Age of Empires 3: Asian Dynasties Announced

For any AOE fans, the latest expansion was announced a while ago!

From Gamespy:

Quote:

---

Looks like Microsoft's renowned real-time strategy series is setting its sights on the Far East. Age of Empires III: The Asian Dynasties, the second expansion pack for AoE III, introduces new playable Asian civilizations. Included are new game styles and random map styles as well as 15 new Asian "wonders".

Big Huge Games, the development studio headed by Brian Reynolds, is developing the add-on. Reynolds says, "We feel that the in-depth experience of Big Huge Games in the real-time strategy genre, combined with the solid reputation of the Age of Empires franchise, will result in something fresh and unique for gamers." Age of Empires III: The Asian Dynasties is expected to ship for the PC this fall.

---

So they've moved from America to Asia? A bit fast, though it will be pretty coool playing as Samurai's and stuff.

Quote:

---

Players can now experience firsthand the rich and historical influences of Asia while commanding their units and expanding their empire in this Age of Empires expansion pack.
In addition to the introduction of playable Asian civilizations, the expansion pack provides new content and several new gameplay elements that include new ways of winning and trading, random map styles that feature remixes of classic "Age of Empires" game styles, and 15 new Asian "Wonders."

---

What do you think? Is this a good move? Or should've they moved to IV?

AoEIII = bad idea from the start.
I cant even move my units in formation

Russo Japanese sea as a campain maybe? or a another fictional thing :blank2:

I'm guessing it's more along the lines of the Chinese/Japanese dynasties.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kekvit Irae

AoEIII = bad idea from the start.

---

i agree. when i bought AOE3 this Feb i utterly regreted it.

Well I guess it says only 'New playable Asian Factions' so at a guess I'd say, Japan,China and India for the British.

AoE I was nice, but had serious flaws.
AoE II was great, and quite polished.
AoE III was a joke, and I doubt having Samurai fighting Bouddhist Monks will make it any better.

I like AoE 3. I had no problems with it, other than it got boring unless you got good at it, which I did. The game seemed to be simple and fun.

The most appalling thing about AoEIII was the lack of any sort of historical campaign. I wanted the French-Indian Wars, and the War of Independence, or even the Napoleonic Wars in Europe (why they included Russians in a colonization game without giving us Napoleon's wars is beyond me). Instead, they gave us a mediocre campaign base on fantasy.

Booo Aoeiii.... Aoeii Ftw!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kekvit Irae

The most appalling thing about AoEIII was the lack of any sort of historical campaign. I wanted the French-Indian Wars, and the War of Independence, or even the Napoleonic Wars in Europe (why they included Russians in a colonization game without giving us Napoleon's wars is beyond me). Instead, they gave us a mediocre campaign base on fantasy.

---

The Multiplayer appeal was enough for me. I did not even bother with the campaign.

AoE II will remain the best historical RTS around. And even it's one of the best RTS in the gaming world.

AoE III is a pretty good game, although I have only played AoE I, so I can't compare it to AoE II. Sorry about that.

May I suggest that, if you guys are disappointed with AoE III, that you try out the Warchiefs Expansion Pack. It may not be historically perfect in a quite a few terms, but it has lost all traces of the mythical "Circle of Ossus" and now revolves around the epic American Civil War and the bloody Battles Against the Sioux - includes a mission to kill General Cluster!

In my humble and pathetic opinion, I am sorry to say that I don't find it as good as the original game - sometimes I find the storyline aspect more interesting that the historical side. However it was still a very enjoyable new campaign and I'm sure that you historical types will enjoy it much more that the original fantastical game.

Hope this helps you guys, cheers!

AOE2 > AOE1 > Horse Manure > A film by Uwe Boll > AOE3

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Omanes Alexandrapolites

AoE III is a pretty good game, although I have only played AoE I, so I can't compare it to AoE II. Sorry about that.

May I suggest that, if you guys are disappointed with AoE III, that you try out the Warchiefs Expansion Pack. It may not be historically perfect in a quite a few terms, but it has lost all traces of the mythical "Circle of Ossus" and now revolves around the epic American Civil War and the bloody Battles Against the Sioux - includes a mission to kill General Cluster!

In my humble and pathetic opinion, I am sorry to say that I don't find it as good as the original game - sometimes I find the storyline aspect more interesting that the historical side. However it was still a very enjoyable new campaign and I'm sure that you historical types will enjoy it much more that the original fantastical game.

Hope this helps you guys, cheers!

---

Aside from the lack of a historical campaign, AoEIII felt bland because each civilization felt like every other civilization. Except for some blatant game-breaking balance issues (Netherlands + banks = OMG), there was no difference between players.
In AoEII, every civilization received their own unique unit, which filled very specific roles. Many of them were not the end-all be-all unit like the Phalanx was in AoEI. For example, the Mongol unique unit was a horse archer that dealt extreme damage to siege weapons. This means that a good player will keep anyone from knocking at their castle doors with trebuchets. How do you counter this? The English has the Longbowmen, your basic archery unit with vastly upgraded range, second only to the trebuchet, killing anything that gets near a group of them. How do you counter this? The Teutons (I forget) have the Huscarls, which are infantry units that have massive armor bonuses against missile weapons. How do you counter this? The Japanese Samurai is a foot infantry that has a damage bonus against other unique units.
All in all, AoEII was like a historical StarCraft, a fine-tuned game of rock-paper-scissors. AoEIII... well, you get a bunch of field cannons and musketeers if you want to destroy stuff.

Also, where is the encyclopedia? I liked reading about all the civilizations in AoEII, but is strangely missing in AoEIII.

I've played them all, and in my honest opinion, I've liked 'em all.

I liked the first one, as it was very good,campaign and unit wise. Number two rocked as it was medieval with awesome factions/etc, and I loved III because it had a more fiction campaign which made it a tad more fun.

To me AoE1 was great. I liked playing as ancient empires (Greeks fighting the trojans level).

AoE2 was great too because of the new features (formations).

AoE3 I havent played yet, well the demo and I liked it. I'll wait till it goes down to $19.99 (nothing to do with the playability, just want to pay less).

I don't want to pay as much as Microsoft want me to pay to replace my broken copy. I am going to wait for the Gold Edition to buy it at a steal.