this is 100% my take on this. metrics are a terrible idea for trying to measure stuff like this.
4 Likes
Just like a lot of posts on “why XXX (my nation or a nation I’m familiar with)” is so poorly and inaccurately represented in the game. Well if you know more about others you’ll realize every civ is poorly represented. One of the recurring topics on AOE3’s Chinese forum is “why is Chinese a mixture of Ming and Qing?”. Yes but British have longbowman and rocket artillery at the same time and Germans have Hussite war wagons.
When I as a kid first read a little more about history beyond AOE, I was eager teaching everyone around me how this unit or that name is inaccurate or out-of-place. Then when I learned even more I realized almost every aspect of the game is so inaccurate, but I am now fine with it XD.
2 Likes
And I already said it was a bad idea. If you want to evaluate a culture, you need to understand it. PROPERLY understand it.
Evaluation doesn’t mean influence. I said evaluation is fine, influence is a far more complicated topic.
1 Like
Does this mean everybody asking my country needs to be in aoe2 is correct?
I would say he isn’t wrong.
Fortunately we’re not in the responsibilty of decision, but the devs.
And for me it looks like devs don’t care at all whether we think this civ is “worth” adding.
I respect and like if people try to bring their culture into the game. It’s an opportunity for me to get a feeling for that culture from a direct perspective. I don’t see these as “please add my civ” threads. I see them as cultural interchange opportunities.
The reason why I made that [Hub] page isn’t for the devs or whatever. It’s for the community, also modders that look for creative input.
It’s a little utopia of dreams, what could be possible. Not what needs to be added to the core game.
There is no gameplay reason to add civs when there are 42, the game is already bloated or at least the rate of expansion leaves nothing for the future. I would like some room for new stuff even 10 years from now.
Everyone is part of the community but people who constantly ask for things which hurt the game are problematic because they give the wrong messages to the devs, who are indeed ultimately responsible.
I point out that they are casual noobs just because this is the trend and it explains why they tend to feel the need to add way too much content, because they experience the game on a superficial level. For them it will hardly ever be enough, you will see the most delusional comments here saying the more the better. It really shows how little they understand about strategy games. You can’t just pretend you have the right to something when you know well enough it hurts the strategy aspect, as if this game isn’t complex enough at any level especially for new players. Ofcourse you can be creative and have fun with Ideas, but this is different than asking for actuall additions. Management has shown their true greed since release and for the devs these expansions are just job security so I don’t have a lot of trust in them doing what’s best for the strategy game called aoe2.
Normally the plan was that after the release of DE, no more new civs should come.
But since the desire for new ones grew, they probably had to change their minds. And apparently they seem to be selling well for the majority.
Of course you can understand the concern that there are too many civs or that you can’t remember all the civ bonuses… but basically all civs share almost the same units/techs. and here and there the bonuses don’t make the huge difference as in AoE 3 or IV. So AoE2 is still very beginner-friendly.
To be honest, I’m glad that we live in times like this where AoE2 really lives and gets the support it deserves. would the game be in exactly the same place today? if there hadn’t been any more DLCs since the HD edition? Good question.
But one thing can be said, a DLC spreads attention and advertising. game sites report and make new players aware of the game. I’m sure there are many people out there who were surprised that AoE2 is still alive and supported.
what else do you want to take as income than classic expansions.
Battlepass?, a skin shop?.. I don’t know if you want something like that in the game.
all the support has to be paid too, no one works for free…
- africa and asia could certainly use some love.
4 Likes
Maybe implement something in the GUI that shows bonuses and tech tree but is visually faster to get than current tech tree.
'What mill techs does this civ have? *Proceeds to scroll to the end of the tech tree "
3 Likes
Assuming interest will still be strong in 10 years (and delaying development now) is a very poor business decision. Many OG fans like myself will likely not be playing in 10 years, and remaining or new players will have a lot more franchises (and even disruptive technologies) competing for their attention. And let’s get real, most people who have ever drawn a line in the sand and said something akin to “it’s impossible to progress beyond this point/ X Domain will be entirely saturated by this date” have been shown to be fantastically mistaken.
How is that bad? The devs continuing to do the job that got them there is the best and most justified way to achieve job security.
And the best part is that if you don’t like where this train is going, you can keep what you have, and get off at any time, like our friend here considered doing here:
6 Likes
The only alternative to 12 civs in 2 years is no civs at all? I never said I don’t appreciate new civs, it’s the rate at which they release them which is unsustainable.
Ofcourse the civs have a lot in common otherwise 42 civs wan’t remotely possible. Still there is a huge difference in playstyle between different civs at any proper level so I just take your argument as casual ignorance. It’s the whole point I’m making that different civs should be played to their strenghts and therefore even average players should be able to understand them to a proper level. Aoe2 beginner friendly? 
Maybe on the most superficial level.
Yeah because businezzzzz is what makes a great game right and we need to milk it as much as possible while we can. You won’t be playing in 10 years? I don’t see the point in talking to someone who isn’t invested and only has a short term vision. I don’t see any reason why I wouldn’t be playing aoe2 in 10 years.
Maybe you should read my messages again regarding the last part of your paragraph.
Do you put any effort into understanding the point made? Also making civs is the only way for devs to keep their job right 
If management didn’t dramatically underfund the basegame they could have asked more than 20E, now we shouldn’t have to pay the price with rapid fire content.
I haven’t bought a single dlc, but if you think this counters the point I was making then again it says something about your reading skills. In a strategy game I need to understand my civ and that of the opponent for good decisionmaking, I am 1600 but still the game is very overwhelming for me regarding different bonuses, UTs (hardly ever get them), ideal opening strategies, ideal late game comps, understanding how to play matchups, what civs are ideal for what maps etc. Not saying we can’t add anything but I think about one per year since the release of DE would have been healthy.
May or may not, but it’s not something to take for granted. Better to capitalize on existing interest rather than assume that it will exist indefinitely. Carpe Diem and all that.
You have a point (that increased complexity has potential costs), but nobody is going to defer to it out of proportion to its low currency. At the moment, and in the foreseeable future, a cost-benefit analysis will overwhelmingly show a net favorable result for more DLCs, likely at ~ the rate they’ve been produced since DE. Even the overly vague roadmap shows that the devs want to at least create the impression that a steady influx of new content is a high priority.
Whatever points you may have, this just shows that there’s no incentive for the devs to prioritize your interests. Call it unfair, but the “doesn’t buy DLCs” crowd isn’t exactly the target audience for future development of AoE2.
17 Likes
This sentence really has a lot of background, and I don’t know exactly how to approach it.
Why is something cool? I don’t want to bore you with philosophical themes or sub-themes that can easily trigger “culture shock”, but maybe I can explain with an example:
The Paladin: is a unit shown in AoE 2 (very loved and “cool” as well) historically based on the 12 paladins of Charlemagne’s court, although they are also mentioned in the old testament classifying Goliath as a paladin (1 Samuel 17: 4-23; 21:9). Paladins are currently the “coolest classes” of all RPG games and Tolkien spin-off universes.
Why is a Paladin cool? It can be many factors:
- They use heavy armor that unconsciously expresses strength and courage to us.
- They have religious bases that determine their way of exercising justice.
- They can be a very human way of representing supernatural angels whose mission is to defeat demons (which are an evil that possesses a power greater than human).
- Etc.
Can this be represented in other civilizations and/or cultures other than Western Europe?
You could tell me without the risk of being wrong that the current Paladins, in the popular subconscious, are referenced to the Crusaders, Templars, Hospitallers and other Christian warriors who went to holy war during the crusades that had the objective of preserving (or imposing) their faith (or religion) in “holy land”, although today many of us know that there were also political and economic backgrounds. Unfortunately my knowledge about the existence of “sacred warriors who wear heavy armor and have strong religious beliefs” is very limited to continents like Asia or Africa, however, I can describe a “sacred warrior” who existed in pre-Columbian America .
(Moche referential image)
Maybe this is just my personal perception, but one of the first things I thought when I saw that image was “they look like WoW paladins”.
After some research in some bibliographical sources I discovered that the Chimú society was highly religious, its nobility used religion in all aspects of their lives and even the Chimú Emperor, Cie-quich, who was considered a divinity was present in all religious rituals. They possessed warrior priests who served as both fighters and healers, and these priests were clad in heavy metal armor (just like the nobles).
Maybe I’m just rambling, but as you may have noticed I’m also a fan of fantasy Paladins, and their ESSENCE can be shared by many “Religious Warriors” that existed in the medieval era. I hope that with this I have not offended some Christian forumer (which I am also) and that I just wanted to express that many cultures and religions have many things in common and that they were used in a similar way in the art of war.
CONCLUSION:
Taking the example of the Paladin:
- are they cool?: sure
- Are they referenced in Western European culture?: Yes
- Is the concept of the Paladin, as a holy warrior in heavy armor, unique to Western Europe?: in essence, no.
- Can this concept be used in other cultures of other continents?: yes, the concept of a “sacred warrior in heavy armor” can be adapted to different cultures, even in civilizations as exotic as a pre-Columbian civilization.
PS: If anyone else knows of any “heavy armor wearing holy warriors” on any continent other than Europe, I’d appreciate it if you let me know.
PS 2: Perhaps this can be taken as a reference, in the Warcraft universe the Zandalari Troll (who obviously have several references to pre-Columbian cultures such as Incas, Mayas and Aztecs) have access to paladins, for me the result is interesting but I suppose that this is very subjective.
If we’re only going to get civs from region which have a lot of civs, we can stop now for what it is worth.
If though they’ll still add new civs from regions with few or no civs, then they can or even should add them.
New regions tendencially also feature more interesting game design usually, giving underused or new regional units a spotlight.
Same goes for architecture sets.
Lack of effort in future DLCs will just result in me skipping it until a sale paired with a negative review.
I really hope the 2023 post Roman DLC is going to be at least as good as Dynasties of India on that regard. Crossing my fingers for some more Eagle Warrior civs as well as some much needed love for Africa with hopefully a new set.
As long as they haven’t stated that there’s definitely not going to be more civs, I’ll hope for that.
3 Likes
As a Chinese I like the regional civs that are as detailed as India’s, but I know that Microsoft would face political problems if AoE2 tried to include similarly fine civs for various regions of China 
4 Likes
Even though I know quite many Chinese AoE players, including me, want Tibetans, Jurchens, Tanguts, Nanzhao but Microsoft certainly won’t take the risk of being banned in China 
3 Likes
I mean, they took the risk of having China as the bad guys in the Le Loi campaign, I’m not sure putting the Jurchens in game would be more controversial.
Tibetans and Uyghurs may be a different story, though.
7 Likes
This is subjective, and that’s my whole point. I don’t find paladins cool. In my opinion, they are not even slightly cool, in any medium. That’s because of the whole religious warrior theme, which has horrible historical connotations to me.
And since everyone can’t agree on what’s cool, you need something more.
2 Likes
Hehe, I get your point.
But what I was trying to imply is that many of the concepts that you might be “cool” for “being tied to Western European culture” can actually be applied to many other cultures, the paladin thing was just one example (although I admit that It’s because I like it)
2 Likes
I find paladins cool in game, because they look epic, and are very effective if you can afford them. When I start thinking about the historical stuff, that opinion plummets like a rock thrown towards the ground.
4 Likes
I may be wrong, but you take for granted the historical context that “they are strong, expensive soldiers with armor that justifies the high HP and armor.” If you hypothetically see a unit with lighter armor (like light cavalry, Hussars, Camel Rider, Steppe lancer, Coustillier, etc.) have better HP or armor, then you’d probably think “something’s wrong here”. The mechanics of AoE 2 are very intuitive, something that far surpasses AoE 3.