Yeah, and i’m not a fan of that. It’s part of why I have hope of a new “traditional” DLC coming soon, the devs have got to hear the rumbling and do something about it reasonably soon.
Though to be fair it is only about a year since Mountain Royals, it released late October last year (or maybe it was early October, but still, it was in October)
I would’ve preferred no content over ruining the game’s perfection with content that does not belong to aoe2.
Oh I see. Yeah, that’s not really my cup of tea either. I don’t actually mind having time pressure sometimes, but it has to be built in to the scenario design in some way, not just a countdown timer.
Well, I should say that V&V is a total trash dlc in the history of AOE2. Compare to this, BoG is so much better. In this, the developers show how they can do well while keeping AOE2’s colour.
They did well. I support the devs.
Plus, they should SACK who designed V&V. TOTAL TRASH.
I still wonder if we will ever have Battle Of Greece treatment for Medieval Civs even though it skipped Scythian Conquest part around modern day Bulgaria.
Like 70% of Mongol Saga still isnt covered. Majority of Crusade campaigns is yet to cover. Ottoman Saga but that is more of a borderline between AOE2 and AOE3. Early Islam Conquest itself will take 2-3 Chronicle style DLC to cover if not even more. Also we just got brief starting of 100 years of war. But still no proper final conclusion.
We need the East Asian DLC with the Chinese campaign, Jurchens, Tanguts, Tibetans and Khitans added along with campaigns for all.
Lately Devs have stopped caring what “we need” and started caring about what “they need”.
They add whatever the **** comes to their mind rather than listening to what the community wants.
I partially disagree. I think Chronicle makes up for ROR and is answering the need expressed by the community for more single player content.
Chronicles answers the need for multiple things people asked for in the past: