I believe that suggestions will not be unwelcome, but obviously some people’s “suggestions” are always mixed with too many intense emotions, making others feel that they are not suggesting, but urging, asking for or even blaming, which will naturally arouse irritability, especially when dev don’t yet, can’t, or don’t plan to do it, those people considered it is “insulting”.
This is according to what the developer once said. I speak based on reality and facts.
Also, I’ve said many times, never compare AoE2 to AoE3. What works for AoE2 may very well not work for AoE3, and vice versa. They are completely different games.
They said no such thing. They said they wouldn’t add Austria as a new civ because the current Germans are essentially Austria. They did not say they wouldn’t split them by adding Prussia.
Nor did he said that the current Germans are essentially Austrians. Nor.
My interpretation of this sentence is that Germans represent German-speaking European countries (eg. needle gun and Berlin for Prussia, war wagons and Wallenstein for Austria, settler wagons in Bavaria), with HRE as a base. The Austrians are included in this, so the requirement for the Austrians is weird.
Btw, in the past, players used to think of the current German civilization as Prussians, so they wanted to have Austrians. You are now narrating in reverse. This does not make the same civilization become Austrians and then change to want Prussians just because of this sentence.
Anyway let’s see what are the developers willing to give the few remaining slots to. The Danes, Brazilians, Muisca, Mapuches, Congolese, Persians, Omanis, Siamese, or the second German civilization.
I’d rather not have Muisca as anything more than a minor faction. We don’t need more civs that were completely conquered before the mid 1500s. If you want another civ from the region, the Maya resisted conquest until the 1900s and deserve more than just a weird Mexican revolution.
The ottomans are a poor example to make your point. The janisaray were rises from childhood and gathered as tributes from all the various nationalities that were part of the ottoman empire. The game doesn’t illustrate this.
If we dig deeper we will find that many of the units are actually from under the umbrella.
If anything, your example just proves my point ever further - they’re specific from Ottoman history. There is only a single unit in the Lakota roster from Lakota history - the Tokala Soldier.
Otherwise, there isn’t a single unit in the Lakota roster that’s actually from Lakota history. Everything in it isn’t even an amalgamation of the Seven Fires - they’re just straight up generic archetypes of prairie nations.
It’d be like having a civ called China, but the units you get are Chu Ko Nu and a bunch of generic units modeled after Siberians, Russians, Tibetans, North Indians, and Vietnamese cultures.
That’s how I view the Lakota civ in general - there’s one little bit here and there from Lakota history, but the rest of it is taken from the stereotypical prairie Native archetype, very little of which had to do with the Lakota in the first place.
It’s hard to describe though, and that isn’t a perfect metaphor - the Lakota civ represents the Crow and the Comanche just as well, despite neither civ having much anything at all in common with each other. It’s hard to explain just how ambiguous the Lakota design actually is because there’s no other civ in the game made with such an ambiguous foundation. Even the Haudenosaunee are at least modeled off the Haudenosaunee family of cultures - the Lakota share a base design that’s so vague it could represent cultures as alien to them as the Mongols are from the Russians and Iranians.
I dunno. You rename them into a new civ and all the same problems apply - they’re still so generic that they don’t actually represent any of the prairie nations in the slightest, they’re just a stereotypical amalgamation of what a miseducated and misinformed person would expect to find on the plains.
Before you give an example, it is better know a little more about what you are going to mention.
The regions you mentioned have different religions, different language systems, far different myths, different ways of life, different artistic styles,…. It is obvious to anyone that the differences between them are far greater than the differences between the prairie nations of North America.
Btw, when you use the term such like “prairie nations”, it means it’s a term that you know it covers the peoples there. You don’t like making this term the new name for the civilization, okay it’s your own opinion. But this term does solve the issue you’re mention that the civilization isn’t just Lakota, and there seems no evidence yet that this term would offend native groups other than yourself.
Well the game used to call them Sioux, which was more umbrella than Lakota.
But they narrowed down to Lakota and did little in terms of less generic naming and units, this is what Ana means. Now the whole debate about Sioux is another topic but I viewed the name fine (exonym vs endonym debate here). Wouldn’t have cared if it changed to Oceti Sakowin or Seven Councils.
I don’t think devs would backtrack to umbrella. It’s easy to change names and make some new buildings or units without drastically changing the game or balance.
What are you exactly trying to argue here tho? I am late to the conversation.
As i said, i think a lot of nations have this problem. For some it is easy to flash out revolutions. For the native Americans, well, that’s harder. Personally, i think renaming Sioux to Lakota was wrong. They should have renamed to something more appropriate for what they were actually aiming.
I think they mentioned at some point that they first create the fantasy of a civ and then pick an actual real civ to illustrate the fantasy. As a designer myself i can understand why they do it like this, but it’s obvious it won’t meet historical accuracy.
I will say this. Asian civs are more stereotypical than native Americans. Asian civs received no love from devs. Like none. Heck even in DE they got no new civs while native Americans got Incas.
Asian civs are built in a idea of orientalism.
