There is also the “low toleration for unorderly things” which come as a part of the package.
Maybe. It depends on whether you think the in-game ages represent roughly the same time periods for all civs, or even represent specific time periods at all.
Certainly the Huns were an odd choice – but, anachronistic or not, given that they are in the game, ideally they should have the most fitting possible architecture. I find it hard to believe that late medieval German buildings are the best possible fit for them.
Yes, I know. But just because people do something, that doesn’t mean they should do it. I would say more, but I’m pretty sure this is not really the place for discussing this.
I just played the Ismail campaign, and, whiny and strangely-British narrator and ahistorical nonsense aside, the biggest flaw present was the fact that the Persians don’t have the proper architecture, which just ruins immersion and takes away flavor.
2 Likes
Considering some civs’ periods don’t overlap at all, I think that very clearly not the case.
Fair, but then again what would be a “nomadic” architecture? What would an Imperial Age university from that architecture be like? If not a “nomadic” architecture, then we would have to pick a sedentary architecture that fits them best. Considering the Huns in-game are mostly representing their european iteration, I think Central European architecture is the best choice, even if it’s anachronistic.
I do think that, in the campaigns, they should at least sometimes get the Normans treatment, where they are essentially the same civ you play regularly, but they have a different skin. In fact, a lot of campaigns would benefit from having campaign-only civs.
This is why I’m opposed to a nomadic architecture set, because it’s always going to look janky no matter what you do. Even the very talented AbeJin couldn’t manage to make a nomadic set that looked good (IMO, anyway).
People have criticized the notion of an Oceania architecture set, but at least there, they have thatch buildings to draw from for the Feudal Age and stone buildings from Nan Madol and Easter Island to draw from for the Castle and Imperial Ages. A nomadic set will literally just be different permutations of round yurts and tents, and there’s only so much you do with that without it getting repetitive or looking weird.
1 Like
That’s just Chinese architecture, which resembles the East Asian set, which the Mongols already have, so there is no need for a change.
3 Likes
Opposing Nomadic Architecture just because one of “your favourite” Modder couldn’t make it properly is such an Idiotic Argument.
8 Likes
Redkirby and Omargg have done some amazing work as well. You are completely ignoring an acknowledgement for their works.
1 Like
Could work for some Northeast Asia architecture set or something but it’s far from nomadic and not a good fit for the Huns at all.
Basically what happened to the African set and even then they had something to draw inspiration from.
Why is this a problem? To create an architecture set, we only need to create up to four levels of skin for each type of building. In fact, most of them basically just need 1 or 2 more levels as there is no need to be designed for the Dark Age.
We can introduce a basic set of nomadic yurts with basic decorations like fences, torches and bonfires to the Feudal Age buildings, and in the Castle Age these yurts can have patterns and additional decorations to make them look more advanced. Then, in the Imperial Age there can be even more fine decorations such as the Nine White banners and the Wind Horse prayer flags, and may have the tents woven from silk and gold. Walls, towers and castles can obviously still have stone structures, while their monasteries based on Ovoo also look stone. Likewise, the university can look partly stone, or have its yurt mounted on a cart/wagon (khibitkha) to make it unique.
The difference between the levels of the Nomad building set don’t have to be as large as between the levels of other building sets. They just need to look increasingly good and distinguishable then they can achieve their goals as an architecture set.
2 Likes
You can modify an already existing civ techtree and change its name. For example, in Joan, you coul change the Franks name to French, make them train Coustilliers and swap Bearded Axe with French Vineyards (renamed Burgundian Vineyards). You’d need a new trigger to set a tech status as Unready, though.
Or, you can add Berserks and Huskarls to the Frank tech tree (and Goth and Vikings UT’s) if you want a Late Antiquity Frank campaign
1 Like
Eh, I wouldn’t say that. The African set is fine, though a bit fanciful in places. It’s actually one of my favorite sets in the game, especially in the Feudal Age.
More about how barely anything changes when you hit Imperial Age.
2 Likes
6 Likes
Exactly. Abejin and his like have made some good nomadic architecture sets. When the Tibetans are added and a Silk Road/Tibetan building set are introduced the Mongols could take that. But the nomadic one works well for Huns and Cumans.
Interesting, what’s the historical nonsense? As for the narrator, I hadn’t actually noticed the Britishness before, but I guess I see what you mean.
I’m not sure a fully “nomadic” architecture set would be best either, but I’m sure there would be ways to do it. There’s already a sort of age progression of yurts in game:
I think if I was designing a nomadic architecture set, I’d use quite plain fabrics in Feudal Age, with them becoming more elaborately decorated as you age up. Age progression in architecture sets doesn’t usually correspond to earlier/later periods of architecture anyway – it’s more about giving the impression of some form of progress.
I agree that the university is a tough one – I find it very weird that Huns get universities anyway. Unlike other buildings, there’s not really a standard shape for universities either.
Another option would be a combination of the two – something like, in Feudal Age everything is tent based, but in later ages some of the buildings (perhaps specifically the non-military ones) are wooden Germanic-style ones, or at least have elements of those. By “Germanic” I mean migration period/early medieval style buildings, not late medieval German ones like they have now.
On the other hand, if an official nomadic architecture set was ever added, I’m sure it would be shared between Mongols, Huns and Cumans – and would probably be quite similar to the Mongol buildings in AoE4. That might not really suit Huns either, just in a different way.
I thought the AbeJin one for Mongols is only “nomadic” in Feudal Age?
I think it’s the Mediterranean set that suffers the most from this, personally.
This is true, but I wish the system for it wasn’t so clunky. It’s the main thing that puts me off making custom scenarios. (Although, if it wasn’t clunky, the main thing putting me off would be not really having enough time…)
2 Likes
Ismail died during his reign, and wasn’t overthrown to become a homeless old beggar.
3 Likes
The felt Mongol yurts in yellow are too small and need to be re-sized by the devs. They don’t even fit the hitbox properly.
3 Likes