What is the essence of the game?

When someone is asked about Aoe2, the medieval age generally comes to mind, knights in armor, soldiers with swords and hand-to-hand battles, these are things that we relate to Aoe2, so Aoe3 basically starts from the colonization of America to the middle of the 19th century, then why are there anachronistic units in the game, for example it doesn’t make sense to use longshot archers in the fourth age? I know that there is a card that enables the rangers but I would like it not to be necessary to use the metropolis.Another example is the Dutch and Spanish infantry , especially Spain with an archaic infantry for late ages, and the Spanish lancers, who look like a conquistador from the 15th century, and finally, the latest civilizations like Italy and Malta look like AOE2 civilizations, they have units from the Middle Ages, So I don’t understand what the essence of the game is.It seems that the developers are afraid to stray so far from the traditional concept of AOE and it seems to me tha# it is an attempt to attract certain fans of a certain game that we already know, so maybe for that reason there will never be an AOE about world wars, but no. No matter what other fans think (yes, I’m referring to aoe2 fans), there can be an aoe that’s about gunpowder and it’s great.

the game is intended to start in 1492 through to the late 1800s. The usa and mexico civs are sort of meme tier anachronistic


I mean the timeline of the US and mexico civs are kinda of the same as those for the African civs

they all start roughly around 1800

early modern to end of victorian era might be a better encapsulation

Except for some units in the game, they can be seen clearly in the historic process of upgrading, most of the civilizations in this game are like silhouettes of a certain historical period. The Netherlands, for example, feels like the Netherlands at the peak of the seventeenth century, While Spain has elements of the nineteenth century, it seems to be more of the sixteenth century, Like Britain, the time span is relatively large, and France as a whole is more like the Napoleonic period.

The two civilizations in North America are about the same time as the American Revolution and the United States after the Revolution. The two main civilizations in Latin America are what they were before they were defeated by Spain, although they are mixed with some subsequent revolutionary elements.

Asian civilization as a whole is chaotic and belongs to a hodgepodge of different periods, especially Chinese civilization. We can see the defensive weapons of the Song Dynasty and There is a partial bias towards Ming style units and more Qing style units, the cards of the late Qing Dynasty. The story of this civilization is also of the Ming Dynasty.

I don’t know much about African civilization, which is probably a combination of the above.

All in all, the game is not entirely based on the exact historical process from the sixteenth century to the nineteenth century in terms of unit design or technology design, but will focus on a certain period or a synthesis of it.


I feel like you are ignoring all the anachronistic things in AoE2.
You have units from the late antiquity (Throwing Axeman, Legionaries and even chariots) fight against gunpowder units.
There are 4 civilisations with gunpowder units in Castle Age now.

Ages never really mean Ages in Age of Empires.
In the Hunnic campaign you can go to the Imperial Age fighting against other Imperial Age civilisations.

Ages are more like the state of your Empire and not a different point in time.
Only in AoE1 they feel more like actual Ages and campaigns usually limit you to the correct Age.
But In Return of Rome they even broke that rule. You can go into the Iron Age in most scenarios of the Sumerian campaign and you are often in the Bronze Age in the Roman campaign.


I know that Aoe2 has anachronistic things, however anyone can relate Aoe2 to the medieval era, in essence Aoe2 is about that era, I would like Aoe3 to be like that, I know they will come to say that it is not like that but with the latest civs like the US or Mexico, the correct thing would be to try not to move away from those times then AOE3 should try to get closer to the fourth age, maybe it is a mistake on my part but I usually relate AOE3 with the Napoleonic era and the independence processes in America (I really love it the issue of revolutions), the latest updates have tried to correct this error with the royal houses, but I would like the civilizations to already come like this, so I would like the European civilizations to be updated like Russia, I feel that when reaching the fourth age Some European civilizations remain in the past and that is uncomfortable, and especially as a fan of the Napoleonic era, I would like the old units such as long archers or crossbowmen to be updated from the barracks, without having to use metropolis cards, I I really like aoe3, it’s my favorite game for aesthetic and mechanical reasons ,I would play other games but there is no metropolis nor can you destroy buildings or hear the roaring noise of a naval combat like in AOE3 haha, it is also the only game that incorporates the theme of Latin American revolutions and that is really great

Because you are not fighting/building a town in your homeland. You are disconnected, far away, colonizing a remote area. Your units won’t automatically follow the technological advancements that happen in your home country; for that you need shipments or special upgrades.


See how our understanding of history is distorted by modern media…

People thinking 1000+ years from Vikings to conquistador is one coherent “medieval theme with melee weapons”.

Then all of sudden the entire world jumps into “the era of gunpowder” which has nothing to do with the past.

There is smaller time gap between longbow and Gatling gun than between Frankish throwing axe and plate armour. But the latter co-exist in the fourth age of AOE2.