Maybe there will be a new greek unit in the future that can throw tsatziki on buildings and if the building is completely covered in tsatziki Zeus will show up and eat the whole building. A new kind of siege.
2 Likes
Can anyone confirm if the Scarab still has the AOE blood damage on death? Never got round to killing one during beta. Was a decent ability, would be a shame to see it go if so. Another mythological nerf…
I played some games with them and they release a big green cloud after death. I don’t know if it damaged enemy units but i guess it does because otherwise this visual effect would be pointless.
Can you cast lightning strike on a TC?
Maybe it only does like 100 damage but it could be enough to finish off an almost destroyed on.
1 Like
I hope they are considering the Babylonians if they are looking into the Mesopotamia pantheon.
The Sumerians and the Babylonians spoke different languages. So which unit name takes priority from whom? Are we going to be hearing two different languages for certain units?
Also, their creation lore is different last I remembered. Some of the gods roles have been changed and their names too.
They could call them Mesopotamia but model them after the Babylonians instead of mixing and matching. Otherwise it would just be confusing as hell from a mythical and real history perspective.
1 Like
Most text in Sumerian language were actually written by Babylonians. They kept the Sumerian traditions alive. Like Europeans did with Latin for centuries.
They have the same pantheon so in AoM they would be the same civilisation.
I don’t think we know well enough how the Sumerian language sounded like anyway so Akkadian (Babylonian) seems to be the better choice.
Assyrians were similar enough. Sumerians where their mythological predecessors.
Like the Greeks are representing Athens, Sparta and even the Macedonians but also the Mycenaeans.
You could say Zeus = Sparta (Infantry) and Poseidon = Athens (Navy) for example.
So the Mesopotamians would have:
- Archer focused god → Assyrians
- Defence focused god → Babylonians
- Siege focused god → Sumerians
(Based on AoE1 bonuses)
They would not explicitly be called those civilisations but could be used as such if someone wants to.
Babylonains still had a lot of mythology based on their Sumerian predecessors. A lot of stories are based around Sumerian kings for example.
So in a mythological game it’s hard to separate those civilisations even if they had very different origins.
So for the god names the Babylonian names would make the most sense.
Maybe they have already decided on those things anyway. If the 2nd DLC is actually the Mesopotamians they likely already decided on what Major and Minor gods they will have and things like that.
Mythological lore can be somewhat conflicting and contradictory, as the Babylonian belief that Marduk slew Tiamat and created the world differs from the Sumerian version. This could affect Age of Mythology’s lore as well.
What about this? Since the Babylonians can trace their lineage, culture, and mythos back to the Sumerians, how about having the major and minor gods/goddesses come solely from the Babylonians? The Babylonians defeated the Assyrians and were technically the last Mesopotamian civilization, so perhaps the primary influence should be on them.
And your suggestion but a spin on things:
- Archer-focused human units could come from the Assyrian army.
- Siege-focused human units could come from the Sumerians.
- Defense-focused human units could come from the Babylonians.
Alternatively, whichever civilization had the better quality military in a specific area could be assigned that particular focus.
I assume mythical creatures would be uniform and consistent across their mythos. Correct me if I’m wrong.
Yes, when they die they release their acid that affects nearby units…
In the game code it appears, whether as a joke or not, that they were planning to include Sumerians, Babylonians or both… but it is most likely that they will go for the Babylonians since they lasted the entire Bronze Age and reached the Iron Age, in addition to the legendary Hanging Gardens…
Yes, it makes sense…
Yes, lastly you could make 3 major gods within the Mesopotamians and have each one focus on a particular civ: one in Sumeria, the other in Assyria and the last in Babylon… then the AIs can be kings of all the civs from Lugal-zage-si and Sargon of Akkad with Sumeria, Ashurbanipal with Assyria to Hammurabi and Nabonidus with Babylon…for example the bonuses of the AoEO Babylonians are these:
Unique Features:
- Economy-based civilization as their brother civilization, Egyptians
- Capable of training armies in a short period of time.
- Ox Cart, which acts as a mobile storehouse (this cannot be because Norse have it in AoM).
Unique military units include the:
Shield Bearer: Absorbs pierce damage easily but easily falls to melee damage.
Sapper: Infantry that acts as mobile siege being able to attack units and deal an impact to buildings.
Lancer: Cavalry that are effective against infantry and can use a charge ability that deals 300% more damage upon impact, provided that Champion Lancer upgrade is purchased.
Babylonian Siege Towers, which can garrison units to provide powerful ranged attacks and defend units from devastating siege and archers.
The Ziggurat, which trains Babylonian Priests, must be constructed to enter the Bronze Age (Classical Age in this case). It also researches the following ages. Researches utility technologies such as Pharmacology.
The Garden, which shortens research and training time for all technologies and units.
The gardens also provide a food trickle of 1.
This can be upgraded with the Cultivation upgrade providing an additional 0.5 food trickle.
Only 4 can be built in the Bronze Age.
Only 8 can be built in the Silver Age (automatically upgraded to Large Gardens with a higher benefit to buildings)
Only 12 can be built in the Golden Age (automatically upgraded to Royal Gardens with a higher benefit to buildings)
Each garden costs more to build depending on how many are already built.
Babylonian villagers can construct inexpensive Clay Wall (Babylonian) out of wood. These walls are quicker to build and repair, but less durable. (Upgrading walls changes the cost to stone like other walls)
Has a very strong stable lineup with many ranged units.
If they later add the Persians, the AoM map will look like this:
1 Like
We would like to get a forum badge for closed beta 
There are only a few units that can survive a Bolt from Zeus (joining the list is the new UFO unit), however you cannot Bolt buildings. Hera’s Lightning Storm used to deal minor damage to buildings.
I never tired Bolt on buildings in the beta so I was wondering it they might have changed it.
Hers Lighting Storm does more damage to buildings now apparently.
1 Like
As someone who has studied Celtic mythology in detail for another game, I do feel it has plenty to offer and would provide an interesting, varied and visually distinct pantheon and civ style. There are plenty of gods to choose from, and a lot of Welsh/British, Gaelic and continental Celtic legend and myth to draw from. You could have Ringforts as the Celts’ castle type building.
1 Like
I never studied history that much just some documentations and a few books but I honestly am very open for the next civs to be added. My personal favourites are maya/aztec, Mesopotamian (would love to see the hanging gardens as a wonder), Celts with their western dragons and Slavic with their werewolves, vampires etc.
Aztecs are a fan favourite, and have two mods dedicated to them already. Meaning the Devs have a template. It’s also one of the best documented and most well known mythologies in the Americas. There’s also precedent in pop culture. Those are strong points that speak in favor of an Aztec civ.
What may speak against it is that they don’t have siege, don’t have cavalry, and don’t have naval, outside of canoes. Plus, perhaps the bigger point: Human sacrifices. They would have to feature prominently, which may affect the rating. And Aztecs without sacrifices are no Aztecs.
Something akin to Persian, Babylonian, or Summerian I think may be likely, but only one of the three, would likely serve as a foil to the Egyptians, given the geographic proximity. But there’s a lot of pitfalls when it comes to overlap with Egyptians. Buildings or Units might be mistaken for one anothers. If they do Summerians, Gilgamesh and Enkidu are a must!
I’d be thrilled for Celts. They need Druids, and I really hope they are more like Panoramix/Miraculix/Getafix in the Asterix comics (Different names in different Translations) than the Druids in D&D.
Plus, there’s so much cool Celtic stuff…
Maybe I should make a concept for the Celts within the next few days.
The problem with the Celts is that they span a massive area, from Spain to Turkey.
They originate north of the Alps in modern day Germany and France but they only survived until modern times in the British Isles and Brittany.
So do you base them on Antiquity like the Greeks or on the Early Middle Ages like the Norse. They could also be a bit of everything.
So many options make it harder to pick.
Favour generation is another question. Animal sacrifice always works but I think that’s the boring option.
I think it would be a good idea for them to add mythology concepts from new regions. Celts are too close to the Norse. Aztec/Mesoamerican pantheon would therefore be a good addition after the Chinese. It is a decision on creating excitement and interest too. Celts/Mesopotamian/Hindu pantheons could come afterwards.
Hindu likely not at all, because of a controversy regarding a different game (Smite? I’m not sure) that added Hindu gods, and people in India were pissed.
That’s also why Ensemble had a rule to not add currently practiced religions. Tho, with neopagan movements being recognized as religions in some countries, there may be the argument that this doesn’t apply to the norse anymore…
Chinese mythology is still practiced…
Chinese weren’t made by Ensemble, but by Forgotten Empires. Both under the Microsoft umbrella, but different people, with different priorities and development philosophies.
Ensemble wouldn’t have made Chinese. Not like that, nor at all.
But since Ensemble isn’t involved anymore, their rule of no currently practiced religions may not be followed anymore at all. But with the smite controversy, that would serve as an example of why that rule existed. And while the Chinese may very well be more tolerant about their mythology being misrepresented, given that there are many, many movies about Journey to the West, with either few or none of them actually staying true to the source material, that may not be true for others…
But it’s also possible that they’ll also make a Hindu pantheon and won’t care if people in India don’t like that. I don’t know anyone at Microsoft. I’m just speculating on the internet.
They could make the Hindu pantheon. The reason the Chinese were not annoyed is because the DLC concept was respectful, not making everything a comedy show. It can be done. There is a huge trove of material in the Hindu pantheon which could be made into a DLC. Vishnu, Durga and Shiva being the main three Gods, Brahma, Indra, Agni, Ganesha, Kali, Skanda, Vayu, Saraswati, Lakshmi and Yama maybe rounding off the Minor Gods segment. And Vishnu’s unique mechanic would be Rama, Krishna or the other Dasavatars representing heroes or demigods who can help in the mission. They need to avoid the stupid typical Western Kali/Shiva God of Death nonsense and I think it would be done nicely.
1 Like