Do you think this is a historical simulation?
1 Like
Im gonna seriously ask you how popular you think the Hautevilles are.
And yes Imo the biggest reason to add a civ should be historical obviously
1 Like
So are they going to be entirely reliant on Siege Ram to take out castles
Why were the huns added in the original version?
If you dont know go look up sandys videos.
P.S normans are well known in european history.
1 Like
I donāt think aoe2 Devs are so slimy to just think about commercial success. Sure they are working and one has to gain something out of it but I donāt feel like theyāre being sneaky (and I like to believe I have a pretty neat detector to that). In case of Huns I donāt see whatās the fussā¦ They didnāt put them in aoe1 neither in aoe2 and they realised this in the conquerorsā¦ How can we miss the Huns both in ancient and medieval games?
Vietnamese are a choice of marketing but in the end itās fine to have them so I donāt consider it commercial for the sake of itā¦ Are Burgundians or cumans that popular? You can make more examples of unpopular civs than popular ones.
Itās like with musicā¦ You can make pop music and commercial pop music, not the same thing. The first is just music that grabs and have nice melodies, the second is music made to cash and nothing else.
Sure itās not always easy to draw the line but I donāt personally feel like aoe2 is being too commercial as long as it does something like dynasties of India with other more obscure civs. Yeah maybe gurjaras happen to be appealing for Indian peopleā¦ I mean, so what? Itās not theyāre doing something wrong as long as they keep representing the world and history.
But I have one criticism, they could dare a little more in terms of creativity and mechanics maybe. But theyāre actually starting to do it with some new civs out of necessity for varietyās sake. And as the Romans addition is showing they could try less to adapt to the fanbaseā¦ I refer to the choice of making them unplayable in rank, you either add them or notā¦ So this could be their most commercial move and itās indeed a little goofy and indecisive but after a dlc like doi thatās fine if they keep adding obscure civs with the next one. And itās still hard work anyway (good or bad weāll see) to port a whole game to another one and make 3 new campaigns.
And they should stop worrying about deluding nostalgics and rework or split old civs like celts and Persians but thatās up to them, donāt know what their policy is.
No theyāre not gonna rely on anything because theyāre not gonna be in the game!
1 Like
Sicilians arent that famous though
There are countless threads for people asking for Polynesian and Oceanian civsā¦ seriously do you guys honestly think these ideas will make it into the game??? I mean there is being hopeful, there is wishful thinkingā¦ and then there is being completely deludedā¦ and then there is being whatever this isā¦
1 Like
Hauteville were instrumental in the first Crusade. And crusades were a pretty significant event in the middle ages.
Normans as a whole are also very renown since William the Conqueror invaded Britain, another very famous event.
Iāve just counted up the number of official campaign title characters whose names I recognised before playing their campaign: 9, out of 34 campaigns in total. (8 if we exclude Tamerlane, since I originally heard about him from AoE2.) Maybe Iām atypical. But I think having a campaign based on actual historical events (however loosely) is much more important than recognising the name.
7 Likes
Do you have suggestions for campaigns for ops civis?
Your attitude seems a bit hostile and cruel. I understand not wanting civs that didnt interact directly with the current roster at all but to deny any civ without cav int he future could be seen as evil. Dont try to deny fans or devs from getting such content out. Cmon just be respectful for once.
Just try to be a little nicer. You might enjoy things if you dont try and hurt others.
I warn you as one who doesnt want Polynesia btw or Easter Island civ.
The minimum to have a civ Iād say is, in order of importance:
- A campaign, civs are actually designed around that from Huns to bohemians
- Historical evidences, specially about some kind of warfare, expansion or major battle since this game is mostly that, not a cultural simulator, this is the biggest issue for north America before 1600
- A wonder, stretches like Mongols and Huns are fine if they somehow represent their identity
- At least another civ to justify new architecture or a dlc in this case (like cumans and Tatars, only exception to this was Indians)
- Contact with other civs, even Japanese and Incas have at least one since the conquerors, sounds strange to me that Polynesians or other Oceania civs didnāt have contacts with Malay or South Asia and India (Iām ignorant on the subject)
- Ai names
2 Likes
Luckily, the Polynesians meet all of those criteriaā¦sort of. Itās a stretch, I guess, but it still works.
The Polynesian campaign is centered around the Tuāi Tonga of legend, focusing on the founding of the Tonga Empire to its destruction at the hands of the Samoans.
The Polynesians definitely engaged in warfare. They would be partly an infantry civ and partly a naval civ, similar to the Vikings.
This oneās easy: one of the moai statues of Ahu Tongariki on Rapa Nui.
The most logical choice would be the Micronesians, the other great power in the Pacific.
Itās speculated that the inhabitants of Easter Island came from Peru (where the Incas are), and itās also believed that the Austronesians (ancestors of the Polynesians) made contact with Arab traders at some point and shared naval technology.
This oneās also easy. They use the names of Tuāi Tonga rulers and settlers of Rapa Nui in legend.
Again, no one cares about Sicilian and Hautevilles specifically. Im just saying that the name recognition argument is qute weak
1 Like
What I heard till now sounds like they could fit, my only reserve now is Oceania having one or two civs more to justify a dlc and contacts with extra Oceania civs.
I think it should be the normal stage of the game. Naval civ should be very strong in water map. But if you check the win rate of Malay, the win rate is not as high as we expect if we take into the account of how bad it is in land map.
Nope, Iām just saying that I donāt think that being familiar with campaign characters is important. Some of my favourite campaigns are about people Iād not heard of before I played them.
3 Likes
Oh my heart bleeds! Confirmed these threads attract a special kind of personā¦ Imagine being āhurtā because someone said something about a computer game.
Also why wouldnāt I try to stop the devs and fans from getting such content out? It would ruin a game that I love and respect. Why would I want people with half baked ideas to come and shit all over it?
And respect is not given itās earned.
Alright, Iām off to doing some more cruel and evil thingsā¦ might go pillage some villages and murder their inhabitants.
1 Like
Ahah you meanie! I suggest you to take a look at that Polynesians built I sent, it made me change my mind a bit and I donāt think you can say so easily thatās half baked or that would ruin the game but to each his own!