That name rings some bells but didn’t want to come to any assumptions.Especially considering periods when I visit this forum very rarely and can be mixing one person with another.
“Knights of the Mediterranean” offers a loooot of content. I don’t know what game series he’s playing where this kind of treatment of a very old game like AoE III is bad by comparison 
I remember changing Windows98 to XP for good on one of my PCs, just to be able to play this game.
It’s 2022.
Totally agree, it’s a bad omen. While it is true that Italy (and the little village “Civilization”) feature novel content, there’s MASSIVE asset re-use as a major reason behind Knights of Mediterranean.
Agree 100%, nothing to add here.
I can sum up the logical reason for you in one word. Benefits 
The Aoe3 community is full of puffed up elitists who refuse to change with the times ironically fitting giving the timeframe of the game but makes for a terrible competitive scene especially compared to AOE2 where its a lot more laid back and accepting of the new things ironically enough given how old the game is.
There’s nothing to add as long as you choose to ignore all arguments, and cherry pick posts that you agree with, that are about complaining ‘I don’t like it or feel it’s not OK’.
Malta is not replacing the second other civ on the level of importance of France, Brits, Italy or US.
It’s an added value. They had only so much time and money and decided to work on this instead of a couple more native tribes or maps.
You have no idea how game development works.
Well I would not agree with that. The AoE 2 player base are the biggest complainers, just look at how many aoe 2 threads get auto locked for people randomly complaining and insulting each other literally about should the devs add a new Europe civ or Asia or African civ
KotM offers more content than AR so I don’t see why the next $10 DLC wouldn’t exceed or equal the content offered in KotM. The game is in a really good state with review scores increasing daily, and monthly patches adding new strategies to17 year old civs.
Just enjoy the ride while it lasts. It is impossible to please everyone but I remember when the game was completely abandoned after TAD came out.
What is the big problem with Malta, I get they are not an empire but honestly I just happy they surprised us with two civs. I was only expecting one
To be honest that’s the forum community which often crosses over with each game and trolls looking for attention when new content is announced and released. It’s on the competitive side of things that you notice a huge difference in attitude and temperament.
This is the real elephant in the crystal shop. There’s something deeply wrong going on here, you can’t explain the unexplainable. Some dude is arguing that they made a “Civilization” out of a little village while leaving out a MASSIVE EMPIRE because they “will make more money” (? ! ? !). Never seen such level of BS before.
Because people like to gatekeep civs as if it a civ they don’t like completely negates the chance of one they do want down the line. Narrow-minded thinking.
A “little village” that halted one of the largest fleet since antiquity during the climax of Ottoman expansion.
you must have been fuming when Sioux civ was introduced.
Another case of some really weird historical grievances and insecurities projected onto supports of a video game. This is Italian expansion, with Malta side dish. Developers never said they don’t want to ever feature Morocco or Persia in this game, or that they’re not important in that time period.
It is a game, not a school book or tv documentary on History channel.
@TechYolk if I write ten posts saying ‘you’re right’, will you like them all and feel better about this whole subject? Because you seem to primarily care about that.
In here or on 2DE forum one can see a lot of unhealthy discussions with people unhappy that their/fav civ is not included in the game, no matter how important or completely obscure it is. It does not do any favors for anyone and certainly not new players, that come here and see an endless stream of bizarre accusations, out-of-place civ concepts and conspiracy theories.
Go play Prince of Persia if you want Persia so much.
And surely you are the V.F.D. as the representative of the almighty Sandy Peterson on earth to determine what is stupid and what is not.
Oh sorry Sandy Peterson made a campaign about Malta at first.
Don’t ignore the Omani Empire. It conquered the Persian and East African coastlines. They annihilated the Portuguese.
Honestly I was thinking something along these lines when I wrote my post.
Here’s a map of main Empires with a background of AoE 3 time:
Threads requesting Persians or Omani have been recurring on this forum for years and I participated in many of them. And they all ended up in constructive discussions.
Maybe OP and presumably the same person who likes and agrees with whatever OP says should seriously reflect on why only this thread had such negative responses, and why you attracted QueenMegatron.
Sicilians and Burgundians are solid civ choices for AoE2 even if their implementation may not have been the best.
