I and many others want an Oceania-themed expansion. I thought of one with four civs, with new civs with a new Oceania architecture set representing the three main regions of Oceania: the Polynesians, the Melanesians, and the Micronesians. Then the fourth civ would be a Filipino civ with Southeast Asian architecture.
The problem is, aside from a Tu’i Tonga campaign for the Polynesians and an anthology campaign like Historical Battles called Island Tales, centered around single scenarios for various islands like Rapa Nui and Lindisfarne, I have no campaign ideas. There is very little information available on rulers for the civs mentioned. I was wondering if any of you had some ideas.
Define “many others”.
You are more or less than 10?
Imho Oceania has literally ZERO potential.
Even worse, since they were seafaring people, they would be based on the game less interesting and balanced aspect: water.
Then you’d get to play a water civ on Arabia. Wonderful
no please no more new world civs with trebuchets and galleons.
Comments like these are the reason why we can’t have fun and actually unique things in this game anymore.
Oceania is a rather niche history subject, though there’s a lot of potential via their oral history and legends. It’s not that easy though to get access to books about this. There was e.g. a book about Maori myths and legends which I tried to buy but couldn’t get my hands on because it was out of stock e.g. this one:
For me, campaigns aren’t a must but if you really would need one, you could go with this.
You’re barking at the wrong tree.
I’m all for water overhaul, but since most people don’t care, I’d rather have a new land based civ, not a sea based one with the current water interaction and balance.
I’m quite flattered though, if you think I can somehow dictate new civ designs.
Believe it or not, there is actually a lot of support for an Oceania expansion. Not as much as others, but it’s out though. I don’t think it’s a small minority like you’re suggesting.
I think Oceania is in a similar boat as a lot of North American civs. There is at least a small core of people who are really interested in them, but on the whole they’re very controversial, and the general lack of knowledge about what they were doing during the AoE2 period, among other things, makes it pretty difficult to recreate them in a credible way. I’ve made concepts for some such civs myself, but mainly in an exploratory/hypothetical way, and I actually think it would be very weird if some of them were added as full civs. Polynesians, for example, had some impressive achievements, but anything related to navigation/exploration doesn’t translate well into AoE2-type bonuses in a way that’s makes for interesting gameplay, and apart from seafaring they were working with much more limited tech than even the existing American civs (e.g. not using bows or any kind of metal AFAIK).
I do think there’s more room for content for these regions though, although I envision that mainly as a few units and buildings in the Editor. I really think this will be the best of both worlds, as enthusiasts will have some decent resources to work with to create their own scenarios, and people who don’t think such civs should be in the game won’t encounter them online. Also just from a practicaity perspective, I think this is the only way we’re reasonably going to see any content for a lot of regions that currently don’t have any. I know a lot of people want new (AoE2) civs, but where the dev efforts have been on other projects lately, IDK how many more we’re going to get in the foreseeable future.
Of course they should play quite different from others but that should be true for African and American civs as well…
Fortunately for you that book is available in pdf form if you don’t mind wearing an eyepatch lol.
If you cant find a wonder building 12 leader names and a campaign which people can identify its a red flag that the civi dosent fit.
Ah so its a popularity contest now?
It obviously is. Gaming industry is a business after all. And the upcoming DLC makes that very clear.
The idea that not popular civs dont fit the game is stupid though. They may still not get added but saying that they have to include popular lwaders is pretty dumb
Like, Mapuche would probably be more popular than Kazars or Gokturks, are they more needed than either of them?
So Gurjaras and Cumans were added to the game because they’re so famous and beloved worldwide?
I tend to think it’s a mix of factors.
Popularity amongst the fanbase is certainly one of them. Then the history impact, the size of the territory they occupied, and so on. Devs probably evaluate these things, compare them to other civs and make a decision.
I think it’s more likely that a civ that ticks more than one box gets added.
Or are you suggesting that civs were added randomly, throwing darts on a map? Might be, obviously, we don’t know after all.
No, I’m just saying the devs probably don’t make their decisions based on popularity or name recognition alone.
i think you can still play Vikings on Arabia
Well that would be unfortunate indeed.
Indeed, we just need to give them an insane eco boost and problem solved.
I don’t know why, but I don’t think I’d like it.
But now look at other strong naval civs, they mostly suck on land. Would you really like to see another naval civ unable to fully utilize its potential because water play is terrible and nobody play water maps?
I honestly don’t.
Overhaul the water play first, please. (Plea to devs).
I mean are not all the campaigns household names?! Lord knows I travel many states away to meet my folks and talk about Yodit and Gajah Mada DAILY! The kids in school couldn’t stop talking about them only surpasses by how much people talked about Hittite kings I tell ya unlike unpopular things like Spider Man, puke!