Then let me tell you, Dravidians(Cholas+Tamils+Vijayanagara) are an even bigger hole than that, since the current Indians only represent North West India(Rajputana + Mughal formation)
Why bigger hole you ask?
Because the population(and also GDP) of Dravidians was atleast 100x more than Tibetans at any point in history. GDP per capitas of the world were largely similar in medieval times.
But we are digressing.
Battle eles for Indians are absolutely essential because there is currently very little accuracy to the the Indians civilization in-game, and it makes little logical sense for them to still not get it just because âThe Metaâ or âMore workâ, even though their stables show trained elephants.
Do you know the film âDoctor Strangeâ had to portray a white as the Ancient One and remove mention of the word âTibetâ, and not take place in Tibet because of the very reason I stated, to get a release in China??
The Ancient One was a Tibetan in the Comics.
Indians got Elefant archer, Chinese got the UT rocketry. Both are lame excuses.
Chinese need hc
Indiana need atleast not elite War Elefants, else the stable graphics is rediculous with Elefants shown inside
The meta can take these changes without imploding. These civs wonât suddenly become better than celts or Frankâs in winrate, and nobody is talking about nerfing them either.
3 Likes
Exactly. Give at least Battle elephants(with EBE but EBE is not so viable anyway) with no extra bonuses to Indians. Or even better would be a Dravidian civ, since they are not in the game (current Indians is only North West India). But at least BE, EBE must now be given. The wait has been long and excruciating.
The Meta is not going to go haywire with this one small change.
We can discuss about Chinese in a seperate thread. This thread is about the poorly designed civ Indians.
That is because it happens in the current day, not in the 12th Century.
Maybe a damage bonus for the Chinese which makes their siege projectiles explode once chemistry is researched? An effect similar to the fireworks or flower bursts visually. And given them to hand cannoneer.
1 Like
The CCPâs official line is that âThe Tibetans were always chinese and always part of china throughout historyâ. You should know this.
But we are digressing . Let us stay on topic namely the following:
Battle eles for Indians are absolutely essential and it makes little logical sense for them to still not get it just because âThe Metaâ or âMore workâ , even though their stables show trained elephants.
I agree. This is why adding Battle elephants to Indians is not going to make âThe Metaâ go haywire even a single bit.
There is not much left between Indians and Battle elephants uniting now, logically speaking.
We are only fans of the game, so it is not completely out of the question that the devs will give Indians a variation of battle elephant at some point.
However, I agree with the general sentiment here that Age of Empires is about gameplay over historical accuracy more often than not and it is meant to interest the player in learning more about each historical civilization. Thereâs nothing wrong with that. Itâs a game, after all, not a historical simulation.
7 Likes
I canât see such elephants anywhere. Only 2 small elephant statues, but no real elephants, unlike horses and a camel.
4 Likes
But onto topic itself, what purpose would the Battle Ele have in Indian army? Imperial camel is already their cheap heavy cavalry unit. Elephant archer can be a meatshield for hand cannoneers due to itâs shorter range as opposed to indian HC with increased range. The imperial camel is cool and the EA will suffice to show the Indians elaphantiness. The persians also only have War Elephants, why shouldnât we give them Battle Elephants, too!
1 Like
Because The Persians already have a melee elephant. The Indians donât.
The Persians got their War Elephants from India through trade/relations(represented by production at royal castle), hence it is clear the Persians could not train their own in their own stables.
From the forgotten to HD, the Indian stable had live elephants.
1 Like
I understand that too. However i do argue that giving BE,EBE access to Indians does not break âThe Metaâ and does not make them OP. Even if it does, the Indians could be rebalanced duly.
This seems like a big and avoidable historical inaccuracy, that makes many many people unhappy about the Indian civilizationâs design.
Why does Indian+BE not become OP, you ask?
Because the Camel line for Indians is already so loaded, no pro is going to go for Indian BE (outside of mastapiece), considering the speed difference. Maybe a couple thrown in in Castle Age but thatâs it. The Camels are also just as good vs buildings.
Now tell me Why you think Indians becomes OP with Battle Elephants
1 Like
I actually agree with your points. You are right, there are ways to include mele elephants without making Indian civ too strong. You just have to change that civ quite a lot for it and unfortunately thatâs not something most people want at this point.
In the end itâs democracy. As youâve seen lots of people donât care about this. Aoe2 sucks when it comes to historical realism. Should India even be camel civ? How many Indian people ever used camel? Itâs like saying China used camels a little bit so theyâll be camel civ. Itâs nuts. We got Aztecs running around with trebuchet. That doesnât make any sense.
As for Mongols, well lots of people wanted that change. Also steppe lancer is must have for them and they needed no balancing while having it. India needs lot of balancing and rework if youâll add mele elephants. Unfortunately not many people want this faction to change. To them India having one elephant units is enough. So the creator wonât make that change.
I want historical realism as much as you. Unfortunately for aoe2 itâs not possible. Maybe in Aoe4 you can have really unique historically accurate factions. I personally believe that creators should focus on that quite a lot. Most hardcore fans only care about balancing and stats. However you have to sell games to lot more irregular fans. The more historical diversity you show the more you attract those fans. Hardcore fans buy games anyway doesnât matter how much they complain. Hopefully Aoe4 will have civilization that are quite unique and have all the necessary units available from the beginning.
1 Like
Your post assumes Indians will become OP with non-bonus Battle Elephants.
The case of the Indians is very similar to the Mongols, where the addition of EBE will not make them OP. The Camel line is much more loaded and Imp Camel is far far better than FU EBE after EBE nerf.
1 Like
Dude calm down. You are saying the same thing again and again. Even if Indian faction doesnât become too op they still need rework. And nobody really want that now. So no mele elephants for Indian civ.
2 Likes
How? BE are actual power units that wipe any unit out. Imp camel has no armor(I guess the Indian bonus counts as 1 base pierce), much lower attack (canât even match EBE and Paladinâs base attack after full blacksmith upgrades). They are good vs cavalry but are mediocre vs everything else, their HP and slightly more attack is what makes them better than a generic camel.
Too fancy and redundant. Adding the hand cannoneers is enough.
But fireworks can be introduced as a special cannon units in the scenario editor, that will be cool.
So many threads about this civâs design is a hint that a significant part of the community is not satisfied with it, mainly from the casual and half competitive half casual players who makes, I would say, about 90% of the player base if not more. The rest hardcore-only gameplay players of course wonât care about design and thematic of the game (it could have different simple geometric figures as units and buildings instead of a medieval settings and it would be fine for them, itâs all about gameplay from their point of view anyway). Resentments aside, while gameplay and balance must not be left aside by any means, I think the civililzation designs should represent and revolve around historical inspiration. Iâll repeat it: inspiration. This game is so wrong in so many aspects in regards to historical accuracy (Aztec magonels, japanese with european cavalry, etc), but it goes around the concept of having many civilizations with the same units and technologies pool, and then add some restrictions to the tech tree, some bonuses, and a couple of unique units and technologies inspired by the most relevant aspects of these civilizations in regard. That is part of what made us fell in love with the game when we were just begginers playing the barbarossa campaign, and to this day this is what keep me engaged with the game: Just the right spot between historical thematic and the best rts gameplay experience. What I mean by all this is that leaving historical inspiration aside for the sake of âgameplay is what everything should be focused onâ takes away part of the magic of the game. And in the end both themathic and gameplay arenât mutually exclusive.
Introduction tldr: Historical inspiration (not accuracy) is important.
Sorry for that introduction as large as the following argument itself. Now, talking about indians. Who was the idea to came with the only camel thing? I know, Itâs funny and an interesting approach for a civ but⊠why does it have to do with indians? The civ is supposedly based on mughals (i dont know why people say this, for me they are based more on rajput kingdoms and delhi sultanate rather than mughals who escape aoe2 timeline) but the only thing i could find after a light research about camels in their armies was âSome of rajput mansabdar provided camel cavalry alsoâ for mughals and nothing about delhisâ using of camels. So there is no better point of this aside of pure gameplay. Itâs like making a new idk⊠tibetan civ and say âyou know what? itâd be cool to make them work around on massing onagersâ. Interesting? maybe. Tibetan themed? not at all. I know all this comes from a fanmade mod, but after two remakes of the game and numerous patches there wasnât any opportunity to adress this?
I know many players (including me) like the camels trait and donât want it to dissappear from the game and just giving indians battle elephants may lead ot unbalancing the civing and also not fitting âonly camelsâ is still there.
So as I said in other thread , what I propose may be a bit drastical but may also improve not only indiands but also saracens. The point would be to go through a whole redesign of both indian and (imo boring and uninteresting) saracen civ, by giving saracens the camels aspect, including taking away knight line and giving them acces to imperial camels which are along a more correct historical design direction (In the deserts and mountanious land of the arab world heavy cavvalry was not as efficient as light cavalry was. Also they did use camels a lot both in warfare and in everyday life); and make a totally new indian civ that works around elephants. It could also be the chance to rename them ârajputsâ since right now the civ does not represent the indian subcontinent at all.
This is not the right time anyway. The game is still going through a development stage and thereâs some work to be done before it reaches a more polished form. There are still many balance, multiplayer and performance improvements to be done, and some people are still not sure whether staying with DE or HD/Voobly. Such a drastic change may not be well recieved by the conservative part of the community.
I hope discussion about indiands continue with open mind and respect. At the end all we want is to make the game better according to our point of view.
2 Likes
