Even if African customers are relatively poorer than those of the other continents, there’s still a sizable black diaspora in the western hemisphere. I think it’d sell alright.
A new DLC in Africa, besides introducing new civilizations, units, maps, architecture etc, would be a great opportunity for a revamp:
• Turn Ethiopians into Nubians, with all their bonuses, and create a new Ethiopian civ;
• Change Yodit’s campaign to Amda Seyon — a real military campaign — and Tariq’s to Yusuf ibn Tashfin and the rise of Almoravids (also taking the opportunity to correct the terrain since Ethiopians live in cold mountains, not hot savannas);
• Turn Gbeto into a regional unit for new civs in Central and East Africa;
• Turn Genitour into a regional unit for Berbers and Iberians; and this camel skirmisher into a regional unit for West African civs:
(I don’t know why, but I can’t upload images 
)
@UpmostRook9474 Well, I’m not so optimistic anymore either, my friend. In fact, considering 3K, I fear the devs will only make one DLC for Africa, and one that doesn’t even include the Bantu.
However, I still don’t think it’s a good idea to amalgamate an area comparable to the entirety of the USA or China, with hundreds of peoples, into a single civ. Will they have the maritime trade bonuses of the Swahili? Because Kongo and Shona didn’t have oceanic navies. Will they have a mining bonus from Shona? Swahili and Kongo didn’t even have gold mines. Will the civ have the aggressive conversion bonus from Kongo or their use of gunpowder? But Swahili were the opposite of proselytizers, and Shona didn’t obtain gunpowder until after the game’s time period. So who exactly would Bantu represent? And if this is the last DLC for the region, I think it’s better that the civs are well-defined than waiting for some possible adjustment that will never come.
@MatM1996 Yeah Ali Gaji is an option. But what we know about him guarantees a campaign? I wouldn’t want another repetitive campaign, lacking variety and inspiration, or bordering on fiction like Yodit when there’s a better choice.
With Idris Alooma you would fight against Saracens and Berbers and, if the DLC focuses on the Sahel, against Hausa as well. Songhai civ would fight with Malians, Saracens and Berbers; Hausa with Kanembu, Songhai and Berbers; and Somali with Ethiopians and Portuguese. Other peoples (like Wadai, Toubou, Mandara, Mossi, Wolof etc) could be represented by specific units.
3 Likes
Yes, the thing is, I saw Idris Alooma more as Kanem’s AI for AoE 3 (because of his connection to Ahmed Al-Mansur, who appears as a Moroccan hero in the Battle of the Three Kings). Otherwise, Alooma’s campaign will be very short, between 1570 and 1591 (1591 because of the Battle of Tondibi, where Morocco conquered Songhai, although there are no historical records of Kanem participating in the battle, but in the game we can make exceptions…).
Sorry, friend, but I didn’t understand what you meant. Idris Alooma had nothing to do with Songhai, so I don’t understand why his campaign should end in 1591 (and he died in the early 1600s anyway).
Actually, Bornu and Songhai never fought each other, at most they disputed influence over the Hausa and Tuareg of the Aïr. I corrected my mistake above. But both fought against the Hausa, so I wanted to include them as well.
This time for Africa!
Samina mina zangalewa!
2 Likes
I am not focusing on the purchasing power of African consumers. I agree an Africa DLC has commercial potential even among player communities outside Africa. What I meant is, if we set aside the question of whether consumers would accept it, the blanks in Africa would still require at least two DLCs to be covered in a compromise way.
However, even though the Chinese and East Asian markets are so large, they still released the Three Kingdoms. A community’s purchasing power is not necessarily correlated with the quality and quantity of the product when the devs did not seriously take the community’s opinions.
I would prefer to actually split the current Ethiopians into Nubians and new Ethiopians, rather than simply renaming them.
The new Ethiopians would retain the Shotel and place greater emphasis on infantry and camels, while still having at least decent archers.
The Nubians could inherit the archer bonus or receive a new Archery Range bonuse, and have Archer of the Eyes (or possibly named Pupil Smiter) as their unique unit. Now that the Composite Bowman has gained the ability to ignore armor, the Archer of the Eyes could instead have a special ability that reduces the target’s line of sight.
Why? The Malians’ gameplay cannot lose the Gbeto as an anti-infantry option, and the Gbeto has a West African background.
Both the Ethiopians and Nubians need an anti-archer option rather than an anti-infantry one. A random idea is to introduce a shielded javelin thrower called Gascenya as a stronger skirmisher that cost few gold, serving as a regional unit for the Ethiopians and Nubians (and possibly the Somalis as well). If I remember correctly, the term used for this unit’s name has a highland-related background, so they likely wouldn’t belong to the Bantu or other civs far from the Ethiopian Highlands.
As for the Bantu, in my African civ concept, I deliberately designed their unique unit to receive a free Elite upgrade, leaving enough slots for this umbrella civ to specially have three unique techs. One of these is Assegai, which gives Skirmisher units and Scout Infantry (the Eagle-like units for the Bantu) a +50% bonus attack. Additionally, Scout Infantry units gain a charge bar to throw their spears.
If there were only one DLC, I would choose the Kanuri, Somalis, and Songhai.
If it could be a larger DLC including four, then I would also add either the Nubians or the (umbrella) Bantu. To be honest, choosing the former over the latter would indeed be the better decision, as it would likely generate less controversy.
That’s exactly what an umbrella civ is for. Its purpose is to provide broader coverage rather than being more accurate for a specific aspect. Since the likelihood of introducing a DLC for various Bantu civs is low since other West and East African civs have higher priority, in my view, after the West African DLC is released, the second DLC could either be an umbrella Bantu civ or a specific Bantu civ (for example, the Kongolese) got introduced together with East African civs. In this way, that specific Bantu civ could also represent other Bantu groups in campaigns if necessary.
if they use the model of “the last chieftains”, they are likely to try to cover the continent as wide as possible
A new African DLC would be great. I would like to see Kanem, Benin, Congo and Swahili.
2 Likes
aren’t they planning a Saracen split? and then still i’d love to see more from Sahel and Central Africa
1 Like
Africa needs atleast 2 DLCs to complete.
There are 10 civs I’d add to Africa:
Nubians
Somalis
Kanembu
Songhai
Hausa
Ghanaians
Edo
Shonas
Swahili
Kongolese
3 Likes
Impossible to split them
1 Like
Neither suggestion makes sense. Gbetos aren’t “a regional thing” and they also aren’t Malian. They’re not even Medieval. Also the knives they use in-game are Central African, not West African.
If you want a ranged melee unit for Malians give them something actually Malian, not a Frankenstein unit.
3 Likes
I am not denying that the Gbeto is neither a Malian unit nor a medieval one in reality. I already mentioned that they (the women of Gbeto) originated in West Africa, which does not necessarily mean Mali.
What I am saying is that, within the game, the Gbeto has existed for the Malians, and the civ now often relies on this unit for its gameplay. It is not a problem to make changes for the sake of historical accuracy, but not in a way that neither preserves the civ’s playstyle nor actually improves historical accuracy.
That’s what I meant, but I didn’t express myself well. I thought about giving the archer bonus and the siege unit to the new Nubian civ because, as I mentioned in another thread, the Ethiopians (both Aksumites and Solomonids) focused on infantry and cavalry, with Emperor Amda Seyon even having a regiment of swordsmen called Sawaryana Asayfet. The Nubians were those famous for their archers, and archaeologists have discovered several Nubian fortresses with traces of trebuchets.
It was just a thematic suggestion, given that the use of throwing knives is something from central and eastern Africa, as @RatcicleFan mentioned. Malians would receive an new unit in its place with the same role, just with a different weapon.
From what I’ve seen, Gascenya is a term invented from Gasha (shield) and the suffix -enya (bearer).
The idea of the Assegai isn’t bad in itself, but the weapon is merely the ubiquitous spear, so the unit sounds rather generic. Perhaps giving the Ethiopians/Somalis a gunpowder mercenary would be better? I’ll research and see if I can find something more specific.
Well, I think your ideas are good and interesting, and they make sense given your umbrella civ approach. But here comes our (I think only) disagreement, the exact concern I expressed regarding the inclusion of the Tupi: I honestly don’t believe the devs will split them into several civs in the future, and because of that they will be generic/vague in nature, covering everyone and no one at the same time, which I don’t like — think of the Slavs before the addition of Bohemians, Bulgarians, and Poles. I have no problem with umbrella civilizations per se as long as they aren’t too extensive. I’ve even been reading about the Middle East lately to see how best to split the Saracens.
But Kongo and Shona (or Swahili) would already be umbrella civs, since they never met and would be representing even less known peoples who would never be included.
1 Like
Yes, that’s why I wrote what I wrote…
Shakira - Waka Waka (This Time for Africa) (The Official 2010 FIFA World Cup™ Song)
Yes, those are good ideas…in fact, the Gascenya would fit in very well as a second unique unit or even a regional one…
Yes, a great dlc with 5 civs at least: Songhai, Hausa, Kanemites, Sudanese and Somalians, Kongolese or Zimbabweans…
Yes, that would be the idea…
a Dev has literally said it in an interview
There is a spit for saracens?
The key point I mentioned about Gascenya is that I believe it seems necessary to provide Ethiopians and Nubians with a tool to counter archers. One relies on infantry and camels, while the other relies on archers; therefore, once their opponents overwhelm them with archers, they would strongly need a means of countering them.
That is why I randomly proposed a more powerful skirmisher unit that costs a small amount of gold for them. If suitable references can be found, perhaps such a regional unit could also serve the Somalis.
From a balance perspective, these civs do not need additional gunpowder units for dealing with infantry.
Perhaps the Malians are the civ that actually suitable for a new gunpowder unit, like using a gunpowder unit to replace the Gbeto. Both are ranged units and effective against infantry.
Maybe those women warriors could just switch to using firearms, like the Musofadi Gunner in AoE4.
Did he tell how exactly?