Reason for why he changed it back was because there were a lot of requests (due to nostalgia from what i understand) from other players to return to the old architecture style. From his changes, only the Egyptians would have had the Egyptian architecture style, while most civs would have had the Mesopotamian one(that would be historically correct as AoE tends to be historically correct - although i do not believe you are historically correct when you call a unit phalanx as it was a formation from what i was able to read around nor where Cataphract introduced as unit until the age 225-300 A.D. - but hey, who am i to complain?).
When he was developing it he was taking suggestions from multiple players and wanted (this is just me assuming) to get as many players on board with his changes.
I was not bothered by the civs architecture change. To be honest i barely even noticed it. But … sigh … some people want to have the same old chocolate i guess, even though it is a bit rough on the edges and dusty … if you get my drift.
Good to know. Frankly the Sumerians having the Egyptian architecture style really irked me because in Age of Empires’ own historical notes (in the Gold Edition manual), the Sumerian ziggurat appears (if I recall correctly). As a kid I wondered why Sumerians’ wonder wasn’t even their historical wonder. That would be like Romans building the pyramids.
SOLOMON’S TEMPLE AT JERUSALEM
A helpful source of information on Phoenician architecture is the Bible’s I Kings 6-7 description of King Solomon’s temple. This was, of course, built at Jerusalem in the 10th century BCE but the architects and artists involved in its construction were Phoenician and its layout matches temple descriptions at Phoenician sites and the wider region. Its general design shows a significant influence from Egyptian architecture.
This don’t mean Salomon temple was Egyptian style. It’s was influenced, Hittites never build Egyptian style. Influence isn’t the same as doing in the style.
Example Roman Architecture influence Spanish colonial or Neoclasissim but aren’t the same.
What’s mean have influence, may be proportions, may be base or the floor plan , may be material, no the same style necessary.
Sure. But I think in Age of Empires, “influence” is as close as we can get to the architectural style if we want to give the Egyptian tileset 3 civs at least. And as Phoenicia showed both Greek and Egyptian influence I think it’s fine for them to have the Greek tileset.
It would be potentially ok for Phoenicians to get Egyptian style, Macedonians Greek, and Sumeria Mesopotamian, that would leave Rome with 3 civs, Greece with 3, Egyptian with 3, Sumerian with 4 civs. That would be the most historically accurate way to go about it. Palmyra having Roman tileset makes complete sense, even if Carthage getting it doesn’t…
But really I mostly just must insist Sumerians get the Mesopotamian architecture style due to their being tied to the Mesopotamian wonder (of course, Age of Empires II also had that weird thing where the Britons’ wonder was Aachen Cathedral, but it at least looked like a cathedral that might have existed in medieval England…a Sumerian pyramid by comparison just beggars all belief).