Instead of bickering with you, I’d rather watch the Kings of the Old World game. Where can I learn a lot of techniques.
1 Like
You also forgot that aboriginal tech is partly inside the big button of the building, this is my last reply to this post.
2 Likes
Zero of the big button techs are specific to Lakota culture. Which is absurd - even the Hauds get at least one that’s unique to the Hauds - Lacrosse was a Haud invention.
If you remember, I suggested a long time ago that maybe look for a name that covers the natives of the plains as the new name of the civilization. It doesn’t matter if it’s simply called Pairie Nations or Pairie Natives.
You said no at the time. Maybe it really doesn’t exist, or maybe it’s because you don’t like it so you pretend it doesn’t exist. I don’t know, but it means we’re missing one of the easiest ways to get things done.
And, it is really unnecessary to calculate the accuracy of the content of the civ one by one. It doesn’t feel very comfortable to me. The point is not whether the accurate content of civilization you care about is more or less than other civilizations, but whether the cost to reach the level you can be satisfied with can be affordable for the dev. Everyone’s threshold for being satisfied is different, and no matter how updated it is, it is obviously impossible to satisfy everyone including you and me, but every update has a burning budget behind it. Don’t forget that we also need the budget to update other civilizations and create new content. Not to mention whether it will still be interesting to the community after the change you request.
So, suggestions are welcome, but requests are unrealistic, and blames are even unpleasant. As for what kind of your complaint is, I think people can judge for themselves.
1 Like
I think this is the important part that most people are missing.
The majority of players doesn’t enjoy playing those civs. They aren’t well designed.
We have to ask: How do people want to feel like when they play those civilisations and how can we deliver on it.
People want to play the Ottomans because of big cannons and they get that.
People want to play the British because of Musketeers and they get the best ones in the game.
People want to play the Aztecs because of iconic units like Eagle Warriors and Jaguar Warriors and the Eagle Warriors are on of the best unit in the game.
So why do people not want to play Lakota in particular?
They are one of the most unique civilisations. They are the equivalent to the Huns in AoE2 which are quit popular.
No houses, strong cavalry and now even movable buildings!
I think strange mechanics like the Community Plaza and the Tribal Marketplace are what puts people off.
4 Likes
I am more interested in the civilizations of South America for example, Mapuches, Brazil, Argentina and maybe the Guaycurú, but I see no problem in adding more native civilizations in the future. 
Perhaps the natives should be represented before and after the arrival of the European empires.
Age I: Before the Europeans.
Age II: Before the Europeans.
Age III: During the arrival of the Europeans.
Age IV: After the arrival of the Europeans.
Age V: After the arrival of the Europeans.
This would mean having to balance the native civilizations so that they have a less restrictive economy in the long run and at the same time better represent their entire history during the arrival of their new European “neighbors”.
3 Likes
I can confess to you, I actually quite like the gameplay of Lakota.
I don’t think the Community Plaza and the Tribal Marketplace are so-called “strange” or “weird” mechanics. They’re just another display of the developer’s creativity. Just like Livestock Market is unique to African civilizations, Revolution is unique to Western civilizations, and Consulate is unique to Asian civilizations. They are all the developer’s creativity, and at most you “personally” like it or not. I can accept them, and I’m sure some people like them. It couldn’t prove that they are the cause of the unpopularity, or even that the Lakota are really unpopular. That’s a ranking, there’s always a bottom. Maybe people don’t dislike the Lakota, they just preferred other civilizations. Of course, you can think about how to update them, like changing the name or skin, whatever. But you must think twice when it comes to the essence of the mechanics. People who like the essence of existing mechanics don’t necessarily like new ones.
8 Likes
It really doesn’t, and trying to do that would be insulting. Do you want to group the entirety of Siberia, most of Russia, Mongolia, Tibet, and half of China into a single civ?
The addition of the Dog Days as one of the ages of the Lakota would be incredible - that’s what we call the times before Sunkawakhan - the horse - arrived. We walked the prairies with dogs, dragging small travois ourselves and smaller ones pulled by dogs. Surprisingly, we found our way around the prairie in much the same way the Polynesians explored the Pacific - through star maps and constellations.
2 Likes
I do not want. But if we can only have one slot of civilization for that region, I accept.
Inner Asians. Done.
I remember I even told you that, if we have only one European civ which includes French cavalry, Spanish ships, Russian infantry… , the name of “Europeans” is acceptable for me.
They should be split more along the lines of “Tribal Confederations” versus “Mesoamerican States” rather than a specifically North American template. Potential South American civs like Mapuche and Guaraní would still work well following the same template as North American natives. I’d give them distinct features as follows:
Mesoamerican States
- Includes Aztec, Inca, and potentially Maya
- Age up with politicians as they currently do
- Community Plaza should be replaced with a temple or pyramid (Mexico and Italy have proved a large religious building can work)
- Have a Noble’s Hut or Kallinka equivalent
- Have shock infantry instead of cavalry (at least early on)
- They should have more options to adopt European technologies like what was done by the Neo-Incan State and in the Caste War of the Yucatan
Tribal Confederations
- Includes Lakota, Haudenosaunee, and potential civs like Mapuche, Cree, Muscogee, Comanche, Guaraní, etc
- Age up with tribal diplomats/alliances similar to the African alliances
- Lakota could gradually expand into the Oceti Sakowin as they add tribes through aging up. It could also expand to European powers like the French, and grant them access to units such as Horse Artillery to fill in gaps in their unit roster.
- Age 2 options would be Lakota tribes like Oglala, Hunkpapa, Two Kettles, etc
- Age 3 options would add tribes such as the Dakota and Dakhota to form the Oceti Sakowin
- Age 4+ would add further away tribes and Europeans and Americans
- Haudenosaunee would age up with the tribes of the Iroquois Confederacy
- Age 2-3 would be Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, Seneca, and Tuscarora
- Age 4+ would add further away tribes and Europeans and Americans
- Lakota could gradually expand into the Oceti Sakowin as they add tribes through aging up. It could also expand to European powers like the French, and grant them access to units such as Horse Artillery to fill in gaps in their unit roster.
- Community Plaza could be replaced by a Sweat Lodge or other civ-specific structure (Totem Poles, Chemamull, etc)
- Tribal Marketplace should be scrapped - a unique coin gathering mechanic could be added for Lakota, but every other tribe should just mine normally
Shared Features
- War Huts
- War Chiefs
- Canoes
- Battering rams to provide siege instead of made up Captured Mortars (each civ should also have other long range siege options like Light Cannons, Arrow Knights, or Horse Artillery from European allies)
Other Templates
- Some features could be shared among both state and tribal South American civs. For example, Bolas Riders could be a regional unit shared by all.
- Civs like the Haida could have an even more unique template with some features shared by potential oceanic civs like the Maori
9 Likes
I think that is generally a good concept with some exceptions. Like the Haudenosaunee encountered the Europeans before the Lakota for example.
And the Lakota encountered Horses before they encountered Europeans.
So it would make sense for the Lakota to have horses in Age 2 and guns in Age 3 like it is the case now.
I’m totally in for Age 4 gun powder weapons and cavalry for the Inca and Aztecs. The Mayan revolt or the Tupac Rebellion could be a good sample model for that.
They would be the perfect addition to the game.
They were fairly significant and they stayed mostly independent until the late 19th century (yes basically all pre 19th century South America maps are wrong but technically most American maps are still wrong).
I’m not sure how much sense if would make for Mapuche to share mechanics with North American civs instead the the Inca.
4 Likes
Personally, I rather like the idea of the Council for the two North American civs - for the Hauds, aging up with Clan Mothers would provide background about the backbone of Haudenosaunee culture while something like an equivalent Tiospaye Matriarch would do the same for the Lakota. It would also point out that the leaders of both civs are women, which is unusual for the time period and would make them the only ones in the game with that aspect.
I’m not really for portrayal of Inipi in the game, but I remember creating a possible replacement for the WoL team - Ribbon Tree. It’s customary among the Lakota to tie prayers to ceremoniously important trees - these are usually large, old trees along well-walked paths, and they end up covered in ribbons. The
Unfortunately, I do not know enough to find a replacement for the Haudenosaunee.
It could easily be a blend of both. Alliances could be representated by diplomats/council members. Something like the “Oglala Warrior”, “Two Kettles Wise Woman”, or “Dakota Messinger”. An alliance with the French could be represented by a “Voyageur”.
1 Like
Oh that’s even better. Could use a few real character, like Chief Eagle Woman (who was the closest thing to a Lakota-wide leader and would make a much better AI personality than Gall) or Moving Robe Woman. Chief Pretty Nose would make a good later-age alliance with the Arapaho.
I like this idea a lot.
1 Like
I wouldn’t go as far as explicitly naming them, but I’d make it heavily implied. Like for “Oglala Warrior” I had Crazy Horse and Red Cloud in mind.
Some of the more prominent chiefs could also be included as cards that send more War Chiefs like how Ethiopia has many cards and techs to send an additional Ras. It’s kind of absurd to have one mega unit that barges in to poke down cannons. It would be more realistic to tone down the War Chief stats and let you get 2 or 3 of them instead.
1 Like
Probably most of this ideas won’t be included on AoE III, but it would be cool for a mod or even an eventual AoE V that would revisit AoE III in the same way that AOE IV did for II.
1 Like
Bold of you to assume only native american civs are badly designed and need redesigning
And why does you wanting new civs should mean the old civs should remain outdated, inaccurate and badly designed?
2 Likes
a lot of hot takes in this thread
1 Like
people like you, no one hates you here on the forum i even understand that you want it to be true to your culture, it’s just that older people just want to play with lakota and hauds like they’ve always been since 2006 just a few additions and that’s all well.
Some people don’t like being reduced to stereotypes, and some other people just want more accuracy in the civs
I for example dislike the Portuguese getting the Organ Gun as a unique unit. For one, I can’t find any proof of them ever using organ guns, and even if they did, multiple other nations did as well, so it shouldn’t be an UU anyway.
5 Likes