what should i get Empires or RoN

**Tsavong** · 12-11-2005, 19:05

Empires: Dawn of the Modern World
Or Rise of nations
which do you think is batter, ive played thedemos of bouth, RoN seems good, thow the demo of Empires dident gave so much, just looked like Emprie Earth which i have so is it worth buying?

**Mongoose** · 12-11-2005, 19:36

No, buy RON. Empires was mediocre, being some what like Empire earth but with out the epic feel.

The empires AI was awful. RON, on the other hand, had a fairly good AI.

**Marshal Murat** · 12-11-2005, 21:50

I got Empires and regretted it ever since.
RoN, that I've played, and found it thrilling, like a epic Age of Empires, world encompassing. Very nice.

**Tsavong** · 12-12-2005, 23:23

Ic, i must say i have enjoyed playing the RoN demo, (instead of righting my essay for uni

) though empires DoMW still appeals to me as it seems every civ is unique is this true? and dose it affect strategies when using different civs?
oh and ive seen pics of sea battles wich seem to have ships from what appers to be the last level, ie WW1 ships with WW2, and others dose this meen units dont upgrade like in AOE or RON etc?

any other games that you would recomend i look at 1st
i have EE 1 and AOE2 and know of AOE 3 (got the demo too :p )

**The Stranger** · 12-13-2005, 20:15

EDotMW SUCKS>>>>DAMN WANNABE GAME

**Mongoose** · 12-13-2005, 20:21

"...as it seems every civ is unique is this true?"

Hell no. In the middle ages, there are only two different catagories. And the CIVs in the same catagory aren't really that different. And certain civs completely lack types of units(The english don't have pike men, for example).

Avoid it at all costs and get RON instead.

**Tsavong** · 12-13-2005, 22:30

Thats all i wanted to know, note to selfe naver beleve reviews

to RON it is!

**Mongoose** · 12-13-2005, 23:04

Well, empires isn't really that bad, but it pales next to EE and alot of the stuff they added is just annoying(Way too many magical effects that, IMO, hurt the gameplay) In an effort to make the civs different, they didn't add units; they just removed them. i can understand that the chinese would have uints that the english don't, but removing pike men? Thats just the soopiederest thing i've ever heard.

**Tsavong** · 12-14-2005, 15:02

true, pike men were a part of the English army for a time like most other European powers
if i rambler correctly they are used to defend musketeers from cavalry right

**The Stranger** · 12-15-2005, 18:31

in Empires...the english had crossbowmen and the french berserkers...WHATAFAK...thats just plain stupid...the units ***** up and...i just wont get started bout that fiasco

**Tsavong** · 12-15-2005, 20:15

im gunna sound old now but it seems to me they don’t make games like the once did. i reamer effort gone into games with great cut seens, that did not use in game graphics and a good story and stuff. People don’t seem to put the effort in so much theses days.... sigh

**lars573** · 12-16-2005, 04:31

Originally Posted by Zerg

im gunna sound old now but it seems to me they don’t make games like the once did. i reamer effort gone into games with great cut seens, that did not use in game graphics and a good story and stuff. People don’t seem to put the effort in so much theses days.... sigh

I think it's not lack of effort it's just that making 3D games takes more man hours to produce than their 2D sprite equivalent. So in days of yore making the actual graphics only took 50% of the development time where as now it seems to take like 75%.

in Empires...the english had crossbowmen and the french berserkers...WHATAFAK...thats just plain stupid...the units ***** up and...i just wont get started bout that fiasco

The French don't exist as a seperate nation until WW1. The Franks do have berserkers. But the Franks are a hybrid of medieval Germany and France.

Truth is Empires isn't that bad, provided you only play WW1/WW2. These eras are where the game shines.