Oh yeah, in the Chronicles game mode they can do whatever they want and the playrbase will not care.
1 Like
Goths lasted until the early 8th cemtury, they are definitely fine
Conventionally the Middle Ages began in 476 AD.
The Ostrogothic Kingdom would be absolutely irrelevant, but the Goths should instead represent the Visigothic Kingdom (Visigoths), which ended in the late 700 with the Muslim conquest of the Iberian Peninsula.
More to the point, I donât understand why they have the HC and the BBC.
For the Huns, on the other hand, you can tell they are right on the edge. They probably wanted to include Attila at all costs.
The Mediterranean set is already quite overused. Moreover, that set was created to represent Renaissance Italy, it has absolutely nothing to do with other civilisations.
It seems pretty obvious to me, any graphics mod is customisable and visible only to those who install it
Absolutely true.
It looks like obvious but itâs not. Most games that sell skins have a good part of the appeal in the âshow offâ to other players. You can see people complaining that if people are not forced to see their skins, they would not buy it.
So itâs best that AoE2 not even think in this possibility of forcing skins being shown to increase appeal to buyers.
1 Like
Nah, theyâre supposed to be 4th and 5th century AD civs.
3 Likes
Currently they have 15th century units though.
That is more wrong then 5th century BC tbh.
I am only talking about units, not buildings! (Even though Huns are completely wrong there too, the only way to make them more wrong would be by giving them Aztec Architecture).
1 Like
Just split the unit line looks according to the trade cart looks,no need to over complicate things.
If anyone should get a different looking unit set it should be the meso civis as they would not look anything similar to european units.
1 Like
The Trade Cart division makes sense for the most part.
It also splits the Indian and Central Asian Architecture sets in 2 groups which makes sense.
Monk skins should be assigned based on religion obviously. Some Monastery skins also need to be changed. The Byzantines are not Catholic.
3 Likes
Only the male one. The female one looks VERY European.
1 Like
How does Archaemenid and Greek trade carts look like? Anyone got pictures?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cq2T4xrT7ws&t=473s Some useful images.
No, because aoe2 Romans are the Western Roman Empire of the 5th century, progressing to the future.
But more importantly because of this: It will break the consistency of the base game.
The end of antiquity being in 476 is a dated view most historians do not held anymore. Antiquity ended either in the 3rd or in the 7th century depending on your inclinations and the period in between is the migration period or late antiquity depending if you focus more in the medieval or ancient aspects.
Arguing that aoe1 ends in 476 is pure nonsense also for the economy of the game. Basically youâre asking to add Franks, Huns, Byzantines, Goths again to that game since they were all around since the start of the migration period which is in the 3rd century AD.
Middle ages in Europe is mostly about Germanics and Christianity so if you want to tell all the story you must start in the 3rd century where Goths, Franks, Alemans and all the people who would form their nations started to replace Romans and of course when Christianity started to become politically relevant.
Putting the cut in 476 is not only historically dubious but also terribly inconvenient because youâre actually breaking in two a process in the middle. Rome was irrelevant already since 300 AD but Romans still existed far later, to the 7/8th century.
Charlemagne or the division of his empire would be a better cut for a âpureâ medieval game but since goths and Huns have always been in game thereâs no reason aside from rigid conservatism to put the cut in 476 or even in 400 AD anymore.
Also the last age of aoe1 is called iron age, not late antiquity, and it shows.
2 Likes
We can discuss giving them skins from the 400s AD (Goths too) but certainly not from the 400s BC. The roman legionary and gothic huscarl are quite period-accurate
3 Likes
Honestly I see more drastic changes in society after post Rashidun Conquest than âFall Of Romeâ. Even after âFall Of Romeâ, you see ppl still clinging to old way of life. Like Goths even though started their own Kingdoms in Europe and North Africa still maintains Roman heritage to some extent and even had fair amount of mutual relationship with Eastern Rome. But post Rashidun Conquest changes that a lot. North Africans are embracing Islamic heritage while considering old Roman/Gothic heritage as ancient past thing. Similar trend in Egypt, Syria and Spain as well. Sassanid Zoroastrian slowly leaving old Zoroastrian religion to the faith of new conquerors. Such drastic changes didnât really happened before 7th century. It was just Rome had troubles with Gothic tribes or land exchange with Persian Empires.
The way I see it, Rise Of Christianity in Roman Empire at 3rd century and Islamic Conquest at 7th Century changed the dynamic of the world. In ancient times Syrians/Babylonians/Egyptians/etc had very distinct culture and hated each other in Classical period but such trend declined in Christian/Islamic period. Especially what we call the âMiddle Agesâ.
Again time of the age heavily depends on what narrative of history you read. Islamic history sources will consider 7th century as the start of Middle Age while European history sources will consider fall of rome.
Anyway in theory DLC can continue upto even 7th Century in one form or another. In AOE2, we already went too far with Korean scenario which belongs to AOE3 period.
2 Likes
No Trade Carts then 
Both the Greek Castles look the same? And there is only one house variant?
He didnât show all houses.
1 Like
1 Like