imho teutons are not the biggest umbrella problem, they are mostly fine lore-wise. big umbrella problems to me are Italians and Slavs. Indians are going to be fixed with this DLC but basically most of the “forgotten” DLC civs are a big bad umbrella
1 Like
From what it seems to me so far, aoe2 uses (at least originally used it) two criteria to choose its civs:
(If you know of any more, feel free to say so).
(1) an ethnic group* that created one or more kingdoms
(2) within the medieval period, that is, from ~400 to ~1600
Italians apparently cover the Italian peninsula in general during the Middle Ages, representing not only the Lombard and Italian kingdoms (under HRE), but other parts as well by the bonuses and names of leaders.
And the other umbrellas cited also fit these criteria (although the title might be “grand duke” and not “king” for the Rus’ Slavs, the political leader was clearly a monarch).
So the question would be: did Venetians make any kingdoms in the Middle Ages to justify their split from the Italians?
*Byzantines are the exception
1 Like
Indians are the last ones that deserved be splitted, pls no more, time to Focus on other regions!!!
3 Likes
Just give the Italians the Galleass as a final warship upgrade instead of Galleon. That would represent the Venetian angle.
2 Likes
The answer is yes. The republic of Venice traditionally dates back to 697 AD and ended in 1797 after it was defeated by Napoleon. So more than 1000 years of history perfectly framed in the period you identified. Regarding the military aspect, it annexed a large part of northeastern Italy, Istria, Dalmatia, the coasts of what is now Montenegro and Albania as well as numerous islands in the Adriatic Sea and the eastern Ionian Sea. At the height of its expansion, between the thirteenth and sixteenth centuries, also ruled the Peloponnese, Crete and Cyprus, most of the Greek islands, as well as several cities and ports in the eastern Mediterranean.
Its main power, however, in addition to the fleet, was due to trade (it was actively involved in the spice trade in the Mediterranean and also overland through the Silk Road) and diplomacy, as well as being one of the very few states in medieval times that had as a political order that of the republic. As far as the military aspect is concerned, maritime above all, it had at its disposal the Arsenal, which for centuries was the most important naval production pole in Europe, and probably also in the world at that time.
Implementing it in the game you would have to choose between two of its most iconic vessels: the Galeazza, large and tanky, or the galea sottile (“galea sottile”), smaller and agile that allows easy maneuvers of encirclement. As UU u can choose between 3 (even more were already designed in this forum): Capitan da Mar (fast and cheap gunpowder unit), Fante da Mar (Infantry), Stradiot (mercenary cavalry). There are several civ design the are different from Italians, personally i think that @DoctBaghi one is one of the best. I also did one if u research it back in forum, but it need some fixes.
5 Likes
While the history and military achievements of the Venetians are really interesting, I see no justification for them. I asked if the Venetians had kingdoms and you replied saying they had a republic. How does this fit the first criterion, friend?
And what difference is there, ethnically, between them and the other Italians already represented in the game? (I would say there are probably fewer than, say, the Germanics in general — Franks, Vikings and Teutons — as these are in more remote geographical regions and not on the same peninsula).
I also find it problematic to insert Venetians because there will be space for people asking for Genoese, claiming (now with more substantiation) that Italians only represent the Italian Lower Middle Ages and not all of Medieval Italy.
4 Likes
Current Italians are Genoa,the wonder uu and shield all belong to genoa.
1 Like
But they still represent very well the Venetians?
3 Likes
Well, after they gain they become indipendent from the ERE, they stayed indipendent since napoleon.
They didn’t found a Kingdom, they founded a republic, which had some aspects in common with other Italian cumuni for a period of time, but for the most they had an unique form of government, combining elements from a monarchy, a democracy and an oligarchy (they became mostly the latter later on…).
Still, despite various attempts, the ERE never regain power over them (it was the other way around actually…) the HRE, the French and other Italian states were never able to conquer them, or to assert their influence over them. They were close with the league of Cambrai, but Venice survived.
So, the point is, how much different was the most serene Republic of Venice from other states from Italy like the papal state, the state of Milan, the republic of Genoa, savoy and so on?
Well, as already said the form of government was unique, even if with some similarities. The language was different, with some heavy influences from the Greek and slavs languages, something that lacked on other states. Military speaking, the venetians used unique units, especially mercenaries like stratdiots or schiavoni. At a maritime prospective, they had some important innovations, and the arsenal, the first statale massive site production, was something unique of the venetians. Economically speaking, that’s a bit more difficult, they had some things in common with other cities like Genoa and Florence for some time, on other aspects they had unique sistems. At times they relied more on commerce, at time they relied more on piracy, some times the economy was controlled by the state, some other times they left it to private entrepreneurs, some times a it of both.
Can’t republics be a civ in the game? All civs have to be authoritarian states?
Hardly, there isn’t a UU, UT or a bonus that really reflects the venetians.
5 Likes
The civ bonuses may as well be the Venetian bonuses abd they have condos. And Burmese also dobt get a single UU and UT based on the Burmese themselves
2 Likes
Only bonus, maybe, is Silk Road that could fit Venice. But as it is design atm is one of the worst imp UT
Yes and no, for some time the venetians were able to assert almost a monopoly on the end of the silk road, and for sure the relationship that the Polo family established with the mongols helped a lot.
But overall, they hardly were the only Italians maritime state to use and profit from the silk road…
I mean, the whole Italian civ bonuses except maybe the fishing ship bonus (I dont know if Venetians were that much into fishing) could fit Venetians
4 Likes
Oh great quote, thank you
In an ideal world, I’d like to see Celts split into Scots (UU1: Schiltron - a pikeman stronger in larger numbers, UU2: Gallowglass -slow but strong melee infantry available to Team), Irish (UU1: Kern - fast skirmisher, UU2: Hobelar - extra-light cavalry available to team) and Welsh (UU: Valleys Spearman - extremely cheap trash spear). Celts could be kept in as a multiplayer choice for nostalgic fans, but obviously, the William Wallace campaign would become a Scots campaign. Bretons are another possible choice, but that might be going too far. Britons can simply be renamed the English.
The Vikings are another obvious civilization that could be split. Specifically, into Norse (or Norwegians), Danes and Swedes. Norse are essentially renamed Vikings, so they have Berserks and Longboats. Danes and Swedes also have Longboats, but Danes field Swordstaffs, and Swedes Mounted Crossbowmen as UUs.
Teutons should be re-named “Germans”, because “Teuton” is ahistorical. Other than that the design of the Teutonic civilization as a infantry knight civilization is pretty fitting.
I don’t think any of these changes will actually be made, because the developers won’t mess with the original civilizations of the game (however unfitting they may be in light of the shift in development philosophy that has happened a fifth of a century after the game’s first release).
A “Dark Ages” DLC would be pretty cool too. Here are my suggested civilizations.
Vandals (a naval and cavalry civilization)
UU1: Alan (a bit like a beefed up, expensive Steppe Lancer) UU2: Raiding Ship (an armed transport vessel)
Saxons (represents German Saxons and Anglo-Saxons)
UU: Fyrdman
Lombards (represents the Germanic Tribe, later Lombard League and southern Lombard states as a sort of umbrella civilization)
UU: Carrocio (an expensive “siege” unit that heals units around it and has a melee attack of its own)
Honestly I would say those are all perfectly fine with the exception of “Britons” which I’ll elaborate on a bit later, but with Teuton specifically it is a Latin word that originally was the name of a single Germanic tribe during the Roman period, but then later changed to refer to all Germans living in the HRE during the Medieval Period. You can see this in the official names of the Teutonic Order (Known in German as Deutscher Orden)
Latin: Ordo domus Sanctae Mariae Theutonicorum Hierosolymitanorum
German: Orden der Brüder vom Deutschen Haus der Heiligen Maria in Jerusalem
English: Order of Brothers of the German House of Saint Mary in Jerusalem
Not to say that the name isn’t unsuitable when it comes to modern day AOE2 naming conventions, but in the context in which it was originally created for, I would say it’s a perfect name for a medieval German civ
6 Likes
Methinks that Italy will not be split any further. Even if you turn Italians into two civs: “Venice” and “Genoa”, that would leave out Ragusa, Naples (though technically “Sicilians” covers them") Bologna, Florence, the Papal States, and Milan. No… better just to leave one single “Italians” civ. After all, Byzantines could technically be split into “Empire of Trebizond”, “Empire of Nicea”, “Despot of Epirus”, but that would be too much.
Moving back to new European civs: I strongly think that Georgians are the best candidate, along with Bosnia/Croatians. The Georgians, though perhaps not “European” by geography, but culturally they have strong ties with the rest of Europe, particularly in religion. It is also possible to add the Flemish (“medieval Dutch”) into the game, but Burgundians already offers some representation for them.
Bosnia and Croatia both deserve a civ (or two) to represent them, since they were not Hungarian (clearly, despite periods where Hungarian kings exerted control over that region of the Western Balkans), and were pretty much far enough away from the “traditional Slav center” that is Poland, Ukraine, and the lands of the Rus (Russia). After all… if Slavs were first introduced, but then Bulgarians, Poles and Bohemians (Czechs) added, then why not Bosnians/Croatians? As for Serbs, I am not sure… as a historian, Bosnians/Croatians seem to be very much unique enough to warrant their own civs. But I could be wrong with this point.
Perhaps the Swiss too can be added… though the Swiss Cantons only properly emerged as a unique nation in the LATE Middle Ages, and one can argue that Burgundians/Franks/Teutons civs already covers them. But it would be sweet to have Swiss Halberdiers introduced perhaps in Age of Empires 2.
As for outside of Europe: Africa I think can offer the Nubians (“medieval Sudanese”) but besides them and the Malians and Ethiopians, all African peoples south of them are perhaps too primitive and isolated from the “medieval times” that characterized much of north Africa and Eurasia from 500 to 1500 A.D.
Some people speak of a North American civ or two finding a place in Age II, but frankly those people are more suited for Age III.
@Mahazona I know, I was just using it as an example. And as I said before, Italians cover both Genoa and Venice, Lombards, Papal Status, Italian Kingdom (under HRE) and so on. There is no need to split Italians. Doing so would go against the game’s logic of choosing civs by ethnic groups, not political entities.
@DoctBaghi according to the criteria I’ve realized, yes, only authoritarian states. If anyone thinks these criteria aren’t valid or there are more, feel free to say so. But for me, that would be like making a new civ based on a political entity and not on ethnic groups, which would be the logic of the game.
@Chinggisid in an ideal world, we could have infinite and remarkably unique civs from across the globe. We could have a kind of Age 1.5 with all the “barbarian” peoples (Vandals, Goths, Saxons etc) and nomad civs together.
@MegasDukas I agree about designations. Let’s leave the political titles and dynasties to Aoe4.
But as for this:
Would you mind saying why you think so? Because I’ve been reading about Africa and it’s not true for many, If not most, African peoples.
2 Likes
I feel like the only serious candidates for splitting were the Indians (by far the biggest candidate), the Chinese, the Slavs and maybe the Saracens. Maaaybe the Franks at one point in development if we’re looking at Europe, but they basically already did that when they created the Teutons, if things even happened in that order. The slavs have already been split/expanded upon, the Chinese are not likely because of present day ideas. Splitting Italians or Celts is splitting hairs.
The devs might still do it, and they might end up great civs to play with, but I don’t think the driving force should be “Oh no there are only two civs based on the British Isles!” Representation wise it’s better to do another split of sir civ not appearing in this game.
3 Likes
If there’s anything left to “split” (if you can call it this way because it really isn’t considering the civs which such a split would add are vastly different culturally speaking), it’s Malians, Ethiopians, Incas and Aztecs.
4 Likes