You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Age of Empires / Rise of Rome / Definitive Edition
Moderated by Suppiluliuma, PhatFish, Fisk, EpiC_Anonymous, Epd999

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.29 replies
Age of Empires Heaven » Forums » Age of Empires / Rise of Rome / Definitive Edition » Why you really like AoE/RoR better that AoK/TC
Topic Subject:Why you really like AoE/RoR better that AoK/TC
« Previous Page  1 2  Next Page »
posted 02-23-01 07:51 PM ET (US)         
All right. I'll start.

I like AoE/RoR better because the whole thing has integrity and spirit.

And I love starting with Nomad or Stone Age. Just great humble beginnings on which to build.

And no overlarge buildings. True, tiny docks, but when the fishing ships cry "Delay" as they are created, I love it!

To tell the truth, if I play RM in AoK, I win more easily than I do in AoE. Maybe that is why I keep coming back to AoE/RoR. It draws me back for more. There is more of a challenge somehow.

True, AoK has more "advanced" improvements. And TC has footprints in the snow. Nice.

But my head is not turned.

And last of all, I love AoE/RoR because I can talk about it here on this forum!

But these aren't all of the reasons AoE/RoR sticks with us, I know.

What about you?


posted 04-03-01 10:30 PM ET (US)     26 / 29       
hehe, and i thought my old junker was the worst in the world

well, i find AoK/TC to just get real borring. i mean, your first aoe expirience is so much better than your first aok expirience...

the music, the sounds, the great summer afternoon crisp and fresh graphics, the uniquness from all other games at that time, the list goes on and on.

Phill Phree
posted 04-04-01 00:47 AM ET (US)     27 / 29       
Good grief - but that's a very valid point and one that many forget - just because new stuff is out there doesn't mean everyone has it. And I threw my old 166 away cos it wasn't even worth breaking down for parts ;-)

My Karma ran over my Dogma

AoEH | EEH | RoNH | IndividualsCAN

posted 04-06-01 00:29 AM ET (US)     28 / 29       
A few things in defence of kings,
towers are not hard to destroy, and early towers can easily be brought down by vills. In aok towers, castles and some siege have "minimum range" and untill certin tecs are researched, can not attack units at its base. Yes, this means a castle can be brought down by a single villiager.
I find rm in kings much harder. try playing with 2 comp players allied (make sure they are set to the same team), they will work together. If you are attacking one, the other will come to his defence. They will also build units that compliment each others. Rushes still work. And even if you hide in your tc, you have pretty much been defeated. The end result being your econ completly stops, and your opponent has free run of your town. I dont see why everyone fears the tec tree, its not much different than aoe, your probably just not used to it. (note to wedsaz, how does someone who has memorized every single strat, staticstic, bonus, find anything too complicated?) I'd be willing to bet if i told you i tested 100 non-upgraded roman legions against 100 upgraded scyths you would be able to tell me who would win, and how many units would be left. (thats a compliment). As for the editor, you have to keep in mind, they are developed for the designers at ES, not the players. And finanlly, why does everyone consider needing 300mhz and 32mb of ram extreem? To me thats a pretty whimpy system that would not play too many games, let alone any good software. Heck, for $400 you could probably buy a whole pc with better specs than that.

Now, getting back to the question, i would have to agree with the graphics, kings was definitly a step backwards. But the thing i like most about ror is online play. kings is nice for sn's and rm (due to the improvements made) but i couldn't imagine playing anything but ror online, despite my lack of skill.

[This message has been edited by butch26 (edited 04-06-2001 @ 00:31 AM).]

posted 04-06-01 01:17 AM ET (US)     29 / 29       
1. Agreed, the AI is much better - but that's the game engine, not the data. Which is why I said and will continue to say, AoE on AoK's engine would be awesome.
2. I tried playing AoK, about 3-4 times. I only started winning when I gave up on military units and started covering the map with villager-garrisoned TCs, and won overwhelmingly at that point, ridiculously so in fact. A castle is just the cherry at the top of the TC cake, and the latter don't need murder holes.
3. True, garrisoning your initial TC doesn't really protect you from attack. That's the worst of it, it's a powerful rush without being a really useful defense.
4. It's quite easy to have villagers come out and kill a ram, then re-garrison before losing more than 1 or 2.
5. I ran a web server, database server, ftp server, the usual desktop with text and graphics editors, browser, etc, with no noticeable lag - on a pentium 90 with 16 mb ram. AoK's requirements are INSANE! I know other games require more, but that doesn't say much now does it.

6. Now, to be fair, a lots of things have been added in AoK:TC to weaken TCs, strengthen and vary their counters. A *LOT* of things. So much that I can see half a dozen rushes to destroy an opponent's TC while he's still in feudal, the stone cost and building time ensuring he doesn't catch up before your knights can wipe him out. Reminds me of slingers and camels, really - trading one problem for another.

7. What does complicated have to do with anything? The comment you're replying to here may be from someone else. BTW, according to my preliminary calculations, about 50 scythes - but it depends how much they mix in, if they get to use their area damage more they may get better odds.

« Previous Page  1 2  Next Page »
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Age of Empires Heaven | HeavenGames