AoE4 Civ Design

In my opinion,this civs must be in game for different gameplays
Archer Civ:Englishs
Horde Civ:Mongols
Cav Civ:Frenchs
Infantry Civ:Germans
Gunpowder Civ:Turks
Colonialism Civ:Spainish
Raid Civ:Vikings
Sea Civ:Japanese
Pop Advantage Civ:Chinese(weak&cheap units,crowded armies)
Siege Civ:Saracens

Defensive civ: Eastern Roman Empire/Byzantines

1 Like

I just hope there are significant differences between the civs, with plenty of unique units. I don’t want the Mongols to just be “England without houses” or “England but without fully upgraded swordsmen”. Yes they said they would play differently, but they didn’t say how.


Look at trailer carefully,you can see mongol pikes,mongol horse archer and mongol archers

1 Like

Elephant Civ: Indians

Give us the Byzantine empire (Greek/Roman).

1 Like

Turks shouldnt be a gunpowder civ. Only Chinese should be so.

1- Ottomans do not lap with the medieval period much. Your logic of representing them in two ages isnt logical. If anything I would say Gokturks+Seljuks. Because Seljuks themselves were high medieval period. Or simply a synthetic Tengrist Turkic culture(Bulgars,Avars,Gokturks,Cumans) for first ages and Seljuks-Turkmen beyligs for the last ages. Do not forget conversion of Turks to islam happened very late in medieval(11th to 14th centuries gradually)Ottomans were an early modern period empire. If we take medieval period as 476-1453.
They were founded in 1300 but until 1396 call it 1400 they werent anything significant in Turkic world. What is more, until 1444 they werent any different than other Turkmen states, in 1444 battle of Varna they first owned their victory to janissaries. Still janissaries were just archers at that period, they didnt adapt muskets much.
If Ottomans are going to be used, wait for a game that is based on renaissence era.

2- They are very distinct from other Turkic empires. They do not rely on cavalry that much after their foundation period(their foundation period culture isnt much different from other Turkmen states anyway). They are unique on their own and that uniqueness comes after medieval period. They were a gunpowder empire.
Western world focuses on it too much because Ottomans were partially in Europe but compared to the the medieval period of Ottomans Timurid was for example far more significant.

3- They are overpresented/overportrayed. I am personally sick of seeing “janissary” as Turkish unique unit. They werent even Turkish by origin. Thats not the case however, when all medieval Turkish empires, conquerors etc are considered they are just so away from Turkic warfare culture.
One would expect a horse archer or light cav unit for instance.
One might say there will be more than one unique units however I think it is too specific/distinct/far from the core even for being one of the Turk unique units.


we need Aztecs or Mayans.

1 Like

> Mongols are considered a cav archer civ in AoE2 while Britons are a foot archer civ and mongols have full infantry upgrades except for halbs

thinking bat small thinking bat small thinking bat small thinking bat small thinking bat small thinking bat small thinking bat small thinking bat small thinking bat small thinking bat small thinking bat small thinking bat small thinking bat small thinking bat small thinking bat small

Ok, but that’s the point. The differences between the civilizations are minor compared with AoE3, especially in the early stages.

1 Like

Meanwhile I never liked AoE3 all that much.

But i gotta say, the good thing about making civs have a similar base makes it so it’s much easier to choose different civs when you wanna accomplish different things, if civs end up having completely different mechanics it becomes harder for people to change between them. (It becomes very clear when you’re someone that only plays Ottomans and then chooses another civ to try it out, and suddenly u’re having to do everything differently, same for the opposite, if u never played Ottomans and then decided to give it a go)

1 Like

I find it sickening how Spain had by far the most interesting Medieval history in Europe (constant warfare from 711 to 1492, fighting both the Sarracens, the Berbers, the French, the English and among the Spanish kingdoms themselves).
The Reconquista is basically the Crusades on steroids + the hundred year wars (the Catholic kingdoms claimed eachothers thrones all the time) + the Scottish war of independence (many independence and unification wars, the most renowned being the Portuguese wars).
And yet, they are always reduced to the colonization of the Americas.

The Conquest of the Americas was child’s play compared to epic warfare of the Reconquista, and also completely out of Medieval scope.

Spain should exist to represent the Reconquista medieval kingdoms of Iberia, not the colonial Spanish empire, thats AOE3 material.

This applies equally to Portugal, but i assume they won’t make it to the civ list since we are only having about 10-12 civs.


And if you actually go a bit into colonization period, you have a lot of history regarding the spanish in europe, too - spanish italy, the nertherlands, the iberian union…

And yet people see the bashing of hopeless barbarians as the biggest achievement for spain lol

Civilizations in the game should not be separated by a sharp classification. Establishing balance in gameplay diversifies strategies. Units may be different, but civilization abilities should not be very different. Of course, armored elephants should be only for Indians and Timurids. In addition, Seljuk is more suitable than Ottoman. Because it was founded in the last period of the Ottoman medieval times. And its origins are Seljuk.

1 Like

I think that the Vikings should be able to build faster but there buildings have less hp. And have really good infantry.

I just made a realisation. The ‘Card’ - system brings a bit too much static gain into the game. Each Card carry an insane amount of impact.
For myself as a strategist it has won me numerous matches againsf faaaar more micro & game-skilled people.

In AoE3 cards granted:

Old Math Formula

200+200•Age +100•Age•HC step
Age =Age is the age its available from.
HC step = 0, 1, 2, ‘3’ based on HC level requirement 0, 10, 25, 40.
So an IV, HC 40 shipment enables:
200+200•4+100•4•3 =
2200 resources of worth
Note: Various; team, double, infinity etc affects these mathatics.

I’d like to see a lesser amount of total worth per card in contrast to ingame resources. If it peaked at ~1550 resources at final Age, I believe it would enrichen the gameplays,

  • Assuming an alternate solution for turtling is provided from other source.

I really wish there would be variety for India. Hindustani or Tamils or Deccanese or Bengali and so on


I don’t think they will go into that much detail in AoE4, it may have far lower number of civs compared to AoE2.

1 Like

Then perhaps they could start with Hindustani and work their way up with mods :smiley:

Yes I hope they make it a proper civ based on the region they select, it gets absurd when they mix stuff from random places such as Urumi of Malayalam, Cataraman of Maratha, or Rajput Camels of Rajputana into one civ. I mean they never were one single entity in medieval era. Whatever region they select should be emphasized properly and not jumbled mess into one umbrella civ.

Till then maybe we should focus on AoE2 to get more Civs from the subcontinent.

1 Like