My personal things I like about those games over AoMR are as followed.
AoE II DE: So much single player content from all the different campaigns they have. The Art of War which is like having more advanced tutorials.
AoE III DE: More total different campaigns + historical battles that can be played in co-op. A lot more different unique civilizations. So many more maps and they have specific natives and outlaws that can be made on them so they are more different then just map layouts. The Home City system where you can make a custom deck to change things up from game to game. The Art of War which is like having more advanced tutorials.
AoE IV: The Art of War which is like having more advanced tutorials.
AoMR I like overall more then AoE II DE and AoE IV of which are games I only play now when they have events to unlock stuff or new DLC. AoMR and AoE III DE I keep playing even after I had beaten all the single player stuff because those two games are the only ones I like the game play that keeps me interested in playing online.
I think people are just too obsessed with balancing issues. Talking about balance is really difficult and most of the times only developers can actually make a judgement about it. IMO balancing isnât great but its ok right now.
I only play PVP team games. I played the campaign when I was a kid and donât want to play it again although it is evident that most of the AOMR players just bought the game so they can play the campaign (which is great). I donât like PVE content, I donât like skirmished against AI, I didnât even bother with Co-op in SC2. All I am intrested is PVP team games.
But it does seem like that PVP is on the niche side of the spectrum for current generation of players. correct if Iâm wrong but it seems like that a good portion of SC2 community actually plays Co-op and a good portion of AOE IV plays team games. I would like to see stats about comparing these game modes with 1v1s (since I hate 1v1s). And I do think that developers are making a mistake by basing their balance about 1v1s.
IMO a PVP games just needs a handful of content to stay alive while PVE games need constant refreshing of the content. would like to see your opinions about Co-op for AOMR.
I wouldnât care if devs just shifted their attention towards PVE content since I am perfectly fine with the sate of the team games as of right now ( not considering the lag and desync).
Its incredible that this is an opinion of an adult
Bro, we all humans are different. Have different opinions and tastes.
We all have the right and freedom of chose whatever like to play and enjoy
Reason why AoM is losing playerbase is because stability issues. I remember myself setting down AoE4 even though I was in top 10 of teamgame rankings because people started abusing sync errors to avoid defeats. I never went back.
Same is going on with AoM, after initial hype dies out people play couple teamgames, it syncs out and they say âoh, Iâll just wait couple patches and hope the game is stable thenâ but then they forget about the game completely. Is 1vs1 working perfectly? Yes, but there is reason why top 100 in every game is 99% streamers, youtubers and tournament attendees. There is very little other reason to grind rating longterm.
What they need to do is fix the stability issues then release Chinese xpac and then people might stay. Nobody wants to come back to reworked game and experience same sync errors as 20 years ago (same reason they initially quit).
This is very true. I abandoned AoE3 and 4 and the technical problems where that final push needed to uninstall and say âI will wait until the game is fixedâ and simple forgetting about it.
There is so many games today that technical problems are a much bigger problem than in the past.
I would say that a large part of the player base is simply through with the game.
For my part, Iâve played the campaign and a few skirmishes. And now Iâve reached a point where thereâs nothing new for me or itâs not varied enough.
Iâve played more or less all the maps. The AI always plays the same. Hardly any variety. You can only win by conquering, no wonder victory. I wanted to try Fun muliplayer Scenarios but couldnât find any lobbies.
These are all points that make me want to play other things again. with the DLC this will change again.
I think Age of Empires in general is missing out massively not offering more replayable single player/Co-Op content. Something like Northgards Conquest mode which is fairly simple so probably not that hard to make that gives you a series of semi-randomised scenarios with different settings and letting you pick up permanent upgrades.
Basically its something between the heavily structured and scripted campaign and a totally open skirmish. The audience is largely single player/Co-op but making campaigns constantly is not reasonable and personally I only really play a campaign once theres not much pull to go back.
This is to be expected, as the players who complete the campaign donât play the multiplayer very often or at all - only a small percentage do. And yes, itâs the multiplayer that will keep the game alive once everyone has finished the campaign.
So yes, what can we expect? A big drop in players at the start because most of them leave the game, and a constantly low pool of active players for multiplayer games.
Each time a new DLC is released, a large number of players will come and increase the number of multiplayer players a little.
The number of multiplayer players will probably level off at some point and increase over time. So no the DEV donât need to be save, they are fine
Needed to add few more fall of trident style campaign + more pantheons beside chinese. AOE2 survived this way. Donât forget modding community friendly too. If you cant ensure that then game will slowly die down hype. Kinda wish Chinese wasnât the only thing for the AOM DLC. Offered 1 or 2 more pantheon as well.
Chronicles DLC is prepping up players to ancient civs. Overtime in future when more civs are added, Chronicle civs will become its own thing as well to keep players busy. 21 scenarios is enough to get adjusted to new civs. AOE3 and AOE4 unfortunately lacked that and still struggling to build up playerbase.
Just imagine a world instead of weird semi-mythical concept of AOE3 campaigns, we had historical campaign where lets for say start playing tons of scenarios related to Ottoman Empire the way we played AOE2 scenarios. Its a big period to cover for AOE3 player to keep busy. Might even need to split parts even. As of right now, we still donât have anything similar. Maybe British Conquest of India where you start small as traders for Bengalis and eventually go to the end of Mughals. Napoleonic Battles can be its own series. If they had that all, AOE3 would still have player numbers.
It would be great to do what AoE III DE eventually did with historical battles and AoE II DE eventually did with some campaigns is have some single player content getting a co-op version.
Turtling should be penalized ONLY until a balance is reached. What should that balance be? No more than 25-33% of games should reach the late game. One thing thatâs certain is that turtling shouldnât be the strongest default option and should require skill.
**How to achieve this?
By improving hunting or nerfing farms.** Letâs look at the example of AoE3 (which in this case gets it right). Towers in AoE3 arenât bad, but theyâre barely used. Why? Spending resources on towers while your opponent spends them on army means giving up map control (hunt, mines, etc.), which is giving your opponent a significant advantage.
In general, rewarding map control more. âExample, making the gold mines near your base have less goldâ
.
LET IT BE ON RECORD that I wouldnât oppose a slight nerf if necessary. But what theyâve done in Retold is DELETING the towers and leave the castles as production buildings
That doesnât matter. Theyâre increasing the health of the buildings, but if they donât deal damage, itâs pointless. Theyâve HALVED the damage of towers, reduced their range, and removed the classic âballisticsâ upgrade that allows them to hit moving targets.
FOR EXAMPLE: if you remove 80% of the damage from a damage-dealing building, increasing its health by 50,000% to compensate doesnât help. If that building doesnât deal damage, itâs useless
Iâm pretty sure allowing military AQ in ranked would encourage more people to try and stay in multiplayer as they are used to it in single player mode. Why even bother listening to people like Beasty when he wonât ever switch to AoMR
