Why such hate for malta? It had significance in the mediterranean and it fits the time period. I like the tongue cards which represent the orders presence in many different countries.
We all thought it was only italy anyway so it was a really nice surprise to get a second civ, I enjoyed the campaigns so I do particularly enjoy malta with it’s explorers from the campaign and home city customizations.
Having played malta extensively they’re a really unique and well designed civ, I think many new and lower ranked players would particularly enjoy them as those types of players like the defensive playstyles of civs and just sitting in base and building up fortifications, as a fan of tower/fort spamming civs myself I also love the civ, I want to try italy more but can’t stop playing malta.
"who made the Ottomans lose? The Spanish" - TouchierFiend53. That isn’t quite correct, if we take away the defenders from the equation “the Spanish” wouldn’t have singlehandedly won the siege, ergo the victory doesn’t belong solely to the relief force, but to the defenders who held for 4 months inflicting casualties and enabling the relief forces to do their part. A symphony isn’t made up of one instrument, the same as a siege or battle.
Also it was a turning point and one part of this event dictates the following events. Contemporary sources & Voltaire seem to not agree with you about the siege.
"If the Turks should prevail against the Isle of Malta, it is uncertain what further peril might follow to the rest of Christendom." - Elizabeth I of England.
"nothing is as well known as the Siege of Malta" - Voltaire.
I’d take the word of Elizabeth I over yours any day of the week about this matter.
“…the Spanish would have steamrolled it easily back” is a hyperbole & speculative statement. It is easy to say “this or that would have happened”, 5 years prior to the siege of Malta at the battle of Djerba, a Spanish led alliance was beaten. Countless commanders, generals etc have called “this will be easy” and lost.
What could be done to improve a good civ (imo) and make it even better! As M00Z1LLA was pointing towards, there are elements that can be done to improve the civ even further.
I think the different “Tongues” which send and allows creation of different unique units from other civs could be improved a bit.
First suggestion would be to give them a bit of a different appearance, differentiate them from the original ones. Give em some different helmets, hats or some rextures etc. Would at least give them a fresh look, since they don’t have upgrades either way.
Second suggestion would be giving them completely different units that could fill similar or appropriate roles. More content is always welcome and it would make Malta feel a LOT less reused. But would be more time & budget consuming.
I fully agree with @M00Z1LLA’s points. Malta being a main civ is not necessarily a problem, Malta being a main civ made of leftover assets from a 15 year old campaign mode is a problem.
The Gunpowder Depot in particular is almost insulting.
How about Arsenals and Artillery Foundries having a 25% chance of triggering a explosion when destroyed? Or better yet, just scrap the explosion mechanic from random maps.
The mechanic behind explosions is mostly okay, it’s mainly just the depot building that looks like trash. It would work great to give Arsenals that function since they’re only temporarily useful while techs are available, and then don’t really serve a purpose afterward. And detonation being enabled by a card would make it an optional mechanic.
Foundries don’t really make sense as exploding buildings. They were where cannons were cast, not where gunpowder was stored. Giving defensive buildings the ability to detonate would however make sense. For example, in the siege of Candia, the defenders repeatedly rigged some of their outer fortifications to explode and kill the Ottomans who would occupy them.
Another good example of detonating fortifications is when the Canadians exploded fort York to inflict significant losses on American attackers.
I agree with the Commanderies. They should’ve used the other model instead of the Fort Center model.
But otherwise, I don’t mind the Depot, and wouldn’t want my Arsenals to explode.
I also think using those towers and walls instead of the default ones is a bad idea, since they would have different sizes from the walls and outposts of other civs, which doesn’t feel fair.
Exactly. One single siege (with Spanish backing) does not make a village turn into a “Age of Empires” “Civilization”! ‘Malta’ is shameless digital asset reuse and sold for profit.
I actually think this is the the only instance where the model is somewhat fitting. It would be better if the command building was scaled down and had a stable on the side, but at least the old keep building is passable as part of their theme.
What’s wrong with exploding Arsenals? It you could wait to send the upgrade until all the techs are done. Italians have the Venetian Arsenal that makes them buff docks so it’s not much different fromPowder Mills making them buff gunpowder units and explode.
For towers it would make hardly any difference at all. Asian castles have a larger footprint and they’re fine. Walls could be an issue, but Malta could still retain the ability to build normal walls in addition to bigger ones.
i mean just comparing it now, i dont think you can build the depot with vils which you can with arsenals, which could allow for just mass arsenal bombing attacks, especially if you can combine it with the faster building card ( i forget if they get that card)
