Thoughts of what to do with Return of Rome and explore new DLCs potencial

Age of Empires II: DE II - Discussion
1

I’m new to the game, but even before i buy AoE2, i had my doubts of what Return of Rome really was. And after looking it up and owning the game i can’t but think that Return of Rome could use some improvements of how it is managed in the game. So after i gave some thought, imo it would be better managed doing the following:

1- RoR should give all the civs from AoE 1 (+Lac Viet) the same treatment as they gave Rome, by adding into the main AoE2 civ pool. There is no need for an separate pool. If people wanna play as the AoE 1 civs, there is no reason to do that in a different playerbase in RoR.

2- All the civs from RoR should get a new campaigns (What could be made into different new DLCs, since it would be to much work to just add in the current DLC). They would be added into a different menu, since my last sugestion is…

3- Making menu changes, that being: get rid of the separate main menu of RoR, revamping the Chronicles DLC menu and changing the Three Kingdoms campaign location into that menu (i’ll get into that). Now hear me out. With the civs integrated into the main pool, in order to get rid of the extra menu, we would integrate the existing RoR campaigns into the main game like the others. BUT in order to the campaign menu not be overwhelmed with new tabs, if the new campaigns are made in a similar way of Chronicles and Three Kingdoms DLCs, all the new campaigns would be added into the existing Chronicles menu, making that the hub for these new style DLC campaigns, TK included. It kinda bodered me in a sence that the campaigns in the main game menu are in a style of their own and when you select the TK campaign, it kinda takes you into a totally new page. For more consistency, TK and Chronicles should be integrated into this new hub of newelly stylized campaigns, making it more consistent and with less menus.

2

Aoe/ror Rome and Aoe2 Rome not the same.aoe2 already has overlapping civis like persians shang yamato so what’s the point of doing this?

1 Like
3

No, just no.

If they do this picture how many players would leave. We already have people quitting because of civs from 200 AD, picture how many would leave from there being civs from 600 BC. Here’s my take. Move all RoR civs to chronicles and then replace the empire wars ranked game mode with an all civ game mode + heroes for every civ. For those who are concerned though, regular Ranked random map untouched with no heroes and no chronicles civs.

Note: The Rome in the game is from 350 AD or so and is around the same time as Huns, thus they are just barely in the game’s timeframe. So they are a unique case where as all other RoR civs aren’t.

2 Likes
4

In these cases, i agree, there’s no point. But if they’re not overlapping, then why not?

5

No. AoE I/Chronicles/RoR/3K civs SHOULD NOT BE on the AoE II main Civ Pool.
This is AoE II not a potpourri of all AoE games as WE is willing to be

1 Like
6

Because everything about ROR civs and AOE2 civs is different. The units, the buildings, the gameplay, the techs, the counter system. They are literally 2 different games. Its like saying why not have Starcraft civs in AOE2.

3 Likes
7

Because most of those civis are under an existing civi?all four asian civis are already there chinese japanese koreans vietnamese.all mediterranean civis are under romans byzantines persians.

It dosent make any logical sense for carthage to fight ottoman turks.if that is not an issue might as well have USA as playable civi.

8

If Return of Rome is indeed not going to officially get never before seen (aka “new") expansions or campaign DLCs, then I’ll be OK with just having eventual small updates and revisions, plus these original campaigns, yet slightly modernized, from AOE1:

  • Enemies of Rome
  • Ave Caesar
  • Reign of the Hittites
  • Imperium Romanum (Pax Romana)
  • Yamato, Empire of the Rising Sun
  • Armies at war, a combat showcase
  • Dawn of civilization
  • The Rise of Rome

That’s the least I can expect from a multi-billionaire company.

4 Likes
9

Isn’t that what Chronicles does, just slowly.

Porting over civs to AoE2 is basically like making a new civ since the game is totally different. AoE1 and AoE2 Romans are completely different, they don’t even have similar civ bonuses.

But I think they should port all AoE1 units to Chronicles because why not? The assets are already made and they fit into the setting.

Though I did make a tread about How to add the AoE1 civilsiations to AoE2 for unranked

That was before Chronicles, now my suggestions would probably look a little different and include some Chronicles things.

2 Likes
10

If RoR is to be expanded, add barbarian civs (Celts, Germans, Scythians). You may split Celts between Gauls and Britons.

I’d add some other civs such as the Hebrews and Harappans (Indus Valley), but barbarians seem more pressing as some placeholders are needed in some campaigns (and not even close, Hittites for Gauls, it’s to the level of using Goths for Poles and Russians in the CD version of AOE2…)

2 Likes
11

Yes, after playing some RoR, i can’t see why they didn’t do it.

Exacly.

Yes, after playing more into the game and the anouncement of the Alexander dlc, i see that now. I think chronicles is going to add the civs in the best way, revamping the whole system.

Also, my opnion changed. I see that people don’t really like the idea of the AoE1 civs along with the AoE2 and i get it now. But i hope after they add more chronicles civs, they’ll add something like a ranked system separated from AoE2 main game or somethings on those lines.

12

It would be cool if they open up the UI so modders can add civis to RoR.Its very easy to add civis to aoe as you dont have unique voices wonders uus etc.

3 Likes