there are cavalry archers, regular steppe lancers, and some other unit that looks less armored than a steppe lancer. Two of those units we know are castle age units, and what we can observe of the third wouldn’t imply it’s unlocked in imperial. the only imperial age unit are the armenian trebs.
the town itself does appear to have a mix of castle and imperial age buildings. the blacksmiths seem like they’re castle age ones.
Also this is marketing material, primarily meant to be aesthetically pleasing. I don’t think it’s necessary that FE wanted to deceive people. Besides those screenshots weren’t supposed to have been released. they were leaked. presumably they’d have been released today. So they’d have fooled you for all of 2 minutes before you go to the persian updates to find that they didn’t have SL.
Not necessarily congruent with the actions of someone trying to deceive you with one choice of building in one screenshot.
Yea this is my thought… ahhh its so frustrating when they do something but in a half ass way and it ends up being somehow even less immersive as a result! Like someone in that team just has no sense of aesthetics or something… When they first introduced these types of bonuses where a civ has a last unit upgrade it worked because in the case of for example the “Imperial camel” the new unit was still aesthetically consistant with the previous versions of the unit, the camel rider and heavy camel rider. Same with the Imperial Skirmisher which looked like a natural evolution to the Elite Skirmisher and was visually consistant. But it seems like they kind of didn’t realise what made those units work, and since have introduced this new Roman
legionnaire unit which looks completely different to their preceding units and now the Savaran which looks like it has nothing in common with its preceding units visually! It just looks like the Persians traded in all their Frankish Cavaliers for Persian Cataphracts. Its stupid!
Also if they are not getting the Central Asian architecture the Caravansarai is also going to look visually inconsistant.
Also also it seems they are not getting a new castle either which considering that they are actually having a whole new unique tech dedicated to their castle is a massive missed opportunity! Imagine if they had a castle design that visually represented the fact that now it shoots bullets instead of arrows. Like kegs of gunpwder on top of it, or barrels protruding from the windows etc…
That said, while I agree that Central Asian suits the Persians best, it does seem like the number of civs with the old “Saracen” architecture set has shrunk ever since Byzantines switched to Mediterranean. If Persians get a swap as well, that leaves us with only the Saracens, Turks, and Berbers using what people have been calling the Middle Eastern set.
Maybe we could have more Arab civs added somewhere further down the road? I don’t really need a Saracen split, and southern African civs are what I’m really waiting for right now, but I wouldn’t mind some of the smaller Arab nations from the medieval period (e.g. Yemenis or Omanis) being added eventually.
Persians having the Central Asian building set is something that can be enable using the scenario editor or modding tools. I think it should be officially keep using the ME set because as you said, the amount of civs with the ME set shrunk ever since Byzantines switched to Mediterranean. Now rather than more Arab civs be added considering that the Saracens are an umbrella civ representing the Arabs of medieval history, I think something like the Kurds and Nubians can be added and both civs can be given the ME set.
Fun fact: The instrument used in the Armenian theme is called a duduk. It is famously used in Narnia and Avatar: The Last Airbender, among other things.
I bought it, happy for the discount. I am surprised by the lack of communication they made. It’s even released before the first AoE4 expansion!
The civs, rework and campaigns looks nice.
I’m just really disappointed the Persians don’t get the central Asia architecture set.
And? African and Central Asian are sitting on 2 each. It’s more important to have civs with their correct buildings, than everyone being “balanced”. Take a look at the Southern European set…
I don’t want to have to rely on a mod that breaks every significant update, just for a civ to have its correct buildings. That should be the bare minimum.
100% agree. We need at the very least Ayubids, (and we need to change the Saladin campaign to use the Ayubids) Fatamids, and Abassids (which the current Saracens can change to like indians became Hundustanis).
Oh are you serious? I usually get roasted for these kind of proposals…
I’m not saying it’s a priority anyway because of Africa etc (Nubians would be cool) but if that ever happens I don’t think they would name them based on dynasties (even if byzantines is kinda dynastic, they should be Greek or Hellenes or something like that) so Saladin and Fatimids too I guess would stay for the Egyptians, Abbasids are Iraqis or simply Arabs and probably Syrians for Umayyads.
Looking further I think Georgians will have a very insane cav archer+Hussar combo for 1v1 with the bonuses and UT, combine that with their potentially insane eco and defenses + wide tech tree and broken UU, Georgians seem to lack a weakness on land maps except arena maybe.
Is there any new contents for ror coming with this DLC.l?
As an age1 player, I feel so weird when I bought both aoe2 and return of rome to play only some old aoe1 campaigns running on aoe2 engine. They promised to update and bring new stuff for aoe1 when they release return of Rome but it is a big scam seemingly
