|
|
Post by Seger on May 28, 2019 17:49:42 GMT
IAP gens easy tech is in the habit of choosing the best known generals because they sell better, it is also common for these to be from the most important countries and from different unit types. by this I predict that the IAP will be caesar / scipio infantry for rome, hannibal (who else?) cavalry for carthago and an unknown general (I am not so familiar with the han dynasty) archery / artilery for the han dynasty. Units: I think this might finally be the game for the navy because two of the three superpowers are separated by water from each other. even if you look at the events you see that in the punic wars the country with naval supremacy: rome has won.  Do you have and ideas? |
|
|
|
Post by Seger on May 28, 2019 19:06:37 GMT
another good question is how will the conquests be? Will the be like the red circles? Or like the yellow? And if it's like the yellow circle What will happen to the two other great Empires in the purple circles? Easy tech told us that the major powers will be carthago, Han and rome does that mean that we won't have the empires in the purple cicles? My prediction is that the conquest will be like the red circles otherwise you will need to make to much countries neutral or add them to a weard alliance.  |
|
|
|
Post by Hobo Joe on May 28, 2019 19:16:25 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Seger on May 29, 2019 4:19:49 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Nobunaga Oda on May 29, 2019 6:46:48 GMT
If the Chinese are to be involved, the preceding Qin Dynasty, Han Dynasty and Three Kingdoms, and the Jin Dynasty that followed.
Why? According to the fall of the Western Roman Empire, it lasted until ~500 AD and these Chinese timelines happen to overlap.
|
|
|
|
Post by CountVonNumenor on May 29, 2019 7:04:31 GMT
If they have a separate conquest map for Asia, does it mean we may get in late conquests the possibly to play as one of the Korean kingdoms or ancient Japan? That would be nice. As for Europe, I hope they would make a bit of diversity for the barbarian nations, and not making them the same generic unit. The German tribes, celts, dacians and thracians (before being part of Lysimachus' imperial remnant) were considered "barbarians", but each had a completely different culture. If the conquest would be around the yellow circle from first image, maybe (hopefully) EasyTech will get rid of most prearranged alliances, and maybe aloow both the Player and AI manage diplomacy their own way. 
DISCLAIMER: around 300 BC, Dacia was not a kingdom (that was established around 80 BC during the reign of Burebista). Until that, it was more of a confederation of tribes - Carps, Costobocs, Bastarns, Yaziges, Getaes and what can be considered "proto-Daciana" in South-West Transylvania. |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on May 29, 2019 8:22:16 GMT
My prediction: IAP generals Caesar - Infantry Hannibal or Alexander - Cavalry Cleopatra or LiShimin - Arty/Navy hybrid  In fact, I'm very curious how they will solve the problem of generals. Let's take, for example, Cathage... Well, as you probably know, no written sources are left. All what we know about Carthage is from Roman and Greek (often incomplete) sources - Polybius, Titus Livius, Diodorus Siculus etc. Well, what we know about Carthage (recommended books "Carthage must be destroyed" by Richard Miles and "The Punic wars" by Adrian Goldsworthy, both are aviable in audio format as well, btw) is the fact that it was not a very militaristic society. Usually they simply used mercenaries and mercenary generals (Xanthippus, for example). The only one exeption is Barcas family - Hannibal himself, his father and his brothers. All other Carthaginian generals are either unsuccessful or known only to scholars. I am really excited how they will solve this . My guess, that we will see a certain number of Roman, Greek, Macedonian (including Hellinistic rulers) and Chinese generals, there are a couple of known names of celts (Vercingetorix, Ambiorix, Boudica), a couple of German, Illyrian and Numidian chieftains, but it is very interesting what they will do with other countries. |
|
|
|
Post by Seger on May 29, 2019 10:55:20 GMT
If the Chinese are to be involved, the preceding Qin Dynasty, Han Dynasty and Three Kingdoms, and the Jin Dynasty that followed. Why? According to the fall of the Western Roman Empire, it lasted until ~500 AD and these Chinese timelines happen to overlap. According to easytech Han, Rome and carthago will be the Major powers I think the conquests Will be around 200 BC because of this. |
|
|
|
Post by Seger on May 29, 2019 11:02:24 GMT
If they have a separate conquest map for Asia, does it mean we may get in late conquests the possibly to play as one of the Korean kingdoms or ancient Japan? That would be nice. As for Europe, I hope they would make a bit of diversity for the barbarian nations, and not making them the same generic unit. The German tribes, celts, dacians and thracians (before being part of Lysimachus' imperial remnant) were considered "barbarians", but each had a completely different culture. If the conquest would be around the yellow circle from first image, maybe (hopefully) EasyTech will get rid of most prearranged alliances, and maybe aloow both the Player and AI manage diplomacy their own way.
DISCLAIMER: around 300 BC, Dacia was not a kingdom (that was established around 80 BC during the reign of Burebista). Until that, it was more of a confederation of tribes - Carps, Costobocs, Bastarns, , Getaes and what can be considered "proto-Daciana" in South-West Transylvania. I Don't think easytech Will let is make out own alliances. I'm hoping for more then two alliances. |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on May 29, 2019 12:13:54 GMT
If they have a separate conquest map for Asia, does it mean we may get in late conquests the possibly to play as one of the Korean kingdoms or ancient Japan? That would be nice. As for Europe, I hope they would make a bit of diversity for the barbarian nations, and not making them the same generic unit. The German tribes, celts, dacians and thracians (before being part of Lysimachus' imperial remnant) were considered "barbarians", but each had a completely different culture. If the conquest would be around the yellow circle from first image, maybe (hopefully) EasyTech will get rid of most prearranged alliances, and maybe aloow both the Player and AI manage diplomacy their own way.
DISCLAIMER: around 300 BC, Dacia was not a kingdom (that was established around 80 BC during the reign of Burebista). Until that, it was more of a confederation of tribes - Carps, Costobocs, Bastarns, , Getaes and what can be considered "proto-Daciana" in South-West Transylvania. I Don't think easytech Will let is make out own alliances. I'm hoping for more then two alliances. I always thought that 3-4 alliances is an excellent idea. The more complex the game is the better. |
|
|
|
Post by Seger on May 29, 2019 14:13:25 GMT
I Don't think easytech Will let is make out own alliances. I'm hoping for more then two alliances. I always thought that 3-4 alliances is an excellent idea. The more complex the game is the better.  something like this, I don't think it will happen but it would be Nice. Also it would be cool if you could donate countries from other alliances: for example if I'm rome and the Japanese faction is close to collapsing I would donate them to make Sure the Chinese faction doesn't predominate till I arrive. |
|
|
|
Post by Nobunaga Oda on May 30, 2019 4:19:40 GMT
If Conquest does not take place in large swathes of Eurasia, I suspect that ET may return to a more confined conquests (EW3 and the American ones of EW4).
|
|
|
|
Post by stoic on May 30, 2019 4:31:35 GMT
If Conquest does not take place in large swathes of Eurasia, I suspect that ET may return to a more confined conquests (EW3 and the American ones of EW4). In fact I was a big fan of regional conquests in GoG and GoG Pacific.  |
|
|
|
Post by Seger on May 30, 2019 5:43:10 GMT
If Conquest does not take place in large swathes of Eurasia, I suspect that ET may return to a more confined conquests (EW3 and the American ones of EW4). I'm pretty sure they won't, there's a Large groop of players who just play for conquests and I don't think they want to loose them with small conquests |
|
|
|
Post by Nobunaga Oda on May 30, 2019 12:23:08 GMT
If Conquest does not take place in large swathes of Eurasia, I suspect that ET may return to a more confined conquests (EW3 and the American ones of EW4). I'm pretty sure they won't, there's a Large groop of players who just play for conquests and I don't think they want to loose them with small conquests If regional conquests are a reality, the map may have greater division of provinces (something closer to campaign size than conquest size) and more units and facilities. This can generate more intense conquests and appeal to those seeking shorter, but more intense battles. Of course, you lose the satisfaction of conquering large parts of the world and your economy may be different in a regional conquest than in a larger one. Another interesting way is for ET to follow something Koei Tecmo Games had done. I had played one of their games before, Samurai Warriors 2 Empires, and they allowed for regional conquests to be played. Winning regional conquests allows the player to advance to a larger and more global conquest with the corresponding conquered lands from the smaller scale version. |
|
