Oh hell no. The timeline of AoE2 isn’t going to be extended. It’s meant to be a medieval-focused game. Not an Empire Earth-Esque kind of game!
Would you be opposed to a Chronicles subgame with different timelines? or Civ creator?
Can’t wait to see tank and spaceship if you want to extend the period. imagine mayan vs galatica battleship…yeah, BAD IDEA.
1 Like
If viking settlers in the new world can be a thing why cant others right? Even in that scenario you are suppose to build a tc market and houses which is similar to building a trade post.
Didn’t Imperial Legionary used to look like this on AoE HD & it’s weird af since they’re used on scenarios like Attila.
Mixing the centurion and legion from AOE1.
But as it’s common for Hollywood to use that style of legionaries from the Punic Wars to the Fall of Rome…
I agree, but itd probably be more practical to limit the civ balancing for the sake of multiplayer kinda like how Chronicles did it. But i too am interested in the AoE 2 timeline exploring, just because of the boundless potential and appeal of the engine over others like AoE 1, 3 or 4
There is no timeline. Because of the age names, campaigns and type of units, its always been assumed to belong to a certain timeframe. In reality the game has nothing to do with real history, civilizations are just names assigned to a certain tech tree design.
1 Like
Of all the bad takes I have seen. This is probably one of the worst lately.
1 Like
That’s because everyone sees the game in a different way. I have played a bunch of custom campaigns with modified civs and thereby I can understand how for some people a certain degree of historical accuracy, timeline and geographical representation are more important than RTS aspects. To me its fairly obvious a single villager never constructed an entire castle, nor did a single swordsman set an entire castle on fire and took it out. These are just RTS game mechanics. Likewise there are balance changes that add or remove techs to a civ suddenly making some of their unit lines good or bad. Again that’s just for good balance wrt civ’s design and has nothing to do with history.
Best part is the ram setting the field on fire despite, at most, bending some crops when striking 
Yes but that doesn’t mean that everything goes.
You already said you don’t care about historical consistency but that’s your take.
I wouldn’t be ok with Achemenids or ancient Greeks in main aoe2 but I can vibe with something like Xianbei (not civs based on single states possiblity).
There is a line to be drawn, not everyone agree on where (for me it’s somewhere in the 3rd century AD) but the game is not just a matter of abstract numbers, pure logic and optimal strategies for everyone, it may be that for competitive players but that’s not everyone.
3 Likes
Yes of course I’m just giving my take and I understand that for many people there’s a certain threshold of acceptance.