I dontvthink they say that.
3 Likes
That is because they don’t say that, the separation comes from 18th century historians that didn’t have much information to go on, modern historians see the east as a continuation of the Roman Empire.
3 Likes
Pretty sure they do. A big study of the Roman Empire is exactly how the Western and Eastern halves differed. They’re generally considered to be different.
I remember being in 5th grade and my teacher was talking about the Byzantine Empire. Of course, I immediately piped up and mentioned how they’re in Age of Empires II. Anyway, he used the term “Byzantine Empire” instead of “Eastern Roman Empire,” which signals to me that they’re at least considered to be somewhat different, at least culturally.
2 Likes
There is nothing wrong with the term Byzantine Empire, the Romans didn’t go by Eastern Roman Empire either. They (and a bunch of other people in the same time period) just went by Roman Empire. But there is no real distinction between the Byzantine Empire or the Eastern Roman Empire. the Changes were gradual and normal for an empire undergoing hundreds of years of development.
6 Likes
Such a bad news. With all due repsect, it is a very bad decision to add them to ranked. They were dead already that time and also not have any middle time good army. They were falling.
3 Likes
It’s either this or the game dies completely and everyone who wants specific civs in the game has their hopes and dreams dashed forever and they remain entirely unsatisfied. I think this is far preferable.
What has this to do with the civ added to ranked?
I understand your post for the civ being added to the game in general. But adding it to ranked is something different.
I like the change. It doesnt made much sense to have a civ that isnt part of ranked. Based on the stats of the civ i do think it needs some balancing before it fits ranked. Some boni seems over the top. I expect some fine tuning in the next patches before it gets to ranked.
If the civ suits the games and need to be added to the game is a complete different question. The point of you both is probably it doesnt suit the time frame of the game. I can understand that argument.
2 Likes
Even as a game how will you add them to ranked?!
What units you will give them to be aoe2 ranked competetive civ?! If so then they should be the weakest civ in the game since they are already dead and old.
Just don’t tell me devs will give them Xbows?! Or even siege rams or Onagers?! Or even pikes and hlabs or even trebs? Or even galleys or whatever.
Anyway if the devs add the Romans to aoe2 THEY SHOULD BE THE WEAKEST AND THE MOST USELESS CIV.
They should be no where near competitive to any middle age civ at all.
Imagine Romans vs Turks guns or Bohemians LOL
2 Likes
Okay, let’s try this logic.
The Aztecs and Mayans should be the weakest civs in the game. They should not have anything past Feudal units, they should not get any Blacksmith upgrades at all, and they shouldn’t get swordsmen.
See how silly that sounds? We need to make some compromises to make civilizations workable.
Are you aware that the Romans had all of those things? Their inclusion is not a stretch.
3 Likes
These are all questions about if the civ fits the game. Yes, you can argue it doesnt fit the game and that is your conclusion. That is completely fine for me. I can understand all your arguments about them not fitting. But the decision to add Romans to the game is already a decision from the past. It will not change.
So we are now here. Romans will be added to the game. If you like it or not. This whole discussion has nothing to do with them be able to add to ranked.
In my opinion there are two options:
- A civ is added to the game for everyone: SP against the AI, for scenarios, in the lobby and for ranked.
- The game isnt added to the game at all.
Given the fact that the game will be added to the game, only 1 still make sense. There isnt a good reason to not add them to ranked given they are added to the game.
Oh, can you tell me when the goths fought the Japanese? When dit the Incans fought the Persians? And when were the Mayan fighting the slavs? And when did the Malian fought that Tatars? Not all matches are historically accurate.
2 Likes
I expected a reply like this, but THESE CIVS THAT YOU METIONED WERE AT LEAST MIDDLE AGES CIVS LOL.
1 Like
Not technologically speaking. They were late Bronze Age at best. If the Romans don’t fit, then the Aztecs and Mayans don’t fit either.
1 Like
I expected a reply like this. But also what you said not an argument since first of all, all these civs are meddle ages and in ranked multiplayer no new with match ups from different empires, at least they were middle ages empire.
Then by your logic lets all aoe1 civs to aoe2 ranked also.
You know what? Actually you can add Yamato empire they were even after Romans LOL.
Yamato empire was from 2AD to 7AD, oh wait but we have Japanese? Oh wait but we have Byzantines and Italians and Teutons and Franks and Burgundians and Sicilians so if Romans yes then Yamato also yes!
With all due to respect to you and the devs and the fans, adding Romans to ranked is one of the dmbest and stupidest things that ever happened, it is even more stupid than making the Mameluke throw soweds on the back of a Bacterian camel.
1 Like
Man, you need to calm down. You’re taking this way too personally. I can feel your blood pressure rising all the way from my computer.
3 Likes
With all due to respect to you and the devs and the fans, adding Romans to ranked is one of the dumbest and stupidest things that ever happened, it is even more stupid than making the Mameluke throw swords on the back of a Bacterian camel.
I bet if you even play Ranked.
1 Like
What would be dumber is introducing a civilization and then not having it available in every game mode. Oh wait, they did that. And everyone hated it.
It seems Rome haters are never happy. If it bothers you this much, go back to HD. Or better yet, just quit the game entirely, since you can’t handle adversity in a mature manner. But please, please, PLEASE stop talking about how much you hate it! You’re going to ruin the experience of everyone who’s actually hyped for this expansion.
2 Likes
11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11
It is not hate or love, it is about that it doesn’t make any sense adding them from the begenning, not only ranked aoe2 even in single player.
The devs should just kept them with AOE1 separated mode.
4 Likes
Well, like it or not, they’re in the game, so stop complaining about it, because you’re just annoying everyone else. Stop complaining or go back to HD. Those are your options.
1 Like
But we already have Byzantines which they are actually Romans middle age LOL.
3 Likes
The Romans and the Byzantines are separate. It doesn’t matter that they had the same administration. Ethnically, culturally, religiously, they were completely different. They are separate civs and always will be.
4 Likes