Hi all - I figure that it may be worth establishing a thread for:
Wishlist Models or Skins for other Unique units or buildings that may have been left out
Suggestions for new graphics regarding units/buildings that are not necessarily Unique but have different stats to other standard units (i.e. the previous Russian Musketeer)
Skins/models for shipment-enabled changes to unit/buildings.
Suggestions for more era-appropriate unit skins
Name changes for any unit where it may not seem quite right (incorrect name / better-fitting name)
Basically anything missing graphically from the unique units/buildings or would-be unique buildings, with justification!
This really is off the back of all the amazing attention to detail and is purely wishlist-style - no begging and and nothing gameplay-related!
Besteiro upgrade - this one has been mentioned elsewhere - basically it upgrades to an (awesome) Napoleonics era uniform but still has the 16th century crossbow. Iād love to see this Royal Guard upgrade return to a more realistic 16th look, whether armoured and wearing a morion helmet or unarmoured with a broad-brimmed hat and nice looking threads from the late 1500s. The wonderful, current upgrade skin looks like a prime āunit replacementā shipment kind of thing, but thatās not for hereā¦
Feitorias - a shipment that makes the Ports Town Center unique via itās resource trickles - that ticks the box for a unit or building that does something āextraā stat-wise compared to the standard! Iād love to see renamed Town Centers with their model to look like a trading/warehouse/factory amalgamation with the same silhouette of a TC.
Wrong units for Asian civs now need to be corrected, the game has changed enough for European civs recently. Obviously most of the players in this game are in Asia, especially China, and they have to endure so many historical mistakes. I donāt think itās fair.
I want the Incas to have a unique look when they send the age 4 revolt card for their infantry.
Also i want Spanish War dogs to have a small armor.
I made post before of cards that make units better.
Brits grenadiers turn into royal guards if all their cards are sent. Because they have the best grenadier in the game along with Sweden(visually)
As well as Russian Unicorn mortars and Portuguese mortars(if appropriate cards are sent) This is to make the player aware that the unit hits harder or hits farther.
This is quite a popular civ for skin and name changes.
I wish the various codexs were used for reference for unit types - they surprisingly easy to follow!
I donāt know where to start with Aztecs - the use of āKnightsā? They had Noble Warriors, backed up by commoners and had a ranking system. There were no Arrow Knights, and generally bows and slings were for commoners, whilst Macuahuitl could only be used if you had captured at least one enemy soldier and nobles generally used atlatl for their ranged weaponry.
Skulls Knights should Cuachic (graphic and name change) and Otontin are way-off - their name is for the second highest ranked noble warriors and their in-game upgrades model is that of a Papalotl (2- captive rank noble). They should just be Yaoquizqueh (commoner) slingers, especially as they are trained at the war hut and not the noble hut.
Totally! Iāve also mentionned the coyote runner who makes zero sense. The model should be kept either for a warrior priest upgrade or as default skin.
I have always felt that all the changes to make the image of the units in the game more in line with history are very meaningful, which can not only enhance the immersion of the game for players, but also enhance the entertainment and attract new players.
Many Chinese history enthusiasts, after coming into contact with the Chinese civilization in Empire III, will feel a very strange, familiar and strange feeling, because there are many military units which make people who know Chinese culture feel very strange.
I think developers have also paid attention to the messages left by Chinese players on steam, and from time to time there are complaints about the design of Chinese units.
Of course, itās not just China, but at present, China in the game may be one of the civilizations with the most stereotypes and historico errors.
I think it is better to make some fine-tuning on the existing basis than to deduce and redo it. This is what I have been calling for in the forum. The simplest way is to redesign the visual effect for the unit, because as far as my personal experience is concerned, it is much easier to redesign the unit visually than to rebuild it as a whole.
I think developers will reworks such as the Mountain Splitter, General Cannon, Shield Car, Archer, and Gun Lift,but,Completely replacing fictional and Hongyi-po for Chinese units is necessary
Would your prefer an Imperial appearance that is at their height of use or a āreimaginingā using 19th century aesthetics?
For example, the Portuguese Besteiro gets reimagined as a crossbowman in Napoleonic-era uniforms instead of appearing in uniforms linked to āits eraā, and as a counterpoint, the German Dopplesoldner Imperial upgrade retains its period of uniform.
Imo rodelero and lancers should be reimagined into āsoldados de cueraā which in fact is pretty much their evolution in the new world. Let them get rid of their heavy armors and look modern.
This makes a lot of sense - armour started to get dropped and heavy jerkins were used.
This is also what Iād like for British Longbowmen too - their Imperial look shouldnāt feature armour - it should just just Tudor, vibrant clothes and hat.
All Noble hut units that use āKnightā should just use āWarriorā
Cuextecatl - replaces Arrow Knight. The skin used is of the Cuextecatl (2 captive rank Warrior), so it already fits in within the Noble Hut - itās just the name is completely made-up. There was no such thing as Arrow Knight/Noble/Warrior. This would be a great, super-minor change. Personally Iād rather them use Atlatl as noble warriors much prefered them over bows which were (along with slings) more for the lower ranks to use in the initial skirmish before the big-hitters rush in.
European Walls
The stone wall has never made sense - very tall and straight walls outright outdated during the 16th century where cannon could easily knock them down.
Iād love for the walls to be sloped, bastion walls. Same size as current and sloped on both sides for ease and simplicity. Sloped, squat walls were much preferred over weak, medieval stone walls!
Alternatively, separate the wooden wall from the stone wall as two separate ābuildingsā. The āBastionā technology would replace the current stone wall with something more akin to a more early modern fortification.
Whilst it would be awesome to have those Fort Walls, theyāre not great for standard (especially multiplayer) gameplay - 1. they only face one way, meaning itās probably a knightmare to fix that and 2. they take up too much space.
Iām aware the fort wall from the campaigns/select maps exist, however, gameplay wise, they take more space than standard ones and they only face one way.
A compromise is to change the model of the current walls to represent the more early modern era rather than middle ages, whilst using the same footprint.
Also Iād totally love to see wood and stone walls being able to be built independently as the above post - as long as the differences are pronounced - stone being very slow to build, expensive, but super strong and wood being a cheap and quick fix.
