Dev dislikes Chinese civ representation. Do you want to remove it from the game?

FE dev said:

Do you want the Chinese civ to be removed from the game?
  • Yes
  • No

0 voters

@RadiatingBlade edit: Topic revised to make it clear that it is about the current Chinese civilization representation in Age of Mythology: The Tale of the Dragon DLC.

I hope they heavily redesign Chinese, because the civ is atrocious, both to play AND look at.

But I would not want them gone.

6 Likes

I think they need rework or at least some polishing. Right now it looks like a poorly designed mod.

To be more specific:
(1) God powers: some designs look very lazy to me. Quite a few are simply “high damage with different visual effects”, while the high-damage god powers for other civs at least have some special traits like auto-targeting or random pathing, etc.
(2) Myth units: re-using existing traits and animations for some units is okay, but the fact that most Chinese myth units are a re-combination of existing traits and animations kind of disappoints me.
(3) Anachronism: alright I know we have Greek armies being mostly Macedonian, and mixture of bronze age and Ptolemaic Egypt, and most Norse units are early medieval, and Atlantean units are purely made up, but Fire Lances? That was already 12th century and definitely beyond the scope of the game, perhaps the most anachronistic in this entire series. Many of the gods were worshipped and popularized much later, like in the Tang and Song Dynasty, which are also beyond antiquity.

3 Likes

I agree. AoM should stay in Antiquity, not go Medieval.

The Chinese buildings and units are also way too plain, when compared to the other civs in teh game. They all look like are “dirty” with layers of mud and dust, even in the HMythic Age.

The Chariots were a nice touch, but the Halberdiers as the ONLY Melee Infantry, while they get 4 Melee Cavalry units, is a silly unbalanced roster.
Almost as if they were making a Scythians or Mongols civ.

I also dislike that they took unit names like Cataphract and Immortal, which firmly locked Persians out of ever being an option.

Chinese History and Mythology are both enormous. There is no need to go Medieval with them, or give them unit names from other civs.

4 Likes

Don’t hate the hater. The Chinese blessed us with so many things. :confused:

I agree, the Chinese units and buildings are rather ugly. I also think all the terrains added by TotD are also incredibly ugly.

What about Aztecs?

4 melee cavalry unit, yes. And the Mounted Archer is also a cavalry, the Turma and Chariot Archer are only archers. Do you want to turn the General to a hero unit? It was hero in the Alpha/Beta version of TOTD.

I don’t think units are ugly, but they haven’t optimized animation lenghts and speed, therefore they look lame. And there are many visual bugs. I definitely like the building and terrain sets.

I think Olmecs would be more in theme, with Greeks and Egyptians.

They already have the Monk, so they do not even need a Hero unit, you can remove the Immortal. Monks already carry Relics and deal extra damage to Myth units anyway, which is a Hero role in this game.

Mounted Archer is fine, but 4 Melee Cav units is way too much. Scout Cavalry should be renamed to Light Cavalry (Scout is already the Greeks scouting unit), Cataphract should be removed, and Chariots should be the Heavy Cavalry unit for the civ.
The General can stay, since it is actually one of the very few new mechanics the Chinese introduce.

Halberdier should be renamed to Daggeraxeman, and a new Infantry unit should be introduced, either Ranged or Melee, but bearing a Shield, and as a counter to Archers. Perhaps the classic AoE Skirmisher?

They are kind of ugly, when compared to the other civs, like they lack flair.
Look at the Greek, Egyptian, Atlantean and Norse units, and compare them to the Chinese ones. The Chinese ones have too much dirty browns and off-whites in their colour scheme, which makes their units blend in, and look dirty. Specially when Greeks and Egyptians already use white a lot in their colour schemes, so perhaps Chinese should go with reds, oranges and yellows.

Then there is the buildings.
Norse buildings look plain, but Chinese buildings look like a Hollywood sepia-washed “historical” movie, on a game that is super bright and colourful as AoM, and that does not look good.

There is much better Asian architecture in AoE2 and AoE3, which only makes it look worse.
Atlantean Mythic Age buildings have really good golden details, that show off the civilization hitting the Age of Myths.
Chinese could have Red Tile roofs, with red and gold ornaments, in the Mythic Age, to make the civ actually look more “mythical” at that stage.

image

or

image

or even green

image

2 Likes

We don’t know much about their mythologies, but you are right. Devs want to choose something popular probably.

AOE3 architecture is better for sure, AOE3 is a masterpiece visually, but you have to compere it to the existing architecture sets of AOM.

I really don’t like when a building uses much player color, like Fuxi’s Wonder.

Mayans, then, which would also fit the Classical Era theme.

I did, it looks bad when compared to all others, even Norse, which was already the most bland before Chinese, is still better.

I agree, but buildings should still be colourful, just not with player colour.
As it is right now, Chinese buildings look bad.

I disagree that they should be completely left out but instead re-design them to be at the same level as the rest civs.

But I hope more than anything that they instead give us AoM 2 with all the current civs + adding new ones etc. I feel a DE would kinda feel outdated in today’s gaming.

1 Like

On the contrary. In this day and age, DEs sell better than new games.

Also, any AoM 2, would never have all the old AoM civs, at least at release, and would fail because of it.

AoE4 is already another AoE2, and people are not interested because it will launch with 8 civs, compared to AoE2 DE’s 37.

Aztecs in aom

1 Like

An official expansion like this would turn the PEGI rate of the game from 12 to 16. :grinning: :grinning:

You have a point,maybe remove the killing graphics.

1 Like

AOE3 DE already has 16 PEGI rate because of the new fancy fire effects, where units burn to death. :rofl: The original AOE3 had 12 PEGI rate.

I see your point but if you ask me I don’t see it as a “failure” if they add the current civilizations from the first game, while also include new ones as well. I see it as a win for us the fans.

People love AoM and when people think about that game, they expect the Greeks, Egypts & Norse to be playable as well as other civilizations in a sequel.

Regarding the AoE4 and which civilizations they will include it’s another story as I never felt all of the civilizations in AoE2 to be unique enough to be a part of the game, felt too much the same apart from a special unit and their team perk.

They’ve to choose carefully which out of all the civilizations to take into AoE4 as well as introducing new ones so people have both familiar civilizations & new ones to explore for the first time = win.

All in all I don’t see it as a failure if they bring back the old civilizations for AoM in AoM2 while also introducing a new ones to play, I think the majority of the fans will be happy to have something they feel comfortable with and know while also explore something new. Keep in mind that even though the old civilizations come back they too will be re-worked probably and feel a bit different than from the first game.

Just my thoughts…

1 Like

Ok, political correction has been happened, but all votes have been lost. Please, vote again!

Removing Chinese will break my maps - it should be kept as I (And prob others) use the assets even if it is no longer a proper playable civ.

Incorrect, the General has no basis in the alpha/beta, beyond repurposing the flag, the closest it had was the generic one-off heroes that waved a flag around to call down godpowers, which Chinese Generals have nothing to do with (though the CCP thinks otherwise…lol)

1 Like