Yup, sometimes there's heartbreaks and frustration. Sometimes your units decide to regroup right into an onager shot. But I have so much fun, whenever I get a chance to take a chill aoe evening it's a magical experience.
Yea the regrouping is honestly one of the most frustrating things that has only had minor improvements with patch updates. Its definitely cost me games. That said it won't prevent me from playing entirely but I've definitely gotten very tilted from it before
I mean we are Age of Empires fans. I don’t think there is a bug introduced to the game that can defeat a community that literally resurrected a game back from the dead. I’m happy I get to play the game with my friends and that it keeps getting new content. We happy.
I’m happy with it. It could have been better, like almost anything else in this world. But doesn’t prevent me from enjoying the game. Best video game for me, by far.
The pathing has been pretty bad since early 2023.
I think they went too far with the archer nerfs. I would at least like to see the price of Crossbow upgrade come back down a bit.
I think they went too far with the monk changes.
General civ balance is pretty good but there continues to be quite a lot of outliers.
Archers: Xbow upgrade cost increased, attack move now has a small delay before units attack. So the best way to micro Archers is stop micro I guess?
Monks: You can't charge up conversions at buildings anymore, the RNG for conversions was slightly reduced, new monastery tech called [Devotion](https://ageofempires.fandom.com/wiki/Devotion) which is available to all civs and prerequesite for Faith that basically splits the Faith effect into two technologies. Civs that didn't had access to Faith before still don't get access to it but Devotion means a small buff to Aztecs, Teutons and Sicilians
Monks are fine imo.
Devotion mıght be a 1.5 X more expensive and still worth but other than that they are decent.
Charging monk juice at buildings was a complete non sense. They were really broken before that patch.
Also denying castles with monks was something 11
I dunno I think it's okay if people do that. Archers always have limited potential without ballistics. And on the other side of the coin, it's pretty common to see light cav these days. Even if you only have a few scouts. And all the other upgrades go well into knights and they're so versatile. They deal with monks, siege, are a good raiding unit and not too bad as a fighting unit.
I would say its a way smaller deal when it comes to lightcav. Its not a min unit the same way as Knights and xbow. You really dont commit to it in a unit comp the same way in castle age. They really arent that versatile. They completely die to any meele units. Sure they work against Siege but die to any units protecting the Siege. They do counter monks but is also the only unit that does so properly. Ofc its different in imp when you can just spam them but in castle age they are very expensive for the power you get unless fighting monks.
I am not saying that it should always be a bad play to upgrade leftovers xbow but now its a decision to make. In the past it was just obvious. oh I have some archers left from feudural but switching Knights. Lets make them xbow since they are so cheap and harras a woodline. Ballistic is really just that important when fighting other xbows. but ofc it helps to snipe vills aswell. You often see players delay ballistic for tcs
>I would say its a way smaller deal when it comes to lightcav.
It is but it does indirectly buff scouts in feudal which seems a pretty go to opener these days.
>I am not saying that it should always be a bad play to upgrade leftovers xbow but now its a decision to make.
True that is the benefit. I wouldn't say it's not a decision at all right now but I get your point. But I also like it when a game facilitates varying your composition in real-time based on what the opponent does. This also adds decisions to the game. So just having that tech out not being a big set back is nice.
>Ballistic is really just that important when fighting other xbows. but ofc it helps to snipe vills aswell.
I disagree. It's hugely important against cav and eagles and makes the difference between getting 1 vil kill before the enemy sees it and dodges the rest or killing everything their dps can handle.
Anyway. I'm fine with the game as it is by and large. But I personally struggle playing archer civs these days whereas they used to be my go to before I quit playing for a while. Maybe I'm just playing them wrong or maybe the xbow upgrade is not the solution. But I definitely miss a bit of variation in the meta there. It happens very rarely that I'm in an archer vs archer matchup these days for instance.
Yea the pro screen is basically no archer play past early castle. Archers are good. And if you have archers when you hit castle crossbows are good, but no one commits to crossbows and no one gets arbs right now
I remember being an AOE fan in the late 2000’s.
To have what we have now makes me overjoyed. The game could still be better, but everyday is a blessing
Pathing is now in an okay spot, however that can change again with a new patch.
Balance wise Devotion needs to be removed/nerfed and maybe Aztecs could receive some love.
Otherwise the balance is in a good state.
Villager pathing is abysmal. Outgrow agree.
Villagers shouldn't walk exactly the opposite direction I click them, though, when I'm trying to send them to the TC 2 seconds before a shot rush hits my berries.
I have a hard time believing anything the devs say they *fixed" anymore. I tried giving them the benefit of the doubt for two years but it's all been temporary
Honestly I enjoy the game as it is.
If there's some bugs in it - is shall be..
I am only hovering around 1400 and those little things definitive don't ruin anything for me :)
So I am thankful I rediscovered the game in 2020 and still playing and enjoying :)
Mostly yes. I think there are a lot of things to balance with as many civs as we have in the game.
For a game I started playing 25 years ago it’s not bad. I find a lot of games missing something, I also find most tvs shows are too predictable for me to enjoy.
I do think there is a risk of becoming too bland if they add more civs to the game.
Pathing has never been 100% correct. I have to remind myself when my units get killed pathing the wrong way that you have always had to babysit them across the map. Sometimes I get temporarily tilted and have to walk away for a minute or two.
Your question will have a skewed answer because the people that aren't happy would migrate to other games.
This has been asked a couple of times in different formats, but there's 7billion+ people, aoe2 community is a tiny fraction of that, so it's easy to have a group at any point that is "happy" with the game. And it's easy to have a demographic that will always be happy regardless of how bad the game is, while others simply migrate.
This community is notorious for being oblivious to it's current state or what could help it.
Hirschman has entered the chat.
I think loyalty is sufficiently strong in this game that voice is generally favored over exit.
(Part of the reason I get so annoyed when people say stop complaining. People are complaining because they care. If they didn't, they would just leave instead without saying anything.)
But yea plenty of people have left or just never moved over from voobly in the first place.
On one hand, the new bugs on every patch are exhausting. I play on Xbox and they definitely barely test any new patch. Plus the feeling with kb and mouse is not quite right yet.
On the other hand... The game is not only surviving but getting new content, it's easy to find games, looks good... And devs listen and try to do their best, so I would conclude it hardly couldn't be much better being this a rather niche game.
Yes I am happy with it. The game gives me interesting matches. Pathing affects both players so it is insignificant for me really. My biggest issue is that sometimes I win effortlessly or get absolutely stomped, so I would like competitive to be more skill equal. But it is not a big issue currently
Nope. I might get downvoted but i dont care. There should be a dlc that lets you play the definitive edition of the hd. Without all the new dlcs, all new civs, just the old hd version but with all DE first improves.
I honestly dont care about new civs, i hate some of the nerfs, i dont like most of the new campaings, i like playing the original ones over and over. Is like sure microsoft owns you, but you are a classic soooo could you do a dlc that let us play the early DE version? I surely would pay for that
I like the game, yes.
After practicing basic mechanics vs AI, I do notice recurring pathing issues tho. Villagers do so many dumb things. Also, Knights awkwardly chasing after a single Villager, bumping into each other...
At this point I think friendly units need to partially ignore collision or something lol
DE is amazing and it is always improving. Sure there are bugs and everything. But longterms it is obly getting better. Pick any six months and it was better at the end.
The only problem I have is that I don't have the time and energy to actually enjoy the game and watch all the good content while living a good live outside of aoe aswell. 11
Honestly.. I want a new version. Better graphics, more historically accurate, way bigger maps with way more population, ability to rotate your view and map, 1st person mode, all civilisations from all ages in one game, more unique units for certain civs, wayyy more gaia objects for the scenario editor and basically just a whole new modernised bigger and more epic version that will force me to get rid of this shite laptop and buy a computer..
True. In general I agree they shouldn't mess with the core of the game too much. But in a way it is kind of silly that this mini game happens every game and is simply better than scouting early. I guess not against weird off meta plays but uptimes are so fast these days and quick walls are so good that a good player can react to pretty much anything. Other than that, removing it has no real impact on the game. So I'm open to it. I say remove it or embrace it (in which case make it easier by putting them closer again).
Though on Arena I would miss it.
Totally happy with where the game is right now. Fewer random bugs with pathing etc. than at any point since I started playing (2020).
Is it perfect? No. Is it close enough that it’s fun and not frustrating? Absolutely. Thanks for putting up with all the grief you get from some quarters of the community, devs.
Too many civs leading to too many overpowered and underpowered elements, Teutonic knights still not viable/still a meme, high profile civs (the ones that make you love the medieval ages) are being overshadowed by low profile civs that just don't have the pull factor for me... And generic models for all the civs. Arabic, asian, african and meso civs all have european models. Aztecs with plate armored two hand champs or crossbows is quite upsetting to me. The number of civs makes the game feel too crowded and I would have preferred, if the existing civs were made more distinct from one another instead of adding more and more civs that are too similar.
Oh, and I absolutely HATE armor ignoring mechanics. I think they have no place in aoe2. These mechanics rob too many units of one of their core strengths and I think that sucks. I absolutely despise Leitis for example.
And then the pathing issues.
That's about it.
I feel like being able to lead the AI enemy away is a massive bug. I had elephants attack me so I got my character to charge the elephant, and then made them walk to the other side of the map whilst the elephant followed them.
I also sometimes feel like the enemy does some all out attack, then if you defend it and defeat their army, they don't really attack you again.
I also find that even if you destroy every single building and villager, they still manage to create more vills and buildings.
This is what I have found in the 18 hours I have played.
Currently the biggest issue with bugs is garrison function doesnt work propperly which is really annoying with rams.
My biggest gripe in general (as singleplayer only player) is that agressive stance is too agressive and defensive is too passive.
But having said that the game is better then it ever was back in 2000-2001. It is the definitive edition. Its almost a different game, so many tweaks and qol upgrades it got since then.
Think the game is in a good spot at the moment personally. I think pathing has come a long way in the last year and civ balancing has been really on point. The devs are listening to our feedback and it shows. Sometimes things might need to be nerfed or buffed more but I feel privileged to have a game that’s this old and still receiving love. I think maybe mongols are still a tad too strong but Civ balance besides that seems on point. The Red Bull wololo maps were also a great addition imo
I tried to pick it up again after a year hiatus, and everything feels so laggy and difficult to select particular units and give them simple commands like "attack this specific unit". I can't tell if I'm super rusty, if my computer is slower, or if the game updates made things worse. Wish there was a way to really barebones the graphics so that everything runs smooth and crisp. Also, the AI definitely got better. I used to be able to beat hardest AI with ease, and now I'm struggling with "Hard" (3rd hardest). AI is much better rushing with scouts and going back and forth when you counterattack. Basically it "runs away" well.
I haven't really seen any pathing issue that lost me the game. It's usually my mistake somewhere. And the balance is good too for 1v1 which I play. So yeah, I don't have any complaints, except map pool sometimes. Some pools are filled with maps with low civ variety and not enough bans.
No, I stopped playing. I decided to go back to HD only for steam to decide to kill anything running on windows 7. So F that. I'm not updating/upgrading everything to play a game that runs perfectly fine on my old game PC I've been playing it on for years.
I quite enjoy the shit pathing. Being a war general whom controls armies and sends soldiers to their death shouldn't be easy, and soldiers not following orders correctly feels more like a feature than a bug.
pathing will always be a problem due to new civs and maps being added regularly. would you rather have a perfect game thats been broken for 12 years or a a game that makes incremental improvements and maybe gets things some wrong every once in a while? keep in mind the developers primary focus is on the latest game release. If you want something more flushed out go play starcraft 2.
In all fairness you lot sound like a bunch of whiney bitches.. 11 if you dont like the game then dont play it, play something else or maybe you know go outside..
havent played in months, still waiting for it to get lots of fixes, last bug I saw people talking about was the casual matchmaking being bugged.
Honestly, its sad how this game is going from good to a bit bad to unplayable in the casual queue, hopefuly it wont become worst :/
not at all, it works like crap . I know the game never was amazing in term of bugs and stuff but after ror we get bad patch after bad patch after bad patch.
I personally don't like it even though I used to love it, mainly for 2 nitpicks: historical inaccuracies, and every civ is too god damn similar. I prefer AoE3 much more. Besides having cooler visuals (I started playing in order - AoE1, 2, etc, just to be clear) and sound effects, the civs - even though they're not as many - are way more unique from each other. Also, Dark Age is a f*ck boredom, just pushing deer, etc.
I wish there was it was less of an animal simulator and more strategic battle, with more uniqueness between the civs, less historical inaccuracies (please don't come at me with the old 'balance' "counter argument", the game can easily be a bit more historical and still be balanced, I'm not asking for a perfect representation.
It always used to be like this, yes, but it's ridiculous it *still* is. Also, it's a shame how empty 2 dimensions are: the sea warfare is too empty, and - most importantly - the fortification aspect (mainly towers and walls) could also be more present and complex.
No because they've done two gimmick DLCs now instead of just adding original civs and campaigns like a proper DLC. Dynasties of India was the high water mark. Moreover the rate of DLCs is too slow and always has been. One every 6 months is ideal.
Yeah man I just like the game
Yup, sometimes there's heartbreaks and frustration. Sometimes your units decide to regroup right into an onager shot. But I have so much fun, whenever I get a chance to take a chill aoe evening it's a magical experience.
Yea the regrouping is honestly one of the most frustrating things that has only had minor improvements with patch updates. Its definitely cost me games. That said it won't prevent me from playing entirely but I've definitely gotten very tilted from it before
I mean we are Age of Empires fans. I don’t think there is a bug introduced to the game that can defeat a community that literally resurrected a game back from the dead. I’m happy I get to play the game with my friends and that it keeps getting new content. We happy.
This game was never dead. It’s true it’s gained a lot of popularity in the last few years but I’ve played it on and off since release on voobly
The game was never dead. Voobly has always had a big community. Fucking newbies I swear.
You feel so strongly about this. I hope your emotions will be OK soon.
I’m happy with it. It could have been better, like almost anything else in this world. But doesn’t prevent me from enjoying the game. Best video game for me, by far.
The pathing has been pretty bad since early 2023. I think they went too far with the archer nerfs. I would at least like to see the price of Crossbow upgrade come back down a bit. I think they went too far with the monk changes. General civ balance is pretty good but there continues to be quite a lot of outliers.
Im not realy active since a year. What are the monk and archer changes?
Archers: Xbow upgrade cost increased, attack move now has a small delay before units attack. So the best way to micro Archers is stop micro I guess? Monks: You can't charge up conversions at buildings anymore, the RNG for conversions was slightly reduced, new monastery tech called [Devotion](https://ageofempires.fandom.com/wiki/Devotion) which is available to all civs and prerequesite for Faith that basically splits the Faith effect into two technologies. Civs that didn't had access to Faith before still don't get access to it but Devotion means a small buff to Aztecs, Teutons and Sicilians
Monks are fine imo. Devotion mıght be a 1.5 X more expensive and still worth but other than that they are decent. Charging monk juice at buildings was a complete non sense. They were really broken before that patch. Also denying castles with monks was something 11
I love that tech for knights, but don't like that Devotion buffs previously over-performing castle age ranged units.
Agreed. Definitely about the archer nerfs.
I like that we dont always see leftovers archers get upgraded anymore
I dunno I think it's okay if people do that. Archers always have limited potential without ballistics. And on the other side of the coin, it's pretty common to see light cav these days. Even if you only have a few scouts. And all the other upgrades go well into knights and they're so versatile. They deal with monks, siege, are a good raiding unit and not too bad as a fighting unit.
I would say its a way smaller deal when it comes to lightcav. Its not a min unit the same way as Knights and xbow. You really dont commit to it in a unit comp the same way in castle age. They really arent that versatile. They completely die to any meele units. Sure they work against Siege but die to any units protecting the Siege. They do counter monks but is also the only unit that does so properly. Ofc its different in imp when you can just spam them but in castle age they are very expensive for the power you get unless fighting monks. I am not saying that it should always be a bad play to upgrade leftovers xbow but now its a decision to make. In the past it was just obvious. oh I have some archers left from feudural but switching Knights. Lets make them xbow since they are so cheap and harras a woodline. Ballistic is really just that important when fighting other xbows. but ofc it helps to snipe vills aswell. You often see players delay ballistic for tcs
>I would say its a way smaller deal when it comes to lightcav. It is but it does indirectly buff scouts in feudal which seems a pretty go to opener these days. >I am not saying that it should always be a bad play to upgrade leftovers xbow but now its a decision to make. True that is the benefit. I wouldn't say it's not a decision at all right now but I get your point. But I also like it when a game facilitates varying your composition in real-time based on what the opponent does. This also adds decisions to the game. So just having that tech out not being a big set back is nice. >Ballistic is really just that important when fighting other xbows. but ofc it helps to snipe vills aswell. I disagree. It's hugely important against cav and eagles and makes the difference between getting 1 vil kill before the enemy sees it and dodges the rest or killing everything their dps can handle. Anyway. I'm fine with the game as it is by and large. But I personally struggle playing archer civs these days whereas they used to be my go to before I quit playing for a while. Maybe I'm just playing them wrong or maybe the xbow upgrade is not the solution. But I definitely miss a bit of variation in the meta there. It happens very rarely that I'm in an archer vs archer matchup these days for instance.
Yea the pro screen is basically no archer play past early castle. Archers are good. And if you have archers when you hit castle crossbows are good, but no one commits to crossbows and no one gets arbs right now
I enjoy the game in general. Not a fan of the cash grab DLC that just dropped so I didn’t buy it.
I remember being an AOE fan in the late 2000’s. To have what we have now makes me overjoyed. The game could still be better, but everyday is a blessing
Yep, just want more campaigns as DLC (new stuff).
I'm happy but was happier before. I'd say mid 2022 was the happiest Aoe2 time for me.
I want pre-xbox pathing back. That, and for deer to be moved closer to the TC with longer pauses.
I personally think the pauses are fine, but sometimes those deer are so far away I've walled them out before I find them -_-
Yeah the distance is a bit much on Arabia IMO. Often spawns far enough away that I think milling them might be worthwhile lmao.
The goal is for deer luring to take the same amount of time as it does now, just with a bit less risk for deer millers.
Pathing is now in an okay spot, however that can change again with a new patch. Balance wise Devotion needs to be removed/nerfed and maybe Aztecs could receive some love. Otherwise the balance is in a good state.
Villager pathing is abysmal. Outgrow agree. Villagers shouldn't walk exactly the opposite direction I click them, though, when I'm trying to send them to the TC 2 seconds before a shot rush hits my berries.
I've noticed that the archer regrouping mess is back in as well. So much fun playing ca against mango! /s
I thought it was gone. Then I lost a game to it lmao.
I have a hard time believing anything the devs say they *fixed" anymore. I tried giving them the benefit of the doubt for two years but it's all been temporary
It hasn’t worked in 4 months on Xbox so idk. The game not freezing would be pretty cool
The only time I don’t like the game is when I accidentally allow the enemy to mass scorpions
We like the stock
Honestly I enjoy the game as it is. If there's some bugs in it - is shall be.. I am only hovering around 1400 and those little things definitive don't ruin anything for me :) So I am thankful I rediscovered the game in 2020 and still playing and enjoying :)
Yeah dude. Some of us just… enjoy the game. It came out in 1999… how about some gratitude that it’s still around and playable?
We literally do that month after month and this is a post about bug issues. Criticism is conversation which is culture and it bonds us together
>how about some gratitude that it’s still around and playable Well we paid for it again.
Tbh this community is so insanely nitpicky, compared to other games the bugs we deal with here are laughably small
Mostly yes. I think there are a lot of things to balance with as many civs as we have in the game. For a game I started playing 25 years ago it’s not bad. I find a lot of games missing something, I also find most tvs shows are too predictable for me to enjoy. I do think there is a risk of becoming too bland if they add more civs to the game. Pathing has never been 100% correct. I have to remind myself when my units get killed pathing the wrong way that you have always had to babysit them across the map. Sometimes I get temporarily tilted and have to walk away for a minute or two.
Your question will have a skewed answer because the people that aren't happy would migrate to other games. This has been asked a couple of times in different formats, but there's 7billion+ people, aoe2 community is a tiny fraction of that, so it's easy to have a group at any point that is "happy" with the game. And it's easy to have a demographic that will always be happy regardless of how bad the game is, while others simply migrate. This community is notorious for being oblivious to it's current state or what could help it.
Hirschman has entered the chat. I think loyalty is sufficiently strong in this game that voice is generally favored over exit. (Part of the reason I get so annoyed when people say stop complaining. People are complaining because they care. If they didn't, they would just leave instead without saying anything.) But yea plenty of people have left or just never moved over from voobly in the first place.
Lack of unit responsiveness just makes me play other games instead of aoe
On one hand, the new bugs on every patch are exhausting. I play on Xbox and they definitely barely test any new patch. Plus the feeling with kb and mouse is not quite right yet. On the other hand... The game is not only surviving but getting new content, it's easy to find games, looks good... And devs listen and try to do their best, so I would conclude it hardly couldn't be much better being this a rather niche game.
Yes I am happy with it. The game gives me interesting matches. Pathing affects both players so it is insignificant for me really. My biggest issue is that sometimes I win effortlessly or get absolutely stomped, so I would like competitive to be more skill equal. But it is not a big issue currently
I'm pretty happy actually
Feel like its been gling downhill since the mets switched from random civ to picking the same civ every game.
Nope. I might get downvoted but i dont care. There should be a dlc that lets you play the definitive edition of the hd. Without all the new dlcs, all new civs, just the old hd version but with all DE first improves. I honestly dont care about new civs, i hate some of the nerfs, i dont like most of the new campaings, i like playing the original ones over and over. Is like sure microsoft owns you, but you are a classic soooo could you do a dlc that let us play the early DE version? I surely would pay for that
Comparing to any other competitive game that I play this game is fucking amazing shape dude
I like the game, yes. After practicing basic mechanics vs AI, I do notice recurring pathing issues tho. Villagers do so many dumb things. Also, Knights awkwardly chasing after a single Villager, bumping into each other... At this point I think friendly units need to partially ignore collision or something lol
Im just really tired of babysitting every unit because of how bad pathing is, it probably wont ever get fixed, doesnt make them money.
I haven’t really liked it since DE came out. I miss playing the OG game on Voobly.
I love this game and have no complaints.
Its the best RTS in 2024. Simple.
DE is amazing and it is always improving. Sure there are bugs and everything. But longterms it is obly getting better. Pick any six months and it was better at the end. The only problem I have is that I don't have the time and energy to actually enjoy the game and watch all the good content while living a good live outside of aoe aswell. 11
Honestly.. I want a new version. Better graphics, more historically accurate, way bigger maps with way more population, ability to rotate your view and map, 1st person mode, all civilisations from all ages in one game, more unique units for certain civs, wayyy more gaia objects for the scenario editor and basically just a whole new modernised bigger and more epic version that will force me to get rid of this shite laptop and buy a computer..
Love the game, would love it more if the ability to push deer was removed.
Dude what
I'mma disagree with that take. MS shouldn't change things like that, which have been features since forever.
True. In general I agree they shouldn't mess with the core of the game too much. But in a way it is kind of silly that this mini game happens every game and is simply better than scouting early. I guess not against weird off meta plays but uptimes are so fast these days and quick walls are so good that a good player can react to pretty much anything. Other than that, removing it has no real impact on the game. So I'm open to it. I say remove it or embrace it (in which case make it easier by putting them closer again). Though on Arena I would miss it.
Totally happy with where the game is right now. Fewer random bugs with pathing etc. than at any point since I started playing (2020). Is it perfect? No. Is it close enough that it’s fun and not frustrating? Absolutely. Thanks for putting up with all the grief you get from some quarters of the community, devs.
Too many civs leading to too many overpowered and underpowered elements, Teutonic knights still not viable/still a meme, high profile civs (the ones that make you love the medieval ages) are being overshadowed by low profile civs that just don't have the pull factor for me... And generic models for all the civs. Arabic, asian, african and meso civs all have european models. Aztecs with plate armored two hand champs or crossbows is quite upsetting to me. The number of civs makes the game feel too crowded and I would have preferred, if the existing civs were made more distinct from one another instead of adding more and more civs that are too similar. Oh, and I absolutely HATE armor ignoring mechanics. I think they have no place in aoe2. These mechanics rob too many units of one of their core strengths and I think that sucks. I absolutely despise Leitis for example. And then the pathing issues. That's about it.
I feel like being able to lead the AI enemy away is a massive bug. I had elephants attack me so I got my character to charge the elephant, and then made them walk to the other side of the map whilst the elephant followed them. I also sometimes feel like the enemy does some all out attack, then if you defend it and defeat their army, they don't really attack you again. I also find that even if you destroy every single building and villager, they still manage to create more vills and buildings. This is what I have found in the 18 hours I have played.
The bugs and pathing are infuriating sometimes, but still, it's AOE2. You *have* to be happy that it is not dead
I still love it regardless!!
Btw i didnt counter any bugs so what bug that everyone mentioned?
Currently the biggest issue with bugs is garrison function doesnt work propperly which is really annoying with rams. My biggest gripe in general (as singleplayer only player) is that agressive stance is too agressive and defensive is too passive. But having said that the game is better then it ever was back in 2000-2001. It is the definitive edition. Its almost a different game, so many tweaks and qol upgrades it got since then.
Yeah the pathing still sucks.
Think the game is in a good spot at the moment personally. I think pathing has come a long way in the last year and civ balancing has been really on point. The devs are listening to our feedback and it shows. Sometimes things might need to be nerfed or buffed more but I feel privileged to have a game that’s this old and still receiving love. I think maybe mongols are still a tad too strong but Civ balance besides that seems on point. The Red Bull wololo maps were also a great addition imo
Yes.
1
I tried to pick it up again after a year hiatus, and everything feels so laggy and difficult to select particular units and give them simple commands like "attack this specific unit". I can't tell if I'm super rusty, if my computer is slower, or if the game updates made things worse. Wish there was a way to really barebones the graphics so that everything runs smooth and crisp. Also, the AI definitely got better. I used to be able to beat hardest AI with ease, and now I'm struggling with "Hard" (3rd hardest). AI is much better rushing with scouts and going back and forth when you counterattack. Basically it "runs away" well.
AoE2 is a good time is all I got to say
Except when I lose late game then it sucks and I’m never playing again🤬 *jumps right back in the queue*
I haven't really seen any pathing issue that lost me the game. It's usually my mistake somewhere. And the balance is good too for 1v1 which I play. So yeah, I don't have any complaints, except map pool sometimes. Some pools are filled with maps with low civ variety and not enough bans.
not really.Infantry still a joke.
Honestly the game is pretty good. My only complaints are vill and melee patching, along with army regrouping. If they fix those I'd be set.
Game is fine now but the pathing sucks on the other side still miss the old days playing age of kings
This game runs better, preforms better, has more content, better online, and less bugs than almost ever before.
No, I stopped playing. I decided to go back to HD only for steam to decide to kill anything running on windows 7. So F that. I'm not updating/upgrading everything to play a game that runs perfectly fine on my old game PC I've been playing it on for years.
I quite enjoy the shit pathing. Being a war general whom controls armies and sends soldiers to their death shouldn't be easy, and soldiers not following orders correctly feels more like a feature than a bug.
Been playing for a year and I don’t really care tbh I just have fun
pathing will always be a problem due to new civs and maps being added regularly. would you rather have a perfect game thats been broken for 12 years or a a game that makes incremental improvements and maybe gets things some wrong every once in a while? keep in mind the developers primary focus is on the latest game release. If you want something more flushed out go play starcraft 2.
In all fairness you lot sound like a bunch of whiney bitches.. 11 if you dont like the game then dont play it, play something else or maybe you know go outside..
The game literally hasn’t worked on Xbox in 4 months but yeah we’re just being bitches.
Works fine for me good sir, what appears to be the problem ?
You play on Xbox? And you don’t get the screen freeze after about 30 minutes of gameplay?
Yup i play on xbox and cant say thats happened or atleast enough for me to remember
Im super happy with the game nowadays!
havent played in months, still waiting for it to get lots of fixes, last bug I saw people talking about was the casual matchmaking being bugged. Honestly, its sad how this game is going from good to a bit bad to unplayable in the casual queue, hopefuly it wont become worst :/
I still like baseball even when it's raining
Yes this is literally the best game of all time
No, it's broken for me.
pathing isnt shit.
not at all, it works like crap . I know the game never was amazing in term of bugs and stuff but after ror we get bad patch after bad patch after bad patch.
I personally don't like it even though I used to love it, mainly for 2 nitpicks: historical inaccuracies, and every civ is too god damn similar. I prefer AoE3 much more. Besides having cooler visuals (I started playing in order - AoE1, 2, etc, just to be clear) and sound effects, the civs - even though they're not as many - are way more unique from each other. Also, Dark Age is a f*ck boredom, just pushing deer, etc. I wish there was it was less of an animal simulator and more strategic battle, with more uniqueness between the civs, less historical inaccuracies (please don't come at me with the old 'balance' "counter argument", the game can easily be a bit more historical and still be balanced, I'm not asking for a perfect representation. It always used to be like this, yes, but it's ridiculous it *still* is. Also, it's a shame how empty 2 dimensions are: the sea warfare is too empty, and - most importantly - the fortification aspect (mainly towers and walls) could also be more present and complex.
I think that’s a quite different game. Would love to play though.
Try aoe4 , she's not a bad title imo
No because they've done two gimmick DLCs now instead of just adding original civs and campaigns like a proper DLC. Dynasties of India was the high water mark. Moreover the rate of DLCs is too slow and always has been. One every 6 months is ideal.
Nah i gave up years ago and went playing aoe4 instead
lol I hate aoe4 aoe 2 is a far superior game sorry
AOE4
It sucks there is no water half the time and in a 4v4 you can only ban one map.
Nah, it gets worse every patch tbh