Confused about game's length in random maps (single player)

We’ve moved over to the paradox forums. Please come visit us there to discuss:
You can still read the collective wisdom - and lolz - of the community here, but posting is no longer possible.

Home Forums Age of Wonders 3 Discussions Confused about game's length in random maps (single player)

This topic contains 12 replies, has 9 voices, and was last updated by  Amulet 7 years, 4 months ago.

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
  • Author
  • #220478


    Hello everyone,

    I’m a new player of AOW and also of 4x genre. I also played Civ5 a little bit before AOW but nothing more and I’ve been playing AOW just a few weeks.

    The game is awesome and I’m enjoying a lot but my games are lasting many days and I would like to play shorter matches.

    I mean, the random map setup screen says that a medium map last between 30 or 60 turns but my first game in that map size lasted more than 400 turns (“squire” difficulty level) and the second lasted around 200 turns with an allied victory (“knight” difficulty level).

    So, I’m thinking that maybe I’m playing in a very wrong way… What should I do to achieve a victory in around 60 or less than 100 turns for a medium map size?

    Thanks in advance four your replies and sorry for my poor english.



    Play aggressively. At squire or knight your enemies might never attack due to not thinking they have a big enough army to take on of your nearby cities. They also will not build their empires very quickly which means they’ll take a while before they get close enough to you to become hostile. On low difficulty levels the game speed is more about how long you want everything to take. On higher difficulty levels you’ll end up having to attack just to keep your neighbor off your back.

    The tip on game length might need to be updated, too – the underground, if the map has one, is significantly larger than when those tips on game length were written if I’m not mistaken.

    I guess I should expand a bit on what I mean by “aggressively.” In general you should try to have two or three scouts out quickly and attack an enemy as soon as you can take his cities without large losses. Specialize – don’t try to do everything your class can do but instead focus on a specific strategy. You might watch a few videos of pvpers to get some tips on this.

    Oh and games with more opponents will also take less time due to the map being colonized faster and victorious empires quickly snowballing into larger empires.



    Rush your opponent when you have large enough army,be aggressive and pushy and don’t sign peace treaties so quickly



    Basically, attack every AI-controlled city whenever you’re strong enough. Clear every independent site whenever you’re strong enough.

    Unless you’re planning to obtain them peacefully, attack every independent city when you’re strong enough.



    if things are taking too long at squire difficulty i would bet that it’s mostly because you haven’t just gone for the jugular. if you want to end the game faster, attack, burn, and attack again. aow3 rewards aggression, which will speed things up a lot. if you have the force to do damage to someone, beeline right for their cities and do it, don’t screw around clearing every site on the map or slowly spreading out your empire. just kill them.



    I used to play similarly to you, OP. I am big into roleplay and immersion in these kin these of games, therefore I tend to take my time and don’t rush the AI as soon as possible because I don’t want the game to end too quickly.

    At least, that’s how I used to play. Here is what I discovered:

    On the lower difficulties, the AI is more of a chicken and even if you wait hundreds of turns, as long as you have a sufficiently sized stack defending your city the AI won’t attack you. Once you build up your armies and begin your invasion, you will eventually reach a point of guaranteed victory from which the AI will never recover. Once I realized this I rapidly became bored with the lower difficulties because I knew victory was just a matter of time and I didn’t feel challenged anymore.

    Playing on Emporer I found my ass would get handed to me every match if I played the same way. I have not been able to turtle and win against Emperor like I could against Squires and Knights. If I waited too long I’d start getting attacked by giant doomstacks of tier IV units and if I tried to attack their cities I found they were defended by even bigger doomstacks of tier IV’s.


    PLAY AGGRESSIVELY. In this game you simply can not allow the AI to build up its cities and armiez, and find and clear all the treasure sites before you can. It is essential to pursue a strategy of good scouting and aggressive site-clearing/early assualt. Otherwise the matches will last forever (although sometimes this can be fun) and you will never be able to match the AI in terms of production in the higher levels so it may actually be impossible for you to win.


    I usually play 1v1 or 1v2 on small maps against the AI (Emperor difficulty.) Games are usually over in 30 turns or less if I play aggressively. I always play with underground turned on.

    I don’t theorycraft or make powerful build orders, so that estimate is just from choosing random options (including random default leaders most of the time.) If I had a plan I could probably do it a bit faster.

    30-60 seems about right for a medium map to me.

    I wouldn’t expect tier 4 units to be a part of the game unless playing on larger map sizes with more room for expansion (so less players.) Any time attacking is an option, I find building more units is always better than building infrastructure. That way either your opponent matches you on units (no disadvantage to either player) or you overrun the opponent (netting yourself all of their infrastructure in the process.) On Emperor difficulty, my best cities are always cities I took from the AI.



    Unlike in CIV, There is no diminishing return to empire size in AOW. So everyone landgrab as fast as possible.
    It’s best to disable city founding. the higher AI difficulty get obnoxious with that option on.



    Try to play something aggressive like tigran warlord.



    Thanks to all for your comments.

    Precisely I was suspecting that probably I’m too much focused on build a wide and strong empire. Exploring to found cities earlier and so get more gold and mana resources, trying to access quickly to higher tier units and despising the earlier and cheaper units.

    These two past days I started to try playing in the manner all of you recommend me and I found out that some tier 1 or 2 units of my arch druid high elf leader can be more powerful than I thought if I use it wisely, but of course I still have a lot of practice to do and things to learn.

    But now, playing more aggressive (knight and lord levels) I think that maybe I shouldn’t be too much concerned about loosing non garrisoned cities? I mean, just try to keep well only my throne city and perhaps a second one to not spend a lot of time garrisoning with my offensive army until I can replace it with new produced units.


    Against the computer I don’t really bother with garrisons at all. As long as you have vision and a sizeable army, you should have enough time to react to anything.

    Make sure to clear out all the neutral camps that spawn enemies so that you don’t have to worry about defending yourself from scoundrels or lost souls.

    Then, use units to keep track of chokepoints leading into your empire. Your main army substitutes for a scout against the AI you are attacking, since that computer is unlikely to circle around your army to attack your lands. You can also use builders and construct watchtowers if you prefer that approach to having scout units watching for threats.

    Basically, instead of having garrisons eating up gold, have scouts or armies active in or near the enemy’s land. That way your troops are earning their pay instead of being lazy back home.



    even in multiplayer garrisons only exist as a “don’t take this city with a single scout drone” deterrent, and consist of 2 or 3 irregulars, unless you’re playing against a rogue or AD. turtling up with garrisons in all your cities will usually lead to pain. an army that isn’t fighting is ana rmy that’s uselessly sucking up gold upkeep.

    Precisely I was suspecting that probably I’m too much focused on build a wide and strong empire. Exploring to found cities earlier and so get more gold and mana resources, trying to access quickly to higher tier units and despising the earlier and cheaper units.

    i mean let me ask you this: under this style of play, if your opponent literally just sat still and did absolutely nothing (basically what squire difficulty does), how long would it take to win?



    i mean let me ask you this: under this style of play, if your opponent literally just sat still and did absolutely nothing (basically what squire difficulty does), how long would it take to win?

    Well that is what I see now. In a recent game on knight difficulty, I was in war with one AI player, I conquered one of his cities a few turns ago in the left bottom corner of the map and left without any garrison my throne city in the up corner of the same side. I didn’t realize that this guy had some scouting army near my throne city… When I saw them I tried to go quickly with the most near army in my second city but they was too close and I couldn’t reach them, but surprisingly They didn’t took my empty throne city, they just passed by two hexes from the city. Instead of take my city they just go to a treasure site… I suppose for the experience or the rewards.

    Unlike in Lord difficulty, that after killing several units of an enemy and take his throne city in a very early turn but still not defeated him because he wasn’t there, he just appeared after a pair of turns with another huge and powerful army of three or four stacks that I still can’t believe he could produce in such little time. I mean, adding this other armies to the other ones that I just killed…

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.