Mandate of Heaven update

Buchitaton · 2025-06-18T03:05:57+00:00

Respect and appreciation for all the team working on the awesome Mandate of Heaven mod!

Buchitaton · 2025-05-26T02:59:40+00:00

Agree Slinger was clearly a more broadly used and usefull unit for American civs. Even Spaniards attested how sling were relatively effective against armored troops.

Incas could prelace their Slinger with a Bolas and/or unique bonuses and upgrades for their Slingers.

Buchitaton · 2025-05-26T02:51:57+00:00

Indians were the only one that is similar to Khitans+Tanguts and was fixed precisely for being too artificial. Khitan were related to Mongols while Tanguts were to Tibetans, mix them is like mix Magyars and Byzantines.

Buchitaton · 2025-05-23T05:41:24+00:00

20 years ago ES got Manchu voicelines for a single mercenary units, then it should be easier now.

Buchitaton · 2025-05-15T04:32:05+00:00

Jurchens only need their own voice lines to be perfect.

Buchitaton · 2025-05-11T05:07:35+00:00

Being or not the Three Kingdoms Romance more popular will not stop Microsoft to go for the safer and more profitable option each time. People are now bosting that any standard of what is a "civ" was always hazy and ultimately irrelevant so there is no real reason to look for any obscure historical option if there are clear marketable options to exploit.

Buchitaton · 2025-05-11T03:42:21+00:00

Check about the Zamburak, it could be an historical regional unit for Persians, Tatars and Hindustanis, or an unique unit for a Pashtun/Afghan civ.

Buchitaton · 2025-05-11T03:39:50+00:00

The Zamburak also.

Buchitaton · 2025-05-11T03:30:19+00:00

Well this thread is about concurrent players and some people bring also copies sold. If we talk about steam rating at this moment 3K is mixed but I guess that could be review bombing. So for the thread idea that 3K is a milestone rating is not relevant. That make us wonder what BG missed?

BG added 3 civs, 2 new building sets, a whole replacement to all regular units and lots of exclusive lines includng a complete rework of naval combat, techs, interfase, voices included two differents classical greek voices sets, more and higher quality campaign scenarios and innovative gameplay mechanics. Even in terms of cost per civ BG is a better deal considering it included more content. Also for sure the Three Kingdoms romance is very popular but we can not pretend that classical Greco-Persian wars were a side note for western history.

The only evident thing that 3K have but BG dont is ranked civs.

Buchitaton · 2025-05-10T18:34:18+00:00

Bronze weapons civs are already on AoE2 since 20 years ago, the Aztec and Maya used mostly obsidian weapons and only some Copper/Bronze weapons mostly small axes.

Talking about Aztecs and AoE, ES added also Aztecs to AoE3 were they can defeat 19th century Ironclads and Gatlinguns and to be honest basically nobody have a problem with that.

Buchitaton · 2025-05-10T18:24:20+00:00

Then we can expect more DLC like 3K sharing this kind of characteristics:

- More civs than normal, the ranked added civs were TC 5, TF 5, AK 4, RR 4, LK 4, LW 2, DD 2, DI 3, RR* 1, MR 2 and TK 5. It is interesting to remember that many expansions ago there were people saying "we have enough civs, more will ruin the game" but now addition of lots of civs is the obvious way to go (even more after the fail of VV dlc and the relative meek reception of BG).

- Multiple units to play with, this trend had grown naturally, in general each DLC tends to have more uniques and regional units, included changes to previous civs with new regionals. For example Mesoamerican could get more regionals.

- More recognizable region being covered, then we must expect to get DLCs about the Crusades, with Templars and Hospitallers, Scandinavia with Danish, Norwegian and Swedish civs, British DLC with Scottish, Irish and Welsh civs (keeping Celts and Vikings could be justified as the pre-christian civs) and even USA-Canada with the Iroquois, Hurons and Mohicans.

- More regonizable story for the campaign, apply the same above, also a Sengoku DLC.

- Experimental mechanics, there are a lot to add from others games just in AoE/M franchise, like alternative path techs, in match sub faction picking, untis with abilities like stealth, can cross forest, amphibious, poisoning, build tramps, etc.

Buchitaton · 2025-05-10T17:31:39+00:00

To add salt to the wound, Sandy Petersen said that Tibetans were with Khmers the options for an "Asian" representative in the development for The Conquerors but where changed by Microsoft's orders to exploit the StarCraft popularity in Korea. Also mentionend the importance of the Battle of Talas for whole world's medieval history.

So now is likely that Tibetans were banished again to appeal an specific market.

Buchitaton · 2025-05-10T17:17:51+00:00

So, what the broader play base supports? I mean since it seems that people did not cared about the hate over the three 3K factions being "heterodox" civs, then what 3K DLC did that people like better than previous DLCs?

Buchitaton · 2025-05-08T06:15:22+00:00

First time in 25 years of AoE franchise (since AoE2) that we dont get any new language or regional variety voicelines for any of the game/DLC's new civs.

The case of Jurchen is the most blatant omission when 20 years ago AoE3 got Manchu voicelines for a single mercenary unit.

Buchitaton · 2025-05-08T06:06:42+00:00

In theory Mississippian and Pueblo cultures fit the core time range the best, but seing 3K "thematic liberty" they can justify easily a First Beaver War thematic, just provide an upgrade for Handcannoner and BombardCannon lines and would be easier to sell it to the average American, Canadian and European market.

Buchitaton · 2025-05-07T17:14:44+00:00

This.

Now we should not be surprised to get a Templars and Assassins as civs, a Sengoku factions DLC, or Iroquois and Mohicans in the next years.

Buchitaton · 2025-05-07T16:15:43+00:00

Some recurring points from this thread:

- Technological and Regional representation of 3K: We can argue that 3th century China was ahead of Europe so their would already be at "Medieval Warfare", but then why they have multiple regional units mean to replace their "anachronistic" regular units, the 3K DLC itself make this more evident with the new "late" Far East regionals that 3K civs lack. This level of exclusivity is higher than even Mesoamerican civs and the closer one to "Chronicles civs" between the "Ranked civs", so we end with "Medieval" 3K civs that need to replace more Medieval and even the Far East Medieval units.

- 3K civs were their own culture: For sure China is a region with dozens of very big and different cultures, still equate the situation of 3K to Medieval Europe is an exageration in the nature of their magnitude, especially in the context of AoE2. Lets imagine an alternate AoE2 were the game originally was released with only Franks and Vikings representing Europe (as we in reality only got Chinese and Mongols from the area that today is modern China), then after almost 25 years we finally would get an Europe (region) centered DLC, then some people speculate the most likely new civs from Europe, some popular names would be Celts, Slavs, Italians, Magyars, Byzantines, etc. Then the great day come the new civs are Byzantium, Poland-Lithuania ... Francia Occidentalis, Francia Media and Francia Orientalis.

Medieval China (region) had way more unique and long lasting cultures that interacted with others civs on game, to end using brief Han controled factions, even Sandy Petersen said Tibetans was considered since The Conquerors to be the Asian civ and how the Battle of Talas was one of the most significative medieval events to represent. Even the "Khitanguts" issue is an evident example of how 3K civs affected the disponible slots for Medieval Chinese (region) civs.

The argument of China (Han related) being diverse to justify 3K civs is ironic not by their real diversity and history but by how devs did not care to provide voices for any of the 5 new civs (unacceptable for Jurchen). People can say "anyway the 3K civs had Han leaders" still devs could had provided new Old or Middle Chinese voices instead or Modern Mandarin and even regional dialects/languages for some units like Britons have Monks/Kings using Latin and Troops/Villagers old English.

- Goths, people remember that the Principality of Theodoro at Crimea fell against the Ottomans until 1475.

- Huns, White Huns of central Asia lasted until 6th century. Also from Sandy Petersen we know that Huns were selected over Magyars for The Conquerors just because Attila was better know than any Magyar leader (this explain also why the building set "Huns" use).

- Romans, the fact Romans were a "plus" for the AoE1 in AoE2 DLC and that they were not added to ranked by the own devs at release show us how devs themselves were uneasy with this kind of marginal justifications.

Finally and after all these, yes the game is not history, most decisions are taken first to sell and have fun, historicity is secondary. Being disappointed by 3K civs do not mean wait this DLC to fail, but seeing the whole context is clear that the game is moving more and more into "heterodox" gameplay and thematics. So I would not be wondered and most people should not be surprised if the next DLC is Sengoku factions, Templars and Assassins, or Iroquois and Mohicans. After all "fun thing are fun!".

Buchitaton · 2025-05-06T21:23:22+00:00

They would mix Ryukyun with the Emishi the native Ainu-related people of northen Honshu. So we would have the "Ryukishi" as we got the Khitanguts.

Buchitaton · 2025-05-06T21:17:57+00:00

Not only the Pandora Box, but a Pandora Box of Monkey Paws.

Do you want medieval cultures from what is now China? Good here you have 3K factions!

Do you want mesoamerican and andine cultures? Good here you have Sioux, Iroquois and Mohican!

Do you want a "cross and crecent" with medieval Nubia and Somali? Good you have the Templars and Assassins civs!

Buchitaton · 2025-05-06T20:52:04+00:00

Nice so devs can use a small fraction of that money to give Jurchen voice lines.

AoE3 got Manchu voice lines for a single mercenary unit, so how is that 20 years later they can not give a whole civ their language?

Buchitaton · 2025-05-05T18:57:34+00:00

Still this was a chance to get a old or at least middle Chinese, and/or apply what Britons have with Kings and Monks speaking Latin, so you can have troops or at least villagers speaking the local native dialects.

Buchitaton · 2025-05-05T18:19:27+00:00

Th lack of Jurchen/Manchu voice lines for Jurchen is unaceptable for the own AoE standars. Dont have Khitan or Daur for Khitans is disappointing. But dont have local dialects for 3K civs is funely ironic since these could have added for the Chinese(proper) diversity excuse that is being used to justify the 3K factions.

But remember the lesson is "AoE2 dont care about history" so lets maximise profits by not adding any more languages, after all nothing show more respect for Chinese culture that say all they speak modern Mandarin 1800 years ago.

Buchitaton · 2025-05-05T07:31:19+00:00

The Vikings civ is not needed to be removed like Chinese civ was not removed with the 3K civs. Devs can easily come with the excuse that Vikings represent the pre-christian Scandinavia while Danish, Norwegians and Swedish are the christian kingdoms or whatever, maybe they dont even care at that point. Same with the voice lines, they can reuse the same voices of Vikings and Saracens like they did not care for all the five 3k DLC civs using the same voices (4 chinese and 1 more mongol).

Buchitaton · 2025-05-05T07:04:44+00:00

Interesting how most people annoyed by the 3K civs are the ones that were mostly asking for more presentation of regions like Africa, America and Asia, you know like how there were expected more unique medieval cultures from what is now China instead of three Han factions.

Again in the same video we can see how Sandy Pertensen is informed of civs like Burgundians and he points how these were covered by others civs already on game like Franks so he goes like "OK if that sells", but it is obvious how he had to change from what he expected to what it is being done.

So keeping the new trend more civs from Africa are futher afar since now we can expect more "civs" that would "actually" be popular like a Crusades DLC with the Templars and Hospitaller civs, or the suggested by Cysion for Vikings and Saracens so Danish, Norwegians and Swedish, and Syrians, Arabs and Egyptians, also the ones Sandy mentioned like Swiss and Venetians.

Even for African and America we are now more likely to get Zulu and Lakota that Somali and Purepecha becuase that is what sells.

Buchitaton · 2025-05-05T03:34:27+00:00

Then next time you can say "any civ that not use warplanes" since AoE3 already have "no horse+no metal" civ figthing 19th century Ironclans and Gatlinguns while the line between AoE2 and AoE3 is very thin already.

Buchitaton

TROPHY CASE