Austria & Germany poll

[Skadidesu]

I don’t think they want to add a 3rd civ to the DLC.

There is also the general question of how to make the German DLC work.
Since some of the content would be moved from Germany to Prussia people that don’t buy the DLC would lose access to it.
But then again when India was split up in AoE2 people lost access to the Elephant Archer and there wasn’t a big drama because of that.

And yes I know that an Indian split would be hard but current India is kinda bad, the same with China tbh.
Bad as in bad design not bad balance.

[MUTYLATOR5553]

@Skadidesu

There is also the general question of how to make the German DLC work.
Since some of the content would be moved from Germany to Prussia people that don’t buy the DLC would lose access to it.

All this content that would have been moved to Prussians civ was recently added to Germans civ as part of an update. So it wouldn’t be a big loss since it’s not classic content.

@Skadidesu

But then again when India was split up in AoE2 people lost access to the Elephant Archer and there wasn’t a big drama because of that.

Just compare the complexity of the civs in AoE 2 with the civs in AoE 3. What is a big change in AoE 2 is something minor in AoE3. It’s just that AoE 3 has more complex civs, which makes them more asymmetric and unique than in AoE 2.

@Skadidesu

And yes I know that an Indian split would be hard but current India is kinda bad, the same with China tbh.
Bad as in bad design not bad balance.

Yes. They just wanted to cram as many things as possible into one civ.

Regarding the Chinese civ, there are also a lot of typical Mongolian things (for example: Steppe Rider, Keshik and Village) that could be moved to atruly asymmetric and complex completely new Turco-Mongol civ and replaced by new things.

[SirBarnzy1]

@MUTYLATOR5553

Well, I think that spliting Germans civ is much easier than spliting Indians civ for many reasons:

1. Changing Germans civ to Austrians civ is a trivial thing: it would mainly involve transferring the new content (also Berlin Home City and Frederick the Great AI Personality) from the update to the completely new Prussians civ and replacing it with content suitable for Austrian Empire and Austria-Hungary Empire (Vienna, Joseph II von Habsburg). This would mainly be the transfer of HC cards, the addition of RG skins and text and cosmetic changes in the Encyclopedia and HC. A minor change could also be to add more details to the current flag - such as coats of arms relating to the kingdoms that were under Habsburg rule.
2. Prussians civ would be a completely new civ that would receive some of the new content that was added in the last update. I will not write more details because I have talked about them many times.

And that’s it for the Germans civ split. It’s not difficult and could be a good warm-up and lesson for creators before Indians civ spliting. And this would be necessary for creators because:

I think on the Dev side of things a rebadge and tweak (i.e removal of Prussian linked items) of Germans to Austria is not so much the problem (though still a resource hog). The suggestion of Prussia is the bigger task - more so than the footnote it is added as to lots of German split posts.

Despite following the Euro template and fitting into existing architecture alongside moving Prussian-relevant units/cards to a new Prussian civ, the veneer of it being an easy job wears thin when Devs have to create a new civ with new traits and quirks, a set of new cards plus the time and money needed. With it’s proper due we’d just end up with almost variant level of two German civs.

[WhateverAbyss90]

@MUTYLATOR5553

Well, I think that spliting Germans civ is much easier than spliting Indians civ for many reasons:

1. Changing Germans civ to Austrians civ is a trivial thing: it would mainly involve transferring the new content (also Berlin Home City and Frederick the Great AI Personality) from the update to the completely new Prussians civ and replacing it with content suitable for Austrian Empire and Austria-Hungary Empire (Vienna, Joseph II von Habsburg). This would mainly be the transfer of HC cards, the addition of RG skins and text and cosmetic changes in the Encyclopedia and HC. A minor change could also be to add more details to the current flag - such as coats of arms relating to the kingdoms that were under Habsburg rule.
2. Prussians civ would be a completely new civ that would receive some of the new content that was added in the last update. I will not write more details because I have talked about them many times.

I agree with you but there is one problem. How can you take a currently available content away from a player and lock it under a paid DLC? It is not ethical.

Yes, you give a new homecity Vienna for free but you still take Berlin away and lock it together with Frederick AI which has been there since 2005. Same applies to Prussian needle gunner skin for example.or Prussian landwehr.

For this reason,I suggest a rework for current Germany to be similar to Mexico with earlier revolutions to evolve from HRE to Austria or Prussia. That seems easier and smoother.

[Skadidesu]

@MUTYLATOR5553

Regarding the Chinese civ, there are also a lot of typical Mongolian things

I think the best thing would be to split China into Ming and Qing.
They were different enough to be worth 2 different civilisations.
Mexicans and Aztecs are also 2 civilisations now.

Qing would basically exactly what the current China is with Banner Armies and a lot of cavalry units.
Ming would be a new civilisation that shares a bunch of units but has an Infantry focus and no Banner Armies.

[CanineCrown7153]

@Skadidesu

China into Ming and Qing.

@Skadidesu

Mexicans and Aztecs

These two things aren’t comparable. The first two are two dynasties of the same real world civilization and AoE3 civilizations aren’t split by dynasties

In the second case, Aztecs were a real world civ on their own who together with the Spanish formed what today is México

@MUTYLATOR5553

hence there is still an opportunity to influence the creators.

You don’t only need to influence the devs, but also the sizeable amount of people who don’t want a split

[M00Z1LLA]

That’s a terrible idea, both are clearly just China. It’s like saying the British should be split into Tudors and Hanoverians.

I would certainly love to see some more Ming units, but that should be within the existing civ. Replace the really dumb and anachronistic units with some Ming ones by turning Meteor Hammers to War Carts, or Flamethrowers to Rocket Pods, etc.

[Skadidesu]

@CanineCrown7153

These two things aren’t comparable. The first two are two dynasties of the same real world civilization and AoE3 civilizations aren’t split by dynasties

@M00Z1LLA

That’s a terrible idea, both are clearly just China. It’s like saying the British should be split into Tudors and Hanoverians.

The current China does not represent Ming at all.
It has a lot of Steppe People in it, which where never part of the Ming empire.

The Qing Dynasty was a Manchu dynasty it enforced a lot fo Manchu things on Chinese society like forcing them to have a Manchu hairstyle.

Yeah over time the Manchu leaders got more and more Chinese and the Manchu people adopted Chinese culture but it took time.

The difference between Ming and Qing is big enough to be worth 2 civilisations.
Also they fought against each other.

I hate it when AoE3 civs just give you units that never coexisted in the same age. No Halberds are not more modern then Muskets.

[MatM1996]

@M00Z1LLA

The only exception that you could reasonably argue for would be the Egyptians who were defacto independent.

And Romanians too…

@Skadidesu

Maybe we should talk about this topic again when people are not upset about only getting European DLC.
The last DLC was European and the next will be European again.
Most recent patches have focused on European civilisations (I count the Ottomans as European) while Asia has been neglected since TAD.

@MUTYLATOR5553

The problem is that now is the perfect time to split the Germans civ due to the upcoming Baltic DLC - if the Prussians civ were the third civ in this DLC and Germans civ would renamed into Austrians civ, there would be no need for any more civs from Europe. There is no better opportunity to do it - especially since we don’t really know anything about this DLC because nothing has been presented - hence there is still an opportunity to influence the creators.

@MUTYLATOR5553

• Changing Germans civ to Austrians civ is a trivial thing: it would mainly involve transferring the new content (also Berlin Home City and Frederick the Great AI Personality) from the update to the completely new Prussians civ and replacing it with content suitable for Austrian Empire and Austria-Hungary Empire (Vienna, Joseph II von Habsburg). This would mainly be the transfer of HC cards, the addition of RG skins and text and cosmetic changes in the Encyclopedia and HC. A minor change could also be to add more details to the current flag - such as coats of arms relating to the kingdoms that were under Habsburg rule.
• Prussians civ would be a completely new civ that would receive some of the new content that was added in the last update. I will not write more details because I have talked about them many times.

Yes, I agree…maybe they will do it in the future…

@MUTYLATOR5553

any more civs from Europe.

You still have Wallachians and the Greeks for a Balkan DLC… and Switzerland in the middle of the Alps which would be another reason to do the German rework…

@MUTYLATOR5553

And that’s it for the Germans civ split. It’s not difficult and could be a good warm-up and lesson for creators before Indians civ spliting. And this would be necessary for creators because:

1. Indians civ, unlike the Germans civ, is very complex (just like every other Asian civ compared to the European civs in AoE 3). I once created a topic about my thoughts on Indians civ spilit and I came to the conclusion that it would require huge changes that could radically change this civ. It is obvious that the current Indians civ should be the base for the Mughals civ, as it is mainly based on them.
2. Indians civ has a lot of content relating to the British Raj - this in itself is one of the main problems because people have no clear idea what to do with it. I am convinced that it could work on the principle of army modernization or it should become content available from the British Consulate. Some people are of the opinion that it should be cut out and moved to British civ as a revolution option, which I think is too wil and complicatedd.
3. If the current Indians civ were to be changed into Mughals civs, content (not only the units themselves but also buildings and etc.) relating to other nations would have to be moved to completely new civs or to completely new Minor Civilizations. The obvious candidate to be the second Indian civ is the Maratha/Dravidians, which would be more Hindi; Bengalis could be the third candidate for civ. The rest of the Indian subcontinent could be represented by the brand new category of Minor Civilizations that all of Asian Maps need.

These are the three main aspects/thoughts regarding Indians civ spiliting in my opinion. One thing is certain that the current Indians civ, unlike the current Germans civ, would not resemble their current selves after the rework.

Yes, it’s a whole issue with India…if they make a DoI for AoE 3 it will be a very big job…dividing India into Mughals and Marathas (the Bengalis were conquered by the Mughals in 1576 and the Dravidians would be just Ceylon, except that they cover the Marathas too)…and let’s not talk about the Indian campaign, we don’t know what they would do with it…

@Skadidesu

I don’t think they want to add a 3rd civ to the DLC.

We can forget about that because as soon as the DLC comes out they already focus on the next one…

@Skadidesu

And yes I know that an Indian split would be hard but current India is kinda bad, the same with China tbh.
Bad as in bad design not bad balance.

@MUTYLATOR5553

Yes. They just wanted to cram as many things as possible into one civ.

Yes, TAD and BHG stuff I guess…

@MUTYLATOR5553

All this content that would have been moved to Prussians civ was recently added to Germans civ as part of an update. So it wouldn’t be a big loss since it’s not classic content.

Yes, the content of the DE is easier to correct…

@MUTYLATOR5553

Just compare the complexity of the civs in AoE 2 with the civs in AoE 3. What is a big change in AoE 2 is something minor in AoE3. It’s just that AoE 3 has more complex civs, which makes them more asymmetric and unique than in AoE 2.

Yes, that’s what it is…

@MUTYLATOR5553

Regarding the Chinese civ, there are also a lot of typical Mongolian things (for example: Steppe Rider, Keshik and Village) that could be moved to atruly asymmetric and complex completely new Turco-Mongol civ and replaced by new things.

Well, these are things from the Manchu Qinq (in addition to China conquering Mongolia and the Dzungar Khanate during this period), but yes, you can move all that to Central Asian civs like the Kazakhs and Uzbeks…

@SirBarnzy1

I think on the Dev side of things a rebadge and tweak (i.e removal of Prussian linked items) of Germans to Austria is not so much the problem (though still a resource hog). The suggestion of Prussia is the bigger task - more so than the footnote it is added as to lots of German split posts.

Despite following the Euro template and fitting into existing architecture alongside moving Prussian-relevant units/cards to a new Prussian civ, the veneer of it being an easy job wears thin when Devs have to create a new civ with new traits and quirks, a set of new cards plus the time and money needed. With it’s proper due we’d just end up with almost variant level of two German civs.

Yes, maybe when they have more resources and personnel (and have brought the other important Asian civs into the game) then they will think about a German DLC…

@WhateverAbyss90

I agree with you but there is one problem. How can you take a currently available content away from a player and lock it under a paid DLC? It is not ethical.

Yes, you give a new homecity Vienna for free but you still take Berlin away and lock it together with Frederick AI which has been there since 2005. Same applies to Prussian needle gunner skin for example.or Prussian landwehr.

Yes, I hadn’t thought about it…

@WhateverAbyss90

landwehr

Well the landwehr could still fit because the Austro-Hungarian also used them in the 19th century…

The Imperial-Royal Landwehr (German: kaiserlich-königliche Landwehr or k.k. Landwehr), also called the Austrian Landwehr, was the territorial army of the Cisleithanian or Austrian half of the Austro-Hungarian Empire from 1869 to 1918. Its counterpart was the Royal Hungarian Landwehr (k.u. Landwehr). The two Landwehrs, together with the Common Army and the Imperial and Royal Navy, made up the armed forces (Bewaffnete Macht or Wehrmacht) of Austria-Hungary. While the name, “Imperial-Royal”, might seem to suggest a link between the “Imperial” (Cisleithanian) and “Royal” (Transleithanian or Hungarian) halves of the Empire, in this context “Royal” actually refers to the Kingdom of Bohemia ############ ####### ## ###### království)* - not a sovereign kingdom on par with the Kingdom of Hungary, but a crownland of Cisleithanian Austria-Hungary and possession of the Habsburgs, who remained formally entitled to kingship*.* In this sense, the Kingdom of Bohemia was comparable in status to the Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria and the Kingdom of Dalmatia.

Unlike the German Empire, where the Landwehr mainly comprised reservists and volunteers, the Imperial-Royal Landwehr consisted of regular units. It was fully established with regular troops and not partly mobilized or cadred. The Landwehr should not be confused with the Landsturm which was a volunteer militia.

During the Napoleonic Wars a Landwehr was established by imperial decree dated 9 June 1808 as a standing and common institution to complement the regular Austrian army. This army was used in 1809 and in 1813/14. In 1859, the Landwehr was abolished.

@WhateverAbyss90

For this reason,I suggest a rework for current Germany to be similar to Mexico with earlier revolutions to evolve from HRE to Austria or Prussia. That seems easier and smoother.

Yes, it could be…

@Skadidesu

I think the best thing would be to split China into Ming and Qing.
They were different enough to be worth 2 different civilisations.

@Skadidesu

Qing would basically exactly what the current China is with Banner Armies and a lot of cavalry units.
Ming would be a new civilisation that shares a bunch of units but has an Infantry focus and no Banner Armies.

And what are you doing with the Chinese campaign?..

@CanineCrown7153

These two things aren’t comparable. The first two are two dynasties of the same real world civilization and AoE3 civilizations aren’t split by dynasties

In the second case, Aztecs were a real world civ on their own who together with the Spanish formed what today is México

@M00Z1LLA

That’s a terrible idea, both are clearly just China. It’s like saying the British should be split into Tudors and Hanoverians.

Of course China is China, and it had different dynasties but it was still China… the Aztecs would be ancestors of the Mexicans (or rather a mixture between the Aztecs and the Spanish, which gave the Mexicans exactly three centuries later)…

@M00Z1LLA

I would certainly love to see some more Ming units, but that should be within the existing civ. Replace the really dumb and anachronistic units with some Ming ones by turning Meteor Hammers to War Carts, or Flamethrowers to Rocket Pods, etc.

That’s easier to do…although I don’t mind flamethrowers either, since there are plans for them back to at least the 17th century…

@Skadidesu

The current China does not represent Ming at all.
It has a lot of Steppe People in it, which where never part of the Ming empire.

You have the Chinese campaign in 1421… something is something I guess…

@Skadidesu

The Qing Dynasty was a Manchu dynasty it enforced a lot fo Manchu things on Chinese society like forcing them to have a Manchu hairstyle.

Yeah over time the Manchu leaders got more and more Chinese and the Manchu people adopted Chinese culture but it took time.

The difference between Ming and Qing is big enough to be worth 2 civilisations.
Also they fought against each other.

Yes, but not enough to split them into two civs, destroying the entire Chinese civ that has been accompanying us since 2007…

@Skadidesu

I hate it when AoE3 civs just give you units that never coexisted in the same age. No Halberds are not more modern then Muskets.

Well that can be done by exchanging their ages…the Halbs at 2nd age with the Pikes and the Musk at 3rd age…

[CanineCrown7153]

@Skadidesu

I hate it when AoE3 civs just give you units that never coexisted in the same age

It’s part of the Age of Empires experience. Scorpions and onagers never coexisted with trebuchets.

[SalarAdin]

The question that should be asked is:
Is Prussia a civilization? Answer: no.
What civilization is Prussia part of? Answer: Germany.
=> End of topic.

[EvilQuasar05641]

True is that - in AO3 we have Malta or Native Tribes but Habsburg Empire or Prussia no cause some people think that they are the same… For example have a german origins but have some own aspect bigger and bigger with subsequent centuries. Austria and Prussia - separate factions, both had big position in XVIII and XIX century. Habsburg Empire was also a multi-national with Croats , Hungarians , Slovaks , Czechs , Bosniaks , Slovenians. Prussia had only some Poles after partitions of Poland in late XVIII century ( Done with Russians and Austrians) , other german states didn’t had other nations in they borders ( maybe some Jews). I think that Devs should release content like : 2025 Asia Dlc , Zulu Flc , 2026 - South America Dlc , Habsburg Austria & Germany rework Dlc , 2027 - Africa Dlc , Asia second Dlc , Mayans Full Civ Flc , 2028 Zaporozhian Cossacks & Crimean Khanate , African Campaign , 2029 South American Campaign , Napoleonic Campaign.

[M00Z1LLA]

Is USA a civilization? Answer: No
What civilization is USA part of? Answer Anglo

Prussia and Austria are at least as different if not more than existing civs like Britain/America, Spain/Mexico, and Sweden/Denmark.

[MatM1996]

@CanineCrown7153

It’s part of the Age of Empires experience. Scorpions and onagers never coexisted with trebuchets.

Nor civilizations…the only historical part of the saga are the campaigns and historical battles and maps themselves, the rest is a great what if a la Civilization…

@EvilQuasar05641

True is that - in AO3 we have Malta or Native Tribes but Habsburg Empire or Prussia no cause some people think that they are the same… For example have a german origins but have some own aspect bigger and bigger with subsequent centuries. Austria and Prussia - separate factions, both had big position in XVIII and XIX century. Habsburg Empire was also a multi-national with Croats , Hungarians , Slovaks , Czechs , Bosniaks , Slovenians. Prussia had only some Poles after partitions of Poland in late XVIII century ( Done with Russians and Austrians) , other german states didn’t had other nations in they borders ( maybe some Jews). I think that Devs should release content like : 2025 Asia Dlc , Zulu Flc , 2026 - South America Dlc , Habsburg Austria & Germany rework Dlc , 2027 - Africa Dlc , Asia second Dlc , Mayans Full Civ Flc , 2028 Zaporozhian Cossacks & Crimean Khanate , African Campaign , 2029 South American Campaign , Napoleonic Campaign.

Yes, it would be good… although it would take a long time and campaigns I don’t think so, but big scenarios like in VaV could be…

[Amiya1998]

I’d like Austro Hungarian Empire and German.

[Notonline]

No and no.
Atleast attempt to answer the question propperly instead of strawmanning.

[Moonshadow7475]

@Skadidesu

I think the opinions on a potential German split or adding Austria and Prussia as new civilisations will be pretty different after the game for some more none European content.

No, this will never change. Austria will never be in game by its name, and people should give up on that. If devs wanted Austria and Prussia in game, they would have added them in KOTM instead of just giving royal houses.
At this point, any further conversation on this topic is pretty much spam.

[MUTYLATOR5553]

@M00Z1LLA

Is USA a civilization? Answer: No
What civilization is USA part of? Answer Anglo

Prussia and Austria are at least as different if not more than existing civs like Britain/America, Spain/Mexico, and Sweden/Denmark.

Let’s not forget about Malta, whose presence is problematic. - Sicilians civ would definitely make more sense.

If Malta is a civ, then anyone can be.

[MatM1996]

@Amiya1998

I’d like Austro Hungarian Empire and German.

The most likely thing is that it was the Austrian Empire and in the Imperial age it became the Austro-Hungarian Empire…

@MUTYLATOR5553

Let’s not forget about Malta, whose presence is problematic. - Sicilians civ would definitely make more sense.

If Malta is a civ, then anyone can be.

Malta is a nod to the campaign, what it should have done is change the musketeers into sentinels and give the hoop throwers the flamethrower upgrade…

[OperaticShip743]

@MUTYLATOR5553

Sicilians civ would definitely make more sense.

If Malta is a civ, then anyone can be.

The Sicilians are in the mobile version of AOE-3. It’s green AI.