It is in AoE3 too.
Canadian Bear squad.
3 Likes
Some minor changes to existing civs would be good as well, and here’re my suggestions:
As I already mentioned, the current East Asian building set is largely based on Japanese architecture, and does not really reflect the architectural styles of other East Asian civs. Hence I suggest the creation of a generic East Asian architecture set that includes the Chinese, the Vietnamese, the Koreans, and the new Nanzhao civ. The Japanese would stick with the current East Asian set as that’s the one that suits them the most, and the Mongols would belong to a newly created Inner Asian architecture, together with the Tanguts.
With these newly added Asian civs, the lack of a proper anti-siege unit for the Chinese becomes even more apparent. Granted they’ve got the Chu Ko Nu and it can deal with siege units to some extent, but it’s still quite vulnerable to Onagers and Siege Onagers. And they don’t have access to Bombard Cannons, and have just lost Redemption as well. Therefore I suggest the addition of a flamethrower type of unit available to them at the Castle Age as their second unique unit, which would not only be historically accurate, and can also make them cope with the attacks from siege units somewhat better.
UU2 for the Chinese: Bamboo Firelancer, available in the Barracks at the Castle Age, an infantry that wears layered paper armor and carries a bamboo firelance, and deals bonus damage against Siege Weapon. It has no elite upgrade, and is not affected by Blacksmith upgrades too.
Cost: Wood 40 Gold 30
HP: 45
Attack: 2 pierce 1 melee (same as the Fire Ship)
Attack bonuses:
+4 vs Rattan Trooper
+3 vs Siege Weapon
+3 vs Ship
+2 vs Building
+1 vs Fishing Ship
+1 vs Turtle Ship
Rate of fire: 0.25
Frame delay: 0
Range: 2.49
Projectile speed: 3
Melee armor: 1
Pierce armor: 4
Armor classes: Infantry, Unique Unit
Speed: 1
LOS: 6
With the addition of this unit, it would be appropriate to take out a unit from their tech tree to balance things out a bit, and I suggest taking out the Heavy Camel (they would still be able to make Camels, but without the Heavy Camel upgrade, similar to the Cumans).
Juat build lots of stables, delete em and rebuild for easy gold, it is too op
so, uhhh… after spending the weekend on wikipedia re: history of South East Asia, both Nanzhao and Siamese are interesting suggestions- though it feels they are both closely related?
Suffice it to say, I really hope the next DLC will address more of Asia, 
At least one of the new Asian civs should have Arbalests.
Wat Suwan Dararam
Sukhothai Kingdom at it’s greatest extent
Map of Siam
Wat Sri Sawai (Photograph by Supanut Arunoprayote)
Unique civ bonus: Monks instead of priests. Castles are Wats. Units can heal faster inside Wat.
Unique tech: Jasmin Rice (some kind of eco bonus)
Source: Wikipedia
Further I do like OP’s suggestions.
2 Likes
Commenting Simply because this thread is amusing
2 Likes
How this topic spilled out of topic is a perfect example why breaking aisan umbrella civis is a bad idea 
Lets add european civis so there is less conflict and more money .
2 Likes
This topic is temporarily closed for at least 4 hours due to a large number of community flags.
This topic was automatically opened after 20 hours.
Just you wait until they add some “controversial” Euro civ (i.e. either Balkans or Caucasus) :o
On the contrary, anything from the Sub-Continent or Africa will be seen a “cool” by the Western majority who probably don’t know anything about the region in question,
1 Like
Western majority was never the issue.if you go up the topic you will see why
1 Like
There are controversies everywhere, be it Asian, European, African or American. Heck if Penguins could talk I bet they’d start claiming most places in the Antarctica, I mean, all this exposure to humans they must have picked up something from us.
But sadly it’s a fact that if the devs decide to do new Asian civs they will be opening a can of worms they’d wish they hadn’t so it’s best they focus on Africa and Mesoamerica after they are done with Europe.
It always made me sad back in the late 90’s playing AOE2 CD and not finding India as a civ. Now I know why, the genius who was their historical advisor believed there was no India before the Mughals. Now on a hindsight I think it was best they didn’t include an Indian civ that was entirely Mughal.
So the best decision would therefore be to focus on Africa and Mesoamerica. I personally am keen on seeing Inuit being added as a civ so would we’d have igloos as huts then.
If mughals were added instead of indians there would be more room to add more civis without this much issues.
Well, you can’t represent all Asians. I’m sure most people would want to see more Asian civs represented in the game, cause right now I feel the Asian civs have very little diversity compared to European ones and there’s still room for at least 4 or 5 Asian civs. Of course expansions on Africa and America would be great, but I really want to see they add more Asian civs to represent the diversity of civilizations that once existed there.
I’m Chinese but I totally don’t care if the devs decide to add Tibetans, Tanguts, Nanzhao, Khitan, Jurchen, Uyghur, or even carve up the current Chinese civ (though unlikely), cause that what it used to be in history. There was no unified China and no Han Chinese. Those who care have a very narrow-mind and a glassy heart.
Oh, and please don’t start discussions about current politics again.
3 Likes
Asian majority isn’t the issue either. Most of us don’t really care and want to see more Asian civs being represented in the game.
1 Like
Tibet is a huge hole in the map, one of the biggest, so it is always highly requested.
Couple that with people knowing it was a big empire in the period, and that creates a demand.
1 Like
Just FYI, I wasn’t the one who started discussions about politics. On the contrary there are other similar threads where I requested people not to go into political discussions. But history and politics are so interweaved together that many such discussion will eventually turn political. Hell I even stopped coming to these forums and would not have participated in this one unless that thing with two legs and half a brain would’ve tagged my username and started attacking me like he does in almost every thread like this.
Now I admire your objectivity when it comes to China but you must admit adding some civs like Tibet could pose problems the makers of this game would rather avoid. I personally would love to see all the civs you mentioned.
Now when it comes to India the issue is a bit different. If you want a new Tamil civ, why not a Maratha and Rajput civ? And the Tamils do not represent the entire South India, there were others like the Kannadas and each of the four major Dravidian (South Indian) languages can be linked to great classical Indian dynasties. Just like that narrowing North India to just the Rajputs wouldn’t be doing history justice.
Now I want to make something clear because some individuals have been putting words into my my mouth. I absolutely do not have any issues with what civs are added into this game because I do not care any more about this game, at least not like I used to. I’d rather have them not add any more and improve the existing one and other gameplay aspects but that’s my opinion.
Fine but don’t you think for a game which focuses mainly on the middle ages (ends in 1500) adding the Mughals (estd. 1526) which marks the early modern age in Indian history be a tad anachronistic?
1 Like
TBH, adding Tibet would actually be hilarious insofar as they’d be Buddhist Franks, and it’d be fun to scream about Tibetans being overpowered.
Of course the political issues make it unlikely.
===
Tibetans:
Armor / Cavalry civ, lacks some weapons upgrades (maybe bracer, bodkin arrow, blast furnace).
Knight-line get bonus armor against bonus attacks like Cataphracts.
Infantry gets +1 piercing armor.
UU: Rtarkhrab. Heavily armored horseman that can both attack and heal.
CUT: Tibetan Medicine: increases healing speed while garrisoned, increases monk / Rtarkhrab healing speed.
IUT: Heavy Mail: adds +1/+1 armor to infantry and cavalry.
In other words, this would be more something out of Warcraft 3 or some RTT game, where Tibetans have tanky units that can be microed out of the battlefield to heal. The ideal set-up would be to raid villagers endlessly.
1 Like
Valid point but we have huns who were at the beginning for a bit.Mughals could represent the afgan/turkik rulers and the subjects people like rajputs and bengals(like the current setup with gun powder) and there could be something like chola which would include all the people they subjugated and have a setup with the traditional army types.
Would a unit that can heal and attack be useful?healing is hardly used.