What AOH3 would look like if lukasz listened to the meatriders:

[OwnM3Z0 1,086]

-no navy

-no unions 

-no resource trade system

-no cultures

-no half the scenarios of aoh2

-no modern scenario

-no frontline system

-no significant religion mechanics

 

pretty much we would have AOH2 with a cooler map, religion and some new unit types that don't do much

@Łukasz Jakowski i suggest the approach for aoh3 to be that you delay those features until post alpha, rework them and add them with new challenges and adaptability, completely scrapping them would be a massive shame, lets not forget the game is still going to get worked on post alpha release, theres still a lot to improve and alot more ideas to add, just not now or in alpha

Edited May 20 by OwnM3Z0

[OwnM3Z0 1,086]

6 minutes ago, mostlymossyman said:

Who are these meatriders, I call myself a meatrider. Are you talking about you disagree with?

 

nope, its people who will go out of their way to call any delayed feature or feature lukasz said he won't add ''useless'' and ''extra'' with no regard to its actual functionality or even use, prime example would be when lukasz said there won't be navy so the community wanted him to add it atleast later, but some nerds kept whining about how its ''useless'' and ''makes no difference'' when the difference between a naval and land superpower is like day and night

 

they're entitled to their opinion, but im worried lukasz will see their comments and opt for their take instead of most the community, they still have a right to express what they think tho, i just mostly disagree 

[OwnM3Z0 1,086]

4 minutes ago, Unity said:

yes it's basically those who have opposite opinions or Don't agree with 

if u think the game will be good without all the features above then in my opinion you just want another aoh2 with cooler graphics and troop types

 

 

 

when the majority of the community asks for navy and a select few say its useless (it literally isn't) and then later when the community moves on and asks for cultures and THOSE SAME PEOPLE SAY ITS USELESS then i will raise some question marks, it's your opinion though and i respect it but i think lukasz needs to hear the majority out and not listen to a minority to skimp out or save effort, if the opinion of the majority was for cultures to be scrapped i wouldn't have opened my mouth

 

i don't even mind the features being delayed, matter of fact i want them delayed to be focused on better, i don't expect a full fledged game on alpha release, but cancelling so many features is insane 

Edited May 20 by OwnM3Z0

[OwnM3Z0 1,086]

15 minutes ago, mostlymossyman said:

real 😱

report button looking real hot, and it won't be your first ban

[OwnM3Z0 1,086]

12 minutes ago, Unity said:

it's my opinion get over it if Łukasz adds it I'll move on from there until then it's my opinion we can have different views from the game

but constantly demanding and pinging Łukasz for features isn't going to make any difference with him at the end it's his game he decides if he wants to add it 

I'm not saying you can't make suggestions anyone can make them just don't get mad at others if they have different opinions 

I Agree, pinging is hella annoying but it did kinda convince lukasz to consider cultures, it's still annoying but my point is:

 

''lukasz adds it? that's great!, this was a great addition and it really makes sense!, how could i even live without it?''

''Lukasz said its not getting added? meh it was useless anyways, you're asking for too much realism, the feature had no use and was pretty annoying plus it would take a lot of effort for lukasz to add it! (its not like we are paying for the game) , grow up bro its not even that big it makes zero difference''

 

 

overworking lukasz and expecting him to release a full fledged game on alpha release is insane and ridiculous, but simply scratching out these features entirely instead of asking for them in post alpha/beta updates is more insane  

[HistoryFan14 39]

I never really dealt with any meat riders before (besides the Tourism post that someone made a while ago, they simply made a joke about It being Age of Victoria 3 when we suggested immigration and tourism, they said that immigration and tourism was the same, when it does not make any sense.), but I can see that they have this sort of narcissistic personality to them. Glad to see you speak with logic against them. Great job! I don't think MANY (if anyone) here has an intent of overworking Lukasz, but if AOH3 is meant to be a descendant of AOH2, then a map graphic change and more troops just isn't It. Like seriously, I can get those from a mod like Bloody Europe II for example. I think all of these ideas are needed, in fact we don't even know when the game is gonna release, he has said 2024, but not told us when. 

He said when It's ready, and currently it's not ready, we are simply giving 'em ideas to make the game better and feel like a descendant instead of a modification to AOH2. 

Also what's wrong with Victoria 2? It's an amazing game and AOH3's setting would be great to have Victoria 2 mechanic's.(Not talking about Victoria 3 since the game is very meh.)

Edited May 21 by HistoryFan14

[Belgen 27]

8 hours ago, Unity said:

yes it's basically those who have opposite opinions or Don't agree with 

the people who keep spamming to release the game earlier, knowing damn well it would release half-baked

[OwnM3Z0 1,086]

7 hours ago, Belgen said:

the people who keep spamming to release the game earlier, knowing damn well it would release half-baked

nope, i don't want him to release it earlier at all, i don't even want any of the above features on release, he should take his time and tune all of them out then add them in updates

[Wayne23lololh 1,625]

20 hours ago, Unity said:

it's my opinion get over it if Łukasz adds it I'll move on from there until then it's my opinion we can have different views from the game

but constantly demanding and pinging Łukasz for features isn't going to make any difference with him at the end it's his game he decides if he wants to add it 

I'm not saying you can't make suggestions anyone can make them just don't get mad at others if they have different opinions 

Yeah, pinging Łukasz is not very good, but I did only one, and I wont continue to do this. I though it was a idea that could be considerate.

[qxz 615]

14 hours ago, HistoryFan14 said:

I never really dealt with any meat riders before (besides the Tourism post that someone made a while ago, they simply made a joke about It being Age of Victoria 3 when we suggested immigration and tourism, they said that immigration and tourism was the same, when it does not make any sense.), but I can see that they have this sort of narcissistic personality to them. Glad to see you speak with logic against them. Great job! I don't think MANY (if anyone) here has an intent of overworking Lukasz, but if AOH3 is meant to be a descendant of AOH2, then a map graphic change and more troops just isn't It. Like seriously, I can get those from a mod like Bloody Europe II for example. I think all of these ideas are needed, in fact we don't even know when the game is gonna release, he has said 2024, but not told us when. 

He said when It's ready, and currently it's not ready, we are simply giving 'em ideas to make the game better and feel like a descendant instead of a modification to AOH2. 

Also what's wrong with Victoria 2? It's an amazing game and AOH3's setting would be great to have Victoria 2 mechanic's.(Not talking about Victoria 3 since the game is very meh.)

Hey, 

That was me who wrote the phrase 'Age of Victoria 3' and said that migration and tourism are similar (which they are, with minor differences).

First of all, I did not try to offend anyone by saying 'Age of Victoria 3', in-fact I would love Age of History 3 to have similar features to Victoria 3 (or Victoria 2 for that matter), the game is amazing and I spent too many hours in Victoria 3 for my liking. 

Migration and tourism are two related phenomena which involve the movement of people. I get what you are trying to say when it might not make sense to you, but you will have to wrap your heard around it. 

I am not narcissistic, in fact I like everyone's ideas, they are all unique. I just don't know if Lukasz will add tourism and migration as separate features (in your case), so I just simplified it to migration as they are similar.

Sorry if I came across as rude, I dont try to be.

[Outlawexperience 338]

23 hours ago, OwnM3Z0 said:

-no navy

-no unions 

-no resource trade system

-no cultures

-no half the scenarios of aoh2

-no modern scenario

-no frontline system

-no significant religion mechanics

 

pretty much we would have AOH2 with a cooler map, religion and some new unit types that don't do much

@Łukasz Jakowski i suggest the approach for aoh3 to be that you delay those features until post alpha, rework them and add them with new challenges and adaptability, completely scrapping them would be a massive shame, lets not forget the game is still going to get worked on post alpha release, theres still a lot to improve and alot more ideas to add, just not now or in alpha

"No modern scenario" bro

"No half the scenarios of aoh2" game isnt finished and he said there will be more

And aoh3 isnt aoh2 with cooler map religion and land units, its much more different and has more features (legacy, tech tree more buildings etc)but since some players's demands arent there you just see it like that

 

It isnt easy to work on developing a game, lukasz alone is working on the game and saying "add this add that" wont do any better

[bun_dha4 378]

i really doubt that lukas listens to people that ride a piece of steak. like, is that even possible?


this is a joke of mine, btw.

[OwnM3Z0 1,086]

33 minutes ago, Outlawexperience said:

"No modern scenario" bro

"No half the scenarios of aoh2" game isnt finished and he said there will be more

And aoh3 isnt aoh2 with cooler map religion and land units, its much more different and has more features (legacy, tech tree more buildings etc)but since some players's demands arent there you just see it like that

 

It isnt easy to work on developing a game, lukasz alone is working on the game and saying "add this add that" wont do any better

i know, many people were asking him not to add the modern scenario because ''politics'' which is dumb imo

also many people were saying ''we just want 1440, ww1. ww2 and MAYBE the modern scenario'' in comments and even some replies, IK he will add more scenarios later

I love what has been done to AOH3, lukasz has made the game into an amazing thing and i don't actually think aoh3 is anything like aoh2, all im saying is that AOH3 woulda been what i described IF lukasz listened to them, my point being that the vision they have for the game of ''not complicated'' just means lacking features when all of the above could be added without being complicated or making the game a second EU4

 

[HistoryFan14 39]

8 hours ago, qxz said:

Hey, 

That was me who wrote the phrase 'Age of Victoria 3' and said that migration and tourism are similar (which they are, with minor differences).

First of all, I did not try to offend anyone by saying 'Age of Victoria 3', in-fact I would love Age of History 3 to have similar features to Victoria 3 (or Victoria 2 for that matter), the game is amazing and I spent too many hours in Victoria 3 for my liking. 

Migration and tourism are two related phenomena which involve the movement of people. I get what you are trying to say when it might not make sense to you, but you will have to wrap your heard around it. 

I am not narcissistic, in fact I like everyone's ideas, they are all unique. I just don't know if Lukasz will add tourism and migration as separate features (in your case), so I just simplified it to migration as they are similar.

Sorry if I came across as rude, I dont try to be.

Thank you for giving a mature reply, however, I beg to disagree with your opinion.

I do not really think migration and tourism are the same thing, and even if they are, what can be done to separate them is:

Tourists coming to one's country can increase income but not population, meanwhile immigrants coming into a country can increase population but not income. Also immigrants may have different reasons for coming to your country, for example, their country is at war, has low stability or a worse economy than your country. Meanwhile tourists will come when you have plenty of landmarks under your control (either from building or conquering.) and that will raise your income. Immigration could also give players the ability to expel rebels and natives to another occupied territory. (I'd say this is better for immersion, for example in Victoria 2 you can send Italians to Israel.)

Immigration could also increase manpower, however the more population you have, the bigger your economy gets.

 

Now granted, these are features that I would love to see for realism and immersion, do NOT have to be added, I just personally think that if Lukasz were to add these features, they would be better off separated.

Because just like in Victoria 2, there could be features to have closed borders, open borders or even immigration quotas. This is more of a population mechanic however, and if you have closed borders, It's likely your nation will lose stability and economy.