Yes, it does have a resemblance to the Chasqui from AoE 3…
Yes, let’s say that with the abandonment of AoE 3 they decided to “jump the shark” with AoE 2 and are slowly turning it into AoM or a soft AoE 4…
At this rate, they’ll probably do a soft port of AoE 3 first…
Yes, in 2019 the developers asked Disney if they could do a remaster of Star Wars GB like the 2DE for 2021 for the 20th anniversary, but Disney said no (maybe because EA still had the license for the games)… now we’ll have to wait until this year to see if they announce a Star Wars GB DE or if they’ll postpone it until 2031…
Changes to Incas (even if not necessarily the ones we’re getting) have been requested for ages the same way the Indian split was, I think making them opt-in would go against the point of them.
In fact I find it weird that Aztecs and Maya didn’t also get the slinger now that it’s regional (it can’t be because it looks Inca, since nobody complained when Incas got eagles and nobody is complaining now that Tupis are getting slingers).
what i mean is “unless a massive majority of people are asking for changes, big changes shouldn’t be pushed out”, even then they should be optional. This isn’t a live service game, the devs should provide an option to revert to old datasets
(btw, by the looks of it the changes to the Inca will be limited to a change in architecture, and a new economic building. For the record, that’s the kind of small tweak I’m not opposed to)
New architecture, champi warriors as a scout unit (I suspect they’ll replace eagle warriors), settlements, new siege ship. Looks like more than a few changes, but the core of the civ should remain the same (just like hindustanis retained the core of the indians civ).
I’m curious if settlements will be replacing anything (and if so, what).
new architecture doesn’t affect gameplay, so i don’t really care.
I suspect the champi warrior will be very similar to the eagle line (maybe +1 attack for -1 melee armor or something along those lines), if not just a reskin.
The siege ship I’d view in light of the bigger water rework, but also seems harmless, considering how few people play water maps and how rarely those games go to a state where siege ships are relevant.
Overall I’m happy with this rework, if a rework as big as the one for Indians->Hindustanis had happened to Inca I wouldn’t be happy.
I have no proof for this, but I’m pretty sure that settlements will replace lumber camps and mining camps (and probably also mills). The reason i say this: we don’t see any of them in the screenshots, but we do see a settlement next to trees being chopped, next to gold being mined, and surrounded by farms.
If so, I guess this means you have to build either a barracks or dock before advancing to Feudal Age. That sounds potentially like a disadvantage, but I suppose the advantages of the settlement will either balance or outweigh it.
I am curious how much these settlements will cost. it says they are
buildings that support population and serve as dropsites for all resources
so they will probably cost as much as a lumbercamp and a house combined? 125 wood? will the inca bonus for “houses provide 10 population” also apply to the settlements? otherwise this might actually be a minor nerf.
should it cost more than 150 wood it will seriously mess with build orders
Perhaps the same as the Town Center…that’s how it is in AoM at least…if it doesn’t produce villagers, at least it would cost half as much as a Town Center…