The goal is to give 65-200 food between 6-12 mins and another 200 food before tcs are added without further investment into techs. Shouldn’t be like 200 food per age either to discourage blacksmith market builds. If you can think of such a way then you can replace it with the food from building bonus.
In this case the civ should get bloodlines and knights.
I don’t care how it’s done, so long as it feels natural.
Food sprouting from buildings is weird.
Tbh I think Tanguts should be worse at archers than almost anyone in China. They werent very famous for it
Also, they should definitely get the Khitam infantry stuff. The Khitan infantry sucked, and Khitans should get some kind of heavy cav
That’s how things works, yeah. The community only have a narrow piece of time to get changes, they rage, they complain, they spam every social media, etc… if the devs want to listen, they listen and fix things. If they don’t want to listen, they simple ignore and people move on after some time.
Take for example another media in the Sonic movie. When the trailer was released, fans bullied the studio to hell and back (the only time Twitter bullying was usefull for anything) and the producers made changes.
If the producers ignored, they would release the movie, it would flop and everyone would move on, as nothing can be done.
An example very close is Age of Mythology. When they released the beta with the AI art and awful arkantos dub, people complaining and the devs listened and made changes. If they ignored, oh well, some months later the community would of course move on, as the message is clear: nothing will change.
When “this time its different” happens, the fans simple abandon the thing and it is left to rot. It happened to multiple games and other media. Look at what happened with Warcraft 3 Reforged.
And now we have a trilogy of movies making millions at the box office, with more spinoffs on the way. Listening to the fans really does work.
The Shu cannot be easily converted to Bai, a lot of things need to be done:
It’s better just to move the 3 Kingdom civs to the Chronicles to free up civ spots in the main game, and then create a new Bai or Baipu civ from scratch.
According to Song records, the Tanguts were known to have invented or used the Shenbi (Divine Arm) crossbow, hence I don’t think they should have worse archers.
I meant more in the sense that theres very little emphasis in their mounted archers from what I read
Also idk about you but everything about their military struggling with Chinese crossbows seem to imply that they couldnt just match the Chinese in that aspect
I’m not sure where you got your records about Chinese history.
From what I’ve read about the primary sources, the Song credited the Tanguts with inventing the Shenbi crossbow and the horseback flail, both of which were later adopted into the Song armies.
And the Tanguts were able to defeat the Song on numerous occasions. In the end the Song had to resort to turtling strategy (building many forts along the border) to deal with them.
I got it from a paper cited on wikipedia (The Sino-Tangut War of 1081-1085 on JSTOR p 10)
I know that the Tangut military was very capable, they survived a war against both the Song and Liao at the same time. Im saying that as far as Im aware their strengths werent on archery
The current War Chariot is already a Scorpion replacement, Shu has no access to Scorpion-line.
If they really introducing Juggernaut as Shu, or any Chinese civs’ unit, I suggest to give it other name like Meng Huo You, a name for petroleum in ancient China, or just, flamethrower.
btw, AoE3 has a pretty accuracy unit recreating how medieval Chinese flamethrower should look like.
Not really related to Three Kingdoms though, as I think it’s based on a illustration from Song dynasty.
So I’d like to add the Scorpions back to Shu after the Chariots are gone.
I think it’s acceptable for the unit to be called Juggernaut. After all, this DLC is Clearly stated that the civs and the story are based on the RoTK, so it can have that name just like in the Total War and Dynasty Warriors, other video games that also reference the novel.
According to the description in the novel, this flamethrower was designed to look like a roaring tiger.
We would gonna follow the description for it.
Ok just to make it clear again, because my other posts have been deleted.
I criticise the implicit claim of this thread to be representative. It’s not. There is also no two sides. Everybody hs different interests and even if there might be some abstractl differentiable interest groups, they aren’t homogenous AND it’s more than two.
I averse the already long but slow tendency of the community to factionate. It’s not healthy.
I think most people can live with that. The people who asked for Heroes there usually didn’t come from the top end of ranked play. And the current Heroes are also not implemented in a “competitive” way. Way too overpriced.
I think it would be better to add a "“Heroic” mode instead where you can play ALL civs with one associated hero. And that isn’t activated in standard ranked, but can for sure be in lobbies.
Maybe it’s a wish. But it’s the devs decision. I like the current 3K civs and changing them to something elso would mess with their design. I also disagree with the reasoning behind that.
We had “Kingdom civs” before and also “Antique” civs. Damn we even have a completely antique unit in the Skirmisher which wasn’t used in the medieval times at all.
And I originally came from AOE1 which is antique. I don’t mind if AOE2 has also a bit more ancient stuff in it. We also have a bit gunpowder on the other end of the time spectrum. But it’s no problem to chose a civ from a specific time if you really want that.
It’s a game where multiple people have different interests in. Nobody has the right to take something else away from others they like to see. And this means in the end everybody has to respect something in the game they don’t like. That’s life. And you disrespect others when you try to raise your voice so it gets more heard by the devs in this regard. Please respecc that there might be others that want to see exactly that what you don’t.
And as I said for me the argumentation is not relatable. Why Huns and Goths and Celts are good civs and accepted as “medieval”, but 3K civs not. Why seemingly nobody cares about the completely out-of place Skirmisher. Something is off with that argumentation.
If yu really want to turn them to xianbei, bai and tanguts you also can make a mod that changes the names and appearance. I don’t see why the game has to change entirely because a part of the community expected and/or wanted something different. This is normally solved with visual mods.
I’m really sure there will be some content creators like ornlu who would show off that mod and this would be a good sign to the mods: “You can’t dictate us what civs we get and what not. We will get them anyways.!”
Because atm it looks NOT like the intend is really to get a healthy game whith that all parts of the community can be happy. it looks really more like a part of the community tries to get their will. And I don’t say this IS the case. I just say it looks like that to me.
And here is the reasoning: A) The arguments aren’t coherent with the reality of them game - from the very beginning. B) The taken actions on the platforms are in no relation to the claimed taken offense. C) The intolerance against other parts of the community and their interests - explicitly mentioning the mass flagging of posts that critic the procedure.
I wouldn’t mind if the 3K civs would be changed to different civs/cultures. But the main civ designs I want to see and try out with this new DLC in ranked. I don’t need Herous or Traction trebs - they are also not competitively essential for these civs in ranked. But I want their base designs to stay integer.
Which I pointed out right afterwards with all the elements to cover.
Unless this DLC is dealt with, that’s going to happen.
No we didn’t.
We have some that straddle the line, but none that are 100% within the period and never make it to the Middle Ages.
But on the other hand, this game has a clear setting, and this DLC violates it.
Plenty of people like Star Wars, but I bet there would be huge objections to adding the Sith from Galactic Battlegrounds to AoE2 ranked.
I accept plenty of things in this game I don’t like. But this is not just what people do/do not like, but also what belongs in a game about the Middle Ages.
Huns existed within the very start of the Middle Ages. Goths lasted well into the Middle Ages (you can see them in the Berber campaign). And Celts don’t represent the ancient Celts (despite the name and UU), they represent the Scots and Irish, hence the William Wallace campaign.
Mods break and have to be upkept.
Not true, as already explained.
In what way are they not?
1: I didn’t flag your posts.
2: Your posts we likely flagged because you were losing your mind and posting paranoid comments. Which smells more like intolerance of other people’s positions than anything else.
The main problem of 3Ks is that they are not civs, and even not kingdoms when the campaigns end in Battle of Red Cliff.
People in Florida, Texas and California are very different, but they are not different civs.
I think the 3K should be moved to a Chronicle mode, because we already have one with Athenians and Spartans. They are not different civs too, but the Chronicle seems to be a parallel world, a sandbox, so it is acceptable. 3Ks will change the main game, so I do not accept them.
It is good that we had a Chronicle mode so we can keep 3Ks. If there were not, I would have to ask to remove them completely.
I really do not know that we have any “Kingdom civs”. If you know, do tell me. I believe that the differences between a “Kingdom civ” and a “normal civs” are much bigger than the differences between 3Ks.
like Burgundians for example? Even some classic civs like Byzantines don’t resemble a “civilisation”.
Byznatines is anyway one the most confusing civs, because it’s weirdly enough such a fan favorite for people that are otherwise so critical on every little “misstep” of the civs out of what they are used to,
Burgundians represent the tribal germanic burgundians, lotharingia, the medieval east french and finally the Grand Duchy of Burgundy that rule over a chunck of France and Belgium/Netherlands. Byzantines are the medieval Greeks.
Burgundians also explcitly are shown to cover Flanders and Wallonia, with their units and wonder, in addittion.
Byzantine civilization is obviously not just the Eastern Roman Empire, but its language, culture and civilization; which outlasted the state, so much so that it reformed when it was destroyed in 1204 by the Crusaders. It also represents a variety of greek states, from the despotates in Europe to the Empire of Trebizon on the black sea
I actually didn’t want to make a discussion about that.
What I can get - which I indirectly interpret - would be somewhat a mix between the natural “resistance to change” paired with hopes for certain new civs that felt being left out.
And especially when the posted teasers left the impressions that these civs would come but then didn’t.
And tbh I also didn’t expect 3K from the first teaser. I was irritated at first when some started to argue it will come.
And then ofc there is the still very open question why 3K came and not other expected civs. And we will proably never get an answer for that from the devs. But it’s unfortunately kinda likely from here that we won’t get these other civs - and it’s probably not to blame on the devs actually.
So how to solve that then?
Burgundy was a mistake but fits the period and there was a regional identity.
All of the Three Kingdom leaders were born in Northeastern China, they dont represent diferent regional Chinese identities
And its not “resistance to change”. Its resistance to stupidity, to wasting civ slots and work for stuff that doesnt fit the game
Having a dynasty like the Shu in the game, with only TWO leaders culturally alike all other Chinese civs alongside actual culturally distinct factions is preposterous and will forever annoy me to see them in competitive play even if I had a mod to rename them. The heroes are the worst part, but its just such a waste for the first and potentially last Chinese DLC and the fact that the campaigns reuse scenarios and are all about the same story is extremely disapointing as well
Oh its absolutely fair to blame the company for it and be angry
And the devs were very openly misleading about it when they could have just made it clear from the start
And no, CCP censorship isnt a valid defemse for adding the Three Kingdoms
I don’t support any of these ideas. Give the DLC a chance as it is. Sounds great for a game. Any historical issue you have shouldn’t cut offs the other people fun.
