4th Asian Civ. For DE. Why didn't it happen?

Hi. I have been a long time fan of AOE3 and was wondering why a 4th Asian Civ wasn’t added the same way Sweden and Inca were for DE. I am bit confused on that.

I thought there would be a Thai or Korean civ. Though its best to keep expectations low i guess. Would’ve been cool.


Hopefully they work in an another Asian DLC (First one was Asian Dynasties)
Now #### ### ##### with AOM Retold. Remenber that they are using the same AOE 3 DE engine, so a great part of the dev team working in AOE 3 DE is working in AOM Retold.

Yeah im currently aware of that. Was just wondering why an Asian style civ could not be made 3 years ago. on the time of release.

Well it’s because of three reasons:-

  • AoE3 is based on Colonial Age which is European domination period. Asia was in the backstage.
  • Devs have some biases, many of them are former modders associated with mods like Napoleonic Era which explains why they introduced civs like Swedes and Italians which had little to do with colonialism. They also are revising old European civs to make them less overseas colonial and more mainland European style so as to recreate Napoleonic Wars feel.
  • European civs are a lot more easier to make than exotic Asian civs who need a lot more graphic assets and unique play style.

Where’s your “Everyone wants a Persian”?


I think Koreans civ would be the best fit. Islamic civs such as Persians, Arabians, Egyptians, etc. deserve their own separate civ category based on brand new mechanics. Additionally, it would be nice to see nomadic civs coming from Central Asia, which should also be unique - mobile. I once suggested civ Tartars that would have multiple development paths using the unique Age Up mechanic, which would allow them to remain nomads or a sedentary empire (multiple choices).

Potential South Asian and Southeast Asian civs should preferably be in the same category and operate under similar rules as those already in the game for Asian civs - to cover regions that are already represented by them in some way.


I think there could at least be a small split within Asian civs like the split between North Americans and Central/South Americans, if more civs are to added. They could have different themes and slightly different base mechanics.

East Asian: Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Vietnamese, etc.
South/West Asian: Indians, Persians, etc.

Both groups are more culturally related within themselves.

This would only explain why they added Sweden but not Inca…

Someone explain how the f Malta was added but No Persia, Austria, Siam, Burma or Morocco?


Without doing a disservice to the awesome Devs, Malta is a European civs so shares a number of already existing buildings and units plus a number of its assets were present as Campaign models, so it was an ‘easy’ civ to implement. Again not putting down the effort needed to introduce new civs - more that an Asian civ would require it’s own completely unique artwork, models and textures for everything aside from the very few shared units.


That was before The Warchiefs and Asian Dynasties were introduced, when both expansions were released, the theme kinda died since you have civs that weren’t involved in colonization and having HCs set in playable maps.

Swedes and Italians were cut content found back in 2005 release where church models were found tho some mods like Napoleonic Era and Improvement Mod made them as civs to “complete” the cut content.

A dev claimed that European civs can be hard to make like any other civs:


They are capable of making dozens of new skins for all the royal house units and royal guard reworks, so this shouldn’t be a barrier. But they did put almost no effort into new models for Malta and the European maps so maybe they were in a rush. I hope they revisit it and fix things like the warthog treasure guardians or terrible-looking recycled weapon caches and keeps that Malta has.


The Asian Wonders and Explorers have a hard “unique” ideas for Korean or Persian
But I will not refuse them and I will buy any DLC


The main issue are Wonders, which need 5 unique mechanics and consulate, that would be overlapping with the others (again).

East Asia seems kind of neglected in AoE in general in recent years.
AoE2 only go the Vietnamese since the Koreans were added in AoC back in 2000 and the Vietnamese were originally designed more as a South East Asian civilisation, only getting the East Asian architecture in the Definitive Edition.
AoE3DE also added no new Asian civilisation, European, African and American.
Both the Europeans and Native Americans got a lot of changes and over wholes since the release of the Definitive Edition while the Asian civs sill kinda feel like they are just modded in.

Now we are getting the Japanese in AoE4 so hopefully they are looking at Asia again in AoE3 too.

I’m pretty sure that was not done because of laziness but because they wanted to add many campaign elements to the civilisation since there are a lot of people that like the first Arc of the campaign especially.
It’s also some kinda of a nostalgia civilisations since playing the campaign was the first thing many people did when they got AoE3.
So giving the civilisation buildings that are prominently featured in the campaign makes sense.

Asian Dynasties was a bad expansion that was done poorly and overplayed racial stereotypes.

I agree! Devs from BigHugeGames made a main mistake - is nothing new features for European and American civs. AoE3DE trying to fix it…

The interesting part was that the African Kingdoms DLC showed just how badly the Asian civs were designed.

Basically the Wonders were basically just God Powers from AoM put back in and Export was Favor and the things you used it on were impractical. Also the consulate alliances benifets were badly grouped and some had no historical basis.


did it though?

i feel like the african age up system is a big negative, its too complex, it has too many hidden effects and requires you to play each age up to even start to understand them.

id also argue that in a lot of ways the african civs don’t really “feel” african too me, there is too much gunpowder, there are too many “this unit type but better” which is a general criticism one could levy against most new civs.

1 Like

No they do not. I kinda feel like people here don’t understand what is truly hard to make.

Like, what Daniel Pereira said is that making a new European stand out is hard to design, not that it’s difficult to make logistically. They don’t need a full set of custom assets like, well, any asian civ.

It’s pretty clear here the bottleneck is having to make a huge amount of custom models and that’s what truly decides what’s better or worse budgetwise to develop.