A South African civ would not be surprising. Not sure why he believes it would be an European-South-African civ though.
I do not know what to think about it. I doubt that the creators would add Boers in the DLC about Africa - especially when everyone was expecting the Zulus or the Kingdom of Mutapa.
Rather, the Boers will not be in this DLC, especially since the Dutch civ is already in the game (besides, the Dutch have a South African revolution), everyone is waiting for a black civ from South Africa.
6 Likes
If the Boers are the third African civilization to be revealed, this was not an intelligent idea, as they are not an African civilization, but a European civilization installed in Africa. If it’s the Zulus, it’s not an important civilization in the main timeline, but at least it’s a truly African civilization that was important for a short period of time. There are so many options for African civilizations! There is the kingdom of Congo, the kingdom of Oyo, the kingdom of Dahomey, the Swahili sultanates, the kingdom of Mutapa, the Sudanese, the Somalis… There is no reason to add another European civilization, or one of European architecture. We gamers will get sick of seeing the same architectures and units!
9 Likes
i wouldn’t take Jaegers “leaks” to serious, he has found no units to back it up, all he got is the name “belfast”. another thing to keep in mind is that he is often wrong or miss understands his own “leaks”, such as the time he found campaign flags and understood them to be new factions.
i think if we see boers it is more likely to be as native to specific maps.
10 Likes
Yeah, this is more an educated guess than a leak.
I still think we will get Hausa - Ethiopians and maybe Zulu, hopefully alongside a small campaign.
2 Likes
To be honest Swahili belong to Age of Empires 2. The Swahili coast was conquered by the Portuguese in the early 16th century. In the late 16th century the Somalis and Ottomans liberated the cities, such as Kilwa and Mombasa, later on Portuguese reconquered the coast. Then the Omani Empire conqered the Swahili coast from the Portuguese in the 17th century. Mutapa Empire is a weird choice as well, because their history is not recorded and the Portuguese dominated them.
1 Like
So exactly like the Lakota.
1 Like
Sorry,USA is earlier than Kingdom of Italy and German Empire.
USA gained independence in 1783,about late of 18 centuries and play a heavy role at North America continent in 19 centuries where is located main maps,especially multiple relations with Lakota,otherwise you can’t explain why the Lakota has so advanced rifle cavalries and men with train,Comanchero,Pistolero,Renegado etc.
If you think USA is weird you should blame the developers made Lakota a full Civ,and according many people’s logic on the forums, “Native” never should become the full Civs from beginning.
3 Likes
I always thought the Lakota was a little weird as an inclusion. The Sioux made more sense. But at least the Lakota existed for longer than the US and their civ wasn’t a direct offshoot of an existing civ in the game such that it breaks the themes of the game.
Not sure what your point is here.
1 Like
This is a laugh and a half
USA was massively irrelevant in the timeframe of aoe3.
2 Likes
If the developers do as you said,every “Native” shouldn’t has horse and rifle regardless its full or minor Civ,so everything are WEIRD from 2005 and 2006.
Because many people talking about “TIMELINE” almost everyday,the only thing I can say is reminding everyone not to double standards to review any Civ.
That’s why they shouldn’t launch The WarChiefs especially Act II: Shadow from 2006.
1 Like
Many Native Americans and First Nations peoples did have horses and muskets prior to US independence.
Also the German Empire and Kingdom of Italy aren’t playable civs in the game, barring one ill-advised reference to needle gunners.
1 Like
That’s why it was able to throw off one of the biggest if not THE biggest Empire in the world at the time. And it quickly became one of the strongest nations in the world. I don’t think it should be in the game but timeline issues is not one of my reasons
1 Like
You probably mean from a military perspective.
But then again, there were no notable wars between countries after the industrial revolution and the napoleonic wars, most western Europe countries realized that it is easier to gain power through commerce and technological advancement, rather than the direct battles that were specific to the middle and dark ages.
Sure, there were conflicts, mostly in the eastern europe, where Russians and ottomans were poking each other and drawing other european nations in their own conflicts, but most armed conflicts were revolutions.
I am quite surprised that Africa is actually getting its own DLC. The affrican cultures in this time frame were essentially doing what they still do today (in some parts): killing each other and human trafficking to further allow killing each other. I am quite curious how the devs will handle the issue of slavery in portraying these civilizations.
4 Likes
You’re right with the horse particularly Lakota using the horse since 1730s,but what about advanced rifle?
Because German do exist in the game with Frederick the Great who is the Prussian leader(German Empire is base on Prussia),and many people wants Italy Civ,so I have to remind them.
These arguments are caused by Age series never define PEOPLE and COUNTRY clearly,so everyone always make part sense but no one is totally right or wrong.
The game is not stuck in time. You age up and eventually, you get access to those. That way, the game reflects the fact Riffles are something that came up latter in time.
I think you are confused. The German Empire is a Sate that exits starting in 1871. But the German civ is a mix of Austria and Prussia, both of which existed way before USA, though it’s true Frederick the Great is a latter ruler, like Napoleon for exemple. Everyone understand the French civ represents France during all the time frame and changes of government (French Kingdom, Republic and Empire) and not the French Empire under Napoleon exclusively.
2 Likes
I’d be disappointed if the Boers are included not because of any woke nonsense but because there are plenty of civs I think are more deserving.
Moroccans for example are already half done.
3 Likes