NationStates Jolt Archive

Has anyone played the new expansion for Age of Empires? It just came out for Macs, I'm planning on buying it, and I want to know if its good.

Havn't played that one but I have never played an Age of (Empires/Mythology/Titans) game that wasn't.

True. Without wanting too many spoilers, I wanted to know if the campaigns have improved. AOE 3 campaings got progressively more boring, implausible, and cliche in my opinion, with increasingly boring maps and goals that involved long marches or repetitive tasks. I was intrigued by hints that the story might move away from made up conspiricies and more towards campainges around historical battles.

Posts deleted.

I tried playing the AoE3 demo once but found it unpleasantly micromanagerial (not a word, I know). I think AoE1 was better in that regard, if I recall correctly.

Eh. The AOE games sit firmly in the same category (my mind) with Starcraft and the C&C games.
Rush games. Build as much as you can, as quickly as you can, and you'll win. Its all based on rock-paper-scissors, and actual strategy/tactics has no real effect on the gameplay. Play fast and you'll win.

I prefer the Total War series. Much more in-depth, and definitely deeper in terms of tactics. You can memorize all the stats in the game and still lose. EDIT: And like Tsaraine said, AOE requires way too much micromanagement. TW games save that for the turn-based campaign bit.

I recommend (at least) trying one of them. I dunno if any of them are out for the mac, though.

AOE3 ASD is fairly good. I enjoy it a lot more than the chieftains exp pack because each of the new factions is actually different and unique to play with. The campaigns still suck. I played through them on the lowest settings just to get the hell over with, and realise they are fairly slow and buggy.

I think AOE3 might be one of my favourite rts games purely due to the historical context. I love the sound of musket volleys being fired. :)

I'll give a slight breakdown of each of the new factions without spoiling too much.

Japanese: Okay. They have a lot of fairly interesting heavy infantry and cavalry, and the daimyo units (you can get up to like 4 I think once you level up a lot) are basically mobile baracks, which are awesome for cranking out hundreds of troops within minutes late game. They also have decent flame arrows, which you can spam and they're basically cannons.

Indians: I hated playing with the Indians because I'm not used to the entire wood for villagers thing. I would build up a few troops and some defences and the enemy would already be in imperial age running my arse over with their battalions. But I'm sure the Indians are quite good if you know how to use them.

Chinese: My favourite all time faction in the expansions. The hero unit (some old kungfu chap) is quite good and the wonders are amazing. Most of your troop shipments come in 10+ and some even are shipped in groups of 20+. All your units train in mixed groups, so basically its like the Russians except the units aren't crap. You're a little bit weak on artillery though, because your main siege weapons will be slowly queued through your wonders. The population cap also goes up to 220, which is epic considering you can rush your enemy's base suddenly with like a massive army of 100+ soldiers, 20+ cannons, dozens of cavalry, etc etc

I would definitely recommend buying it, or *cough* at least torrenting it. :p

It's pretty good. I play Japanese mostly - they have an awesome economy thanks to shrines (houses that attract animals and produce resources).

AOE is one of my favorite games of all time, and probably the one I cherish most of all.

Eh. The AOE games sit firmly in the same category (my mind) with Starcraft and the C&C games.
Rush games. Build as much as you can, as quickly as you can, and you'll win. Its all based on rock-paper-scissors, and actual strategy/tactics has no real effect on the gameplay. Play fast and you'll win.

I prefer the Total War series. Much more in-depth, and definitely deeper in terms of tactics. You can memorize all the stats in the game and still lose. EDIT: And like Tsaraine said, AOE requires way too much micromanagement. TW games save that for the turn-based campaign bit.

I recommend (at least) trying one of them. I dunno if any of them are out for the mac, though.

I agree with that.

What the hell are Dyansties?

Has anyone played the new expansion for Age of Empires? It just came out for Macs, I'm planning on buying it, and I want to know if its good.

I hardly play any of the AoE games, but my wife loves that stuff, and she was more than happy with AoE 3. Her only complaint was that the campaigns were a bit easy, and over a bit too quick.

Eh. The AOE games sit firmly in the same category (my mind) with Starcraft and the C&C games.
Rush games. Build as much as you can, as quickly as you can, and you'll win. Its all based on rock-paper-scissors, and actual strategy/tactics has no real effect on the gameplay. Play fast and you'll win.

I prefer the Total War series. Much more in-depth, and definitely deeper in terms of tactics. You can memorize all the stats in the game and still lose. EDIT: And like Tsaraine said, AOE requires way too much micromanagement. TW games save that for the turn-based campaign bit.

I recommend (at least) trying one of them. I dunno if any of them are out for the mac, though.

I would give my right thumb to play Total War. However, I feel that paying hundreds of dollars for a new computer when my Mac is still new would be wasteful on a student budget. In other words, no, it doesn't play on Macs.

I would give my right thumb to play Total War. However, I feel that paying hundreds of dollars for a new computer when my Mac is still new would be wasteful on a student budget. In other words, no, it doesn't play on Macs.

Really? Huh. I'd heard that somebody got MTW2 to work on a macbook (albeit slowly).

Really? Huh. I'd heard that somebody got MTW2 to work on a macbook (albeit slowly).

Not that I've heard of. Where did you hear this? MTW2 looks awesome.

Sadly I don't have the macbook, so still probably screwed.:(

It's pretty good. I play Japanese mostly - they have an awesome economy thanks to shrines (houses that attract animals and produce resources).

AOE is one of my favorite games of all time, and probably the one I cherish most of all.

I want it for the Indian war elephants. Does China have a good fleet? Historically, it had probably the best in the world around the end of the Middle Ages.

I like MTW2, I just find it incredibly hard to get the cavalry units to charge properly. Most of the time they just charge, stop just in front of their victims and then draw their swords.

That, and I miss cavalry being so overpowered like they were in RTW (yay routing a Spartan Phalanx with some equites).

I like MTW2, I just find it incredibly hard to get the cavalry units to charge properly. Most of the time they just charge, stop just in front of their victims and then draw their swords.

That, and I miss cavalry being so overpowered like they were in RTW (yay routing a Spartan Phalanx with some equites).

Thats a bit odd. You'd think a phalax would have an easy time stopping cavalry, given that horses won't charge into long spears.;)

Thats a bit odd. You'd think a phalax would have an easy time stopping cavalry, given that horses won't charge into long spears.;)The spears were pointing the other way. ;)

AOE3 ASD is fairly good. I enjoy it a lot more than the chieftains exp pack because each of the new factions is actually different and unique to play with. The campaigns still suck. I played through them on the lowest settings just to get the hell over with, and realise they are fairly slow and buggy.

I think AOE3 might be one of my favourite rts games purely due to the historical context. I love the sound of musket volleys being fired. :)

I'll give a slight breakdown of each of the new factions without spoiling too much.

Japanese: Okay. They have a lot of fairly interesting heavy infantry and cavalry, and the daimyo units (you can get up to like 4 I think once you level up a lot) are basically mobile baracks, which are awesome for cranking out hundreds of troops within minutes late game. They also have decent flame arrows, which you can spam and they're basically cannons.

Indians: I hated playing with the Indians because I'm not used to the entire wood for villagers thing. I would build up a few troops and some defences and the enemy would already be in imperial age running my arse over with their battalions. But I'm sure the Indians are quite good if you know how to use them.

Chinese: My favourite all time faction in the expansions. The hero unit (some old kungfu chap) is quite good and the wonders are amazing. Most of your troop shipments come in 10+ and some even are shipped in groups of 20+. All your units train in mixed groups, so basically its like the Russians except the units aren't crap. You're a little bit weak on artillery though, because your main siege weapons will be slowly queued through your wonders. The population cap also goes up to 220, which is epic considering you can rush your enemy's base suddenly with like a massive army of 100+ soldiers, 20+ cannons, dozens of cavalry, etc etc

I would definitely recommend buying it, or *cough* at least torrenting it. :p

I agree about the campaigns. I never even finished the War Chiefs campaing.

I'm glad to here about the Chinese population limit. With the old troop limits, it was always a choice between defending my bases and attacking. I never felt I had enought to do both.

I'm very glad they've made the factions unique. Are their apearences unique as well as the game play? I hated that Ottoman villigers looked like European ones, and native buildings looked like touched up European ones in War Cheifs.

I like MTW2, I just find it incredibly hard to get the cavalry units to charge properly. Most of the time they just charge, stop just in front of their victims and then draw their swords.

That, and I miss cavalry being so overpowered like they were in RTW (yay routing a Spartan Phalanx with some equites).

Have you got the patches? Those fix (most) of the games big issues, although for some reason the two-handed weapon bug is still in place. Fortunately there's fixes out for that too.

I also suggest getting one of the mods thats out. Broken Crescent is EXCELLENT, its set in the Middle East, from Constantinople to India. Great gameplay, and cavalry is quite powerful, especially for some factions.

Stainless Steel is basically a reworking of MTW2 to make it more like good ol' MTW. Plus it adds some historical accuracy and a few missing factions (Kievan Rus! Huzzah!).

Both are excellent mods, and you can run both from a single copy of MTW2, since they dont overwrite any files and come with seperate executables.

Not that I've heard of. Where did you hear this? MTW2 looks awesome.

Sadly I don't have the macbook, so still probably screwed.:(

I googled 'Medieval Total War, Mac' and found a forum talking about it :P

Eh. The AOE games sit firmly in the same category (my mind) with Starcraft and the C&C games.
Rush games. Build as much as you can, as quickly as you can, and you'll win. Its all based on rock-paper-scissors, and actual strategy/tactics has no real effect on the gameplay. Play fast and you'll win.

Not true. If you are playing against someone of your level, you build as fast as the other person. And what happens when the other player plays just as fast as you? That's when strategy/tactics comes in. There's a reason why pro games last over an hour.

Don't have to take my word for it, just watch some replays of people that actually knows how to play the game.

I like MTW2, I just find it incredibly hard to get the cavalry units to charge properly. Most of the time they just charge, stop just in front of their victims and then draw their swords.

That, and I miss cavalry being so overpowered like they were in RTW (yay routing a Spartan Phalanx with some equites).

There are a number of requirements for an effective charge. Your cavalry needs to be in an organised line and needs to stay organised until it reaches its target - if there are trees or other objects in the way they will get disorganised and won't charge correctly. They need sufficient distance and they won't charge if their target is moving at a right angle to the charge. When it works its better than any Sacred Band or Cataphract charge in RTW.

I prefer the Total War series. Much more in-depth, and definitely deeper in terms of tactics. You can memorize all the stats in the game and still lose. EDIT: And like Tsaraine said, AOE requires way too much micromanagement. TW games save that for the turn-based campaign bit.


the campaign map is my favourite bit of TW games. i find playing the 3D battles tedious.... getting the long term strategies sorted out is much more my cup of tea. heh.

but back to the OP: i haven't played AOE3 at all (i bought Civ4 about the time AOE3 was out ;)) so i'm not much help :P

I want it for the Indian war elephants. Does China have a good fleet? Historically, it had probably the best in the world around the end of the Middle Ages.

China's fleet is okay. It's basically the same as the European fleets except with different graphical skins. Oh, and there are fireships. :tongue:

I'm very glad they've made the factions unique. Are their apearences unique as well as the game play? I hated that Ottoman villigers looked like European ones, and native buildings looked like touched up European ones in War Cheifs.

Yeah, the villagers and all buildings are completely unique (even walls!).

The spears were pointing the other way. ;)

Eh, in reality, that's actually kind of the point in battle. Charge the flanks of a Phalanx with cavalry to avoid the long spears, and break the formation(Which is slow moving and difficult to maneuver). However, I prefer the Egyptian approach of massing several of their 40-member cavalry units(Forget which one it is), and just charging in. When faced with 300 or so horsemen, even if rather inferior quality, routing is usually a cake-walk. Hell, I took out enemy spearmen with easy, using nothing more than a dozen or so of these as my army. Fast, agile, with an added OH-MY-GOD-THE-HORSEMEN! affect really just overrun everything on the field. Of course, when going for a siege, you're kind of stuck, and anything involving a choke-point really screws you, due to their rather poor morale. However, in an open field, they give you the numbers to have a very good flexible strictly cavalry army, capable of simultaneously bring in a heavy, fast charge on the front lines and flanking the rear, both with very large numbers. Never underestimate the capability of numbers(And over 1000 horses... hehe...).

China's fleet is okay. It's basically the same as the European fleets except with different graphical skins. Oh, and there are fireships. :tongue:



Yeah, the villagers and all buildings are completely unique (even walls!).

Nice. I was hoping they'd do that.

Not true. If you are playing against someone of your level, you build as fast as the other person. And what happens when the other player plays just as fast as you? That's when strategy/tactics comes in. There's a reason why pro games last over an hour.

Don't have to take my word for it, just watch some replays of people that actually knows how to play the game.

I'm not a great player, so in multiplayer I usually get stomped probably within 10-20 minutes unless its set on no rush. But there are some interesting tactics that can be useful. Sometimes its something you just wouldn't think of normally, like one time I played someone on New England and he built a ship in the middle of a lake to bomb my town. It had never occured to me to build a ship in a lake, I guess.:$

Same guy used canoo spam to kill my fleet.

Have you got the patches? Those fix (most) of the games big issues, although for some reason the two-handed weapon bug is still in place. Fortunately there's fixes out for that too.

I also suggest getting one of the mods thats out. Broken Crescent is EXCELLENT, its set in the Middle East, from Constantinople to India. Great gameplay, and cavalry is quite powerful, especially for some factions.

Stainless Steel is basically a reworking of MTW2 to make it more like good ol' MTW. Plus it adds some historical accuracy and a few missing factions (Kievan Rus! Huzzah!).

Both are excellent mods, and you can run both from a single copy of MTW2, since they dont overwrite any files and come with seperate executablesI have Kingdoms installed. I think that takes it up to 1.4 or something. Broken Crescent sounds awesome. I shall have to download that, though I think I might be getting total war overload at the moment. I've started to auto-resolve quite a few battles. :/

Oh, and two-handed weapon bug?

There are a number of requirements for an effective charge. Your cavalry needs to be in an organised line and needs to stay organised until it reaches its target - if there are trees or other objects in the way they will get disorganised and won't charge correctly. They need sufficient distance and they won't charge if their target is moving at a right angle to the charge. When it works its better than any Sacred Band or Cataphract charge in RTW.That sounds very annoying to organise... I'd prefer less micromanagement than that... like just pressing a charge button and they'd attempt to organise a charge from their current location whilst I go examine some other part of the battle. Even so, I still get lots of odd results. Like they'd all be organised a far distance away. I tell them to attack, but not run. Sometimes they'll charge the last bit and others they'll just continue to walk right up to the enemy. :confused: However, thanks for the tips.

Eh, in reality, that's actually kind of the point in battle. Charge the flanks of a Phalanx with cavalry to avoid the long spears, and break the formation(Which is slow moving and difficult to maneuver). However, I prefer the Egyptian approach of massing several of their 40-member cavalry units(Forget which one it is), and just charging in. When faced with 300 or so horsemen, even if rather inferior quality, routing is usually a cake-walk. Hell, I took out enemy spearmen with easy, using nothing more than a dozen or so of these as my army. Fast, agile, with an added OH-MY-GOD-THE-HORSEMEN! affect really just overrun everything on the field. Of course, when going for a siege, you're kind of stuck, and anything involving a choke-point really screws you, due to their rather poor morale. However, in an open field, they give you the numbers to have a very good flexible strictly cavalry army, capable of simultaneously bring in a heavy, fast charge on the front lines and flanking the rear, both with very large numbers. Never underestimate the capability of numbers(And over 1000 horses... hehe...).You mean desert cavalry? I thought they were 80-strength... Are you playing with half-size units? Though that tactic does sound awesome. My usual tactic is to stick with light-cavalry (especially if they have high stamina and are fast moving) and just bait the army into moving out of formation and then its one big charge. In RTW formation/skirmishing is always the longest part of the battle, with the actual fight being over in a minute or two. Except city-battles -- those are always a slog. Which is why I try not to auto-resolve them. I find them more tactically interesting than fighting on open plains and less frustrating than fighting in woods.

You mean desert cavalry? I thought they were 80-strength... Are you playing with half-size units? Though that tactic does sound awesome.

You are correct, sir! Been a while since I played, and couldn't remember. Anywho, yes, it is awesome... in open ground. Very fast, very mobile. I have routed pretty much any army have faced with it on the open/semi open maps. Even Spartans cannot match it(Although a straight charge will massacre, you send some in to keep them busy on the front, and come in on the flanks with the bulk.) You will have so many units that, if done correctly, the enemy units won't be able to respond at all, and won't be able to change position with their spears. Heavy cavalry is completely overwhelmed by sheer number(Hell, most Spearmen are overwhelmed, forcing them to close-quartered combat, and losing their spears), normal infantry and bowmen are just massacred, routing almost instantly(Within a few second of the charge). Then it is just a cake-walk to round up the routing army as they run. Also, you can't ever let up the attack, because you will incur heavy losses, and an enemy that has regrouped will be able to overcome you.


My usual tactic is to stick with light-cavalry (especially if they have high stamina and are fast moving) and just bait the army into moving out of formation and then its one big charge. In RTW formation/skirmishing is always the longest part of the battle, with the actual fight being over in a minute or two. Except city-battles -- those are always a slog. Which is why I try not to auto-resolve them. I find them more tactically interesting than fighting on open plains and less frustrating than fighting in woods.
[/quote]
Pretty much. Well placed skirmishing and cavalry charges/retreats will end the day for most. City battles, it depends, really. If it is so incredibly out-weighted in my favor, I'll usually just auto-resolve. No point in fighting them, as I will incur no losses anyway, and there very little tactics to it. Just rush into the gates, and end it. Bigger cities, on the other hand, or more difficult ones, yes, by all means(Not only for the tactics, but also to reduce losses/ensure victory. Even a fight heavily weighted against you can be won with good tactics).


I find them more tactically interesting than fighting on open plains and less frustrating than fighting in woods.

True, however it all depends on the diversity of the fields, and the woods are just pains in the ass. Always a pain in the ass. You think you have the day won? HOLY SHIT HERE COMES THE HIDDEN ARMY!

You are correct, sir! Been a while since I played, and couldn't remember. Anywho, yes, it is awesome... in open ground. Very fast, very mobile. I have routed pretty much any army have faced with it on the open/semi open maps. Even Spartans cannot match it(Although a straight charge will massacre, you send some in to keep them busy on the front, and come in on the flanks with the bulk.) You will have so many units that, if done correctly, the enemy units won't be able to respond at all, and won't be able to change position with their spears. Heavy cavalry is completely overwhelmed by sheer number(Hell, most Spearmen are overwhelmed, forcing them to close-quartered combat, and losing their spears), normal infantry and bowmen are just massacred, routing almost instantly(Within a few second of the charge). Then it is just a cake-walk to round up the routing army as they run. Also, you can't ever let up the attack, because you will incur heavy losses, and an enemy that has regrouped will be able to overcome you.I reckon I could take you with that strategy. Probably with the Seleucids. Front line of Phalanxes flanked by their late mock-legionary unit. A second line of more legionary units behind them to help prevent easy flanking and to provide quick maneuverability. This formation would be further flanked on both sides by some elephants and possibly some chariots (both good cavalry killers). Finally, I might have a couple of cavalry units at the back to help pin down any cavalry that escapes the front line or flanks.

Pretty much. Well placed skirmishing and cavalry charges/retreats will end the day for most. City battles, it depends, really. If it is so incredibly out-weighted in my favor, I'll usually just auto-resolve. No point in fighting them, as I will incur no losses anyway, and there very little tactics to it. Just rush into the gates, and end it. Bigger cities, on the other hand, or more difficult ones, yes, by all means(Not only for the tactics, but also to reduce losses/ensure victory. Even a fight heavily weighted against you can be won with good tactics).But also the other way around. Do you have Barbarian Invasion? Playing as Rome and defending your cities from the hordes is lots of fun. Especially at 1:3 ratios or more! I remember successfully defending a city with the invader being ten times as strong as me. That was awesome.

True, however it all depends on the diversity of the fields, and the woods are just pains in the ass. Always a pain in the ass. You think you have the day won? HOLY SHIT HERE COMES THE HIDDEN ARMY!No, no, no, you misunderstand me. It's not that their army is hidden. I can cope with that. But that MY army is hidden, I can't see the bastards for all the damn trees.

Hill battles can be cool, mainly because it requires lots of extra maneuvering and strategic positioning, especially if there are a couple of trees around to hide in.

I reckon I could take you with that strategy. Probably with the Seleucids. Front line of Phalanxes flanked by their late mock-legionary unit. A second line of more legionary units behind them to help prevent easy flanking and to provide quick maneuverability. This formation would be further flanked on both sides by some elephants and possibly some chariots (both good cavalry killers). Finally, I might have a couple of cavalry units at the back to help pin down any cavalry that escapes the front line or flanks.


Hrmphf. Damn elephants. It's not so much that they are good with killing cavalry in and of itself, but they frighten the horses. Which then get slaughtered.

Counter that with bowmen. Fire Arrows+Elephants=elephants on a rampage. :D

Of course, if we're talking PvP battles, my massive cavalry is going to need a few back up units(I like onagers, which will pummel your Phalanxes from afar! Granted, they get killed if you get to them, but eh. Not to worried). I was speaking more so on the computer, but I have won many a battle by massing the Deserts. Of course, the key is to understanding the limitations: Relatively weak, and somewhat easily routed. The main idea is to break the enemy's morale as quickly as possible and charge their open flanks with your first charge. If you fail this, the battle is most assuredly lost. You will have incurred heavy losses, your cavalry will be routing(And subsequently massacred very quickly), and IF you do regain footing, you simply won't have the horsemen to overcome it. Like I said, open field, it's a very reliable strategy: Route the enemy, and once you have a "hole" in their line, don't let up. Send in the rest, and the remaining units will assuredly route. Just takes timing.


But also the other way around. Do you have Barbarian Invasion? Playing as Rome and defending your cities from the hordes is lots of fun. Especially at 1:3 ratios or more! I remember successfully defending a city with the invader being ten times as strong as me. That was awesome.

Actually no I don't, however defending is always a blast if the odds are decently weighted against you. Sometimes I just do auto-battles where the odds are so heavily weighted against me that I *should* lose, yet hold.


No, no, no, you misunderstand me. It's not that their army is hidden. I can cope with that. But that MY army is hidden, I can't see the bastards for all the damn trees.

Hill battles can be cool, mainly because it requires lots of extra maneuvering and strategic positioning, especially if there are a couple of trees around to hide in.

Ack! I repressed those memories of being blinded from my army. Horrible, horrible thing. I have actually diverted my armies completely, wasting a couple turns in the process, simply to avoid a forest fight.

A little question, which is a little off the original topic, but so is everything else being posted in this thread, so...

When I play AOE3, I usually play brits. Normally I use musketeers as my main force, backed up by rocket artillery. The thing about muskets being that they can fight either at range or hand to hand, with the bayonet. But I typically get my ass handed to me. Part of that is I often neglect the unit upgrades, but I'm wondering if i'd be better off with a combination of dedicated meele troops and dedicated ranged troops, as opposed to huge numbers of just muskets.

So can any experienced players tell me which is more cost effective in general: lots of muskets or a mixed force of longbows and pikes?

My only complain with AOE 3 is that the maps are way tOO small

My only complain with AOE 3 is that the maps are way tOO small

Well, some are better than others. The worst are the water based maps like Caribean, because their's to little room to manuver the ships, and when they bunch close togeather, the ship graphics stick through eachother, which is ugly and stupid as hell.

Yes... and boats are HUGE...in such a tiny map...its ridiculous. But over all, its a good game.

I personally prefer LOTR: Battle for the middle earth.

And the BEST RTS game... Warhammer 40K : Dawn of war....with all its expansions.

Yes... and boats are HUGE...in such a tiny map...its ridiculous. But over all, its a good game.

I personally prefer LOTR: Battle for the middle earth.

And the BEST RTS game... Warhammer 40K : Dawn of war....with all its expansions.

I heard complaints about Battle for Middle Earth precisely on the basis that it was too small-scale. A battle would be like, 50 soldeirs per side, right? While the books had battles with probably 50000+, and the movies had armies in the hundreds of thousands.

A good Lord of the Rings game would be awesome, but its hard to imagine a game that would do justice to Middle Earth. Maybe one of the Total War mods out their, which brings this thread back to how badass the Total War games are;).

I heard complaints about Battle for Middle Earth precisely on the basis that it was too small-scale. A battle would be like, 50 soldeirs per side, right? While the books had battles with probably 50000+, and the movies had armies in the hundreds of thousands.

A good Lord of the Rings game would be awesome, but its hard to imagine a game that would do justice to Middle Earth. Maybe one of the Total War mods out their, which brings this thread back to how badass the Total War games are;).

You are right. The battles are very, very small for the epic size that the novels give. But the ability to customize your heroes and the cool units, plus spells and a RISK alike battle game make up for this.

I would kill your mother for a Total War: Lord of the Rings.:mp5:

You are right. The battles are very, very small for the epic size that the novels give. But the ability to customize your heroes and the cool units, plus spells and a RISK alike battle game make up for this.

I would kill your mother for a Total War: Lord of the Rings.:mp5:

I'm fairly sure their are multiple mods for either Rome or Medieval. I'll see if I can find one and post a link later.

I'm fairly sure their are multiple mods for either Rome or Medieval. I'll see if I can find one and post a link later.

That would be cool!

I promise to release your mom unharm once the mods are delivered :p

The problems with AoE3... are that:

1) Once you start getting decent cards (say, L15+ home city), you can totally run rings around the computer... even on the hardest difficulty. The computer's cards are almost always settlers or military cards, but those are the least useful!

2) The computer is inept against walls. If you wall your island and set up towers, you're invincible. If you wall off your opponents, they don't even try to get around you by another means.
For example, on the Japanese map, go out early and find the two native camps. Build a wall across the big island with them on your side. The computer will try countless assaults against you (and four towers and a fort will hold them to zero progress)! THEY NEVER TRY A NAVAL ASSAULT to go around the wall!

3) Monitor ships are too powerful against some targets, too weak against others.
WHY can a tech'd up monitor destroy a Fort or Town Center in two shots? Then can't destroy a dock in 5? WEIRD.

4) A surgeon or two for you destroys game balance.
Once you have a surgeon out there near your wall, your units almost never die. HUGE advantage, eh?

5) Computer players RARELY level up, let alone quickly. Any human that can win a game of checkers can get to Level 5 and womp on 3 computer players at Level 3 or 4.

I mean, its fun, but only one game a week or so. I've played 5 different Civs up to L70 cities at this point (Russia, Germany, Iroquois, Dutch, Japanese). No matter what Civ you play, these weaknesses in the game don't change.

I personally prefer AoE2 withThe Conquers expansion.
I got bored of 3, with the levelling up your home city etc and the business with cards and such, it was still fun, but you can't get a ball rolling as fast as you can in AoE2.

Two weaknesses i've noticed, one of which is probably a bug or computer glitch and one of which is just bad computer ai.

Number one is that sometimes I can only unload troops from ships one at a time, very slowly. As in I click once, wait a second or 2, then click again.

The other is that when you destroy a dock, the computer builds a new one in the same spot. Again and again. So I park a monitor their and blow each apart as its built, ensuring complete control of all water on the map for little effort. Also, sometimes I think the computer will sit a group of soldiers in range of my ships, attack with a few at a time, and get worn down to nothing.:confused:

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why you play multiplayer.