"too bad, battles between large armies are not as interesting tactically."
explain why? more units look cooler and more realistic, and don't do anything to hamper tactics, as you can group units.
"sounds that get the data to my brain efficiently are better than sounds that seem cool."
after you play AoK about 5 times, when you hear the dadada! trumpet sound you know you are getting attacked. English is not the only language people speak. Sound effect is a language. And it sounds cooler.
"I do not get excited by seeing large numbers of men on the screen. Any strat that can be done with 50 archers and 50 swordsmen can be done with 5 of each."
more units are cooler to most people, and also it is more realistic - realism is what Age games are aiming for, as long as it doesn't seriously hamper gameplay. More units doesn't change much from smaller number of units, except many regard it better.
"nope, play Myth 1 or 2 (not 3, some other company made it). You start with points to buy troops and then you fight. The game was superb. You do miss the econ system a little, but I'm sure there is some way to get the best of both. Perhaps an army like in Myth but with neutral buildings like in wc3? Whatever it is it doesn't involve pumping peons like in most games, or fighting creeps like in warcraft 3."
AoK deathmatch is similar to that; that has no rushes, no economy, etc. What the Age game is about is building up a city from scratch and commanding armies to destroy enemies. Development and population has a somewhat constant increase, which means you don't get, say, 50 archers free at the start of the game. You might not like it, but that's the design of Age games, and loved by many.
"so for 20 minutes I am basically playing single player with minimal human to human interaction?"
I think I answered that already, with: "Even afterwards battles in first 20 or so minutes are considered a "rush". But even before you fight, making forward bases, hoarding resource spots, scouting, will mean you will interact with others fairly fast, especially with long-range God Powers."
You need to think about your enemy every single minute of the game. Even so, there isn't much interaction until you fight. Again, it's a matter of opinion; you don't like it, many others love it. Warcraft III seems to fit you more.
"That's a problem. Being bound by realism is preventing them from making the best game that they can."
that problem ES attempts to rectify by making many things unrealistic; the most famous quote in this forum is "gameplay over realism". Even so, Age games have always been realistic and always will be. I'm sorry the game design doesn't suit you, but that's how it is and i don't see them changing it anytime soon.
"I turn the music down or off, as it contains no useful data."
as I recall, Warcraft III has units screaming things like: "Zug Zug", "hey, what's that imprinted on my ***?" and other stupid things. Do you turn WC3 music off as well?
"It is a lot different than other games. If you attacked with five units in age of empires, it would be sending your units on a suicide run. The defensive buildings would take them out."
Glak, you thought this was a "design flaw". It isn't. That IS the design. An orc archer in warcraft III could take on 10 AoM units (presumably). WC3 has less units, that last longer; Age games have more units, that don't last long. THat's the design of the game; battles in an epic scale. If you don't like it, too bad. (not meaning to be rude)
"maybe by the average player. At higher skill levels spells were used quite often."
I agree. however, spells are not part of Age games, as they favor realism. However, with the theme being mythology this time, there are GOD POWERS and special skills by some MYTHOLOGICAL UNITS; check their respecitve sections in http://aom.heavengames.com or any other AoM website."again, huge battles do not give me an epic feeling. It just means that I can't control my army as well as I should be able to. Plus with huge armies the guys get small and hard to click on, small units are harder to tell apart instantly, and of course frame rates suffer."
I'm sorry, once again, that you don't like big battles; that's the design in AoM however. You can group units, and I've never had problem controlling Age units quickly, and I'm a very average player; WC3 is meant to be a RPG/RTS hybrid, and that means less units, but more detail in them. With huge armies, units are smaller, but I shouldn't think harder to click on; if you can't, zoom in. in AoE/AoK units were moderately large (and you could change the resolution), and I think they are fairly easy to click on (unless you're over 90..) Frame rates suffer; this is a valid point. But we've all seen AoM with relatively low requirements, and fairly good gameplay; maybe if you play the alpha you'll see if it lags too much.