What would you like to see in Myth Retold?

And the Man-O’-War is just a giant version of a regular animal :stuck_out_tongue:

Yes and no.
I don’t think every version of the Speerman or Archer has to have unique stats.
They can still have unique visuals but I don’t think it’s a good idea to force unique stats on units that are practically the same anyway.
It makes it easier to balance and understand the game.

But the majority of units should be unique.
It’s like the 2 African civs in AoE3 sharing 1 regular unit and then other things like bandits and stuff are also shared.

AoM will also run out of different ways to set up the resource drop off.

I would prefer a republican era army too with Hestati, Principes, Triarii and Velites as different units.
With the army composition they had during the Punic Wars.

Maybe the game should get an official mercenary system like AoE3 so they auxiliaries and the current Egyptian mercenary units can both be represented by it.

I don’t know how I’d feel about it. The unique visual is obviously a must. In some way, I can agree with you, because at the beginning, the game wasn’t intended to have a ton of different civs. Therefore, making each unit unique was fairly easy. But if I had to decide, I’d prefer to have no shared units with new civs.

Exactly. Same thing for favor gathering, villagers, etc…
My thought is that in order to make new civs unique, we need to take some gameplay aspects which are universal to all civs and make them unique.

For example:

-every civ needs to build a temple, armory and market to progress thtough ages
-every civ has the same caravan unit (with different skins)
-same type of farms for every civ
-etc…

By modifying these aspects for new culture, it would still be very unique despite having the same drop off building as the Greeks, for example.

That’s what I meant with “base army”. The regular infantry would start as “pedes”, than hastati, principes and triarii with the upgrade. I wouldn’t make them separate units though.

The veles, as a weak anti-infantry

And the eques, as cavalry

That’s how I envisionned the auxiliaries.

Ok, i love all the ideas here
My personal favorites will always be romans, babylonians and celts as new civs. But i can absolutely see persians, indians, japanese and all the other cool ideas. Even aztecs because they have a very unique mythology and culture. I get you guys, every AoE title seems to need them and i’m cool with it haha ;D
BUT please stop starting the ‘‘map gap filling game’’ like in every aoe forum xD
ITs not Age of Geography and every new area covered with civs opens new gaps. This game is nearly endless and we are not playing a crossword game here. We want cool, kinda unique civs and mythologies here, am i rigth? :smiley:
No offenense to anyone mentioning it haha. Just a funny forum thing i noticed. have a nice day :smiley:

1 Like

Unique? Well then that means your beloved Romans are off the list since the Atlanteans have several Roman-esque units. lol…

Here is a thing. The whole “map gap filling game” actually works for a game like Age of Mythology because essentially these mythos that are found thousands and thousands of miles away from Europe-centric civs have very unique structures, units, and myths.

You should encourage it.

In AoE2 that makes a lot of sense since all major civilisations have been in the game for a long time.
With the number of civilisations the game already has it’s time to fill the blanks.

The other reason for filling gaps is for making good scenarios/campaigns.

Currently none of the AoM civilisations border each other so it is hard to come up with good scenarios. That’s why almost all campaign missions (besides the Titans campaign) are mirror matches.

Well, let’s put the Romans in the game then… I was just saying that they put the purely Roman gods so that it doesn’t feel like a Greeks 2.0…

Varro, who was himself of Sabine origin, gives a list of Sabine gods who were adopted by the Romans:[19]

Roman mythology also draws directly on Greek mythology, potentially as early as Rome’s protohistory, but primarily during the Hellenistic period of Greek influence and through the Roman conquest of Greece, via the artistic imitation of Greek literary models by Roman authors.[1] The Romans identified their own gods with those of the ancient Greeks—who were closely historically related in some cases, such as Zeus and Jupiter—and reinterpreted myths about Greek deities under the names of their Roman counterparts. Greek and Roman mythologies are therefore often classified together in the modern era as Greco-Roman mythology.

You can be influenced by the Roman units of AoEO without the Legionary and Centurion:

Infantry:

  1. Engineer (works the same as the architect in AoE 3)

  2. Aquilifier (buffs allies infantry movement in the Heroic Age)

  3. Balearic Slinger (good against ranged infantry in Classical Age)

  4. Cretan Archer (good against infantry in general in Heroic Age)

Chivalry

  1. Decurion (heavy cavalry of the Classical Age)

  2. Eques (heavy cavalry of the Heroic Age)

  3. Gallic Horseman (light cavalry against cavalry of the Mythic Age)

  4. Primus Pillus (buffs allies cavalry movement in the Mythic Age)

Naval Units

  1. Liburnia (light attack ship) (Classical Age)

  2. Enneris (heavy attack ship) (Heroic Age)

Temple

  1. Pontifex (converts units but does not heal) (Heroic Age)

  2. Clinicus (heals units but does not convert) (Heroic Age)

Yes, I agree… total asymmetry must be maintained…

That is, like the Romans of AoEO xd…

Of course, you have to maintain a certain balance within the total asymmetry…

I agree…

No, we will do what we always do… fight for new mythologies to fill the entire world map while they can barely balance them xd…

I agree…I couldn’t have said it better…we need new mythologies and units to give life to the game with new mechanics and campaigns…

2 Likes

Because the Romans literally took a bunch of the (well known) Greek gods and incorporated them into their own pantheon.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/8if6xb/why_did_the_greeks_and_romans_have_the_same

This isn’t to say Romans therefore can’t be done, but it’d require quite a bit of ingenuity and research to make them more distinct given the amount of overlap in the popular gods (i.e. the ones most folks have heard of outside of those that research the subject professionally).

(I’m more familiar - as an amateur, not professionally :smiley: - with the Greek pantheon and its development myself, I’m less familiar with how Romans developed their mythology)

The way cultures and religion worked back then was different from now.
There were no clear lines (not that we really have them today) between 2 religions.
So when Romans or Greeks encountered other people they looked at each their gods and either made them equivalent to one of their gods or if too different they added them to their pantheon.

So some gods like Isis were considered unique enough to be worshipped by the Romans, they even build temples for her in multiple Roman cities, including London.

When they encountered the Germanic people they decided that Odin is Mercury, Thor is Hercules (or Jupiter) and Tyr is Mars.
In some ways those gods had the same Indo European origins so they were technically the same.

It was called Interpretatio graeca or Interpretatio romana.

Romans are therefor very possible for AoMR but shouldn’t be priority.
They are different enough from Greeks to be considered their own but they are not different enough to be one of the first civilisations that should be added.

Might be an unpopular opinion but I do hope the devs change the Atlanteans. They don’t have to do any drastic changes to its core gameplay and image but they can change some of their units visually (a more scaley and aquatic themed) and rename them.

By doing so, the Romans would have a better fighting chance at being considered as a playable civ.

  • I would like the updates to have images or a short example video of how the building or armor update will behave. Example: the tower will reach further. Here we could have a yellow line showing the current range and a line in another color showing the new range.
  • I wish there was a way to select all my idle warriors and give them a command for them all at once. Same for the villagers
  • I would like to know to which type of warrior another type of warrior of mine died the most. So I could learn from my mistakes
  • I think having player divisions would be cool. Something like that exists in FIFA. Level 10 players are more beginners, level 1 players are the best. So, I could play with players at my level and try to improve my level.
  • I would like some resources in the game to only be released at a certain player level
  • have daily, weekly missions, and so on to get new powers, warriors, warrior improvements and buildings.
  • in mining there could be stones, in addition to gold, bronze, silver or other types of metals, in wood we could cut different types of wood that last longer and withstand attacks more, in plantations there could be different types of crops that perhaps take longer to be harvested but also provide more resources.
  • multiplayer campaign mode

I think that’s it for now

I totally agree.

Right now Atlanteans are:

  • Roman units
  • Incan buildings
  • Greek mythology

It would be nice if they were mixed up a little more.
Add more American influences to the units, add more from European and African influences from the Atlantic coast.
For example the Fanatics could carry Obsidian swords and their cavalry units could come from North Africa.

Half of your suggestion totally don’t fit into Age of Mythology at all.
Not sure what kind of game you thing AoM is.
Unlockable units, technologies and buildings? People would riot.
Adding 10 more resources? That’s crazy. That would turn it into a totally different game.
It’s like adding dice and cards to chess.

i thought about this recently and yeah back then i was too harsh and a bit too unreflected with my statement of the cartoonish statement. i think the overall approach of AoM was more serious and yes i think some units (especially some myth units and especially the titans) look more cartoonish cause of the limitations they had to work with back then. i agree. - but its not really historical correct regarding some design choices (jormungandr, cyclopses, scorpionman instead of more well know egyptian myth-creatures… (or the atlanteans even i still kinda dig the idea to add them as their own faction but i also understand that some never liked atlanteans instead more real and more richer races like azetc, maya, babylonian, persian or slavic for example)

i personally hope they will, since they have now way less limitations, they can give all the units the serious approach they deserve.

and maybe at 23.02.2024 we know a bit more in that regard.

(offtopic: i really hope we see some stuff like day/night or weather changes - maybe too much or too distracting for competitive but i would love to see this personally and i also read it somewhere. → wouldn’t also mind to see godpowers which change weather etc like Fimbulwinter/Eclipse just more “permanent” or they change these godpowers and make these as ingame features not related to any god (?))

Of course, I think that first they must manage so that the Romans do not feel like the Greeks or the Atlanteans…

They can always rework them as they will with the Chinese…they are not going to remove them, because The Titans is from Ensemble and that is strictly respected as in all AoE…

Of course, in theory Atlantis in the game is in the A2ores so they can make like a mix between Tartessos (Iberians and Phoenicians/Carthaginians), Berbers and if you want Incas, Mayans or Tupi from the Amazon…

Don’t worry, with the 3 DE engine the game will look more realistic…

One thing does not take away the other, they can always add new mythologies and leave the Atlanteans in the game as lost mythology, it also serves to add new lost continents such as Lemuria (southern India and eastern Africa), Mu (Hawaii and Polynesia) and Zealandia (New Zealand but bigger)…

1 Like

Let the developers decide if it makes sense or not. I would love to see some of my suggestions in the game.
I really like getting a little addicted to games, what motivates me to play is to evolve. I think it would be fun

They removed Home City progression in AoE3DE because it was a very unpopular feature. Now you can only unlock cosmetic upgrades for your Home City.

AoMR will certainly not add unlockable gameplay features because the majority of the community would absolutely hate it, the game would be boycotted and review bombed. People will likely even boycott the other games in the series and review bomb them too.

AoE2DE and AoE3DE have regular events that give you cosmetic unlocks.
I personally already hate those because I am forced to play during a certain week to be able to get a certain thing? I got other things to do in my life then play AoE2/3/4 every day.

They will show of the game in a week and it is likely already progressed very far in development so there is no room for big changes anymore anyway. We will see how many of our early suggestions have made it into the game. This thread has been up for over a year after all.

Please add easier difficulty to the Arkantos campaign.

The Atlanteans - I think their background lore about the whole lost titan worshipping civilization and stuff should be elaborated and integrated more into their story / gameplay / feel. Their architecture should probably also be redesigned a bit so it’s not too similar to Mesoamerican architecture, which is definitely something that the community has been interested in as a new civilization.

Is Easy to hard for you?
Or is the issue that there are a few missions that are too hard on easy?
Difficulty spikes can be really annoying. That one mission can prevent you from experiencing the later ones.

Cheats are always and option though but that doesn’t feel very rewarding.

I want easier mode for Arkantos campaign. I remember using the bear cheat to beat the level with the sleeping guardian.