09-11-2011, 09:32 PM
L23 egypt. Game has potential, but it's got some obnoxious problems. I'd wait to see what they do with it by the end of the year.
My problems mainly revolve around really terrible coop, the inability to play skirmish (although that will be addressed later... for $10, I'm sure), and the god-awful long "tutorial". The game is mindnumbingly simple until L20+ when you unlock Age IV and the missions start getting challenging, but man it's a long slog to get there.
I also think the idea of locking so many basic units is silly, in a RTS. Having to unlock very basic units/structures via points achieved through level-ups makes the tech tree less about interesting choices and customization and more just a grind.
That being said, I could see myself really enjoying this game, it all depends on what direction they take the game.
09-12-2011, 12:24 AM
Yeah, the grind got to me. I'm not generally the most grind-happy of players- it got to me in WoW as well, or anything like MarioKart where you have to work on stupid unlocks for content.
So the idea of spending that long grinding out basic RTS units just stopped appealing to me when there's so many other good games to play and have fun with immediately. Skirmish mode and/or PvP is usually my favorite thing in RTS- precisely because you have all the toy men in your army to play with- and in AoEO this has the same gimped box of toys as single player.
09-12-2011, 09:23 AM
L24 Greek. I am having fun, and plan to continue playing.
09-12-2011, 03:04 PM
Well I did play a little more today after a long break and I finally hit level 10, and I did kind of enjoy that. It's just that each level takes longer than the one before and level 40 seems a long, long way off. I'm climbing Mt. Everest and the summit's still way, way up in the clouds.
There is a LOT of stuff to do in this game though and I enjoy all the paraphernalia surrounding the game.
09-12-2011, 03:07 PM
The game is definitely more enjoyable past 10, and moreso past L20. Like you say, though.. it can feel like a long way off. At L24 I feel as though I'm challenged in many missions and I finally have enough tools to make the game interesting.
09-15-2011, 11:35 AM
I'm level 40 now, and XP means nothing now. Kinda makes playing worthless. The only missions are repeatables and I'm bored. I guess for now, I "finished" the game. The trading aspect is a pathetic joke. Just like Facebook games. Maybe another day I'll discuss it, but not now. I'll just say this: like the Facebook shit, there's some kind of dupe bug that lets some people clone epic items they then sell for 10-50K. Fuck that.
And if you want to see some silly business, visit Yoncore's Greek city.
type visit /yoncore in the bottom window client. If you visit, do return here and let us all know what you think. ;-)
PS: The Greek civilization is a gimped piece of Microsoft shit. Egyptians have those HUGE elephants that the Greeks have nothing to counter them with. Talk about a lob sided side.
09-15-2011, 01:59 PM
Is it that bad? The problem I have as Egypt is that the Elephants (and priests) are the only useful unit I have, other than maybe chariot archers. Seriously, their infantry are awful, especially the slingers, and I find camel riders to be quite poor as well.
I just try to turtle up until I get some elephants, since building military units before then feels futile. But again, I've only played as Egypt so I can't really compare, but I really like the stronger greek fortifications and their vastly superior army (I'd kill for those archers or a well-rounded infantry unit) that my coop partner brings to the table.
09-15-2011, 06:39 PM
But now that you're level forty you're ready to PVP now, right? Isn't that the whole point of leveling up so you can finally PVP?
I expect I'll be tired out and probably stop playing then too. That's why they need to release new civs so you can startnall over again. Haha
09-15-2011, 09:00 PM
Haha at first I did not get what the big deal was with yoncore, all I could see were the basic starter buildings which I thought was odd. Then the rest of the city loaded.
09-15-2011, 10:38 PM
Yeah, that city is insanely crazy!
09-29-2011, 06:00 AM
Rachel here with another upset. In the next few weeks, via the next major patch, Microsoft will introduce Legendary gear that trumps epic. ARGHHHHH!! The trading "forum" (tab) is full of Chinese hackers/exploiters. Someone selling several epics at once? Right-click their name and select Game Card. Odds are, their country is China. If Microsoft can't stop them using a server-side game, you guys think Blizzard will with Diablo III? My only wish left, is for Tom to do a follow up expose on the trading situation for this game. It's disheartening.
09-29-2011, 06:03 AM
09-29-2011, 06:10 AM
Well, running WoW has probably given Blizzard more experience with just that sort of problem.
Originally Posted by Rachel Brown
09-29-2011, 07:28 AM
Come now, Microsoft is smarter than Blizzard. Are you suggesting otherwise?
09-29-2011, 07:30 AM
Originally Posted by Rachel Brown
09-29-2011, 11:29 AM
They are finally releasing their first post-release patch today. Some fixes, XP adjustments, and UI changes. Oh yeah, and Legendary gear is included too.
Also, not sure if anyone has been following, but a big to-do is that they announced (with little detail and not implemented in todays patch) that they will be making Ranked PvP balanced and equal footing from rank 1.
Most, if not all, assume this means they will be removing gear from Ranked PvP so its all player skill-based and not affected by advantages and bonuses given to players by the gear they have equipped.
Personally, I understand why they want to do this, competitive PvP'ers have been screaming for this, but to me this takes away one of the more unique RTS-MMO elements from the game. Of course, the default response to my opinion is "just play unranked pvp". It seems this upcoming change is going to make the competitive PvP scene happy.
09-29-2011, 11:56 AM
My mind boggles at the thought that any group would want to play this game in a tournament setting for money.
09-29-2011, 12:00 PM
That reminds me of netstorm, which had similar mechanics of ranking up. You could sacrifice the enemy's general to gain a level, which gave you access to more technology. Once you hit the max level, you could then up your rank instead, which reset your tech level to 1, but for every rank you had, your units did something like 10-25% more damage/hp. (And then you could start over trying to gain levels so you could gain more rank, etc.)
The tournament crowd pretty quickly just made characters that were rank 1 but at the max level and never sacrificed any more generals.
It's kind of funny to see history repeat itself on AoEOnline.
10-28-2011, 12:05 AM
So is anyone still playing this?
10-28-2011, 02:35 AM
Not me. I got burned out. Nothing to do. Legendary is shit. After completing 30+ legendary quests and collecting 150 treasures, I got 1 legendary and maybe 5 epics. Absolutely not worth it. All but two of the legendary quests are timed, designed for the 16 year old morons. This game is not turtle friendly. In fact it's not even turtle neutral. The trading is pathetic and 3500% overpriced, and full of Chinese spammers selling gold.
Originally Posted by Kevin Perry
If experience would convert to gold (at a smaller rate, say 10%) I'd play it some more. Once you reach level 40 experience is wasted.
10-28-2011, 04:49 AM
I am, but only sporadically. The leveling curve is just way, way too slow. Im currently stuck at 19, after getting stuffed by Hector 3 times in a row. I'd like to try multiplayer, though.
10-28-2011, 06:48 AM
I found the missions to be absolutely shit, skirmish mode vs AI is more fun, if you got age of empires 3. This constant buildup to max age which takes about 20 minutes, and then 5 minutes of combat as I take my maxed out army and play whack-a-mole with the AI, is dreadful gameplay.
Shame really, but the game really isn't very good.
10-28-2011, 08:06 AM
This game has some good ideas but it was implemented poorly, IMO. Coop is a disaster, you have to grind and grind and grind just to unlock fewer options than what AOE3 gave you from the start, and you can't even "PVP" (Argh how I hate that term) until you grind either.
I was really excited about the prospect of a RTS game that had a lot of persistence and a strong online component. I tried very hard to like it, but I was sorely disappointed on both fronts. Making me spend literally 20-40(?) hours to just unlock the tech tree that I had in previous AOE games is not fun. For all that work as well, I really don't feel like there's much in the way of specialization possible in the trees. Two Egyptian players are basically going to be playing the exact same way.
All in all, I felt like they took the worst aspects of MMOs (grind for exp, grind for gear, gear gating, gear deciding battles, etc) and none of the good (multiplayer). The MP component to the game is seriously wretched, probably the most anemic MP suite for any RTS (Not counting SP-only games, obviously) I've played. You're limited to at most Coop with 1 other partner, and oftentimes that's done very poorly.
Example: Say you have a quest to defend your town for 15 minutes from attackers. Because it's a defend mission, the primary player starts out with a good number of resources, towers, buildings, and already upgraded to Age 2 or 3. Basically, you're intended to start cranking out the units right away. Your coop partner, on the other hand, starts out with next to no resources and 5 villagers in an undefended town hall outside Player 1's walls. If you're lucky and don't get streamrolled, you just might be fast enough to get your Civ upgraded to point of usefulness right before the map ends. Sound like fun? Yea, me either.
That being said, GPG is probably my favorite RTS developer right now. The original design wasn't theirs, so I'm planning on checking back in a year or two and see what they've been able to do with the game. They've made it sound like they have some pretty big plans, so I'll see. I'm certainly not holding my breath, though.
10-28-2011, 08:29 AM
I play once in a while, but not very often. It is such a grind that it has pretty much lost all sense of fun so I don't get the itch very often.
10-28-2011, 08:47 AM
Agreed, I like GPG. However, Robot Entertainment really screwed the pooch on this one.
Originally Posted by KevinC
Edit: Telefrog, I'll give you that. Am sure that M$ ran it behind the scenes into the ground. I know Robot left development of AOEO early this year. I'd be interested in knowing what the politics of that was. Of course they wanted to make other games like Orcs Must Die, just curious if there were other extenuating circumstances besides just that.
Last edited by drish311; 10-28-2011 at 09:12 AM.
10-28-2011, 08:52 AM
Yea, it felt like the design was "How can we monetize an RTS?" first, "How can we make this a fun game?" second.
10-28-2011, 09:00 AM
Well, to be fair, I'm pretty sure Robot didn't purposefully make a horrible grindy money-suck game becasue that's what they always wanted to do. I imagine MS direction had a lot to do with the final product.
10-28-2011, 09:14 AM
I want to play AOE... but then I log in, realize I'm level 6 and theres a ton of unlocking to do. I typically promptly log out.
10-28-2011, 09:40 AM
I agree. And it's the one thing that has me a little skeptical about the future of the game. If this were strictly GPGs baby I really wouldn't have much of a worry, but I don't understand where the line is between what GPG wants to do and what MS wants to do.
Originally Posted by Telefrog
01-11-2012, 11:51 AM
The Skirmish Hall is out now, and it's free for a limited period. And if I'm understanding it correctly, this means if you "purchase" it today, you won't ever have to pay for it, so if you still have any interest in playing AoEO, grab it now.
In the skirmish mode, all units are unlocked, but technologies are... not? Using a freshly created capital city, I can build completely useless armories that contain no upgrades.