The DE generation

[Jets]

Hello fellow AOE3 players, recently there has been some controversy with the addition of the USA as an american civ. The same controversy appeared with the Incas and Swedes. So despite all the things that we disagree, I think we as a community should unite in some way to provide feedback to developers understand that is not the civilization we wanted everyone, but after 15 years, seeing that little bit new things come to this old RTS is something very important to all of us. I am sure that a community more open to dialogue and debate would lead to further growth.

We may still not see the Italians or Poles, or Persian. But maybe with time and development, the day will come. By now, we can focus on the gameplay of the 16 civs we already have.
I encourage you to post your thoughts about DE in general. To better resume this experience.

Personally, I would like a revision of previous mechanics, unit tags and civ bonuses. There has been such an improvement in terms of mechanics with the come of each expansion, still most of the player base pick vanilla civs. Maybe because they are easier to manage, you've played with them in vanilla, or they are more reliable than the brand new civs. I would like to see simplified unit tags, something easy to read for new players, specially the Aztec & Inca army. (Also, Urumis should be tagged as Shock Infantry imo). A simplification of civ mechanics, if more civs are easier to manage, there would be more games with the supposed hard to balance civs and a more diverse meta.

[n0el]

Speak for yourself, I love the USA and the DE direction.

[ShinkuroYukinari]

I'll most certainly love playing the civ, but it's overloaded as all hell, and will likely be castrated so as to not have it dominating games left and right like Ottomans and Iroquois did on RE.

Would be nice if they reworked/updated existing civs to match America's power level, but i doubt they will do that given how that can easily alienate the fanbase.

[Joe]

I think its fair to wait with judgement till we actually can play the USA and figured out how they work

[jesus3]

I think its fair to wait with judgement till we actually can play the USA and figured out how they work

I agree with Joe here. Although it looks gimmicky at first glance, it's way too early to judge the civ right now for obvious reasons.

Additionally, as much as I like to rant about the bugs that may or may not be solved with the upcoming update, the general direction is totally fine. New civs create new matchups, new strategies, evolution of the metagame - as well as general interest in the game.

[Jets]

Speak for yourself, I love the USA and the DE direction.

I like the new direction, but I would like a revision of the material previous released. I was aiming to catch the attention of those who are discontent with the US.

[Challenger_Marco]

Best move for DE so far i want to see more civs ,updates and constant support ,we getting the dlc this soon means they care about aoe3 & there is big support behind they didn't leave us behind like aoe1 de ,so idk why ppl are upset & ranting about i personally don't mind history much ,it's a video game after all not everything is pin point correct to history .

[Lukas_L99]

There are still issues with Sweden and Inca and the game is out for half a year. Adding new civs will fuck over balance even more.

[malabar]

Best move for DE so far i want to see more civs ,updates and constant support ,we getting the dlc this soon means they care about aoe3 & there is big support behind they didn't leave us behind like aoe1 de ,so idk why ppl are upset & ranting about i personally don't mind history much ,it's a video game after all not everything is pin point correct to history .

Agree, some more civ for fun like NE proposed years ago, keep support and updates ; and for people who needs history stuff : read books (and tell us if ottomans army fought chinese army on great plains in the middle of the US ^^) !
(About balanced civ, it talks to competitive players but most of players are not competitive, they are just simple players imo)

[Jets]

I think balance should be a key topic in this game, since balance is often aimed for competitive players, but they're something around the 1% of the player base. This often leaves to casual players complaining about complexity civs, or strict timed strategies, or just op units. I personally like to watch tourneys and see players shine with their knowledge, but there's always some low elo players who just abuse some of the mechanics, like perma walling, hard rushes, or just hiding in the map. Players complaining about shipments, civs weaknesses, civs that are too strong if you don't stop them, civ bonuses that cover any weakness, op cards.

I would like this game to be enjoyable for most of us. And lower the learning curve. More doesn't always mean better.

[RefluxSemantic]

I'd love this direction if I felt like DE was actually a polished and finished product. I get the criticism of some: fix your game first before your add more stuff that breaks it.

[speedflyer]

i'm really not sure how can anyone love the DE direction. If ppl like the fact half good/top players already stopped this game and maybe will only come back once in a year if prizepool are somehow worth it , then hell yeah this game is totally dead.
As i already said before , its either you put thousand of bucks on the table and "maybe" top players will play it , or have fun getting tournament with 1k6 players in final

Idk how can devs act like " balance is already dead , lets fuck up it even more" , and idk how can you guys like this.
EDIT : It's even worse than this , because they actually prefer to fuck up the game instead of solving bugs or bad servor.

[chronique]

This game is close to be unplaylable when you want some try-hardisme but they add a new civ instead a fixe some obvious issu. I am hyped by aoe4 but aoe3 DE is a sad ending in my book. They did in 5 month what RE did to me in 6 years lol.

So ofc the response to this thread is "no" and i would add "never again"

[ǝɯɐuɹǝsn]

you made a mistake in the title it's degeneration in one word, not DE generation

[Miyawaki Sakura]

Tired of dealing with Mary sue civ.

[Jerimuno]

Mary swe civ?

[Jets]

Mary swe civ?

Tired of dealing with Mary sue civ.

I think this is one of the problem we should address. The game doesn't feel the same for everyone. And "git gud" isn't a compelling argument.

Considering 2 civs that are years apart one from another, Spain & US. On one hand not only Spain deck lacks ranged inf cards until age3, they can only rely on artillery and Heavy inf/cav. Also they can only rely on 3/4 main strategies. While on the other hand, the US excels at cards on their deck, each one with a powerful impact on their gameplay, shaping the timing and strategy of your mu, plus 25 politicians that grant an age up bonus.

I put Spain as an example since it's my main civ, but still, there should be a cut in overcomplicated civs and a revision of old civs.

[Peachrocks]

There are still issues with Sweden and Inca and the game is out for half a year. Adding new civs will fuck over balance even more.

This. Even ignoring balance, bugs alone are a significant issue. I myself have to deal with three bugs every time I launch the game. Yes there’s work arounds but it’s highly annoying. Especially when another problem comes up that requires a restart of the game.

I like my diversity but not at the cost of functionality and general enjoyment. Not to mention that US is forced as hell. I just can’t shake the feeling that bias is going to cause balance issues too.

[duckzilla]

I think I make the most out of it by using 100% troll strategies. If it works, it was fun. If it does not work, it was the troll strategy and not me who lost the game.

[uberjz]

Mary swe civ?

Tired of dealing with Mary sue civ.

I think this is one of the problem we should address. The game doesn't feel the same for everyone. And "git gud" isn't a compelling argument.

Considering 2 civs that are years apart one from another, Spain & US. On one hand not only Spain deck lacks ranged inf cards until age3, they can only rely on artillery and Heavy inf/cav. Also they can only rely on 3/4 main strategies. While on the other hand, the US excels at cards on their deck, each one with a powerful impact on their gameplay, shaping the timing and strategy of your mu, plus 25 politicians that grant an age up bonus.

I put Spain as an example since it's my main civ, but still, there should be a cut in overcomplicated civs and a revision of old civs.

spain is a bad civ, and water needs more fish.

[Kawapasaka]

It looks like they got together 50 people with a basic understanding of the game, did an hour-long brainstorming session and decided to pack every single proposed idea into the new civ. The term "over-designed" seems apt.

[Peachrocks]

It looks like they got together 50 people with a basic understanding of the game, did an hour-long brainstorming session and decided to pack every single proposed idea into the new civ. The term "over-designed" seems apt.

I mean what did you expect from the same people who thought adding more house factories was a good idea. I would love more content for this game, but do I trust these guys to do it? Hell no.

[helln00]

I mean its hard to say with certainty , but the US civ really reminds me of the Napoleonic Era mod, minus the slavery. Since swedes were also kinda lifted from there I wouldn't be surprised if they are just taking mod civs and adding them one by one

[Sargsyan]

aoe 3 is casual game they add civs for fun

[Dolan]

They make imba civs for fun, to keep the nerds angry and busy looking for ways to counter lame stuff