Interesting concept.
But honestly, I don’t know how I would feel about it as a playable civ in AoE III, from a historical standpoint.
Yes, US and Mexico are opening new doors, but colonization of these lands took place much earlier. Additionally and with all respect for Australia’s natives- there was much more historical and cultural background since day0 (especially when we’re talking about warfare and general focus of AoE series), even before the symbolic date of 1492.

I’ve never studied very early days of Australia’s history, but when it comes to strategy games in my mind I don’t take it into account in anything before WW1. Mayflower reached America 168 years before Brit colonial ships did that in Australia.
1788 is veeery close to the edge of AoE III’s timeframe (1800, 1850-ish?), and we already have Brits in game :slight_smile:
Commonwealth of Australia didn’t exist before 1900 and that’s imho WW1-period territory already.

Not saying it shouldn’t be included or it wouldn’t be fun, but I don’t feel as strongly about it as I do about some other potential candidates that existed (under different names) often many centuries before 1492.
Not that historical importance or lifespan should be a deciding factor, but something should.

Names of civs are a bit of a mess in AoE games in general, in AoE3 they are names of ethnic groups, and as I’ve mentioned already in this context it’s hard to justify ‘Australians’ in anything before 1901. Just my two cents.


WW1 was the first war of independent Australia. so yeah i agree, i dont think the faction makes a lot of sense.

its a lot of effort put into this idea, but by the end of the day at some point you have to put the foot down and being a dominion even by the end of the games timeframe (1876) makes it a pretty big no in my opinion.


I would not put Australia as a civ (it became independent only in 1901), but I do not rule out that it could appear as a revolution of the British and the Dutch…the civs that I would put would be the Maori (1500-1872) who settled in New Zealand between 1460 and 1500 and the kingdom of Hawaii (1810-1894),who was created in 1810 (would be as old as Mexico more or less)…


I have to say to be completely honest as well I’m more of a fan of O.G AoE3’s aesthetic and was a litle annoyed with the Asian, US, and the African civs as each was added with how they sort of bend and maybe break the original tone and time period of the game. These thoughts are just my ideas of what I think will happen, but my ideal situation would probably be more like the addition of a few Australian themed maps and an Australian revolution option for the Brits, Dutch, and maybe French - with my ideas for that outlined in my reply above. Adding Australia as a revolution I think fits nicely with the revolution civs being basically on the tail end of the time period.


I have one final revision I wanted to post just because I’ve been thinking about this a lot and have been really enjoying playing Mexico:

Australia as a revolution option for the French, Dutch, and British, to replace the US. We already have a US civ so it’s a bit weird having the US as a revolutionary option still, and Australia fits into the timeline as a revolution civ (late 1700s) very well, alongside South Africa (mid-late 1700s) and Canada (late 1700s). Australia as a revolutionary option would work like those two nations too, with an emphasis on economic viability after revolution, but differs a little in that villagers do transform into revolutionary units. Australia’s niche would be in a normal style revolutionary rush, but with the ability to quickly rebuild their economy by shipping mass convicts to replace missing settlers.

They would not be as powerful as South Africa in a long game due to their lack of military upgrades, but would have a little more staying power than the Canadians due to their focus on economic upgrades.

I stuck to the OG DE style 9 card revolution deck, which after playing a lot of Mexico seems fairly limited, but at least makes it balanced when compared to the Canadian and South African 9 card decks.

Settlers become ‘Stockmen’ on revolution, which would be pretty much the same as the Bear Flag/California Californios but without the lasso.


  1. Pastoralism → 7 Sheep + 1 Homestead wagon (infinite)
  2. Eureka Stockade → fortifications build much faster, allows miners to build military buildings, and ships 10 miners
  3. Bushrangers → Ships an assortment of outlaws (infinite)
  4. 25 Convicts → Free, numerous settlers that become enemy minutemen when defeated (infinite)
  5. Ballarat Gold Fields → ships 1x gold prospector wagon and 10 miners. Allows miners to be trained at the town center and increases their gather rate
  6. Broken Hill Company → ships 2x silver prospector wagons (infinite)
  7. Stockyards → livestock fatten 30% faster
  8. Outback stations → allows livestock pens to automatically harvest fully fattened animals and removes the livestock cap
  9. TEAM Burke and Willis expedition → reveals the entire map and provides books worth 800xp

I think that’s pretty much the best version I can come up with. There’s a dozen other things you could emphasise with early Australian colonial history to change the civ’s niche, but I think the most important things are convicts as cheap settlers and a lackluster military. The number of convicts you get and what they cost (if anything) would be where you’d have to focus any balancing. I er on the side of letting them be very numerous and free, considering that revolutions are a pretty late game function and a player who revolts needs to be able to be able to get on and remain on the attack asap if they want to win.

Anyway that’s all I wanted to put down. I can finally let it go…


I posted a reply to someone else here → Australians civ and Oceanian maps - #3 by TheSquidEmpire

where I brainstormed some ideas for an Australian architecture set and I decided to do a concept illustration of how it might look like for the discovery/commerce/industrial house:

I get the feeling that a custom architecture set is just too much work for the DE devs to do considering they’ve avoided it for pretty much every new civ (except the incans) but it’s fun to speculate and imagine : )


I really like this idea :smiley: its a good way to represent that they are convicts


I love this civ suggestion (I’m totally biased though), and would defo buy it as a DLC, whereas I haven’t coughed up for Mexico or KotM yet.

I don’t see the fact that Australia didn’t become a federated nation until 1901 a problem. Is there a rule somewhere that says a civilisation can’t be an offshoot of another? There’s already USA, Mexico and AOE2 Burgundy…
I agree that an Australian civ shouldn’t progress beyond ~1850, and don’t see the shortness of their existence to that point a problem either. The Incan empire lasted a mere hundred years, and the Aztecs only twice that. The AOE3 community now seems to be about strict factual accuracy, but the game never was originally. It was a wonderful hypothetical “what if” North America was fought for and settled by any European colonial power, not just the British. Time frames and historical accuracy became more elastic with each new expansion. Why can’t that still be the case?

I’d always wanted to see this “what if” approach applied to Australia. Although it was the British who colonised the content, it was done so in haste because France was making its own plans to colonise. The Dutch, Spanish and Portugese had been sailing the waters around the continent well before Cook claimed it for England. And shortly after the ~1850 cut-off date for the game, Chinese and Japanese flocked south to make their fortunes. To not play out this “what if” in the Great Southern Land would be such a missed opportunity.

The obvious caveat though is that First-Nation consultation would need to be conducted, as the colonisation of Australia swiftly led to the genocide of its original inhabitants. Let’s not forget the arrival of Europeans in Australia was far from rosy.

If I can throw a few suggestions, ancillary to The Squid Empires supurb civ idea, to bring Australian maps to life:

  • kangaroos - huntable animal, respawns elsewhere each time one is killed (representing their ########### essentially making them an infinte foodsource.
  • emus - huntable animal. Attracted to farms, haciendas and the OP’s “station” suggestion, where they consume your food supply, and multiply if left unchecked. If allowed to reach large numbers they can render farms useless by consuming more food than is being produced. (Inspired by the Emu Wars saga - look it up!)
  • thylacine (Tasmanian tiger) - won’t attack human or horse units, but will attack herdables that walk past it. Killing them generates a small amount of gold (representing the bounty placed on them that led to their extinction)
  • crocodiles - the same as already exist in the game, attacks all human units without provocation and also attacks any herdable that walks past.
  • cassowaries - attracted to berry bushes and attack any settlers that get too close.

And some of the purely decorative animals:

  • colour the white swans black
  • turn some of the bird flock animations into cockatoo flocks

Afaik “Digger” has been used in Australia since the mid 19th century, would probably make a better unique unit name than an unit simply named “Trooper”

1 Like

the USA and mexico where actually independent in the games time periode and the USA arguably ended the game as a great power.

while i wish we had gotten other nations over them they still have a lot more going for them than australia does.

the barrier for entry into AOE2 is also lower since that game has like 40 factions, and at least burgundy did something and was de facto independent.

the inca are unique as a culture, and the largest native empire in the americas, that alone makes them worthy to be added.

by that point we certainly are moving into the territory of fantasy. and really at this point it seems more like you want a map pack (which why not?) rather than a faction. australian and new zealand maps could be cool.


@coconutcrab1234 it’s cool to hear about your interest, thanks for saying so :grinning:
I like your animal suggestions! Of course emus and red kangaroos would be the best for flock animals. I think the idea of hunting predators (like aoe2?) is interesting but wouldn’t it be more consistent to just have them as treasure guardians? Tasmanian tigers and devils, inland taipans, and cassowaries would all make nice treasure guardians :wink:

@HoopThrower I’ve actually never heard of digger being used before WW1. Imo even if it was I’m pretty sure the word is strongly associated with the world wars. It’d be like calling the US regular a doughboy… I get Trooper is pretty vauge but the idea I was going for was like the police troopers in early Australian history e.g. in waltzling matilda.

@jonasnee4671 I agree with your arguments RE the Inca, US and Mexico. My dream would be something like a (south pacific and Australia) map pack, a bunch of new native settlements to go with, and a full revolution option for various euro civs (Brits, French, Dutch, Ports) to go to Australia. Now that we’ve seen how in-depth the French revolution option was made to be, I’m sure we could get a full-on unique Australian civ revolution that would make it a “semi-civ” in a way that fits both the time period and gameplay!

I wrote it in a different thread a while back but here’s my ideas for maps I think would be a good varied representation of the south pacific + Australia:

  • Daintree → dense rainforest with coral coast teeming with fish and crocodiles.
  • Van Dieman’s Land → A large heavily forested island with a vital coastal trade route at the north. Everyone starts at the South, or even just with settlers in a boat - like a nomad start.
  • Auralia → Goldfields and the Nullabor, rocky map with coast along the south and NO TREES but a lot of gold mines. There would have to be some map gimmick to supply wood, like everyone starts with a market or there are crates scattered around.
  • Pohnpei → A tiny island where players start really close to each other for a quick, brutal game.
  • Fiordland → A cold coast rising to huge snowy mountains with forest inbetween.
  • Solomon Islands → Each player gets a small island to start on and there are numerous other small islands scattered around for settling (this was my idea before archipelago was added. Now instead I guess it could be so that every player has their own island and there are no small islands…?)
Additional Australian map ideas...
  • Simpson desert → the hot red centre of Australia. Lake Eyre is in the center of the map and is almost always dry, allowing troop movement, but is sometimes full of pinkish water, changing the game completely.
  • Outback → scrubby grasslands - like Great Plains, with wild sheep, but no trade route
  • Blue Mountains → very rugged mountainous terrain with only patches of flat ground suitable for building on, and a long winding trade route
  • Kimberley → rugged coastline with a rocky and cliffy inland. The only mines are diamond mines
  • Botany Bay → the location of the first British colony in Australia. A wide open bay with many whales and a gentle and lush shoreline with plenty of resources.

The Tropical North of Australia. The dense jungles hide cassowaries and scattered copper and silver mines, as well as plenty of wood to chop. There is a murky river separating the teams that has no crossings - it’s too dangerous to wade in the crocodile-infested waters! The coastal waters teem with tropical fish in the coral reefs.

Van DIeman’s Land
The island at the bottom of the world. Teams start close but unable to reach each other through dense forests of Antarctic beech, mountain ash, and Huon pine. There is a vital trade route at the north, as well as many lost sheep.

The Nullarbor plains of Australia. Players will have plenty of gold available to mine, but only scattered emu flocks to hunt - and absolutely NO TREES to chop! The Great Australian Bight loom at the bottom of the map, but the high cliffs and churning sea means there’s no way to build docks.

(p.s. thanks to @M00Z1LLA for his map template! Polynesian Maps - #16 by M00Z1LLA )


I think adding an Australian civ, and a Polynesian civ would be great fun. Maps would obviously be included but the civs are the meat and potatoes.

1 Like

One thing I was thinking about as a cool idea for AOE3 in general but which now I think would apply especially well to an Australian civ/revolution option would be mines as a replacement for plantations. Obviously you can’t just have an underground mine villagers disappear into because then you’re unraidable.

My thought is that you’d be able to build (or get via shipments?) a small number of “prospecting shafts” on the map at a time which would after a while create a new mine - e.g. silver, copper, coal, gold - with rarer mines less likely. The new mine would replace the shaft I imagine and then you’d be allowed to sink a new shaft somewhere else. Perhaps there’s a build radius rule too, so they can’t be placed too near exisiting mines or shafts.

For an Australian civ I think they should be unable to build plantations and instead have to rely on mines and possibly livestock (maybe a card that makes sheep worth gold instead of food + you get a new free “shorn” sheep when you harvest a fattened one?).
Perhaps by default an Australian civ gets a new prospecting shaft wagon each age up who can sink a new shaft? More carts might be available from cards or from the capital (parliament) building if you reach age 5. Perhaps there could be economic cards to power up prospecting shafts, e.g. they strike their mines faster, or they are more likely to strike a better resource.

For a revolutionary version of Australia I would have an infininte card in the deck that ships 1-2 prospecting shaft wagons. It would be balanced similarly to the South African diamond mine in my mind.

My concept for an Age 2-3 prospecting shaft

My concept for an Age 4-5 prospecting shaft


I’ve been working on a further architecture concept for an Australian civ town centre. I didn’t want to post it until I’d finished the whole set but with the PUP coming up there’s a slim chance they’re announcing something to do with Australia so I thought I better post what I have just in case…

My concept for a Discovery Age Australian civ town centre


Love the art. Really captures the vibe

1 Like

It would be odd to add australia before you have persians or moroccans or danes.


Given that the OP was making concept art I thought he was planning to mod the civ in himself. But apparently he legitimately believes FE is planning a playable Australia civ which, well, it’s kinda funny in an endearing way,

Civ design is rather uninspired (by his own admission, he only plays European civs), but there’s solid ideas and the art’s gonna be useful some day for sure.


I like this idea more than having Australia be a whole civilization like the US and Mexico. The modern nation of Australia is a bit too recent (1901 AD) of a development to be represented in the earlier ages of the game.

That said, a DLC set in Oceania would still be neat. The Maori and Hawaiians at least have potential to be fully playable civilizations, but I think Aboriginal Australian nations would work best as Native tribes to ally with since their nomadic foraging cultures might be tough to translate into playable empires.


Yes, I think an Oceanic dlc would include Maori and Hawaiians…so nothing from Australia…

honestly if I knew even the first thing about modding I would totally give it a go! I’m sure it would be a lot of fun

I finished my town centre concepts! It took me ages to come up with a design for the middle ages. In the end I’m really happy with the design :grinning: