PDA

View Full Version : Age of Mythology Trial


Pages : [1] 2

Shining1
02-11-2002, 06:55:34
Okay, just for starters, this one's for real:lol:.

The demo version of the one game this year that might possibly eat WarcraftIII for breakfast is out. Go to http://www.fileplanet.com/files/110000/116261.shtml to grab it, though be warned, at 300+ megs, it doesn't come cheap. Still, it's a very neat introduction to what looks like a very complex yet highly playable RTS.

Sean
03-11-2002, 12:40:21
I’m still waiting for a non-Blizzard-fanboy post from Shining1 :(.

Shining1
03-11-2002, 12:56:06
Okay, here goes.

Get the demo. It is better than Warcraft.

Sean
03-11-2002, 13:01:38
Close, but unlucky.

Shining1
03-11-2002, 17:46:35
Um?

Funkodrom
04-11-2002, 09:25:29
Originally posted by Shining1
Okay, here goes.

Get the demo. It is better than Warcraft.

It'd have to be an order of magnitude better than Age of Kings then.

Resource Consumer
04-11-2002, 10:49:17
I rather liked Age of Kings

Funkodrom
04-11-2002, 11:44:09
Too many resources made it much too hard to learn. Too complicated for me to learn the basics let alone get enough units for a real battle.

Funkodrom
04-11-2002, 11:45:26
I did like it too, it's just not as much fun as Warcraft III by a long way.

Sean
04-11-2002, 11:47:32
Originally posted by Funkodrom
Too many resources made it much too hard to learn. Too complicated for me to learn the basics let alone get enough units for a real battle.
It wasn’t so hard, just use very fuzzy logic.

Resource Consumer
04-11-2002, 11:48:17
I have to say WIII is growing on me. Trouble is the games are too damned short which is, of course, my fault.

With AoK, I used to build a lot of walls etc and sit back and wait - can't really do that in WIII so I have to rethink a lot of things...

Funkodrom
04-11-2002, 11:57:40
Originally posted by Sean
It wasn’t so hard, just use very fuzzy logic.

It was almost impossible to get to a level where you could give anyone decent a game that didn't consist of you struggling to castle for 15-20 minutes then losing.

Warcraft III you get fighting from 5 minutes onwards, sometimes sooner if you get hero rushed. It's altogether simpler and more intuitive. Spending hours and hours practicing how to get a fast castle time isn't my idea of a fun game.

Funkodrom
04-11-2002, 11:59:08
Originally posted by Resource Consumer
I have to say WIII is growing on me. Trouble is the games are too damned short which is, of course, my fault.

With AoK, I used to build a lot of walls etc and sit back and wait - can't really do that in WIII so I have to rethink a lot of things...

Absolutely. That doesn't work in WIII at all. If you can survive the early onslaught you need to get your hero out creeping ASAP.

You would learn a lot if you could get into one of our CG multiplayer games sometime. I certainly did! From the discussion after the game if nothing else.

Sean
04-11-2002, 12:03:22
Originally posted by Funkodrom
Warcraft III you get fighting from 5 minutes onwards, sometimes sooner if you get hero rushed. It's altogether simpler and more intuitive. Spending hours and hours practicing how to get a fast castle time isn't my idea of a fun game.
Yep, and rushing isn’t my idea of a fun game.

Funkodrom
04-11-2002, 12:06:44
There were plenty of rushes in AoK and they can be fun in Warcraft but I think that a wargame should actually contain some fighting and I don't see any reason to play for 20 minutes before you get the chance to do any.

Sean
04-11-2002, 12:07:48
I don’t dispute that.

Funkodrom
04-11-2002, 12:08:54
I don't understand why rushing should not be fun but building up stuff for ages in almost exactly the same way every time is fun. That's just weird. If building is more fun than fighting why not just ignore RTS and play Sim City?

Funkodrom
04-11-2002, 12:09:18
X-post. D'oh.

Sean
04-11-2002, 12:14:45
Originally posted by Funkodrom
I don't understand why rushing should not be fun but building up stuff for ages in almost exactly the same way every time is fun. That's just weird. If building is more fun than fighting why not just ignore RTS and play Sim City?
You might want a hybrid. I would have thought that was obvious.

Funkodrom
04-11-2002, 12:20:30
And why does rushing or defending early stop you having a hybrid? It just means that you are trying to build under a lot more pressure.

Sean
04-11-2002, 12:23:40
Yes, but I don’t like rushing. I enjoy both parts of the game, like I enjoy the two sides of Champ Man.

Funkodrom
04-11-2002, 12:30:04
I'm not good enough to rush in WC III but I like defending and counterattacking.

Venom
04-11-2002, 12:48:08
Sounds like someone seriously sucked at AoK.

Funkodrom
04-11-2002, 12:51:08
Well I wasn't too bad against Shakey who got the game at around the same time as me, although he normally won, but I seriously sucked against Rachel who'd been playing it for a year or so. Or who had played it loads at least.

It was a pretty good game but I soon got bored of the 20 minute starts with absolutely no action.

Shining1
04-11-2002, 13:23:23
The learning curve in Age of Kings was totally insane. A new player, for instance, would be doing quite well to get to the castle age (=knights, crossbows, siege, and the DREADED towncenters) in 30 minutes. A good player would be secretly aiming for 15 minutes, and would accept anything from 16-18.

The problem was that you had 4 different resources to collect, and absolutely no benefit for going over the required amount. So if your economy was just a little unbalanced, and you got too much wood and not enough food, it would slow you down. Likewise with stone and gold. Balancing the resource gathering became an exercise in precision instead of anything that could be called fun.

That's all? Oh, no, that's not remotely all. You had to scout to find your resources, too. Get your little horse doing concentric circles out from around your base, hope that you found your first four sheep in the first minute, and the next 4 quickly enough that you wouldn't have idle shepherds when they'd finished cutting up the first ones.

Then you have 'boar luring' - the process by which you get a boar to follow one of your villagers (attacking it) back to the town center so it could be killed there instead of out in the wild.

Screw any of that up, and you would also be behind, sometimes fatally so (because a castle age army of knights and rams is virtually invincible against anything in the feudal age).

Oh, and this is being done on a scale of hundreds of units, too. Ideally, you would enter castle age with 30 precisely tasked peasants, 2 lured boar, 12 sheep, and some deer. Or a massive fishing operation. All of which means you needed to constantly build new houses and manage your town hall to make new villagers.

All that, and you haven't even done a single RTS thing like build a combat unit or work out what counters what. It was just too hard.

In WarcraftIII, it's virtually impossible to fail so badly at the start that you lose the game. Your task is to build 5 peasants for your goldmine and another 4-6 for harvesting lumber. Even that's hard enough, I can't ever play the Orcs without forgetting to build my second burrow. (Note to people: rush Ned when he plays Orcs. It works.)

Funkodrom
04-11-2002, 13:26:17
Exactly! Great summary! :beer:

Venom
04-11-2002, 13:30:55
Hmmm. I never found it was that complex. Then again I didn't think about it. I just went out and played. Won and lost. Good pooints though.

Funkodrom
04-11-2002, 13:36:38
Did you ever play MP against anyone that knew what they were doing? It was like... :eek:

Shining1
04-11-2002, 13:38:03
Did you play online much?

If you'd played against someone like Yin, Uncleroggy, or perhaps me, you'd have been toast. It really was no contest at all against someone who hadn't sat down and carefully practised their build order to get their castling under 20 minutes. Or, alternatively, their feudal tower rush to 10-12 minutes.

Funkodrom
04-11-2002, 13:44:54
Even Rachel said she felt guilty after she watched the replay of the first game we played.

Shining1
04-11-2002, 13:50:31
She should have, slaughtering helpless villagers with knights and catapults isn't respectable behaviour.

Even to her:).

Funkodrom
04-11-2002, 13:58:51
Oh well you know how she is, she didn't attack for ages and ages to give me a chance and I built a few units and attacked her and was absolutely decimated then she wiped me out.

She felt guilty when she watched the replay but when I watched it I couldn't believe that the town I was attacking (which was bigger than my entire development) was only a little expansion and she actually had this enormous city behind it that I never saw during the game.

Sean
04-11-2002, 14:03:49
So, Funkodrom, the problem was you played against people who took it seriously and therefore they beat you?

Funkodrom
04-11-2002, 14:12:27
Did you read any of what Shiny said? He was one of the people who took it seriously and got pretty good but even he agrees with my criticisms.

I took it seriously as well and was enjoying playing it but the learning curve was so steep that I never felt I got to play at a standard where I was able to fight a proper battle with anyone. Which is terrible.

With Warcraft III I can give Rachel or Shiny a game, they will almost certainly win, I haven't won a 1v1 game against either of them yet, but it will actually be a game. Plus I'm motivated to play more 'cause most of what I'm learning now is strategies for picking better armies and counter units and scouting better rather than having to spend hours just working on the first 15 minutes of the game. Practicing boar hunting and sheep collection etc etc.

It didn't take me very long to get good enough in the first few minutes to be able to actually get into proper battles with people, even if they were already really good players.

Basically practicing battles is fun, practicing farming isn't.

Sean
04-11-2002, 14:15:13
I could criticise PES2 to a similar degree, but that doesn’t mean FIFA is better.

Funkodrom
04-11-2002, 14:22:00
Have you played Warcraft III?

Funkodrom
04-11-2002, 14:35:00
And it's not that I didn't like AoK but the learning curve to get anywhere in MP was much, much too steep. I'm not saying it was a bad game. It's one of the few PC games from the last few years that's got any kind of play on my machine. But for me it's no Warcraft III.

As for the football game analogy... well people can sit down and play PES2 with vastly different quality teams against a much better player and they can do things that improve their game every time they play and they can improve by just playing not by meticulously practicing the start.

Shining1
04-11-2002, 14:45:52
That was part of the problem with Age of Kings. You would play a game against someone with a better buildup, and feel like you had achieved nothing and stood NO chance. Unless you went out and carefully looked up recorded games to demonstrate principles, and read the strats, you wouldn't even have a clue of where to begin.

I win against Mike in WarcraftIII, say, because I have more experience with all the sides in it and can work out what to use to counter his stuff more efficiently. But there's never a situation where I've attacked his base with 20 knights and all he had was 10 footmen, which would have been commonplace in Age of Kings for the difference in our experience levels. If we reach the 20 minute mark in a game, he WILL have an army, and I will have to think carefully to defeat it - it's not a case of my having won the game at the 5 minute mark because he got his villager killed luring his first boar and he forgot to go out and hunt it again for a couple of minutes.

The Shaker
04-11-2002, 14:57:37
I guess that would have been quite boaring.

Funkodrom
04-11-2002, 14:58:36
Yep. The best thing about it for me is that if I lose in Warcraft III it's because I haven't controlled my units in the battles as well or I've been outscouted so my opponent built better counter units and it's something I can learn from. So effectively I've generally lost for military reasons not economics. That's not to say that you can't lose because your oppponent starves you of expansion gold but that's more military as well.

And what Shiny says about recorded games and ideal strats for AoK is true as well. I had to spend ages watching those damn things. :bash: With Warcraft III there isn't one perfect start for every race. It depends a lot on what types of units you are going to build or what kind of game you are playing. You might start differently in a team game to a 1v1 or a Free for all. You will almost certainly start slightly differently in 1v1s against different races.

It's more about knowing how things work and being able to adapt than just learning things off by heart. Which is much more my style.

Venom
04-11-2002, 15:34:19
Did I ever play anyone seriously talented at the game? What kind of a question is that? Of course I didn't. I hate to lose.

OldWarrior_42
04-11-2002, 16:33:57
Funko... why don't you just play the game against people that are at your level ... speaking about AoK.

That would be someone like me for instance. I couldn't beat Ned , Roger, Yin or Rachel if I tried either. Once in awhile I gave them a decent game... more perhaps in the beginning as opposed to later on when they just kept getting faster and better. But it still was fun. Especially the team games.

Try me one day and see just how bad I suck. I haven't played it in over a year now so I definitely suck even more. :D

Funkodrom
04-11-2002, 16:37:36
Thanks. Yeah, I did have a few cool games against The Shaker which were closer (although as I said he tended to win). At the moment I am enjoying Warcraft III a lot more than I ever was Age of Kings and I still have a huge amount to learn in Warcraft III. I'm also a lot more motivated to play and learn that game than I have been about any PC game for probably 5+ years. :beer: It helps that there are so many Counterglow players with such varied skill levels.

Mightytree
04-11-2002, 17:28:49
AoK is by far my favourite RTS ... mostly because it has those funny Vikings sounds in it. :D

Venom
04-11-2002, 17:46:03
If I weren't incredible lazy and unreliable you could try and play against me sometime. You could probably beat me.

Shining1
04-11-2002, 17:53:18
Funko has trouble beating anyone. I wouldn't count on it:).

Venom
04-11-2002, 17:55:12
I couldn't have been that good at it and I haven't played in months.

Shining1
04-11-2002, 17:55:45
But you should both play WarcraftIII, really. Even if you have no skill you can fit in on larger MP teams, and the big games are some of the most fun:).

Nav
04-11-2002, 17:57:32
1hr 40mins? man thats a long download.... :(

I'll probably play some Warcraft III tonight if anyones around and up a for an ass whipping.. :cute:

Shining1
04-11-2002, 18:05:06
Define tonight. Rachel and I are both still up.

Nav
04-11-2002, 18:13:40
ouch. probably in an hour or so!

Shining1
04-11-2002, 18:20:43
Hmmmm:).

Nav
04-11-2002, 18:25:36
dont want to play you anyway. :p

Venom
04-11-2002, 19:09:45
1 hr 40 minutes? 300 megs should take way less time than that.

Nav
04-11-2002, 19:23:42
yeah, well you know, I have to divert a certain percentage of my bandwidth to building my porn collection

Venom
04-11-2002, 19:38:15
Porn collections are indeed important. I treat my collection like it was my pet.

Shining1
04-11-2002, 20:04:45
You put it outside for the night?

Venom
04-11-2002, 20:07:25
It always comes back.

Shining1
04-11-2002, 20:39:36
And then devours your slippers.

Sean
04-11-2002, 23:18:12
Ars Technica review of AoM (http://arstechnica.com/reviews/02q3/Ageofmythology/aom-1.html). 9/10, but I’m not entirely convinced.

Venom
05-11-2002, 01:09:17
I have my collection pet trained.

Shining1
05-11-2002, 05:41:21
It's a very basic review.

Nav
05-11-2002, 13:37:58
I played the demo and I'm not exactly convinced.

I've only played half the tuturial and one ffa so far, but it looks like AoE with bits of Populous and Warcraft 3 tacked on

You get god powers by praying at a temple, ie you generate mana to do things such as fire lightning to kill individual enemies or metoers to destroy a whole town.

You also can build heroes (ala WC3) but these are only marginally larger than normal units so are difficult to spot in the heat of the battle. Also some of the myth units look odd, like the centaur (man attached to a horse) and the scout pegasus-type unit (not a unicorn)

not to sure about this one yet, unfortunately the demo doesnt include multiplay either

Funkodrom
05-11-2002, 13:45:43
A review from a site called ars? :lol: Venom should write for them.

That review doesn't tell me anything that would help me decide whether to buy the game or not. I'll wait for Shiny's.

Venom
05-11-2002, 15:21:11
I could be their missing 'e'.

Sean
05-11-2002, 15:26:41
Originally posted by Funkodrom
A review from a site called ars? :lol: Venom should write for them.
You’ve never heard of Ars Technica :confused:?

Funkodrom
05-11-2002, 16:02:46
Nope.

You guys keep forgetting I'm not a geek.

Are all their reviews as shit as that?

Sean
05-11-2002, 16:05:09
Well, read them and fiind out for yourself.

Funkodrom
05-11-2002, 16:09:08
I am going to take that sample of one I've read and decide that it's not worth my effort.

Sean
05-11-2002, 16:13:15
Good idea.

Never heard of Ars Technica…great gaming forum…mutter…

Funkodrom
05-11-2002, 16:20:12
Nothing personal for technical arse, I haven't heard of many gaming sites. Links to some good ones might be nice, I never know where to look for stuff and places like Gamespy and Gamespot are really shite.

Funkodrom
05-11-2002, 16:26:31
Urgh... The homepage of Ars Technica is full of all that nerd shit the guys talk about at tea beaks here when I just switch off or try and get people to talk about something interesting.

The Shaker
05-11-2002, 16:35:19
Girls

Funkodrom
05-11-2002, 16:39:27
Nah, I don't want to talk about girls with the people I work with. It'd be horribly traumatic. Football or talking to the one guy here who plays games about the game he's currently playing is safe. Or something that was on TV last night. Or films or something.

I just have to make sure I never mention computers or networks or Linux or work or cycling or cars at a tea break.

Funkodrom
05-11-2002, 16:40:54
"I finally got the drivers to run my old 486 box with linux as a proxy for my ADSL, I just had to..." :sleep:

The Shaker
05-11-2002, 16:42:20
Did you see the matrix?
Yeah ...what sort of network...blah blah blah

sounds riveting :)

Funkodrom
05-11-2002, 16:53:08
It is fucking dull. I like using computers, for web stuff and games and things but I couldn't give a flying fuck how they work. I kind of resent having to know about fixing and maintaining OSes or what the difference between different RAMs are or anything. Luckily I know people who do so when I am going to buy a PC I say "What's good?" :D

I think I was more interested in it before I had to face the dullness of it every day.

And I know way more about most of it than I ever wanted to although I make sure I learn as little server maintenance stuff as possible so they can't ask me to do anything about it. I got sent on a basic NT Admin course once. :lol: At least the food was nice.

OldWarrior_42
05-11-2002, 17:46:55
Knowledge is power. Power is money.

You're broke, aren't you Funko? :-P~~

Funkodrom
05-11-2002, 18:34:47
I have a lot of knowledge about the stuff which it is actually my job to know about and things that interest me.

I forget this infrastructure/hardware/OS stuff as soon as I hear it. :beer:

Shining1
06-11-2002, 00:25:12
I like the hardware stuff. And the OS stuff for that matter. Knowing roughly how the thing works is a great help to using it.

Hmmm, maybe that's my problem with cars.

Venom
06-11-2002, 02:21:09
compooterz r gay

Sir Penguin
06-11-2002, 02:53:40
Ars Technica is like Slashdot, only smarter and more focussed. And they don't have branching threads. I've never gone into the gaming section, but they've got a few good articles (and the news is often interesting). A while ago they had a news item about using zip technology to identify literature and lingual relationships. That was cool (I stayed up until 5 am trying it out--they were right).

SP

Shining1
06-11-2002, 05:18:41
Intriguing...:)

Still an extremely basic review, though. At least from the point of view of someone who's played Age of Kings, which seems to be the majority of this thread.

What I'd like to know is whether the learning curve is smoother than Age of Kings (it looks it, they're reduced the resources and brutally cut down on the number of units and town centers you can build), and whether the game is fair and plays well, or whether it's just another round of tower and castle rushing.

What I learned was that it was a historical/mythological RTS by Ensemble Studios, and that it ran without any problems on a very nice computer.

Darkstar
06-11-2002, 08:40:33
Nav... like Settlers then? You build up mana by praying/sacrificing goods at a temple in Settlers (2 - Current).

Funkodrom
06-11-2002, 09:52:00
Slashdot? Sounds familiar I believe I may even have followed links to that before.

I was being cranky about hardware yesterday because I was not smoking and tetchy. (Still not smoking, not quite as tetchy). I just hate the idea of turning out like the nerds working here. Well one of them in particular. Apparently it's Ok to be a geek but despite some training on the matter I still find it hard not to find that description a bit negative and insulting.

Anyway back to the review. Shiny's right. Didn't tell me anything I couldn't read in an Ensemble press release really.

Shining1
06-11-2002, 10:37:12
Mike: It probably was an Ensemble press release:).

And I don't want to say 'that's very stupid' as such, but avoiding something you enjoy just because a certain other person enjoys it and you don't want to be like them, is at least a little bit dumb.

If I did that, I'd never watch rugby or football, or probably go to the gym. And I wouldn't have done physics or maths either. In fact, come to think, there's at least one stupid/horrible person I can think of relating to most things that I've really enjoyed one way or another during the time I've been alive. It just doesn't work to base your perceptions of something around what someone else thinks of it.

Though, of course, you probably should be discrete about it around said horrible persons, lest they mistake you for a brother and want to talk to you...

Funkodrom
06-11-2002, 10:53:51
Yeah that's fair enough but the point is that I don't enjoy it to the point I can't understand how anyone else does. It's boring, something that you have to know something about before you can do fun stuff sometimes. Certainly not anything I'd choose to talk about or research unless I had a specific problem to solve.

Like I wouldn't sit down and read a dictionary or phone book but I might read bits of them if I needed a word or number. And I wouldn't do a maths degree but I might do some maths to solve a physics problem. Actually that's probably the best comparison. Theoretical pure maths is intensely boring for me. It's a tool which can be useful and enjoyable to use in practical applications but in it's pure abstract form it has nothing going for it for me. That's probably why I only went to 1 maths lecture in 3 years at uni.

Resource Consumer
06-11-2002, 10:54:10
Originally posted by Darkstar
Nav... like Settlers then? You build up mana by praying/sacrificing goods at a temple in Settlers (2 - Current).

Not Settlers 2 I think - which I liked. Settlers III and IV I never bothered with

Shining1
06-11-2002, 10:59:14
Mike: Well, that's fair enough then, because you are avoiding it because YOU don't actually like it, which was my whole (and only) point.

Other people's fascination with anything can be best attributed to mountain climber syndrome:). Why scale a massive, icy peak in freezing winds? Because it's there.

I think everyone has some form of that.

Shining1
06-11-2002, 11:00:56
DS/RC (since Nav ain't replying): The Greeks pray at their temple using villagers to earn favour. The Eyptians build monuments to earn it. And the Norse kill things:).

Funkodrom
06-11-2002, 11:02:53
I'd be the kind of mountain climber who got pissed off with everyone talking about the technical specs of their ropes and pulleys. :D

Shining1
06-11-2002, 11:13:50
Sir Ed was like that:D. You're in good company, don't worry...

The Shaker
06-11-2002, 11:15:11
you'd be the kind of mountain climber who was sat in the pub while the others were up the mountain.

Funkodrom
06-11-2002, 11:48:51
I'd be in the pub saying "I don't have time to climb any mountains these days." :D

LadyRachel
07-11-2002, 03:50:45
Just happened to wander into the game store today and AoM was on the shelf a day early. For some mysterious reason, a copy ended up coming home with me. Haven't installed it yet, but it's the first RTS I've seen with two disks.

Darkstar
07-11-2002, 05:50:35
My, mysteriously arrived home with you, did it? Must be some wild magics loose down in Kiwi land. ;)

Shining1
07-11-2002, 08:11:30
Yes, you have to watch out constantly for wild magics here. Can't get away from the bastards it seems...

Funkodrom
07-11-2002, 09:51:42
Originally posted by LadyRachel
Just happened to wander into the game store today and AoM was on the shelf a day early. For some mysterious reason, a copy ended up coming home with me. Haven't installed it yet, but it's the first RTS I've seen with two disks.

REVIEW!

Sean
07-11-2002, 11:53:59
Originally posted by LadyRachel
Just happened to wander into the game store today and AoM was on the shelf a day early. For some mysterious reason, a copy ended up coming home with me. Haven't installed it yet, but it's the first RTS I've seen with two disks.
Unless you mean two DVDs, great huge Own Goal.

The Shaker
07-11-2002, 11:57:40
????

Funkodrom
07-11-2002, 12:03:04
Shakey: All the C&C games had 2 disks.

Shining1
07-11-2002, 12:08:14
Fuck you're a twat, Sean.

Funkodrom
07-11-2002, 12:09:37
Maybe Rachel's too young to remember C&C. ;)

Sean
07-11-2002, 12:11:19
Originally posted by Shining1
Fuck you're a twat, Sean.
Wha? I still associate games with coming on CDs—BF1942 is 2 CDs, after all.

Funkodrom
07-11-2002, 12:12:06
Don't worry about it. That's just his general response to anyone own goaling anyone else.

Shining1
07-11-2002, 12:50:54
Me and my own, specifically:D.

Anyway to clear up this particular niggling point, AoM is a game that REQUIRES two CDs to contain all the game data. C&C always had two CDs but I think this was just for covienience and perhaps storing the cinematics for the campaign (there was one campaign on each, and the CD check meant that two people could play per copy bought). The game itself never required 1 Gig of harddisk space like AoM does.

Shining1
07-11-2002, 12:52:03
Also, 'great huge Own Goal' is almost in the 'Brian Reynold's goatee' class of twatishness, so I think I can stand by that.

Sorry for swearing though. That was unjustified.

Sean
07-11-2002, 12:57:52
As the first thing I thought was ‘Metal Fatigue’ shortly followed by ‘C&C’ and ‘Total Annihilation’ I thought it was justified.

Shining1
07-11-2002, 13:11:19
You are a justifiable twat, then.

Sean
07-11-2002, 13:20:51
Just like any other block of text.

Venom
07-11-2002, 13:29:17
You swearing bastard!

Resource Consumer
07-11-2002, 13:30:30
Originally posted by Shining1
Also, 'great huge Own Goal' is almost in the 'Brian Reynold's goatee' class of twatishness, so I think I can stand by that.

Sorry for swearing though. That was unjustified.

Did Brian Reynolds have a goatee?

Funkodrom
07-11-2002, 13:34:03
Originally posted by Shining1
Me and my own, specifically:D.

Rachel's always Own Goaling me.

Shining1
07-11-2002, 14:01:37
She should do Keith, too:).

Resource Consumer
07-11-2002, 14:11:19
It was a genuine question. I didn't think he did and didn't understand why you said that he had...

Funkodrom
07-11-2002, 14:24:12
You are trying to get your wife to 'do' Keith? :hmm:

Funkodrom
07-11-2002, 14:26:13
Originally posted by Resource Consumer
It was a genuine question. I didn't think he did and didn't understand why you said that he had...

You only had him as your Avatar for how many months with a goatee? :D

LadyRachel
07-11-2002, 14:34:55
Never plyed any C&C - tanks bore me. Played a wee bit of TA, but it never made a particularly favourable impression on me. And Metal Fatigue could be Another Goddamned WW2 Shooter for all I know of it. I didn't really start to play RTS games until AoK came out. Also, for the record, Ned came up with the 2 disk comment, so if it is inaccurate, blame him.

Resource Consumer
07-11-2002, 14:37:49
Originally posted by Funkodrom
You only had him as your Avatar for how many months with a goatee? :D

That didn't have a goatee.

Resource Consumer
07-11-2002, 14:38:32
Originally posted by Funkodrom
You are trying to get your wife to 'do' Keith? :hmm:

I passed over that implication out of politeness....

Shining1
07-11-2002, 14:40:34
Keith: You were caught by the brilliant sparkle of his eyes all that time?:D

Funkodrom
07-11-2002, 14:49:18
Originally posted by LadyRachel
Also, for the record, Ned came up with the 2 disk comment, so if it is inaccurate, blame him.

We should have known it was Ned's fault. ;)

Funkodrom
07-11-2002, 14:53:56
Originally posted by Resource Consumer
That didn't have a goatee.

Own Goal... it blatantly did.

Shining1
07-11-2002, 15:00:11
Stupid stupid stupid stupid stupid stupid game.

The Shaker
07-11-2002, 15:04:26
Right that's it the next person to say own goal gets thrown out.

Sean
07-11-2002, 15:06:43
Of where?

Funkodrom
07-11-2002, 15:08:00
Own goal.

:lol:

Nice Setup thanks Sean. :D

Sean
07-11-2002, 15:08:45
:bounce:.

Resource Consumer
07-11-2002, 15:12:06
Originally posted by Funkodrom
Own Goal... it blatantly did.

It did not. It was a full beard

Funkodrom
07-11-2002, 15:12:17
:bounce:

Shining1
07-11-2002, 15:14:26
I think another episode of firaxians is almost due:D.

Funkodrom
07-11-2002, 15:19:54
About Brian's beard? :lol: Goatee or not Goatee, that is the question.

Venom
07-11-2002, 15:57:52
Sorry to interject, but did someone call tanks boring?

Funkodrom
07-11-2002, 16:02:49
Only a girl.

The Shaker
07-11-2002, 16:04:15
cue penis joke.

Funkodrom
07-11-2002, 16:13:04
The Shaker.

Oh... penis joke not joke penis.

Venom
07-11-2002, 16:23:55
Close enough.

Shining1
07-11-2002, 16:33:44
Lame ass, Mike.

Funkodrom
07-11-2002, 16:43:47
You have to be more specific, I make way too many lame comments for a general one like that.

Venom
07-11-2002, 16:44:29
And the Starscream avatar is born.

Funkodrom
07-11-2002, 16:47:17
Don't fuck with Starscream. He'll try and stab you in the back, fuck it up and end up humiliated and powerless!

Venom
07-11-2002, 16:55:01
Starscream is a bad motha fucka but you should have gone with SoundWave (that was his name right?). The purple guy with the evil tape in his chest.

Funkodrom
07-11-2002, 17:01:32
Starscream was always my favourite. Soundwave was the first Transformer toy I owned.

RAVAGE, RUMBLE, FRENZY... EJECT, EJECT, EJECT

Sean
07-11-2002, 17:02:25
Soundwave was cool, had a cool voice.

Venom
07-11-2002, 17:05:30
You always identified with trying and failing.

I always like the dinobots. I identified with their stupidity.

Funkodrom
07-11-2002, 17:06:07
He did. He was a bit too straight and unemotional for me. Like Mr Spock, I always liked Dr McCoy best.

Funkodrom
07-11-2002, 17:07:05
Originally posted by Venom
You always identified with trying and failing.

I liked him 'cause he was really sarcastic. He got all the funny lines.

Shining1
07-11-2002, 17:08:04
The cat or the eagle?

Sean
07-11-2002, 17:09:22
Originally posted by Venom
I always like the dinobots. I identified with their stupidity.
Me Grimlock say Venom good!

Venom
07-11-2002, 17:11:37
Grimlock, Slag, Sludge, Swoop and Snarl.

Slag was my favorite.

LadyRachel
07-11-2002, 21:33:47
Originally posted by Venom
Sorry to interject, but did someone call tanks boring?

Tanks = :sleep:

Sean
07-11-2002, 21:37:38
Argh, you used the equals sign! No, no, no!

LadyRachel
07-11-2002, 21:51:14
Okay -

tanks : boredom :: chocolate : pleasure

Venom
08-11-2002, 00:10:59
Arrrgggh you used the evil SAT signs. And you're wrong!!!!

Shining1
08-11-2002, 06:46:16
How about chocolate tanks?

Sir Penguin
08-11-2002, 07:42:59
They're only good for one thing.

SP

Funkodrom
08-11-2002, 09:28:30
Getting parking spaces in chocolate car parks?

Venom
08-11-2002, 13:03:50
Coating with sprinkles?

Sir Penguin
08-11-2002, 21:54:13
Yes, those two and...

SP

Venom
09-11-2002, 02:21:04
Fighting chocolate rabbits.

Shining1
09-11-2002, 02:27:27
The rabbits won't know what hit them.

BoltyBoy
10-11-2002, 01:57:38
AoM - Played this for a few hours. Just seems like playing AoE again and I can't bring myself to buy a game where I'll feel like I'm just replaying an old game I got gored of playing.

Nice new myth units but really when it comes down to it they're just another combat unit.

Reource gathering seems the same, buildings even do 90% the same things as AoE buildings!

I mean come on, I'd expect more than just revamped graphics and calling the units something different...oh no I'm wrong, they haven't even done that!

I point you to B&W 2. From what I read it sounds like they've really listened to people and made a lot of changes to gameplay as well as visually. Where as Microsoft's attitude seems to be "how can we do as little as possible to make it look new and grab more of the public's hard earned wodge?"

Is this an outspoken opinion?

Sean
10-11-2002, 02:02:59
Originally posted by BoltyBoy
I point you to B&W 2. From what I read it sounds like they've really listened to people and made a lot of changes to gameplay as well as visually.
I think we would all be well-advised to wait until we actually play the game, damnit before commenting on anything from Lionhead. Or Elixir.

Mightytree
10-11-2002, 02:47:09
BoltyBoy, that's exactly what I've heard other people say about AoM too. I'm not surprised at all Shining likes it.

;)

Shining1
10-11-2002, 05:53:27
Boltyboy: It's evolution instead of revolution, aside from the addition of a few new features like the big spells.

A few hours is probably enough to know that you won't like it, at least in singleplayer. AoK for me had it's whole life in the MP game, though - what did you do in your few hours?

Shining1
10-11-2002, 05:55:02
At least no-one is complaining about me being a Blizzard fanboy for this one:).

The Shaker
10-11-2002, 10:42:20
It definately plays like AoK, but with out the mad rushing around thing. which can only be good thing. I'm having fun with it, but it isn't sapping my will to drink tea.

Shining1
10-11-2002, 11:01:31
Damned tea sappers!

BoltyBoy
10-11-2002, 13:11:20
I played AoE II on multiplayer a few times and admit that was far superior to single player missions so I guess AoM would be a hoot on MP.

But playing on SP (ok the trial version can't give a complete feeling of a game) it just seemed too much like I was replaying a tired old over-worked concept. Shining, you say "evolution" and I agree except it's not got past dinosaurs yet! It's like watching Police Academy 7 - sure it was fun and novel at first but they seem to have got stuck using the same recipee.

I mean they not even got something like trees that grow back. Yeah you say this would mess up gameplay as players wouldn't have to be as careful with their resource gathering but you could work in it a way that if a player is carefull they will have a good supply of nearby trees, whereas if they over resource the trees will quicky run out.

This is just an example of how they could build on the old "Age Of" concept and turn it in to something that makes you feel more like you're playing a new game as opposed to regurgitated!

Maybe there's an element of "ugh Microsoft" in what I say. I just feel the marketing machine of Microsoft is blinding people in to believing they are getting a new game for their money.

I'll stop ranting now and play something I like instead...where's my copy of MTW... :)

Shining1
10-11-2002, 13:19:54
Ensemble have pretty well taken their first game, AoE, and over the course of AoK and AoM have tried to balance and improve it so it became easier to control and was more fun in multiplayer. The evolutionary stuff has come in terms of the game interface, the civilisation setups and powers, and how the game plays in MP against other, more ruthless opponents.

I have to agree that AoM is probably about the last thing I would recommend for singleplayer value and most of my excitement is based on my extensive MP experiences with Age of Kings.

And I've played about one game during all that time where the trees actually ran out across the map. Regrowing trees aren't really a priority - there just isn't that much call for wood during a whole game (it was a huge naval game, too).

Sean
10-11-2002, 13:52:00
I played the tutorials, good fun, looks a lot like Empire Earth, can’t really say how it plays but resource management appears to be easier. The mythology stuff seems like a novelty addition (yes, I know it impacts the game, but still).

Why would you want trees that go back, if most people are complaining that resource management has been too complex?

Resource Consumer
10-11-2002, 19:38:36
Bought it and really rather like it (waits for Beta1 to scream).

The special "use-once" powers are an interesting variant. Need to think about how is the best way to play here.

A thumbs up from here though

Shining1
11-11-2002, 01:47:01
Okay, what I'm getting from the forums about AoM

* God powers aren't really effective enough to turn a game - even the huge battle spells like meteor and Lightning storm don't really matter terribly much because the game gets so spread out and armies are rebuilt so quickly that they are more nusiance value than anything else.

* Age of buildings is not dead, just wounded. Fortresses (the castle equivilent building in AoM) are quite cheap compared to many units, especially the myth ones. As a result, there's a large investment in siege weapons to counter this required in some games, and siege weapons (you guessed it) are built at the fortress:).

* Myth units aren't being used to major effect yet - too many of them are too easily countered by archers/fortresses or a mass of heroes (which you have to build anyway), and they are fairly expensive, certainly compared with just fielding another 10 or so infantry.

* Buildings and towers are much weaker than in AoK, meaning the game is more offensively driven. You can't just wall in, build a host of bombard towers, and settle down to a nice long game of turtle. The Norse ramming team siege weapons in particular are uncounterable by buildings alone, having 99% damage reduction against piercing attacks.


Overall it actually sounds fairly balanced, and I suspect that Myth units will become increasingly popular once people figure out ways to eliminate hero units early in a battle and then rush in their reserve force of hill giants and trolls to devastate the rest of the human army.

Thanks for all the comments in this thread so far - especially some of the negative ones. They'll help a lot in the review, and are a good reminder for me to set the scene properly by explaining my own past with Age of Kings properly.

Sean
11-11-2002, 01:54:56
Hmm, it looks like my fiendish plan of playing while ignoring the gods might just work.

Shining1
11-11-2002, 02:00:40
Heathen!

Sean
11-11-2002, 02:02:57
A mighty warrior, feared by all for his single-minded devotion to slaughtering the opposition with or without divine assistance who doesn’t believe in luck, thank you.

On a completely unrelated note, I want to try out that Norse walking, fighting forest power.

On another completely unrelated note, are the buildings still on grids? It seems like you can place them pixel-perfect, but I like having grids to work with.

Shining1
11-11-2002, 07:48:15
Yes, that's all very well until you run headlong into a pack of cyclopes and wonder what hit you:).

Yeah, that sounds very cool:).

No grids, you can put them precisely where you want. It doesn't really affect anything that way, you still get rows of very straight looking houses.

Venom
11-11-2002, 13:02:07
I hate it when the houses get crooked.

Sean
11-11-2002, 18:19:56
Played some more, the Myth units get all the cool stuff. Like when a cyclops throws a poor Hoplite into the trees and knocks the trees down, or the Anubian priests leaping into battle.

Resource Consumer
12-11-2002, 09:32:39
I really like this game. Just to amplify Shiny's point. The AI on easy is non-existent. It didn't seem to build any troops until I was knocking down it's town centes. Amazingly, my progression times were a fraction slower than the AIs. I'll need to get my act together else I'll get creamed on normal.

Playing "Easy" is good to learn what all the buildings and upgrades are though.

Playing as Hades - quite like that.:)

The Shaker
12-11-2002, 10:00:38
I only just realised...i've never ever seen the scrren with the timelines on. it doesn't seem to come up automatically.
why is this and where is it?

(AI still kicks my arse when i attack on easy)

Resource Consumer
12-11-2002, 10:24:18
It's right at the end (unsurprisingly). You have to click on one of the tabs on the stats screen.

You attack too early. I just built the army from hell (literally) with all the heroes myth units and seige engines I could (just to see what they all looked like) and just marched in and left them to it. AI resigned after 5 minutes of mayhem.

The Shaker
12-11-2002, 10:30:14
stats screen?

Hum, usually i get a message saying 'will you let me quit' so i click yes, and it sits there until i find the exit thingy at the topright corner.
they it just goes back to the main menu.

Resource Consumer
12-11-2002, 10:42:38
It should show up before that.

The Shaker
12-11-2002, 11:05:10
OK, in that case i'll just settle for a fucked install and redo it.

Resource Consumer
12-11-2002, 11:12:08
You did install both disks?

Funkodrom
12-11-2002, 11:34:09
Originally posted by The Shaker
I only just realised...i've never ever seen the scrren with the timelines on. it doesn't seem to come up automatically.
why is this and where is it?

(AI still kicks my arse when i attack on easy)

When you finish the game is there a difference between End Game and Quit game? There is in Warcraft, and I vaguely remember there is something like that in AoK. One takes you back to the main menu or out of the game, the other takes you to the screen that shows you all the stats. In AoK One of the tabs in that screen told you the timeline things.

The Shaker
12-11-2002, 11:36:52
Hmmmm, i'll pop home and have a quick game to see :)

OG on both disks :)

Funkodrom
12-11-2002, 11:39:48
I doubt you could get an install where it all worked perfectly but no stats screen. I think you probably just aren't looking in the right place. :D

Resource Consumer
12-11-2002, 11:46:53
Originally posted by Funkodrom
When you finish the game is there a difference between End Game and Quit game? There is in Warcraft, and I vaguely remember there is something like that in AoK. One takes you back to the main menu or out of the game, the other takes you to the screen that shows you all the stats. In AoK One of the tabs in that screen told you the timeline things.

I've got a feeling you're right - that is probably the explanation.

The Shaker
12-11-2002, 12:29:16
Actually ther are 2 choices, end and something else.
I always press end.
In warcraft you get continue and end game. End game gives you the stats screen. Maybe these are the other way round :)

Funkodrom
12-11-2002, 12:31:52
If that's it then it's just further proof that I'm a frikkin genius.

The Shaker
12-11-2002, 12:42:25
Ok, well no point trying that then.

Shining1
12-11-2002, 14:14:54
When you win or lose the game, there is a tab menu that pops up with three options, IIRC. The top one of these lets you see all the game info screens.

Additionally, pressing F11 will let you toggle on the in game clock, so you can see how close to perfect with your build order you are getting. (You lamer you). It's also nice to have so you can see how long the game's been going for, etc.

I played a game against the moderate A.I last night. You won't want to try this one until you actually have a decent plan in place, I think. The A.I gives you about 10-15 minutes to get an army ready, and then storms in with it's own troops. Doesn't quite seem to mastered the art of combined arms (it produced a huge number of archers and very little else), but you'd better have a good idea what to do as far as scouting and base defense go, or else just rush it and beat it before it starts building up;).

Question: How are people finding the game performs on their system? I keep getting interminable little slowdowns and other hitches from time to time, even though I beat the minimum specs by lightyears... :(

Resource Consumer
12-11-2002, 15:00:10
Runs beaut on 1GHz 512MB.

Looks like I'll have another try on easy before trying the moderate (is that the 2nd difficulty or the third, i.e., moderate = normal?). Trouble is the "easy" really seems to be almost somnulent.

Sean
12-11-2002, 15:00:49
I run it fine on low detail, 32-bit colour (Radeons apparently perform as well as 16-bit as 32-bit, so why not?), 1024x768. Looks a lot like Empire Earth and runs beautifully, except for some prboelms with the cursor flickering.

I’ve not played a skirmish yet, just the campaign (ma’am) on medium. It’s pretty good fun, still on the first campaign so it’s very easy, giving me a a chance to get into the game. The gold Collosus is one tough bastard of a unit and amazing against buildings, and I also like the sea-Hydra things.

I’ll have to find a build order before playing a skirmish, from what’s been said here.

Oh, and the house limit is damn annoying the first time you hit it. Villagers should count for half or something: I had to slaughter thirty or so of them.

Resource Consumer
12-11-2002, 15:17:30
:lol: Just wait for the Kraken to come along for a spot of villie-throwing.

My one complaint is that the sound on the campaigns is very clipped/cropped.

I run on high detail

Sean
12-11-2002, 15:35:46
Originally posted by Resource Consumer
:lol: Just wait for the Kraken to come along for a spot of villie-throwing.
I’m not sure what the benefit of a villager-throwing sea creture is, to be honest. The two hydra units are fantastic if you can mop up some easy enemies first, like bears, caravans, or villagers, so they grow more heads.

Resource Consumer
12-11-2002, 16:01:28
I didn't realise that. There are so many civ unique units I haven't even been able to scratch the surface yet.

This game is a real goodie..

Sean
12-11-2002, 16:50:07
I’m going to play online against a friend later, with luck. I fancy trying out the Egyptians.

Sean
12-11-2002, 16:53:23
Any good strategy sites and stuff? I thought MFO (http://www.rtscentral.com/readPosting.asp?PostingId=835047) would be good, but their Civ guides are from the Alpha version.

Shining1
13-11-2002, 03:39:08
Sean: Aside from my comment about spamming fortresses, nope, you're on your own. Don't go too heavy on the myth units until you have a proper human army, either - they are a bit too easy to counter.

Example: 6 infantry will beat Ajax (greek hero) easily enough, though with some loses. 2 Nemean Lions will tear through 6 infantry without much effort. But Ajax will slaughter the two lions with barely a mean glance and a snap of his fingers. You definitely need the real troops to take out the myth counters before you can deploy the myth units properly.

Oh, and villagers = 1 population slots. Soliders = 2, and Siege/Myth/Heroes = 2-5 population slots. So they already are worth at least half of a combat unit:p.

Shining1
13-11-2002, 03:41:10
My 'unstoppable' force of criosphynxes in the moderate game I played was easily crushed by the greek archer/hero army, for instance... :(

Shining1
13-11-2002, 10:11:35
Stupid fucking game runs so incredibly poorly on my computer that I'm putting it away for a while.

Random crashes in MP (almost consistantly now) combined with extreme slowdowns are pissing me off:(.

It's a good game, design wise, but the technical stuff is pretty bad.

Resource Consumer
13-11-2002, 10:13:14
shame:(

Means I get a chance to get better than you.:D (some chance;))

Funkodrom
13-11-2002, 10:45:13
More WARCRAFT!!!

Shining1
13-11-2002, 11:00:53
Do your worst:D

Funkodrom
13-11-2002, 11:27:58
That's what I normally do. :D

Shining1
13-11-2002, 11:34:09
Gods, I haven't reinstalled that yet. Hope it still works, too...

Funkodrom
13-11-2002, 11:37:09
I managed to have a couple of games against Tau the other day. In the first half of the second game I managed to somehow get a great advantage. Then throw it away. :beer:

Shining1
13-11-2002, 11:52:38
WarcraftIII is too difficult:).

Funkodrom
13-11-2002, 11:55:48
I had a great suicide moment on that map with the huge bunches of dragons. They kicked my arse once (I'd never actually seen them before and I confused the map so I was expecting just one level 10 dragon...) so I went back to get my revenge. Saw Tau's elves lurking round the corner and attacked the dragons anyway.

I just love killing dragons so much, that and mining.

I'm such a dwarf. *sigh*

The Shaker
13-11-2002, 12:07:31
So we get to call you stumpy from now on.

Funkodrom
13-11-2002, 12:19:01
OK you Boltonion.

Resource Consumer
13-11-2002, 12:25:16
Youri Djorkiev?

Sean
13-11-2002, 13:02:33
Originally posted by Shining1
Oh, and villagers = 1 population slots. Soliders = 2, and Siege/Myth/Heroes = 2-5 population slots. So they already are worth at least half of a combat unit:p.
Yes, but I want 100 villagers and a navy and an army :(.

Oh, and I had worked out the balance thing, thank you :). Still on the first campaign, just rescued the first lot of hostages on my way back from Troy.

Shining1
14-11-2002, 01:27:36
Just build masses of huntresses, you'll be fine:).

Sean
14-11-2002, 01:31:43
BTW, what settings were you running it at?

Sean
14-11-2002, 01:36:42
Now I am helping the Egyptians. The campaign is actually quite good fun, if a tad easy. The shades in the underworld level were nice but made it too easy it you used them an your heroes well, and the only challenge was dodging the kraken.

Shining1
14-11-2002, 01:58:28
800*600, low details.

Sean
14-11-2002, 02:00:20
Ouch. I ran it fine windowed like that.

Shining1
14-11-2002, 02:27:27
You still get massive slowdowns when using multiple godpowers (a battle where I invoked Frost and Rachel invoked Meteor) and large armies at once. And I get random lockups, which is the thing I am really pissed off about.

Rachel (and everyone else, it seems) can run it fine, it seems I am almost ready to fully ascend to my status as the new Star of Darkness:(.

Sean
14-11-2002, 02:35:44
That really does sound bizarre, and also suck. Tried WCIII on the redone system yet?

I had a slowdown on the Troy mission out of the wooden horse when I used Meteor, yes, but not terribly so. Still not played a skirmish.

Shining1
14-11-2002, 06:48:01
No I should reinstall it and lose some games to Rachel just to see how if there's any performance improvement/issues with that.

It's quite possible I've failed to install something I should have installed, I keep finding little windows updates and things I haven't got yet.

And I can always try the new Nvidia drivers. But the main thing seems to be running the game under win98 causes problems - I had a look a few tech support threads and the general consensus was that win98 problems don't occur under XP.

Of course, it's a evil MS ploy to get people to upgrade! Bolty boy was right!

BoltyBoy
14-11-2002, 12:17:31
Amen

but this thread is slowly convincing me to get AoM...it must be a conspiracy.

Shining1
14-11-2002, 12:32:28
Okay I've flipped out completely and gotten the new 40.72 Nvidia drivers. Will test it now and report back.

So far so good, though - everything else I've done tonight seems to be slightly crisper and to move a bit faster.

Hope this works...:)

Sean
14-11-2002, 12:40:38
Originally posted by BoltyBoy
but this thread is slowly convincing me to get AoM...it must be a conspiracy.
It’s good, but it’s probably not as big a jump as WCII -> WCIII.

Funkodrom
14-11-2002, 12:44:48
Not as big a jump as Complete Shite -> Really good?

Sean
14-11-2002, 12:51:33
Basically.

Probably bigger than the switch from AoE -> AoK, but that was a long time ago and I’m confused.

Darkstar
14-11-2002, 22:47:01
A new Star of Darkness is acsending? Don't be silly, Shining1. ;)

Shining1
15-11-2002, 01:47:44
It's more like they've raided AoE and AoK for all the cool stuff in those games, and then done their regular thing of adding a bunch of interface/management improvements on top as well.

The god powers and myth units thing is definitely amusing, but there aren't so many of them that will win you the game outright, kinda thing, like a high level Warcraft hero can.

Shining1
15-11-2002, 01:50:24
Oh, and the 40.72 drivers made absolutely no difference at all. It's not a graphics power issue, it's something in the code.

I upgraded Explorer to version 6 and downloaded media player 7, etc, and all of a sudden the game seems to be running quite a great deal better. I'm up to 800*600 low details with only the occasional slowdown (instead of a slowdown every second).

Sean
15-11-2002, 01:57:18
Good stuff, good stuff.

Sean
15-11-2002, 01:57:43
Originally posted by Shining1
The god powers and myth units thing is definitely amusing, but there aren't so many of them that will win you the game outright, kinda thing, like a high level Warcraft hero can.
This is a good thing, surely?

Shining1
15-11-2002, 06:44:16
It is, in some ways, but then again it kinda marginalises them as well. One of the major points of difference in AoM is the selection of gods and minor gods, and the most obvious difference there is what the god power of each is. I'm finding as I play that I'm increasingly unconcerned by the god power as compared to how each god upgrades the regular units in the army, and what the myth units are.

For instance, Ares, the greek god of war, has a pathetic god power in pestilence (prevents your opponent from training any units in a selected area). But he researches damage upgrades for all infantry units and has Cyclopes, which are one of the better (and cheaper) all round myth units. As opposed to that, Hermes has the utterly invaluable Ceasefire power, but only has an upgrade to cavalry, and Centaurs, which are unspectacular alongside regular archers.


I still have a few windows upgrades to go, too, so I might get even better stability after I download the remainer. Assuming, of course, the java error on their site is fixed and will let me click 'accept' on the license agreement...

The Shaker
15-11-2002, 10:17:14
Ah, but 9it's always fun when someone is trying to pump out units from their barracks, to go and dump pestilence over them. Muahaaaa.
Admittedly they arn't ultimate game winners, but i much prefer to be irritating.

P.s Stop fixing your system before I get a chance to beat you :(

Funkodrom
15-11-2002, 11:30:44
Originally posted by Sean
This is a good thing, surely?

The warcraft heroes are great. :beer:

Shining1
15-11-2002, 12:40:51
Well, I can play the campaigns at the moment on 800*600*no cool graphics options at all, and I get the occasional slowdown, but its nothing like as bad as playing someone with a laggy connection under the old AoK.

If necessary, I can step down another level of graphics and that should improve stability to the level that I can try multiplayer.

And yeah, the warcraftIII heroes are really good. Until you try to make a campaign out of them. AoM has the best single player campaign since Starcraft.

Funkodrom
15-11-2002, 12:44:29
What's the point of wasting time building single player campaigns in RTS games?

Sean
15-11-2002, 13:00:34
I’m enjoying it.

Originally posted by Shining1
I'm finding as I play that I'm increasingly unconcerned by the god power as compared to how each god upgrades the regular units in the army, and what the myth units are.
The God Powers are invaluable for support, especially the more powerful ones like Meteor, Son of Osiris, and Nidhogg, and they can swing a close battle. I think the game just encourages a greater balance of forces, including God Powers. I mean, it would be really dull if a God Power could easily win you the game, and Gods aren’t just valuable for their GPs, as you said.

I don’t like the Cyclopes, though; I prefer to mix Minotaurs and Colossi.

Funkodrom
15-11-2002, 13:20:36
Yeah... sorry. I'm still getting phases of nicotine withdrawl bitchyness for no reason.

Venom
15-11-2002, 19:22:22
Addict.

Sean
15-11-2002, 21:53:38
Just played one and a half skirmishes on moderate difficulty. First time I was Zeus against the Norse (Loki, I think) on a medium map (Acropolis) and kept level with them in terms of which Age I was in but was badly behind on economy. I quit when it became apparent my economy wasn’t strong enough to suppport the constant defending I had to do.

Second time went a lot better, thanks to the AI on large Acropolis. I was Isis and it was Poseidon (not sure again), and I Heroic-ed in less than 10 minutes, Mythic-ed in 18:18 (that’s slower than I used to castle, but that’s all I can remember of AoK. I think advancement’s quicker in this anyway).

I made for the ‘neutral’ settlement that wasn’t right outside its damn base and built a TC there as soon as I was in Heroic, and kept three town centres going fairly comfortable for a while before building an army and setting out to take the settlement just outside its starting position.

There was nothing there except the two watch towers from the start. Nope, not guard towers—good old impotent watch towers. From there on it was a classic Sean siege, where I send small force into the enmy base that get cut to shreds until I finally crack and kill all my villagers and build a super-army. The AI was really disappointing on this one.

Shining1
16-11-2002, 02:20:15
Mike: Because that's what about 80% of people end up playing, perhaps?

Anyway, they made a GOOD one this time.

Sean
16-11-2002, 02:21:35
Yeah. The tug-of-war level is a great concept (early in the Egyptian section).

Shining1
16-11-2002, 02:24:25
Sean - are you sure you didn't accidentally switch back to easy?

Sean
16-11-2002, 02:30:40
Yep, I had the time thing on like you said and it said 18:18 (or whatever) Moderate. I think it’s wrong, though. Somehow, someplace, it’s wrong.

I should point out that it did attack me, and destroyed one of my mining camps. It definitely wasn’t the same as Easy, from what I’ve heard. Maybe I have the wrong moderate?

Shining1
16-11-2002, 02:53:41
No, the A.I can fuck up a game just like a player can. Depending on the map.

Shining1
16-11-2002, 02:54:56
Also, so long as you play fairly aggressively and build a good army early enough, moderate shouldn't be a massive challenge for an experienced player to overcome. Perhaps you've just gotten a bit better:).

Sean
16-11-2002, 02:56:40
Maybe it was because it was a large map, then. I just wanted more time at the start when I chose it.

I also got a chance to try out the Son of Osiris: damn, it’s good, but as a support unit. That chain lightning is awesome. I also like the Egyptian camlery and chariots, very useful units indeed. The elephants aren’t quite as effective as the building-annihilating gold colossus, though.