Dutch settlers cost coin? I didn’t play them enough to notice.
But as I said in other threads, I think wood takes too long to gather even with upgrades and cards (and buildings cost too much wood imho), which is why I personally dislike villagers costing wood.
Another thing I dislike about TAD is the lack of variety in languages. Before the Tengri Shrine and Qizilbash were introduced, all Asian units including outlaws and mercenaries only spoke Hindi, Chinese and Japanese (and that’s still true for mercenaries and outlaws). I really wish they’d make Mongolian units speak Mongolian.
I’m aware of the Manchu’s existence, but I checked in the wiki before commenting and he’s from the base game, so my point about TAD units still stands. Either way, I guess I should have clarified that I knew about the manchu.
Just wanted to step in and defend the TAD campaigns. They were all so well done compared to the earlier campaigns. Each mission was way harder than anything from vanilla and allowed for a satisfying challenge while also acting as a sufficient tutorial for each of the TAD civs. I don’t know if the missions are broken or bugged in the current DE version but in TAD they were great. Big Huge Games knew how to design single-player scenarios.
They should bring back the firepit for most of the native civs. It was visually appealing, historical accurate and incredibly fun. I don’t see them as “god powers”, I see them as a simplified in-game representation of the role religion and dance played among indigenous American groups and how it could increase harmony, morale, and order.
I certainly never saw it - at any point - as a horde of dancers dancing around like an evil witches coven to cast a powerful spell to smite my enemies from afar.
The thing is that, specially North American natives, are always depicted with that dances. All European civs had danced a lot in the past, and some were in key moments of the years like the festivities during the harvests days.
So the thing is like doing the Flamenco a core feature of Spain. Spanish people dance Flamenco? yes. All of them? No. It’s important to the culture of Spain? Yes. It represents all Spain? No. There is more culture of Spain that Paella, Flamenco and Sangria? Hell yes.
Maybe we can make the Plaza look different depending on the ceremonies.
Ceremony A, the appearance of Plaza is that people are listening to someone’s speech on Plaza, like the present.
Ceremony B, the appearance of Plaza is that people form several small circles to discuss things on Plaza.
Ceremony C, the appearance of Plaza is that people are blessing the warriors together on Plaza.
Ceremony D, the appearance of Plaza is people dancing around a bonfire or fire pit on Plaza, just like before.
Ceremony E, the appearance of Plaza is that people dance another dance on Plaza, and may also chorus and play traditional musical instruments.
Ceremony F, the appearance of Plaza is that people are making handicrafts together on Plaza.
Ceremony G, the appearance of Plaza is that people cook together and hold banquets on Plaza.
…
Each part is an important part of people’s culture, but it is not the whole of culture.
Fire pit was easier to see who was working and who was idle they all moved in a circle instead of sitting still and doing whatever, and fire changed depending on the dance.
The native dances were ceremonial and not really comparable to European dances. It’s something more equivalent to a church liturgy for Europeans (which is culturally significant enough to warrant representation).
And they weren’t really being depicted wrongly. The Stomp Dance has a sacred fire and everything. The Sun Dance was also similar but had a pole in the center instead of the fire. The Snake Dance of the Hopi is another one. There’s also the Ghost Dance, but that was a later development.
It seems like the dances were removed because their cultural advisor said it was taboo to share with outsiders. I’m not sure if that’s always been the case, or if that attitude came about after the dances were banned and therefore needed to be done in secret.
Except that your opinion is literally the unimportant one here because new mechanics are already coming into old civs and that’s not your decision to make. Just look at all the civs that have gotten reworks.
A definitive edition is not some fancy graphics job.
Imagine being so stubborn that you cant learn a few new things because you want to play old stuff. If you want old stuff, play the old game.
I wanna play AoE3DE with all the changes it brings.
And sweet summer’s child, have you even played AoE4? Can you tell me what new civ design elements/mechanics that game has that AoE3 doesn’t have at this point?
They’re very few and far between but they should get credit where credit is due. The one I can think of would be carrying carcasses. I think that would be a good addition to AoE3.
The one other thing AoE4 does better is walls. However, in the gunpowder era walls are much less important and most of the issues with them are specific to AoE3 (inconsistent cost of pillars, not being able to put gates on trade routes, etc). I don’t think guys on walls would really make sense but some bigger style walls like what is seen in the campaign could make sense for a few civs like China and Malta. Maybe they could have extra perks like absorbing some of the ranged damage from units firing through them.
A buen entendedor pocas palabras bastan. El IV es un juego nuevo, donde puedes añadir naciones nuevas que ya están en el III, con todas las mecánicas que querais. Pero no destrozar y recrear una civilizacion preexistente desde cero y llamarlo versión definitiva.
Si quereis mecánicas totalmente nuevas dejarlo para naciones nuevas. Es fácil de entender.
Y sí, he jugado al IV, su artillería me parece ridiculamente poderosa, rápida y versátil que pierde el sentido.