It was mostly that the Jews declined the calling of the Messiah, and as Jesus said, the privilege passed from them, to a more worthy nation (Matthew 21:43).
So the Greeks became the majority of the first christians, and that is why the most documented Apostle is Paul, since he spent most of his minitry preaching to the Europeans.
Yes, pass from Jews to Christians.
Acts is pretty interesting for Paul’s… acts in other lands
Christian is mostly an off-hand term for European, specially in an Ancient World or Middle Ages scenario.
God literally told the Jews they lost their chosen position, and that it would be given to the Greeks, since they were the ones following the Messiah around, and the majority of the converts in the Apostolic era.
Also, all European Civilization has it’s base in Greco-Roman Civilization, including values, philosophy, art, perspective, literature and historical roots.
This eventually spread as Christianity did, and built what is now known as the West.
Well not what we now know as, but what was known as the West a few hundred years ago
I’d love to see North Americans but they would be really hard to make.
If they like to take risks they could make them very different from all civilisations in the game, including the Central Americans.
No Eagle Warrior for North America please, they need something different.
Giving them Fortified Palisades could work.
Chimu Runner could be a replacement for the Eagle Warrior for the Incas and Chimu.
It was not when it started. Back then it was just the Hellenic World, and then the Roman Empire afterwards.
We have been calling it “The West” roughly since the 1800s, but before it was “Christendom”, which was seen as the big overarching civilization that followed and replaced the Roman Empire.
Not really. If they made concessions for Meso civs, then North-Am civs would only need similar concessions, not more.
An Iroquois or Missipian Crossbowmen is not stranger than an Aztec Crossbowmen.
Yup.
But I dislike referring to the current ‘West’ as being built on Christianity anymore due to rather obvious… contradictions.
If you get my point
There is always contradictions, but the entirity of the West is based on Greco-Roman culture, and Christian religious tradition.
No matter if people like it or not, westerners are still culturally christian, even if not religiously so.
If we were dividing on religion/morality we would need another split to group eastern European countries apart of Western ones and USA etc
No, USA is still the West, even if they say their culture is based on “Judeo-Christian” values, there is little “Judeo” at all in their culture, as emphasized by their freedom of religion tradition, and their love of pork and shellfish based food.
They are still Greco-Roman, wether they like it or not.
Eastern Europe can call itself whatever it wants, in a similar fashion, but they are still Greco-Roman too, and mostly based around christian morality and philosophy, even if Orthodox.
Replacing Archers with Crossbows is like the worst thing AoE2 did.
They function fundamentally different and have very different roles.
Also Archers where much more common in basically every country in the world.
All strong Archer civs in AoE2 used Archers and not Crossbows historically (beisdes the Chinese but they have it as Unique Unit)
Just replacing Crossbows with Archers would make the game visually so much more fitting for most of the world.
Bit too late for that now.
No, it is not, that would be Woad Raiders, which are both out of timeframe, and on the wrong civ (should be Britonni, which were Ancient Celts from which the Isles draw their name from, and ancestors of the Britons).
This game also gives Berbers the Genitours, ballistae to the Caravel, no Cannons to the Chinese, Hussars to the Mongols and Turks, and so many more cases of historical inaccuracy, that are way above “replacing Archers with Crossbows”.
Archers were actually phased out by Crossbowmen, for most European armies, and in China.
An Archer had to train all his life to shoot well, while a Crossbowman could be trained to proficiency in a few weeks, and mastery in a few moths.
Archers were phasing out by the Middle Ages, except for in very specific kingdoms.
Unique Units are often memes. They basically cartoon versions of the real thing.
Crossbows are the thing that looks visibly the most wrong in most armies.
While Hussars are of course not Turkish they don’t look as wrong as Mayan Crossbows.
Crossbows did kinda replace Archers in Europe but most Archer Civilisations are not European (Besides the British but they use Longbows)
Archers and Crossbows where originally planed to be separate units with Crossbows costing gold and Archers being trash.
Crossbows would be similar to Hand Cannons gameplay wise if they were realistic.
It’s hard to fix mistakes that where in the game for 20 years.
Being made in a different time where cartoony units where more accepted (nearly all AoK unique units are memes) and Forgotten Empires was started by some fans that reverse engeneered the game and repainted some unites to make new Unique Units.
I’d love to rework some old units and civilisations of the game but fanboys don’t want that and new Civilisations are easier to sell.
It is more that it would screw up balance pretty bad, and likely kill off the game.
AoE2 is a very simple game, and that simplicity is a plus. It is actually why it remains relevant to this day.
Those may not be fanboys, but people that actually know why this game is still good, when clones or sequels all failed, specially when they tried to be more “accurate”.
The first two Expansions (The Conquerors and the Forgotten) both added new Unique Technologies to old civilisations and some new units like Halberdier or Eagle Scout and some new generic Technologies.
All Expansions after that left the old civilisations as they where besides a few very small changes. The game is stuck on adding new Civilisations since then.
I’d love to see some more tweaks to older civilisations like adding the Steppe Lancers to the Mongoles.
Native Civs have Crossbows (and steel and siege) for balance reasons.
except what you see as a mistake, others see as simple balance.
the game is simply too fast paced for UU in general right now. but since you brought it up
Longbows, Woads, Berserks, Longboats, Throwing Axeman, Huskarl, Mangudai, and Jannisary all see regular use. that’s 8 out of 14 unique units from AoK days.
AoE2 has never been a game about being historically accurate, more influenced, with decisions made for gameplay reasons. its why for example the william wallace campaign ends up with you being on the winning side despite the obvious happening.
to completely redesign the game for realism, i don’t think would end well.
The BE line and lancer lines got added so there isnt much more units you can add to the tech tree.
Adding stuff is not teh same as redesigning original base features.
The Conquerors also added Paladins for the Huns, which is laughably wrong in every sense, but it is the base strongest upgrade for the generic Heavy Cavalry unit, so they got it.
There is no need to redesign Archers upgrading into Crossbowmen.
There is, but they are all Infantry, which already is the most ignored type of unit in the game, unless they train quickly, move quickly and do not cost much at all.
I can only see adding Steppe Lancers/Battle Elephants/Eagles to more civs and one more regional unit for South Africa.