---- ---- A – every unique unit for the Italian and Swedish (not Swiss) civs is in the X-Pack, enhanced and improved. With the exception of the Architect, who was lame anyway. Most of their unique church techs were already incorporated into the basic game. These civs were dumped before the card system was instigated, so it’s not applicable. ---- I guess since I�ve already spilled the beans on the Klamath, I�ll talk about their upgrades a bit to try to stem the tide. At this moment (this could change with testing), they have three upgrades: Strategy, Work Ethos, and the Huckleberry Feast. Strategy doubles the attack of their rifle-armed warriors. Work Ethos boosts all your settler gather rates a tiny bit. Huckleberry Feast gives you a bunch of food crates, depending on how long the game has lasted. Their warrior uses a rifle, and I think you can see him in videos of E3, because he was used as stand-in art for one of the iroquois units on the screen. ---- ---- ---- (Wha? Sarcasm?) A � well, I don�t view it as our best game. I think Age3 is way better balanced. And while it�s fair to say that it was more successful than AoM, Age3 is also more successful than AoM, and is doing extremely well. We�ll have to wait to see what Age3�s lifetime sales turn out to be. That said, I think one of the reasons for AoK�s success is the medieval setting (much as I love the renaissance/Napoleonic wars, it�s hardly a well-known or sexy period). A � my favorite civs (the most fun to play) right now are the new native civs in the X-Pack. The playtesters here said the Iroquois were fun to play from the moment we got them in the game (even before they were balanced at all). Then when we added the Sioux, they rapidly became the �most fun� civ. Now we�ve added the third civ, and the general reaction is that they are the best yet. Anyway, the natives are really fun and fast to play. They suit my play style just fine. A � the ottomans are able to get both hand infantry & riflemen via allies, so these techs, while less-useful, are still occasionally valuable. Why take them out? As far as giving them new replacement techs, as I said before, the Ottomans don�t seem in need of a boost. ----
A – the two are indelibly connected. Weaken one, and the other drops too.
A – this is not because Portuguese were supposed to be weak in artillery, but because the organ gun did not live up to expectations. As a unique unit, it should probably be better.
A – I think they’ve been brought back into line with the range nerf.
A – the issue here is that it is easy to make a custom map that gives players tons of XP, thus letting people “cheat” their way up in HC level quickly.
A – the limit is based on CPU and video card power. It’s not chosen by us to be mean. Talk to the hardware manufacturers. We here at ES would love to have pop limits of 1000.
A – well, there are some issues with having No Rush as a game type. For example, how exactly should it work? What does “no rush” mean? Does it mean no attacking at all – even raids – for X minutes? Or does it mean no large-scale combat? Or does it mean no attacking the enemy’s “base”? Definitions need to be set so that people’s expectations wouldn’t be shattered. Are you violating the “no rush” principle if your explorer shoots at a villager who’s forward-building a blockhouse? Is forward-building illegal under “no rush”? You see some of the issues that would be raised. Advice from you guys on this would be welcome.
A – please give us some credit.
A – yes
A – alas, this is news to me. When I searched the old campaign for evidence of tribal affinity all I came up with was the old coot asking Amelia if her grandpappy was a Mohawk. Well, let’s just say that Kenyenke was half-Mohawk and half-Oneida, and that Nathaniel was raised as an Oneida.
A – you got a problem with that?
A – the engine allows it. We do it all the time for special screenshots. The problem is that when the camera is pulled way back to see the whole map, the game chugs badly.
A – in theory you should go up about the same. There are probably specific combinations that would make one of the situations better than the other.
A – MS Marketing is going to reveal it, not me. I will probably be featured in the article though.
A – you’ll just have to play and see. One thing – the European sniper shot still works vs. converted guardians.
A – two
A – no. Each large map has to be designed as a full separate map. You can’t just magically “expand” a small map (though you can use it as the basis for designing the large one).
A – again, they’d have to be independently designed. Go ahead and do one.
A – you’ll find out in 1.08
A – our current take on it is that the Germans are, in fact, slightly overpowered, though not necessarily because of War Wagons.
A – at one time we did. Originally, not all civs got all artillery. Some didn’t have mortars. Some didn’t have culverins. The French were unusual in that they got every type of cannon. It was decided for balance purposes that everyone should have every cannon which sort of canceled out this French advantage.
A – I better wait and see if there’s a showcase planned. Each gets only one unit, though.
A – yep.
A – it does not worry us that much. The British are the most-played civ by far. It is our opinion that the familiarity of the British name, and the fact that it is the default civ when you load up the game for the first time means that it has way more n00bs playing it than the other civs, which accounts for the difference in victories.
A – they’re heroes, considering the almost total lack of support we provide them with.
A) we have not done a whole lot of thinking about our next Age game, frankly. It’s not really our style. But I don’t recall civilians figuring heavily in trench construction during WW1, frankly.
A – the pop cap in Warchiefs is 200, same as Age 3. And just like Age 3 there are ways to violate it (minor native allies, certain shipments, naval units, etc.)
A – yep. Pirates too.
A – my guess is they will rely heavily on their Fire Dance.
A – they have some excellent lancer-like units
A – outposts, no. Frigates, yes, if you have enough canoes to zerg it.
A – everyone keeps talking about balance issues …
A – I think you have a basic misunderstanding of why there’s a pop cap. It’s not because we have to pick some magic number – it’s to keep the game from chugging and looking like crap.
A – I say that it was always a strong unit, but the recent changes tempted people to try it out and find how excellent it was.
A – get the wall upgrade, you cheapskate.
A – I think we’ll have to save answering this question for a press release.
A – I sure hope so.
A – yes yes no no. Architects were settlers that could build, but not gather. Merchants were settlers who could only gather gold. So they really aren’t very interesting units.
A – the European civs are significantly enhanced. They have no equivalent to the war dhief, the firepit, or other native traits – instead, they have new, European-style bonuses.
A – not yet
A – it seems he’d be kind of boring.
A – yes
A – they don’t have blockhouses. All of them have firepits.
A – still under discussion
A – all their naval units, except for the canoe, will be new. And the canoe’s stats will probably be significantly changed.
A – they look like Iroqouis to me.
A – all I’ll admit for now is that the Huron are indeed the replacement minor tribe for the Iroquois.
A – while he is Iroqouis, he is not a Mohawk. In fact his mother is from the Oneida tribe, and so is he. The Oneida sided with the patriots during the Revolution.
A – not that my opinion has any weight in what the next game should be, but I have been slavishly studying WW2 for about 30 years, so my answer should be clear.
A – well, of course. That’s an easy question.
A – crossbows, musketeers, pikemen, halberds, skirmishers, and dragoons are all able to cost-effectively beat war wagons in a stand-up fight. If the war wagons are carefully microed, they can shoot-and-scoot the pikes and halberds. So I guess I’m going to just flat-out deny that only longbows can beat them.
A – yes
A – yes. Much of it is already in.
A – yes, as I’ve said before.
A – I think it is highly unlikely.
A � obviously. I mean, we�re testing them right now against European civs, and they are able to hold up despite their lack of a factory.
A � they were one of the first civs to start relying on firepower instead of cold steel to win their victories.
A � not in the x-pack
A � when I BS in these threads, it�s always really obvious (like when I claimed the Inuit were the third civ).
A � sadly, the Inuit are not one of the minor allies. Really, I can�t say who the other minor allies are on the off-chance MS Marketing wants to do a �Special Interview� on the topic.
A � nope.
A � Yes. No.
A � what�s wrong with letting a person invest in an improved explorer? I agree it would make every civ stronger � but �if everyone is super, then no one is super.�
A � not exactly. It�s hard to explain.
A � This week Russia was the top civ, so no I don�t think they need any kind of boost.
A � refreshing, isn�t it? Personally I love not getting all those posts about ES Must Nerf Cuirassiers. Nothing Else Will Work.
A � all applicable patch changes will be in Warchiefs. Furthermore, if you install Warchiefs, and you DON�T have the patches, your game will be automatically upgraded to the latest pre-Warchiefs patch.
A � most generals sat a mile back of the fight with a telescope. Hardly an inspiring figure compared to the fighting warchief.
A � to make things simpler.
A � their villagers do not gather more quickly than european settlers.
A � the Unkown map is NOT balanced in any sort of way, though usually when there�s a drought of resources, it applies to all sides. The whole point of the map is to provide a more randomized experience � something which a lot of our fans were asking for. I agree it�s not for everyone, but making it less random would subvert the fundamental concept.
A � The Cherokee are probably comparable to the Sioux, though of course they occupied less territory. They were much less imperial than the Inca. The last time the Inuit seem to have engaged in wars of conquest seems to have been when they (might have) wiped out the Skraelings during the �little ice age� of the 1500s. Denmark is one of my favorite countries (note my last name) and, bless their hearts, they have striven mightily to be imperial in the past with mixed results.
A � I think Russian players would (a) have random strelets strewn around the map of which they were unaware and (b) have their pop cap gradually filled up without their participation.
A � that�s an interesting idea.
A � no
A � I think I already have. Didn�t I mention the Klamath? Seems to me there was someone else too.
A � we�ll probably work our way back to them again someday.
A � none of the natives have tribal council only, but some have units that cannot be trained. These units can be acquired via the tribal council, or via �politicians�, or other non-trainable means.
A � I wish we could. I would like to have distinctive and accurate art for every single tribe. Unfortunately, the demands on our artists are so great that we have to generalize somewhere.
A � they sound great. You should go ahead and design them.
A � it�s not really a combination of any extant maps.
A �both the Sioux and the Iroquois aggressively expanded their territory and acquired other tribes as allies and tributaries. The Iroquois were especially belligerent, and carried out wars of conquest hundreds of miles to the east and north of their original lands. One could make a case that the Sioux conquests were more defensive in nature than those of the Iroquois. Note, I�m not saying the Iroquois were �bad� � quite the reverse: I admire their conquering spirit.
A � you�ve caught me. The third civ is, in fact the Inuit. I�ve loved Eskimos ever since seeing Nanook of the North as a kid. It still makes me sad when I remember that Nanook and his family died of starvation a year after that documentary was made.
A � we are fully aware of the fact that longbowmen can�t hit and run because of their attack animation. We chose to lower skirmisher speed because we specifically didn�t want to mess with the animations.
A � I wonder who that �horse� was.
A � you might be happy to know that ES itself gets to decide what game we do next. It�s fair to say that if we go too far off the rails MS gets a veto, though.
A � dude. I�m lead designer on the X-Pack. How secretive do you think we are? Internally, I mean?
A � we�re just talking about native allies here of course. I am happy with any native that people are happy to get. So I like the Seminoles, the Caribs, etc. I�m sad with the way the Iroquois turned out, since they�re unpopular. But of course we�re getting rid of those old-style minor Iroquois so that�s the good news. The new major-civ Iroquois are plenty fun.
A � painted desert.
A � nope
A � not the foreseeable future
A � the warchief is no stronger than an explorer in the first age. He gets beefed up in subsequent ages. The explorer�s sniper shot still works on the controlled guardians, so you can just blast down the bear. And the TC is able to handle a bear too.
A � we want to encourage everyone to have native teammates, if they�re not native themselves.
A � no factory. Some of them have something resembling a fort.
A � did you not notice that in a very recent patch we changed a ton of cards, nerfing some and buffing others? I think this makes our attitude clear.
A � because the European civs are doing just fine right now with explorers as they are. Historically explorers weren�t nearly as big a deal tactically as warchiefs, and because the whole warchief thing is supposed to be a native advantage. It helps make up for the fact that they are missing some European things, like mercs, most artillery pieces, factories, etc.
A � their Capitol techs are spread throughout many buildings.
A � yes, though they call it �Legendary Native Allies� and no it does not boost their own units. They have to get separate Legendary upgrades for each unit type, just like the Europeans.
A � we are also ignoring the more brutal parts of European culture/warfare, such as scalping and slavery.
A � at least I don�t hear people complain that they�re too weak ïŠ
A � yep
A � nope
A � if we�re thinking of the same guys, no.
A ) we all sincerely wish them stellar success.
A � not the ones that boost native HP or stuff. That would be a horrible screw!
A � not necessarily. We didn�t use a real Turk for the Ottomans, after all. Some of them are real Native Americans though. I just don�t remember which ones.
A � Ottomans don�t seem to need much of a boost right now.
A � new units, new shipments, and new buildings aren�t enough for you, eh?
A � I�ll tell you the truth � I don�t think it�s finalized yet. That looks like one of the contenders, though.
A � we talk about this all the time. It bugs us too.
A � we talk about this all the time too. We call it �villager radar� and dislike it.
A � because people play them in a grossly wrong way. They constantly try to get villagers via building manors instead of just training them normally and using the manors as a periodic bonus.
A � it�s not fun to fail seeing a unit because it blended into the background. That�s why we have friend or foe colors, which is also why doing what you ask wouldn�t work.
A - up to MS marketing.
A � the single biggest complaint we heard from Native American groups about Age 3 was that you did not actually get to PLAY the natives. Obviously, we have addressed this issue in spades, and the Native American organizations we have contacted about the X-Pack seem happy with our current approach overall. We are actually really sensitive on this topic. I am probably even more so than the average guy from ES because my religion (Mormonism) actually considers Native Americans to have special promises from God.