Tibet being a religion based civi is just a modern concept.
1 Like
Huh, really? That’s unfortunate.
But Mongols were religious in the Middle Ages…
1 Like
They were “religious” in the sense that the Tibetan Empire here was a new power, invigorated by a mystical new religion and its rulers and mobility strongly patronised and endorsed the new faith across the realm. So there should not be any problem with them being developed like this. No different from how the Saracens/Arabs arose as a new great ppwer on the back of their adoption of Islam and expanded over the Near East and beyond.
When it was beneficial to them,they had no problem taking out people with same religion as them.
Yes there is no problem but some people seem to think the dalai lama is similar to a pope with lots of influence over buddhists.
And? I don’t see how that adds anything to what I said.
They had monastery related bonuses and feudal age monastery?
At one point even Dark Age monasteries were planned:
Personally I don’t think Feudal Age monks would be that useful – maybe even a bit of a noob trap. Good for collecting relics, but conversion is mostly good against high value units that don’t exist in Feudal Age. Scouts and archers are very common in Feudal Age and both hard counter monks.
I don’t see the problem with it including Buddhist and Shinto elements – as I understand it, it’s accurate. Buddhism and Shinto were only officially separated in Japan in the 19th century, and throughout the AoE2 time period there were combined Buddhist monasteries/Shinto shrines. Plus I think katsuogi being exclusive to Shinto buildings is a modern development too.
I agree that Japanese (and other East Asian civs) could do with some scenario editor content, though. But personally I’d prioritise a mounted samurai graphic over a Shinto shrine. (In fact, at this stage, I think I’d prioritise a mounted samurai graphic over any other update to the game.)
Admittedly I don’t know much about it, but I thought Tibet’s reputation as a religious centre arose mostly from 20th century politics. That said, I don’t know what this means:
and I don’t see a problem with them getting a monastery bonus.
Especially since Tibetan Buddhism dates back to the 6th century AD at the earliest, so it’s hardly a recent phenomenon.
1 Like
True. It will be a good tool as a preventive measure against knight rush.
Really? I thought 480 BC was more authentic than 563 BC as Buddha’s birth year.
Buddha’s birth year has nothing to do with the date of Tibetan Buddhism.
Nice to meet you my friends, I am new to the forum and I would like to participate in this type of publications to support with new ideas for the AOE franchise, I will start by saying that I have been reading this whole topic about architecture and I have nothing left to say that For this game to continue being profitable in the future, it needs new architectures that are more attached to the cultures of each civilization to give a fresh and new air. In addition, it seems to me that the military units need a remodeling. I think that adding regional units would make each civilization more feel more original and more fun to play, for the moment I can only add this type of conclusion I hope to be able to give you more meaningful suggestions in the future, thank you and greetings to all
2 Likes
What?
Welcome to the forum.
Why did you bring up Buddha’s birthdate? It is roughly a millennia before the rise of Tibetan Buddhism, so a small difference of about 80 years is not going to mean much. It’s simply not relevant.
I mean how can a religion originate before its founder’s birth. Anyway let’s focus on Architecture. While we’re eagerly waiting for a new DLC, let’s hope for at least one new architecture set.
Do you understand how dates work? The 6th century AD is a long time after 400 BC. Almost 1000 years, actually.
I was sure I had read 6th century BC. My mistake.
1 Like
The amalgamation of Shintoism and Buddhism is a big topic. In most cases, I think it is reflected in people’s understanding of Buddha and kami, such as understanding a kami as a kind of Buddha and enshrining it in a smaller Shinto shrine built inside or next to a Buddhist temple, or understanding a Buddha as a kind of kami and enshrining it in a smaller Buddhist temple built inside or next to a shrine. But in terms of architecture, Buddhism was stronger than Shintoism. The shrine structure was heavily influenced by Buddhism and almost not the other way around, which may be why the structures of shrines and Buddhist temples before shinbutsu bunri were similar. On the other hand, Japanese Buddhist architecture was influenced by the Six Dynasties in southern China from the early 3rd century to the late 6th century.
However, some elements did tend to only exist in one or the other. A tile roof is always better than a roof with katsuogi for the East Asian Monestary in the game. Even Shinto buildings use tile construction, but I have never seen a Buddhist temple with katsuogi. Not to mention that tiled roof also makes more sense to the Chinese and Koreans.
Katsuogi predate Buddhist influence and are an architectural element endemic to Japan.
Grand shrines that existed before the arrival of Buddhism, such as Izumo or Ise, already had thatched roofs with characteristic katsuogi and chigi.
2 Likes
Thanks for your response. I guess that means the current monastery looks more like a Shinto shrine with some Buddhist elements than vice versa. I suppose the original artists, who evidentally had three different roof styles planned for the different ages, just stuck with the Castle Age design once it was decided that there’d only be one monastery graphic.
One extra thing I’ll add (but not with any intention of arguing):
As I mentioned earlier:
This is particularly relevant to roofing, which is very often replaced, especially in the case of thatched roofs.
It has better to be just a Buddhist temple without Shinto elements, as it meanwhile serves for the other civs.
Being a simple Buddhist temple can not only fit the Japanese but also fit the other East Asian civs.
There are some old styles of Japanese shrine that have their serious and strict practices for centuries without an obvious change. The ancient styles have been replicated through the centuries to the present day. The style using chigi and katsuogi basically have never be used for Buddhist structures. Even with rare exceptions, the game should not reference them because they are not sufficiently representative of the Japanese, let along other East Asian civs.
1 Like