They don’t need to. However it would make sense for different reasons if they did and there really speaks nothing against it. If I remember correctly the Magyar Hussar originally even used to have no wings.
2 Likes
So far the multiple accounts types are equalizers and coyplatus or however you spell his name. People who I routinely disagree with for various reasons, and basically never agree with me.
3 Likes
Okay well I noticed the same trend with other people but I’m not gonna make accusations now because I don’t try to get flagged by their multiple accounts again and get banned.
2 Likes
What reasons make sense to change it?
2 Likes
The main reasons are for a better differentiation of the now 3 different, yet nearly identical Hussar units in game and to remove this insinuatingly polish element from other civs now that the Polish will have their own civ.
3 Likes
All that have drastically different wings. Mission accomplished.
Guess we should remove paladins from every civ that isnt franks or teutons then, since you know, other civs having that takes away from a very HRE/Frankish element
4 Likes
So 2 wrongs make 1 right now? I didn’t propose to remove the Hussars but to adjust their appearance just slightly which would hurt nobody.
Nice arguing with you. You literally see that my points are valid yet your ego forbids you to agree with me. Have a good night!
2 Likes
Point is. This game has NEVER been historically accurate or called itself such. We literally have knights on 33 civs despite that being a very European thing.
We have meso civs with steel, crossbow, arbs, and siege.
We have Chinese with almost no gunpowder.
If we start making changes in the name of accuracy this game is going to need whole slews of changes and it would take far longer then you guys seem to think it would.
Funny how you think your points are valid but I never see you guys cry about the other inaccurate things in the game. Why should Poland have the priority on accuracy when the game has never pushed for such a thing?
You call it two wrongs dont make a right, but the truth is its more like dozens of wrongs and you guys only care about those that matter to Poland.
4 Likes
It’s even funnier how you refuse to acknowledge that they are.
You make it sound like I would have to create topics about all previous historical accuracies before I’m entitled to support this suggestion.
Of course I’d love to see odd things like the Throwing Axe-Man modified but again, how do those “more like dozens of wrongs” invalidate this suggestion? Doesn’t make sense.
Here is another recent post for more “historical accuracy”, people are repeatedly asking for such changes.
Unfortunately it’s frowned upon by the stubborn and old-fashioned part of our community who disapprove of any changes if not brought up by themselves.
Mongol Historical accuracy petition - Age of Empires II: DE / II - Discussion - Age of Empires Forum
It’s not about: “Why should Poland have the priority on accuracy when the game has never pushed for such a thing?” but about getting the devs’ attention and overall support for all such righteous suggestions, no matter their prioritization or grudge held against what civ they may apply to.
4 Likes
You want to know why people frown upon that guys ideas? They massively buff mongols.
They buff their economy, offsetting their weak currenrly Midgame.
Thry buff mangudai, arguably rhe strongest unit in the game that definitely doesn’t need buffs.
Here’s rhe thing though. You made it clear earlier that you didn’t actually care about other things being accurate. Here I’ll even quote you.
Yeah. Just a few minutes to remove the wings. Then since we opened historical accuracy can of worms to appease Poland fans (despite already getting a unique castle, a unique hussar skin, and a unique mill, more rhen most civs get already), we then will open up rhe floodgates to other people wanting uniqueness for their own civ.
That’s a heck of a lot more work then 15 minutes.
Not to mention having to rebalancing the civs once you’ve given Chinese gunpowder and the like.
We had a game that tried to make the civs unique and accurate. Age 3. It didn’t work well.
They are also trying rhe same in age 4 and people are apprehensive about that and pros are already saying they don’t think it will do as well as age 2.
Fact is that Poland already has a lot of uniqueness going for it. Unique castle. Unique hussar skin. Unique mill.
Honestly when you guys want to be even more unique then you already are just looks absurd to others. Like how far do the devs have to go to make you happy?
I dont see a lot of “overall support” for this period. Not here. Not on reddit. Not on aoezone. I see it as something that some support. But most of those fixate on one civ and ignore all the other areas of inaccuracy in the game. They ignore how much actual work that they would open up by appealing to accuracy.
4 Likes
The new Hussar looks great, don’t get me wrong, but the unit (from what we know as of now) is nothing new and it’s not the first time a civ has more than 1 unique unit either.
A unique building as the Donjon and a unique castle model apparently are standards now for civs in new DLCs so I don’t get your resentment against all that only when it comes to the Poles?
For whatever reason you just seem biased against the Polish community or Poland in general so I see no reason in further discussing this.
3 Likes
Looooooooool
The irony
2 Likes
I really don’t see why this is a big deal. Yeah not all Europeans used winged hussars, does it matter that most civs get them no, it’s a game seriously guys chill
1 Like
Sicilians got 1 unique building. 1 unique unit. And 1 unique castle. You don’t see them in here asking for changes to orger civs because they want to be more unique do you?
Meanwhile here we have poles. Coming in with 2 unique units, 1 unique building, 1 unique castle, and yet that isnt enough. They want more on top of that. We got to make sure our hussar is rhe only winged one. Furthermore they are also asking for Grunwald to be a historical battle so they would come in with far more unique stuff rhen any otger recently added civ.
4 Likes
We don’t, because there exists no comparable issue in their case.
Outrageous! 
2 Likes
Easy way not to get attacked: don’t attack others first? Save the talk, we both know the truth.
2 Likes
You think Sicilians didn’t have anything else rhey could have done unique? Seriously. You’re talking about a civ that contained numerous different groups of people.
Not outrageous. Pure fact. I’ve literally seen many of you comment it should be a historic battle
2 Likes
Apparently neither do you or you would have already came up with it, if it was of major importance.
2 Likes
How about them not having camels? It fits historically for them to have them. But you don’t see people complaining about it do you?
4 Likes
Oh boy if you were from India having these talks would be hilarious.
Even as someone that hates the current India civ, the only thing we can do is change whats going to be added next.
The same goes for Poland
2 Likes