they were probably refering to the part where you told her that she should watch her words or else she might get banned or suspended. it was not for you to make that statement, but for you to report to the mods and let them judge.
Saying that when you are not a mod makes the mods and the devs look bad since it makes it look like you are hiding behind them when you are not their representative. They can defend themselves if they want to, its up for them to decide.
And if you haven’t seen the language on this forum, her language is still in the average bound of what happens here, pro players have had much harsher words. Could people have use less harsh words, sure but the offence is for them to decide
Well insulting creators of the game by branding their work, that for well over a decade was well-regarded among the fans and didn’t cause any controversy, as ‘bullshit’ seem to be something that on a forum with rules would lead to consequences.
When one sees dark clouds, it’s sensible to say out loud ‘rain is coming’.
There is nothing unusual in that, and I don’t see a reason why I should report that post- unlike some people, I don’t want to remove things I disagree with, when I’m replying to them especially.
But in modern generations and broader culture across the sea, censorship is an easy way out to solve most things and where it leads- everyone can see.
Just the fact that there is mechanics of hiding posts because few people can tag it because they don’t like the content is mindblowing and in opposite to the spirit of a public forum.
Pointing out that public insults might lead to consequences is not ‘hiding behind moderation’.
Of course it’s up to them to decide, I didn’t say anything about it and was speaking about that user’s way of conducting discussion.
Yes, and I don’t have issues because of profanities, but because of that user’s judgment about content in this game. Which is night and day compared to AoE 1, Online, and IV combined, when it comes to putting as much meat on the bone as possible.
I didn’t use any harsh words either, even less so, and my lengthy post was removed.
All it takes is a few flags, because somebody disagrees with something.
Merit and substantive value is not up to public voting, especially in this way.
But you can open any given thread and find handfuls of completely worthless posts, fluff, spam, flaming etc. and nobody is doing anything with it.
Writing paragraphs about user experience, game design, accessibility etc can be disregarded in a moment, just to make more room for things like :
When it comes to users browsing hub for 3DE regularly, sadly there’s only a small group, so in the end that’s not a very fruitful ground to trying to talk sense about the perception of this game and pleas vocalized by some of the people here- that are an extremely small fraction of customers that decided to give 3DE a try.
There are 100 ways to approach the subject of improving and expanding the game, and not only is expansion of nomenclature and terminology isn’t among the best ones but is a questionable direction that poses a real risk of cementing some barriers players perceive, like making this game less approachable, easy to learn, easy to adjust to when migrating from much simpler strategy games.
The direction itself is not wrong and I even said it’s fine to have an expanded description and historical full name in the help window-tooltips, but this is mostly fan service for people knowledgeable about a particular native tribe, that are already part of history buffs group - so a fraction of a fraction. Is there a value in that? Sure. But minimal compared to improvement of the AI, introduction of proper campaigns, attractive co-op modes with leaderboards and rewards etc.
It helps, but very, very few, and without solving the big demands- it’s a waste of opportunity and nail to the coffin of popularity of 3DE. This game isn’t getting younger, and still after 18 years I can’t recommend it as great classic single-player value. Optional native Indian horse unit will have a longer name? Awesome.
When holding the well-being of the game as a whole as the highest goal- it doesn’t matter, at all. 3DE wasn’t and still isn’t in a position where we can lay back and iron out inaccuracies. New civs might be coming, but if they’re not- devs might only have resources for these little things, sure. But I’d rather remain more hopeful that one day campaign offering side of AoE III will cease to be laughably poor.
It is quite evident that I have not made the decision to delete the thread because of his criticism, but because of what you answer, hence why he wants to turn the issue around is another story.
I also deleted a post from her and dealt with her messages about calling those who may criticize her speech racist. Racism is a scourge that seriously violates the forum rules and people have to be careful when accusing someone in particular.
Northern Musketeer (modeled after the Narodnoe Opolcheniye)
Trabant (based on the Trabant Foot Guards)
…are all units based specifically on European (or near-European) history, and these are just a few of the infantry units I grabbed from an infantry unit list.
Meanwhile, the North Americans north of the Rio Grande get…
As the sole unit in this area more than three times the size of Europe that is based on the history of the people there.
“This isn’t a history book,” then why are the Europeans so heavily steeped in history and designed on references? Why do the Natives get “Axe Rider” when there’s basically no historical precedent for something like that? Why do we get “Tomahawk” as a ranged unit when it’s a melee weapon the Haudenosaunee weren’t even using in large numbers in this time period? Why are the Tashunke Prowlers (which isn’t even proper Lakota, btw) even a unit at all - the name just roughly means “Horse Prowler”? Where is the historical precedent for that?
You’re happy to see the Europeans get history but object to the idea of the Natives getting the same treatment?
In fairness, Dog Men also were specifically taught and organized to fight as supportive infantrymen, not cavalry units. This is just another weird ########### that the Devs created by refusing to do basic research before they created these units.
As for the rest of what you’re saying… there’s no point in responding. Arguing against something is stupid as hell. Argue for something here; Arguing against just makes ### # #### for the sake of ##### # ##### and it’s not like someone else getting something useful they want is going to take away from what you get, and it could improve your own gameplay in ways you didn’t even think about.
(Also, “Nation + type” is irrelevant, you’ve got units like the Janissary, the Fusilier, and the Highlander who do none of this and somehow still manage to be understood.)
Why is there so much resistance to someone trying to push for a sliver of accuracy in regards to North American civs / minor native civs?
The OP has given full, justified and descriptive first post backed with knowledge on the subject matter
It all boils down to the above question. The answer is no, not at all.
The Devs have done a fantastic job of going back to the source material for a number of other civs, renamed Units and Shipments to more historical terms and have recently have even make some really quite neat touches to their aesthetics. They totally didn’t need to, but they had - and in addition, those changes based on some form of historically accuracy - not made up ‘cos it’s a game’. This hasn’t ruined the game - the mechanics are the same generally - it’s just a nice touch!
With this in mind, why not take this to the native American civs? I guess it would take far more research and time to implement proper naming as I’m guessing most of the Devs, not having go-to knowledge of North American societies (unlike knowing what typical European military units may look/be refered to as), would want to irr on the side of caution as there’s probably quite a bit to change.
I’d love if the Devs could take a look at essentially minor changes when they can - I’m all in favor of representing civs as best as they can, without destroying gameplay… which name/portraits don’t.
the term “dog soldier” existed in the game before the cheyenne minor native even exist in the game and applied to the lakota native and was used through out tad for a heavy cav unit so if the name is just off to you, congrats we were already there, it just got applied to the wrong unit.
I don’t have any knowledge about Lakota military units but if your request is to adjust their names to meet historical ones - of course it is 100% valid request.
It is just tiny bit of work for devs. If new name is readable and not too long, it can be switched.
The basic list of Akicita I know for the Oglala (I am Oglala and my sources are all Oglala) are as follows:
The Crow Riders aspired to be the first on the battlefield and the last to leave - This was a rather unique position, as they acted as both the vanguard and the rear guard, and their main method of doing so *seems* to have been by favoring the bow and the rifle. They (to the shock of absolutely nobody) wore crow feather adornments and acted as swift scouts during the winter times, both for new camps and for hunts.
Stronghearts were among the most *noble* of the Akicita, as one of their main purposes was also to feed the people in the band who could not feed themselves, whether hunting for the elders, the wounded, or the inexperienced. They aspired for emotional and physical self-control and to volunteer whenever and wherever they could to help the tribe overall. They are one of two Akicita known for wearing the buffalo horn headdress.
Known as the most elite of the Oglala, the Kitfox were a purely Oglala Akicita and could be found nowhere else. The Kitfox were well-known for their the buffalo horn headdresses, which is something the game did fix and I appreciate it. From a technical standpoint, the Kitfox can be regarded as a more elite Oglala version of the Stronghearts, as they shared duties, moral goals, and wore the same headdresses.
(I find it fitting that the game includes these - of all the tribes of Lakota, the Oglala were often regarded as the most warlike and “crazy” of the Seven Lakota tribes. Their inclusion implies the Lakota in the game are prominently, and possibly solely, the Oglala.)
The closest thing to a berserker among the Lakota, the War Badgers were reckless and fearless in battle. They were chosen when they had dreamed of badgers. It was often noted that their lances would be crooked and wrapped in otter fur, and that they would embed shards of glass into the otter fur to blind and lacerate their enemies, and (one source noted this, and that was my uncle) that they would sometimes do the same to their war clubs.
The veteran Akicita, but not as old as the next one on the list, the White Marked were made up of older warriors whose headdresses would reach the ground. The Lakota Warchief would most likely be a member of this society.
These are *the* oldest warriors in the tribe, and usually long past their fighting days. These are the old men and women whose battle and war insight and wisdom is invaluable, but no longer have the bodies to be on the front line. They are called the Silent Eaters because their Akicita had no communal tipi to gather in anymore, and rather they would pick a ######## #### and gather there when times needed... or when they wanted to gather and gossip and share a meal.
To contrast the last two, the Bare Lance Akicita is made up of young warriors who have yet to earn any real accomplishments in battle - in Native terms, "Bare" is used in the same manner that "Green" is used, to indicate new and untested soldiers.
While this is an incomplete list, it is, I believe, the most prominent Akicita relevant to the game.
Should it become relevant, there’s a whole section of Dreamers, like the Heyoka, that have their own unique identities that could become relevant, and tend towards more mystical aspects of the culture. On the other hand, there are also the Associations, like the Quill Workers or the Owns-Alone, or the Shield-Bearers, all of which are exclusively for women and tend towards more the more industrial and economic aspects of the culture.
Im usually hesitant to introduce mechanics just for the sake of historical reasons, but as we saw with aztec slingers renaming some units at worse takes a few times to adjust to and at best exposes more people to the cultures they play. It takes just a few lines of text and its not like "wakina"rifle is intuitive to english speakers anyways.
A few lines of text changes is minimal dev time spent, doesnt change balance or mechanics for the sake of it, and encourages people to learn and intereact with real history. It is a pretty low risk ask imho. Out of all the forum…“dreams” people have for civs this one seems realistic enough.
To respond to the original topic, Dog Soldier sounds 100 times cooler than Dog Man, but both are better than Cheyenne Rider.
It would be a huge improvement to rename at least the most unique Lakota units. Tokala Soldier → Kitfox Soldier and Tashunke Prowler → War Badger are not only more historical, they’re also way better names.
For some of the more generic units like Axe Riders and Bow Riders I think it would be okay to keep them generic so that they could be shared with new civs like Comanche or Cree. Just do something akin to a royal guard upgrade to change their names like Bow Rider → Crow Rider.
Some of the worst named units are the generic shared ones like “Healer” and “Warrior”.
There was absolutely no reason to rename Medicine Men to something so vague. Yes they may have a role more to do with community and spiritual matters than healing, but that’s also the case for every other healing unit other than Surgeons.
Silent Eaters would be a good upgrade/replacement for Lakota Warriors. Under normal circumstances they’re too old to go to battle, but they could participate in a last ditch defense. Maybe there’s also a better generic name for this unit.
What’s your opinion on using the term “Brave” for some of the more generic units? Some people try to claim it’s pejorative but I’ve never seen it used in a negative way. Generally it has connotations of admiration for their courage and at worst it’s a bit of a generalization used in ignorance.
A “Brave” could serve as a generic archer unit for all the North American natives. It’s not like Cetan Bowman (Hawk Bowman) or Aenna (Bow) are stellar names to begin with.
Yeah, I think you can achieve a better representation of the Lakota civ just by adding a couple of renamings and some few texture changes, like giving some crow feather adornments to the Bow Riders. I think a couple of them can simply be Cards (p.e. White Marked can be a Card that increases the range of the Warchief’s aura and allow him to trickle XP, maybe accompanied by a visual change) and one or two can be Home City exclusive units, like the Sipahi, or a “replacement” for a unit after you send a Card, like the Chevauleger (this would be great for the War Badgers: they could replace the Club Warriors as a unit with 20% less Hp, but with a higher movement speed of 5.75 and 100% more melee attack - just an idea).
I’m never going to agree with just renaming and redecorating the Lakota units as they are now - I firmly believe the entire civ needs a rehaul from the ground up to remove the Plaza, farms, and estates and rebalance around a new “gimmick” - in this case, giving the Hauds + Lakota a shared set of generic units that both civs can send cards for to unlock their own variants of those units or have Royal Guard upgrades for them is the better approach.
Something like this →
Bare Bow Archer (Shared by Lakota + Hauds)
Osage Archer (Lakota Royal Guard upgrade)
Hawk Archer (Haudenosaunee Carded Upgrade)
It’s worth noting that, as far as I can tell, the Haudenosaunee names for their warrior groups would have simply been the name of the Clan they were in, which would be one of nine different names. Hawk is one of these.
On the other hand, all of the Lakota societies are cavalry, with the sole exception being the Kitfox, who should be updated to have a Mounted/Dismounted variety. Their mounted would remain largely the same, but the dismounted should gain the ability to absorb damage for allies and make them strong spearmen, with bonuses into cavalry units.
I support this because calling it cheyenne dog man, dog man rider, or just dog man is easier to convey than cheyenne rider (which could mean anything that’s on a horse).
It’s going to make easier to communicate when using voice chat.
I absolutely love all the suggestions from @AnaWinters and learning this sort of history is fascinating to me! I’m especially interested in what you were saying regarding a rework of the Native civs to remove plaza and farms and things and bring in a new gimmick - having Native cisv that play completely differently from the old world civs would be fascinating. You could create something seriously atmosphereic and unique that would also be fun to play and have enough verisimilitude to get people interested in the real history.
Pure speculation but I wonder if the reason changes like this seem so hard for the devs to do is because anything touching the Native civs has to go through internal red tape? I imagine no higher ups will care if a random dev wanted to push through yet another euro musketeer, but as soon as someone wants to work on the Native civs they get held up by advisory committees and reviews and things. I assume the stuff they talked about right at launch with their cultural advisors hasn’t gone away.
In terms of making the Hauds + Lakota more unique and their own cultural region, I would ideally like the Farm + Estate to be combined into a single building that collects Food + Wood, with the big button of it allowing for the collection of Coin. The Hauds would start with one while the Lakota would lack access to it without Mniconjou Support - their name “Plants By The Water,” so it makes sense that the Lakota would require support from them before they can make this building.
Otherwise, further explaining the concept would require a new post on its own.
Balance wise this is a horrible idea. You cant lock food (most used resource) infinite gathering after a card. It can be a huge buff to farming card or advanced farm like card, but not an unlock one.
The best example would be black forest map, where there is no hunting.