Spin-off that fills the gap between AoE2 and AoE3

Age of Empires II: DE II - Discussion
1

Age of Empires 2 is focused on the Middle Ages. The most modern units are 15th knights in plate armour and hand cannons (plate armour is actually newer then hand cannons) while Age of Empires 3 directly jumps to late 17th century musketeers with bayonets.

The 16th century and early 17th century are not really represented by either games.

Since this Spin-off pick up where AoE2 ends there will be some differences:

  • The civilisations from the Spin-off are stronger then the base AoE2 civs
  • The tech tree has more differences compared to Chronicles
  • The tech tree starts with stronger units then AoE2

Big Tech tree differences:

  • No Archery Range
  • All siege weapons use gunpowder

Ages

  1. Feudal Age
  2. Castle Age
  3. Renaissance
  4. Imperial Age

Maybe the first 2 should have different names but it would also make clear that this mode takes part after AoE2.

  1. Feudal Age
    Only one military unit, the same as AoE2 Dark Age.

  2. Castle Age
    Has similar units compared to the AoE2 Castle Age but no siege units.

  3. Renaissance
    Similar to AoE2 Imperial Age but with more Gunpowder units, especially Siege units.

  4. Imperial Age
    Has overall stronger units then AoE2.

Military Buildings

New units are bold.
New names are place holders, feel free to suggest something better.
I try to not reuse any existing names (though they can be existing Scenario Editor exclusive units) so some names are a little longer.

Old units will get new names like in Chronicles but I keep the old names here so you know what units I’m talking about.

Barracks

  • Man-At-Arms → Long Swordsman → Two Handed Swordsman - Champion
  • Pikeman → Halberdier
  • Long Pikeman → Imperial Pikeman

Gunsmith

  • Crossbow → Arbalester
  • Arquebusier → Musketeer
  • Dragoon → Imperial Dragoon

Stable

  • Knight → Cavalier → Paladin
  • Scout Cavalry → Light Cavalry → Hussar → Imperial Hussar

Artillery Foundry

  • Culverin → Imperial Culverin
  • Bombard Cannon → Imperial Bombard Cannon
  • Falconet
  • Petard → Saboteur

Military Units

Swordsman Line

  • Same as in AoE2
  • New Technology to give them AoE damage
  • Man at Arms in Feudal Age
  • Long Swordsman in Castle Age
  • Two Handed Swordman in Renaissance
  • Champion in Imperial Age

Pikeman Line

  • Same as in AoE2
  • Starts with the Pikeman in Castle Age
  • Ends in Renaissance, no Imperial Age upgrade
  • Represent soldiers using weapons like Halberds that were build to counter cavalry

Long Pikeman Line

  • Basically a Kamayuk
  • Higher base attack but lower bonus vs. Cavalry then normal Pikeman Line
  • Starts in Renaissance Age
  • They have 1 range
  • New Technology to give them bonus armour in formations like Chronicles Hoplites
  • Cost Gold
  • No Spearman Armour Class

Crossbow Line

  • Same as in AoE2
  • Starts with Crossbow in Castle Age
  • No Imperial Age upgrade
  • Likely will be visually replaced with an Archers since that’s more historically correct
  • Not sufficient to counter the Long Pikeman Line without civilisation bonuses
  • No Thumb Ring available!

Arquebus Line

  • Similar to Hand Cannon but more general purpose
  • Do some bonus damage vs. Infantry
  • Considered an Archer and Gunpowder unit for bonus damage

Dragoon Line

  • Gunpowder Cavalry
  • Starts in Renaissance
  • Bonus damage vs. Cavalry

Knight Line

  • Same as in AoE2
  • Knight in Castle Age
  • Cavalier in Renaissance
  • Paladin in Imperial Age

Scout Line

  • Same as in AoE2
  • New technology to give them bonus damage vs. Archers/Arquebus
  • Scout Cavalry at the beginning of the game
  • Light Cavalry is a free upgrade in Caste Age
  • Hussar in Renaissance
  • New Imperial Hussar upgrade in Imperial Age

Culverin

  • Long range anti Artillery Artillery
  • No AoE damage

Bombard Cannon

  • Same as in AoE2
  • Imperial Bombard Cannon is stronger as Houfnice

Falconet

  • Imperial Age Artillery
  • Does AoE damage
  • Good vs. Infantry and Archers/Arquebus
  • Decent vs. Buildings

Petard

  • Same as in AoE2
  • Now has an upgrade available in Imperial Age

Regional units

Buckler Swordsman

  • Fast but cheap Infantry for raiding
  • Kind of similar to an Eagle Warrior
  • No bonus damage vs. Monks or Cavalry

Cavalry Archer

  • Same as in AoE2
  • Need probably some new technology for them to make them more of a raiding units then a mainline solider unit

Rifleman

  • Soldier equipped with an early hunting rifle
  • Low DPS and fragile but long range
  • Good second line support unit

Zamburak

  • Camel mounted gun
  • Replaces Dragoon for Middle Eastern, Persian and Indian civs
  • Bonus damage vs. Infantry instead of Cavalry (because Camel Riders exist)

Camel Rider

  • Same as AoE2
  • Imperial Camel Rider is not unique anymore
  • Does bonus damage vs. Cavalry of course

Grenadier

  • Short range siege unit
  • Fragile but strong in larger numbers
  • Better against units then against buildings

Defensive Buildings

Tower

  • Available from Castle Age
  • Same stats as a Guard Tower
  • Can be upgraded to shoot bullets
  • Can be upgraded to get more HP and armour

Bombard Tower

  • Available in Renaissance
  • Can be upgraded to get more HP and armour

Castle

  • Same as in AoE2
  • Available in Castle Age
  • Limited to 1 before Renaissance
  • Trains unique units starting in Renaissance
  • Research unique technologies
  • Can be upgraded to shoot bullets
  • Can be upgraded to Fort in Imperial Age
  • No Trebuchet
  • No Petard

Wall

  • Same as in AoE2
  • Stone Wall from Castle Age
  • Fortified Wall from Renaissance

Other Buildings

Blacksmith

  • Handgun attack upgrades instead of Archer upgrades
  • Infantry and Cavalry upgrades are the same

University

  • Available in Castle Age
  • All Castle Age AoE2 techs available in Castle Age
  • All Imperial Age AoE2 techs available in Renaissance
  • Gunpoweder units (besides Bombard Cannon and Ship) benefit from Ballistics
  • No Chemistry required for Gunpowder units
  • New technologies

New technologies

Zweihänder

  • Available In Renaissance
  • Man-At-Arms Line does 0.5 AoE Damage
  • Not Trample damage like Drauzhina
  • Effectively making them like 2x as strong

Pike Formation

  • Available In Renaissance
  • Pikeman give each other +1/+1 armour when close to each other (does not stack)

Logistics

  • Barracks units cost 0.5 population
  • Technology already exists in AoE1

Wheellock

  • Available In Renaissance
  • Dragoons gain a charged attack

Flintlock

  • Available in Imperial Age
  • Arquebus reload faster

Cavalry Charge

  • Available In Renaissance
  • Scout Line gets bonus damage vs. Archers/Arquebus
  • Scout Line can dodge projectiles

Wall guns

  • Available In Renaissance
  • Towers, Town Centres and Castles shoot bullets instead of arrows

Advanced Fortifications

  • Available In Renaissance
  • Towers and Bombard Towers get additional HP and Armour

Fort

  • Available in Imperial Age
  • Castle upgraded to Fort
  • More HP and Armour
  • Main attack is a cannon ball instead of bullets/arrows
  • Garrisoned units shoot bullets if Wall Guns is researched else they should arrows

Blunderbuss

  • Available in Imperial Age
  • Villagers gain ranged attack

Removed technologies

  • Gambesons (Free in Feudal Age)
  • Supplies (Free in Feudal Age)
  • Thumb Ring (Replaced by Flintlock)
  • Parthian Tactics (Replaced by Wheellock)
  • Keep
  • Arrow Slits (Replaced by Wall guns)

Economy

Unchanged

  • Almost everything is the same as AoE2
  • Feudal Age → Castle Age
  • Castle Age → Renaissance

Trade Workshop

  • Available in Imperial Age
  • Allows players to trade with themselves
  • Provide half as much Gold as trading with allied markets
  • Allow Trading for Food and Wood instead (Chosen at each Trade Workshop)
  • Cost Stone to build

Dock and Monastery

Undecided on those for now.
I want to try out Chronicles before I make a Water concept.

Thoughts

Crossplay

The civilisations from this Spin-off are clearly stronger then normal AoE2 civilisations. They basically skip the Feudal Age and start in the Castle Age.
People have to be aware off this balance difference when they want to mix civilisations. Different AI difficulties and handicaps are some balance options.

Crossplay can be an important aspect of many scenarios. Civilisations from the base game like Aztecs can fight Spanish from this Spin-off or base game Byzantines vs. Spin-off Ottomans.

Ranked

The civilisations from this Spin-off need their own queue.
The civilisations are supposed to be balanced compared to each other.

Trash War

There are only 2 generic Trash Units. Hussar and Halberdier
But it’s possible to trade in a 1v1!

Main counters

Long Pikeman > Hussar
Hussar > Arquebus
Arquebus > Long Pikeman

  • Swordsman are mostly strong vs. Pikeman thanks to their AoE damage
  • Knights are a good all round unit but they are less powerful compared to AoE2 mostly thanks to better Cavalry Counters
  • Dragoons are one of those new cavalry counters. With micro they can be used against Infantry too
  • The Falconet is the Artillery that counters Infantry and Archers
  • Culverin are an alternative to Cavalry when it comes to countering Artillery

Civilisation differences

  • The new technologies are not available to all civilisations of course. The availability of them decided on what focus a civilisations has.
  • There should be regional units too. I ignored them in my concept.
  • Every civilisation has unique units and unique technologies of course

Potential civilisations

  • Chinese, Koreans, Japanese in an Asian DLC
  • French, Spanish and British in Western European DLC
  • Ottomans, Persians and Mughal in Gunpowder Empire DLC
  • Holy Roman Empire, Swedes and Dutch in 30 years war DLC
  • Morocco, Mamluks and Omani in North Africa DLC
  • Russians, Poland-Lithuania and Cossacks in Eastern European DLC
  • And many more

What not to add

  • The USA
  • Technology from after 1700
  • Home cities
  • Colonialism
  • Civilisations without Gunpowder (like Aztecs)

What’s your opinion?

Other then “I hate everything that is not Middle Ages!” or “I hate everything that could be a competition to AoE3!”.

Edit

  • Added the Spearman Line from AoE2 (staring at Pikeman)
  • Added the Archer Line from AoE2 (starting at Crossbow)
  • Removed Heavy Crossbow
  • Moved the Scout Line one Age down to match the other units and gave them a new Imperial Age upgrade
  • Added some regional units
  • Rifleman are not a regional unit
  • Added logistics technology
  • Gambesons and Supplies are now free
7 Likes
2

But there are Gunsmith that basically for the same purpose.
To make it closer to AoE3, I would like to pick either Gunsmith or Stable.
If the Barracks can train foot units, then the Stables can train mounted units.
Or, if the Barracks can train melee units, then the Gunsmith can train ranged units.

I guess there would be civs with something like rams and catapults still, especially Asians and Native Americans.

1 Like
3

Interesting concept!
Nice work bro!

4

yeah pretty much. Not sure why I wrote it like this, since the Siege Workshop also just got renamed.

I don’t want to make it close to AoE3, that’s the point.

Also there are 5 foot soldiers and 3 mounted ones.

There are 5 melee solders and 3 ranged ones, so the same unbalance here.

I mentioned at the end that those civs would not be added to the Spin-off.
Since all vanilla AoE2 civs are still available you would use them instead.
Yes they are weaker but doesn’t that make it more historic?

Thanks!
I will be thinking about Navy, regional units, civilisations and stuff like that in the coming days/weeks. I wanna try out Chronicles first.
Also thinking about more detailed unit stats. The hardest will be the Arquebus since they will be a core unit and there is nothing really like them in AoE2 atm.

5

I feel like if anything AoE3 feels too close to AoE2 in time scope. Sure, the wars over colonization became more intense by the 17th century bur the game still represents the 16th century quite well and, with a very archaic looking Spain as well as British with Longbows, Aztecs, Incas and a Zheng He campaign

To me if anything AoE3 feels worse suited for the 18th and 19th century

6

Yes, AoE 2 could have a Chronicles DLC too also set in the Pike and Shot era (1500-1550) (Europa Universalis IV had a DLC in that era I think)… AoE 2 already has many campaigns between 1500 and 1550 (Moctezuma in TC, Almeida in TAK, Bayinnaung in RotR, Babur in DoI, Ismail in TMR), instead AoE 3 only has the historical map of the Italian Wars (1494-1559)…

So you would only have cannons?..without rams or trebs?..

Ah, like AoE 4 before the last patch…

I like the idea…

Yes, it is understood… I mean outside everything that would be Late AoE 3 (1700-1900), only Early AoE 3 (1500-1700)…

Yes, AoE 3 starts in 1421 (you have the Chinese campaign, the German War Wagons and Henry the Navigator)…then you have a gap until 1494-1559 (the Italian Wars) and the 80 Years’ War (1568-1648), you have the historical battles of the 16th century (1516-1586), the Morgan/Blood campaign (1565-1566), the Japanese campaign (1598-1600) and if you want the Tutorial (1587-1607)…then in the 17th century nothing, except the historical maps (1618-1683/1699) and then in the 18th century, you have the Great Northern War (1700-1721), Fort Duquesne (1754) and the 18th century campaigns of Ice and Fire (1756-1781) and then everything you already know about the 19th century: historical maps, historical battles and campaigns (1803-1876)…

7

AoE3 has a few civilisations, units and campaigns that take part at the end of the Middle Ages but then skips to the 18th century.
Almost no campaign scenario takes part between in the 17th century (1601-1700).

It goes right from Medieval Longbows to 18th century musketeers in the same age!

AoE3 is becoming more and more a 18th/19th century game.
The Napoleonic Wars took part at the beginning of the 19th century and now the focus seems to shift towards them.
They even added new home city cards to turn British Longbows and German/Portuguese Crossbows into Rifleman.

There is no game in the AoE series that does the Pike and Shot era of warfare justice. Pikeman are always just hyper focused anti cavalry.

Exactly.

Or AoE3 now.

8

Technically, the 16th century was no longer the Middle Ages, but the Renaissance and Early Modern Age…

Only the Japanese campaign and the 17th century historical maps (80 and 30 Years Wars, the Deluge and Great Turkish War)…

Yes, in defence of the Longbowmen they continued to be used until the start of the English Civil War in 1642…although it would be good that they were automatically replaced by the Rangers when you reach Fortresses Age…

Sure…

9

When you can put 5 type of unit in current Archery Ranges and Siege Workshops.
As long as you don’t put too many techs, you can have more than 4 type of unit in a building.
Or even you can introduce a new type of building that is exclusive for researching unit upgrades, so the others can focus on training.

Don’t make them as same as in AoE2, or I think they would be as useless as in AoE2 on most occasions, especially when the heavy cavalry are allowed to be trained in Age II.

The term “Man-at-Arm” is not really suitable for naming an early-stage infantry.
I would suggest to name the line by: Swordsman (I) → Long Swordsman (II) → Great Swordsman or Two-Handed Swordsman (III). Taking about Great Swordsman, for the Scottish, they could refer to claymore swordsmen; for the Germans, they could refer to landsknechts; for the Japanese, they could refer to odachi warriors; for the Chinese, they could refer to changdao soldiers.

Some civs in Renaissance can have Buckler Swordsman, using a rapier or a sidesword, rather than Great Swordsman, such like Spanish, Portuguese, Italians, French and British. The Great Swordsman could have area damage naturally (the new tech is not necessary I think), while the Buckler Swordsman could have speed.

The line can be classified as a standard infantry, well armored and well trained. They could be kind of versatile, good at going rush in early game and good against spearmen, but in later games it would be more and more difficult to keep using them. After Renaissance, the swordsmen, especially well armored ones, were less and less used in battles around the world.

I would suggest to name the line by: Spearman (II) → Pikeman (III) → Long Pikeman (IV). When the soldier updates its weapon from a spear to a pike, it naturally gains +0.5 or +1 range, and when it gets its pike even longer, it might gain another +0.5 or +1 range, meanwhile the stats other than range might be barely improved. Besides, that new tech could be named Pike Square in Renaissance to increase armor.

But I think them should be trash and have the spearman class. Even though they have very weak stats other than range and bonus attack against mounted units, costing no gold makes them eventually be used more and more as time goes by, no matter facing foot soldiers or cavalry, like how they were heavily used until the 18th century.

In my opinion, you cannot have trash units only be available in the latest age. They should be available in most of the time. Otherwise, who lacks gold first, who loses.

As for the 3rd type of melee infantry in Barracks, I think some civs could have light infantry and elite upgrade in Renaissance and Imperial. They are something like levied militias, irregulars and auxiliaries, lightly armored or even barely armored, using a sword and a cheap shield or a short spear, running fast and costing no gold. Although they are weak and probably weaker than Long Pikemen with Pike Square, they can be used for scouting or raiding when no gold. Compared to scout cavalry, they can be gathered even cheaper and faster, and can be better at siege as they are infantry. For the Spanish, they could refer to Indian auxiliaries; for the Japanese, they could refer to katana ashigaru; for the Chinese, they could refer to rattan shield swordsmen.

By the way, the Halberdier could be the UU for the Germans in Castles, if there is no Swiss. The Halberdier could be reasonably very strong in melee combat like the current TK.

Um… maybe, maybe they do not have to be mixed. Many civs had still continued using bows in the 16th and 17th century, like longbows of British and Japanese, and hornbows of Chinese and Koreans. Abandoning cold missile weapons in generic units is inacuurate.
By the way, the Ming Dynasty and Qing Dynasty of China had seldom use crossbows in army, so probably only Europeans need the crossbowman.

Rifles were created as an improvement in the accuracy of smoothbore muskets. Until the end of the 17th century, people were still using muskets. One of the most successful early rifles, the long rifle, was developed over the course of the 18th century.

Reiter could be used to replace Dragoon for some civs, or could be the name of the upgrade unit to Dragoon.

By the way, you know the East Europe and Asia had kept using horse archers.
I would like the dragoon and horse archer could be two different lines. Some civs could have the former, some civs could have the latter, some could have both, and some could have none of them.

Additionally, I would still like to see the mounted units together in same type of building like Stable. I just think that makes sense.

Knight → Man-at-arms → Cuirassier. I think that them could be better than Cavalier and Paladin.

According to the Wikipedia, the counterweight and traction trebuchets were phased out around the mid-15th century, and in some parts of Germany and Switzerland, the springald survived until the early 15th century.

But I don’t like that they can be played with normal AoE2 civs. If such a DLC would be true (to be honest I don’t look forward it), I hope it would be separated like RoR.

10

i would like someone to make mod around this and use that as a testing ground to iron stuffs out first.

11

I want to make them an AoE damage unit. With 0.5x Blast damage they would be practically twice as powerful in many situations.

I would want to rename most units but I kept the original AoE2 names to make clear what start I want those units to have.

I think that would be a cool regional unit.

I decided to change my concept a little for that.
Instead of removing Gambesons and Supplies I go the opposite way of making it free for everyone.

I hate that about AoE2 and AoE3.

You’re right. I’m changing my concept in that regard.

So practically Eagle Warriors?

I thought about it an it’s indeed kinda strange that Crossbow turn into Arquebus.

In the 30 years war there were already some soldiers being equipped with rifles.
Most of them where hunters being recruited. Maybe this unit should be a unique unit or regional unit though.

I guess if we think Globally the Dragoon should be the regional unit and the Cavalry Archer more of a generic one.

That’s the whole purpose of this DLC. If there is no crossplay why make it within AoE2 in the first place?
The crossplay would use the same civilisation set system as Chronicles so you can choose to allow it or not.

The core reason behind that is to have more content available. This mode doesn’t need to add civilisations like the Aztecs. Or generally use all the AoE2 civs and units in scenarios.

It’s not about being balanced, Chronicles is also not balanced against normal AoE2, especially not on water.

I remember there were some people making a 5th Age mod years ago.

12

5th Age simply adds new age. Not something like playing around the idea with existing civs.

13

I have been thinking about possible unit stats.

Arquebus Line

Arbalester Hand Cannon Elite Janissary Arquebusier Musketeer
Cost 25W 45G 45F 50G 60F 55G 40W 35G 40W 35G
HP 40 40 50 40 50
Armour 0+2/0+2 1+2/0+2 2+2/0+2 0+2/0+2 0+3/0+4
Attack 6+3 17 22 12+3 16+4
vs. Infantry 0 10 0 6 8
Reload Time 2 3.45 3.45 3.45 2.9
Range 5+2 7 8 5+2 5+3
Accuracy 90% 75% 65% 80% 90%

Assuming Renaissance Age upgrades for all units besides Musketeer. That includes Chemistry and Blacksmith upgrades for Aqrquebus but not for Hand Cannon and Elite Janissary.
That means +3 attack, +2 range and +2/+2 armour.
There is no Thumbring but the Flintlock technology in Imperial Age giving Musketeers a faster reload.

The Arquebus like is cheaper then Hand Cannons and especially Janissaries. They cost overall 5 more resources then the Archer Line but they cost less gold, so they become more affordable in the Late Game. Also they cost Wood instead of Food because they are the main ranged unit for most civilisations.

Their attack is lower then Hand Cannons or especially Janissaries while their anti Infantry bonus damage is lower then Hand Cannons too.
They make that up with higher accuracy and lower costs though. Wood is less valuable then Food too.
With equal resources they offer a higher volume of fire and also hit more of their targets.
The Arquebus is not that impressive though, it’s the Musketeer with Flintlock that shines. Exceeding Hand Cannon damage while also having a higher rate of fire, range and still the lower costs.

Long Pikeman Line

Two Handed Swordsman Champion Halberdier Felmish Milita Elite Kamayuk Long Pikeman Imperial Pikeman
Cost 45F 20G 45F 20G 35F 25W 50F 15G 45F 30G 45F 15G 45F 15G
HP 60 70 60 60 80 60 70
Armour 1+2/1+3 1+3/1+5 0+2/0+2 1+2/0+2 1+2/0+2 0+2/0+2 0+3/0+4
Attack 12+2 13+4 6+2 11+2 8+2 12+2 14+4
vs. Cavalry 0 0 32 8 12 8 12
vs. Building 4+2 4+2 1+2 0+2 0+2 6+2 8+2
Range 0 0 0 0 1 1 1
Reload time 2 2 3 2 2 3 3
Speed 0.9 0.9 1 0.9 1 0.9 0.9
Spearman armour class no no yes no no no no
Formation bonus 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 +1/+1 +1/+1

All units have Renaissance Age stats besides Champion and Imperial Pikeman.
Kamayuk is considered without Fabric Shields.

The Long Pikeman are the cheapest Gold costing Infantry. They cost as much total resources as the Spearman Line without having the Spearman Armour class.
The removal of the Spearman Armour class is there to indirectly buff the Arquebus line with their bonus damage vs. Infantry in general.
They don’t have any base armour outside of the formation bonus so they are still relatively vulnerable to ranged units and other Infantry.
They have similar damage compared to the Milita Line but at the lower attack rate of the Spearman Line. Their main advantage in large fights is their +1 range that allows the second row to attack at the same time. This can give an up to +100% increase in effective DPS in some situations.
They don’t counter Cavalry as hard as the Spearman line does but it’s still a bad idea to charge your cavalry into a Pike formations.
Another advantage they have over the Spearman Line is that they have a good bonus damage vs. Buildings. They are overall a way more general purpose Infantry.

Yes they are a very cost effective unit, especially if you research Logistics which makes them cost 0.5 population. They should be the backbone of most armies.

Imperial Hussar

Hussar Imperial Hussar
Cost 80F 80F
HP 75 85
Armour 0/2 0/3
Attack 7 8
vs. Monk 12 12

Imperial Hussar pretty much just gives +10 HP, 0/+1 armour and +1 attack.
Hussar itself gives +15HP, no armour, no attack only +2 vs. monk.
This upgrade won’t be a game changer. They look worse then Winged Hussars but both civs having Winged Hussars are missing 1 blacksmith upgrade each.

It’s the new Cavalry Charge technology that makes them significantly better vs. ranged units.

Monastery

Is available in Castle Age and all old technologies can be researched in Castle or Renaissance Age.

New Technologies

Reformation

  • Conversion time of enemies -2 min -2 max
  • Conversion time of own units +2 min +2 max

Counter Reformation

  • Ignore Heresy
  • Enemy units with Heresy now lose 50% of their full HP (units still die when they are below 50% before conversion)

Those two technologies are mutually exclusive. Every civilisation only has access to one of them.

Anatomy

  • Monks heal 100% faster

Humanism

  • Monks and Villagers passively heal 30HP/Minute
1 Like
14

Honestly II would prefer not adding any form of 5th Age. I actually played the mod back in AOC days. It just feels very annoying and snowbally. Portuguese Civ mod did it. Sure balancing is there but still just too much snowbally and expensive to reach there.
In AOM 5th Age simply buffs Mythic units and Titans. Nothing new. That is after making the wonder.

15

I would add a new Handgunners(1 handed pistol units) as a new unitline for Barracks tho. Will function something like Eagle Warriors but ranged.

16

These are actually the eras that are most emphasized in the game. Factories, revolutions, and rifles are proof of that.

The 16th century is actually barely represented, which in the game is recreated as the age of exploration, where you can’t build troops. And then you get to the age of trade (colonial age or age 2) where civilizations have access to archaic units, but they are not the focus of the game. They are eventually made obsolete by skirmishers and carabiniers.

17

Factories and revolutions at least to me font outweight the heavy use of arvhaic military and the focus on the very early colonization of the Americad

I disagree at the idea of it being a minor thing

18

AoE3 does not have a single scenario between 1600 and 1754!
The last AoE2 scenarios are just a few years before that.

My DLC is basically about adding the time between 1600 and 1700 to AoE2. The only thing covering that time period are some Historical Maps which are not even close to a scenario.

19

I believe that AOE4 can fill the gap between AOE2 and AOE3, if they ever choose to release an update where they add a fifth age that covers the period from the 16th to the 17th century.

20

Yes, you have the Japanese campaign (which only takes place in 1600 due to the Sekigahara campaign)… then you have the KotM historical maps:

  1. The Eighty Years’ War (1568-1648)

  2. The Thirty Years’ War (1618-1648) (only in multiplayer)

  3. The Deluge (1655-1660) (it pains me that we never have a Polish civil war to fight the Swedes and the Russians)

  4. The Great Turkish War (1683-1699) (aka the Siege of Vienna, here it pains me even more that we don’t have the Poles to liberate Vienna from the Ottomans)

  5. The Great Northern War (1700-1721) (aka Poltava if you will)

And the only thing missing were the Wars of the Spanish Succession (1700-1715), Polish (1733-1735/8) and Austrian (1740-1748) prior to the Seven Years’ War (1756-1763) that would possibly have been seen in the Baltic DLC…

Yes, but that’s how it is… it’s a pain that they barely touch on the 17th century in the saga (mainly in AoE 3), just like what happens with the 6th and 7th centuries in AoE 2 (where you only have Bukhara and Dos Pilas) (and well, the Yamato campaign in 1DE, but it doesn’t count for much at this point)…

Of course, considering that AoE 4 has more gunpowder units and is later than AoE 2 (with the Malians arriving until 1670), it would be possible to do some final campaigns or missions in the 17th century (for example the Battle of Sekigahara in 1600 and the Siege of Osaka in 1615 as final missions of the Japanese campaign or a Mali campaign that goes from 1235 to 1645 or else we would have to wait for AoE 5 to be colonial or early modern to touch the 16th to 18th centuries in conditions like Cossacks 3…