Militia has a mace/club,Konnik has a flail which is a different weapon.Jan zizka has a proper mace.
Jaguar warrior’s Macuahuitl is also a type of club.
not anti-ethical, antithetical. different word, different meaning.
- purely technical issues. at some point HD won’t be compatible with modern systems
- engine issues: aoe2HD doesn’t even let you choose your own resolution
- improved multiplayer. servers reduce ping in online play significantly. they should also be able to resolve desyncs etc better than p2p games, no idea why that isn’t happening.
- gameplay improvements: I am still hoping for larger lobbies (10 players and more), they already added new game modes (empire wars, battle royal, etc), and they promised new campaigns.
Here is an interview about what they were actually planning to add: The old and new in Age of Empires 2: Definitive Edition: "we're done adding civs"
(it doesn’t have a date, but they are referring to DE releasing “this autumn” so I’m assuming it was some time in 2019)
Jaguar warrior?
Macuahuitl is a trype of sword right.
oh, i think you are right. i just assumed it was a club, based on its shape and the sound it makes
I think its somewhere in between a club and sword,you have sharp bits that cut but you use brute force like swinging a bat.good catch btw.
1 Like
My bad, I thought you misspelled it.
Still, what constitute the game’s design has already change, you could argue against the implementation of the snare, but, let me ask you, are you against the regional skins?
The original Kamayoq is a title, not to be confused with the spearmen line, acording to wikipedia the Pukara Kamayoq is the name for the soldier with a lance, but, that’s just a spearman, so, no need to change that
Not even the Chasqui is a regional unit, and moreover, is not a fighter is a messenger
yes, it’s awful. has no place in aoe2. the melee snaring in aoe3 is probably what bothers me most in that game.
I can only decide on that once I see what they look like. I think they can look good or bad. If implemented, it should be done as an option, so people who don’t like them can disable them.
This didn’t answer my question at all actually.
I do want to see lobbies with more possible players though.
your question was
how is what i wrote not an answer? the whole point of a remake is to “make it with the old one in mind”
Ah, yes, you’re right… well then, it could be a unique improvement to the Inca militia line…
Well, it was an option, but I’m ruling it out as a last resort…
I didn’t ask what were the limitations of the old engine, I asked why DE would have to pretend to have the same limitations.
So, you have no problem with all MAA from all civilizations looking like a medieval english MAA?
Are you against regional monks?, they should be given the option to disable them by your logic
And castles too, I suposse
firstly that’s not what you asked. But I’ll answer anyway: I don’t think aoe2DE should have the same limitations as aoe2hd. it should allow for more players, it should allow for higher resolutions, zooming, multiplayer with dedicated servers etc.
How is not obvious that this is my stance though?
nope. it’s a game. units are abstractions. this is not a simulation. i am also fine with a single villager being able to build an entire castle by themselves.
I like regional monks in campaigns, i prefer readability when playing multiplayer. So
I’d prefer if there were options for that, yes. how are more options ever a bad thing? they also give you the option to have smaller trees in the game, and the option to show range indicators
If the devs gave us 3 options for what they’ll implement
A) get regional skins, everyone has to use them
B) get regional skins, you can enable/disable them as you like
C) get no regional skins
surely everyone would pick option B. Why would anyone pick anything else? Let people play the game how they like it.
2 Likes
It IS what I asked. You’re the one who misinterpreted.
I agree. I’d keep the regional skins always active, personally.
no you asked:
those are different questions. Also the rephrased question “why would DE have to pretend to have the same limitations” is dishonest, as that’s not something I ever claimed, nor should it.
This was the important part
And this is what I was talking about in the occasion
well, as I answered in the first post: the HD engine seems to limited in several aspects (so a new engine seems to have been necessary)
Well, it is what it sounded like. On that note, why do you get mad when I misunderstand you?
On that regard, would you be against a rework on the buidings?, like, lets say, a certain number of villagers are required to build a stable, barracks, house, castle, etc, would that make them funnier?, wouldn’t that open oportunities to new strategies?
Finally something to be on the same page with
Don’t call me Shirley
yes, I would be against a rework that requires multiple villagers to build certain buildings. this would drastically change how the game works. I think it could be an interesting idea for a different game though.
11 Roger.