I disagree–I think the legion armor looks quite like what we might think of for a Roman legionaire (at least in a stereotypical sense). They had to make it generic enough otherwise it would make less sense for other civs (like the Choson for example).
Hittites didn’t create pyramids that we know of, but at least the rampart I mentioned twice earlier looks like a pyramid. They certainly could have created smaller pyramids with relative ease.
That’s fine from a historical standpoint re: against having Egyptian architecture for other civs, but from a gameplay perspective they have to give the Egyptian style to some other civs, sorry. 
I am saying that of the candidates Assyrians, Hittites and Phoenicians can fit that bill if needed.
@mythdracon said:
@BornPants34 said:
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.
@Augustusman said:
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.
http://www.ancient.eu/Phoenician_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).
Everything you say makes sense and keeps a fair spread of the different tilesets +1. Agree.
Thanks! So full tally of the most balanced distribution with some historical accuracy:
Egyptian–Egypt, Phoenicia*, Assyria
Mesopotamian–Hittites, Babylon, Sumeria*, Persians
Greek–Greek, Minoan, Macedonian*
Roman–Rome, Palmyra, Carthage
Asian–Choson, Shang, Yamato
Only three civs’ styles need be shifted for this to work–Phoenicia from Greek to Egyptian style, Sumeria from Egyptian to Sumerian style, and Macedonian from Roman to Greek style. 
Maybe the developers will at least let us customize the architecture sets in the scenario editor? (Since I doubt they will shift any architecture styles, even if it takes little effort.)
Change Macedonian for Carthage, Macedonian successors creates most rich art called Hellenistic.
If AOE DE is going to have a workshop, there is going to be a custom mod to change it for sure 
Would have to be, since I doubt the developers would make an official change. We’ve been scant on news in general for the last two weeks.
