Although the official efforts have finally been released, I have found that my player community is in a strange state of doubt. Many players I know are afraid that this major update will be the last update of Age of Empires III. What I want to know is whether the official will maintain updates every three to four months (or every six months), and whether we still have the opportunity to obtain new countries, especially Persia as a representative
As far I know, devs are working in AOM Retold. As AOEIII players, we could benefit from that work, as AOM and AOE III share graphic motor.
6 Likes
We’re hoping 3DE DLC hasn’t ended with KotM. Kind of bummed we didn’t get any future plans with this patch release.
I hope so, I personally want to see Argentina as a complete civilization, but I see it as unlikely that they will add it alone, perhaps together with Brazil or with Greater Colombia, I would also like to see the Guaraníes and Mapuches.
PS: I honestly think all original revolutions should be full civilizations, but I think that’s extremely unlikely. 
Devs: *for some reason, take two extra days to deploy the patch
Gamers: the game is surely dead
Tell those gamers that maybe they have the same sources as Nikolai Berdyaev.
If most of Europe is present in the game, most of LatAm should be, too. I say this because the amount of LatAm players may very well be a source of income. As long as Haití stops being a pirate civ.
1 Like
We should have many more Asian civs. Only 3 for the continent that has always been the heart of the Human civilization is ridiculously low.
From the Middle East/West Asia we only have have the Ottomans (which are designed as en European civ) and we still don’t have anything at all from either Central Asia or South-East Asia.
5 Likes
Persia, the main opponent of the Ottomans next to the Habsburgs should be a thing.
But so should be the PLC and denmark within the timeframe of the game.
Certainly the Kongo empire as one of the main players in Africa and salesmen of the raw material of the atlantic ##### ##### should make an apearance.
There is an argument for morocco aswell, as a barbary state.
Absolutely.
You’ll find that the majority of folks here want Persia in before other civs. Asian Dynasties was the second of the original expansions whilst the Native American civs had Inca added in Definitive Edition, we’ve yet to see another Asian civ. It would be a great one excuse to a little update on the current Asian Civs as well, maybe losing some of the ‘mystic orient’ stuff and also giving them more appropriate, less outdated and novelty units or uniforms.
Korea is a close second for me, followed by Siam maybe. In all honesty any Asian civ that had some traction in their part of the world over a significant time is good for me - just give me an Asian Civ 
2 Likes
Yes, I think it’s time for Asia…we haven’t had any new Asian civs since 2007 (Indonesia doesn’t count because it’s a revolution)…and all the rest of the continents have already been visited in 3 DE…remember that after The African Kingdoms in AoE 2, they visited Southeast Asia with Rise of Rajas… now it’s time to visit that area with AoE 3, show what happened in the area after Bayinnaung’s death…
4 Likes
Yeah, that’s probably the civ we all agree it should be in the game asap.
In my opinion the game should at least have the Persians and Omani for West Asia,the Uzbeks from Central Asia, the Thai and Dai Viet from South-East Asia and Korea.
That’s the bare minimum for me. There are also many other civs that could be added, like the Kazakhs, Burmese, Afghans, etc.
Yes, please. It’s also the only region that hasn’t received any new civ in DE.
That’s why I think the main focus if the game in the future should be Asia.
2 Likes
I was very opposed to Korea before because I was afraid that we would have a limited number of civilizations, which would lead to the disappearance of some more important countries. However, now this issue is secondary because even the fourth Asian country has not appeared, and it is no longer meaningful to dwell on the issues that follow. I hope the official production team can produce new Asian countries as soon as possible, and Korea and Vietnam will appear together as the seventh and eighth Asian countries after Persia, Myanmar, and Siam (although Kazakh and Uzbeki are countries in the Asian region, they should not use similar mechanisms with traditional Asian countries, so they are excluded)
1 Like
absolute agreement with this opinion
If Persia gets added, I think it shouldn’t be a single-civ DLC and should still be paired with another civ, maybe with an Asian rework as well.
2 Likes
i am all for Asian dlc and i agree with all you sugguestion but Korean is definitely my bottom.of the listed. their participation in aoe3 period is limited. i would like to have focus on the powers actively interact with the others.
still, we have Malta. i am not going to guess the dev choice
I mean, it’s true that Korea didn’t have that many armed conflicts in period, but all the ones they had were with powers that are already ingame, so…
oh not saying they arent goin in game at some point. i am agreeing to his reply, 7th and 8th to a long list of waiting asian civ.
1 Like
I do agree with his suggestion on this point. During this period, North Korea was indeed a medium-sized country that could be chosen as a player, but its importance was also the lowest among all medium-sized countries in terms of international participation and the least important. If not included in the nomadic region of Central Asia, North Korea should be considered the seventh or eighth, in Persia (the three great emperors of Islam, who were also long-term opponents of the Ottomans), After Myanmar (two generations of Burmese dynasties defeated Siam twice, attacked the Chinese dynasty, and harassed the Bengal region of India, while deeply participating in the war with Britain), Siam (a representative of modernization in Southeast Asian countries, surviving from colonial times to modern times and becoming a benchmark for Southeast Asian independence and reform). In theory, a country with weaker national strength than North Korea should not be eligible, but with the example of Malta ahead, we are indeed unable to determine the official idea
As a counterpoint, I think Unique Unit potential, interesting key points in history, being nationally cohesive and spanning the entire AoEIII timeline further push the cause of civs like Korea.
In Korea’s case:
Unique unit potential? Yup the Joseon Dynasty has a number of truly unique potential units, the obvious ships and Hwacha (though I’d also include the scary Mangam Hwacha which was a boxed cart version with 3 firing sides) - among tons more of really quite unique soldiers and cavalry.
Key points in history? The iconic one being the Imjin War, defending Korea from an incredibly vast Japanese amphibious invasion.
International interactions? - Yes, conflicts with the Jurchens, Manchus, Qing, Japanese, Wakou Pirates, Russians, French, US - stretching from the start of AoE3’s timeline to the very end. (With a lot of internal rebel conflicts too, for good measure)
Does their history lend itself to a unique trait? or particular style of gameplay - Yes! They would make a great defensive/turtle civ. Joseon Dynasty had vast defence and warning systems alongside provincial garrisons - Korea could greatly make use of AoEIV’s English ‘Network of Castles’ trait (some positive idea stealing there)
3 Likes
So I admit that Korea still has the right to appear, preferably as a DLC with Vietnam, but the current situation is that we haven’t even seen Persia, which should have appeared first in Asia, and Korea’s appearance will only be far away
2 Likes
Fair comment.
Yes, I’d very much want to see Persia be the next new civ over any Native, Euro, Africa and other Asian civs.
2 Likes