i love the art of war scenerios. i think they are a brilliant and are a perfect practice for real multiplayer games and situations. however it is not a campaign. it does not follow a historical series of events. it is a multiplayer tutorial not a historical campaign. so why is it located in the asia campaign menu. admitedly this is a petty complaint but it realy bugs me that a non campaign is in the campaign menu. we have an art of war button in the main menu we dont need it to also be in the campaign menu because its not a campaign
there is also a unique button for the tutorial (william wallace ‘campaign’), i think it’s fine
And historical battles, in the north of the Africa map.
Since it’s named after Sun Tzu’s famous book, placing it in China on the map makes sense.
This assumption is not true. You need to delete the word multiplayer in it. It is a general tutorial about the game. The insight you can get from the AoW campaign are useful for single player and multi player.
Things like how to build your eco and how to fight are also skills for single player. People play 1v1s against the AI. It will tell you about counter units and how to control your army. Things like that are also useful for campaigns.
So your assumption that AoW is a multiplayer tutorial is wrong.
Campaigns are a set of scenario that belong together. The different AoW scenarios belong together, so they form a campaign.
Only difference is that all other campaigns are based on historical events and this is the only odd one out. On the other side you can argue AoW is based on Sun Tzu famous book and therefore based on Chinese history. So placing it in Asia kinda make sense. There isn’t really a better spot for this campaign.
No thats not the meaning of a campaign. The strict definition is “an organized course of actions to achieve a goal”. In the case of an AoE2 campaigns tell an story. This doesnt tell an story. Its just a bunch of tutorials. Tutorials that dont even follow the idea of being “an organized course of actions” unlike the other campaigns
I dont want to mean but it just sounds like you are making the concept of campaign so abstract because you dont care, or maybe you think it would occupy space of the UI it shouldnt use
Seems like you are great in googling. Luckily it just fit my defintion, which wasnt a general defintion, but more specific for AoE2. Let me explain this. Each scenario requires you to do certain actions, leading to a final goal. Multiple scenarios combined are a campaign and these scenarios combined are also a set of action leading to a goal. In a tutorial campaign the goal is to learn the game. The skills you learn in this tutorial are for single player and multi player.
This is something made up by you and doesnt follow from your definition. And even if you include this into the definition, then AoW still fitting the description of a campaign.
The AoW campaign does tell a story. It is the story about how the game works, which is the goal of every tutorial in every game. In the story you are guided to how to set up your economy and military. How do you attack effective? How do you defend effective? How do you play naval battles? How to siege an enemy town? The Art of War campaign guides you through the story how this game works. It is an organized way of telling the basic of most important actions in the game. That is pretty much “an organized course of actions”, which is the definition you give us to work with.
You can even see the AoW as an historical story. Sun Tzu’s legacy still influence many battles nowadays. So learning how to fight battles effectively is pretty much fitting the story line of Sun Tzu’s legacy. The name of this campaign is even named after his most important and influencial work. The Art of War story is the story of his legacy. Many of his lessons are applicable to AoE2 as well. And you learn that story in the AoW campaign in the form of this tutorial campaign.
Nice part of flaming at the end. It made no sense at all to include this in your post. Adding these kind of statements to a post doesnt add anything to a discussion in a respectfull manner. It is totally fine if you disagree with my statements (like i do with yours), but shall we not add personal attacks to the posts? Thanks.
This is a non issue. It is literal nitpicking. The game has other issues far more important than this.
If yourbdefinition you used was so abstract, yes, ofc I would use google
An explanation isnt an story. I like tutorials and I like the Art of War, but its not an story just like a science book isnt an story.
Nope, its an unorganized course of actions. The order of many of the scenarios may as well be entirely random
And yes before you ask I think it would also make sense to give historical battles their own tab but at least the contrast isnt as harsh as it is beetwen the art of war and other campaigns
Either way, its a nitpick, but putting them togheter seems very weird.
I, for one, agreed with you, I think the fact that I can never remember where it is, what tab it’s on shows that it’s a terrible place for a tutorial.
However… before hitting ‘post’ I thought I’d just double check something. I use an old main menu mod where ‘the art of war’ is on the front page. Which I like, but after reverting the menu to the default one it has a ‘learn to play button’ which brings up a menu for ‘the basics’ William Wallace campaign and ‘advanced techniques’ for art of war.
So I think it’s fine having it in a place where no one will find it, so long as it stays easy to find on the main menu.
The book of Sun Tzu isnt ‘just like a science book’. Its historically value is much more than this. AoW tells the story of Sun Tzu’s legacy. A very big legacy.
There is a reason why his page on wikipedia is for a big portion filled with his The Art of War. The story line of Sun Tzu is fitting for the tutorial campaign.
I just found out that the wiki ended with his note:
Funny to find my statement back in the wiki. No, i didnt put it there…