yeah but you know what? none of those bother me. you know why? balance. and it makes balancing easy.
Of course i will do that, provided i can.
A primitive expression, what shows your deep level. The issue is, that the majority are often stupid, just like you. You annoy people, who want to improve the game in the forum und just insult them, instead of staying to the matter.
You are not even sure of your reasoning, you talk about âmaybeâ. The graphically equilibrium is not given on the map for the Saracenian and British swordsman, who look the same, as there is no visual distinction.
In the contrary, it is the ugliness of Age of empires 2, that there is no some extend adaptation of the unit graphics.
You deviate distinctly from facts, from a graphical view, there are 11 civilizations with their own architecture set, in which case you would have to create less than 11 swordsmen versions and not more than 30.
But that does not change the fact, that the game has major flaws in terms of graphics.
Even the majority can be wrong and that is what they do in this case. The game is significantly worse than the rating and has always been. It is mainly because of the game mechanics, that the game is rated so highly.
The graphics have also weaknesses, which i have already mentioned.
You get ironic, how insulting you are. No, i want to bring this thing into an official DLC, so that the players can enjoy it. But i will not to do it certainly for you.
You are naughty, i do not bungle anyone something in the game.
Of course yes, i will do that, because you want to spoil an improvement in the game.
Yes sure, i will that.
I hope it, that a possible next DLC will come for such people like you, what it would be a very nice extension.
No, my arguments are only well observed. But your envy are very worrying.
In the case of East Asia, I suggest giving Chinese, Koreans, and Vietnamese a new generic East Asian architecture instead of the current Japanese architecture, the Japanese can continue to use the current one, and the Mongols need to have their own architecture as well.
1 Like
The first building is not historically accurate. It is a restoration directed by a Frenchman who designed it according to how he thought African architecture should look. It is not a good example for your point.
if they were unhappy with something they would be complaining about it. and while i do see some who would like optional graphics pack, i wouldnât say they anyway represent the majority. nor do they want them to be baseline.
whose idea of improvement though? just because you think something would be better does not mean others do. so should we change something because 10% of the player base thinks it would be better?
still 11 of them that would have to be memorized then. no thanks. remember to K.I.S.S.
according to you anyway. do you speak for the majority of the playerbase?
again - whose idea of an improvement? just because you view it as an improvement does not mean others will.
no, you just reach for any argument you could - you argue historical accuracy while ignoring all the other historical accuracy flaws.
Disagreeing is one thing, but you will personal and twist facts, what i have to put right.
I never said that like that. They could do it, but not must do.
You put up false numbers, where they have no evidence. 90% of the players will think, that suggestions would be better and and do not mind to posting them.
Age of empires 2 is a real time strategy game with such differences. Realtime strategy is a niche genre, that means for people who like to have such differences and not for people like you, who are out and about in general.
Play something else.
Yes, there is no issue with it.
I speak for all those, who see the mistakes. Whether it is the majority or not does not matter.
They do not have to, but they can.
No, you do that. But it makes zero sense, because you can not deny obvious flaws.
Yes, i am trying to do that.
You are talking about themselves.
no my point was if people were unhappy with the graphics, they would be complaining about them. the fact that they are not leads me to believe that the majority is fine with the graphics as they are.
i wasnât putting up false numbers, i was throwing out a random number. you said yourself that only a few thousand want this.
no itâs not. aoe2 has always been a game about minimal differences between civs. thats why almost everyone has access to the same tech tree. and has minor differences to distinguish them. so having regional units would be a huge deviation from that. regional monks, sails, and kings is one thing. having regional cavalry, archers, and infantry would be a nightmare.
and yet AoE2 has THRIVED despite not having the differences you refer too. whatâs that say?
actually it does matter - if you turn out to be say, 12% of the playerbase and this change upsets the other 88%, youâve just annoyed a huge portion of the playerbase to cater to a mass minority.
no you do. you are the one arguing historical accuracy while ignoring the fact that the game has literally never been historical accuracy.
while ignoring that the game has never been historically accurate, and never claimed to be historically accurate either.
It does not have to be. Most players buy the game without commenting in any way afterwards.
Your listed numbers match the numbers, which you believe, that they are right, even thought you can not prove it.
I never spoke of a few thousand. I said, there are thousands of players, who would like to see it, regarding more suitable architectural styles for the peoples.
Sure, it is so.
Exactly for this reasons, why i want to reassign the graphics to the architecture, because it would not change the game in terms of game mechanics.
That has nothing to do with the fact, that the game should not be historically correct.
Regional peculiarities would be even more historical correctness in this case. But that does not change the fact, that the game itself is and wants to be somewhat historically correct.
It does not have to hinder the success of the game, even successful games can contain errors. Furthermore, game magazines can be wrong and rate games far too well, which is also the case with Age of empires 2. Since the realtime strategy is a complex matter, much more time would have to be invested in the evaluation than with other genres in order to give a fair evaluation.
But it does. For your listed numbers can you not prove something. There is a considerable number of players, who are bothered by the graphics regarding the architecture.
I have nobody annoy, at most you and a few of your arguing colleagues here in the forum, which i do not care either.
You ignore facts and are contentious.
Yes, i do that and as correct as i can.
The game had always a certain historical correctness. Otherwise, it would never have been inserted to the realtime strategy.
the game doesnât have historical accuracy anywhere, let alone graphics. the campaigns arenât accurate, the units arenât accurate, siege isnât accurate, etc.
If it were not so, the developer and the game magazines, would not put the game in realtime strategy.
If it were not for that, you would see graphic architectural styles from significantly different ages, which is not the case.
The developer tried to represent these units as historically as possible.
show me how my statement was in any way false?
1 Like
All you have to do, is read your sentences and you will see your mistakes immediately.
then stop calling me a liar when i speak the truth. here you go. and this is just a short list of things that arenât accurate.
2 Likes
If you lie, i have to defend myself.
You speak the lie.
To stay here is okay 
The graphically inaccurate is obvious and that is why the improvements should be made here first.
then donât call me a liar.
1 Like
But you speak for themselves.
This is a fun topic 
Then i hope, you can enjoy the good comments 
Spoken like a small child wanting to have the last word. Also, this could be considered spamming.
The problem you think is a problem isnât really considered an issue by the vast majority of AoE community. They play the game for the gameplay, not historically accurate architecture. The game was made simple with small variancies to add flavour. Thatâs all it pretty much needs to be good and have civs that feel unique. The game is in the best shape it has ever been with having the largest playerbase in years, I feel like accurate looking base units and ultra-accurate architecture sets for every single civ are not needed.
Also, forums are here to discuss and share opinions. If someone doesnât like your idea, they have the full right not to - and they have the full right to share it with everyone else. Everything you suggest might not be wanted by everyone here, and that is absolutely okay. Everyone values different things.
How about you stop policing who can and cannot respond to your suggestion? This is a forum, people can respond to your idea however they want.
7 Likes
If the guy is constantly insulting me, i have to argue with something, to make him stop. Therefore, you seem like bo be a little kid, who does not want to notice this fact.
Spam are your flag messages and abusive posts, not my factually oriented sentences. The guy, you are talking about, has insulted my suggestion completely inappropriately, you do not have to reprimand me.
You can not prove it, they are just statements. I have enough likes for the topic, apparently there are some people for whom a better adaptation of the architecture would be important.
That has nothing to do with that, that they are against proposals considering architecture.
That i have never to posed in question, you twist facts. He describe my proposed topic in his first post as a can for worms, that is an insult and no longer objective. That i react to it, is only appropriate.
You insult the moderators as police officers, then they should be cautioned for this. That is a evil assumption. There are certain rules in the forum and they should be observed. Moderators are here for such things and if people will attacked personally, they should intervene.
They can do that, but then they have to accept the consequences, if they break the rules. However, there are people in the forum, who are not decent, become personal, for example you too and push down the mood 