Sounds fancy and aoe4 could use some spice.
I honestly like the name a lot.
Don’t listen to those, who criticise everything for the sake of criticising.
Please fix pathfinding and unit animations instead.
Horses shouldn’t float like water in the formation.
Putting a mechanic like Jeanne d’arc in the game, if it is well-balanced, is a great idea for versatility and people who already complaining without being able to test are stupids retrogrades.
For me there are 2 big issues with the hero name:
As a civilisation name it makes absolutely no sense because it’s not a civilisation name.
Call it “Jeanne d’Arcs Followers” or something but not just her name.
You are not just playing her after all.
Pretty sure changing a name doesn’t delay the programmers work.
But that said, i agree with keeping the name.
For those who get confused by the “its not a civ name” , the civ name is french ok. That’s what variants names mean. They are not the name of the civ but the name of the variant of that civ.
Bro but jeanne didnt do too much and counting her as a civ variant is so weird there is a centruies old french civ and jeanne,she died without even swing a sword its so weird, if they name it orleans duchy everybody at least know she was from orleans and learn a historic fact maybe they should make variant civs another dlc and cut the dlc price half
“those who criticise everything for the sake of criticising” is an absolutely massive mischaracterisation. The community as a whole overwhelmingly dislikes the name. I personally love most of what Relic have done with this game, it’s why I play it, but the variant names (minus ayyubids) are bizarre and bad.
The idea that the community as a whole dislikes the name is the mischaracterization. It’s a select group of people continously making the same threads, and it practically amounts to “remove this because BAD”.
What’s your definition of for the sake of criticising?
Let people give some construct feedback.
Look at Ayyubids, it was the sultans army a few days ago.
If we wanna criticize a game “for the sake of criticising” why would we go here in the official forums instead of youtube/twitter to reach more people?
We are here because we love the game
Also, you have your point to like, even love the name.
Just don’t open a thread here and say “Don’t listen to those”
Why? Should the devs just listen only you?
Give arguments, learn how to discuss things.
Saying to not listen the community, the customers, is the biggest shot in the foot for any company
That poll was before the change, I also didn’t like Sultan’s Army. Because it could be any civ (delhi, ottoman…)
I like the names now, and nothing else make sense as civ name when jeanne darc is the center of the civ . French is still the civ name historically. Jeanne darc is just the gameplay name of civ bonus variant.
Jeanne Darc was fighting with a sword in games since AoE2 but people didn’t have an issue with her then.
I don’t care about the name, I like the gameplay that it will have. So to those haters, stop yelling and complaining, enjoy the game and the new ideas that are coming to the game. When the devs don’t do something new you complain, when they take risk to bring something new you also complain. And you know what other player from other RTS will see their game mechanics similar to these new variant civs and will come to play them, the less thing they would care is the name.
I like the concept of hero variants, the issue is surprise and inconsistency. Nobody was expecting that and JdA is the only hero variant in there…
Well I’ll make I thread myself with what I was gonna say!
I still don’t like naming the civ after her, but I’ve accepted the silliness of cloning her or having her in different ages. After thinking about this more, it’s not that much different than what we’ve had in previous age games. In AoE3, each AI civ had only one leader so you could have Napoleon vs Napoleon, or Napoleon vs Queen Isabella, two rulers from vastly different eras. AoE2 you also could have something like Joan of Arc vs Charles Martel.
Yeah there are a more than a few instances where we had to close an eye. Wouldn’t be AoE without those moments though!
No, this whole update is trash except for the addition of Byzantines and Japanese. We literally already have a French civ in the game as well as a Joan of Arc campaign. Why would they make more French stuff instead of making new civs that aren’t yet represented? We aren’t criticizing for the sake of it, we are criticizing this awful decision because there are currently only 10 civilizations in the game and with countless options available, they decide to give us weird knock offs of some of the very few civs we already have so that they can save money. It is honestly a joke.
Also, this name sucks for a civ. The established timeline for civs currently in the game is roughly 800-1650. Why would a civ that exists from dark age to imperial age in the game be named after a French girl who died at age 19 in the 15th century? There is already a campaign about her story. She died like 3 years after rising to prominence, in the 15th century, so it doesn’t fit with the established timeline of the game. Actual fans of the series see right through this and recognize it as the money saving sham it is.
I strongly agree with you comment in general, but Ayyubids is cool and relevant as a civ in this expansion. It should be promoted to “civilization” from “variant civ” right away as I have pretty much demonstrated and proven in my topic here on forum.
They did a great job with Ayyubids, but must separate Jeanne D’Arc, Zhu Xi’s Legacy and Order of Dragon by placing them in a toggleable “Variants Mode”. Ayyubids must join the real civs.
Totally agreed, especially with a giant civilization of history like Persians not yet in the game.
Right on. The situation is serious. I invite you to take a look at my investigation and conclusions regarding a solution in my topic. If they force Jeanne D’Arc and Zhu Xi as equal to real civilizations without a separate toggleable Mode, the reaction will be strong and hurt AoE4.
The Ayyubid dynasty was a confederation under that Abbasid caliphate and it’s timeline seems a bit narrow for the established time frame of the existing civs, but it probably bothers me the least of the variant civs. I’d still definitely see other, more unique civs first but at least they seem to be heading in the right direction with the changes they are making to this one.
The Jeanne D’Arc civ is not salvageable though, we already have the French as well as the Joan of Arc campaign, it is already more than enough to cover her very limited window of prominence and not worth being its own civ.
I’d rather have no new civs than recycled copies that will likely make the game worse. Almost everyone would have been thrilled with just getting Byzantines and Japanese. These variant civs are extremely divisive and should be scrapped.
I don’t think it is unsalvageable. But, for all intents and purposes, under Relic, it probably is.
They could easily rename the civilization into the Franks and have the civilization centered around a “King” unit that is meant to represent multiple Kings throughout the ages. Like the English one, but keeping the identity of having the entire civilization centered around that one unit. Franks might not be an ideal name, but French is already an overarching name–they seemingly had no foresight when they chose to make it that. All you would need for this is to rename the units, the civilization and swap out the JdA model for one of the existing French King models.
Here is the issue though. Good luck changing their minds on this! Someone in their studios has their gaze dead set on Jeanne d’Arc for some reason and they are willing to drag the entire franchise down to make it real.
Awful name aside, it is still a civ that shares a geographical location with an existing civ.
The reason they are dead set on her and don’t want a generic king is of course politics. She is the most prominent character on the cover, she has her own campaign - both fair enough - but her own civ when the French are already in the game and she wasn’t even born until the end of the established timeline for the civs already in the game is just too much.
So they are called variants, and not civilizations. The blog post and the trailer make that clear. The DLC adds 2 civilizations and 4 variants. That means that they were intended to focus on a specfic portion of their reference civs timeline and expand it to the full gameplay. The period of time being experienced is already breaking the reality of their depiction. No day time night time cycles, no transition between seasons, no character ages out of play as a result of existing for hundreds of years. These complaints always feel so strange to me when I compare them to what I experience I play the game.
If you did this you would effectively eliminate the entire focus of the variant, which IS Jeanne d’Arc. The abilities, the units, even the name, it’s literally all about Jeanne d’Arc. Trying to adjust parts of this takes away from the overall design. It also sets a precedent for future design. This is more than likely not the last variant to be lead by an individual identity, it is most definitely the first of many.
She has been a primary representation of the franchise since 1999 as the first campaign you would play after the tutorial. It is honestly the most likely pick, her face comes up first in the release trailer of the game. I would argue that all of these doom and gloom statements coming from people who haven’t even touched the content in question, those are the people attempting to drag it down. It really is not that these comments are falling on deaf ears. The arguments for change are not effectively compelling, and the scope of change you can make as a consumer was always limited.
Change the new civ’s name into “French (Jeanne d’arc)” and change original French into “French (Valois Royals)”. PLEASE, currently variant civs’ name seems weird when they are displayed next to their root civs.
For example,
Abbasid Dynasty → Arabian (Abbasid)
Ayyubids → Arabian (Ayyubids)
seems making better sense right?