I still wonder why Yamato is in AOE. It belongs in AOE2 i think
1 Like
How true is that yes⊠
The Yamato period in Japan falls into the Ancient times, to a time period, which already represents the Dark Ages or the Antiquity from Age of Empires 2.
I ask me really seriously, what the developers thought before around 26 years at the launch of Age of Empires 1 and thinking still today at the revisions of Age of Empires 1 and 2? How can they assign civs and campaigns to such wrong time periods. They can learn a lot from the users here, they improve the most, what is wrong.
Look at this Link: Yamato period - Wikipedia
I want to see Kushites, Aksumites, and maybe one South Asian civilization (either Harappans, Mauryans, or a combo thereof named âIndiansâ).
2 Likes
Civs often overlap with future installments, AOE1 has the coming of the huns, and Portugalâs campaign is pretty much in AOE3 territory hell, Spain, and Portugal are a sprite based aoe3 civs in aoe2.
More actively participants in the multiplayer lmao.
Game is a blast but the scene is already dead.
AoE1 DE is often nearly unplayable
an HD Enhanced graphics pack like AoE2 DE, it allows for a superior zoom
Sobre os arĂetes eu tambem adcionaria bonus de ataque vs outras armas de cerco. As outras armas de certo tem ataque a distancia. O Ariete tem ataque corpo a corpo. As armas de cerco (catapulta e balista por serem semelhantes a construçoes deveria tambem ser mais fracos vs arĂete. O arĂete seria uma unidade anticonstruçoes e anti outras unidades de cerco.
Of course, what did it have to do with it?
Yes, I agree with everythingâŠ
Yes, maybe later they willâŠ
The Yamato Period is a period in Japanese history. In general, this term refers to a period of Japanese history lasting from the 3th century to the 8th century, but it can sometimes refer to a period lasting from after the Yayoi Period to just before the Nara Period, including the Asuka Period (from the latter half of the 6 century to the 7 century). In recent years, however, this term has become used less often, and the term âKofun Periodâ, which coincides with the Yamato Period, is now commonly used (kofun is the Japanese word for ancient burial mounds). The period is marked by a strengthening of Yamato royal authority and control, the frequent construction of grand burial mounds (round burial mounds, and those square at one end and rounded at the other), and the settlement of the basis of the ancient Japanese state.
In the first half of the Yamato Period, the Otomo clan, the Mononobe clan and the Soga clan held real power at different times. But through a law introduced by Prince Shotoku (the Seventeen Article Constitution of the Asuka Period) and government organizational reform (the system of twelve courtly ranks), after the Taika Reform of 645 the political system shifted to an emperor-centered system. The Imperial Court made efforts to introduce a system of centralized government based on the ritsuryo codes by reforming the system of clans and hereditary titles, enforcing the ownership of all lands and serfs by the emperor, and introducing a uniform tax system (taxes in kind or service).
In addition, Buddhism was introduced into Japan from the Korean Peninsula in the first half of the 6th century (cf. the article on Japanese Buddhism) and through dispatches of missions to Sui and Tang Dynasty China technological developments were made in many areas including agriculture, iron working, and architecture. Buddhist art was an area which displayed particular progress.
Of course, they did it this way to fill in the chronological gaps in the games and to connect them: Attilaâs campaign connects with the last mission of the Imperium Romanum campaign from AoE 1 and the Moctezuma campaign and the battles of Kyoto (1582) and Noryang Point. (1598) connect with AoE 3âŠ
1 Like
So is the original game.
They want unplayable, so they get unplayable. People who bought RoR should get something AoE2-adjacent.
Itâs just that itâs a dlc focused on AoE 1, the Romans from AoE 2 are just a bonusâŠ
Whats up with the elitism towards AoE1? Look at some of the new campaigns, the game can be very fun, even if its more simple than AoE2. AoEDE isnt unplayable because its AoE1, AoEDE is unplayable because its badly optimized and multiplayer is terrible. The lack of QoL changes that RoR has is also you could complin about, although its not nearly as important as the other two problems
Just because you dont like it it doesnt mean it has to be changed, its just a diferent thing. We dont need to make AoE3 like AoE2 either. Im not against AoE1 changes but just making it AoE2 is dumb.
3 Likes
Sure, all AoE/M are different and unique⊠letâs not try to change themâŠ
2 Likes
True, I love AoE 1, itâs actually my favorite of all of the games. Itâs simpler and faster, and the ancient period is the most interesting time period to me.
RoR has made some nice improvements, and I am enjoying the DLC immensely.
2 Likes
The fact every unit in the Stable cav line, the Academy or the Barrack looks Greek/Roman is quite off putting for any change of a decent campaign experience. We need regional unit skins at least for ROR.
1 Like
That would be really cool actually
They need to redo the visuals of some units. They copied wholesale the Camel Rider from AOE1DE. The camel he rides on is crooked and looks completely off. Now there is proper base model, they should revise it. Donât think a
no oone playing AOE1DE is sentimentally attached to this crooked camel.
5 Likes
And why they do they, add the Aoe1de African ear elephant and the alligator too. They need to add a black horse as it was in AOE:ROR to the editor too. The horseâs icon is already the black type.
All the other color combinations are already in.
4 Likes
Thatâs probably the worst looking unit in the game.
Strange kinda Greek looking guy with Iron armour on a ronze Age unit?
A Gold unit that doesnât have an Iron Age upgrade and becomes completely useless.
1 Like
Heâs a camel thief in aluminium foil, no iron stuff.
4 Likes