I think it would be interesting and logical to introduce a new gameplay element for female and male settlers. The different gather speed!
Maybe I missed something, but the main idea, example
Male settlers will be effective for:
Food from animals hunted
Wood from Tree
Gold from Mines
Female settlers will be effective for:
Food from Berrybush, Mills, and other buildings
Gold from Plantation and other buildings
That sounds awful and pointless
28 Likes
ah yes, please add sexism to the game :gigachad:
20 Likes
That’s a great idea. But I think you don’t go far enough. I understand It might be controversial, but in addition to what you propose, I think villagers with darker skin should gather gold faster from plantation…
(Obviously I’m mocking the OP, I’m not advocating for adding racism in this game…)
7 Likes
No. That would make little to no sense in many of the civs - afaik, only the European civs would have any basis for this. In every other culture in the game, both men and women were expected to be capable of these tasks equally.
5 Likes
An emphatic no. 20 chars
2 Likes
that is absolutely terrible a pointless idea. It just add useless complications to the game, also you randomly get villagers you don’t choose if they are male or female. Unless you change that
4 Likes
What the **** did i just read? Lol
4 Likes
0 a.d was built on that and they are considering changing.
This won’t happen in AoE III, btw.
What we need is female Courer des bois to French.
4 Likes
There weren’t any female Coureur des Bois. A lot of colonies were >80% men. The Metis came about because there were almost no European women. They had to bring over the Filles du Roi to correct the massive gender imbalance.
I’d like to see a Filles du Roi card, but I don’t think we need more than that.
8 Likes
What is wrong with you?
1 Like
Sorry, you’re right, I should said female villagers/setllers wether from France or being Metis.
Perhaps they could gather from unique fields too with special corn and watermelon crops.
The 0-AD game works similar to this. But they are 2 types of villager.
This, in addition to being controversial, would be impractical, so they would also have to be divided into 2 types of villagers.
I think it’s currently fine as it is, since it’s the first AOE to include female villagers. (I don’t know if mythology also has them).
Instead of this I would propose that they include female soldiers.
also its pretty hard to distinguish the vils sometime and not to mention its a random roll, so u will be ■■■■■■ if you dont get what you want for the resources you need
It does.
How many of the civs in the game have a historical basis for this? I know the Lakota and Haudenosaunee do, but I don’t know about any beyond that.
But I’d gander that the Lakota are probably the only civ in the game that very nearly had equal numbers of both - women generally served as sharpshooters and support rather than direct melee combatants, though.
Are you high ? Please give me some of the stuff you take °^°
I don’t know, but I guess there are always exceptions.
The only Age that didn’t had females was I, probably by tech limitations. A pitty that they didn’t fix it in DE.
From what I recall, other women on battles had been somewhat common in Euroasian steppes (Scythians) and some African cultures. Also in last stands and siege defenses.