why people play treaty?
-
- Lancer
- Posts: 655
- Joined: Sep 9, 2015
- ESO: Supernapoleon
- Location: Munich
Re: why people play treaty?
If there will not be treaty implemented in AoE3 DE I do not see any reason why I should buy it.
- dicktator_
- Howdah
- Posts: 1565
- Joined: Nov 14, 2015
- ESO: Conquerer999
Re: why people play treaty?
deleted_user wrote:I like how this all (seemingly) started as a joke from @lordraphael to remove the TR game mode from AoE IV/AoE3DE for no reason other than to "trigger" (holy fuq I actually used that word) TR players. And look where we are now...
Except he wasn't joking lol.
steniothejonjoe wrote:I can micro better than 99% of the player base and that's 100% objective
- Hidddy_
- Retired Contributor
- Posts: 379
- Joined: Jan 9, 2017
- ESO: Hidalgito
- Location: Miami, Florida, USA
Re: why people play treaty?
Imo killing treaty would be terrible for the community. I think one actual concern people should have with aoe3DE is the civ balance. If treaty and supremacy are both in the DE, it would be nice if they tweaked the civ balance differently in the two game modes. It'd be like having TP and EP in the same game
De Funk
-
- Ninja
- Posts: 14364
- Joined: Mar 26, 2015
Re: why people play treaty?
Hidddy_ wrote:Imo killing treaty would be terrible for the community. I think one actual concern people should have with aoe3DE is the civ balance. If treaty and supremacy are both in the DE, it would be nice if they tweaked the civ balance differently in the two game modes. It'd be like having TP and EP in the same game
very nice made up post! I like the idea of having improved treaty with AOE3DE
- dietschlander
- Lancer
- Posts: 944
- Joined: Oct 8, 2015
- Location: Dietschland
Re: why people play treaty?
Idea: having pre-made bases.
saves 40 minutes, go walk a dog
saves 40 minutes, go walk a dog
Theres going to be a dam, the great dam and we'll let the beavers pay for it - Edeholland 2016
Anyway, nuancing isn't your forte, so I'll agree with you like I would with a 8 year old: violence is bad, don't do hard drugs and stay in school Benj98
Anyway, nuancing isn't your forte, so I'll agree with you like I would with a 8 year old: violence is bad, don't do hard drugs and stay in school Benj98
- Gichtenlord
- Howdah
- Posts: 1437
- Joined: Nov 15, 2015
Re: why people play treaty?
dietschlander wrote:Idea: having pre-made bases.
saves 40 minutes, go walk a dog
Good idea. Thanks!
r]
-
- Lancer
- Posts: 970
- Joined: Mar 6, 2016
Re: why people play treaty?
dietschlander wrote:Idea: having pre-made bases.
saves 40 minutes, go walk a dog
Most players enjoy the boom period. Also having premade base and resources will remove skill as certain civs are quite hard to boom with.
- Hidddy_
- Retired Contributor
- Posts: 379
- Joined: Jan 9, 2017
- ESO: Hidalgito
- Location: Miami, Florida, USA
Re: why people play treaty?
Must agree there with IP, the boom period is very important as is the post-40 macro (especially for cowing civs). Removing the 40 minute boom period would ruin the game mode for treaty players. However, it would be great to implement something like Gichten's 40 in 10 scenario as an option for players who want to get straight to the fighting and don't mind having preset resources.
Edit: giving credit where credit is do
Edit: giving credit where credit is do
De Funk
- ocemilky
- Dragoon
- Posts: 205
- Joined: Aug 5, 2015
- ESO: Motch | Milky__
Re: why people play treaty?
sergyou wrote:i won't even bother reply to ur posts anymore and id like u to the same and not quote me
howlingwolfpaw wrote:cognitive dissonance is what people suffer from when refusing to look at 9/11 truth.
- Hidddy_
- Retired Contributor
- Posts: 379
- Joined: Jan 9, 2017
- ESO: Hidalgito
- Location: Miami, Florida, USA
Re: why people play treaty?
Was I misinformed? I saw a stream once where he talked about the scenario, he was talking like it was his
Guess I shouldn't assume
De Funk
- _NiceKING_
- Retired Contributor
- Posts: 1795
- Joined: Sep 16, 2015
- ESO: _NiceKING_
- GameRanger ID: 9999999
- Clan: Xbox
Re: why people play treaty?
Hidddy_ wrote:
Was I misinformed? I saw a stream once where he talked about the scenario, he was talking like it was his
Guess I shouldn't assume
viewtopic.php?f=176&t=10190
-
- Crossbow
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Nov 28, 2017
- Location: Downunder (Aus/NZ)
Re: why people play treaty?
First post, new on here. Be nice!
Oh, and keep the Treaty.
+1
In fact they should EXPAND it if anything; why not allow up to say a 60min treaty?
I am getting good-ish* at treaty and have barely finished building a robust base with a good first attack at the 40min mark (starting from Discovery age).
If treaty is about post-imperial madness /base building, then why not allow even more time to get it perfect?!
Allowing 60min (or even say 90min!) would allow new/noob players more time :) - which might be more fun for them. I might stick to 20/30/40min myself but hey give 'em the choice I say.
In fact, it's all about choice... why remove treaty if you can simply choose not to play it?
Get over yourselves whoever wants to ban it! Let others do what they like (while you sit on your high-horse..)
Its effectively just a different game play style. And I happen to like it
Agree: the Devs should better balance the Civs for AOE3 DE/AOE4, and also allow more than 2 teams.
Also, regarding the AI in treaty: the Devs could make the AI much better in treaty by changing their strategy accordingly (including, especially, the home city card choice).
Regarding lag in online/network treaty games: this is more a problem of any of: the game programming, the internet connection, or the user computer specs, than the game mode itself.
Aside: For those of you who joined here a while ago, you may have forgotten this little registration blurb so I'll post it up for your convenience:
"You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-orientated.."
"You agree that “ESOCommunity” have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time should we see fit.."
( *: I say 'good-ish' as I'm new-ish and have just beat 7x expert allied AI with a +100% resource handicap each, with usual tactics (not using Aklaks wall-madness or pause-micro etc). I'm probably not so good against human players though! Unless playing as OP French, with a long treaty period, haha! And even then probably not so good!..).
Oh, and keep the Treaty.
Lake_69 wrote:Adding myself to the treaty fan brigade. Live & let live I say
+1
In fact they should EXPAND it if anything; why not allow up to say a 60min treaty?
I am getting good-ish* at treaty and have barely finished building a robust base with a good first attack at the 40min mark (starting from Discovery age).
If treaty is about post-imperial madness /base building, then why not allow even more time to get it perfect?!
Allowing 60min (or even say 90min!) would allow new/noob players more time :) - which might be more fun for them. I might stick to 20/30/40min myself but hey give 'em the choice I say.
In fact, it's all about choice... why remove treaty if you can simply choose not to play it?
Get over yourselves whoever wants to ban it! Let others do what they like (while you sit on your high-horse..)
Its effectively just a different game play style. And I happen to like it
Agree: the Devs should better balance the Civs for AOE3 DE/AOE4, and also allow more than 2 teams.
Also, regarding the AI in treaty: the Devs could make the AI much better in treaty by changing their strategy accordingly (including, especially, the home city card choice).
Regarding lag in online/network treaty games: this is more a problem of any of: the game programming, the internet connection, or the user computer specs, than the game mode itself.
deleted_user wrote:@mods, its fucking disgusting and disrespectf that you guys removed my poll, who did it?
Aside: For those of you who joined here a while ago, you may have forgotten this little registration blurb so I'll post it up for your convenience:
"You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-orientated.."
"You agree that “ESOCommunity” have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time should we see fit.."
( *: I say 'good-ish' as I'm new-ish and have just beat 7x expert allied AI with a +100% resource handicap each, with usual tactics (not using Aklaks wall-madness or pause-micro etc). I'm probably not so good against human players though! Unless playing as OP French, with a long treaty period, haha! And even then probably not so good!..).
-
- Ninja
- Posts: 14364
- Joined: Mar 26, 2015
Re: why people play treaty?
I like your name.
Concrete is cool.
Concrete is cool.
- QueenOfdestiny
- Retired Contributor
- Posts: 2139
- Joined: Aug 9, 2016
- ESO: QueenOfdestiny
Re: why people play treaty?
No tr mode= a lot of saved time and money for me! not gonna buy some bullshit game that has no tr mode! in that case hello rl and fuck aoe!
-
- Crossbow
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Nov 28, 2017
- Location: Downunder (Aus/NZ)
Re: why people play treaty?
deleted_user wrote:I like your name.
Concrete is cool.
Cheers! Somehow this was the first thing that came to mind..
(Although I'm not sure they had concrete, as we know it, at this point in time (AOE3 period); perhaps for AOE4?! - although it might start to look a little like Command and Conquer (/Red Alert) by then... where else can AOE get to after AOE3?!)
Re: why people play treaty?
Foire421 wrote:No tr mode= a lot of saved time and money for me! not gonna buy some bullshit game that has no tr mode! in that case hello rl and fuck aoe!
Nice try, you're gonna buy it anyways
Re: why people play treaty?
Lukas_L99 wrote:Foire421 wrote:No tr mode= a lot of saved time and money for me! not gonna buy some bullshit game that has no tr mode! in that case hello rl and fuck aoe!
Nice try, you're gonna buy it anyways
shhh dont tell em pls
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests