POLL: What do you think about the Heroes?

  • I want to see historical characters in the game as heroes (like Jeanne d’Arc).
  • I want to see only abstract heroes in the game. These should not be real historical characters (like King and Khan).
  • I don’t want to see any heroes in the game.
  • I have no opinion on this.
0 voters

During disputes about incorrect names. We forgot that another radical change in the traditions of the Age of Empires series. Heroes will add in the game. Previously, we already had heroes like Khan and King. But these are abstract characters. Now it looks like devs want to add heroes based on real historical characters to the game. Such as Jeanne d’Arc. Several questions arise at once both on historical authenticity and on gameplay. Let’s take the example of the most likely hero of Jeanne d’Arc:

  1. If Jeanne d’Arc dies, does she revival? The Khan and the King appear new after death. Will there be a new Jeanne d’Arc?
  2. Jeanne d’Arc was born in 1412. Will she be a playable character for four ages?
  3. In the game, the language of units varies depending on the age, if Jeanne d’Arc has been with us for four ages, will she know the old French language?

I really want to know the opinion of the community about the heroes?
UPD: We mean only multiplayer.

My opinion. Every hero doesn’t have to be a real historical character. It should be a hero based on a historical character and referring to him. The hero must have an abstract name.
Jeanne d’Arc → Maid of Orleans
Saladin → Sultan
Vlad Dracula → Count
Unknown Chinese man → Unknown Chinese man

Update after the announcement of Mary Sue Civilization.
I hope that the heroes can be turned off and not play on them if you don’t want to. Let it be a separate hobby, just like freaks who like water maps.
Or we could have a separate mode with heroes like in SC2.
Rating games should remain only for real nations and civilizations.
I think it could be a compromise between those who want to play Warcraft 3 and real Age of Empires fans. They will just have four new civs like in Warcraft 3, as they used to play.
Or it can be compared to the Return of Rome to AoE2. There is a separate mode for antiquity and separate ones for the Middle Ages. They do not overlap and the feelings of the fans are not defiled, you can also do it in AoE4. A separate fenced area for fans of civilizations with heroes.

  • Civs with heroes should be in rating games together with normal civs.
  • There should be an opportunity to exclude civs with heroes from your game.
  • There should be a separate game mode for civs with heroes.
  • The heroes should only stay in the single player.
  • I have no opinion.
0 voters

Oh no, age of warcraft noooo


I only want to see abstract hero characters because the core gameplay involves moving through a period of anywhere from 400-500 years. Even the landmarks roughly correspond to a progression of time across multiple centuries. Abstractions like “Khan” and “King” work because they aren’t tied to specific years within those civilizations. Named characters would just completely throw off the thematic consistency IMO. Save that stuff for campaign.


I prefer no named heroes in multi-player.

It just doesn’t make sense for them to be a thing in Age of Empires. The civs are advancing through the ages, evolving in architecture, clothing, weapons, and language. Having a named hero that whole time is silly. Unnamed ones like the Khan are fine as an abstraction.


Depends of their gameplay design.

Can’t really comment on this until we get more information.

I’m fine with unique units with aura that inspires nearby units.

I don’t think I’d like strong warriors that can kill ton of stuff by themselves. (Ex: blade master in WC3).

I can agree that the multiplayer should use generic names.


This poll was created before the developers confirmed that they want to turn AoE 4 into WC3. Now it has taken on a new meaning.


There is 1 civilization (of 16 that we will have on November) where they give more importance to a historical heroine and you comment about how they are going to turn the game into WC3.

A little seriousness, please.

1 Like

All variants of the civs will be associated with their heroes, this has been confirmed by content makers.

1 Like

Can you tell me the source?

I’m finding this entire expansion for Age of Empires 4 interesting, everything looks incredible!!
Age of Empires 4 follows its own style, and leaves the past like Age 2 or Age 3 in the past, and brings some elements from the past, Age of Empires 4 has to move forward, to attract new players. I’m from the old, I have a preference for the old like Age 2, but I know I’m in the past, let the new emerge!!

I like the idea, it’s brilliant, nice new mechanics, new ideas, it’s all good, except for the names, especially the Joan de Arc one, please devs , this is age of empires not age of individuals


Easy for you to say. You clearly have never shown a single bit of care about whichever direction this game would go.

Why even comment if you hold such a careless position?

1 Like

I have a preference for Age of Empires 2, I’ve been playing since 2003 since Age 1, I saw when Age of Empires 3 was released and the community destroyed that game, although I liked it but in Age 2, I don’t deny that something new has to emerge to attract new players, in Age 2 there are the same players and they don’t change, they always age poorly, you can’t see everything die again, just because of the pride of this community that whenever something new appears it destroys it, as they did with Age of Empires 3, and with that he always dies in old age, enough, something new has to emerge!!! I see the Starcraft community, which always renews itself as a new player, even when Blizzard is not investing in the game!! AGE OF EMPIRES CANNOT DIE IN AGE OF EMPIRES 2, in this old community like me, AGE OF EMPIRES IS BIGGER THAN AGE OF EMPIRES 2!!

Maybe just like me, I’m old and I like Age 2, I don’t have anything to add, since I get caught up in nostalgia and old concepts, that’s why Age of empires doesn’t move forward, the old man has to die to the new is born, that’s it, or he will die of old age, as always happens.

I’ve been writing messages of positivity, concern, criticism, and feedback from the closed beta until now, and you’re telling me that I don’t care about the direction of the game.

If you have any personal issues with me, DM me. We’re not going to divert this conversation to off-topic.


If they wanted a civ that heavily rely on a hero, they should have gone for a generic hero, like a khan, king, or sacred warrior.

I would have personally chosen the aztecs for an heavy relying heros, with a sacred warrior, something similar to the aoe3 war chief.


For me, I don’t really care how they create hero characters, as long as it works and is fun. If having Jeanne d’Arc as a very specific named character works for her faction, I’m totally fine with it. Having a King and Khan works well right now for the English and Mongols, and I’m happy with them. And the civs that have no heroes at all right now also work well, so I don’t see a big problem. Clearly the game can function with multiple models, so as long as it makes sense and is built well, I’ll be happy with whatever. The implementation matters more to me.

1 Like

Starting as a lowly peasant and moving upwards, is an interesting concept. I do think it is fine as long as it is a unique aspect of this French variant civ.

It should be a unique concept, an exception to the rule. I wouldn’t want to see it everywhere, the whole leveling system of Jeanne d’Arc that is.

1 Like

Exactly. I loved OG WC but uninstalled WC3 after only a few hours because of the heroes.

Enough people seem to like them that it’s a feature in lots of RTS though, and now changing AOE4 as well.

A very sad day for some.


only Jeanne d’Arc is gonna has hero other dont get hero but i liked jeanne it seems nice but how is she gonna farm xp at battles i think she will die constantly