Civiliztions- A new concept ----- [Sub-Civilizations]

Age of Empires IV IV - Discussion
1

This is probably going to be a new big deal in Age of Empires series. Till now, we have seen multiple playable civilizations in the game. Though all of the civilizations available have not been covered and it is a hard task even if to include so many of them. Let’s have a look at the format:
Main Civilization
and mere regional civilizations inside the the big superset

For an instance, let’s have a look at this example:

Main civ- South Asia or India or The Hindus

Sub-civilizations-Nepalese, Sikhs, Marathas, Cholas, Karnatas, Bangla, Maithil, Sinhala,etc

Main civ-British

Sub-civs-English, Irish, Scottish, Welsh

Main civ-Teutons

Sub civs- Austrian, Deutsch, Swiss

How about this idea? I think this needs more brainstorming and thinking. Please suggest the liability of this topic or new innovative ideas.

10 Likes
2

I have also thought about something like that, something that would cover more parts of the world while adding more strategy and variety in the game.

I thought about:

Mesoamericans: gets to Aztecs or mayans

iberics: spanish or Portuguese

Turkic: get to Seljuk or cumans

Mongols: tatars or others derived from the mongols

Franks: France or the HRE

Regarding Teutons I would be more carefull as they aren’t what aoe2 says. So I would just put Germanics (referring to the early tribes) they could also be related to the HRE, but that brings me to the point where I just don’t really know which nations should derive from which ones, or how complex would this system be?
I think of it as just an option you have when advancing to the next age, which makes you choose between two or three “evolutions” that are just a bonus and a UU and maybe some small graphic changes on main buildings

6 Likes
3

I like the idea because I love having many civilizations on games (Civilization, Total War, RoN and of course AOE2) and as long as it doesn’t make weird main civs like East Asian (chinese, koreans and japanese) like the failed Empire Earth 3 did.

The main civ could have certain bonuses, and the sub civs could have others.
For example, the slavs could have a powerful heavy cavalry but the sub civs also adds bonuses (like improvements to normal units or adding unique ones)to other fields:

  • Lithuanians: bonus on spear infantry (tower shields)
  • Polish: bonus to light/shock cavalry (hussars and maybe winged hussars if the timespan of the game covers that period)
  • Rus: bonus to sword infantry (Druzhina)
  • Bulgarian: bonus to mid cavalry (early stirrups)

(using examples from Age of Empires 2, if I make a horribly mistake about the cultures don’t send scouts to my feudal camp D: )

6 Likes
4

Main civ - France
Sub civ- france, norman, burgundy, aquitaine
Main civ : holy roman empire
sub civ: Flanders, bohemians, habsbergs,saxons
Main civ : Aztec
Sub civ : Tenochtitlan, Tarascan, Tlaxcalan
Main civ: Maya
Sub civ : Tikal, calakmul
Main civ : Caliphate
Sub civ : ALmohad, Abbasid, Ayuubid, Mamluke of egypt

5 Likes
5

Main Civ: Slavs

  • Rus’
  • Poles
  • Bohemians
  • Moravians
  • Bulgarians
  • Serbs
  • Croats

Main Civ: Turks

  • Seljuks
  • Ottomans
  • Tatars
  • Cumans
  • Khazars
  • Gokturks

Main Civ: Persians

  • Sassanids
  • Ghurids
  • Khwarezm

Main Civ: Chinese

  • Song
  • Tanguts
  • Jurchens
  • Dai Viet

Main Civ: Mongols

  • Yuan
  • Ilkhanate
  • Chagatai
  • Golden Horde

Main Civ: Moslems

  • Arabs
  • Berbers
  • Moors
  • Mamluks

Main Civ: Franks

  • Carolingians
  • French
  • Normans
  • Burgundians

Main Civ: Iberians

  • Spanish
  • Visigoths
  • Portuguese
  • Aragonese

Main Civ: British

  • English
  • Scottish
  • Irish
  • Picts

Main Civ: Italians

  • Lombards
  • Venitians
  • Naples
  • Sicilians

Main Civ: Germans

  • Saxons
  • Bavarians
  • Austrians
  • Teutons (representing the Teutonic Knights of the Baltic region)

Main Civ: Norse

  • Swedes
  • Danish
  • Norwegians

Main Civ: Indians

  • Delhi
  • Tamils
  • Bengals
11 Likes
6

I don’t think it’s a good idea, you only have to choose representative nations, it’s just impossible to go to such a large number considering that each nation will be unique, and having nations like Croats whose kingdom didn’t last 200 years or other listed smaller southern and Western Slavs would be a horrible failure

6 Likes
7

I don’t see the problem with having the sub-civilization system if there are only minor differences between the nations, similar to the god system in Age of Mythology. I do prefer the old system better, though. I don’t see why featuring a variety of Slavic civilizations is destined to be a “horrible failure”, especially with how clumsily the Slavs were defined in Age 2.

3 Likes
8

it’s not about whether the Slavs need to be in the game. i am the first for it. but the whole concept of subcivilizations is wrong if we consider that special emphasis is placed on uniqueness. in this way we will just get totally misrepresented exactly as in aoe 2. select the 2 most important and they are Poles and Russians.

9

This in not a new idea old AOE 2 mods such as age of chivalry and age of civilizations did this,But a set up like this is worse than the umbrella civis of AOE 2.

10

But…spanish for example are:

Spanish:

Iberians + Celts= Celtiberians > Visigods

Reign of Aragon

Reign of Castilla

Reign of Navarra

Reign of Portugal

1 Like
11

I agree with this. I think the best idea is to just make the overall civ and then name it according to the subciv just like they did in the AoE2 campaign. And not make 35 civs again, where you might study 2 months before actual multiplayer-play.

But English are already announced? So there will be no Brits I guess.

3 Likes
12

I think it’s a great concept. It reminds me of the possibilities of aoe3 where you could choose your card deck after the game started and different ways to advance in the next age. There is always the risk of a “civ win” and to adress that it would be interestingt to let people choose their sub-civ after the game started maybe while advancing to feudal age. So they can react to the pick of the other player(s) and optimize their strategy

3 Likes
13

It would be a better history lesson for me, connecting the civs with their countries and sub countries

4 Likes
14

Yea I like this, it could address the issue that too many civs with unique architecture and unit skins will be too confusing and too few civs might just become boring. This way you can have regions with similar looking architecture and units but still different gameplay bonuses to get more mileage out of each region and create a bigger world.

2 Likes
15

Also here are my suggestions which by no means are exhaustive:

British Isles:

  • Celts
  • English
  • Welsh

North Western Europe:

  • Vikings
  • Saxons
  • Normans

Germanic:

  • Franks
  • Goths
  • Teutons

Iberian:

  • Aragon
  • Castile
  • Portuguese

Southern European:

  • Byzantines
  • Genoese
  • Lombards

Central European:

  • Swiss
  • Bohemian
  • Magyars
  • Lithuanians

Slavic:

  • Poles
  • Muscovites
  • Bulgarians

Arabs:

  • Abbassids
  • Fatamids
  • Umayyads

Indo-Iranians:

  • Persians
  • Afghans
  • Kurds/Ayyubids

Turkic:

  • Saljucs
  • Ottomans
  • Cumans

Asiatic Nomads:

  • Mongols
  • Tatars
  • Huns

South Asian:

  • Moguls
  • Rajput
  • The Tamils

South East Asia:

  • Malay
  • Khmer
  • Vietnamese
  • Burmese

East Asian:

  • Korean
  • Japanese
  • Chinese

African:

  • Malians
  • Ethiopians
  • Congolese

This way there is 15 regions with unique architecture and skins which should be manageable.

4 Likes
16

The Khazars were Jewish, not Turks. Even, one of their kings speak for that to Muslims. The Khazars conquered the land of the Proto- Bulgarians- 679 AD, but finally the Rus defeated the Khazars- 950-1050 AD.

17

They were of Turkic origin even though their religion was Judaism.

6 Likes
18

How dare you put Dai Viet (Vietnamese) to Main Civ Chinese ! The Vietnamese is not China ! We don’t the same . Foolish ! :rage:

2 Likes
19

This sounds very similar to Age of Mythology. In that game, there are only three civilizations: Greeks, Egyptians and Norse. Where’s does it branch? To start the game, you have to choose one major God - there’s three for each civilization. Comparing it to the current topic, we would have: European, Asian, American, and the “subs” could be: German, English and French; Chinese, Japanese and Mongol; and Aztec, Mayan and Inca, respectively.

In Age of Mythology, the three civilizations play very differently. All of their military units are unique. Norse don’t even have archers. The major God chosen at the start gives different bonuses, so the same civlization will also have some tweaks, and to advance Ages you also have to chose minor Gods. Age of Empires III mimicked this with the Politicians.

If we have the same system in Age of Empires IV, then it would be, for example:

Major civilization: Europeans. This will give you the unique unit Longswordman, and access to bigger or stronger Castles.

Subcivilizaton: British, which gives you the Longbowman and faster working Archeries; or French, which gives you the Chevalier and 20% more HP for Cavalry.

OR:

Major civilization: Americans. This will give you a lack of cavalry (and this needs to be balanced properly, not like they did with the Eagle Warrior, which is… not very good). I think a good mechanich for the American factions would be to get 3 Villagers for the price of 1.

Subcivilizaton: Aztecs, which gives you the Jaguar Warrior and faster creation time for all military units; or Mayans, which gives you a unique Monk.

Now, there would be a problem with the Asian factions, because I’m putting forward the idea that Mongols shouldn’t build walls , but the Chinese have built a really long wall in real life. So, they would be too different to belong in the same major civilization.

2 Likes
20

Cant say i dislike this idea, and would certainly offer a wide variety of Civs within a main culture choice.

1 Like