When you complain about inaccuracies it would be a good start to be enounce and precise yourself.
And btw this also applies to the logical methodic. If it’s a question of principle then it has to be applied PRINCIPALLY to ALL stuff already in the game. And the other doesn’t hast to be evalueated relativating.
If it’s not done this way it surely looks like a strawman.
Dude, just play and enjoy your AoE2. If you don’t understand the criticism of this DLC just don’t engage.
I’ve already mentioned multiple and went into detail in other posts, but if you want to hear the most egregious ones:
Tangut assets in the Khitan civ: Those two groups are completely unrelated, and yet the Khitan have a unique unit that was only used by the Tanguts in real life, and a castle sprite based on a Tangut fortress. Again, no relation to the Khitans, thus this fusion is counted as an inaccuracy.
Xianbei units in the Wei civ: It appears the designers confused two different states, Cao Wei and Northern Wei, and fused them together. The former is from the Three Kingdoms period, the latter was founded much later, and was created by a people known as the Xianbei. The Wei have assets from the Xianbei too. Thus it’s very inaccurate to fuse these two kingdoms, and shows very poor research has been conducted.
Wizards: the campaign has wizards. As in actual magicians. Obviously not accurate to real history, where nobody has ever summoned storms using magic.
Liu Bei: the hero unit, dual wields giant swords and has a special ability where he does spin attacks. Inaccurate because that’s physically impossible, especially egregious in a campaign that is being marketed as being “immersive”.
War chariot: war chariots weren’t used in that time period, and repeating crossbows were not siege weapons, nor were they ever mounted on chariots. Inaccurate.
Conclusion: this DLC has more inaccuracies, and more serious ones, than any other DLC before. Example: Dawn of the Dukes, the Obuch is a cavalry weapon but the unit is an infantryman. Very small issue if we compare it to the new DLC.
Also I noticed everyone who defends this DLC, never tries to argue why the 3K civs fit the game or why these design choices are actually fine. It’s always just “but other inaccuracies exist” or “it doesn’t matter”. Nobody has ever argued positively for them (outside of gameplay, but we’re not discussing that right now), just trying to attack other’s arguments without ever giving their own.
Genitours fit Berbers. Period
When you turn to whataboutism you should do the work of checking whether it is really relevant first
Maybe you should have a look
Berbers are literally the last civ that should get it. Though Berbers are also inaccurate in themselves as they merely represent the Moors and not as much the Berbers themselves.
So… still think I don’t know my stuff?
The word jinete (of Berber zenata ) designates, in Castilian and the Provençal dialect of Occitan language, those who show great skill and riding especially if this relates to their work. In Portuguese, it is spelled ginete . The term jennet for a small Spanish horse has the same source
Now your turn to provide:
Just leaving this here.
And Genitours were actually used AGAINST the Moors, which are represented by the Berbers here.
There is SO MUCH going wrong there, and Moors AND Berbers have a right to be completley offended by that, because it’s projecting the opposing factions on them.
Whilst this stuff you complain here about is just a little bit inaccurate. Not completely inversed History.
The relations of yours are just completely off whilst underplaying real historic wrongings in the game.
And again using here “relativating” logic vs principal one when it comes to the current DLC.
It just needs a name change like “Zenata rider” in AOE3 to better reflect the tactics not the exact unit
But you cannot give a samurai with all Japanese armor with the name “warrior attendant” to Chinese and pretend it’s fine.
Moors and Berbers used the similar tactics that the Iberians copied. The name is directly borrowed from them. The name is “genitour”, a poor transliteration, not “jinete” which is too specific.
It could reflect the tactics not the unit. And this unit can simply be “fixed” with one name change
Now your evidence that the Liao/Khitan used catapult on camels
The unit is clearly a Jinete, what are you even talking about?
How many jinetes wear turbans and draw scimitars on their shields?
The Spanish version of the game does call them that way, so we’re halfway there?
And the Genitour unit is dressed like a Berber warrior, not a Castillian one, so it represents Berber warriors that have been using those same tactics as far back as the Punic Wars.
Just a little bit? Are you trolling? Because everything I pointed out is worse than a slightly anachronistic name, like you could rename the unit like the other user said and it’d be perfect. You can’t do the same for the Three Kingdoms units.
That’d only be the case if the Berbers had Almughavars or something. But good thing neither the Khitans or Tanguts can complain because they’re all dead.
I thought you said this game was never historical and it didn’t matter? Also I have been doing the opposite of that, in fact I pointed out more than you have.
Outline your logic please. I have done it myself and now it’s your turn. Explain why Liu Bei dual wielding giant machetes is a minor historical nitpick.
We should make a compilation of things like “Mongols fighting Franks in Texas” as a copy-pasta so people don’t waste their times writing anymore
I don’t see any need for me to oblige to your demands In fact, I think the real issue is that you are obsessed with demanding YOUR personal ideals on others.
If you can’t deal with other doing the stuff not EXACTLY as you like you should probably make your own content. Cause it will never happen and nobody is willing to play your working slave.
All I did is pointing out how your relations and argumantations are just not consquent and off.
You even recognize that Berbers and Moors are culturally AND ethnically completely different? And you go over that with a way of ignorance whilst fixating on little inaccuracies, added stuff for civ design purposes with outrage…
Your relations are just comletely off, sorry.
A very simple logic:
Khitan with camel trebuchets is LESS inaccurate than Berbers with genitours
So, MORE people are dissatisfied with the former
And NOBODY asked for absolute realism or accuracy. The corporate fanboys in fact bring up that concept far more frequently than any critic.
So you have no arguments, got it.
You did not, you just started complaining about genitours, right after claiming historical inaccuracies don’t matter.
Like how Khitans and Tanguts are different? But apparently that’s minor to you, so you’re the one being off.
Magicians are the biggest inaccuracy the game has ever had…
You even recognize that Khitan and Tangut don’t even overlap geographically at all?
If your argument is that is historically too inaccurate for you you also would have needed to complain about the berbers (and other civs btw).
But you didn’t. (And still don’t btw what is absurd)
