You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Strategy and General Discussion
Moderated by Yeebaagooon, TAG

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.66 replies
Age of Mythology Heaven » Forums » Strategy and General Discussion » Well another good suggestion for ES.
Bottom
Topic Subject:Well another good suggestion for ES.
« Previous Page  1 2 3  Next Page »
Bernardo
Mortal
posted 02 April 2002 00:33 AM EDT (US)         
text DON'T MAKE X PACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
AuthorReplies:
Trade Mark
Mortal
posted 02 April 2002 11:16 PM EDT (US)     31 / 66       
Brenardo dude... are you ok? you must come from the same planet as that other dude i wrote a reply to...are you gonna get AoM when it comes out? if you are and ES does make the expansion dont get it! (REVELATION!)

For lack of a better signature I have put this on
My Home Page [ Version 2.0 is being made ]
'Why is it that whenever I post the thread goes dead?' - Wise man
Played AoK since 2000, and I'm still crap at it.
Bernardo
Mortal
posted 03 April 2002 00:25 AM EDT (US)     32 / 66       
Well, let me correct what I said.

I gave the Ideas for an X pack because I liked the idea of an Israelite Culture and I was telling why it could be a good choice.

Well I was thinking an X pack for AoM would be bad idea because what more Cultures could we add?

1. Chinese: Tell me one G-d and MU (EXCEPT FOR DRAGON)
2. Mesopotamian- A lot of G-ds but MUs?
3. Meso American- A lot of G-ds and maybe the Qetzalcoatl MU but we know ES guys and they may give them siege weaponry.
4. Israelite- Single G-d one MU two civs but not a good idea since theses all polemics.

Well what new features could ES add, its a very complete game that's why I said X pack's not so good idea.

WHY DID I SAID AoK:TC SPOILED AOK?

1. I said it wasn't too spoiled, I meant for the Mayans and Aztecs.

a) Did aztecs or Mayans had siege weapons?
NO.
b) What weapons used these civs?
Spears, stones and makanas (Clubs with sharp stones).

That's why I said these game was spoiled no more.

Bernardo
Mortal
posted 03 April 2002 00:31 AM EDT (US)     33 / 66       
P.S. Giving Mayans Rams, trebuchets and onagers is like giving tanks to the Turks and submarines to the Franks.
c r e e z y
Mortal
(id: Hairy Scary Man)
posted 03 April 2002 00:40 AM EDT (US)     34 / 66       

Quoted from Bernardo:

What weapons used these civs?


learn sum english man ...it should b "what weapons did these civs use?"

[This message has been edited by Hairy Scary Man (edited 04-03-2002 @ 00:41 AM).]

GNon
Mortal
posted 03 April 2002 00:42 AM EDT (US)     35 / 66       
Don't buy it. I'm glad we got TC and i like it, i'll accept the rams a trebs for the azzies and mayans cause you need them so the civs can be acceptable to play in the game.


It's not like giving the others tanks because tanks didn't exist then, rams a trebs did exist at that time, but the azzies and mayans didn't have them. It was needed to balance them into the game. The Spanish need someone to conquer you know.

Bernardo
Mortal
posted 03 April 2002 00:43 AM EDT (US)     36 / 66       
You understood what I said. And is not my natal language so I don't talk it very well.
Bernardo
Mortal
posted 03 April 2002 00:46 AM EDT (US)     37 / 66       
Is the same Tanks didn't exist, and rams yes that's ok and real.
But is as real to give Mayans and Aztecs siege weapons as giving Turks tanks that's what I meant.
izzy
Mortal
(id: Ballista_Turtle)
posted 03 April 2002 00:48 AM EDT (US)     38 / 66       
My goodness, boy, you defiantly gone off the edge.

Quote:

text DON'T MAKE X PACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Look, you!

*Attempts to punch Bernardo*
*Gets held back by other forumers*

Your only reason you want ES not to add an X-Pack due to some major historical inaccuracies? AOM has it's share (Not that it's bad), but limiting the company to not make an X-pack because some random forumer thought the idea of balancing a civ was bad, shouldn't be taken seriously. An X-Pack doesn't entirely revolve around the Civilizations, but mainly around the patches and fixes they clean up.

If the Mayans had no siege, how the hell would they take down buildings? Do you expect their spears will take down a stonewall? That's even more inaccurate.

Besides, they made that game.. Oh.. a year ago, ES defiantly learned from some minor mistakes they made.


~Izzy|HG Angel |Since August 2000~
~INTL|HeavenGames~
<('.')>
GNon
Mortal
posted 03 April 2002 00:55 AM EDT (US)     39 / 66       
I do understand what you are saying. My point of view is different, so i don't see it as bad as you. I don't care much about historical inaccuracies because its a game. Read the history section of the game for historical correctness.
Bernardo
Mortal
posted 03 April 2002 00:57 AM EDT (US)     40 / 66       
No I expect them not to bring down buildings.
I expect them to be a little easy to kill civ.
Don't you commit mistakes sometimes? I was new to use that bolding feature sorry no man's perfect.

And I consider giving tanks to turks as innacurate to give mayans or aztecs rams.


izzy
Mortal
(id: Ballista_Turtle)
posted 03 April 2002 01:00 AM EDT (US)     41 / 66       

Quote:

I expect them to be a little easy to kill civ.

...

What's the point? Who would play them? An easy to kill Civ?

The Aztecs were able to fend off the Spanish. If it wasn't for the Spanish's deceases and their influence on the natives, the Aztecs would have prevailed.


~Izzy|HG Angel |Since August 2000~
~INTL|HeavenGames~
<('.')>
Socrates
Mortal
posted 03 April 2002 02:11 AM EDT (US)     42 / 66       

Quote:

Not something is fun relism other and stupid things other.

Que? Would you mind that translating that for the regular Joe who doesn't speak Bernardise?

Quote:

WHAT THE HELL'S THAT?

Game balance. Do think Aztects and Mayans would be fun if ES took away the Trebuchet, Onager and Swordmen units? No, they wouldn't be playable - they'd be weak.

Bernardo
Mortal
posted 03 April 2002 02:27 AM EDT (US)     43 / 66       
Mayans and Aztecs are supposed to be weak not playable but easy to kill.

And I meant this: No, realism is one thing, fun other thing and stupid stuff other.

Socrates
Mortal
posted 03 April 2002 02:36 AM EDT (US)     44 / 66       

Quote:

Mayans and Aztecs are supposed to be weak not playable but easy to kill.

How do you figure that?

Bernardo
Mortal
posted 03 April 2002 03:30 PM EDT (US)     45 / 66       
Well for making Mayanns and Aztecs real to the game, they must be weak.
SandyMan
Immortal
(id: ES_Sandyman)
posted 03 April 2002 04:41 PM EDT (US)     46 / 66       
The Spaniards conquered the Mayans & Aztecs by a bizarre cancatenation of historic coincidences, disease outbreaks, and extremely skilled diplomacy, not because their weapons were superior. One Mayan kingdom held out against the Spanish until post-1700.

Did the Aztecs & Mayans have siege? YES. They conquered walled cities all the time. Their siege tools and weapons were not onagers and trebuchets, but we didn't want to do a bunch of specialty weapons just for the Aztecs. So sue us.

Did the Aztecs & Mayans have swordsmen? YES. The obsidian-edged "sword" used by the meso-americans was a perfectly good weapon. It was able to slice through chain armor, cut off a horse's head in a single blow, and even after the obsidian blades were chipped and broken it made a fine mace. They were not as durable as metal swords, of course, but that's not everything.

If you want to go looking for historic inaccuracies in AoK there are hundreds of them. Every civ has gross inaccuracies and errors we chose to make in favor of playability.

Now to display your lack of knowledge of other mythologies:

You ask:

1. Chinese: Tell me one G-d and MU (EXCEPT FOR DRAGON)
They had a whole pantheon of gods. Wen-Chang, Xi Wang-Mu, the Jade Emperor, Ling-Guan, Mu Gong, Pang-Gu the primordial giant etc. etc. They have tons of Myth units too -- celestial tortoise, Phoenix, Ki-lin (the chinese version of the unicorn), and a wide variety of horse-headed demons, giants, monsters, and goblins.

2. Mesopotamian- A lot of G-ds but MUs?
They also had plenty of MUs. The scorpion man, which we stole for the Egyptians, is just one of them. There is also the Bull of Heaven, Basmu the giant multijawed snake, Alu the demon without legs ears or mouth, the monstrous Tiamat, and so forth.

3. Meso American- A lot of G-ds and maybe the Qetzalcoatl MU but we know ES guys and they may give them siege weaponry.
Get stuffed.

4. Israelite- Single G-d
Too controversial.

Bernardo
Mortal
posted 03 April 2002 04:52 PM EDT (US)     47 / 66       
Well sandyman, I'll tell you something, I don't know any siege weapon mayans or Aztecs used, maybe you can tell me one. Then Obsidian Blade, hmmmmmm, don't you think I know them, I live in the country which the Aztecs lived, I won't consider Makana as a sword and won't consider stones so powerful....

Then, I don't know much about Mythologies, I never said I knew too much about Mythologies, I don't know the Chinese Mythology, I know few about Mesopotamian one, few about Egyptian, few about Greek and more less about the Meso American (Aztecs only).

Well then About Israelite, controversial? Why?
I could understand you say this: "It's single G-d so we can't add G-d Pantheon, how can we divide it in Civs?, and they weren't so influential", things like that but controversial?

What controversy could it cause, I know Jewish communities' reply to this.

tin man
Mortal
posted 03 April 2002 05:00 PM EDT (US)     48 / 66       
Bernardo, I don't see how anyone in his right mind could be so utterly blind. Stop trying to create endless arguments, and as Sandy said, "Get stuffed."
Bernardo
Mortal
posted 03 April 2002 05:08 PM EDT (US)     49 / 66       
Which endless arguements?
Blind why?
XCrash_Fish
Mortal
posted 03 April 2002 05:19 PM EDT (US)     50 / 66       
Bernardo:
Youd be suprised what kind of siege weapons people invented over time. The most common ancient idea is tersion power. Tersion power works like this: Hold your hand out straight and level, twist your arm until you cant twist it anymore, now relax it (your hand flies back). Many early people grasped this technique. Onangers, Mangonels, Ballistae, scorpions, and catapultua all worked by tersion. Considering the known math level of the Maya, it is safe to say they could have invented something.

AOK was too big to make each culture special like in AOM, so they made everyone look european. I dont think that the Chinese infantry looked like that either.

Conisdering all the cultural influence the Chinese have had over the years, they have tons of Gods, they would be fun to learn about, as they are slightly mysterious.

For Mesopotamia, all the things Sandy said up above, including stone men, thunderbird, and Humbaba(Huwawa). They would also be a cool one to make.

Meso-American, see above. I would like S. American....The Chavin culture... LLAMA RIDERS


Though I than He - may longer live
He longer must - than I -
For I have but the power to kill,
Without--the power to die--
The only reoccurence in every AoM games you lose, is you.
Gullinbursti
Mortal
posted 03 April 2002 05:26 PM EDT (US)     51 / 66       
is it just me or do llama riders sound really cool?

Flaming boars are very bright
Socrates
Mortal
posted 03 April 2002 07:05 PM EDT (US)     52 / 66       

Quote:

is it just me or do llama riders sound really cool?

No, it's just you.

Quoted from Sandy:

Get stuffed

You speak for me, if not most of us.

Bernardo, do yourself a favor and quit while you're ahead. Oh, too late.

vladimir87
Mortal
posted 03 April 2002 08:18 PM EDT (US)     53 / 66       
IMO, this is a stupid post. What the heck are you talking about Bernardo?

Uh, the mayans were TOO strong?!!?!? They didnt even have calvary!!!

If you think AOK is bette then AOC cuz the mayans have seige weapons, i dont know what is wrong...

-vladimir87

Bernardo
Mortal
posted 03 April 2002 08:22 PM EDT (US)     54 / 66       
Llama riders?

Ha ha ha ha ha! (Sorry it sounds funny).

And Socrates: Ata Okhel Drek!

Bernardo
Mortal
posted 03 April 2002 08:26 PM EDT (US)     55 / 66       
Vladimir87, I don't think AoK is btter than AoK:TC, no I say is not logical Mayans and Aztecs have those siege weapons, I was giving only my point of view I like AoK:TC that's why I bought it but, I don't like Mayans or either Azecs that was my damned point.
Real
Mortal
posted 04 April 2002 07:43 AM EDT (US)     56 / 66       
One thing that disturbed me about the americans in AOC is that they have trade carts with weels, they didn't have weels. Though I like those carts.

And you made a new graphic for the monck too, so why not for other units?

But well, not important, just say nothing and work on on AoM.


Where's paradise?...............AoM is....In war there're only loosers!
Paradise is in your heart - ..gonna come! Love is the soul's blood!
open your heart and you'll be in paradise!..There's no uncertainty, there's only hope!
What's the difference between a raven?...What's yellow and hangs in a tree?
Nothing...its legs are both equal, all about the right one!...=> A blue couch!
Real may say he leaves...but be sure, he'll come back!
vladimir87
Mortal
posted 04 April 2002 07:46 AM EDT (US)     57 / 66       
Im sorry for my misinterpretation, I read the first 15 posts, and thats what it seemed like you were saying

-Vladimir87

TheShadowDawn
Mortal
posted 04 April 2002 07:51 AM EDT (US)     58 / 66       
The bottom line:

Realism < Fun.
Realism < Practicality.


TheShdwDwn
If you're like me, then it's possible you're a clone generated from my stolen DNA. I suggest you turn yourself in for destruction immediately.

[This message has been edited by TheShadowDawn (edited 04-04-2002 @ 07:53 AM).]

Stormboy
Mortal
posted 04 April 2002 09:02 AM EDT (US)     59 / 66       
*puts on full body armour*

Well, I'm going to agree with Bernardo on this one. Not for the same reasons though. As was pointed out, there are plenty of cultures that could be considered for a possible xpack. You'll get no argument from me on that point. Adding one or more extra cultures would be a balance nightmare, but given enough time and resources ES could probably pull it off.

My main reason for not wanting an xpack, is that I would much rather see ES get on with the next game. Why do books, movies, computer games all need sequels, add-ons, xpacks anyway? That is such a waste of creative talent. I would much rather see directors, authors, game designers take a risk and try something new, instead of playing it safe and giving us more of the same.

Yes, sometimes these xpacks/sequels improve on the original, but often they don't. AoC is in some ways a better game than AoK (no more TC warfare), in other ways it isn't (less strategic options - flush or die).

Think about it this way: if ES hadn't made AoC, we would probably be playing AoM right now.

Real
Mortal
posted 04 April 2002 09:31 AM EDT (US)     60 / 66       
Nah, I doubt we would.

And look, TC didn't bring anything that new, an expansion for AoM would bring a completely new diff interesting civ.

Don't say such things anymore plz!


Where's paradise?...............AoM is....In war there're only loosers!
Paradise is in your heart - ..gonna come! Love is the soul's blood!
open your heart and you'll be in paradise!..There's no uncertainty, there's only hope!
What's the difference between a raven?...What's yellow and hangs in a tree?
Nothing...its legs are both equal, all about the right one!...=> A blue couch!
Real may say he leaves...but be sure, he'll come back!
« Previous Page  1 2 3  Next Page »
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Age of Mythology Heaven | HeavenGames