The “return of rome” dlc requires quick matchmaking just like the base game. This would drastically improve match finding and they could add new civilizations for the dlc respecting the eras such as in Mesoamerica from 2500 BC with the Olmec civilization or in Africa where in those years there were already peoples who developed iron before the Roman Empire.(I’m sorry if my English is bad, I use Google Translator.)
RoR should become a full-fledged game independent of AoE 2. The content of RoR loses a lot due to the fact that it is only DLC for AoE 2.
1 Like
Age of empires DE???
4 Likes
The whole point of RoR is supporting AoE1 and 2 at the same time at once
3 Likes
The point of RoR is to get money from AoE1 and AoE2 players at the same time.
7 Likes
People have to be blind to not see that. They literally added Romans for that reason.
Lets say aoe2 won’t get more new civs eventually. I’m sure there would still be a missing medieval power from the game whose spot got stolen by Romans.
The big missing thing for RoR is a crossplay mode between AoE1 and AoE2.
Doesn’t matter if it’s perfectly balanced, just let us have some fun!
AoE1DE was bad. It was based on the older AoE1 version of the engine, and it was a pain to play.
Path fining is awful, there is no command queue and there are lot’s of bugs.
The best solution would be to make RoR a standalone DLC. So you don’t have to buy the base game to be able to play RoR.
That shouldn’t be hard to do. AoE3DE already made the base game a DLC and is offering a free trial version.
AoE2DE should do the same. Give us a free trial version with a free civ rotation (that includes RoR civs too) and then we can choose to either buy the base game of AoE2 or AoE1.
Everything a company does is to make money, what a surprise.
If they don’t the shareholders can literally sue them over it.
RoR was made so they can support AoE1 with regular patches and especially bug fixes a lot easier.
Supporting 2 games running on the same engine is a lot less work then supporting 2 games on different engines.
There is no number of slots.
Like not at all.
It’s not like there is a predetermined end date for AoE2, like no new civs after 2030 or something like that.
Adding a civ you don’t like makes them money which in return finances the DLC with the civ you will like.
As controversial as Romans are, many people out there wanted them and are happy they were added.
The Romans were initially designed as a Single Player only civilisation so people don’t have to buy the DLC to get all ranked civs but people did want Romans in ranked so they added them.
I just wish they made a Romans only DLC that doesn’t require you to pay for all of AoE1 too.
6 Likes
Amen, this would have saved the whole train wreck.
thats a terrible excuse used everywhere
u can be a half decent company and still make A LOT of money and not get sued and we all know 99.999% of the companies chose not to do that, because “a lot” isn’t enough for them.
further more it won’t apply for WE/FE, they dont have investors nor a traded company as the parent company is MS. and MS simply treat the game as a small part until it grows large enough (in esport scene they hope)
if we/fe loses money you have no ground to sue them because “I invested in age of empires 2 your honor”
1 Like
He said they made the DLC make money and I just pointed out how obvious that is.
In the best case the interest of shareholders and customers align.
We both want a good product.
We as customers can vote with our money. If we all think 13$ is to much for a bunch of scenarios then they won’t sell any copies and won’t try something like this in the future.
If we as customers keep demanding a Rome only DLC and RoR standalone they might consider it because it would potentially sell them more copies.
They just need to make sure not to alienate players who already bought RoR just for Romans.
1 Like
sad thing is only unsatisfied people complains and often people who are happy or could careless don’t bother voice up
i’d bet that we are in the minority and once they get their numbers (which they wont share) they’ll know how effective all these complains are, and we’d only know with time on how they do and include in their next DLC
1 Like
I think if they want to make RoR more attractive, the first thing they need to do is improve the gameplay. by improve i don’t mean that it has to become AOE 2 only in antiquity. but that it has to try to find its own style. so that people have some kind of alternative to aoe 2 agmeplay. They need to have the confidence to deviate from the original and make something new and unique out of it
Currently RoR feels more like a downgraded version of AOE 2.
In general there are things that I find interesting like that all have one and the same tech tree only with very strong restrictions and I think that can be expanded a bit with new technologies and new units and extensions for existing units like axemen or slingshot not for all but as before only for some.
Another point that should be improved in my opinion is that the individual civilizations feel more like the historical image than just a tech tree variant. What I mean by that is that when I played the campaign of the first Punisher war. I saw that I played against Rome but they didn’t feel like Rome. (and I know that it is an original campaign). but if, for example, each CIV gets a special unit line or variant that stands out visually from the others, it can improve a lot. For rome, for example, a unit line that starts in age 2 and represents the roman legionaries. but the unique units should not be limited to a special bulding like a castle like in AOE 2.
so the civs could be expanded with unit, Buildings, techs to make them more unique from eache other another.
they should also expand the muliplayer with matchmaking to make it more attractive. but i think a focus on singleplayer could make ROR more interesting with more interesting gameplay and civs that are unique along with new civs like Gaul, Germans, Picts (british natives i think they were called back then but i don’t know for sure. then at least in the singleplayer area ROR could become more interesting.
and when more people play it in SP, the more likely they are willing to try in multiplayer.
but in order to realize this, WE/ FE would have to invest more time and money.
sorry for my bad english
3 Likes
Its already a lot different than aoe2 which is a problem for many aoe2 only players.
Aoe3 has this but has less players than aoe2.
yeah i know but i just can only speak for myself and i would play it more offten when it has more intersting gamplay when it feel like its own instand like a aoe2 (Antike) with a Gameplay Downgrade.
I have play it recently and i find it okay but ther is potential to be better then just okay
I like aoe2 but why not use RoR for thinks that you could not implement in aoe 2 ( Berceuse how aoe2 is structured in term of tech tree and UU, UT ) without controversy.
and make it so a interesting variant.
I dont think that the problem of Aoe 3 is the Design of the civ. For me i can say i like Aoe 3 from the gameplay and senario, i am not the biggest fan of deck building (because there is no randem deck option for quick play) but over all i like it. my personal problem is that for me there is no content i can play otherwise i would play it more often. it got new civ but without new campaign characters. and civ are for me no content where i start the game for
but Overall RoR Even when the gamplay stay like it it. it would like to the see new Contant for it in the form of Campaings.
I do care about RoR I even sent my unit proposals to game devs, for which I got usual answer (we have received your mail and will give you the feedback etc…), but not any serious feedback will they even consider my ideas in future RoR updates or not. New unit and unit upgrades ideas for Return of Rome - Age of Empires II: DE / II - Discussion - Age of Empires Forum
1 Like
Adding new units is not going to fix this game.
for understanding what exakty you think are the Problems?
More unit lines are needed for the ROR civs. Upgraded slingers, axeman line, scout line upgrades, a heavier chariot archer, a lighter spearman line (than the hoplites) and something for the camels. They could have added new wonder buildings for each civ and variants for the houses too.
3 Likes
Upgraded slinger would be perfect counter vs chariot archer spam, so I am really hoping it will be added to game.
It plays too differently to aoe2 which is the main turn off for aoe2 players.
@PeakHornet46539 yes some upgrade units to current unit lines it fine,if you bothered to check the post he tagged its just a ton of new unit lines with no real use ingame.