Thorfinn the Shallow Minded Posted October 22, 2021 Report Share Posted October 22, 2021 At the very least their removal and replacement should be strongly considered. 0 AD attempts to represent factions at their zenith. Cleopatra was reigning when the Ptolemies were in decline; she might be iconic, but that does not change the fact. Agis III reigned when Sparta was at most a minor regional power. The Spartan golden age could be considered immediately following the Peloponnesian War, but during the Persian Wars and up to the Battle of Leuctra would be a more general point. Agis IV died heroically, but so did many other kings. As a final note, having more hitpoints is just boring. Agesilaus II would be an objectively better king to select in my completely unbiased opinion. Iphicrates suffers from the same problem. The Golden Age of Athens could be regarded as from the Persian Wars up to the end of the Peloponnesian War. He is simply after that. I would argue for someone like Miltiades who could have a similar function. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted October 22, 2021 Report Share Posted October 22, 2021 they should leave them for the maps.(editor) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wowgetoffyourcellphone Posted October 22, 2021 Report Share Posted October 22, 2021 5 hours ago, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said: Cleopatra was reigning when the Ptolemies were in decline; she might be iconic, but that does not change the fact. Yet, she was massively influential. Ptolemy II isn't a bad choice either. Too bad the game can't have more than 3 heroes. 5 hours ago, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said: Agis III reigned when Sparta was at most a minor regional power. The Spartan golden age could be considered immediately following the Peloponnesian War, but during the Persian Wars and up to the Battle of Leuctra would be a more general point. Agis IV died heroically, but so did many other kings. As a final note, having more hitpoints is just boring. Agesilaus II would be an objectively better king to select in my completely unbiased opinion. Agesilaus II and Cleomenes III are definitely better choices than Agis III. 5 hours ago, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said: Iphicrates suffers from the same problem. The Golden Age of Athens could be regarded as from the Persian Wars up to the end of the Peloponnesian War. He is simply after that. I would argue for someone like Miltiades who could have a similar function. Iphicrates isn't bad. He did pretty much win a war against Sparta single-handedly. Miltiades is a good choice though, along with Aristides and maybe Thucydides. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted October 22, 2021 Report Share Posted October 22, 2021 15 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said: Thucydides This... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorfinn the Shallow Minded Posted October 23, 2021 Author Report Share Posted October 23, 2021 17 hours ago, Lion.Kanzen said: they should leave them for the maps.(editor) Definitely that would be fair. 15 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said: Yet, she was massively influential. True, but her ability was in recruiting foreign leaders to side with her. Her retreating at the Battle of Actium was baffling at least in my opinion. Neither of these really are the makings of a 'hero,' but I am sure that there are some qualities to her I've missed. 16 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said: Cleomenes III are definitely better choices than Agis III. I would support this even though he was not ruling during the Golden Age, but that would definitely be contingent on Sparta having access to pikemen. 16 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said: Iphicrates isn't bad. He did pretty much win a war against Sparta single-handedly. Miltiades is a good choice though, along with Aristides and maybe Thucydides. While Iphicrates is hardly bad, he is again outside the scope of Athenian hegemony. Aristides would be a redundancy to me. Pericles fills the role of statesmen pretty well as is. Thucydides was a phenomenal historian; his quality as a general is difficult to assess as he is only known for being late to the Battle of Amphipolis. Another alternative I would offer would be for Cimon to be represented. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LetswaveaBook Posted October 23, 2021 Report Share Posted October 23, 2021 21 hours ago, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said: 0 AD attempts to represent factions at their zenith. Why is it necessary that all heroes/units are from a factions zenith? If you take heroes from different eras you also get heroes that fought different enemies so that leave more room for stories and such. Taking only heroes from a factions zenith means the Macedonians do not have a Greek enemy represented in the timeframe of their power. For me it seems to be fine to represent most factions as they were during the period of their zenith and the time thereafter until say 0AD. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted October 23, 2021 Report Share Posted October 23, 2021 There must be villains (heroes who took power in decay) We have Antiochus IV for example. The Seleucids are not having their best time. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.