Let me start with the positives. I like the new skins, regional units, and bit bigger differences between civilizations.
But why heroes? If i liked that i would play AoM or warcraft or some other game.
And why dynasties are nov civilizations? Not that I am an expert in history but…
Please some opinions forum chat. <3
And my rant for the way everything is changing:
Couse, if you started with regional units to civs you could rework also older ones and remove european units (like spears) from meso american and asian civs, make unique regional spear line for each and could even differ slightly. Give paladin as UU to franks. And rename units so upgraded units have the same name. lets say knight line, use early and late. Also I would change archer to early crossbowman, and arbalest to late crossbowman. As bows, crossbows and arbalests are different weapons and could be used as UU or reginal units with different stats.
Halbeldier can become regional unit, and you have three stages for spearmen. Make upgrading units naming stay the same unless it changes its use totally.
Drop also the elite naming as it implies veterancy. And use also late or heavy in exchange.
1 Like
One thought that came to my mind relating heroes, is that maybe they are testing the waters to add a trainable hero to every civ in the future. And that why they are in ranked too, to test if they are used and if people like the concept. It wouldn’t even be much work, as most civs have a campaign hero unit model already.
I agree with you, but I kinda don’t like heroes in multiplayer. Maybe it is just me or new thing they will add active abilities to them. - next thing we will have dota.
2 Likes
I absolutely don’t want the heroes extended to all the civs!
1 Like
I’m not saying I do like them, just guessing what they may be planning.
2 Likes
Well then. Test concluded; NOT a good idea.
3 Likes
If they want to test the waters they should’ve made the 3K unplayable on ranked multiplayer like they did with the Romans. I seriously have no idea what their mindset is…
4 Likes
Any feedback on renaming units idea?:
early spearmen - spearmen - late spearmen
early crossbowmen - crossbowmen - late crossbowmen
early knight - knight - late knight
scout cavalry - light cavalry - late light cavalry (remove wings from the unit)
etc..
the militia line is a problem i would rework them totally and split them in two separate units.
early swordsmen - swordsmen - late swordsmen (get better pierce armor couse of shields)
two handed swordsmen - late two-handed swordsmen as a separate unit you get access in imperial age for some civs (these should be trash killers with low pierce armor)
this system also solves the i need to tech into militia line in imperial problem.) as it is directly into two handed swordsmen.
I play along by borrowing some other unit prefix in renaming common troops. The renamed unit could also come with a new model that is still got 95% similar looks, like removing wings from Hussar or changing the shield symbol and pattern on cavalier, etc.
spear line, pikeman and halberdier could be regional unit
-Spearmen > Heavy Spearman > Armored Spearman
archer line, Crossbowman can be regional unit, while Arbalester become the new unique unit
-Huntsman > Archer > Royal Archer
knight line, Paladin become european regional unit or for Cuman they got the Savar treatments
-Heavy Cavalry > Armored Cavalry
scout line can follow the Chronicles by replacing Hussar to Raider, and for militia line I think only the Champion that is not having a general name (Armored Swordman, Armsman?)
1 Like