Will some historical errors be corrected? Ex: Leviathan in egyptian mythology and Behemoth on Atlantis.
UnlikelyâŚitâs about MythologyâŚthe historicity aspects are more flexible to say at least in this gameâŚ
Behemoth is already confirmed to return and itâs unlikely that the Leviathan is gone either.
I suppose weâll have to wait and see. AoM isnât exactly known for its historical accuracy, though they did rename Petsuchos to Petsobek to be more accurate. This video at the timestamp goes into more detail: https://youtu.be/27-tJxIepmo?si=qTRsMHOSFhP757y6&t=3652
Leviathan is fine as the Egyptian civ also somewhat covers Canaanite regions.
But behemoth given to Atlanteans is odd.
The Behemoth for the Atlanteans is fine, since the Behemoth is from 11000 BCE (shortly before the creation of Atlantis according to AoM and Plato), secondly the Behemoth is based on the Glypthodon and the latter inhabited all the coasts of America since Florida to Colombia and then all of eastern South America and as we know according to AoM, Atlantis had colonies in America that later became the Aztecs, Mayans and Incas that we knowâŚ
1 Like
Itâs unlikely that they will correct any of the preexisting mythological inaccuracies without the addition of new pantheons that need to those units, powers and flavor. If they add Canaanite or Mesopotamian then Egypt will probably need a significant rework since they take a lot from Semitic mythology. Behemoth would need to be taken from the Atlanteans as well. A Persian or a broader Iranian pantheon would also probably see some things taken from Egypt and the Greeks, most notably the manticore.
2 Likes
I doubt they will take the Leviathan out of the Egyptian MU roster since it comes in handy as a naval transport that can fight back. At most, theyâll remodel and rename it as something more suitable to Egypt (maybe something crocodile- or hippo-based?).
1 Like
Maybe not those, but hopefully they wonât consider Gaia and ####### Titans as they did before, because Gaia and ####### were primordial deities.
Edit: why the heck is it blocking ######. Heâs literally in the game!
The Egyptians need to get a proper archer line, not slingers only. And better human units for all the civs.
2 Likes
Correction of historical errors, in mythology?
lol
3 Likes
Just say ###### That should work.
One AoE1 civ is also still censored.
Edit:
Ok every way to write this god is banned.
I guess we have to say Planet 7? Unless you want to copy Îá˝ĎινĎĎ every time.
Does the censoring system in this forum not allow them to set a whitelist???
1 Like
Youâre an aoe2 player, arenât you? XD What would be the purpose of an archer for the Egyptians? Even the Greeks historically used slingers but they do not have them ingame. AOM has asymetric civs, unlike aoe2.
3 Likes
How about we give that Archer a chariot?
Wouldnât that be a cool idea?
2 Likes
What I am saying is that the human units in AOM need more diversity. Thatâs a different matter from âasymmetric civsâ. Surely the AOM player base are not 6 yr oldsâŚ
1 Like
Yeah donât worry, I havenât forgot the chariot archer. Iâm only asking why the Egyptians would need another archer unit.
Iâm not sure I understand what you mean. What does it have to do with age?
The inability to recognise more than a handful of units.
But the thing is, we donât need more units just for the sake of having more units. Have you tried the expanded mod? It adds a ton of new units to each civ but doesnât make the game better, quite the contrary actually. The game is much better with fewer units but more unique. It has nothing to do with the ability or inability to recognize more units.
2 Likes
Letâs say Retold added another archer-type unit for the Egyptians, what purpose would they serve? Counters, range, where they would train from etc. EE tried something similar to what you are saying with the Khopesh Swordsman as a raiding unit but I hardly ever see people use them because there are better alternatives. Convince us with one or more hypothetical units.
Maybe correction of mythologycal errors?
1 Like