AOE-II DE So there will be more DLC civs what should they be?

[Paint]

Sadly delete goths is not an option and hoping for no new civs is just Copium so if there have to be new civs what should they be?
I think the game really needs more European civs because it's very under represented especially in the DLCs so I would go with Armenians and Venice because what aoe2 needs is more Italian civs.

 

[Potkeny]

Kingdom of Hungary still doesn't have every ethnic group represented, so I would say the two new civs should be Croatians and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jasz_people

 

[USC_kiky]

Not sure why you think European civs are underrepresented, but 4 billion people (African + Indian + Chinese), or half of the world's population, are represented by 3 civs only (Malian + Indian + Chinese), which is 8% of the 39 civs

 

[Oli King]

I want Inuit and some penguin themed Unique Unit

f.e.
Peng Penguin:
Sniper Penguin with a range of 16, reload time 1 minute. 200 damage but only on non-moving targets.

 

[King_Marv]

Not sure why you think European civs are underrepresented, but 4 billion people (African + Indian + Chinese), or half of the world's population, are represented by 3 civs only (Malian + Indian + Chinese), which is 8% of the 39 civs

He is sarcastic.

and you missed Huns, mongols, Ethiopians, Japanese, korea,malay, Khmer, Vietnamese

they are also aisa/African.

also when I last checked, Turks, Persians are also on Asian continent.

 

[Huehuecoyotl22]

4 billion people (African + Indian + Chinese), or half of the world's population, are represented by 3 civs only (Malian + Indian + Chinese), which is 8% of the 39 civs .

While I agree that population-wise it is unbalanced, I think most regions' populations looked very differently 500-1000 years ago.
Chinese probably covered 20-25 % of the world's population back then, but I don't think the AoE 2 civilisation should be split. And with Indians it probably is difficult too.

List of countries by population in 1000 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

List of countries by population in 1500 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Chainsaw]

I don't know how accurate or possible, but I'd love me some more meso or south/north American civs. I feel like 3 is too little. Maybe some from Amazon?

 

[jiushiyongcha]

I don't know how accurate or possible, but I'd love me some more meso or south/north American civs. I feel like 3 is too little. Maybe some from Amazon?

Amazon ?

Could you find out their Wonder / Castle / Hero and a complete story of campaign in the Middle Ages ?

 

[Chainsaw]

Amazon ?

Could you find out their Wonder / Castle / Hero and a complete story of campaign in the Middle Ages ?

LOL, I am quite ignorant when it comes to history and I was just blindly wishing. I hope both were clear in my first post. To be fair, as far as I've understood, historical accuracy has never stopped the devs. They could dig some stuff up. I'd buy the DLC though.

 

[Akos04]

No more Euro civs please.

 

[sheeesh]

I want Inuit and some penguin themed Unique Unit

f.e.
Peng Penguin:
Sniper Penguin with a range of 16, reload time 1 minute. 200 damage but only on non-moving targets.

unique tech: club penguin
seems like they will keep adding civs until the conversation becomes ''add north american tribes with AoM-Set animal armies or expand the game with orcs''
It's nice to see the old dlcs at a discount though

 

[HongeyKong]

While I agree that population-wise it is unbalanced, I think most regions' populations looked very differently 500-1000 years ago.
Chinese probably covered 20-25 % of the world's population back then, but I don't think the AoE 2 civilisation should be split. And with Indians it probably is difficult too.

List of countries by population in 1000 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

List of countries by population in 1500 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Chinese has been Chinese since forever, theyve already split Mongols from Chinese, how dare the devs further split them into different factions.

 

[jiushiyongcha]

Chinese has been Chinese since forever, theyve already split Mongols from Chinese, how dare the devs further split them into different factions.

What are you talking about ? It's a game of Middle Ages , not contemporary

 

[IvIaximus]

Unpopular opinion: No more factions and definitely no more non-european factions. It may offend some people but medieval ages is european term to describe european society in certain period of time. As such its eurocentric and it should stay this way. Applying this "medieval concept" into different parts of world lead to some silly and questionable game design. Meso civs are prime example. They are incredibly hard to balance and just feel out of place since Conquerors. Meso civs having castles and galleons, trade carts pulled by dude who can run as fast as horse is just dumb. I know that this is fantasy game with medieval theme, but it still should preserve some internal logic and consistency. Including civilizations whos technological level is on par with societes from prehistoric period is just dumb. Certain civilizations of middle east, central asia or far east such as Mongols, Japanese or Turks is ok but thats about it.
Also, diving this "umbrella terms" into different factions is redundant. Keep this major pseudocivilizations such as Franks, Britons, Slavs and be done with it.
Instead they should focus on fixing bugs and performance issues, matchmatking, etc. The game is already bloated and slowly turning into crap I do not enjoy anymore.

 

[LowEloNobody]

I think there is still room to add some more french civs.

Maybe the "Normandians" and "Parisians" and "Champagniers"

Just make them all cav civs and add some semi decent cav bonuses

 

[warownia]

What are you talking about ? It's a game of Middle Ages , not contemporary

I wont dwell on it but history is often used in propaganda nowadays and its not only happening in countries like China. Nevertheless if you wants tibetan civ you can forget about it.

Instead they should focus on fixing bugs and performance issues, matchmatking, etc. The game is already bloated and slowly turning into crap I do not enjoy anymore.

I dont think that dlc with bug fixes and balance changes but no new content would be welcomed well.

 

[jiushiyongcha]

I wont dwell on it but history is often used in propaganda nowadays and its not only happening in countries like China. Nevertheless if you wants tibetan civ you can forget about it.

I dont think that dlc with bug fixes and balance changes but no new content would be welcomed well.

Buddy, it's all in your head.

Strictly speaking, steam is not legal in China. Aoe2 DE has never been officially released in my country. Devs doesn't need to consider the political attitude of a country that can't be listed.

Moreover, China has never denied the existence of the Tibetan Empire in the Middle Ages, as long as the description of Tibetan conforms to our view of history.

 

[SouFire]

Unpopular opinion: No more factions and definitely no more non-european factions. It may offend some people but medieval ages is european term to describe european society in certain period of time. As such its eurocentric and it should stay this way. Applying this "medieval concept" into different parts of world lead to some silly and questionable game design. Meso civs are prime example. They are incredibly hard to balance and just feel out of place since Conquerors. Meso civs having castles and galleons, trade carts pulled by dude who can run as fast as horse is just dumb. I know that this is fantasy game with medieval theme, but it still should preserve some internal logic and consistency. Including civilizations whos technological level is on par with societes from prehistoric period is just dumb. Certain civilizations of middle east, central asia or far east such as Mongols, Japanese or Turks is ok but thats about it.
Also, diving this "umbrella terms" into different factions is redundant. Keep this major pseudocivilizations such as Franks, Britons, Slavs and be done with it.
Instead they should focus on fixing bugs and performance issues, matchmatking, etc. The game is already bloated and slowly turning into crap I do not enjoy anymore.

You should read the official forums, people want to add the next tribes: Missssipeans, despite they were more undeveloped than any other meso tribe, cause they saw somewhere in the net a fundation like a small pyramid.

People wants chimu, probably you never heard of them cause they were just another inca fanction and as we know the inca empire was never known to be warriors, even the old guy from ensemble studios said that "incas had no one to fight".

People wants greenland as a civ, why i don't know and i will never understand it.

People wants either the vatican or venetians ._. despite the channels of venetia were built in aoe3 times.

They also keep asking for polynesians, cause you know that island on Chile with the big heads, they deserve to be a strong civ in aoe2 times.

And of course they want more europeans civs, like wallachians, croatians, serbs, fins, swiss, etc.

Even tho the african tribes also were under the domain of the saracens, they also want to add kongoneses and more african tribes.

Honestly the game was just perfect going for regions rather than countries, now every single dude with internet and 0.1% blood from foreigns wants their own civ to identify with something.

 

[Baron Icey Harkonnen]

I want more mesoamerican civs because im tired of all the ****ing KNIGHTS

 

[hellhammer]

All I can see is that we will see more civs that were present in some or other form on existing campaigns (Bohemians, Burgundians, Poles and Sicilians were all represented by previosuly existing civs in that scenarios).

So for America you get Chimus (present at Pachacuti campaign), to complete the set then add Muisca so you have a perfect theme for a meso themed expansion, also, both civs have good recorded story from 15th-16th centuries (AoE 2 timeframe).

For Africa, Swahili, present at Fransisco de Almeida campaign, if you need other african civ here the Nubians are perfect (Swahili had trade routes across Indian Ocean during 11th-15th centuries, so great interaction with other asian civs, also we need more Naval civs so finally that absurd Viking/Italian/Portuguese reign is halted, and Nubians were the very first peoples to stop the Caliphate expansion into east africa), However about southern african civs is hard, Kongolese more relevant histories comes back from 17th century (aoe 3 timeframe), Zimbabwe, don't know what units/campaigns could get, Benin is a potentially small chance to get there but tse tse flies made impossible horse breeding so how you add cavalry here? while some people want Songhai/Ghana civs, both were basically how Malians are played in the game.

Tamerlane campaign introduced Georgians and Armenians, bot which have really strong potential to be in the game as playable civs, also, Georgians can give David the Builder campaign, famous for the Battle of Didgori, plus filling the empty that exists in the Caucasus area.

Continuing to the East, In Suryavarman campaign both Cholas and Siamese are present, people want more south asian faction so the Chola are good here, and can be the first south asian civ to get battle eles, as well another naval civ, and Siamese can fill the biggest missing civ in south east asia region, also the one with focus on elephants and gunpowder, whoch noone of the other civs in the region has.

 

[Akos04]

People wants either the vatican or venetians ._. despite the channels of venetia were built in aoe3 times.

They also keep asking for polynesians, cause you know that island on Chile with the big heads, they deserve to be a strong civ in aoe2 times.

And of course they want more europeans civs, like wallachians, croatians, serbs, fins, swiss, etc.

Even tho the african tribes also were under the domain of the saracens, they also want to add kongoneses and more african tribes.

Honestly the game was just perfect going for regions rather than countries, now every single dude with internet and 0.1% blood from foreigns wants their own civ to identify with something.

Didn't know that Saracens conquered Central Africa. Is Channels of Venetia really a civ? What is Kongoneses? I am just curious. Stop with the "Incas weren't warriors nonsense", actually there were only 30000 ethnic Incas so that's why he said that. They conquered nearby states and conscripted their citizens therefore 200k warriors served in the Inca Empire army.

 

[green eggs]

Muisca (Colombian civ, last to be conquered by Spanish); Polynesians or Māori; Thule (proto-Inuits, aka Skraelings); Zimbabwe; Tibetans (never going to happen but would be nice). Please no more European civs.

 

[Ayase_Chihaya]

Not sure why you think European civs are underrepresented, but 4 billion people (African + Indian + Chinese), or half of the world's population, are represented by 3 civs only (Malian + Indian + Chinese), which is 8% of the 39 civs

It was irony bro!

 

[LaHire]

You should read the official forums, people want to add the next tribes: Missssipeans, despite they were more undeveloped than any other meso tribe, cause they saw somewhere in the net a fundation like a small pyramid.

People wants chimu, probably you never heard of them cause they were just another inca fanction and as we know the inca empire was never known to be warriors, even the old guy from ensemble studios said that "incas had no one to fight".

People wants greenland as a civ, why i don't know and i will never understand it.

People wants either the vatican or venetians ._. despite the channels of venetia were built in aoe3 times.

They also keep asking for polynesians, cause you know that island on Chile with the big heads, they deserve to be a strong civ in aoe2 times.

And of course they want more europeans civs, like wallachians, croatians, serbs, fins, swiss, etc.

Even tho the african tribes also were under the domain of the saracens, they also want to add kongoneses and more african tribes.

Honestly the game was just perfect going for regions rather than countries, now every single dude with internet and 0.1% blood from foreigns wants their own civ to identify with something.

I totally agree. Usually it's young us-americans that know history only from TV and they feel entitled to have a north American civ.

Although we know barely nothing about north American tribes other than that they must have been dark age forever. Also there is no common history they took part of.

With the meso civs up can at least make it believable and appealing...there had been common history (cortez etc.) and they had big cities, technologies and impressive architecture.

I would love to see Georgians and Armenians added.

 

[Tiekel]

You should read the official forums, people want to add the next tribes: Missssipeans, despite they were more undeveloped than any other meso tribe, cause they saw somewhere in the net a fundation like a small pyramid.

People wants chimu, probably you never heard of them cause they were just another inca fanction and as we know the inca empire was never known to be warriors, even the old guy from ensemble studios said that "incas had no one to fight".

People wants greenland as a civ, why i don't know and i will never understand it.

People wants either the vatican or venetians ._. despite the channels of venetia were built in aoe3 times.

They also keep asking for polynesians, cause you know that island on Chile with the big heads, they deserve to be a strong civ in aoe2 times.

And of course they want more europeans civs, like wallachians, croatians, serbs, fins, swiss, etc.

Even tho the african tribes also were under the domain of the saracens, they also want to add kongoneses and more african tribes.

Honestly the game was just perfect going for regions rather than countries, now every single dude with internet and 0.1% blood from foreigns wants their own civ to identify with something.

I'm 0.1% Cypriot, reading up on their rich history, I bet they conquered a bunch