A statistics of historical battles and what's missing

Time periods

16th century: 5
17th century: 0
18th century: 1
19th century: 6

Comment: A big U shape. The reason may be that the scenarios still heavily focus on (North) America and Africa, and 16th century had a lot of exploration and early colonization attempts while 19th century had revolutions.
Many major events in the 17th and 18th century were wars in Europe, so these time periods can be enriched if there are plans for European contents later. There are important battles in the colonies as well, like the Seven Years War and US revolution, but they already had several scenarios including the campaigns.
There are also major events in Asia in those time periods, but Asian civs already had campaigns.

BTW, War of 1812 is the only event with two scenarios.

Regions

Asia: 1
Africa: 6
North America: 5
South America: 0

Comment: Almost exclusively related to DLC themes (Africa and North America), and limited to the colonial events.
Specifically, there were also series of important conflicts in India and East Asia, which had no representation.

Playable civs (total appearance/number of civs)

Campaign versions of later DLC civs also counted as that civ. Morocco counted as a pseudo-civ. Algiers counted as half-Ottoman half-Morocco. Canada counted as half-Britain half-America.
European: 5/10 (9+0.5*2)
Asian: 0/3
African: 3.5/3.5
North American (US and Mexico): 3.5/2.5
Native American: 0/4

Comment: Again, heavy bias on DLC themes. Asian and Native American civs have no historical battles probably because they already have campaigns, But these campaigns are still half-fictional and more focused. There are still several other interesting events to be explored.
Specifically, Dutch is the only legacy civ that never had an appearance even in the campaigns; Germans, Ottomans, Spanish and Aztecs appeared but not as protagonists (John Black not counted); and Swedes and Incas as DE new civs do not have any scenario either.

Conclusion

  • South America needs some attention.
  • Some civs had almost no appearance at all.
  • Asian and Native American civs, despite having their own campaigns (which were half-fictional), could have more historical contents.
  • Most missing parts are due to the fact that European and not-colonialism-related Asian events are fully neglected.
  • The ‚Äúcolonial theme‚ÄĚ is still prominent, which I think is unnecessary. You already had a full Japanese campaign that had nothing to do with colonialism. At least for the historical battles there is no need to stick to that theme. I was expecting DE to offer a broader scope, but it is now biased towards that one or two specific themes even more heavily.
Unimportant rants...

I personally do not like design holes.
For example, when Battlefield 1 was first released, it’s okay if there were no Russians because there was no Russian map at first. But I cannot stand the fact that there are French maps but no French as a faction.
Same here. Okay if European and Middle Eastern scenarios are missing as they are not covered in the game yet. But you already have East Asia, India and South America, and when you introduce the new concept of ‚Äúhistorical battles‚ÄĚ, I cannot see why these are under-represented. This does not conflict with the campaign. AOE2 had civs appearing multiple times in both campaigns and standalone battles.
Fine if they take time to implement but I hope they are at least planned for the future.

10 Likes

We absolutely need a Siege of Vienna (1683) historical battle. You get the Ottomans, French, Germans, and the Poles (if they give us a Polish civ).

Other great ones that could be included:
Austerlitz, Battle of the Nile, Waterloo, Rourke’s Drift, Isandlwana (if we get Zulus), Plains of Abraham, Capture of Atahualpa.

Asian battles are already well represented, since the Indian and Japanese campaigns are largely historical (with narrative modifications). More historical battles could cover the earlier parts of the Sengoku Jidai, particularly the conquests of Oda Nobunaga.

4 Likes

Batallas históricas como:

Batalla de Maip√ļ a√Īo 1818 fecha 5 de abril ubicaci√≥n chile am√©rica del sur, las fuerzas realistas espa√Īolas fueron derrotados por los ej√©rcitos unidos de argentina y chile// protagonista chile.

Batalla de bailen a√Īo 1808 fecha 18-22 de julio ubicaci√≥n Espa√Īa, Europa, las fuerzas espa√Īolas lograron propiciarles al ejercito napole√≥nico su primera derrota en campo abierto// protagonistas Espa√Īa.

Batalla de nordlingen a√Īo 1634 fecha 6-7 de septiembre, ubicaci√≥n Alemania, Europa, Las fuerzas Germano-Espa√Īolas se enfrentaron contra un ejercito Sueco-Germ√°nico protestante saliendo el bando cat√≥lico vencedor de la batalla// protagonistas Espa√Īa-Alemania.

Batalla de Kahlenberg a√Īo 1683 fecha 11-12 de septiembre, ubicaci√≥n Austria, Europa, las fuerzas sitiadas fueron socorridas por el ejercito del sacro imperio romano germ√°nico y las tropas de la manco comunidad polaco lituana, derrotando de manera definitiva a los turcos en Europa central// protagonistas Polonia.

eh french? as far as i know france was neutral.

1 Like

If we need a siege of vienna of 1683 (where french were not resent), then we absolutely need the siege of Turin of 1706, it was part of the war of spanish succession

1 Like

Ah, true. My mistake. I forgot that France didn’t join the coalition.

if i had to make historical battles for a possible european DLC id choose:

for Poles:

Battle of Vienna 1683 (pretty obvious i think).

for Danes i think there are 2 interesting options:

siege/battle of Kalmar, attack and take the swedish city of kalmar.

Assault on copenhagen, 1659, defend the city, historically one of the most one sided sieges in history: sweden suffered 1000s of casualties to denmarks less than 40. also its a nigh battle, so might make it more interesting.

1 Like

I noticed early on that the devs gave a heavy emphasis to the 19th century. I’m not inherently opposed to it but I think we don’t need to see more missions set in that century. Especially when the bulk of AOE3’s settings and tech arguably belong to the 17th-18th century. I imagine it as bell curve which starts out low in the 16th century, then rises dramatically and peaks between the 17th-18th centuries before falling down and landing in the 19th century.

I’d recommend:
a) Historical Battles set between the 17th-18th centuries
b) Historical Battles featuring as of yet unused civs

As such, some suggestions:
Plains of Abraham - British
Battle of Cartagena - Spanish (cool naval defense mission)
Colonization of New Amsterdam - Dutch
Pontiac’s Rebellion - Odawa (Haudenosaunee)
Beaver Wars - Haudenosaunee (featuring 1600s expansion of Hauds vs French and Huron (Hauds)
Klein Vendig - Germans

Yes,in fact other battles could be:

1)Battle of the Maule (1485) (Incas vs Mapuches-if they put Mapuches into the game;they would be like the Sioux but without cavalry,at least in the historical battle)

2)Battle of Pavia (1525) (Italians cities and Spanish forces vs French)

3)Battle of Lutzen (1632) (Swedes vs Holy Roman Empire)

4)Battle of Kahlenberg (1683) (Poles and Holy Roman Empire vs Ottomans)

5)Any battle of the Napoleonic campaign in Egypt (1798-1801) (Anglo-Ottoman alliance vs French)

6)Anglo-Zulu War (1879) (British vs Zulus-if they put Zulus into the game;they would be like the Zulus of Wars of Liberty)…

2 Likes