Could we not have “variant” civs by having some revolts be earlier? Age 3 and 2 like Mexico has, but instead of returning you’re stuck with it you can even go through the ages with it?
2 Likes
And Aoe 3 already has this with the decks, each deck has a specific way of playing, one more than the others.
Japanese with a samurai deck doesn’t play like the Japanese with a dojo deck and natives for exemplo.
and the revolutions are rather a variant of the civ, mainly in Mexico, with Maya, Texas and California.
We already have this in the game, we never paid attention and gave due value to this mechanic
6 Likes
I have a slightly different view about that—I’d rather more civs/sub civs with less cards then just add more cards to civs. And as far as maya Texas and Cali, those are fairly good “subcivs” and people have realized that.
2 Likes
I.E. I’d rather split Germany, or have Prussia as a “civ revolt”, then have Prinze chagvalers, the xbow skirm dudes, and the royal house guys available through cards.
2 Likes
If done properly, it’s a system that have some potential in game like aoe2 and aoe3, where you have already a decent variety of civs.
Like, if they add the scots as a variant of british, the persians as variant of the ottomans, the austrians of the germans and so on.
Of course, revolutions per se are already variants of CIVs, only from the industrial age onwards…remember that revolutions came with the first expansion, TWC, just as they now “arrive” in AoE 4 TSA…
Please, no
I hope this variant civ concept will not be used as an excuse for new low-effort cloned civs.
5 Likes
Yes, for me there are civs that yes or yes have to be in AoE 3 to cover the gaps that remain in the game (Poland and Denmark in Europe, Persia and Oman in the Middle East, Burma and Siam in Southeast Asia and Brazil and Argentina in South America)…maybe there content until 2027…
5 Likes
One thing that could be done to make the revs feel more variant is to change the fact that the settlers become revolutionaries and make that a card that arrives fast.
Maybe that could make them more viable and allow non unit shippments more attractive.
I had been having this idea for years, and have designed 2 pirate theme variant civs, that Captain Drake’s fleet(Britain variant) and Zheng’s Army(Chinese variant). If devs do it, I will certainly support and buy.
Deck could already achieve this with much wilder freedom.
But like I said before too much freedom is not always a good thing. It is possible to provide some better crafted pre-built deck with a coherent theme (both for gameplay and historical background). I find the “beginner” “land” “naval” pretty uninspiring. What about:
HRE deck: elector princes and mercenary cards
Austria deck: European native cards
Prussia deck: landwehr, death ride, March revolution
Some more “restricted” cards can be added to each of the decks. Certain basic cards are still shared.
If people like that idea it could even evolve into its own mode, like only allowing a more restricted combination of cards, separate from the standard mode where any combination within civs is allowed.
1 Like
IF at all russia would be a variant of the PLC in this timeframe.
Nahh, plc it should be a real civ
Age of Empires 3 has a bunch of unique features:
- Revolutions
- Minor Civilisations
- Mercenaries
- Outlaws
Those are all used to represent cultures that are not represented by the main civilisations.
AoE4 has none of those things.
AoE3 civilisations also don’t have completely unique architecture sets so what would be the difference between a variant civilisation and a new civilisation?
There are also civilisations that share mechanics.
Are Hausa a variant civilisation of the Ethiopians?
Are the Mexicans a variant civilisation of the United States or of Spain?
1 Like
I think people are missing the point with revolutions - they are a variant but under much different circumstances and offer different things:
- Available late game via an existing civ
- Are an alternative to continuing with the standard Imperial age along with the Imperial upgrades
- Certain civs have certain Rev choices.
- Were originally in the game as a ‘last-ditch’ or clean up option, as you previously couldn’t improve upon your economy.
Variants (or rather Sub-Factions) differ:
- Allows you to play a altered ‘normal’ civ from the start
- Adds new Age-up Governors (and other altered African/AD/Native age-up options)
- Changes small elements of an existing Civ whilst retaining its basic traits and Shipments
Basically a variant allows you to play a standard civ with slight tweaks for a different play-style. It could be seen as a way to play as something ‘different’ which would really not be worth developing into a brand new super unique civ.
A proper variant civ, in this case taking the Scottish example, could work like this:
British - Scottish
Uses the same framework as the British includes available unit categories, HC shipments, Royal Guard designations and Unique unit/building categories, with small changes. Overall main changes make the British tougher in melee (seen through their Unique Unit replacements) though at the cost of flexibility. The historic theming factor is the Covenanter Scots (1600s) and the various Jacobite factions before becoming the more general British civs, albeit with a little more Scottish flavour.
HC: Edinburgh (just a name/aesthetic change, if that)
HC Shipments: British (no change)
Unique Buildings/Units:
- Crofts instead of Manor Houses (spawns a Sheep instead of Settler when built)
- Scottish Targeteers instead of Longbowmen - Claymore and Targe (small shield) melee Light Infantry.
- Frame Guns instead of Rockets. A frame with multiple gun barrels. Closer-ranged and faster firing than a Heavy Gun, it is a weaker (and less Population-taking) artillery unit that emphasises the more mid-close range fighting the Scots variant use.
- Highlanders? British - Scottish get the same shipments, i.e. Highlanders and Church techs.
Age-up Politicians:
A number of British Politicans are swapped out for a more Scottish-focused ones (ideally 1 per age), for example:
Highland Chieftain (replaces Naturalist) - Ships 1 Sheep + all built Crofts spawn a single sheep each
The Covenanter General (replaces Mercenary Contractor) - adds Redshank* mercenaries to Tavern and changes Priests to Field-Preachers, who get nearby units fired-up with religious fervor (boosting health points).
The Jacobite Leader - (replaces King’s Musketeer) Ships 10 Scottish Targeteers
The Scottish Industrialist (replaces The General) - 3 Frame Guns
*Redshank Mercenaries - new Light Infantry merc armed with Shortbow and Lochaber Axe. Similar to Iron Troops in function however more like Irish Brigadiers in Combat promotion, pop & Coin cost as well as being ‘weaker’ mercs.
What else?
Ottoman - Mamluks - The Mamluks did their own thing under Ottoman rule so an Egyptian Ottoman offshoot is a civ that works best as a variant of the Ottomans rather than a unique civ.
Further afield, the Aztec - Tlacopan (or any other of the Triple Alliance)
This could also help with new civs in the future…
For example, if we were to see Morocco you can make Barbary States a variant of them (or, again the Ottomans)
Again, just to reiterate - this is no way a replacement for proper civs. Persia being a variant is absolutely the wrong thing to do (and rather offensive!) - it’s a diverse. unique and powerul civ. However, real-world civs, factions, orders, whatever, that were being governed by another but had it’s own characteristics are prime candidates (though, I’d steer away from a nation’s particular army or fleet being a sub-faction - it works better with real nations/identities within larger rule).
2 Likes
I think the differences are:
- The roster of options you choose before the game which you cannot change later (civs, decks, or potential “variant civs”)
- The roster of options you are given during the game (cards, revolutions, upgrade options)
1 Like
- Maltese civ could have Sicilian Variant
- Italians civ could have numerous Variants such as Venice, Tuscany, Papal States, Sicily and etc.
- Swedes civ could have Finnish and Livonian Variants
- Brits civ could have a Scotish and Irish Variant
- Spanish civ could have a Aragonian Variant
- Ottomans civ could have a Egyptian, Bosnian, Bulgarian and much more Variants
- Russians civ could have a Cossack / Ruthenian Variant
- French civ could have a Valois, Bonaparte and Richelieu Variants
- Dutch civ could have a Belgian Variant
- Germans civ could have numerous Variants such as Austrian, Prussian, Saxonian, Bavarian and etc.
- Portuguese civ ?
- Poles civ could have a Lithuanian, Warsaw Duchy and Cossack / Ruthenian Variants
- Danes civ could have a Norwegian Variant
- A Germans civ split could provide even more depth and better representation with Variants. The Prussians civ would have German Variants (like Bavarian, Saxonian, Swabian and etc.) and the Austrians civ would have Romanian, Slavic and Hungarian Variants.
1 Like
I’d rather have the first. Compartmentalizes things more.
Please don’t bring that cancer from AoE 4 of naming a civ from a single person name to AoE 3.
7 Likes
No one has advocated for that. I’m pretty sure we’d all agree that if a variant civ is made it should be like The Order of the Dragon and not Joan the maid.
1 Like