| When ronin kills an exalted mûmaki... mahout Posted: 11 Dec 2019 04:18 AM PST |
| Worth the wait? Posted: 11 Dec 2019 01:40 PM PST So, I am very close to pulling the trigger on the complete collection of III to relive a big part of my childhood and to give me some exciting new procrastination material for finals week. However I have just now come across the news that they are remastering III (yes I live under a rock) My question is, do I wait for the release of the remastered edition or should I indulge myself and let the consequences of my actions be a problem for future me? I imagine there would be no discount for owners of III and I would have to cough up another $30-40 in shame fees. Is it worth the wait? TLDR: Will I get burned if I buy the complete edition now submitted by /u/Hailestorm [link] [comments] |
| Any players in the DMV area? Posted: 11 Dec 2019 08:46 AM PST |
| AoE 3 African/Arabia speculation Posted: 11 Dec 2019 05:25 AM PST We know AoE 3 DE is coming. That means most likely a few new civs along with it. Maybe. We have no clue but one can only assume. There is one part of the world we see very little of, Africa. Ottomans expanded into both Africa and the Mid. East but the Ottoman Empire is a weird one. It's technically a European, Asian, and African nation all at once. So I'm sure this is an exception and not the dogma that destroys any further possibility here. Here is why we will probably end up in Africa and Mid. East for DE... New maps. Obviously Africa is perfect. I mean Age 3 is about both the Age of Discovery and early colonization right? We went to Asia and all of the Americas are mostly done. So a few African maps would be really neat honestly. I want to play the Aztecs in a safari map and tame lions ok? I don't imagine all 5 of these would be in the game but at least 2 or 3 of them. Here is what I think are the easiest most likely civilizations in Africa/Mid. East for Age 3. Abyssinia (Ethiopia) They have a long history of independence, including independence during the entire time that Age 3 covers history. The campaign I see would most likely be during the Abyssinia war with the Adal Dynasty in Somalia. The Abyssinians were backed by the Portuguese and they would fight the Adal, who were backed by the Ottomans. It sets a pretty Age 3-like campaign in my head where you fight with the Portuguese against Ottomans and units of the same Civilization as a placeholder/fill-in for the fact the Adal were probably very similar. Although the Adal Dynasty could be the civ I will speculate next. Omani Empire (Saracen). They actually were partially colonized by the Portuguese, who held many large cities in Oman. The Omani eventually gathered armies to fight back and pushed them completely out of the region, as well as Persians who were present. The Omani Empire would be an Arab civilization, which could mean that instead of Oman it could just be Arab or Arabia. Saracen as well was in common usage during the history of Age as well, although not throughout all of it. Seeing as how Aztecs were around only for the Age of Discovery and early Colonization, being gone for the later major half of Age 3's coverage of history, Saracen would be acceptable here. Another good Saracen people for a campaign would be the 1st Saudi State. Saudi Arabia technically formed in the 20th century, but the dynasty had a history with 3 states. The 3rd one being what we have now in history. The Ottomans for most of history had control over the Hijaz/Hejaz region where the Saudis today now control. Abdul Wahhab, one of the most influential Islamic scholars, even in our modern age, who along with the Saudis developed political control in central Arabia. Another easy campaign. Yes. They had gunpowder. Another would be Zanzibar but they're politically weak and not as distinct as a civ like the other Saracens could be. Also Zanzibar wasn't technically a Saracen city-state, but rather a Saracen-controlled African city-state. The people themselves not being mostly Saracen. Persians (Safavid Dynasty). The Safavid Persians were closer to the Age 3 Ottomans than they were the Age 3 Indians. I could see them being more focused on gunpowder Infantry rather than Artillery like the Ottomans do. So that would provide an area for uniqueness on part of the Safavid's. Sadly they wouldn't be much of an Elephant civ. Kingdom of Kongo. Central Africa, able to take us to some cool maps possibly. The campaign I imagine for them would be during the Third Portuguese war. The Dutch were present and fought with the Kongolese but were eventually kicked from the region by the Portuguese. Then the Kongolese were left to push them out of Kongo by themselves. Yes. The Kongolese did have gunpowder technology that was gifted to them by the Dutch and Portuguese over the years. Even using them in battle against Portugal. Zulu Kingdom. I know a lot of people may not find this idea attractive, but hear me out first. We have the Aztecs... Yes this example. They didn't last all that long in history, but much shorter than the Zulus did. Aztecs did go on longer than the fall of Tenochtitlan but not necessarily. Technically. After the fall of Tenochtitlan the Aztecs as we knew them were finished. Soon after the remnants of the Aztecs were absorbed into the ranks of the Spanish to take over what eventually became modern day Mexico and most of what we even know about the Aztecs came from Tenochtitlan. So how long they "last" isn't the factor here. What is? The historical significance and coolness. Aztecs are historically major to the age of discovery. That's why they're such a focus when studying that period of history. It's also so important to the new world because they were far more advanced than anywhere else in the Americas. So much goes into sociology here. The other factor is that Aztecs are just so damn cool. That's why we have them as a civ and we're in China winning against the Russians along the Yellow River. Gotta love Age of Empires. lol. With that said, I think the Zulus could actually make for a legit civ as they have a longer history during Age 3's history coverage than the Aztecs do. Zulus fought many wars and even expanded their borders. They did lose, just like the Aztecs. The issues with the Zulus is that a lot more people maybe aren't personally familiar with them and they're not as iconic as the Aztecs. So why compare right? Just to throw that out there that maybe the Zulus could work. They're large enough and culturally distinct enough to be a civ just like the Aztecs and the Sioux are. Maybe not as iconic, again that's the issue I agree with there but there is history and culture that we may be not aware of in our own ignorance. I'm sure Relic has the resources to consult historians that could teach us something. I mean I loved Age because it taught me stuff about history I didn't know and MADE things iconic to me. I didn't even know the Ottoman Empire existed and I would go to school rambling about what I read from Age 2 and 3 in my class. My teachers were shocked I had that knowledge of all these different ancient and medieval cultures. Age 3 being colonial/age of discovery but you get what I'm saying. I'm sure Age could 100% do that with the Zulus and make them iconic to us. submitted by /u/Acorn-Acorn [link] [comments] |
| Hey everyone ! We made a custom scenario on the 100year war on DE 2 ! We really love making these so if you have the spare time check this out ! Posted: 11 Dec 2019 07:52 AM PST |
![[link]](https://i.redd.it/ewnlgy6sxz341.png){kind=link}
No comments:
Post a Comment