The sarrc dlc
Gurjaras dravidians India
Hindustani Pakistan
Bengals Bangladesh
Afganistan Sri Lanka Maldives Nepal Butan yet to be added.
1 Like
Pashtuns.
Can easily be added in a future Central Asian DLC along with Azeris or Tajiks or Gokturks or Hephthalites.
Sinhalese.
A strong candidate for a future Indian DLC. A Dravidians split into Tamils, Telegus, Kanndigas, and Malaylam or just a simple addition of Deccan can be accompanied.
I know little to nothing about their history.
1 Like
I mean what do you mean by “Indian”? Modern day nationality of a specific country? All the population that lived in a region?
During medieval period, I don’t know any source that called Bengalis or Dravidians people as “Indians”. “Hindustanis”, “Hindus”, “Indis”, “Indians” always referred to north-northwest region - basically in game Gurjaras and Hindustanis.
Bengalis are one of the least Indo-Aryan people among Indian Sub-continent. Even during medieval period, they were a mix of Indo-Aryan, Sino-Nepalese and Tibeto-Burmese people. Modern day Bengalis are even more mixed which is irrelevant for the in game time period.
Maldives I know they fought off the portuguese.pretty sure butan wasnt a country in the middle ages might be a part of tibetan empire.Nepal was independent kingdom but not sure if they have a interesting story to tell.
I still don’t believe that anyone actually reads this forum. I am strongly opposed to them making drastic changes to civs of a 20 year old game. The Persian changes were already more than I’m happy with, but I can stomach it. I really hope that they only rename the Chinese and don’t actually change the civ too much.
However the last 3 years of DLC have turned my “favourite game of all time” into “not even in my favourites on steam” to “negative review on steam”
that’s not really pay to win. making balanced civs is very hard, erring on the side of OP is better, because an OP civ will see lots of play, giving tons of data. If you make the civ underpowered at first, means nobody will play it, makes it very hard to balance. Also they have gotten better at this. I don’t think we’ll see another Cumans at launch situation.
No we shouldn’t be thankful for them doing the absolute minimum. My standards haven’t fallen this far. I think the reason we are getting another traditional DLC is that twofold:
-they were planning this for a long time. there was the “oh you liked dynasties of india” roadmap thingy. I think they were planning this since then
-they can’t get away with another shitshow like V&V. that squandered a lot of good will
I agree. Replace scorpion with the new unit Hwacha/Nest of Bees and change the useless “Demolition Ship +50 HP” to “Hwacha/Nest of Bees +x% HP” and call it a day.
no. don’t change classic civs
2 Likes
I can’t personally agree with this. The War Wagon doesn’t belong in the Korean civ at all, and neither does the Woad Raider in the Celts civ (but that entire civ is an example of poor civ design). I can understand why the old devs made the choice to add the War Wagon back in The Conquerors time as they were forced to add Koreans to the game on very short notice, but there’s no good reason to keep an ancient Chinese wagon on a medieval Korean civ. Nostalgia is not a reason and I WILL fight this.
I don’t see what they would change in the Chinese, I don’t even know enough details about the expansion to know if they need a rename. When they tried changing their start there was strong pushback and the changes were undone. As for Persians, I still want their architecture set to be changed. A lot of people do, in fact.
2 Likes
I disagree.
20 characters.
I really enjoy playing as Koreans and using War Wagons. Is that a good reason to keep them?
3 Likes
Silly. In a world where American civs got crossbows, steel, siege, galleys, trebs, etc.
The Korean war wagon looks like a very minor issue.
Mayans also get a made up UU that I also complain about. I don’t see why I shouldn’t complain about the War Wagon.
If we had to get rid of all made up features we wouldn’t have the game anymore. Or a very different one at least.
2 Likes
Is it really that weird that I want at least the unique unit to be something real?
And the in-game language (if the real one is known obviously, which applies to a lot of civs that speak the wrong language)
That’s not weird. Many UUs are made up though.
And I complain about the ones I know are. 
The War Wagon is iconic for the Koreans in AoE II. I don’t care if historically Koreans has War Wagons, they have been having them in aoe2 for 20 years now. Aztecs didn’t have trebuchets, Goths didnt have gunpowder, Romans didnt exist in the middle ages, Chinese invented block printing, gunpowder and so many other things but get none of the techs. Mayans didn’t exist, that’s not a word (they should be called Maya).
Nostalgia is the main reason I play this game. so it is very much a reason. don’t gatekeep
1 Like
Because new content gives money. Imagine a paid DLC that only solve bugs…
As do I. The Koreans are probably my third favorite civ. I will not play them if War Wagons are removed.
First of all, it’s fine to debate history, but always with the best of intentions, guys. If you can avoid disrespect, all the better.
Remember that it is not allowed discuss controversial topics, such as religion or politics in a way that is not directly related to the Age of Empires games and their historical context.
Personally, I am not very aware of ethnic issues in the Asian continent specifically, but I will do my best to moderate the thread to avoid cases of racism.
And finally, be thankful that you have new civilizations, they were taken from us 
PS: I set a timing to avoid too much fuss, please excuse me, if I see that the thread is moderated a little more, remove it.
1 Like