ArcherHombre
Squire
posted 12-01-16 05:27 PM
CT (US)
4 / 33
Wow, it's so great to see some of the business processes behind such a great game. It was a business activity to these guys, and the depth of this document reminds me of that.
I loved the build instructions for their testing. I wonder what VCS they used. I loved the historical explanations for the civ weaknesses, like the Goths didn't have enough manpower so they would demolish walls of captured cities in case they lost them again. That one especially is amusing because the Goths get extra pop, because that's what the Romans thought of them. Man, reconnaissance has really developed since the middle ages. (It only took me three times to spell that right.)
It's also amusing that they talk about how Word's track changes feature was bulking up the document too much. An internal application wasn't good enough for these people! At least now we know that Microsoft actually had to live with what they sold to us.
I wonder if any of those cheats/easter eggs/debug flags in chat work in the released game?
I also appreciated the long list of suggestions for how to make the game better. Some of those (like the Objectives screen, or whatever you call the screen that tells you the map type, etc.) made it, while I'm quite glad some did not.
I wonder whatever did happen to the Asian and Middle Eastern monks? I know some mods tried to handle that, but it's not the same as coming from the official source.
I would have loved to see custom formations, when I was younger. Nowadays the regular ones are good enough for me, but when I first got this game, I had great ideas about how I would have made my own formations, and I didn't even know they had thought about those.
I remember at some point in the past few years seeing a screenshot or something about formation buttons (probably from a beta of some sort), and it had an unusual one on the end. I wonder if that was part of the custom formations thing.
It's interesting they were originally planning a "unit facing direction" mechanism, like Rise of Nations. It kind of annoyed me in that game, so I'm glad it wasn't included here. I do like the idea of different special attacks, to a limited extent.
ArcherHombre
Squire
posted 01-10-17 05:42 AM
CT (US)
7 / 33
@atrican, wasn't there one scenario from the Indian campaign of "The Forgotten" (AoE2HD, and maybe also The Forgotten Empires for CD/AoC) where you were given resources for each building you destroyed? I wonder if that mechanic is also a throwback to that raider civ idea, or just the identical mechanic because it's a common idea.
HarleyThomas
Squire
posted 02-12-17 03:47 AM
CT (US)
9 / 33
I once heard spies were going to be a thing which just amounted to training a villager that was the same color as an opponent. Would be cool for single player, but jank for multiplayer.
Any stock in that and if so, would it be possible for such a thing to be put in the game itself except actually good?