I’m sorry if I turned the dunking and sarcasm to 11.
I’m the OP, and to summarize at least personally I feel like the community was lied to.
I’m not trying to be some literalist and get artificially upset about nothing. I had an open mind when going into the event. But one-off scenarios just aren’t and have never been campaigns.
It seems like the community wanted campaigns, MS/FE/Worlds Edge had no campaigns to sell, so tried to jedi mind trick us that these scenarios they just had lying around, are somehow related to campaigns and would just hope no one noticed or cared when the truth came out.
And I’m not trying to be some rules-lawyer literalist so I can be upset over nothing. I’d have been ok, if for example they were scenarios that were unlocked after beating a campaign that were tied to that campaign. Like if you beat Ghengis khan you unlocked a scenario about the mongol invasion of japan. Maybe even play as the japanese. Or maybe the DLC could have had campaign only castillian or romanian civs for el cid and dracula. Make them obvious mashups of existing civs so we don’t have a repeat of the romans being not multiplayer then the devs caving and making it multiplayer. Or maybe a architecture selector for the campaigns so those people who were really upset that persians didn’t get the central asian architecture could at least have it in the campaigns (I wasn’t upset about the persians not getting central asian architecture but i saw a lot of people who wanted that.) Or maybe import the barbarian ai and have a super difficult setting for the campaign missions. Anything. Something.
I’m not upset cause I didn’t get what I wanted. We were promised a dlc that focused on “campaigns” and what we were delivered did not in any way that is intellectually honest focus on campaigns.
I came in with a very open mind about what “campaign focused” could mean, and still I am unable to square what was revealed with being “campaign focused”.