What civ would get the split treatment? The only one I can think of is the Japanese and the Italians.
Hmm… maybe Chinese? Spanish?
1 Like
That’s not how AoE2 civs work. Different city states do not warrant being different civs. And not sure if you are referring to different clans or the Ainu with the Japanese #### ### either way, no. The Ainu never were a unified people, or had a united army.
Chinese will probably get the same treatment as the Slavs. Stay as they are, but have a bunch of civs from around them added like Tanguts, Jurchens and Khitans.
2 Likes
Examples:
visigoths, crimean goths and ostrogoths are goths
swedes and danes are vikings
scots and irish are celts
2 Likes
That’s a defeatist attitude. This is not a Vietnamese only game. Ridiculous decision on Lac Viet but more should be done to add AOE1DE civs.
1 Like
Meanwhile how he(Sandy) talks in podcasts today about how they picked Koreans 101:
Microsoft: Add Koreans.
Sandy: What? Why?!
Microsoft: Starcraft has huge amounts of customers in Korea.
Sandy: But there is no Korean civilization in Starcraft…
Microsoft: Just do it.
Sandy: OK…
4 Likes
I was hoping to see some Indus Valley civs, but maybe next DLC…
3 Likes
They should have been implemented in the Return of Rome DLC right away - this way AoE1 would have 20 civs.
- Lac Viet
- Funan
- Harappan
- Mauryan
1 Like
Strange when this Roman civilization is available without the Israelite civilization.
1 Like
Israelites civ are perfect for Cradle of Civilization DLC:
- Aksum (ancient East African civ)
- Armenians
- Israelites
- Peloponnesians (Spartans and Greeks dominated by Sparta)
The current Greeks civ could change the name to Delians - Athenians and Greeks dominated by Athens.
2 Likes
######################## post:1, topic:229511"]
That’s ridiculous.
[/quote]
I’ve checked comments under first teaser, on official YT channels (Xbox and one for AoE brand) and some private ones, and responses and predominantly positive (even when leaving aside posts like ‘wooo F YEAH let’s GOO!!’)
It’s a super exciting DLC that will most likely be very fun and hopefully a success for the developers and the brand, just like all others.
It’s not ridiculous but some of the whiny fans, living in echo chambers and the reality of their minds, are.
edit: I have no idea what is going on on this forum. Why username is censored? I’m, just replying to a registered user, using the ‘quote’ function.
Whose idea is this? That kind of mindless auto censorship is as bad as water AI in AoE3.
3 Likes
Funny how you are much more agressive than the whiny fans.
I guess not likimg something isnt allowed in your evho chamber
2 Likes
Saying that someone is guided by their imagination and not reality (and gets emotional based on that) is not ‘aggressive’. If the word ‘whining’ is an act of aggression, maybe you are just a little bit too sensitive?
I’m not sure what your definition of that word is, but you are more than welcome to state it like that if that does make you feel better.
Not sure what I have to do with anything with what I said, that is a positive reaction of people on the Internet, observed since the video reveal of this DLC.
Using an strawman argument to criticize a group of people is aggressive lol.
What strawman argument?
Overly emotional complaining is my observation.
My argument is a general reaction of fans on AoE-related channels where they express their opinion about this DLC, labeled here by said people as ‘backstab, ridiculous, the worst in the history’. And that is very much unreasonable, to describe it in a polite way.
This.
Whats the problem with calling something ridiculous? Lol
Also overtly emotional complaining? “i dont like Romans being in the game, Byzantines are Romans”, “Romans are unnecessary”, “whats the point of a single player only civ?”, “Thats all for AoE2?” Seem like all pretty solid argumebts to me.
What ‘this’? I have no idea what are you even trying to say. Try to formulate a sentence of two instead of quoting me. I know what I said.
I can repeat and rephrase the same thing about whiny comments depicting this DLC as an outrageous, terrible thing and dev blunder. That still is what it is- my opinion, based on what everyone can see.
My argument, or rather counterargument to these claims, is everything happening outside- on Steam forums, in the comment section of Age of Empires channels, content/price analysis, comparisons to previous DLCs etc.
And what is happening outside this place, a forum for dedicated or very dedicated fans, is positive reaction and excitement, far, far from what few people here are saying about ‘worst thing in the history of AoE2’.
It’s whining, and again- you can call it however you want if that bothers you. I don’t see a reason to not speak my mind. Unless the point of this forum is to create a hermetic echo chamber with one accepted narrative: ‘DLC terrible!’.
How are we in an echo chamber when a lot of people here are just expressing their opinions and disagreeing with each other? And those “overtly emotional complains” done by “whiners” are actually based on stuff, you know? They are arguments.
Thats the strawman argument you were making. If you come here to just complain about us like that you are being more toxic than us.
at least give us +2 civs in aoe2
3 Likes
here’s what they should’ve done, make this an aoe1 mode within aoe2, no civs strictly added to aoe2, and offer a reasonable deal to existing owners of aoe1 DE, yk the people they’re trying to target with this
instead you either pay 15$ for 1 civ you can’t really use in ranked etc. or 35$ when including base game, if you’re an aoe 1 DE owner purchasing this as an upgrade, and both of these just end up looking like scams, smt that could’ve been avoided completely if they were smart, like they were with 2 and 3 DE’s being released in a way that offered perma discount by either owning a copy of aoe2 HD or aoe3 on steam
1 Like