Would you prefer empires spanning multiple eras or just a focus on one era in AoE IV?

The announce trailer obviously shows artwork of armies throughout history which could be hinting towards gameplay in the style of Empire Earth for example. But this isn’t definitive yet and could just be a throwback to the previous titles.

I feel a focus on one era like the previous games would allow more development into each empire and it’s units to provide variety whilst still keeping them balanced, but something fresh would also be welcome.

What do you think?

I feel if you do Multiple Eras its going to make it feel to much like, “Rise of Nations”, lets still with what AoE has always done, Single Era History game play.

With AOE 2 and 3 getting Remastered AOE 4 should step out in some unique way.

If it is in one single era then what era would you wan’t it to be?

@pate623 said:
With AOE 2 and 3 getting Remastered AOE 4 should step out in some unique way.

If it is in one single era then what era would you wan’t it to be?

Obviously the next era, right after AOE III, you know it already (World War).

@KingDarBoja said:

@pate623 said:
With AOE 2 and 3 getting Remastered AOE 4 should step out in some unique way.

If it is in one single era then what era would you wan’t it to be?

Obviously the next era, right after AOE III, you know it already (World War).

Red alert already made games from that era. Not sure how AOE4 can make it to feel like AOE.

What would the Town center upgrades be? Pre WW1, WW1, WW2, cold war?

Without melee units it isn’t AOE.

I like ancient settings more than modern ones, so I wouldn’t want AoE4 to go any further forward in time than AoE3 did. But all the single eras before that are already covered by the earlier AoE games, so I would like multiple eras more.

I like the linear campaigns of memorable history but a suggestion for new game would be a dynamic timeline gameplay option. Have a slider timeline at bottom of screen where you can maintain multiple battles in time. And since time is linear and to the winner goes the spoils all battles in timeline affect future options. We always here the question what would you do if you could go back in time? Kill baby Adolf hitler? If the aztecs beat the immigrants how would that change the world? Just as you can zoom in on battles you can zoom in on slivers of time and change the world one victory or loss at a time.

In addition to the timeline option the goal of the game should not just be measured on the win or loss of battles but maybe the scale of humanity as a whole. Percentage of people in freedom, percentage in dictatorships. How many years humanity existed before self termination or ignorance overwhelmed. Measure of innovation or ignorance of humanity. Each battle in time changes the scales and players will always have option to turn back the clock and try different outcomes to try to build a better humanity they see fit.

Multiple Eras, five or six would be great :slight_smile:

I choose Single era, because if we want to start with different Historical ages in just one game, I prefer asking for a new RTS with a new title instead of Age of Empires, to not add confusion with the rest of the franchise and to respect the continuity of the series, although I think having a game with multiple eras is not a bad idea :slight_smile:

1 Like

AoE 1, 2, 3 are covering ancient eras, and they’re getting remastered edition, so there would be indeed not point of keeping 1 era within those.
At the same time, an AoE in the modern age like WW would not be Age of Empires anymore.
So a multiple era, for example going from the oldest dark ages to the end of Middle Age or Renaissance would be great, as it would allow something that fit the AoE style but at the same time use new game mechanics and options that would refresh the series.

@Azudaah said:
AoE 1, 2, 3 are covering ancient eras, and they’re getting remastered edition, so there would be indeed not point of keeping 1 era within those.
At the same time, an AoE in the modern age like WW would not be Age of Empires anymore.
So a multiple era, for example going from the oldest dark ages to the end of Middle Age or Renaissance would be great, as it would allow something that fit the AoE style but at the same time use new game mechanics and options that would refresh the series.

agree with you. Multiple era could be a good compromise for who wants to play different Ages… Developers could release mini-expansions pack or DLC with unique factions, campaigns and different events around the world. For example " Alexander The great", “Augustus and the Roman Civil War” or forward to history, “the rise and fall of Napoleon”, “Aredenne Battles”… There are plenty of options about that.

I think it’s safest to keep it to a single ‘era’. Perhaps a mid 19th century to mid 20th century era.

That way you can kind of fudge history of the civilizations a bit - claim they all had iron-clad ships, etc…

While there is no comparison between a tank from 1943 and a tank from 1918, again they can fudge that for the sake of balance.

I think it’s a little crazy to go from clubs to spears to muskets to automatic rifles to predator drones and beyond in one game.

You could have: The United States, The United Kingdom, Russia, France, Germany, Japan, China as big civilizations. You could throw in Italy, the Ottoman Empire, Spain and others if you wanted. While it was obviously a time period where empires were on the decline… it’s still a period of empires.

Age of Empires have been always a single era game and I dont see good reasons to change that.

Single era, we can wait for EE4 , lol.

Single ERA. No tanks or anything. Should be ancient or <AO3 equivalent.

I don’t want to move to a WW1 or WW2 settings because we have enough RTS games with tanks. Though late 1800 with some early prototypes of modern tanks and weapons might be fun.

Though I would also like for AoE4 to go back to the roots and have Egyptian/Greek civs available again.

Single era, middle ages, theres a reason AOE2 is the best in the series, most successful by far.

Eras are pretty slippery things to define. I think AoE4 should roughly follow the existing timeframes, though tightening that a bit would be OK, too. I mean AoE1 included the stone age, tool age, bronze age, and iron age. Depending on how you count, that covers at least 2,000 or 3,000 years and perhaps even 5,000 years.

I single era allows for subtle strategy development instead of blowing through the tech tree just to reach the end game era. Rise of nations always felt awkward when destroying a modern warship with some ancient hardware anyway. Yes, Rise of Nations is fun, but I’ve always thought AOE to be greater for what it is. The element of suspense we share is what age will it be? Since the other versions are getting udpates, perhaps we could have a modern or near future age. But, AOE2 is my current favorite. I suppose the AOE2 age of Castles and walls helped to differentiate it from other RTSs (even stronghold).