Talk:Age of Empires (video game)

Article Name

Shouldn't the title of this be Age of Empires (computer game)? Or even just Age of Empires? -- Zoe

I see no reason why not... so now it is --Camembert

Thanks.  :-) -- Zoe

Removed Lists

I removed these lists from the article, since the expansions and sequels should have their own articles. These lists can be incorporated into those articles. —Frecklefoot 18:47, 22 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Four more civilizations were added in RoR:

• Romans
• Carthaginians
• Palmyrans
• Macedonians

In AoK, 13 civilizations were available:

• Britons
• Byzantines
• Celts
• Chinese
• Franks
• Goths
• Japanese
• Mongols
• Saracens
• Persians
• Teutons
• Turks
• Vikings

Five more civilizations were added in AoC:

• Aztecs
• Huns
• Maya
• Koreans
• Spanish

Gates

Are you sure that there are no gates in the original Age of Empires? I own Age of Empires and none of the expansions and yet I recall them. I've also played Age of Mythology so I might be thinking of that. K1Bond007 00:17, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)

I cannot recall gates in the original. AOEII has them. The original always used a set of walls that leave just a little pathway in between. The best defence was to make the entrance a winding entrance and setup some towers around it. I think you are thinking of AOM--Will2k 00:21, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)

I've done a search on the AOE help file, and I can't find any references to gates apart from in the history section, which isn't about the game at all. In particular, gates are not mentioned in the list of non-technology buildings, and I can't see a mention in the sections about each type of wall either.Silverfish 00:27, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Okay. I must have gotten confused between it and another similar game. K1Bond007 06:18, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)

There are no gates in the game (only on AoK). I have the manual right next to me, and also installed the game on other computer to check for any errors. \ wolfenSilva / 00:53, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

contents list too large

Shouldn't we cut a bit on the sections/subsections, or take out the TOC ?it is too large, and the article still does not any justice to it. Also, some info on units would be welcome, instead of just the name. \ wolfenSilva / 01:04, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Holy men vs Priests

From Expansions subsection:

In a sop to such sensibilities, holy men can be generated who are in effect employing persuasion technology to convert followers of other traditions to itself.

Are these holymen the same as the "priest" unit mentioned elsewhere in the article. Nomenclature shoudl be consistent if this is so.--ZayZayEM 02:32, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

IIRC, in both game and expansion there are only three priests (other than heroes) : The regular priest, a lame priest (who can't move) and in RoR a cheat unit called st. francis, who does not act like any priest, but attacks with thunderbolts from the sky. Now that you mention it, tomorrow I'll add a section about cheat units, some of them were quite funny. \ wolfenSilva / 05:51, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Age of Empires for the Mac OS

This article seems to be POV towards the PC - as in the fact that there is no mention that a Mac version exists. For the record, the AoE expansion, I believe, did not come out for the Mac, but for AoK, you can't get it without the expansion.

Ages

Ages seem to be appropriate here, considering the title of the game! Brianjd 08:49, 2004 Dec 16 (UTC)

I missed it:

A major research goal is progress between the ages, from stone age to tool age, for example. This allows new units and building to be built, as well as opening up new technologies to develop. To advance from one age to the next two building are needed from the current age, and some resources are needed. The research takes place at a Town Center.

This doesn't make much sense! I will improve it. Brianjd 08:51, 2004 Dec 16 (UTC)

unnecessary details

I think the article has fare too manz unnecessary details, all the units for example. 80.200.235.78

The problem is giving each unit a different header, where most of them are upgrades over older units. I'm going to change that now. \ wolfenSilva / 04:36, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

possible merge

maybe the sequels should be combined with this article to create one big one.

• No, all other articles are too well developed to be merged. It might be a good time to create a Age of Empires series overview article, 'to ^wS 23:51, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Expansions

Do we really need the information about "militarism" and "persuasion technology" in the Expansions section? The information is inaccurate (e.g. priests were actually in the game before the expansion pack), and was explicitly first posted as an effort to put anti-Microsoft material into the article. With the Rise of Rome article already linked in the heading, I think this section should be as small as possible. I'd edit it myself if it didn't have such a long pedigree on such a frequently-edited page. Article6 15:34, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

I've made a revision of the article, and rewrote the expansion part. I don't see it as anto-MS material, but a remark with little interest - I'd be more concerned about the lack of proper attacking formations. ^wS;✉ 18:32, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Cheat Units

I deleted a whole block - related discussion is common with Talk:Age_of_Mythology. Greenleaf 06:41, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

There is a difference from mentioning map/resource cheats ("Pepperoni Pizza" or "no fog", which is of no interest unless the result is strange enough to be notable) and units created or modified by cheats. If they aren't worth mentioning, go ahead and delete all unit information - they can also be checked on any FAQ. ^wS;✉ 09:53, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

If you read the list I deleted, you would have noticed that almost half of it is of "no interest" nature. Anyway, I'm afraid I cannot still agree with your argument, because normal units are regularly used in game play, while cheat units are not. Not that I'm much fond of keeping detailed information of individual units - it would have been sufficient to describe what type of units the game has, and what types of resources/technologies were supposed to be acquired for game advance. Cheat uniits can be fun for the people who have played the game and want to explore at a time they are bored, but "an outsider" who wants to know about the game would not care much about what type of cheats are available, unless they stand out in some way in computer games in general. True, cheat units are different from game-variable tweaking cheats, but does that fact alone make them significant?

If you really feel like that cheat units must be mentioned, I guess just listing and describing those units who are really interesting to a non-AoM player would be ok. My argument here is, an AoM player won't most probably consult Wikipedia to see what kind of cheats are out there. So, listing cheat codes won't be of much use either. We can put a link to the most complete cheat site instead, in case anyone want's to know. Greenleaf 09:46, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Half, not all. Still, you are missing the point: the cheat units in AoE are quite a novelty of the game - with the exception of super beefed-up regular units, no other RTS I know about has units that use different sprites and are completely anachronic with the setting of the game - a corvette with a rocket launcher and a trooper with a laser in this case. This is the ground for notability in this case. ^wS;✉ 02:15, 6 November 2005 (UTC)