Concepts: Armenians and Georgians

Not completely, but they do have clear historical inspiration and justification behind their bonuses, and they tend to represent multiple aspects of the culture. This guy’s ideas, while valid, don’t feel like a generic Armenian civ because he took one aspect of their history, their involvement with the Crusaders, and ran with it. I think that’s unnecessarily limiting.

I want to feel like I’m actually playing as a culture, and not just a civilization inspired by a culture. My favorite civilization, the Khmer, is my favorite precisely BECAUSE it feels like I’m controlling the Khmer Empire. Having also done extensive research into the Khmer Empire back in the day, I know what it’s like, and the Khmer civ successfully pulls off that vibe. Point is, all civilizations should feel as real as the Khmer feel to me, which is why I always make sure to have tons of research poured in before I try to work on concepts. My worst civ ideas are ones without a lot of research done.

1 Like

This is the main reason his design is better than yours.

But I have done a ton of research. Are you saying I’m just overthinking it? And no, it isn’t better, because it isn’t Armenia.

Okay, that’s a bit harsh, but it all comes down to our differing philosophies. I play the game for its history, not its mechanics, and that’s easily reflected in my designs.

Why are you responding to yourself?

I do that sometimes. I figured it was better than an edit.

I’m more than a little on the verge of insanity.

I’m sorry, but if that’s true, then you shouldn’t be designing the mechanics of civs (I mean, you still can, but don’t expect anyone to like them or take them seriously)

I also enjoy the historical aspect of the game, but gameplay comes first, this is a game, not a documentary, just look at how boring the AoEIV campaigns are because they aim to be as historical as possible

The thing is, I still appreciate the gameplay of AoE2 and consider it a priority, but I’m not going to design an entirely original civ if it has no basis for being that way historically at all. Balance is important, but so is logic.

For sure, but there has to be a balance between history and gameplay, UpmostRook’s design is also inspired by history (he has a paragraph about it just under the title of the civ) but he prioritized gameplay, which is important since this is a game we are talking about

Again, historical accuracy to an extent is welcome and needed (Otherwise it wouldn’t be a historical game) but civilizations need to be well balanced and fun to play above all, and no offence, but UpmostRook’s version sounds more balanced and fun to play than yours

I disagree - I wouldn’t play his version because it doesn’t make any sense at all. If it doesn’t make sense, I don’t have fun, regardless of balance.

How is it more balanced, anyway? It just seems kinda uninspired.

@Apocalypso4826 you may not be spamming or reaching Vinifrss levels (not yet) but you kinda drown out threads like these. If you’re going to spam and be rude because nobody followed your ideas then maybe just… take a breath and think over things a little. There are other civ concepts people want to talk about stop making it about yours!

This is why I don’t look at other people’s ideas for the same thing, because I feel like it’s a competition.

I feel the Armenians are fine. They are not Gothy.
Siege would be their main power, and infantry and castle age monk would be good assistants.

Cavalry are Franks’ main power, and infantry and strong eco are good assistants.
Franks have bonuses to make Paladins already great enough, but there is still Chivalry.
Many example like this.

For reference.

While making Siege Towers and Rams only cost 200 wood, maybe it also makes Scorpions have the ballistic effect?

This works.

After all, it’s a bonus to help them in the early game on open maps, but doesn’t enhance the closed map games they’re supposed to be strong.

If this bonus doesn’t help this need well, we can keep it and add another bonus to make up the shortfall.

I am very sorry to everyone for being so hostile towards @UpmostRook9474’s ideas. I was rude, childish, and immature, and I realize now that my ideas aren’t as good as I thought, and that his ideas have some merit. I was too blinded by my understandable bias towards my own ideas that I couldn’t see it.

I always felt my civ ideas lacked soul, even though they were historically accurate, and people’s feedback just confirmed it.

1 Like

Yeah, go for it!

That’s an interesting video, I didn’t know that about Armenians. Perhaps Ballistics for Scorps.

Trash-Rams are a GREAT idea, obviously it cant be Siege Ram, and also the civ that will have this feature must lacks Halbs, to prevent a way too simplistic of a one-trick-pony composition of just going Halbs Rams paying no gold yet forcing the enemy to use gold to counter it (Champs for example).

We want Armenians to have Halbs, Infantry civs need Halbs to acompany their UU.

Will be good as a DLC with rename/rework Slav to Rus :slight_smile:

So I consider a new one to company with it.
Maybe all techs (excluding advancing ages, castle techs and monastery techs) cost -50% gold.

Btw I’d like to add a new effect to Tsikhe, barrack units and archery range units can be trained at Towers. I think it could make this UT more flexible and give an interesting strategy to their late game tower rush.

I remember a rumor that there was a big DLC with Armenians, Georgians, Vlachs, and Russ renamed from Slavs. If the dev want to finish Europe with a big DLC like the last one, it will be fine.

Btw, about the Vlachs, I had putted forward an idea about “Țintaşi”, the Vlach marksmen, as their UU before.
Low HP glass cannon, able to be a charged shot much like the coustillier. On the other hand, for reflecting the ambush, the attack from Țintaşi may not show their location automatically if they are out of your LoS.
Some people always think that the UU of the Vlachs/Wallachians has to be cavalry, which makes me find it boring. There are only 5 foot archer UUs in the game, I hope there could be more.

Why not an impaler? The big stabbing Vlad namesake has to have a lot of potential.

It is the soldiers who fight on the battlefield, not the executioners.

Ouch, Sicilians are mad. I wouldn’t ruin the uniqueness of Donjons tbh.

That’s interesting, 50% might be too much (?)