Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Naval battles were a minigame I didn't care about, because I was playing the main game of land battles. Continue devoting all artist and dev effort to land battles, please.
For pharaoh, i'm not sure how they would do it to make it good. Theres no ramming, it would be a few archers on boats, some fighting platforms and maybe, as the drawing from Ramesses 3 of battle of the delta implies, throwing ropes over the ships sails to tip over the boats?
The other options are to have some kind of landing battles or using boats as naval siege towers in cities along cost or down the Nile...
Not sure what else they could do to make it compelling if its to stay within a broadly historical context.
Well that's sort of been a thing since Empire and Napoleon. (Though for empire my memory of it is a bit sketchy, but definitely Napoleon as i replayed all the campaigns recently)
I definitely think trade routes should be a thing. Thats a good mechanic to improve income, relations and perhaps more trade of finished goods. Something else to fight over. They should be land based ones also, e.g. amber road trade from Baltics / tin from Indus at edge of map etc.
Though naval battles themselves i remain cautious of. I would be very happy if they could prove me wrong and make it compelling to play though.