line, such as line infantry. Warhuts would still have the original units, with maybe some gone. Warhut ≠ barracks. Outposts means the artillery versions, its extra defense, warhuts again ≠ outposts. Same function does not mean same thing. The whole idea of westernization is to leave the guerilla fighting. And sure the guerilla tactis worked small scale, but in big battles it wouldnt, also I am not speaking purely about Lakota, I refer to natives, and In my opinion if a few natives get westernization all should, just like Dutch got revolution for Indonesia and the US.

And again, westernization is not just military, so also factories and perhaps other upgrades for estates and farms.

You still havent explained how I was racist, if you are going to use that, you better be able to explain why.

i dont think adding “westernisation” into the game would add any benefits to it, factions should remain unique even into the imperial age.

that being said i also wanna say: no Lakota where not the best horsemen on the planet, their culture was heavily tied to it but that doesn’t mean they would perform well on a European battlefield.

4 Likes