New evidence released from Trayvon Martin's cellphone


Recommended Posts

Florida is a defend your castle ( as yourself too) state. Maryland here is too.

Here is the updated list of the states which have adopted some form of Castle Doctrine law, as of June 21 2008.

Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Washington, West Virginia, Wyoming

source: http://tekel.wordpress.com/2009/01/24/castle-doctrine-map-update-for-january-2009/

So is that what happened? Nobody seems to know how the altercation started. At this point, you are assuming that Zimmerman started yelling at him and giving him crap.

What if Zimmerman was just following him, and Trayvon turned and started the physical altercation? If that is the case, then Trayvon is in the wrong. He could have walked away without an issue.

We do not know what happened, we know he got out of the vehicle, and followed Trayvon. We know that Trayvon was killed. We know that Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman pulled the trigger. That is what we know.

Everything else is conjecture at this time.

No it isn't.

Neighborhood watch rules : No guns, No confrontations. You call police and that is it.

Zimmerman was following a kid, while being armed, and confronted him. He decided to ignore the regulations given by the counties sherrif for neighborhood watch rules, as well as disregarding and ignoring dispatch who said not to do the exact thing he did.

Doesn't matter what you believe might have happened afterward. You look at how it all happened.

Would a person have died that night if Zimmerman had done what he was supposed to? No. That right there is enough at the end to get him guilty of manslaughter. Then we can go even further. Was Zimmerman in the wrong for carrying a gun? Yes. He has a past record that should have made it illegal for him to carry, as well as breaking the rule that NHW are not supposed to carry guns. Remember, all these rules are orders from the Sheriff of the county.

You can have doubts about whatever you want, but the evidence against him makes it easy to see how this all could have been totally avoided.

Would a person have died that night if Zimmerman had done what he was supposed to? No.

Doesn't matter. Self-defense is a valid defense.

Sure, he'll be kicked out of neighborhood watch and might be charged with other crimes, but if he was attacked, he's not guilty of manslaughter. The problem is, we don't know who attacked who. But given Trayvon Martin's affinity for street fighting, you can't say beyond a reasonable doubt that he didn't attack Zimmerman.

And you can't say that you should have a reasonable expectation that you will be physically attacked if you follow somebody. No, being physically attacked is assault. You can't just go around assaulting people because they asked you a question (assuming Zimmerman even got the chance to confront before being attacked).

I'm not taking sides... I'm just saying that their is enough evidence to swing this either way to either story, and both are plausible. Nobody can be certain beyond a reasonable doubt.

  • Like 2

rfirth is correct, all of the "rules" that were broken have pretty much nothing to do with anything except civilly and procedural. The fact is, if you are attacked and are being attacked to the point that you are in fear for your life, you have the right to defend yourself. It doesn't make it OK for someone to bash your skull in because you were "following them" but it does make it OK to shoot and kill someone if they are bashing your head into the pavement, regardless of how the fight started. Once one person puts another person into the danger of death, things change.

Now there are some people out there, believe it or not, even on this forum that will reply/argue back with "But fine sir, if I started it by following someone then the other person who I was following has the right to bash my head in and kill me, and I should not be allowed to fight back or defend myself".

I really don't get people.. and the above was a general statement, I wasn't at the scene of the crime like half of the other people on the internet and these forums were. So I can also see things going both ways honestly.

To those of you who were at the scene of the crime when it happened, since you seem to know all of the details of exactly how it went down, please contact Sanford PD at 407-688-5070 or CFCrimeLine at 1-888-423-TIPS. I'm sure the investigators/prosecution/defense would love to interview you and get a statement, P.S. you will probably be called as a witness.

Doesn't matter. Self-defense is a valid defense.

Sure, he'll be kicked out of neighborhood watch and might be charged with other crimes, but if he was attacked, he's not guilty of manslaughter. The problem is, we don't know who attacked who. But given Trayvon Martin's affinity for street fighting, you can't say beyond a reasonable doubt that he didn't attack Zimmerman.

And you can't say that you should have a reasonable expectation that you will be physically attacked if you follow somebody. No, being physically attacked is assault. You can't just go around assaulting people because they asked you a question (assuming Zimmerman even got the chance to confront before being attacked).

I'm not taking sides... I'm just saying that their is enough evidence to swing this either way to either story, and both are plausible. Nobody can be certain beyond a reasonable doubt.

rfirth is correct, all of the "rules" that were broken have pretty much nothing to do with anything except civilly and procedural. The fact is, if you are attacked and are being attacked to the point that you are in fear for your life, you have the right to defend yourself. It doesn't make it OK for someone to bash your skull in because you were "following them" but it does make it OK to shoot and kill someone if they are bashing your head into the pavement, regardless of how the fight started. Once one person puts another person into the danger of death, things change.

Now there are some people out there, believe it or not, even on this forum that will reply/argue back with "But fine sir, if I started it by following someone then the other person who I was following has the right to bash my head in and kill me, and I should not be allowed to fight back or defend myself".

I really don't get people.. and the above was a general statement, I wasn't at the scene of the crime like half of the other people on the internet and these forums were. So I can also see things going both ways honestly.

To those of you who were at the scene of the crime when it happened, since you seem to know all of the details of exactly how it went down, please contact Sanford PD at 407-688-5070 or CFCrimeLine at 1-888-423-TIPS. I'm sure the investigators/prosecution/defense would love to interview you and get a statement, P.S. you will probably be called as a witness.

Self Defense goes both ways. Who was more affriad, the guy doing the stalking or the one being stalked? The guy who was armed and knew what he was up against, or the teenager who wasn't and was be followed and confronted?

Zimmerman already has a checkered past, that is on record. We don't have to jump to conclusions from photos or facebook post, because Zimmerman has actually been in conflict with the law and others through his actions.

I'm not saying I was there, but it isn't hard to think logically and see where and who is mostly at fault. If you can't, you are pretty blind to human nature and other such ways to our behavior and how we apply the law.

Self Defense goes both ways. Who was more affriad, the guy doing the stalking or the one being stalked? The guy who was armed and knew what he was up against, or the teenager who wasn't and was be followed and confronted?

Zimmerman already has a checkered past, that is on record. We don't have to jump to conclusions from photos or facebook post, because Zimmerman has actually been in conflict with the law and others through his actions.

I'm not saying I was there, but it isn't hard to think logically and see where and who is mostly at fault. If you can't, you are pretty blind to human nature and other such ways to our behavior and how we apply the law.

Self Defense does not go both ways. It is clearly defined when deadly force can be used - http://www.leg.state.../0776/0776.html your definition of "who was more afraid" is so far off base it's not even funny.

Self Defense does not go both ways. It is clearly defined when deadly force can be used - http://www.leg.state.../0776/0776.html your definition of "who was more afraid" is so far off base it's not even funny.

Explain then. How am I off on it? Easy to just dismiss something without backing it up with an actual arguement.

Teenager being followed at night by someone. Teenager confronted by that person. How would you 'feel" during that? Would you be scared or try and hug them?

Man following teenager. Man is armed. Man confronts teenager. Does someone who is scared of someone normally confront them? Or does someone who feels they are more in control of the situation more likely to try and confront?

When I said self defense goes both ways, it was to mean that if we are to assume Zimmerman was right to defend himself, we are to assume that Trayvon was just as much in the right to defend himself. Self Defense, not deadly force, is OK when you feel that your life is in danger. Deadly Force is what self defense escalates to when you can't stop what is happening and are facing serouise grievous harm and the only way to stop it is by taking the other's life.

So yes, please, explain yourself.

Explain then. How am I off on it? Easy to just dismiss something without backing up it up an actual arguement.

Read the state statute, I can't explain it any clearer then that. It is written clearly and defines when deadly force can be used and the aggressor definitions also.

Read the state statute, I can't explain it any clearer then that. It is written clearly and defines when deadly force can be used and the aggressor definitions also.

And I just explained what it says.

In the United States of America, stand-your-ground law states that a person may justifiably use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of an unlawful threat, without an obligation to retreat first. The concept sometimes exists in statutory law and sometimes through common law precedents. One key distinction is whether the concept only applies to defending a home or vehicle, or whether it applies to all lawfully occupied locations.

Trayvon tried to get away, but was followed and confronted. What part of him feeling endangered would not constitute him defending himself? I don't think you are looking at this both ways.... You are saying Zimmerman had the right to defend himself, but are basically saying that Trayvon didn't. Let's say Trayvon did start the fight.... Who's to say it it wasn't in self defense to the actions that Zimmerman did, making Trayvon feel endangered and without any way to retreat.... Hense, self defenes in this can go both ways. It's amazing what can happen when you put your mind to it. You can see almost all options, and see how the actions of 1 lead to maybe both of them being wrong. But in the end, the actions of 1 are what lead to the death of the other. That is what they will get Zimmerman with.

You are saying Zimmerman had the right to defend himself, but are basically saying that Trayvon didn't.

Defend from bashing head in, does not = Defend from being "followed". You are still totally missing the point

Being followed and having your head smashed into the ground are 2 different levels of aggression, they do not both equal the same response of force as each other.

That's what I am saying.

Trayvon tried to get away, but was followed and confronted. What part of him feeling endangered would not constitute him defending himself? I don't think you are looking at this both ways.... You are saying Zimmerman had the right to defend himself, but are basically saying that Trayvon didn't. Let's say Trayvon did start the fight.... Who's to say it it wasn't in self defense to the actions that Zimmerman did, making Trayvon feel endangered and without any way to retreat.... Hense, self defenes in this can go both ways. It's amazing what can happen when you put your mind to it. You can see almost all options, and see how the actions of 1 lead to maybe both of them being wrong. But in the end, the actions of 1 are what lead to the death of the other. That is what they will get Zimmerman with.

Tried to get away from what, When he was shot, it looks like he was on top of Zimmerman, applying force to his head to bring it up and back down into the pavement. We can say that he was not trying to get away at that point. Also at no point was it stated that there was a confrontation and Trayvon tried to walk away.

If I am correct on that piece, again it becomes conjecture. I can see your point in all of these situations, however, we do not know of ANY of those were the situation. Until we get a better idea of what happened, everyone is guessing.

Don't need a permit to own a gun, only to publicly carry. Zimmerman illegally carried his gun. You guys are making this easy.

There are states where you need a gun license.

...

Now we know Trayvon not only liked Skittles and Arizona Iced Tea, but also Reeses.

As far as I'm concerned if you start trouble you get whatever's coming to you. It's a shame it wasn't Zimmerman that was shot, one less dangerous gun nut on the streets would be better for everyone. If the case were reversed and it had been a black guy shooting a white guy the righties would be absolutely up in arms about. Freedom: As long as you're a white guy with a gun.

I beg to differ. Most Americans are nice, upstanding people.

As for this, it's about what I expected. The media had him painted as a saint.

So which part makes him not the saintly kid the media painted him as (not that I agree with that, your argument is bogus IMO). Smoking weed? Which 90% of middle and upperclass white Americans do? Are none of them saintly or good and innocent? Or holding a gun which half of all of America hate Obama because they think he will disarm them from having assault weapons at home and teaching toddlers to use them.? This includes mortars and rocket launchers.

The Catholic Church still protects and transfers pedophiles, so I take it no Catholic who still supports that church can ever be a saint or good person?

C'mon growled.

As far as I'm concerned if you start trouble you get whatever's coming to you. It's a shame it wasn't Zimmerman that was shot, one less dangerous gun nut on the streets would be better for everyone. If the case were reversed and it had been a black guy shooting a white guy the righties would be absolutely up in arms about. Freedom: As long as you're a white guy with a gun.

The Black guy would already be convicted and in prison. Let's be real here. They should charge this guy with manslaughter and call it a day.

Unless he is still value for political for jesse jackson, al sharpton, or obama; otherwise, right now he is just another thug who sadly got shot.

Just curious as to what makes him a thug? Does he have a criminal record? I don't know, haven't followed it that closely. But you called him a thug so I figure you know.

White boys take pictures with guns, smoking weed, act and talk black and thuggish and it's considered style, so I'm just making sure you're not confusing thuggery with acting like a teenage white boy.

If the case were reversed and it had been a black guy shooting a white guy the righties would be absolutely up in arms about. Freedom: As long as you're a white guy with a gun.

If the case were reversed? When did George Zimmerman become white? He's half Peruvian. He's clearly hispanic. Is Obama now just another white president?

If the case were reversed? When did George Zimmerman become white? He's half Peruvian. He's clearly hispanic. Is Obama now just another white president?

Hispanics are Caucasian if you didn't know. America was basically built on anti-African American racism and it lives today. It can be overcome, but it is disingenuous to pretend it does not exist throughout America and particularly in Law Enforcement in large Metropolitan areas which is where the majority of African Americans in this country live.

If you believe the outcome wouldn't be dramatically different if the roles were reversed you're living in a fantasy land. Seeing you're from Louisiana, and how ridiculous law enforcement is there, I know you know better. Countless blacks were murdered during Katrina down there and the perps will never be brought to justice.

Don't get me wrong, criminals are criminals and all need to be punished. But the BS and people living in pathological lie fantasy land over issues like this drives me nuts. You really think you can rewrite history online? People are really stupid, no wonder we're in the shape we're in.

To hell with manslaughter I hope they do him for murder.

Well, he was wearing a hoodie which helps cloud his intent and will keep this thing drawn out. They don't want to punish it at all so they're attacking his character over hip hop photos of himself to say maybe he deserved to be shot in cold blood. (Maybe it would have been better if he had Instagram'd them like white people do.)

Manslaughter would give the guy some prison time and put an end to this mess. It's bringing all the middle-class racists and their bull**** circular reasoning out of the closet and I prefer them to stay in the closet and terrorize their women and children at home instead of all of us with their sociopathy and whatever other psychological problems generates these types of sociopathic sadists.

Hispanics are Caucasian if you didn't know. America was basically built on anti-African American racism and it lives today. It can be overcome, but it is disingenuous to pretend it does not exist throughout America and particularly in Law Enforcement in large Metropolitan areas which is where the majority of African Americans in this country live.

Very true, but you're ignoring the anti-Hispanic component. Hispanics aren't getting a free pass either. I never said it wouldn't be different if reversed.

If you believe the outcome wouldn't be dramatically different if the roles were reversed you're living in a fantasy land. Seeing you're from Louisiana, and how ridiculous law enforcement is there, I know you know better. Countless blacks were murdered during Katrina down there and the perps will never be brought to justice.

All too true. I'm just glad you didn't try to use the "Jena 6" as an example, although I don't think your Katrina example is any better - it was an overwhelming event and a huge failure on all levels.

Well, he was wearing a hoodie which helps cloud his intent and will keep this thing drawn out. They don't want to punish it at all so they're attacking his character over hip hop photos of himself to say maybe he deserved to be shot in cold blood.

They don't want to punish it at all so they're attacking his character? No, that's not what's going on. The state is prosecuting George Zimmerman. It's George Zimmerman's defense team that would like to attack Trayvon Martin's character.

It's not to say he deserved to be shot, but to build a case that perhaps Trayvon Martin did attack Zimmerman. The important piece of evidence isn't the guns or the drugs, but his interest in street fighting. Relevant? Absolutely. But everyone is wrongly focusing on the guns and drugs.

Very true, but you're ignoring the anti-Hispanic component. Hispanics aren't getting a free pass either. I never said it wouldn't be different if reversed.

They don't want to punish it at all so they're attacking his character? No, that's not what's going on. The state is prosecuting George Zimmerman. It's George Zimmerman's defense team that would like to attack Trayvon Martin's character.

It's not to say he deserved to be shot, but to build a case that perhaps Trayvon Martin did attack Zimmerman. The important piece of evidence isn't the guns or the drugs, but his interest in street fighting. Relevant? Absolutely. But everyone is wrongly focusing on the guns and drugs.

Approving nod. I think I'll avoid this thread. Too incendiary. Many teens fight a lot. This should be open and shut. Gun vs. No Gun, Zimmerman's intent rather clear. I'd be happy with a few years in prison and a plea bargain for this to just go way, though the family probably wouldn't. Prison justice will balance things out.

By why does it matters how the media painted him? It's not revelant to the case at all imo.

Personally i don't consider holding a gun or smoking as a really bad habit unless it becomes an obsession/addiction.

Sadly it does make a difference. So many people have this notion that zimmerman simply killed this kid and since the media is helping paint the kid as a saint, and innocent/helpless victim. Was the kid targeted because he smoked weed and played with guns? No. But you can bet when/if this goes to trial the defense is going to use this 'new' evidence to say that he somehow brought this on himself, and the jury, who is pulled from the area that he was killed at has seen this report, and it may cause them (the jury) to rethink the whole case, just because we are all be told how good Trayavon was.

This situation was the culmination of a series of poor decisions. Mr Zimmerman should have not been armed and he should have heeded the advice of the emergency operator and not approached Trayvon. Conversely, Trayvon should not have escalated the situation from simple self-defense to assault with intent. Trayvon landed an initial punch to Mr Zimmerman breaking his nose; this would have essentially rendered him defenseless. Trayvon could have easily beat his retreat at this point. Instead, he made the conscience decision to assault Mr Zimmerman sitting atop him and bashing his head into the concrete pavement. Had Mr Zimmerman not shot Trayvon when he did, he would likely be dead now. The evidence of the assault on Mr Zimmerman is well documented; the absence of any such injuries on Trayvon speaks to the validity to Mr Zimmerman's account of the events that night.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 by Razvan Serea TeraCopy is a compact program designed to copy and move files at the maximum possible speed, also providing you with a lot of features. Copy files faster. TeraCopy uses dynamically adjusted buffers to reduce seek times. Asynchronous copy speeds up file transfer between two physical hard drives. Pause and resume transfers. Pause copy process at any time to free up system resources and continue with a single click. Error recovery. In case of copy error, TeraCopy will try several times and in the worse case just skips the file, not terminating the entire transfer. Interactive file list. TeraCopy shows failed file transfers and lets you fix the problem and recopy only problem files. Shell integration. TeraCopy can completely replace Explorer copy and move functions, allowing you work with files as usual. TeraCopy is free for non-commercial use only. For commercial use you need to buy a license. The paid version of the program includes the following features: Copy/move to your favorite folders. Save reports as HTML and CSV files. Select files with the same extension/folder. Remove the selected files from the copy queue. TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 changelog: Added support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. Improved exception handling and automated bug report upload. Fixed several minor bugs and small memory leaks. Build 26 (June 24) Fixed a rare exception when a transfer completed. Features added since version 3.17: Enhanced speed graph. New multi-threaded copy engine. Support for copying to multiple targets. Queue system for managing multiple copy operations. Support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. TeraCopy entry in the modern Windows Explorer context menu. Integrated toolbar in the title bar. Why receive LocalSend transfers with TeraCopy? Handle file conflicts: Skip, overwrite, or rename files when a file with the same name already exists. LocalSend always creates another copy, which can waste time and disk space, especially when resuming an interrupted transfer. Filter unwanted files: Apply ignore lists or remove files manually before accepting a transfer, so unnecessary files are not downloaded. Better performance on fast networks: In tests over a 10 Gbps connection, TeraCopy received files several times faster than the standard LocalSend app on Windows. Download: TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 | 14.5 MB (Freeware, paid upgrade available) View: TeraCopy Website | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Briefly used Turbo Pascal (and Turbo C++) in 97 and soon after that I bought PC magazine that included a full version of Delphi 2. I still use Delphi today, some 29 years later.
    • Age of Empires Mobile comes to PC, here's how to carry over progress from your phone by Ivan Jenic Image: YouTube/Microsoft Microsoft just released Age of Empires Mobile for PC. The game, officially called Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, is available for free on Steam and Microsoft Store, almost two years after its initial release for handheld devices. Age of Empires is one of those franchises that entire generations grew up with. The original came out in 1997, and immediately got people hooked to building civilizations and crushing their enemies on the battlefield. However, the franchise today is a far cry from its roots, as Age of Empires Mobile is, well, a game optimized for handheld devices, and not a classic RTS title we’ve all loved for years. And, of course, it includes in-game purchases. The PC version is still a mobile game at its core, but it’s been optimized for desktop play. There’s mouse control, full keyboard compatibility, and a refined UI. Microsoft also refreshed the visuals with some 4k textures, so the game should look better on larger screens. The game supports Crossplay, so you can switch between your phone, tablet, and PC without losing anything. But linked progress doesn’t come out of the box, as you have to enable it first. Here’s how to link your progress: On your mobile device, open Age of Empires Mobile. Go to Settings (Gear icon) > Account. Select Bind Account and choose a sign-in option. Once you enable account binding, sign in on PC using the same method, and your progress will be accessible across all your devices. Xbox Game Pass subscribers also get a bonus reward pack on PC, which includes: 1 Monthly Pass Token 1 Custom Resource Chest 10 Universal 60-Minute Speed-Ups 1,000 Empire Coins Exclusive Player Portrait Frame You can find more info about Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, as well as download links, on the Age of Empires official website.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      458
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      79
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!