what did?
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /v/ - Video Games
You are currently reading a thread in /v/ - Video Games
what did?
>>320286984
Age of Empires III is simply too fast.
Must have been the utterly shit balance and rush or lose mechanics.
>>320287245
have you even watched aoe 2 pro games? tell me THEY don't rush or lose. the only way to have a game without out of control rushing is to play on Arena of Black forest.
>>320287740
AoEII rushing always involves some risks, just because the better players can handle it does not mean it is required. In a 4v4 sea based map it is not uncommon to see the match through 2 hours with streams of trade carts/ship.
>>320286984
The fixed camera always felt better in strategy games, I haven't ever played a strategy game where you could control the amera that felt good.
Als the graphcis are mroe detailed and overall look better even if the technology is inferior the visual result suprasses that.
The gameplay and rythm of the game flow was more balanced and actually more tactic.
Or at least it's what I feel.
>>320286984
I liked AoEIII better because I play RTS for the single player.
Also I liked the setting better.
Both suck in balance but aoe2 sucks less.
>>320288372
>AoEII rushing always involves some risks
yeah the risk that the other guy will rush you first. on any map except for black forest or water ones the only strategy was feudal rush or die.
>>320287245
Isn't every single RTS about rushing?
>>320289487
This. There's always an advatage to going faster
>>320289487
yes
>>320286984
I like both though
I like AoE3 more though
Well, for starters the bottom image has bloom. mid 00s bloom was fucking cancerous.
because aoe3 looks like shit
because aoe3 plays like shit
because we were kings n shit
the push to make 3D games ruined a lot of RTS series, most had to sacrifice unit counts to work 3D models, and resulted in much slower and less interesting games.
>>320289916
>>320290603
pls no
pls
>>320288552
>World In Conflict
>Total War games
>>320293538
they are great games but they don't feel as good as AoE2 or even Starcraft.
>>320286984
>Aoe3
>Peseants don't need to move back to drop resources
>No optimal positioning, less resource management
>less penalty for fucking up
>No downtime
>Civilziations were extremely cookie cutter and allowed a single narrowed down playstyle
>The game is completely antirush, up until cannons destroying buildings makes you lose more than what you win. In aoe 2 if you had 8 man at arms in the opponent base the TC wouldnt last more than 10 seconds
>The map importance is literally 0 wheres in aoe 2 is was the center of the focus of the game
>You needed to expand as fast as possible to grab as much gold and stone as possible as they were limited
>In AOe3 you can seclude yourself ina corner of the map as you can make a plantation that gives gold
>The treasures were supposed to do something but they are another incredibly shallow anti rush mechanism
>Units aren't expendable as in AoE2
>The builds aren't nearly as flexible as in AoE 2, you can't boom to castle age/3rd age like in aoe 2 for example
>The Portuguese were obscenely overpowered
>The units are slow and the micro matters fuck all, nothing misses
>Since its super hardcore rockpaper scissors and all ranged attack are instant all engagements are the same. In aoe 2 the cannon was a slow projectile
>The game is not balanced around the units advantages but its weaknesses
>Its okay for a unit to deal a shiton of damage because it dies in 2 hits. In aoe 2 a unit would have a tactical advantage over others in some way not just deal more damage
Im sure microjew forced them to try to cash on W3 and AoM most likely they considered AoE2 "outdated"
>>320289009
I wrecked some fools with the "20 knights in 20 minutes" franks build
>>320286984
>tfw I enjoy all three games and play each one from time to timeI also enjoyed Age of Empires Online. It was surprisingly okay and the artstyle was a bit goofy but still neat and comfy.
One looks nice, the other, while technically more impressive, looks like shit. Granted at that time it looked good, but it aged terribly, while AoE2 still looks great. Gameplay was less RTS like and more RPG like. The card system was shit, the microing was shit. This too >>320295639
The only thing I liked was the quest shit (some of it). Being able to get some supplies for fighting shit would be a great risk/reward system. It would make militia a worthwhile unit and throw in more strats. Do I attempt to look for quests? Do I risk spending resources in an attempt to get more?
Not sure if it would actually work out, but it seems like it's a possibility.
>>320286984
I fucking love III.
Always did
>no home city shit
>no units taking more than one pop.
>more game modes
>more units
>bigger maps that aren't circular (why the fuck though?)
>reasonable game pace
Anything else?
>>320286984
More fun era, less restriction on buildings, and I don't know.
Maybe the pathing and such is bad in aoe3?
Usually is harder to get it right in 3d games.
>>320296558
the game itself was well done. respectable quality even for AoE standards. what killed it was the game model and Windows Games for Life
Is it just me or does every rts that comes out nowdays just feel like a adhd speedfest? Can rts be good whitout looking like you have a seizure while you play it?
> T: grampa
>>320297686
>ts. Do I attempt to look for quests? Do I risk spending resources in an attempt to get more?
The quests are pointless and offer no strategical advantage.
Yes you get more points but once you have enough units you can wipe them all and gain everything at once
Its there to delay rushes
>>320298467
>no units taking more than one pop
yes because it so much makes sense for a single villager to take as many upkeep as one knight + horse
>>320298467
>no units taking more than one pop
Units dying just about instantly yet taking forever to produce killed my interest in AoE3 alone.
>>320289487
if rushing is an rts thing then turtling, the act of defending against rushing, is also a different rts thing
>>320299930
>yes because it so much makes sense for a single villager to take as many upkeep as one knight + horse
You are projecting your notion of sense to the game
The games aren't made to be realistic
>>320286984
I hated how you didn't have to use villagers to repair and instead have to click a button a few moments after it gets attacked.
What pissed me off even more was since I'm a casual I like playing against the AI and those dumb motherfuckers would never repair their goddamn forts and let it eventually die (or any building really)
they made the best game in between
>>320299859
I liked the idea of it, though. Plus, you can't always expect the quests to be up if the other player is doing them. There's also the fact that it would cause more fights if both end up going for the same quests. Just some touch-ups and I think it could be a good addition (for AoE2 hypothetically).
>>320301354
CHINA EXPANSION SOON
I hope there's a campaign
>>320301354
yes
>>320301446
no it wouldnt
They have no fucking purpose other than exp
its not like in W3 heroes level up and get items some which were very powerful
its there because microshit wanted the W3 audience
>>320301716
>They have no fucking purpose other than exp
They would give resources, not exp.
>>320302202
If you do that you completely imbalance the game
How could they balance it if they are not sure about the amount of resource the players would have?
>>320301551
There is.
Age2 Campaign was based around history and had you fighting in the steps of historical leaders
Age3 Campaign was based around a family lune and some organization regarding ultimate power and isn't just Assassin's Creed and let's just ignore all history that wasn't just the settlement of the Americas and Asia (with the expansion) amd also the US isn't even a faction.
I am able to enjoy Age3, especially with yhr Napoleonic Era Mod, but there's just so much more to nitpick. Farms should be smaller and host 2-4 workers. No return point simplifies resource gathering to be too simple. Plantations are a nice touch, but it makes it so much easier to turtle resources. Explorers have importance only early game and are not useful after the first 2 ages and you can build actual armies, who, by the way, cost too much early game and have less payout to be useful, and then the Fortress Age Castles make you just have to rely for Age4 arty rather than charge with underpowered units.
Trade posts are a nice touch to get you to expand and try a risky strategy to get more resources/points unique techs/tribal units. I enjoyed the card shipment/level up system, though all it makes me do is just farm maps with trade posts, sitting on 6 trading posts with railroads.
>>320304194
what a great day today has become
>>320287195
no it's fucking boring
early man to medieval is far superior to anything in the renaissance
>>320292621
>were kings
at least meme it correctly
2D > 3D
Villagers not carrying resources back to the town centre also killed it for me.
>>320289487
technically, the problem is that scubs cannot tell the difference between harassment and an all in rush.
>>320289487
>He never played superior Cossacks
>Or even better American Conquest
AoE2 filthy peasant detected
>>320295639
>I can't rush: The post
Eat the barrel, son
>>320294029
The camera in World in Conflict is great though, I prefer it a lot more than fixed camera
>we will never get an Age of Mythology 2
And the sad thing is, if we ever got to get one, it would be some regular EA shit with always online that would make Sim City look like a simple mistake.
>>320286984
Let me think... Cossacks did everything better than AoE ever could about the specific era? And then they've released American Conquest, even better game that was entirely about colonisation of Americas
AoE3 was dead in the water before they even started working on it.
