Nope it isn’t identical, the projectiles are different
Thats kind of a silly argument. You can always make a unit look diferent, particularly when they come from so diferent cultures
They arent your opponents, and I just dont get why do you approach the discussion as " Yeah slightly similar to an existing thing, maybe they would be redundant?" When you have barely any reason to think so
Ask “how this thing would play off?” Instead
2 Likes
East Asia needs better treatment for sure!
Japanese Architecture Set:
Japanese
Ainus
Ryukyuans
East Asian Architecture Set:
Chinese
Koreans
Vietnamese
Jurchens
Khitans
Dians/Zangkes
Inner East Asian Architecture Set:
Gokturks
Tibetans
Tanguts
Mongols
Uyghurs
Southeast Asian Architecture Set:
Mons
Khmer
Burmese
Siamese
Malay Architecture Set:
Malays
Javanese
Visayans
1 Like
Neither Ryukyans of Ainus deserve to be added. If you paor another civ with Japan pair them with either Filipinos/Tagalogs or with Jurchen
And you can move Chams to Malay Architecture. Although with all the variety there not sure what would be the more fitting pairings
1 Like
Ryukyuans probably could be added if we have enough space, but Ainus I see no reason for them to be added.
Any civ can be added as long as there is enough material to make a good campaign. Doesn’t matter where they’re from: you either make a campaign, or don’t add the civ.
I am up for Tibetians together with Uyghurs 
Interesting story material here along with 2 civi choices khitans and juchens.
3 Likes
Give me Tibetans, Nepalese and Bhutanese
I think African DLC is also good as long as it brings exciting content. As a player living in East Asia, I pro Khitans and Tibetans, the former has interesting history stretching from China to Transoxiana and the later just culturally a lot different from Chinese and many interactions since Tang dynasty. It would be great, just like current DLC, to revamp Chinese or even Japan and Korean a bit.
1 Like
Tbh I think Korea, Japan and China dont really need a revamp. They are both well designed and very unique in terms of what they can do and have mostly really cool UUs
All they need are properly made full campaigns.
2 Likes
Tbh there prob are ome really great campaigns for those civs already in the workshop, but more content is always nice
1 Like
When I said “revamp”, I think I wanted to say reskin both building or units. Current East Asia building graphic is somehow hybrid but in fact nothing like Chinese, Korean, and Japanese. Not sure have you ever seen Abejin’s great mod in HD version, it provides better immersive experience while playing these civ. However, I think it also applies to other region civs, a long way to go
1 Like
i think a lot of people disagree with you
-
chinese are overly difficult to play for something like 90% of the player base
-
japanese UU is almost never seen, it doesnt matter how well it does in X scenario, almost no one uses them. beyond their UU, they have faster attacking infantry, which isnt a very used unit in the game, beyond? a load of good BUT generic units
-
koreans create negative player experience with their WW, even if its balanced it still generates hate. beyond their WW, their UT’s are rarely used for the majority of the player base. towers are still not meta (even if they have uses in X scenario) and by the time you can afford shinky, there WILL be a number of BBCs on the field which obsolete the onagers. leaving them with worse than generic units and a sub par eco bonus
there’s a number of civs that could do with a rework, all of these 3 fit the criteria, even if its minor tweaks.
for example(if you havent seen) people are propositioning that keeps (imperial age towers) gain an additional arrow (or 2, and guard towers gain +1 arrow) to give keeps more relevance in more matches and justify that high stone cost in place of castles or BBTs
They are still a very flavourful and unique civ. Nothing major needed beyond rebalancing the start
Japanese have one of the best MAA into archers into 1TC xbow, theres not many civs that can pull it off that well
Yeah the Samurai could be improved but again, nothing major
The UTs are good and strong enough. The problem I see with Koreans is that in open maps they can do two or three things (extra armour and cheap archers, towers and WW) and all of them are situational, leaving them with big weaknesses vs strong kinght civs. They could use some chamges but nothing comparable to a rework
1 Like
To be honest i didn’t reall care about indian history more than any other history but i still bought the DLC. So it would make no difference for me if the next dlc is african or sth else. I would have bought the last dlc even if it had been another european dlc.
Chams would be a good addition. The brick style buildings could work for Javanese (Majapahit) and the Chams too.
2 Likes