I thought it could be useful to gather some numbers about these controversial topics. Of course, these are just non-binding consultations but can help get a grasp of the forum’s sentiment, both to us and the Devs.
1) Should Wu, Shu and Wei be available in ranked games?
Yes
No
Don’t know/care
0voters
2) Should the 3K content be repackaged as Chronicles and placed outside the base game?
Yes
No
Don’t know/care
0voters
3) Do you approve magic abilities being featured in single player content?
Yes
Yes but only in Chronicles type content
No
Don’t know/care
0voters
4) Would you welcome the addition of other more appropriate China-area medieval Civs?
Some context for my answer for “2) Should the 3K content be repackaged as Chronicles and placed outside the base game?”
Firstly, I don’t care if it’s rebranded as chronicles, or something else to differentiate from the very historical chronicles. Probably best that it’s something branded like legends or something that implies a more, pseudo historical, brand of content.
Secondly, I think MS will face a lot of backlash if they pull 3k out of ranked without replacing them, and even so will face backlash. the most practical solution IMO, would be a civ ban. But the best solution for the thematic integrity of the game is moving them to something chronicles-esque.
A better one would be adding three civs people actually wanted from China. Win-win.
The civ ban idea is controversial, and can scare off players who have certain civ preferences. Not to mention it can be used to punish newer/odd civs. Like I bet a lot of people would ban Gurjaras because they hate Shrivamshas or something, which would be a big thing that discourages me from playing online.
I’m afraid there are those that actually actively want 3k in ranked, and MS promised it to them, which is in large part why we’re angry.
IDK, I just don’t feel good about being upset about MS lying to us and the solution being that they break promises to someone else. MS is 100% to blame for the quagmire they’re in, I don’t feel sorry for them, but a civ ban is the best solution I can come up with that doesn’t require more lies and broken promises.
But yes, in a vacuum, adding three proper civs to replace 3k would absolutely be my preferred solution.
There are only a tiny handful of reviews praising 3K civs IN RANKED, and quite a few are written in a sarcastic fashion or mention reddit. So likely trolls just trying to stir up trouble.
At the end of the day, someone will always be mad at something. You can never please all of the people all of the time. However…there are ways to make the fewest people angry and the largest amount happy.
I would wager that the group which includes both the people angry about 3K/being lied to/not getting actual civs and the group which would be happy with any 5 civs in ranked is a much much larger group than those who specifically want 3K in ranked.
Removing 3 Kingdoms from ranked play is the first priority. And you did not ask, but heroes should absolutely not be introduced in ranked, or even in general out of campaigns, custom scenarios, maybe HyperRandom and specific events.
About Chronicles: everyone says that the Three Kindoms should be repackaged in Chronicles entirely, and I agree with the feeling absolutely, but perhaps a new game mode entirely would be more appropriate? I don’t have a definitiveanswer to this question. But for instance, if AoE II introduced Lord of the Rings tomorrow, I’d be very happy… but it’d obviously have to be a separate mode.
Moreover, as I understand, Chronicles itself is it’s own thing, with its own team, so maybe better to leave them alone and not impose onto them what they didn’t ask for?
Once it’s released, it can’t be changed except small change. 3k overhaul means devs betray the funs who bought this DLC. Renaming is better if changing.
About Khitanguts, mounted trebs are for beating bbc that kills skirms or rocket carts who support swords or liao dao. They need alternative if mounted trebs are removed.
And change a Khitans castle. What castle is good for them?
One caveat about “chronicles”. The definition of chronicle is “a factual written account of important or historical events in the order of their occurrence.” (google)
From what I read the 3K stuff is not factual or serious history, so it wouldn’t be called chronicles but more like romance.
I don’t mind if they are in unranked lobby multi-player with civset = all, like Battle for Greece. They feel incredibly weird as part of the aoe2 civ roster (more so 3K than Greece; Roman was already borderline).
Khitanguts is the more glaring one but don’t forget about the Wei and Wu
Wei: this civ is clearly Northern Wei, or Xianbei, by all means
Wu: one very generic UU and one very generic and dubious UU (hardly Han Chinese)
They should be fixed too before qualified for even chronicles
There’s some pretty inaccurate cutscenes in multiple campaigns, but I think basing a campaign off the Romance of Three Kingdoms novel instead of using the historical Records of the Three Kingdoms, definetely crosses a limit. And said inspiration gave us wind-controlling wizards xd
I’m totally against renaming, cause it involves a lot of changes to the civs and not just a simple change of name (with the only possible exception being renaming the Wei to Xianbei).
If it’s just a change of name without modifying the content, then it’s gonna be even worse than what we have currently.
The best solution is to move the 3K civs to Chronicles, and remake a proper medieval East Asian DLC.
I actually think in this case renaming might be more of a betrayal, assuming people who hype for it are hyped for 3 Kingdoms specifically. The DLC’s name is 3K. And now after renaming they are no longer 3 Kingdoms.
Rather have them in “chronicles”. They can add almost any non-civs as long as they are not part of the base game roster and can properly opt out. By properly opt out I mean not having to face them in matches or team up with them in matches. Battle for Greece antique civs are optional in this sense.
