So if you want to add Korea, its characteristics should be similar to the United States, the Asian version of multiple gatherings of militias, relying on walls, towers, and militia to protect the city.
I oppose Korea for reasons that have a high probability of being a limited country. After all, no one knows when the official updates will stop. There are more important countries in Asia than Korea at the same time, such as the Kingdom of Myanmar, which conflicts with the Ming Dynasty, the Qing Dynasty, and the British, the Siamese Dynasty, which is a hegemon in Southeast Asia, the Persians who have the Three Great Emperors of Islam during the same period in West Asia, and the Uzbek Sibani Khan, who dominated Central Asia for a time, At the same time, Korea’s influence is far inferior to these more powerful civilizations
The most terrifying reality is that we have not received a new country for nearly a year, and Age of Empires III has actually stopped updating the DLC. If the official informs us that there are only a few new countries with DLC, and Korea wants to seize the more important position of the Persians, I will definitely oppose it
Honestly, I love all the new civs that have been added but I do think that the priority of the devs should be re-working some of the vanilla civs because soon we will have whole continents like Asia, Africa and “Native America” with individual civs that all get very unique looking units and building whilst back in Europe every country’s Hussar, Dragoon, Skirmisher, Musketeer, Halberdier and Pikeman all look the exact same as well as all the artillery units.
I see people getting sensitive when a Native American units get depicted geographically/culturally incorrect but are you telling me that Portuguese Musketeers and Russian Musketeers wore the exact same uniform despite coming from civilisations 4,500km apart from one another and during a time period that produced some of the most bright and pompous uniforms in history? All I’m saying is it would be nice to see some of the most used European units (hussar, dragoon, musketeer, skirmisher) get a re-work similar to the one the Ottoman civ had last autumn.
No. Far from that. This is the same level of misinformation as “all Latin America/India/East Asia look the same”.
They even have a different uniform set for each German state. And it is easier because they are well-documented.
The magic of strategy games is whatever scope you choose, you can always make things different enough if you want to. Not to mention when it’s historical. Heck they could even make 5 completely different culture/unit groups on the British Isles alone in Total War Britannia.
For a community of mainly history buffs this seems a bit of insult to European culture. The largest most obvious difference in uniforms during this time period was colour - for the French blue, for the British Red, for the Russians Green, for the Austrians white and for the Swedes Yellow/blue. A way of introducing these colour sets within the game would be a great start in helping each of the European civs look more unique.
I find if it funny researching a tech called “Redcoats” when my troops are lime green or cyan that don’t have a single splash of noticeable red on them
The player’s colour could literally be shown by the colour of their backpacks or a feather in their hat not the whole of their outfit. I think it would be nice to have armies identifiable more by their uniform style, than just their colour. The graphic quality in the game has come a long way since the early 2000s, we are gunna be able to see the difference.
I did the research. I made a huge 19th century mod for this game. We were pulling at straws to make units look vaguely different from each other. We had to recur to so many Ceremonial units that never saw combat in real life and irregular forces.
Dunno why you’re even recurring to the Total War Forums for your proof, lmao. All those uniforms look the same, the minimal differences are impossible to tell apart in a real game.
Like you could make an argument that if you go back to the 17th century you might find units that look different across the continent. But even then Italian Soldiers looked like Spanish Soldiers looked like Portuguese soldiers.
Because the other guy is right, the large obvious difference to tell apart uniforms are just that they color swapped them but they otherwise look all the same. But you can’t make them different colors ingame, lol, you must give them good playercolor for players to identify them. Come on folks, this is basic game design. Having higher quality models is not an excuse to just away with player color.
I’m making mods. I don’t care what “must or must not” be added to the game. I just make whatever civ I want and let people decide which one they want to install.
I couldn’t care less if the units from one civ to the next look the same.
You are confusing “player color” with “color scheme”.
The hat could always be black. The belt could always be white. They are not player colors. The unit does not need to be covered in player colors head to toe.
Back in legacy the musketeer always have a red epualet despite the player color.
Same design principal have been used for a lot of in-game units. US regular have “whiter” pants. Soldadoes have overall white uniform but player color on the decorations (and early soldadoes is literally what the Spanish musketeers should look like if they don’t have the shared version). Caroleans have yellow pants. These are all independent from the player color.
And the game has already got 5 or 6 different revolutionary variants, differ by only the hat or some colors. That’s not a problem at all. Same applies for the civ-specific skins for shared units.
I could image some slight variations in the colors and decorations like plumes, backpacks, belts, would work perfectly. Just look at the caroleon upgrade. It gets a “golden brim” on the hat, very noticeable yet does not interfere with the player color units ——if they look similar from afar, that should be intentional because they are after all similar units. It should not interfere with identifying those units during gameplay. It’s for those who want to appreciate the details.
Just a toy example: real Napoleonic French musketeers have broad, white lapels and Prussian ones do not. Hat decorations are also quite different. You replace the “national color” parts with the same player colors yet keep the uniform designs, they are still quite different.
For Austrians that have all-white uniform, you can add the player color on the lapel, cuff or pants instead:
They could all end up being different designs. It’s not just the shape. Color scheme is also part of the design. That is already applied to many in-game units:
They all have very distinct main color that both stands out and is historically relevant, not interfering with their player colors.
On the other hand, the game has left out quite a few uniform designs in real history, common or not. Some go into mercenaries and natives. Units like royal arquebusier, royal dragoon, harquebusier, elmetto, all have the very standard appearances for all Europe nations of their time, yet are still assigned to a “unique” role.
So there is no problem giving a “common” appearance irl to a unique unit as long as it’s unique in the game.
My thoughts on this page is should we introduce completely new units to replace some of the European royal guard units, that have completely different abilities from their original base unit. Think of the Ottoman’s Hussar turning into the Deli - same role, different stats.
