You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

General Discussions
Moderated by Maffia, LordKivlov, JimXIX

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.21 replies
Age of Empires III Heaven » Forums » General Discussions » ideas for AoM2/AoE3
Bottom
Topic Subject:ideas for AoM2/AoE3
Starvin Marvin
Skirmisher
posted 08-15-04 04:14 AM EDT (US)         
they couldredo the food system so that certain workers like certain foods(like in settlers)ie. villagers gathering gold like to eat meat while woodies like fish.
do u guys think that would be a good idea or am i way of base?
opinons please

Yes. My weather control machine is almost complete.
How do you feel about that Broccoli?...
*********
ARE YOU MOCKING ME?!?!?!
Stewie, family guy
AuthorReplies:
primitiveOrigin
Skirmisher
posted 08-15-04 06:23 AM EDT (US)     1 / 21       
That sounds like an okay idea, I just wonder if it would get tedious to manage after a while. For example, it would be something you would have to monitor all the time to make sure that you had enough of another resource for a special group of units. It would take the focus off the fighting in a way. Basically it sounds like you would add more resource types.

I had an idea to make your army actually age in the course of the game. For example, if you had an archer that for some reason made it all the way through the game he would not be as effective fighter as an archer that had just been built. Kind of like a young soldier is more strong and powerful than a grand-dad soldier. But again, for similar reasons above this may detract from the game cause its something else you have to manage (rotating your army) instead of focusing on the battle.

Lexus_Reloaded
Skirmisher
posted 08-15-04 06:27 AM EDT (US)     2 / 21       
I would anything if I'm really hungry

Lexus
Current Designs:
The Silmarillion 5% || Elenamon 75%
The age of Men is over. The time of Orcs has come. Gothmog
The_Mafia_Man
Skirmisher
posted 08-15-04 11:14 AM EDT (US)     3 / 21       
instead of making soldiers weaker they shoukld get stronger, more experience so the better they get, i reckon attack and everything shouls stay exactly as it is but the time it takes to fire should get quicker and the distance or accuracy should increase...only very little though,the time to fire should improve by.1 after killing like 5/10 people and the distance should increase by ..2 after 10 people and the accuracy should improve by 10%of the last percent as in compound percent not simple percent.

Just an idea


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ****** * The_Mafia_Man * ******* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * Practice makes perfect, but you cant be perfect, so why practice * * * * * *

Favourite AOM website
SilverOsirisAOM
Skirmisher
posted 08-15-04 11:43 AM EDT (US)     4 / 21       
accuracy and speed. If you increase something like hitoints it makes you think "How would a veteran soldier gain maximum hitpoints by fighting?"

I told you I'd be back.
El Moppo
Skirmisher
(id: C J)
posted 08-15-04 02:55 PM EDT (US)     5 / 21       
I think, for the game setting, it should be based mainly in Asia, instead of Europe and the Middle East as it usually is. Including civs such as India (or Indus), Persia, Khmers, Thai and so-on. In other words try to focus more on south Asia, because that is one of the least included areas in the Age series.

As for new gameplay, I think more types of formation should be included, not just the arrangement they stand in but how they attack, such as phalanxes, shield walls, scattered/unorganised formation. The ability to change how tight the formation is and being able to order a charge.


][- ][_ . ][\/][ (()) ][) ][) (())
Angelcynn > Niwe Middangeard ~ Ic

[This message has been edited by C J (edited 08-15-2004 @ 02:58 PM).]

Rhyder
Skirmisher
posted 08-16-04 01:16 AM EDT (US)     6 / 21       
The soldier formation is a good idea. There should be more strategies as to fighting aproach, for example, each type of unit could have a special formation or attack stance. Archers could have a hit and run stance, and attack ground, etc.

Another thing that would be good in AoE 3 would be that units had their stats in percentage (like AoM) rather than in numbers and plus upgrades.

Finally, as for civilizations, I think their should be more individualistic architecture for each civ. For example, Teutonic, Viking, Goth and Hun archetecture is entirely different from each other, as well as Byzantines and Middle East civs. The computers are much, much better since AOK came out, so that could be a possibility (unless Ensemble thinks that there wouldn't be enough memory, time or whatever..)

By the way, what do you think would be the most probable theme for AoE3? Colonial Era, from 1492-1918? A 3D remake of AoK (that would be cool, but it would seem like a lack of ideas from Ensemble..) Maybe both..Time will reveal the answer.

The_Mafia_Man
Skirmisher
posted 08-16-04 07:37 AM EDT (US)     7 / 21       
you cannot really add india because they didn't fight with other countries a lot and it defeats the poinnt of AO"Empires". India never had an empire because they fought within n india too much, very rarely did india go against another country.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ****** * The_Mafia_Man * ******* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * Practice makes perfect, but you cant be perfect, so why practice * * * * * *

Favourite AOM website
El Moppo
Skirmisher
(id: C J)
posted 08-16-04 01:55 PM EDT (US)     8 / 21       
Fair enough, but other civs from that area would still be possible.

][- ][_ . ][\/][ (()) ][) ][) (())
Angelcynn > Niwe Middangeard ~ Ic
lachlan
Skirmisher
posted 08-24-04 08:40 AM EDT (US)     9 / 21       
I'd like to see them advance the animal herding aspect. For example: Instead of killing all the available herd animals you could have the animals remain constant and have a trickle effect of food based on the number of animals under your control. Obviously cultural bonuses would play a large role and perhaps the animals would have to move to represent feeding, they'd be controlled by a peon shepard. This would allow opposing players to kill or steal a valuable food source and factor in civs that relied on herd animals as a food staple.
Thanatos
Skirmisher
(id: deathmaster666)
posted 08-24-04 09:18 AM EDT (US)     10 / 21       

Quote:

------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------
you cannot really add India because they didn't fight with other countries a lot and it defeats the point of AO"Empires". India never had an empire because they fought within n India too much, very rarely did India go against another country.

India started off as separate kingdoms but it was through the formation of several empires that India as we came to know it, came to exist. India was never a single nation or single people, it was merely a geographical term. India itself is in fact an empire. Saying that India wasn't an empire is like saying that Russia and China weren't empires either. India like those nations given as examples as well as others came into existence due to empire building.

Help me to tally the forums belief patterns, vote in my poll

Tally so far:-
Agnostics:18
Atheists:28
Theists:42

[This message has been edited by deathmaster666 (edited 08-24-2004 @ 09:31 AM).]

GoForGoldenJarls
Skirmisher
posted 08-24-04 12:15 PM EDT (US)     11 / 21       
They should make it a little like a sim, with villager happiness. If it falls below 10%, they refuse to work. Happiness depends on resource surplus, defense, whether they're being attacked or not, stuff like that. That might be really hard to work in though.

Meteora
Skirmisher
posted 08-24-04 12:39 PM EDT (US)     12 / 21       
A lot of those soldier formation things are useless until they implement flanking bonuses into the game.

★ ★ ★ ★ ★
El Moppo
Skirmisher
(id: C J)
posted 08-24-04 03:19 PM EDT (US)     13 / 21       
Then they should put that in too.

][- ][_ . ][\/][ (()) ][) ][) (())
Angelcynn > Niwe Middangeard ~ Ic
Meteora
Skirmisher
posted 08-24-04 04:24 PM EDT (US)     14 / 21       
I belive they originally had it in AoK, but took it out since they thought it was too much to worry about during a hectic game. Or something like that. Ask a Supertrooper.

★ ★ ★ ★ ★

[This message has been edited by Meteora (edited 08-24-2004 @ 04:24 PM).]

Midala87
Skirmisher
posted 08-27-04 09:25 AM EDT (US)     15 / 21       
I think ES should completely redo AOE & AOK and make something similiar to AOM. Of course you will have to get rid of the whole mythical part. Things to include or change are:

Generals: Each time you age up you choose a general. Different generals gives you different units, research, command power, as well as formations (which is a button on the UI.)

Animal Population: Any units which require a horse will cost 1 animal pop, while a unit with 2 horses requires 2 animal pop, etc.

Neutral Units: Units such as the catapult, or trebuchet can be taken over by anyone. (Im not sure exactly how to kill the humans controlling it)

Resources: Food, Wood, Gold, Stone (yep the stone is back)

Command Powers: Similiar to the god powers in AOM.(also similiar to the ones in C&C Generals which I dont have yet)

Formations: Different generals come with different formations, such as a triangle or two combined triangles. Theres also speacial strategies like hoplites actually pushing back enemies.

Unique Units: Instead of 1 or 2 unique units almost every civ has their own unique unit skin and stats from the beggining.

Unique Buildings: (same as above but for buildings)

Garrisonable Walls: Most walls can be garrisoned with archers to allow the walls to fight back. Also their is a research which allows the walls to attack without garrisoned units, but is weaker and costs some human pop.

Moving while attacking: Not all units sport this but units that are on horseback and have a bow can fire while moving.(prob unlikely but they did it in Generals)

LOS: Walls, towers & gates have NO LOS. Unless researched (costs human pop) or garrisoned.

Well thats all I can think of (for now) I'll prob rethink this stuff and decide that it doesn't belong. This is after all an opinion (a long one). Im sure that whatever ES creates for their next game will be awesome as their 3 other ones are. Thanks for listening, err umm for reading.

[This message has been edited by Midala87 (edited 08-27-2004 @ 09:27 AM).]

Antz
Skirmisher
posted 08-27-04 05:44 PM EDT (US)     16 / 21       
No units like fanatics or myrmidons who has bonus damage vs (almost) everything. I don't like that idea of a unit who is that powerfull, and only available to a few of the civs.

The best clan ever is TOAO Clan!
Meteora
Skirmisher
posted 08-27-04 06:40 PM EDT (US)     17 / 21       

Quote:

LOS: Walls, towers & gates have NO LOS. Unless researched (costs human pop) or garrisoned.


Why shouldn't towers have LOS? The whole point of them is to keep watch of a certain area.

A lot of your suggestions seem as if they'd make the game needlessly complicated without adding to the fun.


★ ★ ★ ★ ★

[This message has been edited by Meteora (edited 08-27-2004 @ 06:41 PM).]

rodrigo102920
Skirmisher
posted 08-28-04 01:21 AM EDT (US)     18 / 21       
Iíve always wanted a more in-depth market/trade... where you can barter units/armies/people, for resources/buildings. Their would also be a tribute kind of thing that focuses on an area of interest (like a chokepoint) where you can pay tribute to an enemy so that you can pass without being attacked, or to have certain buildings protected in the area with tribute.

I am also one of the people who think that roads are a good idea, so that caravans could more efficiently travel through; but the road would have to be defended because anyone can use it.

Any type of catapult or anything thatís not alive, should not be able to be killed, only kill the people operating the equipment and then you can assign one of your soldiers or villagers to operate the siege weapon. Of course you have the option of destroying it since in a battle; the enemy can retake the siege weapon and continue to use it against you. (I think someone already said something like this)

Also it would be nice to have people be able to walk on the walls, so that archers can shoot from the top of the wall (seeing the enemy) not from the back of the wall. This would also add to a whole new way of fortifying your empire since you might be able to make/put siege weapons on the walls to kill the people bellow. The soldiers would need to climb ladders (that could be tipped) to kill/destroy the archers or the siege weapon. Soldiers should not be able to damage a wall too; walls should be something very difficult to topple (like it was in real life) so the goal of a siege should be to destroy the gate to get inside the city. (Also something that I think has been talked about before but is relevant)

Well these are just things that I have been thinking about and are only opinions. What do you guys think?

Midala87
Skirmisher
posted 08-28-04 03:27 AM EDT (US)     19 / 21       
Why shouldn't towers have LOS? The whole point of them is to keep watch of a certain area.
A lot of your suggestions seem as if they'd make the game needlessly complicated without adding to the fun.
____________________________________________________________
(not sure how to "quote")

I personnally enjoy realistic games as well as games that give you options. Though I do admit it would make the game less enjoyable if you have to garrsion units inside buildings to gain LoS. But in reality can buildings really see on their own? Unless of course you add security cameras and perhaps an onboard targeting system to destroy any threat. But of course that wont work in the middle ages.

Of course some of the things mentioned wont work to still keep the AOE feel (including AOM). And by the way to get around the medic healing soldiers thing (extremely unlikely a soldier in real life would be COMPLETELY healed. Just think of a human unit as more then one soldier and when healed is in fact getting more troops to replenish its strength.
(Ex.)
1 = 1,000, 1,000 - 50%HP = 500, 500 + 50%HP (healed) = 1,000

Again this is just an opinion thanks for reading.

SilverOsirisAOM
Skirmisher
posted 08-28-04 11:29 AM EDT (US)     20 / 21       
Its assumed that there are troops manning the towers (and if your possy there actually are!)

I told you I'd be back.
Midala87
Skirmisher
posted 08-29-04 04:15 AM EDT (US)     21 / 21       
Its assumed that there are troops manning the towers (and if your possy there actually are!)
____________________________________________________________

Yeah I know, anyways the idea of towers with no LoS isnt going to work real well for an AOE game. But at least have walls garrisonable to attack with no LoS till they are garrisoned, also walls block LoS. You can however have like a wall so that you can "peek" through it. Or when it gets damaged to a certain point you can see over it.

Also one thing that doesnt make sense is why cant the Titan go through trees and shallow water? I kinda understand the water but come on the trees? Just have it so when it walks it does damage to units/buildings nearby.

And what do you mean by "possy"

Thx for reading this

You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Age of Empires III Heaven | HeavenGames