I would’ve also guessed them to have some sort of face paint, or ornamentation on their “armour” considering that these are carrying priests, making it more ceremonial or ritual in nature.
Side nitpick; the Imams plank at an awkward angle when they die on the Healer Elephant. Also this picture demonstrates an issue with the armour clipping through them when they die, this is a thing on all Elephants.
The DLC delivered such a cool representation via the Raider Elephant and Worker Elephant that it is sad to see that the Healer Elephant and Ballista Elephants are so placeholdery in comparison.
Regarding face paint, or ornamentation on their “armour”.
I disagree!
I repeat! It should NEVER be done!
The reason is that the developers promised to return to the theme of India and develop a new civilization, which will probably be South India.
Precisely to show the cultural and DIFFERENT DESIGN differences, the elephants of North India and South India should have very distinct appearances and not be the same.
Here is some research I did that might help you understand what I mean:
The Dravidians, and more broadly, including the southern Dravidian regions, used elaborate paintings and decorations on the faces and bodies of their war elephants. These decorations had multiple purposes: - Intimidation: The paintings and ornaments, along with armor and towers carrying archers and slingers, aimed to terrify enemy troops and horses on the battlefield. - Identification: Specific symbols and colors could indicate which army, king, or clan the elephant belonged to. - Cultural and Religious Significance: In Indian culture, the elephant is a sacred animal, a symbol of strength, wisdom, luck, and power, often associated with the god Ganesha. The decorations had a strong ritualistic and spiritual meaning. - Royal Status: Richly adorned elephants also demonstrated the wealth and power of the ruler who owned them.
In short, I want a VERY VISIBLE difference between North and South India and not a recycling of the same units.
Note: It is known that southern India made extensive use of colors, paintings, and ornaments… however, they were terrible at armor. Therefore, the most visible difference will be precisely this issue of colors, ornaments, and paintings between the elephants of northern and southern India.
Sometimes I forget that promise. And it’s an old one (2021).
I’ll keep it on my to-do list, along with the most realistic Japanese walls and the Jeanne d’Arc remake.
Indeed, in medieval Hindu kingdoms, especially in the south, war elephants were generally unarmored, except perhaps for the front section used for charging city gates.
Most war elephants were ridden by nobles or high-caste soldiers.
Here is a depiction of a Chola war elephant in a temple; note that it is unarmored:
As for the reason why, I theorize that because of the intense heat at that latitude, most soldiers preferred to fight without metal armor that would slow them down, preferring to rely on their shields for protection against arrows or blows. And since they weren’t concerned with developing better armor, they were even less likely to consider equipping their elephants with it.
It was the Delhi Sultanate that introduced heavy armor to elephants in India, as they viewed them not as mounts for nobles, but as war mounts. Like horses, they could be armored and ridden by experienced soldiers instead of a select few.
At least for future civilizations of South India, such as Chola/Muvendar, they could well introduce a subtype of lightly armored elephants, ridden by nobles, perhaps in a support role.
I did some research a few months ago… I haven’t had time to post it yet. But probably when I post it here on the forum, I’ll need help to supplement the information.
From what I’ve researched, I haven’t found any documented or written evidence, or any statue or painting from the time, or descriptions from visitors… that the elephants of southern India possessed chainmail or iron plate armor. Apparently, chainmail armor and iron plates were never used on elephants in southern India. There’s only a “belief,” but without proof.
This applies to standard infantry and cavalry… however, since Cholas and Vijayanagara hired mercenaries, I believe that nothing prevents the mercenaries from possessing their own armored armor.
Initially, all the armor for elephants in southern India was either very superficial or had a partial covering of leather and padded fabrics.
As you mentioned, it seems that the ambient temperature was unpleasant… opting for very light armor or armor with several layers of leather and padding.
Another interesting point is that they had a great variety of colors; I don’t know if it was just for status or nobility or personal choices. It would be cool if the colors of the padded leather armor in the game varied, like the colors and designs seen on the shields of Byzantine lancers.
Image of elephants belonging to the Vijayanagara Empire:
Apparently, there was indeed a civilization in southern India that used full armor for horses and elephants. It covered the entire body… however, the quality of the material is unknown.
This civilization was the Hoysala Dynasty!
They had access to merchants from the north and, consequently, acquired some differentiated armor for cavalry and elephants.
At the same time, the Hoysala were in direct combat with the northern peoples, who used full and superior armor… this certainly influenced the Hoysala.
Image of horses and elephants covered in full armor, belonging to the Hoysala Dynasty (circled in green is the armored cavalry and circled in blue are the armored elephants):
thanks for the zoom in screen. no wonder people still talk about the same stuff 5 years later. the game is and looks as bland as it gets. the faster you guys accept it the better for your own health and peace of mind, and start looking forward for what might be next. there’s never going to be any graphics overhaul, redesigns or similar as some hope. they will keep releasing some cookie cut civs as long as there’s profit margin for them and besides that the game is already moving steadily towards life support.
The water change was drastic. The terrain rendering also.
They’re not going to redevelop the whole game, no. But they still do stuff. They fixed the Cisterns and the Floating Gate not very long ago. They diversified sheep.
Stuff keeps happening. It’s incorrect to act as though it isn’t.
Struggling to understand what you mean by this, sorry.
Neither AoE II: DE, nor III: DE, changed their engine. It was even used again for Retold.
I was responding to someone saying that graphical overhauls hadn’t happened, when in fact they have. Water used to look a lot worse. Terrain used to look a lot less detailed (same texture, different rendering technique). Shadows and AO were rewritten to be both better and more performant.
“Unreal Engine” isn’t a magical phrase. It still requires a graphics pipeline. It still requires (significant!) investment to get a good return.
It appears to be a symmetrical extension of the ship’s keel, held in place by timbers, but that design is very strange, so maybe is a BUG. What I don’t know is if it’s an error in setting the maximum keel size that affect the shape of the Rudder.
I reviewed old videos of the game and came across one from the BETA version (September 26, 2021), made by Aussie, where “the same error” appears in the Baghlah.
I mean that Relic is not going to update all graphic aspects for Age Of Empires. It needed of amount of investents, time and 5-7 people who working on It. RELIC has not enough people.
UNREAL Engine Is not a magican solution but It very simply for the most of developers.
Aside of Relic there are not developers out there who are able to work on this Engine with the same skill of RELIC.
And personally i believe on what Jez Corden said about difficult faced by World’s Edge with Essence.
I saw some discussion addressing how good some caster’s streams looked, which was mostly due to oversaturation in post effects or directly via their streaming program. In the comments below, a user suggested that it turning the brightness dial to zero would have a similar effect and remove the hazy washed look of AoE4.
After some testing, I’ve found that the reverse is actually true. The game looks much better with overexposure in brightness by enhancing colours and doing away with harsh darks that gives the game an overcast british vibe.
It also adds more to the whimsical nature of AoE4, which many attribute to being “cartoony”. I think those individuals may have little taste in visual fidelity and may simply prefer clarity than mood. It strikes me that AoE4 was designed with such an appearance first, only for it to be tuned back in response to council members of influencers who no longer even play AoE4. Back when everyone saw the trailer and immediately yelled “Mobile game!”.
Deserts look more like deserts, forests pop and feel more vibrant, waters look refreshing rather than like sludge and the strong team colours (which was always a thing in AoE games, including AoE2) makes the game feel more like it should have. Unfortunately enhancing the brightness also influences the menu, which definitely does not fit with higher brightness, but, this is a sacrifice well worth the price if you care about visuals.
For context, I went from 35 brightness to 60. At 75, it is definitely too much, and yet it was the number that made me realize the game looks better with higher brightness than without, and so I am still experimenting with the number 60. If you’ve been disappointed by the washed look of AoE4, I suggest you give this a try.
I would mess with my screen’s saturation settings, but they are perfectly tuned for my line of work, and nor do I find it appealing to use filters specifically for AoE4.
Funny thing tho is that you were already happy with the game and defending it and the devs on these forums so there’s that substantial difference for you. I bet not single person who disliked the game at release has changed their minds now because of these very substantial differences.
Granted, they tried to save face and pull the navy out of its beta state. Some want to present this as a great achievement and gift from the devs that people should be grateful for. It’s not. It’s the bare minimum for an AoE game.
see, that’s what I’m talking about. People are still talking about redoing stuff 5 years later, as if the game is still in beta or alpha. The same convos circulating the forums for 5 years should say something about the overall quality of this game.@TheLiberator236 It’s not your fault of course, you are absolutely right to want quality in your game and that’s sometimes hard to find in a world as dry as that of AoEIV.
Is not that obvious pal?
We all deserve the quality for a product we bought
Instead we got a undeveloped game with a messy graphics mix, bugs, unfinished with non-existent features and so
