RU - Takuara Lancer
Yes, it already feels very forced and it’s also very late… we should stop here before the game gets set in the 17th century and loses its “medieval” essence… just because the devs no longer feel like updating AoE 3 (although judging by the Steam app it seems they’ve finally gotten their act together and are preparing a final patch for 3DE) doesn’t mean they have to ruin AoE 2 by getting into more “colonial” themes, which AoE 3 does better…
3 Likes
Say that to the Tupi civ that just got here
It has long gone since 3K civs
Guess what it already happened
1 Like
Yes, I know, that’s why I feel uncomfortable that they continued down that path…you have 200 years (500-700) that they barely touched on in AoE 2, couldn’t they go that way instead of going so far back to the 2nd century or further and further into the 16th century?
2 Likes
I’m pretty sure this is a civ that you, the OP made because you are also from Paraguay? Surely you want to embrace the pre European culture of this civ as well do you not?
There is a less than good answer here and it doesn’t make you look good if you say it
No, not really, I want them with the Jesuit influence, as stated, trying to reflect so much time period, especially in a civ that rapidly adapted in a short period of time would result in something incoherent
I can understand the appeal to give them the Champi line, if that is the case, the militia line should be gone, and that civ specially do use european weapons, so is a matter of compromise
How to solve that?, create a new archer line for american civs?
And that answer would be?, I do not understand your implying
The implication is that these people were made better and more interesting because they converted to and submitted to the European invaders instead of being interesting beforehand.
Wouldn’t it be better to call this something specific to Jesuits themselves who by the way set up… SETTLEMENTS
Just because someone shot themselves in the left foot last year, doesn’t mean it’s any less stupid if they now also shoot themselves in the right foot.
1 Like
And who is implying that?, because I’m not, so….
Yes, Missions, and the estructure of those Missions was this
Does this look like a tribal settlement?
I will propose the civ’s that I like, take the criticism when is constructive and consecuently improve the concept but I won’t participate in the “belong don’t belong” thing, because is useless for the thread and the precedent is right here, scream at the void against the precedent if you must, your constructive criticism is welcome, the rest is not
Steppe Lancers and Houfnices?
Did they have equivalents of these units?
Exactly, instead of leaving them lame, it seems they want them to end up in wheelchairs…
Yes, they could make it bigger than this…
I can’t find the sources for the leather-wood cannon, it was likely reveal to me in a dream, jokes aside, I will look into it again
I like TLC civ-wise, but I don’t like them pulling only from the contact period for campaign material. Really gives the impression that Native Americans are only relevant as long as they interact with Europeans.
1 Like
And they intentionally left out civs who didn’t make contact like Wari, Tinakwu and Chimu… I’m smelling some sort of bias somewhere in the design process we got
Yep, they could make a Guaraní (Ava Chiriguano) civ and start with the intertribal wars, the religious migration searching for the Yvy marane’ỹ, the fight against the Inca, the conquest of the andean foothill, the demilitation of the frontiers against Guakuru’s and only in the last part of the campaign, a fight against Virrey Toledo
Yes, that’s why it feels strange and like a forced expansion. It’s like The Conquerors 2.0, where Moctezuma and Noryang Point are set in the early and late 16th century, but in the Korean case it’s worse, because they could have had more medieval campaigns or scenarios (Kaesong in the 10th century or The Joseon Rising in the late 14th century)… I always considered the 16th century in AoE 2 as a nod to what AoE 3 would be later on (The WarChiefs with Cuauhtemoc after the Moctezuma campaign and The Asian Dynasties with Tokugawa after the death of Hideyoshi, aka Kyoto and Noryang), not so they would keep adding more and more 16th-century content in AoE 2, but in AoE 3… At some point, Moctezuma, Babur, Ismail, and these TLC campaigns should get a remake in AoE 3 or in AoE 5 if it were colonial again…
A future Andean DLC perhaps?
Yes, it could be…something that predates the 1500 and is more focused on the 900-1400 CE range…
I am not saying you shouldn’t propose them. I am saying “just because something was done once, it’s ok to do it again” is a bad argument. Most of us agree that 3K was a stupid idea, but one could easily argue that now it would be fine to add a “king arthur” and a “siegfried” faction. they are both very early fictional splits of existing factions.
if you want to propose Guarani, that’s fine