Instead of 25 cards why not 40 ?

[FinalBreath98]

Why not 25 is so limited 40 will be much better.

Like 10 by age

[Meogron]

Perhaps 40 is too much but 30 would be fine.

[aracines]

Originally posted by Meogron:

Perhaps 40 is too much but 30 would be fine.

then why not 29 or 31?

I would actually call for what ever "fits" in the UI. Perhaps 48 (12 cards per age). :-)

[Chrinchy]

Originally posted by aracines:

Originally posted by Chrinchy:

True but the game has been designed and balanced around 20-25 cards. Sure you can add less if you want, are you giving yourself a disadvantage...big time! But pulling off a win that way would be more thrilling.

I don't know that the game has been "balanced" for 25 cards, and I don't think you know that as a fact either.

There have been mods made to allow for 40 cards and it never hurt the games "balance". As a matter of fact as long as the AI and other MP's get the same advantage of 40 cards it makes for more interesting/intense scenarios. 25 40 or 400 is all still "balanced" because ALL players have the advantages of more benefits.

Again no harm to anybody who thinks 25 is all they require...if one is afraid to play with only 25 cards while others have 40 cards, then its obvious that 40 cards is better. All one has to do is play MP with players who want only 25 cards, but who will do that? The answer is NOBODY if 40 are available. As long as everybody gets 40 then its fair, I think there are 90+ cards to choose from so there is still some calculations/trade-offs.

It's definitely balanced for 25 cards and the devs want to keep it that way. I don't think you understand that civs with 40 cards would be broken and unbalanced even if the other player also had 40 cards as well. I keep saying Sweden and Japan are perfect examples of this...they get huge benefits to it more than others. I could pick Sweden and steam roll pretty much any other civ lol.

Again to, once you hit Age V you can send unit and resource shipments again so there's a bonus to 25 cards that increases your count, not to mention infinite resource cards and unit cards.

And again, the purpose of 25 cards is to narrow in on certain strategies...40 cards makes decks pretty much useless because you would just build one and leave it at that. And while you may enjoy not having multiple decks, that is the part of AoE 3 alot of others, myself included enjoy.

In a 1v1 non treaty match, 40 cards is way way overkill and too much cheese, it lacks variety and innovation and is just lazy play.

[Necro-Phoenix]

The game UI only allows 10 cards per age. Deciding how to curve your cards is part of strategy in deck building. Knowing what your plan is and picking the cards that help you most for it as your core is part of strategy. Using your remaining slots, which you should have plenty, to cover your weak points and add some versatility in unexpected situations is par for the course. What you're asking for cheapens the whole deck building aspect. As someone who plays tcgs and likes rts games, I would very much be against flattening the curve and cheapening the experience.

[idiotdoomspiral]

40 is too much imo, but I would like another slot or two in decks for the age 2 cards, there are SO many good cards in the age 2 slots. If they could make certain cards able to be used in different age slots that would help. Or just give every age one or two more slots.

[Gwotyng]

I like AoE3 but I don't like the card system design of AoE3 much. It unnecessary raise the threshold for new players to learn the game and a new civs. It gives player more freedom to customize their decks but also make some cards particularly useless/overpowered.

I feel a better way is to provide a few fixed decks for players to choose at the beginning of a game. It seems limit the play styles, but actually it will make no card useless and encourage players to use different combinations of cards.

[Chrinchy]

Originally posted by LGwotyng:

I like AoE3 but I don't like the card system design of AoE3 much. It unnecessary raise the threshold for new players to learn the game and a new civs. It gives player more freedom to customize their decks but also make some cards particularly useless/overpowered.

I feel a better way is to provide a few fixed decks for players to choose at the beginning of a game. It seems limit the play styles, but actually it will make no card useless and encourage players to use different combinations of cards.

The card system in AoE 3 to me is great! It adds some unique ideas and strategies and it doesn't make 3 just a copy of 1 and 2. The whole point of the game is that you are trying to establish a new colony for your country somewhere and you're going to need support from your home land to do so. It is accurate because most European colonies were supported from their homeland time and time again and did need supplies and technology to keep going.

It's not balanced in terms of all cards being useful for every play style or game style but it's getting a lot better and new players shouldn't have a hard time learning it either.

I learned it when I first started playing AoE 3 and I didn't have anyone to help me. Now there are online articles, discussion forms and youtube vids to watch to guide you. I don't know how much more help you could give someone with that. You can't have your hand held all the time.