Rename some units to be more generic: Legion to Elite Swordman, Hoplite/Phalanx/Centurion to Spearman/Phalanx/Pikeman.
Regional skins for every buildset. No more greek cavalry for yamato. Unique models for heroes.
Not sure about one unique unit for faction. If it’s the case, it could be train on the barrack/stable/archery/siege workshop instead of a specialized building.
Main menu song, please
AoE I campaigns; AoE II formations, pathfinding, scenario editor… I took that for granted. If you want to play more classic, you can always play AoE I DE. And if you think that AoE I DE was a mistake because auto farms are for dumb players, you can play original.
Another addition that may be nice would be new building sets. Even though it’s not the hightest thing on my list, I’ve always been bothered by the Phoenicians and Carthaginians sharing the Greek and Roman sets respectively rather than being grouped together.
I don’t want AoE1 to turn into AoE2. Please everything but no castle!
I mean seriously. I don’t want AoE1 to feel like AoE2. It is supposed to be a different game that plays in a different way.
This makes more sense then the castle.
Or just do it like AoE3/4/AoEO/AoM and just put the unique units into normal buildings and let them replace generic units. The way AoE2 does it has been outdated for nearly 20 years.
Assyrians and Sumerians not having the Babylonian set is an even bigger crime.
Assyrians were very similar to Babylonians in so many ways, why do they have the completely unrelated Egyptian architecture. Just to get the same number of civilisation for each set? Stupid reason.
Yeah, it’s even weirder when you consider that Babylon is kind of “between” Sumer and Assyria, both geographically and historically, so it makes even less sense for it to be the odd one with no connection with the other two.
The original AOE tries to make architecture sets “balanced” so there are weird placements.
And all ROR civs being “Roman” is also weird.
To add some more:
Unique wonder for every civ
North/West European (Celts and Germanics) and North African civs (Numidians)
Actually I feel it is harder to make unique units for most ancient civs, except some very well-known ones like Romans or Macedonians, etc., due to lack of records.
For example unique units for Sumerians/Assyrians/Babylonians for most Civ games feel either generic or purely made up (like the classic Babylonian “bowman” replacing archer).
Assyrians do historically have a very unique unit. The Assyrian Siege Tower. It’s like a hybrid of a mobile tower and a battering ram. Archers are stationed at the top for protection and to fire over walls, meanwhile a big axe-shaped ram chews through the wall below. It’s awesome, and we even have a very good idea what it looked like thanks to art at the time.
There are other good ideas for different civs. Like Romans getting a Legionary that can throw javelins. Persians getting the Immortals.
It’s from one relief. Not sure if it is numerous enough or unique enough.
Similar to the Sumerian “war cart” inspired by a painting.
This is just to say we simply know too little of them. Eg if I search for “ancient Babylonian military” there aren’t many “unique” stuff pooping up. Even more well known setting like AOE2-4 have forced unique units not to mention the poorly documented ones.
Most of the well documented military in classical antiquity are no earlier than the Greco-Romans, maybe Egyptian chariot is the one exception as there are too many evidences about them.
We don’t even know languages like Minoan.
AoE2/3 already have the issue that many languages sound way to modern and that some civs just have the wrong language like Goths and Huns.
Sounds like an impossible talks.
Plus the voices are iconic.