This is why I said this:
We need more ranked game modes so more people can enjoy ranked.
Not sure. Too many modes and you split people up and itās less likely to get a fair game.
We literally only have 2 modes that actually sees play these days; 1v1 random map and team random map. No one plays empire wars.
I ban all the new civs for a reason in my games. Only AoK and AoC civs are allowed, and Iād be happy if this option existed in ranked.
Iām a Turk main, and I donāt want to deal with castle age tanks, hand scorpions, super heroes, 310 HP ballista elephants, trample damage dealing trashes, monk resistant elephants or similarly overpowered absurdities.
My civ was not designed in 1999 with these kinds of units in mind.
Iāve always been neutral on the new civ stuff. (I donāt mind the extra content but, I never bought any of it either. Mainly because the game is required to have the units/stuff in the editor regardless if you own the content or not. I still get to test them out in the editor a little. Just not the civilization.)
However, I will admit, some things about it does annoy me. (Iāve said it many times soā¦) The main one being it breaks data mods every time something new comes out. (They have to be updated each time and it sucks.)
Another thing I will mention is something I found out during messing around with data mods. The more civs you add to the game, the worse/bigger the filesize becomes. (Drastically.) So, I do recommend they do stop at some point. (Maybe 64? That is a nice good computer number.)
Finally, I will mention, AI scriptingā¦ Every time some new civ strategy comes up, new unit, etc, happens, this may effect the overall AI design somewhat. (depending on how specific/advanced it is of course.) Thankfully, itās just āadding ontoā it but, even still, that can still be a lot of workā¦
But, in the end, I still donāt really care either way. shrugs
edit: As for a banning sytem, I dunno about thatā¦ But, I donāt mind per say if it was an option I guessā¦ shrugs
Thatās not a good take. Everyone starts off as a casual but start trying hard when they feel its worth the shot. Its worth the shot when civ balance gets better. Going forward the level to which some civs sre broken in some settings should come down and not support gimmicks for fun. Gimmicks like flemish, obsidian should just be a way of luring casuals into the game for fun with the hope theyād stay even after its taken away.
Itās just reality. You will always get people like that.
1 Like
Before you start labelling people as racist, maybe take into account that he hasnāt heard of the civs before. Iād argue not many people have in the west, in Asia itās different as the civs originated from there. They probably havenāt heard of Goths in Asia.
I donāt think ignorance is a good excuse when OP is being completely dismissive of their history and culture as well as suggesting that they do not matter as much as Eurocentric civs and hence deserve to be banned.
If this was about the 3K Civs I would get it, since a lot of people are mad about that. But a civ being banned should NOT take āwell I donāt know who they are, so theyāre irrelevantā as a talking point.
5 Likes
Are you going to make an argument or are you going to just cry about it
I mean thatās a pretty good argument.
Going āwah, wah, I donāt know the people who founded the last chinese dynasty, why should I careā kinda deflates the rest of the point.
1 Like
Thereās a difference between being dismissal of something or just being ignorant about it. I see your point though, no civs should be banned from being in the game unless thereās a modern controversy linked to them. Or if there governments are stopping such historical events from being told.
I share your frustration but I think civ bans would make the problem worse. If as you say they offer 2 bans per player, thatās 2 civs you donāt have to play against, but your opponent could also ban any 2, meaning you need to be comfortable playing 2 more civs.