Why keep adding new civs instead of improving the already existing ones by making them more unique from each other?
The game was completely fine with the original 13 civs from AoK, and today I’ve lost count of how many there are.
Why keep adding stuff instead of making the game better at its core? (Pathing and balancing issues come to mind).
Am I the only one? Would like to see your thoughts.
Yes.
Keep adding more & more civs.
This is the gaming equivalent of complaining about the menu at a restaurant being too big.
Would you like to speak to the manager about this? I’m sure if you pay them any upwards cost of a few million dollars or so they’ll be happy to cater to your specific wants.
Otherwise deal with it, this is what keeps us from doing back to the Hun wars period of Voobly.
Well as I recently read, there will came out a new East Asian DLC this spring of 2025, perhaps even with a Central Asian civ, the Catapult camels suggest this.
According to the shown graphics so far, the Chinese civ will be improved in a more historically accurate way in terms of their units and weapons namely Fire lance carriers and Gunpowder cannons. That is already a good step… So there will not only be more new civs, but also an improvement of an old civ…
Let us hope for more. I really hope, that the indigenous American civs like the Aztecs, Mayans and Incas will finally get their own historically appropriate technologies. The game needs to move towards being less Eurocentric, then there will be also a better balance in terms of historical accuracy.
Yes the issues with pathfinding are not resolved up to now. When I played some campaigns last year, the pathfinding difficulties of some units were indeed annoying…
Fixing pathing doesn’t make money. Making new civs does. It is very simple.
That would be fine.
Fixing that won’t help selling the game, I guess?
I know right…
So if fundamental technical issues of a game are solved, I think it will have a better effect to sell future DLCs. Pathfinding issues are annoying, they are not small issues, the impact the fun of the game yes.
No, but you are a minority.
The majority wants to have more civs.
Also you only have to learn like 2-4 new civs per year. That is at last 3 months of time per civ. Should be doable.
Because more = better tbh.
Adding more civs doesn’t make the old ones worse in my opinion.
It gives more variety and more things you can do, more stories you can tell.
I feel like many of them are too forced and localized, just for the sake of “more”.
For example, Bengalis/Dravidians/Gurjaras/Hindustanis should simply be merged into “Indians”.
Why do you think that?
20 characters
I’d prefer active development with regularly added new civs than what AOE1 and AOE3 are (not) getting.
Don’t care for campaigns, don’t care for separate antiquity game modes. Give me new civs with new architecture sets or using lesser used ones for regions where we haven’t gotten much content already and I’m happy.
I would highly recommend OP to read a book about South Asian history, or even just reading a Wikipedia article about Medieval South Asia, as, no offence, it comes off as really ignorant to suggest to merge India back into one civ.
They did that initially and figured out its wrong.
No one cares about your personal opinion.
That’s silly. Bengalis/Dravidians/Gurjaras/Hindustanis are all Indians.
They even made “Italians” who weren’t ever a univocal power throughout the whole medieval period, so it can be done.
Read a history book there was no indians till the 18th century.
Look, I assumed you argued in good faith, but this comes off as trolling. I’ll just leave a book suggestion for you to purchase, loan or download about Medieval South Asian history and call it a day. I don’t have the patience to argue for any longer, as I’ve did that in the past and I don’t want to waste more time. If you really think that roughly 1/5 of the world population is the same than quarreling city states on a peninsula, I really can’t help you.
It’s a forum. I can say whatever I want as long as it is within the rules.
Franks, Britons, Teutons and Vikings are all Europeans. So merge them.
Players who satisfied with only 13 civs will not pay again but players who wants more civs will pay for DLCs.
$$ = power. Simple? Welcome to Age of Capitalism.
Consider Indians as a macro-group of the peoples of India. Call them Hindus if you wish.
Again: they made “Italians” even if, according to your reasoning, there were no “Italians” until XIX (which isn’t true of course).
By your logic they should add Lombards, Saxons, Bavarians, Tuscans, Papal States, Venetians, and more.
Not valid since Europe is a continent and India is not.
Are you all really going to waste your time with a troll who joined the forum a day ago?