A Vague Rename for Jin Dynasty: A Compromise Fix if Old Chinese Stay Unchanged

Age of Empires IV IV - Discussion
1

Originally, I suggested that since the new Jin Dynasty has too many units that aren’t characteristic of the Jin, they should distribute some of them to the Chinese. I love this Jin Dynasty, but should we also give the original Chinese some updates? But the Devs didn’t adopt this, and they don’t seem willing to make further changes — at least I don’t see that in the notes. So, I think it’s time to introduce an alternative, compromise plan.

If you insist on the current design, I’m afraid you’ll need to rename this obviously hybrid Jin Dynasty to something more ambiguous and generic.
Personally, I suggest names like :

“Border Guard”

“Great Wall Legion”

“Great Wall Guard”

or “Northern Frontier”

This is because units like the Iron Pagoda, Zhanma Swordsman, Bed Crossbow, and Three-Barreled Handcannoneer did historically exist in Northern Chinese armies — they just belonged to different eras (Jin, Song, and Ming).

I know some people will say: “No, don’t change it, I prefer the historically accurate name like Jin Dynasty.”
Well, look, you should have made the Jin Dynasty historically accurate from the very beginning!
If I created a new civ including Samurai, Keshiks, and Nests of Bees, but named it “Japanese”, how would that sound? Damn, you’d probably have to call it something like“Far Eastern Asians” , because it’s a hybrid from the start.
The same logic applies to the Jin Dynasty. You’ve created a hybrid civ, so it requires a hybrid title. It’s that simple.

This isn’t about us disliking the concept of the Jin; it’s about how we can’t accept a Song-Jin War campaign where the Jin Dynasty simply acts as a catch-all bucket for every unique unit. It just makes it look like you don’t take this subject seriously.
Imagine if you released a Hundred Years’ War DLC with a civ called “French” that has Royal Knights, Joan of Arc, AND Longbowmen. What would history buffs think? You’d even anger players who love English culture — especially since this DLC isn’t exactly cheap.
If possible, the best solution would obviously be to add an English civ like the Plantagenet, or give the existing English civ its proper unique units. Or, you should rename this new hybrid civ to a vague regional name like “Western Europe”rather than French.

This compromise isn’t my favorite either, but it’s the most cost-effective way to cut our losses and manage player sentiment. It might not win us much praise, but it should at least defuse some of the anger.

And yeah, I noticed the Devs are planning another update in a month. If you have a fix like this — or even just the concept — you’d better announce it sooner rather than later.
I really hope I won’t need this compromise plan a month from now. We’ll see.

2

I fully support the original poster’s point. As a Chinese player, I find it very hard to emotionally accept a DLC titled The Legacy of Yue Fei that introduces the Jin Dynasty — the very enemy Yue Fei fought against his entire life — as a playable new civilization. In our historical narrative, although the Jin Dynasty was later partially assimilated into the broader Chinese nation, at the time they were invaders who committed massacres and enslavement of Han Chinese. Even today, most Chinese people, including many Manchu, have no positive feelings toward the Jin Dynasty.

Chinese players were excited to see a DLC about Yue Fei, but in the end we found that, apart from a campaign (which is not the main focus for most Age of Empires IV players), there is no new mechanic, unit, or feature for the Chinese civilization itself. The developers had several better options:

  1. Sell the campaign alone at a lower price.

  2. Include the campaign plus a “Yue Family Army” variant civilization.

  3. Include the campaign, a “Yue Family Army” variant, and the Jin Dynasty — and charge more.

  4. Include the campaign and the Jin Dynasty, but also rework the original Chinese civilization or the “Zhu Xi’s Legacy” variant, adding historically Chinese units (like the zhanma daoshi, bed crossbow, san yan chong, etc.), while possibly nerfing their economy.

  5. Include the campaign and the Jin Dynasty, with no other changes.

Based on what we’ve seen so far, the devs chose the worst option — #5.

I hope the developers will reconsider. Announcing a future fix soon would go a long way to calm much of the frustration among players.

3

I don’t actually dislike the Jin Dynasty that much, but like many players, I vaguely sense a certain disregard in its design.

It feels like the Devs might have originally designed multiple new civs, but due to a lack of content, they just shoehorned everything into the Jin Dynasty. Even though these new units don’t fit the classic image of the Jin, players can’t help but feel brushed off.

In that case, they might as well have just made a hybrid civ representing both the Song and Jin dynasties from the start.

1 Like
4

I agree with that. Honestly, we’re already used to “Zhu Xi’s Legacy,” and giving it a region-based name might be better too.

If the Jin is the only new civ and it already uses Song units, then renaming it to represent Yue Fei would be a fitting choice.

There is a small issue though: if we rename the Jin Dynasty, what about its banner?

5

0503-002302
0503-002302345×206 17.7 KB

Do you mean this?

Ah, that’s a great question. As a matter of fact, this five-colored flag reflects a profound and ancient aspect of Chinese culture. It stems from the concept of the “Five Elements” (Wu Xing) from Chinese antiquity.

The five colors represent five basic natural elements, each corresponding to a specific cardinal direction:

White-Metal-West,

Green-Wood-East,

Black-Water-North,

Red-Fire-South,

Yellow-Earth-Center.

This color system was likely integrated into military command around two thousand years ago. This system of command banners, defined by these five colors, remained in use all the way from the Han Dynasty two millennia ago until the fall of the Ming Dynasty in the 17th century.

The Manchu Eight Banners system, which emerged in the same century, later reformed it: they removed Green, changed Black to dark blue, forming the initial Four Banners, and then created the famous Eight Banners by adding borders to the flags.

Therefore, the influence of the Five Elements banners extended all the way to the fall of the Qing Dynasty in the 20th century, only then being overshadowed by European military systems.

You could say these five colors are one of the most classic representations of ancient Chinese military culture. So naturally, it can represent the armies of various powers around China. It works for the Jurchens just as well as it does for the Han Chinese — it was designed to be universally applicable from the start.

6

I’d keep Jin as Jin but rename Chinese and Zhu Xi into Ming and Song (or Tang and Song?)

7

Well, nobody hates historically accurate names, but combined with the current unit design, it just gets confusing.

It means the Song’s Zhanma Swordsman is Jin-only, and the Ming’s Three-Barreled gun is also in the Jin roster. At this point, I’ve stopped worrying about name accuracy.

1 Like
8

Yes, Ming and Song would be good… since Tang is more pre-1000 and AoE 4 isn’t as focused on…

9

Oh, I can explain this.

From the Chinese intro, we can see the time span is 907 to 1644 AD. 1644 is the year the Ming central government collapsed — no need to elaborate on that. But 907 isn’t the start of the Tang; it’s actually the year it fell.

From 907 to 960, China was in a state of fragmentation. This “Tang” likely serves as a placeholder, representing “no new legitimate dynasty, so we just acknowledge the Tang for now.”

10

Of course, it would be more the pre-Song era, which would start from 960 onwards…

11

Oh yeah, I’d very much like to see reworks to Jin and Chinese to improve historical accuracy. I just think that the Jin as a name is fine (assuming the units are corrected), much better than something bland like “X’s Army” (I’m looking at you, Joanne of Arc, don’t you think I forgot my distaste…)

1 Like
12

Alternatively, you could interpret it as the “Later Tang” founded in 923 AD by Li Keyong — the short-lived dynasty that defeated the usurper Zhu Wen. But that’s a whole other story.

Later Tang was eventually overthrown by its own general, Shi Jingtang, who ceded the strategic Youzhou prefecture (near modern-day Beijing) to the Khitans in exchange for their alliance. The loss of Youzhou later led to the prolonged tug-of-war between the Song and the Khitans.

That’s because “Later Tang” is just a retrospective label we use to distinguish it. They would have styled themselves simply as “Tang”. But regardless, the Later Tang explanation is still a bit of a stretch, so I still lean towards the previous one.

13

Yes, it would be like a slight extension of the Tang dynasty until 923…

14

This is far from a pleasant situation. The new DLC is baffling, and some players on Tieba are even angry.

Like you said,it’s like releasing a Joan of Arc DLC that only include a new English civ. It makes absolutely no sense. It has even sparked a heated debate over the DLC’s pricing.

1 Like
15

I gotta say, if the devs only had the bandwidth for one new civ in this DLC, it really should have been Yue Fei’s, not the Jin Dynasty. After all, this is a Yue Fei-themed DLC — people are here for Yue Fei! As for the Jin in the campaign? Even just reskinning the Golden Horde with a different flag would’ve worked; most players wouldn’t have minded.

As it stands, I can only hope they’re willing to give the Chinese (aka the Song) some new units — like ideally the iconic Shenbi Bowman, and the Zhanma Swordsman, then put the Bed Crossbow in the Clock Tower, and boom, you can recreate the Song’s resistance against the Jin outside of the campaign.

If they can’t do that, they should at least rename the Jin Dynasty to something more generic that represents multiple factions. That would be enough to get by.

16

Yes, although I fear we’ll end up using the same old Chinese characters against the Super-Jin (though perhaps we’ll alternate between Jin missions and missions with Yue Fei so that it’s not all the same)…

17

After taking a look at the Jin Dynasty’s specific description, it feels like they just pooled the resources meant for two civs into one, or maybe it’s just some second-guessing of the Song-Jin wars.

I don’t deny that these designs are creative, but this kind of hand-waving regarding historical accuracy is bound to annoy many players.

18

I think they should be renamed as Jurchens plus have unique architecture in addition to the new voicelines and music

1 Like
19

New buildings are always good. Although after watching the video, it seems they’ve ultimately relegated the Jin to a sub-variant of the Chinese.

Anyway, the problem we face now is that the Song-Jin wars seem to exist only in the campaign; Yue Fei’s faction doesn’t have a proper representation in standard matches.

Whether they rename the Jin Dynasty or tweak the original Chinese, they really need to do something about it.

20

Yes, the campaign is going to be good, but the civ is going to be kind of meh…