I absolutely disagree.
There are so many nice and interesting new civilisations that could be added.
I don’t think there is ever a downside of having more. Seriously.
I don’t care about the competitive side.
Even AoE2DE is still missing a lot of civilisations. Massive parts of the world map are still empty.
I personally love making scenarios but in AoM it’s really hard to come up with a scenario that involves more then one civilisation because none of the current civilisations even border each other.
That is already a big issues in the AoM campaign where the majority of scenarios is a mirror match where you fight against the same civilisation as you play yourself.
I don’t even think 100 civilisations would be too much for AoE1/2/3/4/AoM.
On the one hand the United States is a terrible idea because the civs are otherwise bronze age/Iron Age/Time immemorial. But I love the idea of American gods ie. Uncle Sam, Columbia/Liberty, George Washington (Cincinnatus Reborn), The Spirit of Capitalism, Paul Bunyon, John Henry. The US has mythologized a lot of it’s history just listen to any politician speak about “the founding fathers.” Alternatively the Neil Gaiman Americanized versions of gods could be cool like Odin - Wednesday, with modern ones like Technical Boy.
“Washington, Washington six-foot eight weighs a f—ing ton. Opponents beware! Opponents beware! He’s coming, he’s coming, he’s coming.”
The Aztecs are the most requested civilisation for AoMR.
The Aztecs as well as the USA are both already in AoE3DE.
So naturally there should be nothing against adding them to AoMR too, right?
But seriously, I know it’s never going to happen but I would kinda love seeing gunpowder units like Musketeers and Falconets fight against Cyclopses and Hoplites.
It would be pretty cool tbh. Not really logical or realistic in any way though.
“I don’t care about the competitive side.” “I don’t care about the competitive side.” “I don’t care about the competitive side.” “I don’t care about the competitive side.” “I don’t care about the competitive side.”
LMAO
My feeling is mainly due to the many conflicts caused by radical Hindus in recent years. Of course, some people cannot represent the entire 1.2 billion of Hindus. Both the Indian mythology adaptation and the Japanese mythology adaptation will be exciting to watch, but comparing the two, I personally would still choose Japan first if I must choose only one. At least, in the past few decades, there have already been a large number of entertainment works adapted from Japanese mythology or partially referencing Japanese mythology, including literary works, comics (manga), animations (anime), TV series, movies, video games, etc. created by Japanese themselves and foreigners.
An adaptation that is acceptable to one Hindu may not be acceptable to another Hindu. but at least the Japanese people have more experience with and may probably be more tolerant of their own myths being adapted into entertainment works to varying degrees. My personal preference for Japanese culture may also affect my judgment more or less.
The other one is not dead either. The Shintoism, based on Japanese mythology, remains an important root of Japanese culture to this day.
Interestingly, it appears to have the Cthulhu Mythos as well.
I would be totally ok with them adding new civilisations that are just not available in ranked but that will never happen.
In AoE2DE the Romans were originally not available in ranked with the reasoning that many people disliked them for being outside of the AoE2 timeline but they appeared in multiple campaigns.
The idea was a compromise. Let people have the Romans in Single Player and custom lobbies but don’t force anyone to encounter the Romans.
But the community didn’t like it. They wanted Romans in ranked, so they were added to ranked.
I would not mind if they would add the Soviet Union, the Zerg and the Night Elves to AoMR because I can just choose not to buy the DLC.
But I know that won’t happen.
As far as I’m aware those were not because someone in the West represented their religion wrong but mostly for internal Indian politics like when they allowed woman to visit temples or something like that.
I like Japanese Mythology too. I just don’t like this mindset (or strategy) of arguing against adding certain pantheons/civilisations because you want to increase the chance of your favourites being added.
They mix gods, mythological creatures and heroes together though. You have King Arthur, Medusa and me (Skadi) fight each other.
Interestingly they choose Mayans over Aztecs.
A few hundred larpers in Norway is not the same as the majority in the country with the most people on the planet.
I will briefly mention the Chinese from the Tale of the Dragon dlc for AoMEE.
I don’t think I need to describe how it’s almost universally hated, nor why.
That’s why I say quality over quantity. Whatever pantheon is being made, they should actually take their time and put in the extra effort to make it good, rather than make 3 in the same time, and neither of them are better quality than the Chinese.
In the long run, I’m not saying they should stop after I don’t know how many civs, simply because there’s so many already. But every single one of them needs to be made with care, and some effort being made to have it make sense.
If that means less pantheons are going to be added overall, that that’s worth it.
I think, whatever the second pantheon dlc will be, there will be more people angry about the choice than excited.
If it’s Aztec (which is the most requested/speculated) people who wanted Celts and Japanese will be angry it’s not Celts or Japanese.
90% the Japanese are being made because they can share a lot of assets with the Chinese, or at least use Chinese assets for the basis of their own.
That just makes them super easy to make. The Lakota in the Divine Edition are mostly ported over from 3DE and will be the first civ I should be able to get functioning in Retold simply because the assets are already there and require minimal tweaking.
Whichever civ it’ll be, hopefully this community will not devolve into the petty toxicity that plagues so many others.
At the end of the day, we will have our beloved game. We will get new content. Those that wish to buy the new civs can. Those that don’t want the new civs don’t have to buy. It’s that simple.
If we support the game, the devs I’m sure aren’t blind to what the people want. The civs we want will come in time.
I truly hope there’s not a petty uproar at whichever pantheon they choose. It’s not being forced on us to buy so if we don’t like it, don’t buy it. Personally, I’m wanting Celts, then Mesopotamians. But if it’s Aztecs, so be it. I’ll just be glad the game is getting love.
While the Atlanteans used assets from unfinished Roman and Aztec civs that were being considered to be added in the Expansion, I don’t think any future pantheon will share assets or units with a different one.
When it comes to Japanese and Chinese, similarities in architecture don’t men they can have the same building assets.
I can’t tell at a glance if a building is Chinese or Japanese, but there are differences for sure. I know there are people who can’t tell Greek and Roman buildings apart. I happen to know that arches are a clear sign. Common in Roman architecture, mostly absent in Greek. Something like that is bound to exist for Japanese and Chinese buildings too.
Right you are. Unfortunately, I’m pretty sure some people will be angry.
Aztecs are being requested often, and the Devs certainly know that, but there are also very good reasons not to pick them. First and foremost, the high importance in their religion on sacrifices, which would have to feature in some form. Which would affect the games rating.
Celts are my personal pick as well.