All of them definitely should be included in an eventual expansion! I don’t know that much about Indian history, are them different etnicities, separate kingdoms or dynasties from a same kingdom?
1 Like
They are all different ethnicities with their own different kingdoms.
Read about the bloody Kalinga War. One of the bloodiest in whole history, river turned red with blood.
Or about Porus of Punjab who fought with Alexander and scared him enough that he stopped his further expansion ambitions.
4 Likes
Although we know that there will be no expansions, if a miracle comes and they do an expansion, they will not add 45 civs as you propose. Surely it will be only 4.
4 Likes
Thanks for your recommendations, I love ancient history and will do some research on those subjects! 
2 Likes
If civilizations from ancient ‘India’ (excuse my ignorance) are added, then they should have their own building architecture, as they wouldn’t fit within any of the existing ones.
2 Likes
Season Pass for Age of Empires: Definitive Edition:
- The Birth of Civilization - Israelites, Arabs, Indians
- The Hadrian’s Wall - Celts, Gauls, Armenians
- The Fall of Rome - Slavs, Scythians, Huns
5 Likes
I would most likely preorder that!
4 Likes
They are the only civ to have a unique architecture set in AoE II and I guess it makes sense that they’d be the only civ in AoE I to have a unique architecture set too. And on a similar topic, a lot of people complain about the Burgundians and Sicillians being the only civ to have unique castles but Indians have unique castles too, why don’t they include that in their discussion?
4 Likes
Not part of the “Birth of Civilization”. They only became relevant in the 7th century AD, so the Middle Ages.
Adding Axumites or Lybians would be much more accurate.
Celts are Gauls, Gauls are Celts. There is no need for 2 civs, that are basically Continental Celts (Gaulst) and Island Celts (Celts).
Germanians or Iberians would be better additions, if you want another European civ to fight the Romans.
I propose Iberians, with a Viriatus campaign, and the Heavy Slinger (for Israelites too), because the Balearic Slinger was famous throughout the Mediterranean and beyond.
3 Likes
Yeah, tbh what AoE 1 really needs (aside the obvious bug/performance fixes) is new units and techs for the existing civs.
New civs and campaigns would also be very welcome.
3 Likes
I haven’t encountered a single performanc issue in AoE, only a couple bugs that I usually don’t mind or have gotten used to.
I WOULD DEFINETELY PREORDER THIS AND 1 MORE FOR A FRIEND
2 Likes
I would like such DLCs to arise 
Arabs are a broad generalization. I think the name itself does not hurt.
Already from the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC. Arabs built advanced civilizations in the relatively water-rich south-west of the Arabian Peninsula (eg, Irem, Saba). However, there is no cultural continuity between them and modern Arabs, as these countries collapsed at the end of the first millennium BCE. due to the change of trade routes from Rome to India. Also the northern areas, partly influenced by the developed cultures of Mesopotamia, developed trading states (Nabataeans, Petra, Gassanids). On the other hand, the desert areas were inhabited by Bedouin shepherd peoples, who lived without state organization in a state later referred to as jahiliyya (the period of ignorance, darkness). The social structure of these peoples was based on family ties (asabiyya). The families waged constant wars with each other. The religion of the Arabs in this period was characterized by polytheism, in which the heavenly bodies were worshiped next to the supreme god Allah.
You’re right. Don’t duplicate the same.
The Hadrian’s Wall - Celts, *Germanians, Armenians and Iberians (If there could be a DLC with more civs)
The big empires in Arabia, at this time, were mostly Jewish (Saba and Himyar) or Persian influenced. Ironically, it could already be represented by the current Persians and a future Israelites civs.
Nothing against Arabs, but they just were not very important for the time period. The original devs already made a big mistake when they threw Carthage into the game, while having Phoenicians in it from the start.
Carthaginians were Phoenicians.
Xiongnu, Vandals, Libyans (Meswesh Warriors), Nubians (Axumites), Mauryans and several other much more important civs for the period, should take precedence over any Arabs civ.
Even Numidians were more crucial for the time period.
2 Likes
Please read an actual history book he went back because his army started a mutiny.
3 Likes
She actually derailed one of my threads with all that Indian civ talk.
The Palmyrenes were a poor choice but they could be renamed Arabs, given a Semitic buildset alongside the Phoenicians, Hebrews.
Add Meso civs pleasee and Moche.
These are must civs too.
3 Likes
Rather than just people saying add this and that civi someone should come up with civilization concepts.aoe 2 community has a ton of people making civilization concepts but I have never seen someone here do it.
I don’t know what you have in mind, but there were so many suggestions and ideas that people made. Also, at the time I wrote a huge post about units and civ balancing and new units. Even unit values and prices were there. And other fans did the same. None of this were noticed. But that is not even the worst. The worst is that the devs don’t even think it’s necessary to fix bugs and technical flaws that have existed since the release. These shortcomings and bugs have also been documented here page by page in duplicate and triplicate. What else are we supposed to do? Should we write the patches ourselves?
5 Likes