Age of Europe 3

India and Japan are quiet easy to play, essentially just European civs with their units being too strong.
It is a problem that pretty much any non European faction all their units, or at least the important ones, are Overpowered. This then leads to having to pull the faction in other ways, for example by limiting their ability to get artillery or what have you.

Sometimes i read people wanting China or India having normal artillery, completely oblivious to the fact those factions are balanced with their current roster and giving them european style artillery would break them.

3 Likes

Tout dépend si c’est ou non en team et en suprématie ou traité, je sais juste que en traité l’artillerie est primordiale, par contre je joue Japon et j’ai pas trop compris pourquoi les dev ont mis un mortier aux Samouraïs

Yep, It would help that African fields could be worked by 5 workers instead. Also make the cows auto-sell and auto-buy when maxed, without the tech. Factories doesnt have that micro

Making livestock auto-sell is bad because they generate influence just from existing and when fully fattened they generate a little more influence so someone might want to keep livestock for that influence generation. A card or a tech for auto-sell for coin is fine just don’t force auto-sell on the civs/

1 Like

Just look at which are the most popular civs in the game, how many posts there are on this forum asking for other European civs, how many mentions are there of Denmark and PLC within the aoe discord…
Now I would like proof to the contrary, why my statement would not be valid?

Both Sweden and Russia admitted territory in the Baltic, conquering territories from the PLC, while the Kingdom of Prussia was one of the kingdoms that succeeded the PLC, along with the Habsburg monarchy and the Tsardom of Russia.
PLC in this case would be a much more suitable representative for the Baltics than the other countries you mentioned.

Here you are being very dishonest with me, at no point did I say anything like that.
What I said was that given the historical period that the game covers, it makes sense for Europe to have a greater focus compared to the rest of the world.
Which is very different from saying “that Europe is another carrier of 90% of the world”.
I said previously that any and all additions to the game are welcome.
but the devs chose two European civs again for simple reasons, KtoM was the best-selling dlc on steam and the European civs are the most popular on aoe3 (with the exception of the ottomans) according to what was published on the official instagram of the AOE profile.

1 Like

That’s simply not true. I played Tupi in Wars of Liberty and I’d like to play them in AOE3:DE. Would get me more excited to play them than the 2024 DLC tbh. I don’t know how many think this way though but saying that a Tupi civ wouldn’t have fans is definitely incorrect.

Mapuche and Tupi would be both cool. Liked them in Wars of Liberty. It just annoyed me that they removed Aztecs for no reason in Wars of Liberty even though they’re really iconic in the game. Would have continued to play this mod if they did.

1 Like

This is what I’m going to do. I’ll skip it until there’s something else and it dropped to at least 50% if not even 75% off.

LOL. Sure you can be contrarian but lets be frank Tupi would not sell copies, did you download WOL specifically for Tupi? Or because of the 50 other civs they made? Don’t lie to yourself.

Pretty much no one, its only a contrarian opinion you have. If you did not know what the DLC is you would never have suggested Tupi, you only mention it specifically because you hate Denmark and Poland as choices and have some bizarre need to oppose them.

2 Likes

I did download it for the wide range of civs they added. I didn’t specifically download it for Tupi that’s true, but I didn’t download it for Danes either which some people here are really excited about for some reason.

I find it weird that the Age franchise is slowly turning into an RTS variant of Crusader Kings/Europa Universalis where the rest of the world is just seen as an afterthought which is at best “nice to have” where German provinces with dialect variant are under the “huge” German umbrella while it’s okay to have a giant blob West African civ.covering dozen of different peoples e.g.

Maybe I’m not the target audience for this game anymore, maybe I’m alienated by the eurocentric approach the franchise has taken, I don’t know. If the devs really think that this is the approach the franchise as a whole should take, then okay. Though don’t expect me to be excited for it and say “Hurray” when the game adds the tenth civ from the same region using the same set. AOE3 has even less the excuse of not having civs around the world, as it is literally the epoch where globalization accelerated to an unprecedented scale.

I’m sorry if this offends you for some reason, but I’m not looking forward for Danes and Poles which are I’m pretty much sure going to reuse the Northern European set and be a similar dissapointment on the scale of DotD and TMR. I’m pretty sure it will be barebones when it comes to new maps.

6 Likes

i doubt we will ever get new maps.

Now I would like proof to the contrary, why my statement would not be valid?

So you do have nothing but anecdotal evidence and personal biases. There’s way, way more threads asking for NO more european civilizations than there are in favor of them. It’s the most contentious topic on this forum and the one that gets the most people banned. For every request for Poland there’s about two posts asking for Persia. I can easily point you towards about as many requests for, I dunno, Brazil, Argentina, Siam, Korea, Vietnam, hell, the entirety of Oceania.

PLC in this case would be a much more suitable representative for the Baltics than the other countries you mentioned.

And why do we need to have an entire civilization representing the Baltic out of all places. You didn’t even debunk what I said, we do have three completely separate civilizations representing that area of the world. A tiny, tiny fraction of a continent that’s already the smallest and overly represented in the game already.

makes sense for Europe to have a greater focus compared to the rest of the world.

No, it doesn’t make any sense whatsoever. The entire period is Europe trying to colonize the rest of the world. Going from that we do have way too much “Europe” and too little “rest of the world”. Why should we focus so much on Europe? Did they settle colonizes overseas trying to occupy other europeans settling colonies overseas who were occupying lands of other europeans settling…?

the devs chose two European civs again for simple reasons, KtoM was the best-selling dlc on steam and the European civs are the most popular on aoe3

The devs chose two europeans because they are the most cost effective to make.

You don’t need to explicitly say “I am eurocentric” to clearly demonstrate that you are.

India and Japan are quiet easy to play

I can buy Japan, but India?

They have to rely on absurdly specific timing pushes cuz their vills cost wood, they have no artillery nor artillery counters that don’t cost a bajillion resources and pop.

You can’t realistically tell me Agra Pushes are anywhere near “normal” gameplay, not to mention the weird balance changes they’ve been getting lately with Rajputs becoming overpowered rodeleros and Sepoys being ground to dust, that’s a topic for another thread tho.

I don’t know how to say this in a nice way, but no one wants to play Tupi. In games that allow you to play them no one does.

For what is worth, Brazil is way, waaay more popular in Civilization 6 than Poland (not in Civ 5 but that’s because Civ 5 Poland is broken in half so it’s one of the easiest civs to win with.)

5 Likes

Y’all can argue till the seas run dry meanwhile I’m over here just being excited my favorite game of all time is still receiving support. I think that is pretty neat. Would I have liked to see an Asian DLC? hell yes, but that won’t prevent me from enjoying this one and I choose to remain positive one will come eventually. Perhaps if this DLC sells well enough WE might increase its budget because I suspect that is the main reason why Asia has been left untouched.

6 Likes

I mean i play a lot of Korea in Civ 5 because they are overpowered, i dont think most people play civs in civilization based on what country they like the most.

Also how do you know the numbers? Brazil has a “win as brazil” achievement but Poland doesn’t, so i’m not sure how to make such a conclusion unless you have some data to draw from. Also arguable if one even can compare a DLC civ to a Base game civ, by comparison 11% has the “send 2 rockets” from british in AOE3 while only 4% has a win a game as Mexico.

Why do people keep mentioning this game as if it was only about Europe?
Do you guys just read the name and see “Europa” and be like, this game must be awful and super Eurocentric?

Europa Universalis 4 let’s you play pretty much everyone on earth, even Australian Aboriginals.
Most regions/religions have their own set or unique mechanics on top of a lot of unique stuff for many “civilisations”.

The game released with a little bit of European focus, making it harder to play other parts of the world. But by now it’s pretty good at representing the majority of civilisations during that time.

Europa Universalis 5 has not been officially announced yet but there are already weekly dev diaries on it (imagine that for any Age of Empires/Mythology game).

2 Likes

How is my evidence anecdotal if I’m based on data provided by the game’s official Instagram page?
It wasn’t me who came to the conclusion that European civs are more popular, it was the game’s official page on Instagram, I’m just reviewing the information, despite it being qualitative data, you can reach websites that show pick rate and win rate statistics to draw your own conclusions.

I don’t have a duty and don’t need to debunk everything you said, in fact I can agree and disagree with part of what you said.
In fact, the civs you mentioned represent the Baltics in a less comprehensive and superficial way, I don’t disagree with that, but all these territories were, in a certain way, either conquered or “inherited”/succeeded by these empires you mentioned, despite the PLC being a better representative for this part.

This is sound like “anecdotal evidence” and “ad populum” LOL
There is no such consensus about “no euro civs”, in fact the community is very divided on this

You have EVERY RIGHT in the world to disagree or agree with any of my speeches, you just don’t have the right to impute things to me that I’m not, don’t be dishonest with me, because I’m not being dishonest with you.
things don’t work like that… “I disagree with your point, therefore I am Eurocentric”… pls zzz
The way you put things gives a feeling of false dichotomy, there are opinions that differ from yours.

Fica em paz ai parceiro.

3 Likes

Jadwiga has an achievement and is the only available polish leader. That’s how.

In fact, the civs you mentioned represent the Baltics in a less comprehensive and superficial way, I don’t disagree with that, but all these territories were, in a certain way, either conquered or “inherited”/succeeded by these empires you mentioned, despite the PLC being a better representative for this part.

Do you not realize how insane you sound when you say that the Baltics don’t have enough representation (3 whole civs) when the entire continent of Africa has only two 2 civs?

2 Likes

I think the learning curve is longer, but once you get used to it they are not as difficult as they might seem at first.

I think they’re making what they like. But I also suspect they are being careful with non-euro civs. Maybe they’re planning a rework of the asians that a lot of people on here have been asking for.