They weren’t persians.Look at wikipedia
Wikipedia says their(Safavid’s) official language is Persian.
Despite their demise in 1736, the legacy that they left behind was the revival of Iran as an economic stronghold between East and West, the establishment of an efficient state and bureaucracy based upon “checks and balances”, their architectural innovations and their patronage for fine arts. The Safavids have also left their mark down to the present era by spreading Twelver Islam in Iran, as well as major parts of the Caucasus, Anatolia, and Mesopotamia.
List of dynasties described as Persian
- Achaemenid Empire (550–330 BC)
- Sasanian Empire (224–651 AD)
- Safavid dynasty (1501–1736 AD)
- Afsharid dynasty (1736–1796 AD)
- Zand dynasty (1751–1794 AD)
- Qajar dynasty (1785–1925 AD)
2 Likes
If limited to just ten civs I would very much prefer the Franks over the French.
It sounds like a nitpick, but the Frank empire that peaked with Charles the Great is seen as the starting place of both the powerful French nation and the Holy Roman Empire/Germany. This makes it the pick for a Western European knight civ in an artificially limited field. If you squint hard enough it’s even sort of maybe a little representative for the Belgians and Dutch as Charles’ capital in Aachen sits very close to their borders and he was generally concerned with those areas and peoples as well. With more civs the opposite case can be made, how can you have proper French-German wars if they are both represented by the same faction?
P.S. Todays historical fun fact: some historical "the Great"s are named after being a great leader, but Charles the Great was actually a very large man. His father however was known as Pepin the Short. I feel like there is some basis for a pseudo-historical star crossed lovers novel about Charles’ mother in there somewhere. (Sorry Charles, I will stop saying bad things about your mother.)
4 Likes
The Kurdish languages belong to the northwestern sub‑group of the Iranian languages.
1 Like
kurdishs aren’t iranian,they are a different nation.also safavids established at ardabil,south azerbaijan.and ardabil mostly speak azarbaijan language.also azerbaijan regard safaris as their ancestors
So Wikipedia is wrong?
i don’t know
20 character
maybe they were iran origin,but their culture very different from iran
this is what I meant. Iran is one of the
1 Like
okay
twenty character
Seems more like the actually lineup
i think that if the mongols are in, the slavs should be too(cause history)
the Saracens, Turks, Persians and maybe Tatars should be too with probably Italy, France, the Brits(which are already in) and like major Crusader civs.
Teutons would be great to see again
Japan, China and basically more eastern civs would be good too
2 Likes
Scenario wise it’s good to always have at least three civs that can operate in the same theatre of war, with those theatres preferably being big cultural hubs.
If they do an American hub civ 1 and 2 could be Aztecs and Mayans, or Incas could be one of them. Olmec or Sioux or something is probably a bit farfetched. Civ 3 could then be a colonial power, Spanish, Portugese, maybe Italians or Britts.
An East Asian hub could be Chinese as civ 4, Japanese or Koreans as civ 5 and Mongols as civ 6.
Mongols invade Europe, so we already have two civs for our European theatre. If we add Turks as civ 7 that unlocks the Middle East as a fourth hub, making civ 8 and 9 something like Arabs and Persians.
At this point we could use civ 10 to do something from Africa, because their counter sits at zero so far. We could also try to represent South Asia with them. But on the other hand a European theatre made up of Spanish (or such), Turks and Mongols is also kind of weird, the Spain or such civ is too isolated. So something like Franks yo round them out (even if it’s a bit weird to mix old-name and new-name civs) would work too. I guess Slavs would be an even better pick for fighting both Mongols and Turks, but I’m not sure the world is ready for a medieval combat game with no proper Western European knights. Plus with the Franks we can have crusades.
So something like Mayans, Aztecs, Spanish, Chinese, Japanese, Mongols, Turks, Arabs, Persians and Franks. That would be my list I think.
4 Likes
Britain did have knights and crusades tho.
2 Likes
1)Brits : already confirmed
2)Mongols : already confirmed
3)Spanish
4)Turks
5)Berbers
6)Franks
7)Germans HRE/TO
8)Latins(Byzantines/Roman/Italians)
9)Saracens/Arabs
10)Russians/Slaves
5 Likes
what is the difference between Franks and HRE?
Its basically germany and france. It would not be accurate to put them both in to one civi since its diverse from each other(language culture etc.)
Since the mongols are confirmed we should look at the game time zone being from 1200 to 1500 era provinding its more historically accurate than AOE2.
1 Like
so we should ignore chinese, japanese, indians, persians, africans? but include civilizations like Franks and HRE separately which were almost the same thing?
1 Like
Like someone said earlier they will become DLC much like AOE3
I hope to see a full South asian DLC whcih dosent put everyone from mughals to tamils in one group.
Blockquote but include civilizations like Franks and HRE separately which were almost the same thing?
You cant have a medievela game with out Germany France Italy and England.You can say all of europe is germanic,much like how some people think all of india is one people.
2 Likes