AOE3 Forums

Kaarle_W:

omglol:

Emp. Rommel:

Well, I guess fact and nationalism coincide then, because I'm not basing it on the fact I'm canadian. Yes, Yugoslavia may have lots 600,000 men, but hey, GERMANY INVADED THAT COUNTRY. Going on casualties alone is not accurate, and kinda pathetic that it would be treated as such. Going on casualties alone, I'll bet you that china also had a larger impact than the US. Which, we all know, isn't true. A countries impact on a conflict would best be summed up by: 1. Military Contribution 2. Contributions behind the lines (EATS for example)

I guess it's a waste of time to argue about anyway. After all, we all know that an american run company like ES is not interested in adding Canada, or any of those other "Minor" players.

I guess i could more or less agree with this .

Even though i still do think 600 000 actual soldiers  is a lot either way , and its a waay bigger number than for example canada or finland , even though you shouldnt go on numbers alone , but still....

But anyway , lets stop argueing about this :- )

Just one thing I want to point out here (absolutely not meant as an offence to anyone):

Yugoslavia's population was, (not sure about this but) around 15-18 million whereas Finland's population during the wws were maybe 3 million. Obviousely the losses of Yugoslavia were higher. Which is also why the number of casualties shouldn't be considered as a criteria of adding or not adding a civilization to the game. Maybe judging by the kill/death ratio would make more sense?

i lolled , its no cs dude  

It should still be the most important criteria imo , it just makes most sence.  

The kill death ratio doesnt make any sence imo 

Kaarle_W:

It's not cs but losing a lot of men in a war might not be the smartest reason to add that civ into the game?

Really , please explain me why the amount of dead soldiers shouldnt play a role in adding a civ .

 For me it seems the most sensible thing to do .
 

€Pat$:

yeah the chinese that was under attack by the japanese who 10time less soldier than chinese and still won half of chinese land?

diggo11:

Although all the concepts would adapt well (Infantry/Barracks becomes Infantry/Trench, Cavalry/Stable becomes Tanks/Factory, Artillery/Artillery_Foundry becomes Planes/Airport) I think the general core of Age of Empires would be lost. [Remake of AOE1 better.]

If it was about WWII, I would love to see Chinese women being (definition= forced to have sex) by Japanese soldiers.

I would very much like to see you get fucked by japs, AceKiller14.

€Pat$:

yeah the chinese that was under attack by the japanese who 10time less soldier than chinese and still won half of chinese land?

After Opium war in 1840, Qing dynasty (which we have seen in TAD )tried to catch up with western powers, goverment established modern militaries and industries, but gradually emperor lost control of the modern army that some ministers became the real masters of the troops(This feature is not shown in TAD).

After Qing dynasty,the last dynasty in Chinese history, was overthrown by a group of revolutionlists highly influenced by western civs who later established KMT (also known as the Nationalists Party), the revolutionlists established republic government but they actually controled only a few troops.

Old ministers form Qing goverment became different warlords and they had wars with republic goverment and each others for many years.

Marshal Jiang of KMT finally put those warlords under his control but he still can't control all the milltary forces directly in China.So as you can see,China at that time was seperated by warlords althrough they were all under the KMT goverment.Japan took advantage of this disunification and invaded China.

It's no use to talk about how many people one nation have to determin its destiny, it's how much one nation can take use of its total resources that tells the real story.