I always chalked it up to some kind of general disregard for the existing design, whether intentional or not.
I bet if they were asked though, it would be some kind of answer orbiting the idea of wanting to, um, I don’t know, emphasize the importance of specific pinch points on the map/specific buildings/specific moments in a match. (Said in a way suggesting they aren’t aware that all of our existing games achieve that goal with the existing design, not that they’ve played our games to know that, of course.)
I am strawmanning here, so I don’t want to fall into a rabbit hole of speculation arguing their case for them. But no matter what, it feels very much like an outsider’s non-AoE decision in the spirit of changing things not for any coherent reason but just for the sake of change.
It’s the kind of thing that could be intelligently assigned to a specific civ if some gameplay motivation arose that could be naturally connected to some kind of historical/civ related idea. But to boldly apply it across the game smacks of hubris. Just because one has made other rts games does not mean one knows how to make ours.
I’ve been on these forums nonstop since 2011 and off and on since 1998. Not once can I ever recall any player ever asking for tech upgrades to apply to specific buildings only. It’s an alien, foreign idea, and I want to banish it back to the bowels whence it came.
Huh? Making towers have to be individually upgraded, and with emplacement options being exclusive, is very obviously a conscious design decision…
There are plenty of good reasons to do it this way. It adds more decisions to make, it gives us essentially 4 different types of towers instead of 1 or 2 and let’s which type a tower will become be picked well after it’s built depending on your resources and what’s going on in the game, it requires more commitment to a tower rush if you are going to use emplacements, it allows the default tower to be cheaper and still not be OP, it requires additional investment if you’re going to try and turtle and cover the map in strong towers, etc…
Although it’s one of the very few instances where AoE4 didn’t streamline something from previous age games.
It is speculated by leaks that Denmark and Poland-Lithuania could be added to AoE3:DE. Will it be new revolutions or new Civs? The most optimistic believe that they are new Civs, on the other hand it is difficult to think that they are revolutions because Poland-Lithuania and Denmark never became independent from anyone: they already existed!,
3.- New MOD for Aoe3:DE with Mayans, Caribs and Egyptians:
Speaking of possible new Civs, I just found out that thanks to AoE3:DE allowing mods, there is a new mod from Fenriz8997, that includes many new Civs, including… pum pum pum …THE MAYANS, and even THE CARIBBEANS,
It’s named “AGE OF THE WORLD”:
I have played a few games and the new civs are the best. Take a look.
Note: To install the mod you have to download a file from Mediafire, and then put the content in the Mod “Local” folder of the Aoe3 game, which is usually on the game’s installation site with Steam, if it was downloaded by Steam. Instructions on youtube and on the same page of the forum.
Yes, I agree, for me the “Dawn of the Dukes” of AoE 3 is coming just as KotM was the “Lords of the West” of AoE 3, then they would focus on Asia with Persia and Oman (Middle East dlc with the Historical Battle of Pyramids in Egypt too) or Burma and Siam (SEA dlc after the Bayinnaung campaign of AoE 2)… and of course for AoE 4 the Spanish and Aztecs may arrive…
I don’t see the logic here. What were they left out from?
Ottoman & Romans is a classic combo, but I don’t see how Romans fit into the Ottoman + Malian combo.
If anything, it suggests that they are doing unrelated civilizations. For example, Norse and Japanese.
Though, if they are only releasing two civilizations with the intention of selling them, they better include a different styled campaign to make it worth the purchase. I cringe at the thought of only buying civilizations in a series that has already established the baseline of civilization + campaign DLCs.
It is because Ottomans and Malians are Muslims and they are African empires (the Ottomans occupied Algiers in 1516 and Egypt in 1517, besides supporting Morocco in the battle of the Three Kings in 1578)…all that seen in AoE 3…but it would have been nice if both civs brought campaigns and not just missions for the Art of War section…