Myth is the real age of empires 3. Thats why you type 999 in the age of mythology chat and a fun song plays "this is rts 3, this is rts 3, this is rts 3, this is rts 3"
As a single player gay i prefer Mythology, but i agree with this.
Honestly 4 is the only game i dislike, even 1 is very soulful and i love the time period and sound effects.
Just wish 4 commited to being modern times rather than just making AOE2 but much worse.
Rise of Nations gets it but the game plays weird.
Horrible balance at the start. French would dominate 90% of mid and low skill level games, so no new players would want to join.
Awful campaign with overly scripted levels and too many "Defend your base for 45 minutes" missions. Decision to go with the "documentary" style limited any storytelling or hook.
Controls and feedback felt very awkward at launch. Units didn't seem to respond to clicks appropriately. Clicking in the fog of war had no response.
Probably because III and IV have bean done to death thematically.
Age 1 2 and 3 are still within a less popular area of RTS and work as most of the human history up to the 19 century has had slow technological progress.
No and people just say "woke" at anything nowadays
The original game had 4/8 of it's civilizations be from europe and 3/4 of the campaigns were of european nations.
anon... age 3 remaster is the third most played game of the series
the people who still play the original 3 game are tryhards who dislike the changes on the remaster
3 is unpopular for a few reasons >AOE 3 is chiefly inspired by Warcraft 3, not age of empires >Several staple mechanics such as forward buildings are outright disallowed >Microsoft killed AOE2 multiplayer servers back in the day to drive traffic to 3 >AOE3 is a menagerie of strange units and mechanics to the extent that even top level players don't fully grasp everything that can be done in the game (There's a popular meme where two native american civ players are fighting each other and one says "What does that unit even do?" and the other responds "lmao I have no idea"
In a series where you typically have a very clear rock papers scissors gameplay and easy identifiable functions for each unit AOE3 has foot soldiers counting as cavalry, identical cannons that do wildly different shit, etc. It's a very obtuse game to break in to.
AoE3 makes NO sense in terms of unit stats.
Villagers have more HP and physical damage waving their blunderbuss than Pikemen, who also have less armor than Musketeers, unfortunately available on Age2 instead of Age3 like they should.
And that's from the base game.
Every expansion only made it worse.
>got an expansion >got a steady rise of more average players
the frick do you want else? For the past 7 days it had more players than 2. You don't even have a reason for hating it. No wonder new RTS games aren't made when people refuse to play anything new.
>Launch in a terrible, fricking inexcusably bad state >Make fun of your fans for asking you to fix the FRICKING CAMERA >Water is still fundamentally broken >Balance was bad before, it's still bad, just not "French is instawin" bad >
[...]
pulls out of all AOE2 tournament funding and pays guys like Hera and Nilli to sell out the scene for a quick payout
It deserves it's "eternal whipping boy" status. I wish for the worst for this game and everyone who elects to play it over AOE2.
Let me tell you what REALLY went wrong. >Music is shitty faction-based 'historical' music instead of a nice blend of all styles in a long and delicious soundtrack that plays for everyone after their little ethnic intro >Voicelines are CoH-like autistic screaching instead of simple one-liners like the rest of AoE games >Campaign is stupid history channel narrated by bored woman >Civ variations are artificial clunky bullshit like prelates, officers, influence radius that forces you into a playstyle instead of giving you more freedom like in all other AoE games >Setting is exactly the same as AoE2 down to the age names, something that never happened before in AoE games ever, and should have rebooted it from the stone age instead.
Making a game replicating another game in the same setting as the game it's replicating doesn't work. As long as Age of Empires IV was rewound to be in the medieval period, they had to contend with the fact that the Age of Empires II "hardcore e-sports" crowd is one of the most autistic playerbases on the face of the Earth, and would have nothing to do with their game. This is true for basically every game that tried to follow up a cult classic. No matter how many improvements they make over the original (almost none in this case), they were not going to succeed.
It's a shit game that has no reason to exist since it's basically just a remake of 2 but 2 still does pretty well and even has more players. I don't know why Xbox even bothered having the game made.
It's true, though. AoE2's player counts are consistently stable, AoE4's drops like a rock until an update comes out, then it does up a bit then goes all the way back down shortly after.
It was 10k last month, doesn't seem rock bottom to me, you homosexuals are dramatic as frick.
7 months ago
Anonymous
You seem emotionally invested in this game for some reason and refuse to see things in an objective manner.
7 months ago
Anonymous
Now you're just projecting. You have a personal vendetta against 4 and it's showing. An RTS having 10k players daily is a good result.
inb4 you say I'm an AOE4 fanboy, here
AOE2 doesn't have substantial player shifts during DLC because it just has a consistent playerbase. Everyone who logged on to play the DLC was playing 2 weeks before the DLC, a month before the DLC, etc
One game's player count remains the same even with expansions due to having a reliable userbase, and one game only goes up for a brief period of time after an expansion comes out.
>AOE2 has a stagnant playerbase while AOE4 has potential for growth
wow I wonder why Microsoft is investing in it. Truly a mystery.
7 months ago
Anonymous
Stagnant playerbase has dwarfed your shit game since launch :^)
7 months ago
Anonymous
You seem emotional about this game anon
7 months ago
Anonymous
Not him but it doesn't require emotional investment to reach that conclusion. You said AoE2 is stagnant and dying, and despite that it has more players. It's a statistical fact.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>dying
literally nobody said that. You are putting words in people's mouth. Exactly what an emotional moron would say.
7 months ago
Anonymous
What do you think stagnant means, ESL? There's no growth, flow, or activity leading to the point of death and lifelessness to an unpleasant degree. Yet you also said that 2 only gets bumps during DLC releases, so then it also must not be stagnant following this train of thought.
7 months ago
Anonymous
stagnant means the game isn't getting a flow of new players, moron. And that's true.
It does not lead to "death". And you are a moron for thinking this. >Yet you also said that 2 only gets bumps during DLC releases
I literally never fricking said this. How the frick do you use your computer when you can't even form proper arguments?
7 months ago
Anonymous
Stop using words you do not understand the meaning of. I'd say to go open a dictionary but I don't know if you even know what one of those is. If you weren't an idiot you would know that stagnation, as a concept, is directly related to death and decay. You even referenced it just now by mentioning no new users but it doesn't seem like you're aware that you did that.
Shut up, dumbass.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>Stop using words you do not understand the meaning of
you first
7 months ago
Anonymous
Shut up, moron.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>AOE2 all time peak: 38,725 >AOE4 all time peak: 73,629 >dwarfed
yet another disingenuous moron
Yes, growth. Any year now. The only way that has a possibility of happening is if Xbox higher up's lose 80 IQ points and decide to kill AoE2 for some reason, which probably wouldn't even do what they want it to do.
AOE4 went from averaging 9k players in June 2022 to 15k in June 2023.
Is that not growth to you?
God you're all fricking moron. It's clear you hate AOE4 on a pure emotional level and not with any actual facts
7 months ago
Anonymous
>Is that not growth to you?
You admit in your OWN POST it has managed to drop from 73k to 9k. Limping back up to 15k (Still below AOE2's average) is not growth by any definition of the word.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>Limping back up to 15k (Still below AOE2's average) is not growth by any definition of the word.
It literally is, you dumb idiot. Because the game has gotten constant updates it also brough back some players.
Are you gonna pretend now that Definitive Edition was perfect at release? Are you gonna pretend like AOE2 was a hit on day 1?
Fricking idiot.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>AOE2 all time peak: 38,725 >AOE4 all time peak: 73,629 >dwarfed
yet another disingenuous moron
[...]
AOE4 went from averaging 9k players in June 2022 to 15k in June 2023.
Is that not growth to you?
God you're all fricking moron. It's clear you hate AOE4 on a pure emotional level and not with any actual facts
>it went down, so it's growing
lmao
7 months ago
Anonymous
>Are you gonna pretend like AOE2 was a hit on day 1?
???
It has been. For over 20 years now. Cope and seethe :^)
7 months ago
Anonymous
underage moron discovered. It wasn't until the Conqueror's expansion when it's popularity peaked.
Thanks for proving that you don't know what you're talking about
7 months ago
Anonymous
AOE2 had a 100k prize pool tournament before the conquerors ever came out
7 months ago
Anonymous
source?
7 months ago
Anonymous
That's a lie according to Liquipedia. >I hope this screenshot isn't total shit
7 months ago
Anonymous
>It's not growth and potential >BECAUSE IT ISNT OK?!
I'll never get the mentality of wanting games to fail.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>73k to 15k
Ah yes
Growth
7 months ago
Anonymous
>30k to 15k
wow I guess AOE2 Definite is dying....
It's not, but I have to make it obvious that I'm being sarcastic because itt there are a bunch of mouth breathers that can't detect sarcasm.
7 months ago
Anonymous
AOE2 hits 20K+ idiot.
>10k lower than the covid spike
vs >60k lower than on launch day
Imagine in any way arguing that AOE4 is the healthier game. Actual brainrot.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>Imagine in any way arguing that AOE4 is the healthier game.
Yet again putting words in my mouth. I said the game has potential for growth, not that it's healthier.
Do you enjoy making nothing but disingenuous arguments with random people online?
7 months ago
Anonymous
Yes, growth. Any year now. The only way that has a possibility of happening is if Xbox higher up's lose 80 IQ points and decide to kill AoE2 for some reason, which probably wouldn't even do what they want it to do.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>The only way that has a possibility of happening is if Xbox higher up's lose 80 IQ points and decide to kill AoE2 for some reason
Phil Spencer is /ourguy/ and loves to play AoE2.
One game's player count remains the same even with expansions due to having a reliable userbase, and one game only goes up for a brief period of time after an expansion comes out.
AOE3 is wildly different than the rest of the series but fun now that the dust has settled.
AOE4 is...fine, but when you add in context (Microsoft wants it to kill AOE2, developers shit talking players for basic feedback, devs took the budget and funneled it into Company of Heroes 3) it makes you want to see the game fail.
AOM is great but the version on steam is a terrible middle ground because its got weird alterations+a bad dlc. Just wait for it's definitive edition.
AOE1 is good but clunky as hell and the average player will have more fun playing Return of Rome in AOE2DE
I would play AoE4 but I hate the 3d look in modern RTS games. AoE2 DE is a nice blend of homage to the original, easily distinguishable sprites, but still maintaining a modern look.
I cannot fricking stand the overly aggressive AI in Relic's games. Not only that, but unlike AOE2 DE, the AI in 4 cheat like the original AOE2 AI so that they have infinite resources.
Its even better than the usual because when it comes down to RTSs, and I assume fighting games too, you can really tell that those people are really fricking clueless.
Well yeah. The internet is why the series got revived. AoE4 hasn't really added anything new or noteworthy, although I think the water play is better than AoE2's from what I've seen. All it did was piss off the original player base.
This thread encapsulates modern Ganker perfectly >Genre is barely alive >Some games have healthy a playerbase >morons still fight wanting a game to die... Just because.
Why not just playing the game you like and enjoying that another game in the same barely alive genre is gaining love? This shit in here is some high level schizo talk.
this might be dumb but is there a way to tweak/mod AI bots at all? choosing between the CD and HD version of them doesn't seem to matter much but i haven't fully explored those matches, i'd like for an AI to use walls and gates and towers instead of scattering buildings and slow spamming units
For AoE2? You can try playing against Barbarian AI. It's a mod. There's a couple others like that I think. Rehoboam or something is the other big one maybe?
In 5, Civs have 1 big thing and 1 small thing.
In 6, the abilities outright change your gameplan way more substantially than in 5, and have more substance.
Should’ve been set in same time period as AoE3 but with focus on the Old World. Italian wars, HRE, pike-and-shot up through Napoleonic warfare, that type of thing.
can you stop making this thread every single hour?
2 > mythology > 3 > 1 > 4
Swap myth with 3 and we got a deal
Myth is the real age of empires 3. Thats why you type 999 in the age of mythology chat and a fun song plays "this is rts 3, this is rts 3, this is rts 3, this is rts 3"
?si=gNGnnEd8HBsOvXrf
Mythology > 2 > 4 > 3 > 1
This but I'd swap 4 with 1. I could never get into the Empires games, but I really like mythology.
As a single player gay i prefer Mythology, but i agree with this.
Honestly 4 is the only game i dislike, even 1 is very soulful and i love the time period and sound effects.
Just wish 4 commited to being modern times rather than just making AOE2 but much worse.
Rise of Nations gets it but the game plays weird.
2 > mythology > 4 > 1 > 3
Fixed that for you.
I like 3 the most but I'm biased because I have an intense love for the colonial aesthetic tbh
3 > all else
lack of soul
I sucked your moms soul of of her butthole
huh?
Horrible balance at the start. French would dominate 90% of mid and low skill level games, so no new players would want to join.
Awful campaign with overly scripted levels and too many "Defend your base for 45 minutes" missions. Decision to go with the "documentary" style limited any storytelling or hook.
Controls and feedback felt very awkward at launch. Units didn't seem to respond to clicks appropriately. Clicking in the fog of war had no response.
It's a good game, it's just no AoE2
Not much, it's doing fine all things considered, even if it's shadowed by its more successful predecessor.
I don't know, why not make yet another thread asking the exact same question? Maybe you'll get the answers you like next time!
They tried to remake AoE2 instead of just going forward from AoE3 into ww1.
they didn't follow their vision.
Probably because III and IV have bean done to death thematically.
Age 1 2 and 3 are still within a less popular area of RTS and work as most of the human history up to the 19 century has had slow technological progress.
you're too stupid to hold an opinion, please refrain from posting in the future.
Vision of people who don’t work at the company anymore
Boring, bland, soulless and woke game.
Play 2 instead.
What was woke in it? Did they raceswaped any culture?
No and people just say "woke" at anything nowadays
The original game had 4/8 of it's civilizations be from europe and 3/4 of the campaigns were of european nations.
Dead genre.
>If I repeat it enough, it becomes true
there is nothing to talk... the game has no flavour
>devs played too safe
>everything looks bland
>no map editor/custom scenarios
despite everything, the game still has a big playerbase
its kinda weird
>3 is the least played by far
Wow, was it really that bad? I dont remember it being so
anon... age 3 remaster is the third most played game of the series
the people who still play the original 3 game are tryhards who dislike the changes on the remaster
oh shit I thought that was like a free trial demo in the 3rd place, my bad
Look again you blind b***h, 3 remaster is higher, bit people do dislike a lot of the systems in 3
suck my fricking wiener homosexual I already saw
3 is unpopular for a few reasons
>AOE 3 is chiefly inspired by Warcraft 3, not age of empires
>Several staple mechanics such as forward buildings are outright disallowed
>Microsoft killed AOE2 multiplayer servers back in the day to drive traffic to 3
>AOE3 is a menagerie of strange units and mechanics to the extent that even top level players don't fully grasp everything that can be done in the game (There's a popular meme where two native american civ players are fighting each other and one says "What does that unit even do?" and the other responds "lmao I have no idea"
In a series where you typically have a very clear rock papers scissors gameplay and easy identifiable functions for each unit AOE3 has foot soldiers counting as cavalry, identical cannons that do wildly different shit, etc. It's a very obtuse game to break in to.
AoE3 makes NO sense in terms of unit stats.
Villagers have more HP and physical damage waving their blunderbuss than Pikemen, who also have less armor than Musketeers, unfortunately available on Age2 instead of Age3 like they should.
And that's from the base game.
Every expansion only made it worse.
Blaming warcraft 3 isn't fair. That game is significantly better than aoe3 in every single way
Im not blaming Warcraft 3 so much as I'm explaining it trendchased Warcraft 3 cause it was huge at the time
Trendchasing warcraft/starcraft is the leading cause of dead RTS francshies. I'm still mad about TA:Kingdoms and Homeworld:Cataclysm.
It's a perfectly fine modern RTS, and when all the other RTS are ether StarCraft 2 or shit, of course people are going to play it
They didn't set it after the Colonial Age like they were supposed to and tried to make AoE2 2.
waited too long
bump
Nothing really it's fun.
Stop regurgitating shit from people that don't play it.
they can't make a game better than 2
gettin high cause he say "BOW"
hamburger knees
swasti
a fatsie may wallow
YOU ARE RUNNING LAD
>got an expansion
>got a steady rise of more average players
the frick do you want else? For the past 7 days it had more players than 2. You don't even have a reason for hating it. No wonder new RTS games aren't made when people refuse to play anything new.
moronic Gankerermin are a very vocal, very tiny minority.
I don't like how most races are 1 trick ponies, but it is better than the stale meta of AOE2
>Game is doing totally fine
>morons still posting like it's a massive failure.
This place is a massive cognitive dissonance field.
This should have been obvious from the TLOU threads with people delusioning themselves to think normies don't eat it up
The game is doing really well, on par with Age 2 and Total War Warhammer.
This shit isn't easy for an RTS.
>Launch in a terrible, fricking inexcusably bad state
>Make fun of your fans for asking you to fix the FRICKING CAMERA
>Water is still fundamentally broken
>Balance was bad before, it's still bad, just not "French is instawin" bad
>
pulls out of all AOE2 tournament funding and pays guys like Hera and Nilli to sell out the scene for a quick payout
It deserves it's "eternal whipping boy" status. I wish for the worst for this game and everyone who elects to play it over AOE2.
Anywho has anyone here played Cossacks? Best RTS ever, frick this gay AOE crap.
Let me tell you what REALLY went wrong.
>Music is shitty faction-based 'historical' music instead of a nice blend of all styles in a long and delicious soundtrack that plays for everyone after their little ethnic intro
>Voicelines are CoH-like autistic screaching instead of simple one-liners like the rest of AoE games
>Campaign is stupid history channel narrated by bored woman
>Civ variations are artificial clunky bullshit like prelates, officers, influence radius that forces you into a playstyle instead of giving you more freedom like in all other AoE games
>Setting is exactly the same as AoE2 down to the age names, something that never happened before in AoE games ever, and should have rebooted it from the stone age instead.
Making a game replicating another game in the same setting as the game it's replicating doesn't work. As long as Age of Empires IV was rewound to be in the medieval period, they had to contend with the fact that the Age of Empires II "hardcore e-sports" crowd is one of the most autistic playerbases on the face of the Earth, and would have nothing to do with their game. This is true for basically every game that tried to follow up a cult classic. No matter how many improvements they make over the original (almost none in this case), they were not going to succeed.
It's a shit game that has no reason to exist since it's basically just a remake of 2 but 2 still does pretty well and even has more players. I don't know why Xbox even bothered having the game made.
>They have now 2 succesfull RTS games
That's why it was made.
This is just new expac numbers. It's gonna drop like a rock by the end of the year.
You homosexuals say the same shit over and over, this game is over 2 years old already.
And it's existed at sub 10k for the majority of that time? It's objectively limped along these 2 years.
It's true, though. AoE2's player counts are consistently stable, AoE4's drops like a rock until an update comes out, then it does up a bit then goes all the way back down shortly after.
It was 10k last month, doesn't seem rock bottom to me, you homosexuals are dramatic as frick.
You seem emotionally invested in this game for some reason and refuse to see things in an objective manner.
Now you're just projecting. You have a personal vendetta against 4 and it's showing. An RTS having 10k players daily is a good result.
inb4 you say I'm an AOE4 fanboy, here
>Point out a fact
>You're emotional
Sure
AOE2 also just recently got an expac, disingenuous frick
AOE2 doesn't have substantial player shifts during DLC because it just has a consistent playerbase. Everyone who logged on to play the DLC was playing 2 weeks before the DLC, a month before the DLC, etc
>AOE2 has a stagnant playerbase while AOE4 has potential for growth
wow I wonder why Microsoft is investing in it. Truly a mystery.
Stagnant playerbase has dwarfed your shit game since launch :^)
You seem emotional about this game anon
Not him but it doesn't require emotional investment to reach that conclusion. You said AoE2 is stagnant and dying, and despite that it has more players. It's a statistical fact.
>dying
literally nobody said that. You are putting words in people's mouth. Exactly what an emotional moron would say.
What do you think stagnant means, ESL? There's no growth, flow, or activity leading to the point of death and lifelessness to an unpleasant degree. Yet you also said that 2 only gets bumps during DLC releases, so then it also must not be stagnant following this train of thought.
stagnant means the game isn't getting a flow of new players, moron. And that's true.
It does not lead to "death". And you are a moron for thinking this.
>Yet you also said that 2 only gets bumps during DLC releases
I literally never fricking said this. How the frick do you use your computer when you can't even form proper arguments?
Stop using words you do not understand the meaning of. I'd say to go open a dictionary but I don't know if you even know what one of those is. If you weren't an idiot you would know that stagnation, as a concept, is directly related to death and decay. You even referenced it just now by mentioning no new users but it doesn't seem like you're aware that you did that.
Shut up, dumbass.
>Stop using words you do not understand the meaning of
you first
Shut up, moron.
>AOE2 all time peak: 38,725
>AOE4 all time peak: 73,629
>dwarfed
yet another disingenuous moron
AOE4 went from averaging 9k players in June 2022 to 15k in June 2023.
Is that not growth to you?
God you're all fricking moron. It's clear you hate AOE4 on a pure emotional level and not with any actual facts
>Is that not growth to you?
You admit in your OWN POST it has managed to drop from 73k to 9k. Limping back up to 15k (Still below AOE2's average) is not growth by any definition of the word.
>Limping back up to 15k (Still below AOE2's average) is not growth by any definition of the word.
It literally is, you dumb idiot. Because the game has gotten constant updates it also brough back some players.
Are you gonna pretend now that Definitive Edition was perfect at release? Are you gonna pretend like AOE2 was a hit on day 1?
Fricking idiot.
>it went down, so it's growing
lmao
>Are you gonna pretend like AOE2 was a hit on day 1?
???
It has been. For over 20 years now. Cope and seethe :^)
underage moron discovered. It wasn't until the Conqueror's expansion when it's popularity peaked.
Thanks for proving that you don't know what you're talking about
AOE2 had a 100k prize pool tournament before the conquerors ever came out
source?
That's a lie according to Liquipedia.
>I hope this screenshot isn't total shit
>It's not growth and potential
>BECAUSE IT ISNT OK?!
I'll never get the mentality of wanting games to fail.
>73k to 15k
Ah yes
Growth
>30k to 15k
wow I guess AOE2 Definite is dying....
It's not, but I have to make it obvious that I'm being sarcastic because itt there are a bunch of mouth breathers that can't detect sarcasm.
AOE2 hits 20K+ idiot.
>10k lower than the covid spike
vs
>60k lower than on launch day
Imagine in any way arguing that AOE4 is the healthier game. Actual brainrot.
>Imagine in any way arguing that AOE4 is the healthier game.
Yet again putting words in my mouth. I said the game has potential for growth, not that it's healthier.
Do you enjoy making nothing but disingenuous arguments with random people online?
Yes, growth. Any year now. The only way that has a possibility of happening is if Xbox higher up's lose 80 IQ points and decide to kill AoE2 for some reason, which probably wouldn't even do what they want it to do.
>The only way that has a possibility of happening is if Xbox higher up's lose 80 IQ points and decide to kill AoE2 for some reason
Phil Spencer is /ourguy/ and loves to play AoE2.
One game's player count remains the same even with expansions due to having a reliable userbase, and one game only goes up for a brief period of time after an expansion comes out.
That's what it is now after an update, it's gonna tank back to its 50% baseline within 2-3 weeks just like last time.
It came WAAAAY too late
Wish the motherfrickers pushed this shit at least in 2015
<Verification not required.
i just got into aoe2 recently but haven't played the newer ones
are they really that bad?
i'm enjoying aoe2 DE
You shouldn't hear Ganker on game advice at all.
>are they really that bad?
no
2 is just too good
AOE3 is wildly different than the rest of the series but fun now that the dust has settled.
AOE4 is...fine, but when you add in context (Microsoft wants it to kill AOE2, developers shit talking players for basic feedback, devs took the budget and funneled it into Company of Heroes 3) it makes you want to see the game fail.
AOM is great but the version on steam is a terrible middle ground because its got weird alterations+a bad dlc. Just wait for it's definitive edition.
AOE1 is good but clunky as hell and the average player will have more fun playing Return of Rome in AOE2DE
proofs on the aoe4 claims?
i am really liking return of rome in de and it's what i play the most, didn't now it's supposed to be a 'new engine aoe1' thing
Return of Rome is great fun. Its basically hyper aggressive AOE2 with some AOE1 isms
It's honestly pretty good. That's what AoE 1 Definiteve Edition should've been in the first place.
Nothing? Japan, Bryzantine and the new chink is fun. That said most of Ganker probably only play vs AI so I get why you think the game is boring.
I would play AoE4 but I hate the 3d look in modern RTS games. AoE2 DE is a nice blend of homage to the original, easily distinguishable sprites, but still maintaining a modern look.
I cannot fricking stand the overly aggressive AI in Relic's games. Not only that, but unlike AOE2 DE, the AI in 4 cheat like the original AOE2 AI so that they have infinite resources.
Honestly completely ruins it. Same with COH3.
What is your guy's favourite civ? Picrel.
>Watching this episode with a friend
>>
the AOE2 sound effects start
It's crazy to me how no one acknowledges the mongorian plot in this episode is just a big AOE2 reference
Glad you got it Anon, everyone looked at me like I have brainworms when I got excited about it lol. (:
HRE
Personally, I've enjoyed playing the Vietnamese. I've also been getting into the Incas lately.
SP feels like sleeping through a NatGeo documentary.
MP is good, though
>RTS autists want other RTS game to fail.
You guys deserve your dead genre lol
Damn, extra spicy awful Ganker takes ITT.
The RTS flavoring really adds to the >I dont even play videogames base
It's just like fighting game threads kek
>No one plays the games
>But they know all the shit about it
Its even better than the usual because when it comes down to RTSs, and I assume fighting games too, you can really tell that those people are really fricking clueless.
I'm an oldgay and I've been playing strategy games for decades and somehow never played any of these.
For me it was Stronghold and BFME. I didn't get into AoE2 until DE.
This thread is a perfect example of why you shouldn't have two games that both want to be medieval RTS games in the same series.
Because morons on the back of the internet lose their minds over it? Kek
Well yeah. The internet is why the series got revived. AoE4 hasn't really added anything new or noteworthy, although I think the water play is better than AoE2's from what I've seen. All it did was piss off the original player base.
It's two different games anon, both alive, just play what you like.
I'll stick with age of empires 2, and 3. As well as warcraft 2, and 3, and sc/scbw
I turtle in aoe2 with Japanese castles
This thread encapsulates modern Ganker perfectly
>Genre is barely alive
>Some games have healthy a playerbase
>morons still fight wanting a game to die... Just because.
Why not just playing the game you like and enjoying that another game in the same barely alive genre is gaining love? This shit in here is some high level schizo talk.
this might be dumb but is there a way to tweak/mod AI bots at all? choosing between the CD and HD version of them doesn't seem to matter much but i haven't fully explored those matches, i'd like for an AI to use walls and gates and towers instead of scattering buildings and slow spamming units
For AoE2? You can try playing against Barbarian AI. It's a mod. There's a couple others like that I think. Rehoboam or something is the other big one maybe?
yes for 2, thanks fren i'll check them out
i'm only like a week into this game and still poking around
You might not like them then. They're supposed to play at around a 1200-1300 1v1 elo.
Each individual civ has more flavor than aoe 2, sounds fun.
Mongols are fun as frick to play.
Reminds me of civ5 vs 6 argument.
In 5, Civs have 1 big thing and 1 small thing.
In 6, the abilities outright change your gameplan way more substantially than in 5, and have more substance.
The only thing the games have in common is the time period, the viva are way more unique in architecture and gameplay.
I play both from time to time.
Off topic, but which Civ game is best?
Civilization 4. Saying this as someone who started with Civiliization on the Amiga.
Any time someone says Civ 5 is the best, it tells me that Civ 5 was the first strategy game they played.
The 4gay mald never ceases to amaze me. Especially because you just go play 2de.
Should’ve been set in same time period as AoE3 but with focus on the Old World. Italian wars, HRE, pike-and-shot up through Napoleonic warfare, that type of thing.
Imagine giving the Age Of IP to the people that released DoW III