No reason to suspect: it was confirmed awhile back by mexxxico.
(September 2020)
edit:
I personally think that's absolutely ****ing nuts but I have no experience in developing computer games, unless you count being a beta tester, so maybe it is just a standard indie-transitioning-the-big-time mistake.
that's really bad! If I presented a project like that as a paper during university I'd have been reproved immediately. It's not even acceptable for students to have that mentality / work-flow. Guess that's the price someone pays for being successful form the get go coming from a total layman start...
The most aggravating factor's that in the past I did mention, multiple times, even before I was totally out of the GD field, that I was good with Game Design roles because of the way my mind works and computes information, and I've even jkingly offered multiple times to write them a proper GDD - of course I'd charge for that, but was never taken seriously
- the only issue is that I never had any desire of living in Turkey so I never applied for a job (if I was to become a collaborator I'd want to do it from distance, didn't matter work hours) but I'd not move to Turkey - there's too much political stress and tension there, besides I don't speak their language at all, none of the official ones and have no desire to learn it. Living somewhere under such conditions (not know language, not willing to learn it) can be nightmarish.
Now it's too late for that, though they could have contacted me in private to talk, even if just pushing ideas, structures and suggestions under a direct channel, never happened neither... Those who accompained some of my posts throughout the years know that I'm neither a layman nor that I'm some nutjob case of "megalomaniac" who flexes narcissistic nonsense. I did, however, provided them with tons of disorganized suggestions and tips over the years, some of which I've even bothered explaining the theory behind them (but I've also lashed out a lot over the baffling evidence that the entire development was being done in what seemed like an amateur kickstarter project without any logistics applied)
Now I can only say: too little too late, even if any of the things I've mentioned were to pass. I'm totally disconnected from the field, can't remember crap about coding and would have to re-learn and practice extensively for up to six months to call myself fully capable of handling anything pertaining to real professional roles. Add to it the fact they are already releasing the game, and we're in for an impossible task because I'd have to revamp not one, but at least a handful of systems entirely from scratch. - The only thing I could do now is work as an advisor and just try to mitigate the damage already done... And I have been giving these suggestions in drops here and there without any feedback, much like the course of this past decade, being totally ignored. Quality isn't democractic, it's objective, and there are a few ways to achieve it, none of which they seem to be following..
The really frustrating thing is that some of the biggest problems with combat can be fixed by relatively small numbers tweaks, yet it's been 2 years and it still hasn't happened.
Arrow/bolt damage to armor- easy fix, increase pierce damage reduction number in the armour formula by 1.7x
Spears having terrible stats - easy fix, just increase all their damage by 3x (taking into account pierce damage reduction above).
Glaive gamebreakingly overpowered stats making Khan's Guard the best cavalry, horse archer and infantry unit all in one - easy fix, nerf its damage number or slow down its swing speed, or just take it away from the Khan's Guard line and give it to infantry only, many options all of which are easy to do
Melee lance cavalry being underpowered - easy fix, lower the speed value they need to be travelling to be able to couch (currently seems to be set so they must be travelling down a steep hill to couch, so it rarely functions)
@Dejan are we likely to see any movement on these issues before release? They're so small and yet they could make such a massive improvement on the balance and thus tactical quality of battles instantly
some of the fixes aren't as simple, and also not often mentioned not even noticed as flaws by most (reason why i've never read any posts even mentioning it, even though I've known it for a while) - character size should matter stats-wise.
Weapons should keep values but character scaling should influence range, to balance-out the mini-hitboxes from small characters, toning up HP for the taller you are should also be added. - such changes need to be calculated (it's pure math) to make a perfect balance between it and insert character size as a meta choice (a game that does that, even though I find their formula crap, is Mortal Online 2). It's important because otherwise you're forcing a situation where the optimal is always to make a gnome PC to lower the % chance of being hit by missiles, while it also provides a lot of advantage in small spaces (sieges and prison breaks) - this means even having PC size choice's useless from a game design perspective, because it fails to provide a meaningful choice, it simply offers you "either take advantage or be handicapped by picking the opposite". (hence one of the my most recurring complaints: a lot of the game's disjointed and lacks a meaning towards the Game Design itself, which translates into wasted time and resources for something that's ultimately useless, again, they'd be reproved on multiple subjects in the University I've gotten a degree in Game Development for doing things like that)
A basic rule for filmmaking, game design and creative writing is: "can you answer why 'X' thing is here? Does it make sense? - if not it shouldn't be here." basic lesson 101 for any form of production (games, films, books, short stories, comics..) - and the explanation doesn't even need to be something "WOW", a simple: "X is here because it gives a better atmosphere" is often enough. For games and films, though, everything must communicate with either message being conveyed (for films mostly), or it must be rounded up so it works symbiotically with all other elements involved (much more significant on game design, but films that lack this are often considered crap, even though most ppl can't really tell why - it's a mix of perception and "uncanny valley" effect) - the level of brain needed to make the really "incredible" stuff that ppl often praise is actually very high. The best literary example I like to mention is Tolkien - if you make anything putting as much thought as he did, you'll create a ground-breaking classic instantly, not everyone is capable of that hence why I believe there are so many crap directors and game designers out there. Creative work can be "no-work" with crap results, or it can be "50 times more work than any other" and result in stuff like LOTR books... I only do the latter, while aholes like JJ Abrams or Todd "minimal effort" Howard only do the former...