Yeah, I’m not sure how many people actually do. Based on the number that don’t seem to know how to use all the features, I think more than a few.
1 Like
I’ll give that a look.
It’s not the same as AoE1 Rome of course.
I think they are practically not Goths and Celts.
Goths are stand-in civ for everything vaguely Germanic and Celts are Scots but only based on the Braveheart movie.
They shouldn’t stop adding Medieval civs but if they would expend the timeline by a few hundred years into antiquity they could expend the possibilities. They would need to find some replacements for all of them not having gunpowder though. Maybe “regional units” like a catapult or slinger.
It’s not confirmed. Still just rumours.
I hope they use the AoE3DE engine improvements though. They could also reuse some assets like animals, trees and terrain.
Or even units if they decide to add the Aztecs for example.
I kinda forget that it’s the 25th for AoE1. I was to focused on wanting AoMDE and AoM2.
As someone how always randomly selects parts of the text they’re reading I very quickly noticed that “Quote” popup.
I think anything related to anything but AoE2 wouldn’t appear in the AoE2DE readmap.
That doesn’t mean that there won’t be anything AoM related. It just means that those 2 things are unrelated.
It’s someones birthday, isn’t it?
Was related to AoE2 because it’s the birthday of the series. And it already sounds like an event. I mean it’s a birthday.
We’re inviting some ancient friends to hang out!
What is invite and what is hang out. I don’t think it means invite AoM themed event mods so you can hang out with AoM looking units?
That would also be an even more minor thing for AoE2 because it’s not even directly AoE2 related unlike the series birthday, so why would they announce it a year in advance?
Wait there was a tutorial?
You can search for the User"discobot"
Thats the bot that gives you the Tutorial
1 Like
Yes, everything can be…
No, not even close…AoE 2 DE has more than 20k players, AoM with luck and reaches 2k players (the same amount as AoE Online also and a quarter of those that have the 3 DE), but it does deserve a definitive edition,it is an excellent game and its campaign is god tier with the story of Arkantos and the theft of Poseidon’s trident…
Of course, I wouldn’t have said it better…
Stop making three posts. Use edits, quotes, and mentions, otherwise you are just spamming. Instead of that mess, it should be like this @MatM1996:
2 Likes
Ok, it’s to make it faster, but then I get confused with the answers xd…
You’d think someone presumably born in 1996 would not be boomer-y enough to get confused by how the forums work…
Dunno, I think AoM:DE if done well would have a lot of players for sure. I’ve tried roping several internet friends into playing AoE2:DE, but they’ve all said ‘sorry, call me when they do AoM:DE tho’ and I’ve seen similar sentiments whenever there is talks about AoE2:DE on other platforms as well.
1 Like
In the same vein, they could expand the timeline to the 17th century and add the Netherlands (I wouldn’t like that, btw)
There are plenty of civs from 476 to 1598 to explore.
4 Likes
the whole point of aoe2 is to be medieval. why would you advocate for making it something it is not?
8 Likes
Older civs are more reasonable because modern gunpowder weapons would be way to strong.
I could see a Spartan Army fight a Viking army.
But no AoE2 civ would be able to fight against an army of Musketeers.
Yes for history nerds.
I could probably find 100 more civs.
But how much reach will they have.
What means Medieval? Knights and Castles? Then why are the Vikings in the game, not even talking about the Huns.
AoE2 doesn’t have clear borders and the concept of Middle Ages is very Western European. It makes little sense for Asia for example.
1 Like
Well, for those that like the idea of ancient civs and are not already aware of my mod Romae ad Bellum please check it out. Our team is heavily invested and continue to produce new content to explore this period.
Discord Channel
Latest version on [Moddb](
)
Iron Kaiser YouTube video of Roman’s
5 Likes
Vikings are super medieval. They made their presence felt since late 8th century.
Phalanx would get shredded to pieces by Vikings, because of the differences in technology. Let’s not even talk about the differences in tech between 15th century Chinese and 3rd century BC Greeks
I won’t comment on Huns, because I can’t be objective with then
How do you mean? Reach, as in how many players have heard of a civ and therefore will recognise them?
Because, that is a frustrating argument to make, as these games are what many have as an introduction to world history. Why not use civs from the existing timeframe all over the world - Africa, Americas, Asia - to broaden the horizon for future games to have their involvement?
Seeing the same bread and butter civs all over again is getting boring. Expanding the timeframe much earlier for Romans or Greeks or whoever to be added is just…uninspired. You have AoE1 for that!
The history nerds exist to make history fun through games for the masses, not repeat the same few things over and over again!
15 Likes
Because the eurocentrists want to shove more europe down our throats
8 Likes
They are Medieval because someone in Western Europe decided to define the Middle Ages as around 500 AD till 1500 AD.
We just kept this definition.
The Vikings would be a more equal match to Greeks then to late medieval Europeans.
Viking weapons and armour wasn’t better then Greek or Roman weapons and armour.
Vikings didn’t have plate armour, Vikings didn’t have high quality steel, Vikings didn’t know how to make advanced composite reflex bows etc.
And If we look at China for example there is nothing of major importance that happened around 500 AD. There is no reason to make a cutoff there.
In the Middle East and North Africa you have the rise of Islam in 600-700 AD that could be considered a starting point for the Middle Ages but the Persians in the game also already seem to be pre Islamic.
I’m not against any of those civilisations. I have never said that they should stop adding Medieval Civilisations.
But why not both? They are doing 2 DLCs per year. So why not one ancient one and one Medieval one?
Have you played AoE1DE? It’s awful. It’s technically so much worse then AoE2DE on so many levels. I get like half FPS in that game (still perfectly playable) and so many features are missing. No formations, awful path finding, no triggers in the Editor etc.
Also AoE2DE has the better gameplay independent of the setting. I’d love to have a more modern Ancient AoE that isn’t stuck in 90s game design (or 00s cartoon design like AoEO).
Ironically in the recent AoE3 poll Which civilizations do you like the most? (MEGAPOLL) it seems that Western European civs are pretty unpopular.
I’m personally all for more Asian, American and African civs.
AoE2DE only has 2 Sub-Saharan civilisations. (AoE3DE has a lot more if we count minor civilisations)
The Americas only have 3.
And the worst part is that every civilisation looks European. Every generic unit is European. Only American Monks and now since recently all the Trade Carts have regional skins.
You can’t tell me that it would be to hard to read the unit if the African Pikeman had dark skin.
But I’m getting Off-Topic.
2 Likes
I’ll be honest, I’d rather have no DLCs than an ancient world DLC. It’s not something I want to see in the game, and there are so many civs that fit the timeframe far better.
4 Likes
Why would anyone consider this as the start of the middle ages?
1 Like
Its easier to term them the Early Middle Ages (450s, Fall of Rome to 1000), High Middle Ages (1000-1300) and Late Middle Ages (1300-1600 or so).
3 Likes