Guest Jordan Posted June 12, 2006 Posted June 12, 2006 Nice one retro! I meant slow in terms of getting resources/aging etc. That takes way too long, oh and Siege weapons do stupid amounts of damage. You can take a small base out with a couple of rocket launchers and a small set of troops.
Shorty Posted June 12, 2006 Posted June 12, 2006 Anyone who says AoE3 is better than 2 is a fool! >_>AoE3 is horribly slow, clunky and boring. AoE2 was super super fun. QFT.......
Ginger_Chris Posted June 12, 2006 Posted June 12, 2006 I tend to find AOE3 online games last very little time, less than 20 mins usually. if resource gathering is too slow, play deathmatch, or ship few resource crates over, boom a few villagers etc. wouldnt you expect a cannon to do alot of damage against buildings? or hitingit with a rocket full of explosives. (plus seige weapons should be getting anywhere near that close, they die horribly to cavelry, or anything that does melee). I think the main change between AOE2 and AOE3 is that the attacker definaterly has the advantage, turtling is almost useless.(as oppose to generals when you get a decent line of laser turrets and your practically invincible)
Shorty Posted June 12, 2006 Posted June 12, 2006 My favourite thing to do in AoE2 was duo with another player, build one giant city and defend against a hard opponent while amassing an uber-army for one big slaughter
Bluejay Posted June 12, 2006 Posted June 12, 2006 Anyone who says AoE3 is better than 2 is a fool! >_>AoE3 is horribly slow, clunky and boring. AoE2 was super super fun. He speaks the truth. I still think you have got Dawn of War. I love that game.
AshMat Posted June 12, 2006 Author Posted June 12, 2006 Ill be abl to enjoy this with my new headphones if they hopefully arrive at the same time, or game second..
Recommended Posts