If you want microsoft to die you can do this,microsoft does not want a great loss of money of the biggest market of the world, split chinese means serious political problems,so tibetans will never being released by the officals.
So now Slavs are important for Medieval North American history? That’s new…
Medieval history is a history of regions. You wouldn’t be happy either if you had to pick Malians to represent Poland or Bohemians, especially if you’re already picky about the Slavs civ.
Arguments about importance lead to nowhere. In the grander scheme of things, we have quite a lot of civs which didn’t have a long-lasting impact but they still are in the game from around the world. Cumans, Goths, Aztecs, Maya, Burgundians, Sicilians etc. are basically dead factions right now.
Something like Medieval times is a pure Eurocentric term. It isn’t applicable on Asia, Middle East, America, Africa, Polynesia etc. yet you can still see that it doesn’t prevent the devs from adding civs from everywhere around the world.
The original Ensembles devs wanted that too when they said:
“Maybe we’ll do India and Africa another day.” and when they even had plans to add Zulus, Hawaiians and Indian factions, way bolder suggestions than LOTW:
http://aok.heavengames.com/gameinfo/conquerors-expansion
Of course Mississippians are irrelevant in the defeat of the Ottoman, but you could say the same that Slavs are not important in regards to the Foundation of the Iroquois League, which had the oldest living participatory democracy in the world.
2 Likes
strawman
exactly why European civs should have priority
Not a good thing lol 
3 Likes
For new civs we definetly ONLY need
Alans,
Albanians,
Aragonese,
Armenians,
Avars,
Bohemians,
Bosnians,
Bavarians,
Burgundians, (Oops! Already on CIVILIZATION tier!),
Bulgarians, (Oops! Already on CIVILIZATION tier!),
Catalans,
Cornish,
Corsicans,
Croatians,
Cypriots, (only the Greek ones though)
Czechs,
Danes,
Dutch,
Estonians,
Finns,
Flanders, (devs’ originally planned NEW CIVILIZATION!)
Frisians,
Galicians,
Habsburgs, (devs’ originally planned CIVILIZATION for AoK!)
Irish,
Latvians,
Normans,
Normandians,
Novgorods,
Occitaines,
Ostrogoths,
Picts,
Poles,
Portuguese (Oops! Already on CIVILIZATION tier!),
Prussians,
Ruthenians,
Sardinians,
Saxons,
Scots,
Sicilians (Oops! Already on CIVILIZATION tier!),
Serbians,
Swabians,
Swiss,
Tuscans,
Valencians,
Vandals,
Venetians,
Vlachs,
Welsh,
AND
Wends.
and almost all the relevant cultures of the world will be covered.
don’t you guys agree?
Can’t wait to see the Picts vs the Chinese!!!
Or the Sardinians vs the Mus…Saracens!!!
EDIT: Forgot to pay utmost respect to the (Greek) Cypriots, the Corsicans and the Valencians.
6 Likes
I advise you to go through your list and remove double ups, such as ‘Bohemians’ and ‘Czechs’.
A+ for that work lol.
4 Likes
OH NO! 
How could I possibly have forgotten the Ruthenians, the Normundians and the Occitaines??? 
4 Likes
Even Luxemburg had a duchy in the Medieval Ages.
2 Likes
Sarcasm on right now 11
I don’t mind a Slavic expansion, it’s just that I feel that it’s not the most urgent expansion while we have like 2 Slavic civs and 4 Eastern European ones 11
1 Like
But on a serious note, If Burgundians more than made the cut as a Civilization, no reason the Normandians, the Lorraines, the Occitaines, the Carinthians and the Swabians cannot.
Or the Swiss, the Finns, and the Danes, apart from the Dutch and the Frisians.
1 Like
If you see the Burgundians as representing all Lowland civs and maybe even Switzerland, they can make sense though they’re still an addition in an already very crowded world region.
What? NO WAY!! How can you possibly say that???
Europe and European peoples are so diverse, or more accurately, so uniquely diverse, that you cannot possibly say anything like that and group up entirely different Central European cultures like for the other edges of the World.
You do know whatt you’re speaking is falsehood right?
I think there is no need of any explanation for the inclusion of the Bohemians, the Poles, the Serbians and the Croatians, since everyone will love to have these over exotic civs from the other peripheries of the World!
And then the Swiss, the Finns, the Normandians, the Lorraines, the Occitaines, the Carinthians the Swabians, and the Danes, apart from the Dutch and the Frisians.
I find it funny that the people who wanted more civs, are so annoyed that the first 2 are Euro civs, when those not only sell well, but are also the easiest to make and experiment around with.
I was expecting more non-European civs too, but I take what I get.
Besides, if you really wanted another French imperial civ, the Angevins would be easily justifiable.
Old DLCs
- Civs from uncovered regions
- New architecture set
- 2.5 Euros for each civ
NEW DLC
- West European civs
- No new architecture
- 5 Euros for each civ
I love new civs, it’s just that it doesn’t really fit the approach they had in the past. I’m convinced I’ll enjoy playing as Sicilians, especially the Donjon-Serjeant combo, though it doesn’t really fit with the approach they had in the past.
2 Likes
To be honest, the Forgotten expansion had several European civ, and AK had Portugal.
Couple that with Last Khans having Lithuanians and Bulgarians, and how Rajas got a lot of flak back then because people though the civs were OP thanks to the Regional Unit (BE).
I can see why the devs may want to make more Euro civs.
1 Like
The thing is now we have less space for civs that the community actually asked for. I was fine with burgundians and normans being covered by franks, and was more concerned with splitting other umbrellas and representing new regions of the world instead, and I think most of us feel this way.
I like we’re having new civs, but I had my list of 15 possible new ones (to round up at 50) and now there’s less space available.
4 Likes
Well, they are introducing concepts that were foreign to AoE2 previously, so the design space maybe expanded.
If it proves successful, the civs that people actually asked for will be even more unique.
To be honest, i always wanted Normans. Now I just need Swiss, Georgians and Bohemians, and i would call Europe covered.
We don’t need Swiss. Another Teutons.
2 Likes
Swiss would be much different to Teutons.
It would have to be a Pike/Halberd + Crossbow/HC civ with really bad Cavalry.
Teutons, on the other hand, are a Paladin civ.
Teutons have good everything, expect Archers. Teutons with Arbalest and without Paladin=Swiss. It would be really boring. Teutons are the best Arena civ, because of their Infantry, Siege, Monks, Defenses and Economy. They also have good gunpowder. We really don’t need Swiss.
1 Like
Except Teutons never use Infantry, and they would need more than Arbalest to be a Pike & Shotte civ like Swiss, since they also lack Bracer.
As it is, Swiss could be the first civ in the game that only has access to Scouts in the Stable, without Knights, Camels, Lancers, Elephants, Bloodlines or Husbandry.
They really did not have the terrain to muster significant Cavalry forces. Heck, you could even take away the Cavalry Archer from them!
Designing an unique Swiss civ would be actually very, very easy.