Isnt Turks and Turkic different tho? I am not sure but isnt Turks like anatolia and that area and Turkic all the nations that deprived from the Turkic tribes who migrated?
Not all Italy, besides northen italian cities, even under the influence of HRE, they still had their own culture and identity. Venice, Florence, Milan, got really relevant during renaissance, and if that’s a new age in the game, Italians should be included. And about Vikings, dutch and slavs, they would be nice to have, but not a must for the base game I think.
1 Like
Almost have of Italy was for a long time part of the Hre, even when the renaissance came around. Napels also was a time part of the Hre just like corsica, sardinia and sicilly. And technically if the HRE is in the game italians are too.
This would be different if just like the previous games it is the actual people they do instead of really nations. For example Franks instead of Frankia, Teutons instead of HRE (appeariantly they are supossed to be that), Japanese instead of Japan etc. Than if Germans were to be added Italians can too.
The part about Slavs was just that i think it is different area then nordic, same for Dutch point about location.
Yes, I agree with the people as civilizations, germans, italians, french, etc. A DLC that covers Vikings, slavs, dutch and celts would be suitable too, even if the nations have a different culture group.
It is better to make specific nations than to name by country that has changed its name through history. so it is necessary to have German Italians, etc. because it is historically more correct and accurate to call them by the name of the people, not the country or ethnic origin, precisely because of the large period of time the game covers. And in the interviews we saw that they called them English and Mongols, so I think that’s the logic we should follow when talking about possible civs.
Thats what i said… Maybe not clear enough but atleast thats what i ment, all AoE titles have done it, but i wouldnt mind being it actual nations.
With people you have it that it doesnt matter if a nation existed the whole time period of the game, because the people most likely did.
But with the new AoE IV there are probably going to be a lot less civs then AoE II, perhaps around the same as AoE III. This means that a lot of people groups, will be left out, but if you include the nations, for example HRE, you have the Dutch, Swiss, Germans, Italians, Czechs and Silesians in one.
So to be honest i am split on it. Also dont know if there could be like a have have. Having nations like HRE but also peoples like Saracens or something.
1 Like
it is impossible to create a slav as a civ because it would be just like having germanic civ that include German, English … or Roman civilization instead of Spain, Italy, France … The differences are huge I think in addition to the above, they should simply choose one.
Going for the straigh forwards answer:
- Chinese
- French
- Persia
- Arabs
- Deutsch
- Indians
- Ottomans
- English
- Japanese
- Russian
For the real answers, we’de need to know the real purpose of age IV … will it be a prettier version of AOE2? or a whole new concept?
2 Likes
To the look of it, a whole new concept (as far as I know a civ not having acess to a whole age is a first in the Age series)
Deutsch are a renaissance power so are the Ottomans.
Persia is a antiquity power not medieval(only for a very short time). Japanese also insignificant.
India was ruled by various Turkic dynasties(Delhi Sultanate+Baburids)
1 Like
I can’t imagine medieval Europe without Turks, Germans and Persians, I’m not talking about the names of countries or dynasties because they have changed. It is very difficult to find a country that has existed in such a wide time range that this game covers.
1 Like
The thing is Persians didnt possess a state like almost entire of their medieval history. If we accept medieval era as 500-1500, their last proper state was Sassanids which fell in 651 AD.
So Persians have like 151 years in medieval era and that was mostly the falling period of Sassanids.
After that Iran was ruled by first Arab then Turkic then Mongol then again Turkic dynasties.
If you check the Arab caliphates(Rashidun-Ummayad-Abbasid) you can see they all built up on the Persian state culture. They took their institutions and culture.
I want there to be Vikings or Norse men
2 Likes
I think Vikings should be in the base game
They have to have Vikings. They could do SO MANY cool campaign stories with it.
“Deutsch are a renaissance power” Are you kidding me? The Holy Roman Empire was like the strongest and biggest Empire in Europe in the medieval era. Had almost constant conflict between the pope about the rights of apointing bishops. Fought numerous wars and dominated most politics.
-
Germans
-
French
-
Spanish
-
Portuguese/Brazilians
-
Turks/Ottomans
-
Russians
-
Chinese
-
Japanese
-
Mongols
-
English
-
Malians (or another generic African Civ, maybe Suaheli or Congo)
-
Aztecs (or another generic Native American/ Polynesian Civ)
As I assume, that the game wont be covering the same timeframe as AoE II because the devs said there will be new history to be discovered. I think it will be the 1000 until 1800 timeframe unlike the 400 till 1600 timeframe of AoE II. And because the number of civs will be limited I would be surprised to see a totally new civ in the pool, so there would be not much new history to cover that way. In addition the most AoE-viable things happened anyhow in that timeframe. And it would make AoE 4 more unique and less of a remake of AoE II
And if we look at which are the most important empires in that timeframe I come up with the upper. Russians for instance become way more important now compared to AoK on the other hand Vikings, Celts, Goths, Huns are out of that timeframe. Byzantines dont have late-game in that case aswell-.Mongols for instance will absorb all steppe identity what they already did for AoK. As will Chinese South- and South-East, East-Asia. Japanase will be there ofc simply because of the Samurai. As well we get rid of the Persians/Arabs and jam all muslims into the more important for the 19th and 20th century period Ottomans.
In a nut-shell AoE 4 will use a lot of civs as short-hand to simulate a world which is easier to understand by normal players. On the other hand I dont think we wont see any African or Native American Civ, but we will have at least one civ from every part of the world, just to balance out the Euro-Centrism that would naturally come if we only focus on the colonial powers.
PS: Sorry for breaking the assumption, but I think it will be 12 civs. If it really rigidly needs to be ten, then erase 11 and 12
You assume there are campaigns 
Thats one big of an assumption for the game that wants primarily to fill in the niche of rts-competetive MP that SC2 left after it fell to pieces in 2016. Coincidentially MS announced AoE 4 half a year later together with all DEs of the OG series as little PR event to promote that they found their property randomly in their cellar 
I think they will keep the campaigns in AoE II/III as they are mainly SP games and also there are rumours that a campaign only expansion might be on the way somewhen next year for AoE II DE.
Well, i just leave a a statement from one of the interviews here:
“Our time period is the Middle Ages, but it’s slightly bigger – on both ends – than the time period from Age II,” creative director Adam Isgreen tells us. “So we start a little bit earlier than Age II’s time and we go a little bit further, kind of bumping up against the early Renaissance. We’re not going to give you specific dates, because then people would be like ‘ohmygod the campaigns must be this if the dates are this’, and we’re not talking about campaigns. I’d love to, and I could , but I’m not allowed to.”
(source https://www.pcgamesn.com/age-of-empires-4/time-period)
As far as i understood their plans they are focusing on more different/unique civs. So i guess we dont see that many civs that are closely similar in playstyle(euro-centric countries).
It would be pretty surprising to see no campaings. See the above statement - it kinda tells you that campaigns are present.
1 Like
Well, if they only choose civs that are so different that they never met historically they cant make campaigns except silly fantasy campaigns. And I dont think they would interfere with AoE II campaigns at all.