I also don’t think they’re intentionally being deceptive, only that they can’t bring themselves to accept the simple reality that MS lied.
They don’t mean to deceive, but they HAVE to figure out how words don’t mean what they clearly mean so MS who clearly lied didn’t actually lie.
Their preferred reality is one where MS didn’t lie, and hell or high water they’re going to perform the requisite mental gymnastics to get there, even if it makes no sense, which aids in the deceit propagated by MS.
It’d be preferred if they just accepted that MS lied, but many of them, for the worse IMO, can’t bring themselves to do that.
So the Indians rework counts as a “split” but the Chinese one doesn’t because of the name change and the fact that you can’t count (four isn’t “dozens” and, if we include Jurchens, Chinese were split into more civs than Indians). Very good.
That would be one way to split them, but obviously not the only way to do it. Indians weren’t split into dynasties in this way and none of the new South Asian civs inherited bonuses from Indians. So why would a Chinese split have to be done this way? (Answer: it wouldn’t and wasn’t.)
Or Bengalis and Indians? The fact that Shu, Wei and Wu were poorly chosen doesn’t make this not a split.
I’m sorry, I don’t mean to be rude, but your answer to my question is nonsense and it’s pretty clear you’ve got nothing. Remember that the original question was
To answer that you need to identify some feature of the Indian rework that the Chinese rework doesn’t have, and argue that that feature is essential for it to be considered a split. Identifying features that the Chinese rework does or doesn’t have that the Indian rework also doesn’t have (which is what you’ve done so far) does nothing for your argument.
Three months ago was before the GL video came out, let alone the the official announcement.
Thank you so much for going out of your way to demonstrate the reality ignoring revisionism in defense of MS that I was talking about. You have been exceptionally illustrative.
Even then, the Dev’s stance on the DLC has become clear since it’s been over a month since it’s launch and two since the new units and Civs were added in the update. Since then we’ve only really had hit fixes and no major balance changes.
To me this feels like the Devs are satisfied with the current state of the game even with how overpowering the Khitans currently are as we usually get Balance changes within a month especially if a Civ is too strong, like what happened with the Cumens.
It’s likely they’ll leave things as they are and focus more on AoE4 now since AoE2 got the content drop it needs and having a powerful civ in a DLC will ensure it sells well in the future.
Yeah only if someone insults you first. You often insult anyone you even remotely disagree with right off the bat. Use some of your brainpower and reply with meaningful spirit. Even now you just barely passed the 20 char minimum by 11 characters, just to say nothing.
We had to wait for a month for the medal “fix” which consisted of a simple bump of 1 rank, which took them about 5 minutes to implement (ok, 30 min along with starting up the computer, the workspace, commit and push). Hopefully right now they are planning and debating how to weazel out of this mess by removing the 3k and replacing them with meaningful civilisations in order not to rob people who paid for 5 MP civs (which is like 30 people in total - figuratively speaking).
I have to disagree. The playerbase of aoe4 is about a half of Aoe2 playerbase.
they’ve tried so hard over the years to get aoe4 to the top, but people “unexpectedly” don’t like mobile-like looking games with gimmicky mechanics, aoe3 minimap and much less content than proper aoe2. Focusing on aoe2 is the best thing they can do.
This is a company that literally responds to nothing for a whole year after deciding to ditch part of its playerbase. Do you really think they’d put that sentence in the precious space of roadmap casually, for fun, not trying to hint or stir some hype in the audience for their favor?
No, focusing on aoe2 means more DLCs for various civs that we lack (eastern slavs, balkans, more of china/east asia, americas, africa), to get more aoe2 campaigns for civs that lack them, and to fix the 3k nonsense. Better to focus on aoe2 and fix it than to leave it as it is.
with an OBVIOUS meaning that fixing the 3k is the best thing they can do to reunite the playerbase. And if they get their stuff together, we might as well get it.
With the same spirit, if the DLC was really the “best selling ever”, they’d been announcing and celebrating it like their last “best selling ever DLC”
Instead of letting an unofficial content creator with “internal knowledge” leak a speculation of pre-orders
Giving short posts which including insults and lack of depth only shows that you are not using your intelligence which I’m sure, as most people do(at least to an extent), you have. All these kind of posts accomplish is displaying to people that you’re annoyed, not that you’re right.
Yeah what purpose could displaying your annoyance when discussing a bad expansion pack in your favorite video game on official channels that the devs monitor for feedback?
Dumb. Dumb poster with dumb posts. I don’t need nuance I need the devs official channels to be flooded with endless angry “3K bad” posts.
