[ROR] Stone Age to Imperial

[Skadidesu]

@SoullessHeathen

This idea is stupid but the fun kind of stupid. Let’s do it. xD

Exactly!

It’s not my idea btw. some people mentioned they wanted that kind of gamemode out of RoR so I though about it if was doable.

@RealMatrim2

again the question: Do you want to introduce the Citadel as a new building for an improved town defense or do you want just to introduce the necessary technology for an improved town defense at your game proposal? When choosing one, what are the advantages and disadvantages?

That question doesn’t have anything to do with this topic.
But anyway.
The reason why I want to have it as an individual upgrade for every TC is simply because TCs only cost Wood in AoE1. So having a technology that makes all TC stronger would allow you to spam defensive buildings.
Making all TCs cost stone would massively alter the AoE1 economy because booming would suddenly be way more expensive.

So the compromise of making it a per TC upgrade is that this way you can combine both the option to use TCs defensively and also make booming cheap but not both at once.

@CanineCrown7153

Stone Age, Tool Age, Bronze Age, Iron Age, Dark Age, Feudal Age, Castle Age, First Imperial Age, Exploration Age, Commerce Age, Fortress Age, Industrial Age, Second Imperial Age

AoE3 is a 3D game done is a totally different engine and requires a lot of features that don’t exist in AoE2s engine to even remotely make sense.
Musketeers have to be able to automatically switch to melee mode when being attacked from cavalry for example, everything else would completely brake the way warfare worked in that time period.

@Martinurello

I though two ways to accomplish what you want. The simple one is leave each game tech tree as it is and add to this merged mode a timed event called Black Death. This event should have some grade of randomess.

That doesn’t sound like a fun game mechanic at all.
Also it would be so random that the game would basically just be decided by a dice roll at that point.

@Martinurello

I think, some ages should be merged. And the cost for each should be very expensive.

I) Stone and Tool ages.
II) Bronze and Iron ages.
III) Feudal and Castle Age.
IV) Imperial and Renaissance

I don’t think that’s a good idea, especially with the Ages of AoE1.
The Bronze Age and the Iron Age are more different to each other then the Iron Age to the Middle Ages. They are very fundamentally different time periods.
The Stone Age is not a “real” age anyway it’s just there to delay you getting into the Tool Age, the same way the Dark Age also just exists to delay you getting into the Feudal Age.

@Martinurello

Second, The Resources:
I think should be 1 more resource: Iron, that replace gold some way in certain ages to “force” some units switches.

I want to combine AoE1 with AoE2 not make a new game.
This game mode wouldn’t include any new unit, buildings or technologies.

This is not supposed to be a proposal for Empire Earth # or something.

I’m working on a concept for a new game that kinda sounds like the ideas you have but that’s a different topic:
My RTS concept
I’m collecting some ideas there.

@SamePorpoise303

From a gameplay perspective it’s surely easier to merge aoe1 and 2 but from an historical one it would be easier to merge aoe2 and 3 because there’s more continuity between middle and modern ages but as you acknowledge the main issue is the iron age to dark age switch which feels inconvenient from a gameplay pov

Yes but AoE1 and AoE2 use the same engine while AoE3 is completely different.

@SamePorpoise303

For the units like knights that have two imp upgrades you could simply move them in feudal like you did for centurions and units in aoe1 that have two upgrades in iron age. In that way you would achieve a non interrupted line of heavy cavalry from bronze, iron, cataphracts in late antiquity / dark ages, knights in feudal, cavaliers in castle and paladins in imp.

I thought about that too but there are some reasons to not do that.

1. I don’t want cavalry to be too strong in Feudal Age
2. I want Knights to become a very strong unit in Castle Age like they are now
3. I want to keep most units in the Ages they are already in (beside Post Iron Age units)

There is a secret reason why I like that idea though.
The Knight looks like a Man-at-Arms on horseback while the Cavalier looks like an AoE2 Long Swordsman on Horseback.

@Rashalgal

I’m fine with this, but it should not be limited in such a way.
I don’t think civs should change, instead it should be more like the civilization series where say…Babylonians can make it all the way to Imperial age.

This game mode would be relatively complex to make so I think it has to start out with a small selection of civilisations and then slowly expand over time.

@Rashalgal

Also if we used your concept of civs changing, then it’d be Macedonians who’d go Byzantine, not Romans. The Byzantines may have descended from the Roman government but they were as much Roman as Ghana is British. They spoke/wrote Greek, had Greek army traditions and more. Heck some Greeks to this day still refer to themselves as Romans.

The Aoe 1 Romans would instead go Roman. (The new Aoe 2 civ)

The reason why I transitioned from the Romans to the Byzantines is because I want to “fill out” as much of the Timeline as possible.
I don’t want to use Late Antiquity AoE2 civilisations.

The AoE2 Romans are there to fill the gap between AoE1 and AoE2 but this game mode is supposed to expand beyond this intersection into the Early Modern Age.

You could argue that the Romans should transition into the Italians and the Greeks into the Byzantines but that’s not really the point of this topic.
The interesting questions are how to make the gameplay transition work and not flavour details like which exact civilisations to pick.