Currently, aside from the Grand Campaign in Chronicles, the four currently available AoE1 campaigns (bring in the missing ones already!) in Return of Rome are the only campaign content without a sword rating for difficulty. In my opinion, they should propably receive one, despite their age. The babylonian campaign, for example, has some rather tricky scenarios in it for new players, and a higher sword difficulty rating could reflect that.
I would give Ascent of Egypt and The First Punic War 1 sword, Glory of Greece two swords (mostly for the finale, which is pretty tricky due to all the wonders), and Voices of Babylon three swords (due to the presence of some pretty tricky gimmicky scenarios), for example.
Not sure if this is a needed change, but I wanted to open up a discussion to see what others think 
1 Like
none of the aoe2 originals has a three sword rating, and only saladin has two swords. If they do this I doubt they were going to be any higher than one sword, they may be tricky but too simple for the difficulty rating of the game.
Well, the Lepanto battle got two swords as well, though I’m not sure if the second sword is justified there as it is rather easy to destroy all transports before they land, which turns the scenario into a cakewalk.
Though I would argue that, strangely enough, the Joan of Arc campaign, in its current state, actually should get at least 2 swords. Joan 5, right now, is one of the more difficult fixed force missions in the entire game on hard (compare it to its equivalent, Grand Dukes 3, back to back, if you find that hard to believe). Joan 6 currently places you under very heavy pressure, the likes of which you usually don’t see in 1 sword campaigns, and Joan 3, if you don’t know that you need to harass Fastolf early (which the game doesn’t hint at), you’re up against an imperial age foe while limited to castle age, which can be pretty difficult as well.
Simple map design doesn’t mean low difficulty and shouldn’t mean low sword difficulty rating imo - Tariq 5 is a very simple scenario in terms of design, but very very tough and arguably the reason the campaign was upgraded from 1 to 2 swords.
The argument would be that, if a new players gets thrown into a mission like The Great Hunt, they might feel very frustrated with the water part of the mission. A higher sword rating might make them realise that it’s not just that they are new - the mission is actually pretty tricky, and maybe the campaign is not the ideal one to start with. Though 2 swords seems fine for the campaign as well, as some of the less tricky missions can be quite short and easy.
And the Sargon campaign is pretty brutal to be the one sword campaign of the DLC.
I agree that Joan of Arc 3 and specially 6 would deserve giving a two sword rating; but I’d never understand when people say that 5 is hard: you have enough army, it is not too long and there’s no rush, the river may be annoying but there’s not really anything difficult about it.
Yes, I agree:
-
A single sword for Ascend of Egypt (because it’s the tutorial)
-
Two swords for Glory of Greece (because it’s a standard campaign and you face 2 or even 3 enemies)
-
Three swords for Voices of Babylon (because it starts with only one priest and you have to face several enemies in different scenarios)
-
The First Punic War could be a single sword (since it’s not that difficult and that’s because it was a demo for The Rise of Rome)
And if they include the missing 1DE campaigns:
-
Reign of the Hittites (two swords) (similar to Glory of Greece)
-
The Rise of Rome (three swords) (similar to Voices of Babylon and Pyrrhus of Epirus)
-
Caesar (one sword) (similar to Trajan)
-
Imperium Romanum (two swords) (which is why I put it above)
-
Enemies of Rome (three swords) (because you face Rome the whole time, like in Pyrrhus of Epirus)
-
Yamato: Empire of the Rising Sun (two swords maybe, or even three, because you face multiple enemies, like in Shimazu in VaV)…