Well, there’s some topics discussing this, so in order to talk about it in a dedicated topic, I opened this.
Aoe 1 had a lot of specific units of civilizations made as generic units, so my proposal would be change them for a more broader concepts. I know that devs are sticking with the old feel, and, if they don’t add female villagers, hardly would change the names of the units, but let’s try:
Legion: could be changed into elite/choosen/picked/armoured guard or swordman Hoplite, Phalanx, Centurion: could be spearman, phalanx/heavy spearman, and finally pikeman. Heleopolis: could be field ballista (improving mobility of siege units was a huge step in battlefield) Cataphract could be assault/shock/armoured/elite cavalry
Some adjectives sound a little repetitive (elite and heavy), but this would be a little more accurate way of representing the units, and opens a path for unique units or skins packs, although I think that they are very improbable.
But it’s cool Having an army of priests saying wololo doesn’t either!
AoE 2 uses all those “more realistic” names. For me, AoE 1 is like a board game based off of history, where a particular unit is representing a group of units. Eg maybe the centurion is a phalanx with a trained officer controlling it.
In any case, if there is a language.dll, you could mod them yourself - I did it for fun, changing bowman to “crap archer” and artifacts to shopping trolleys etc.
@ArkadasLlisa said:
Well, there’s some topics discussing this, so in order to talk about it in a dedicated topic, I opened this.
Aoe 1 had a lot of specific units of civilizations made as generic units, so my proposal would be change them for a more broader concepts. I know that devs are sticking with the old feel, and, if they don’t add female villagers, hardly would change the names of the units, but let’s try:
Legion: could be changed into elite/choosen/picked/armoured guard or swordman Hoplite, Phalanx, Centurion: could be spearman, phalanx/heavy spearman, and finally pikeman. Heleopolis: could be field ballista (improving mobility of siege units was a huge step in battlefield) Cataphract could be assault/shock/armoured/elite cavalry
Some adjectives sound a little repetitive (elite and heavy), but this would be a little more accurate way of representing the units, and opens a path for unique units or skins packs, although I think that they are very improbable.
If you were going to bother to change the names of the hoplite line, then you wouldn’t pick phalanx again. Its not even a type of soldier its a formation.
I think Phalanx name was picked because how you call those soldiers that stay together using this tactic? Yeah, let’s call them like the tactic to make them more unique than a “Heavy spearman” unit name.
@ArkadasLlisa said:
Well, there’s some topics discussing this, so in order to talk about it in a dedicated topic, I opened this.
Aoe 1 had a lot of specific units of civilizations made as generic units, so my proposal would be change them for a more broader concepts. I know that devs are sticking with the old feel, and, if they don’t add female villagers, hardly would change the names of the units, but let’s try:
Legion: could be changed into elite/choosen/picked/armoured guard or swordman Hoplite, Phalanx, Centurion: could be spearman, phalanx/heavy spearman, and finally pikeman. Heleopolis: could be field ballista (improving mobility of siege units was a huge step in battlefield) Cataphract could be assault/shock/armoured/elite cavalry
Some adjectives sound a little repetitive (elite and heavy), but this would be a little more accurate way of representing the units, and opens a path for unique units or skins packs, although I think that they are very improbable.
If you were going to bother to change the names of the hoplite line, then you wouldn’t pick phalanx again. Its not even a type of soldier its a formation.
Well, in my idiom doesn’t sound bad. But you’re right, the technical name would be phalangite (it sounds awful imho)
@SammyyyyyyyyZA said:
I would honestly just stick to the old names, I know it doesn’t really make sense but I don’t think its worth changing either
As I said, probably they won’t change them. But a little discussion doesn’t hurt.
I do like the culture-specific names of the old game due to nostalgia, but it doesn´t make much sense that faction specific names (such as legion or centurion) are applied to the most elite version of a unit tree for all factions. Why does a roman legionairy have better stats than the ambigiously named long swordsman?
Given that there are “no unique units”, it’s either super generic names or names that sound cool. Eg you are upgrading from a heavy cavalry to a cool sounding Cataphract That said, it’s a little odd upgrading to a “heavy” horse archer but they are faster than the normal one…
@ArkadasLlisa said:
Well, there’s some topics discussing this, so in order to talk about it in a dedicated topic, I opened this.
Aoe 1 had a lot of specific units of civilizations made as generic units, so my proposal would be change them for a more broader concepts. I know that devs are sticking with the old feel, and, if they don’t add female villagers, hardly would change the names of the units, but let’s try:
Legion: could be changed into elite/choosen/picked/armoured guard or swordman Hoplite, Phalanx, Centurion: could be spearman, phalanx/heavy spearman, and finally pikeman. Heleopolis: could be field ballista (improving mobility of siege units was a huge step in battlefield) Cataphract could be assault/shock/armoured/elite cavalry
Some adjectives sound a little repetitive (elite and heavy), but this would be a little more accurate way of representing the units, and opens a path for unique units or skins packs, although I think that they are very improbable.
If you were going to bother to change the names of the hoplite line, then you wouldn’t pick phalanx again. Its not even a type of soldier its a formation.
Well, in my idiom doesn’t sound bad. But you’re right, the technical name would be phalangite (it sounds awful imho)
@SammyyyyyyyyZA said:
I would honestly just stick to the old names, I know it doesn’t really make sense but I don’t think its worth changing either
As I said, probably they won’t change them. But a little discussion doesn’t hurt.
Hadn’t actually heard of a phalangite, but a slight bit of research helped. Hoplites would go into phalanx formation, the more classic soldier, whilst a phalangite (which would also use the phalanx formation), had a longer spear and was used more by Alexander the Great and some others. The phalangites were what caused chariots to become obsolete.
@Penelinfi said: That said, it’s a little odd upgrading to a “heavy” horse archer but they are faster than the normal one…
That’s right!
@SnapNSnaz said: Hadn’t actually heard of a phalangite, but a slight bit of research helped. Hoplites would go into phalanx formation, the more classic soldier, whilst a phalangite (which would also use the phalanx formation), had a longer spear and was used more by Alexander the Great and some others. The phalangites were what caused chariots to become obsolete.
Well grammatically sounds reasonable that phalanx spearmen (that could be the name) are the phalangite. But you’re right, it seems that the word it’s used for macedonian sarissa pikemen.
Or if we were being reasonable it could be hoplite>phalangite>elite variation.
However I kinda like how ridiculous the current naming is and love to send an army of ‘centurions’ at people.
Having an army of priests saying wololo doesn’t either!
