AoE focuses too much on history which to be honest is the most boring subject of all, the game really should try to be more fun rather than trying to accurately represent what happened hundreds of years ago.
Kinda like the historical aspect of Age Of Empires. Those campaigns teached me alot while just gaming.
They can’t go full historical concept cause they still add some “fun factor” too it.
But still love the historical and love that they also do it on AOE4.
I’d be willing to bet that 85% of the community disagrees with you. Lol
The historical aspect is one of the things I am most looking forward to about the new title.
I’m sorry but history is never boring to me. In fact the reason I play with AoE is to learn more history from the community. 11
Defiantly disagree, that is the fun side of it. For example still doesn’t make sence to me a civ like Burgundians have gun powder units and more powerful that Turks and they lived before the gun powder units invented.
This is a bit subjective. Turks still get the most powerful hand cannon type unit, the longest range cannons, and fastest access to gunpowder, both castle and imperial. They aren’t exactly going to rework Turks every time they add another civ that has a gunpowder bonus to make sure Turks supersede their gunpowder in every way.
And for balance perspective they can’t really give every civ everything and only the things they actually had, as some nations were simply stronger than others.
Not overall disagreeing with you, but we can’t nitpick the little details of the game either.
Turks was just an example to compare but we are talking about a civ that uses gun powder unit 1000 years before it is invented. PS: I did not know they had gunpowder options in castle age?
My Teuton transport ship filled with allied Persian Elephants besieging the enemy Aztecs/Khmer side of the Nile would like to laugh at this post
Omg no! The history gives it depth and fires up the imagination!
I must have misunderstood your comment. I thought your complaint was that Burgundians have higher attack hand cannons than Turks. Yes, Turks are one of three civs that get a gunpowder unique unit (Janissary) in castle age. (others are Spanish and Portuguese)
I personally love the history. It helped me excel through certain things in school. especially with Age of Empires 2 and Age of Mythology.
I don’t really understand this complaint, to be honest. The Age games have historical settings and themes, but they’re not exact reconstructions of history. Gameplay takes priority in their design, and there are many inaccuracies. For instance, in AoE II we have Mamelukes who ride Bactrian camels and throw swords; Celts with “Woad Raiders” but no illumination; Huns who can build castles and universities; Franks who can field double-bladed throwing axes alongside hand cannon; Aztecs with crossbows but no masonry… The list goes on.
So I’m confused… what features do you want in an Age game that you can’t have because they’re ahistorical?
Ok, I guess my complaint is just that the game isn’t ambitious enough in terms of gameplay.
What do you mean by “ambitious”?
It doesn’t have enough units and the game doesn’t have weird mechanics like in AoE III and what was teased of in the AoE IV trailers.
The destructions and arrow trajectories are a bit bland too.
I think a new physics system would work wonders for the age franchise. Now that we have units on walls(I think this will be added) what happens when the wall is destroyed with units on top? Do they float to the ground and continue fighting or do they die, also, units below get crushed by debris. Or battles change the landscpae, mangonel/trebuchet shots create holes, felled trees add another obstacle for units, ect. An in-depth physics system is long overdue imo(since there hasn’t been a true “new sequel” since Aoe3)
History is awesome. Age of Empires is literally the reason that I own a large library of historical themed books.
For arrows maybe a better chance to touch the closer you are to the target or an increased range while standing on an elevation?