US breaks concept of AoE and devs should maybe adress complaints

Its an awkward title, but my previous post was deleted because I am not allowed to critizise the dev team.

First the changing of all the names at release was weird for an idea and basically broke the AoE III concept.

Now the US concept just breaks the entire franchise. Always have civs been about people groups, never nations. Well untill the new devs came around. The US is another example of this. In game they are literally called United States, not even trying by naming them Americans.

Not mentioning that Americans werent a thing for basically the first 4.5 ages.

Its just mind boggling that they made the United states when basically no one asked for them, even tho I didnt want Italians it was way better then the US civ.

I think first of all the devs should make a post adressing the complaints as now there is just no tranceparancy. A road map would also help. You see how many people dislike the US beeing added, as a dev team you should then adress these and atleast put out your logic behind it. Also cencorship isnt going to help your case and might just make people more likely to lose interesst entirely.


There are so many things wrong about this addition i can’t even begin. I’m baffled.

  1. They’re not even around during Exploration age
  2. They appear 300 years into the games timeline
  3. They’re basically all euro civs condensed into one
  4. They reworked the revolutions to make them viable but then they add US as main?

Tomorrow, they will also add the United States as a playable civilization in AoE2, AoE1 and even in AoM.
ps: Sorry I’m that annoying, but god, I don’t want my favorite game to be ruined in this way !!!


Hello guys.
I think the best if they wants to add USA, in aoe 3. They should think about adding the new mod War Of liberty in DE but very well done. This is after of the colonial age . So there will be soo many New civilizations. I know is just gonna be like a new game but well USA can be added .

It doesn’t make a lot of sense but neither do most of the additional civs in AoE2 since The Conquerors, since the original Age of Kings civs were designed to be peoples around at the Fall of Rome.

An even more expanded revolution mechanic would be more interesting but too difficult to implement.

Hello bro.
I think the best if they wants to add USA in aoe 4,Then change the theme of aoe 4 from the Middle Ages back to World War I and change the current aoe4 name to aoe2: Reforged


They are deleting your threads because you are a troll. All I have ever seen you post is negative statements with zero reasoning behind them. All you do is complain on the forums, no wonder they delete the threads you create. Your criticism is not constructive, maybe you should step away from the game for a while and rethink your position on things first. The civ is not even out yet and you are mad, African civs are coming. The devs have done a very good job at balancing the game and listening to the communities feedback for what they want.


This is not going to ruin the game, maybe see how they play when they come out before making comments like this.


I mean one could argue that the antebellum US was groups rather then a nation, but its hard to fit that language into the game.

The themes of colonialism are not exhausted yet, there are still so many regions waiting for us to explore. We can even circle the world and return to Europe to add European DLC, but the developer decided to add countries that surprised us, just like a professor deliberately embarrassing students by taking an exam.(I mean the new civilization vote)

1 Like

I mean the US was also a coloniser, people kinda forget the entire western expansion manifest destiny thing.

1 Like

People complain because they are not agreeing with the devs descissions.

People have already expressed their exitement over the African announcement including me, if they just had invested that time of USA into the dlc they would have been able to show a little more and people would be making only posts about what could be new.

The people complaining seems to be the majority, so its not just me. We also give arguments almost every post there is made, but because you like the US you are dismissive about them.

Also your last statement is just a joke, Incas and Swedes were broken at launch and are arguable still decently broken, there is no doubt the US will be OP aswell. Balancing after a civ is released is lazy and breaks the game early on. Also it seems the core of the US is strong, not single stats, which would make it impossible to balance with just some cost increase or stat decrease.

I mean sure you can enjoy US, no one stopping you, but you shouldnt come here and tell people to not be mad about a civ addition when no one asked for the US, they dont make sense in the game and them having all European unique bonusses and mechanics.

A pretty simple solution would be to add the option to turn off USA in lobby, just like you could with warchiefs and dynasties. This way people who dont like the US, can just turn it off. Also it is very possible the same will happen to the US as to the French/Japanese and basically most lobbies just banning them.


eh I mean we will see how broken it is when we actually get to play it. Also I think there is a limit to how much they can actually balance it before releasing, balancing after release to me is inevitable.

Also if they are releasing this DLC the same way as Aoe 2 , it should be modular, in that you don’t need to have the DLC in order to play with people who do have it. In addition if they do things like update ladder later with the ability to ban civs, then this entire problem is moot.

And like to me anyway saying that “they could have done something else” to me is a bit like “Why dont you do it my way” which is valid but like in the end, they make the decisions. Like is the US my first choice? No. But do I feel insulted that they are not doing my thing yet? Also No. Things can come later, and its not really a big deal in the end.

1 Like

I wouldnt have complaint if they just announced African dlc’s the same as now and then just nothing, AoE II got 2 screenshots or something saying of an expansion and I dont see them rioting.

The point mainly is that everyone would have been fine if they just didnt add US. Just tell us you are working on an African dlc and everyone will hype up for that with the few screenshots you do have.


But we have the US, they made it first and its playable. Would you have prefered that they dont show us an actual working civ and then just say they are working on something else that is even further away?

1 Like

I think you forget how busted some of the civs were in the original game (if you even played it). The game as it stands is in a far better state for balance then what used to be before DE launched. Yes DE has some issues, some bug fixes and crash fixes are needed and some rebalancing of civs are in order but they are doing it slowly when they can. I truly do not think you understand how hard it is to balance online games with multiple factions/characters, games rarely ever get things perfectly balanced on the first try. They can only play test so much before content hits the stores. Calling it lazy shows how little you know of game development.

I have no issue with them adding USA, I personally would have liked another Asian civ in the game to add more flavor and to round out that roster.

As for the majority complaining about the USA being added, yes generally people would have liked other civs to be added first but there is no reason why the USA can not exist in the game. They are within the time line of the game where as other historical aspects of the game are not even close but are still in anyways. I have no idea if you are part of any of the discords with hundreds of people in them but the ones I have seen and am actively a part of have constructive criticism rather than rants, unlike here. Most people seem quite positive on the mechanics being added and are generally excited to see a game this old getting updates adding neat things into it.

I am not being dismissive of peoples dislike of the USA, what I am saying is that people are saying the sky is falling because they think they are over powered based off what we have seen. We have basically zero data on how games with the USA will actually play out. They might be OP, they might be UP, or they might be balanced, we can not actually say. I am holding judgement on calling it until we have actual games behind us for at least a month. Look even on the Reddit threads about it, I see a large amount of positivity towards this DLC.

This is going to bring more people into the game regardless if the civ is op or garbage and more players is always a good thing.

And no, they should not add the option in to ignore civs/dlc as you will split the player base. That is not a good thing for the game, if you are playing casual just type it into the lobby title and call it a day.


I think the aoe 2 approach to DLC has shown to work, in that you can still play against the US even if you don’t have the US DLC. That way it doesn’t split the player base but people who don’t want it don’t need to get it. I think they are going to do the same with this DLC and subsequent DLC as well.

1 Like

What they are suggesting though is different than that. They want the option to literally turn off the civ in lobbies so they would not have to play with them. This was an option in WC and TAD in the original game, it was stupid then and it is stupid now. I would expect that if you do not buy the dlc you can still play against/with teammates using them since the update to bring them into the game is downloaded by everyone.


If its going to split the playerbase it shows that a lot of people dont want USA, I dont buy the dlc so I should have the possibility to not play against it, if you didnt buy the Warchiefs you cant play against them either, which is fair, because there is a reason why you didnt buy the dlc.

And no thats a misconception you see with a lot of smaller game communtities, this dlc will bring barely any new players, dlc’s are bought by people already owning the game, a single civ dlc isnt going to boost population at all, maybe 5% which is like 20 people. Also Americans who like AoE would have already bought it, the US dlc would not really make them buy it.

People who are against the US, have also stated, including me again, that the new mechanics are mostly unique and seem interessting, however the problem we have is that they have simply too much, Japan has a lot, and the US has even more. All European civs have become obsolute with the US, can you tell me a dutch unique mechanic the US doesnt have? There is literally no reason to play the Dutch anymore.

And no the devs have stated themselfs that they made Swedes and Incas deliberatly good so that people would start playing with them, it is a concious descission they made. And yes balance is hard, but that becomes harder when you supercharge one civ, they bring it really on themselfs. And besides that most balance changes early on were literally copied from Esoc patch.


Don’t think it will split the playerbase ,if you see how the dlc is done in aoe2 ,ppl with no dlc content won’t be play to play vs usa and instead get to play the normal civs.I’m sure many gonna get it for free anyways which is a huge+ for the playerbase and the people.