Suggestions

I saw in Bwa's video that Mali was passing through areas without civilization occupying, lands that were not "colonized" It's cool to be able to pass through these areas, but my idea is that when passing through there, there could be a chance of the troops decreasing, insinuating that they died in the crossing, or even becoming slower (since these lands are not controlled, there would be no infrastructure and security) This way, the AI and the player would only pass through there when it was really necessary, as it would normally be better to take the "longer", but safer and faster route

It could be useful to have a button in the settings that made sure the player's armies are automatically pinged (or at least those with generals), and far more better than having to manually pin armies

It would be good if every mod that is created was rated by you @Łukasz Jakowski, and if you like it and consider it good, it should receive your accreditation and in a separate section here on the forum you could create a topic where you would post links to mods with your accreditation. I think that as a creator of the game you are best person to say whether a mod is good or not.

@Łukasz Jakowski You can make it so that players only conquer one province at a time, rather than three provinces at a time.

1. Corsica belonged to the kingdom of Vandals and Alans 2. There is a rather controversial point in Sicily: Although the island was formally Vandal, in fact, King Odoacer of Italy had control over most of it by agreement with King Gaiseric of the Vandals. So I consider it necessary to paint two thirds of the island from east to west in yellow

9:50 If the AI attacked with its armies, it could have won the war. The AI is not focused on sieges, it only attacks the player's units and it can't do it correctly. There are 10 days left for the game to be released. If the AI is fixed, many people will like it. I wish you good work.

Please make we able to disable them before playing in a scenario.

Hi @Łukasz JakowskiI think that occupying all provinces adjacent to the one that was sieged is a bit much, I know it's to counteract with how many provinces are going to be but I think for the early game at least that should be a unlockable upgrade down the road. Speaking of it is the mobile version which is gonna have less provinces going to have this type of siege system?

at the very start of each scenario while we're choosing our civilization i think we should 10000% get the ability to choose whether technology will be research based or era based how it'll work? very simple. in AOH3 there are multiple ages, the age of information, age of feudalism etc etc, well the technologies will be divided based on that, certain technologies like colonization will be researchable starting in the Age of discovery, this will make it so certain civilizations can still unlock tech trees before everyone else if they're more technologically advanced already while still stopping gunmen and nukes from being used in the 1700's like we saw in the 14…

You know. In AoH2 we can play on 2 countries, but there it isn't comfortable. Make move in one country and second move to another it's not good I think. How about you make a switcher. I mean: If player want he make necessary quantity moves in one contry and then, if player want, he make a necessary quantity moves on another country. What do uou think about it?

1. Claimant: This will limit the availability of the government to only one or few countries. Claimant_Tag: {ger} If set to false, this type of government doesn't require any claimants. Example A: German Reich, National Socialism { Name: "National Socialism", Extra_Tag: "z", GOV_GROUP_ID: 5, Claimant_Tag: {ger} SUBJECT_GOV: false SUBJECT_TYPE: false SUBJECT_LORD_GOV_Tag: false } 2. Dynamic Government names: This will add roleplay, without making it complicated. Dynamic statuses will vary according to economy, workforce and population size: HRE-German hierarchy C…

I love leaning about the Chinese warlord period so I would like to give some ideas on how to make it more historically accurate (I am assuming the June 1936 start date is the same otherwise I would have more revisions) 1. I believe Tunganistan should be added since it was a political entity at this time, separate from Xinjiang and the other Ma's, despite being apart of the "Ma Clique" Tungastan was much detached and would eventually be destroyed around October of 1937 by Xinjiang, the word "Ma" was not a family name but a name used by Muslims of the area, in this case Tunganistan was led by Ma Hushan, same really with Ninghai which was inderpendent from the other Ma …

it could be nice

It would be good to see the total deaths in the world during your game.

This was my original post, expressing disappointment with the war mechanics of AoH3. It was posted yesterday, and got a couple of replies today, and now all of a sudden I find that it has gotten deleted. What exactly is wrong with this post that would cause it to get deleted?

I have another idea. You can add that the type of fight as in crusader kings 3 In some territories, countries will have unique interactions and relationships This is how the Tatar-Mongol yoke can be realized, All Russian states are vassals of the horde The struggle will have phases Here is an example in this Russian struggle of three phases: 1 domination, 2 reconciliation, 3 thirst for freedom. The struggle can be completed by the country and it can end by itself Russian Russian states will treat the horde badly, but the horde will receive more money and soldiers from the Russians. As an example, the relationship between t…

Yay ig lol

Add civil wars whether in a future Update or dlc thx

Or is there chance for it coming out later on in a future update or dlc? @Łukasz Jakowski

In Age of History 3 videos, images or PNGs of cities are shown, which have different shapes, but will they change depending on the era? I also suggest that when the capital is upgraded, it could have an image change, and at the same time, the infrastructure, which I believe exists, could be improved, and the shape of the city and buildings would change as well.

You know how in Age of History II. It takes one turn for the other country to respond to our alliance-request? In Age of History III. This should also be done whenever you want to call your vassals, or request alliance. A delay will make it more realistic..

Hey guys here i will talk about some ideas i think it will make the game better : 1/ adding a supply situation to the armies every army will have a stock of supplies enough for two months , if the two months pass you will have to resupply your army by sending them food from your kingdom resources or let them take it by force from your enemies land , if you don't resupply them in the first week they will take a hit in their moral , in the second week they will leave your army or worse they will rebel with their general , of course the supply situation only apply when you leave your land to the enemy land , and if you cross to your vassals land they will have to…

As you can see, the border between the Russian empire and the ottoman empire is wrong, russia had control over kars so showing it as ottoman is wrong Also, the ottomas held the city of Didymoteicho until 1915 when they gave it to Bulgaria, as stated in the treaty of Constantinople in 1913 "Bulgaria acknowledged Ottoman gains of Adrianople (mod. Edirne), Kırklareli and Didymoteicho and the surrounding territory. The Ottoman Empire ceded the port of Dedeagach (mod. Alexandroupoli) to Bulgaria."(Can't find a map of Bulgaria in 1914 but you can see the following Wikipedia pages: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarian–Ottoman_convention_(1915) and http…